Skip to main content

What happened to U.S. passenger rail?

An empty black-and-white train track disappears into the fog

Almost a century ago, the railroads were the economic engine of the country, spurring the transportation of both goods and people over long distances. Now, the American railroad system is merely a specter of its former self. How did the United States devolve from an expanded passenger rail network to the system we have today?

In recognition of recent progress for passenger service in the Coastal South, we’re releasing a four-part series exploring how unified regional and national approaches, supported by local advocacy and sound policy, can help create a successful passenger rail network. This is part one of the series, written by Mehr Mukhtar and London Weier. Read part two on building momentum for change, part three on converting support into action, and part four on next steps for a national network.

An empty black-and-white train track disappears into the fog
(Jan Huber, Unsplash)

The Rail Passenger Service Act of 1970 created the National Passenger Railroad Corporation (Amtrak as we know it today). The advent of the automobile, creation of the Interstate Highway System, and a boom in air travel all diverted passengers away from rail. Railroads began losing out on passengers, and in their desire to increase profits, they started viewing their requirement to maintain passenger railroads as a costly financial burden. Creating a dedicated entity to serve passenger rail was seen as the solution to shifting the burden of passenger railroads away from freight railroads.

The mission of Amtrak at its inception, to maintain a national passenger rail network, is a far cry from the current state of the corporation. This is largely due to a failure in government funding, as policymakers continue to criticize Amtrak for a lack of profits, even as a lack of funding diminishes the service. In 1995, Amtrak faced severe budget cuts by the federal government, forcing suspensions and reduced service across the country.

In most of the country, passenger service decreased from 7 days per week to only 3 days per week and some routes were permanently eliminated, devastating the frequency of the service and its reliability as a mode of commuting. This had particularly far-reaching consequences for smaller towns and cities that suddenly became disconnected from their passenger rail routes.

Despite this setback, local leaders coalesced to press Amtrak and Congress to restore many of these reductions in service. Congress responded by creating an entirely new Amtrak Board of Directors, and under new management, Amtrak made great strides in the Northeast Corridor with the rollout of Acela, their first high-speed rail, in 2000. They accomplished this all while improving long distance service and developing state supported service. These improvements were short-lived, however. Changing leadership of the board and executive staff led to decisions focused on the Northeast Corridor to the detriment of the national system. This deficiency of investments and oversight outside of the corridor stifled expansion in the rest of the nation.

In the Coastal South, as in much of the United States, this trend ultimately resulted in a passenger rail system that was failing to prioritize connectivity and meet the needs of the public. Hurricane Katrina was the final nail in the coffin.

In 1962, a robust web of passenger rail service skirted across the U.S. By 2005, this network was immensely diminished, showing only a small smattering of distinct lines
Even before Hurricane Katrina hit the Gulf Coast, passenger service was experiencing an ongoing decline in every part of the country. Maps created by Michael Kenton using data from the Rail Passengers Association.

Disaster strikes

In 2005, Hurricane Katrina devastated the Gulf Coast of the United States, causing thousands of deaths and over $108 billion in property damage. Among the damage caused by the storm was considerable destruction of critical rail infrastructure, especially on the line between New Orleans, Louisiana (LA) and Mobile, Alabama (AL).

In the days immediately before and after the storm, all Amtrak service through New Orleans was halted. Today, three long distance trains depart from New Orleans Union Passenger Terminal, the City of New Orleans (service between New Orleans and Chicago), the Crescent (service between New Orleans and New York), and the Sunset Limited (service between New Orleans and Los Angeles).

Although the City of New Orleans and the Crescent returned in full swing about one month after Katrina made landfall, the Sunset Limited service was permanently changed. Prior to Katrina, Sunset Limited connected communities from coast to coast, running from Los Angeles to Orlando, Florida; however, since Katrina, the train reaches its final eastward destination in New Orleans.

The brunt of track damage occurred on the eastward bound sections of track connecting New Orleans to Mobile, an essential connection to continue Sunset Limited service to Orlando. Along this route, Amtrak passenger trains shared track belonging to freight companies CSX Transportation, Norfolk Southern (NS), and Union Pacific (UP). CSX took the brunt of storm damage and needed to restore five bridges and 40 miles of track that were completely washed out in the wake of Katrina. Norfolk Southern and Union Pacific lines also experienced considerable bridge damage and track repairs, including the need to restore felled power lines. Though freight rail lines took four months to repair, tracks shared by Amtrak (which were the responsibility of freight railroads to restore) took six months to recover.

In the almost two decades since Katrina made landfall, passenger rail lines leading eastward from New Orleans have not been restored. Post-hurricane rail restoration left this line out of the picture, an oversight that members of the impacted communities would fight for years to amend.

The loss of Gulf Coast service after Katrina had a particularly devastating impact on communities in the region, but the decline of passenger service in the South was also reflective of a larger disinvestment in passenger rail in every part of the country, particularly outside of the Northeast Corridor.

These lessons from the past can serve as a blueprint for the future of nationwide passenger rail that we are aspiring towards. New funding mechanisms and policy developments, such as the IIJA, capture the efforts to revive the historic role that passenger railroads have played in the country. Through decades-long advocacy with passenger rail groups across the country, Transportation for America has demonstrated that good policy, combined with the knowledge and expertise of dedicated advocates, can build momentum for improved service to reverse the deterioration our passenger rail system has witnessed. We’ll explain how in the next three parts of our series. Stay tuned!

Does your community have too much parking? Here’s how to find out.

A parking lot hosts three cars and dozens of empty spaces

Many communities are either “overparked” (meaning they have too much parking) or are inefficiently allocating their existing parking resources. By understanding how communities’ parking assets are being used and regulated we can ensure that all modes’ access to jobs, services and amenities is supported.

A parking lot hosts three cars and dozens of empty spaces
Nearly empty parking lot in Isabella County, Michigan (Jeffrey Smith, Flickr)

How much parking do we really have?

In Miami, Florida there is a minimum of 1.5 parking spaces required per residential dwelling unit and a minimum of 3 parking spaces required for every 1000 square feet of office or commercial use. These parking requirements are quite common in community zoning codes, the regulatory framework guiding development. As a result, communities across the country now have an oversupply of parking.

Considering the factors above, it is important to be mindful of how we use parking in our communities. Building an understanding of the space available can allow communities to maximize the benefits of having sufficient parking while also ensuring that we help communities identify underutilized parking areas and enable municipalities to allocate space more effectively for various modes of transportation, including sidewalks, bike lanes, public transit, and community activation.

One essential way that parking is regulated today is through parking audits. Parking audits are comprehensive assessments of a city’s parking systems, encompassing facilities, policies, regulations, and management practices. These audits involve supporting strategic management and provision of sufficient parking and curb access around cities, and analysis to gain a deep understanding of a city’s parking resources, utilization patterns, and their impact on transportation and urban development.

How to conduct a parking audit

During a parking audit, people measure how much parking is available in a specific area. The interesting thing is that anybody can do this.

The specifics of your audit will depend on your local context. If your city is considering reducing or removing parking requirements, you might have an opportunity to partner with your local government to conduct parking audits with city staff. If city leaders and officials haven’t yet caught on to the parking dilemma in your area, you can use a parking audit to help advocate for change. In either case, using the audit to build connections with community members, policymakers, and city staff can be a powerful way to develop common ground.

To get started on a parking audit, check out these step-by-step guides from Strong Towns and the Metropolitan Area Planning Council of Boston.

Questions to consider

How long are people staying parked? Occupancy stay refers to how long a parking space is being used by a vehicle. This metric provides insights into the duration of parking sessions, helping planners understand the average duration vehicles remain parked in a specific location.

DDOT parking evaluations include time of day and spot usage on 17th St NW
To understand parking in DC, the District DOT utilized time-lapse photography. (DDOT)

How many times was the parking space used? Occupancy turnover measures how many times a parking space is used within a given period. It provides insights into the rate at which parking spaces become available for new users. High turnover rates indicate efficient use of parking resources, while low turnover may suggest underutilization or improper pricing.

What is the ratio? Occupancy is the ratio of the number of parking spaces in use to the total number of spaces available. It is a fundamental metric for understanding the utilization level of a parking facility at a specific point in time or as an average over the day. The purpose is to provide a snapshot of how full a parking area is and whether there is excess capacity or shortages during peak times.

Collecting all this data can take time, but fortunately, there are tools you can use beyond a clipboard, camera, and a stopwatch. To cover more ground, communities like New York City or Washington, DC have deployed time-lapse photography to understand parking and loading demand. To learn more about how to take time-lapse photos, check out this guide from the District Department of Transportation.

By embracing parking audits and utilizing metrics like occupancy stay, turnover, and overall occupancy, communities can enhance accessibility, promote safety, and maximize the utilization of valuable real estate. So, whether you’re strolling, biking, or driving, let’s park smarter and pave the way for a more sustainable and accessible future.

Rays of hope: National City & Southeast San Diego’s Community Connectors story

A group of people representing a range of ages, genders, and ethnicities, stands in a circle beneath a highway overpass, with the sun rising in the background

After many decades of being divided by highways, community members in National City, CA are building capacity to reconnect their community in a project that will also acknowledge their community’s heritage and future.

A group of people representing a range of ages, genders, and ethnicities, stands in a circle beneath a highway overpass, with the sun rising in the background
Community members in National City, CA doing a land acknowledgement ceremony on land they are reclaiming from a highway to a community park. (Mundo Gardens)

The National City Southeast Greenspace Corridor Project is receiving support from the Community Connectors Program, led by Smart Growth America in collaboration with Equitable Cities, the New Urban Mobility Alliance, and America Walks with support from the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation. Learn more about the Community Connectors Program.

Often romanticized in the media, Southern California has been the home and the template for the modern US highway that we know today. Media portrays these highways as facilitating economic growth and safer and speedier commutes for area residents. However, the underbelly of that media portrayal fails to acknowledge the divisiveness those highways create, separating communities, destroying cultural and economic assets, and exposing many vulnerable road users to deadly conditions.

However, Southern California, especially the greater San Diego region, didn’t have divisive highways when those communities were initially developed. For San Diego and the greater Southern California region, one only has to look to the Robert Moses of the West, Mr. Caltrans, Jacob Dekema. Dekema came to the San Diego region in 1955 as its first Caltrans district director. At the time, the region was home to only 25 miles of highways. When Dekema retired in 1980, he had overseen that network growing into 485 miles of highways and entrenched a culture dependent on the car.

A black and white aerial photo shows the relatively dense community of National City before the highway boom.
National City, CA before the I-805 Expressway. (Source: John Fry)
Google Earth screenshot shows a more recent picture of National City, with large roadways highlighted in yellow lacing through the city's core
National City, CA with the I-805 Expressway and defunct SR-252 spur (future park site). (Google Earth)

One of those communities in the shadows of, and sliced by the intrusive, life-sized sculpture dedicated to the car, is National City, CA. This diverse community of 56,000 as of the 2020 census, had its community sliced and diced by the sprawling highway creation. I-5 divides the city from it’s waterfront to the west, and I-805 runs through the heart of the city’s east side.

The 805, like many highways across the country, came into consciousness around 1956, with its construction in the late 1960s that wrapped up by 1975. Parallel to the highway’s construction, efforts in National City in 1969 revisited zoning to facilitate auto-oriented strip mall development, further setting up a concrete jungle for residents.

The most disruptive and obsolete highway construction for I-805 is Exit 11A. This exit was built to facilitate a highway to future highway transfer (what was to be known as the El Toyon Freeway or SR-252). Through intense community advocacy and opposition, the Toyon Freeway project was canceled in 1980 and removed from consciousness in 1994. However, Exit 11A remained, today serving as the 43rd Street exit, which drops a driver off at the auto-oriented Southcrest Park Plaza.

Seeds of a movement

Two women crouch in front of a child playing in the grass, with a raised highway looming in the background
Since the construction of the Interstate 805 Corridor in 1967, SESD and National City have grappled with the legacy of redlining and infrastructure divisions. (Mundo Gardens)

The multicultural tapestry that connects National City and Southeast San Diego (SESD) today has been left with a disproportionate share of challenges. The community lacks green space, has high levels of diesel particulate matter exposure, faces transportation barriers (due to the intricate web of highways around it), plus more and bigger cars zooming by community streets. These challenges have eroded the community’s quality of life, health outcomes, and well-being, particularly for those living in low-income households.

There is considerable acreage lying fallow under the shadow of the 43rd Street ramp. The land under the freeway occasionally is used by Caltrans as a highway maintenance and operations storage space, but otherwise remains a living scar for the community, overlapping National City and Southeast San Diego and preventing them from being fully connected to their fellow neighbors. With the economic decisions made in the 1960s, economic development opportunities remain poor in the area, with value generated in the area not fully captured and invested back into the community.

Even in the midst of an overbearing highway structure dividing various neighborhoods in northeast National City and Southeast San Diego, members of the community have worked to bridge infrastructure divides through cultural activities and streetscape beautification. One of those efforts, Joe’s Pocket Farm, has served as a catalyst for area advocates to push for a holistic community vision to reconnect the community.

Starting as a vacant land plot by I-805 and Division Street, Mr. Jose Nuñez cultivated a pocket garden near his home for many years before moving away from the area in 2008. This pocket garden fell into disrepair and turned into a dumping ground until community members organized to save the garden and turn it into a community asset. In late 2009, community members engaged the National City City Council to reclaim the vacant and dilapidated garden into what is today the Joe’s Pocket Farm. This advocacy and organizing ultimately led to the creation of a local-area nonprofit, community garden, and social justice organization, what is Mundo Gardens today, which is aimed at empowering youth and community members on cultivating solutions to address social determinants of health.

Not long after Mundo Gardens’ founding, the Urban Collaborative Project (UCP) was formed. Created in 2013 as a nonprofit organization serving redlined communities in National City and Southeast San Diego, UCP leverages a data-driven, community self-healing approach to tackle key issues, including building social infrastructure and capital, transportation and infrastructure equity, health disparity and environmental justice, cultural beautification, and housing and community development.

Developing and executing a community vision

A group of people gathers around a circular table covered in posters and sticky notes, hard at work
National City / Southeast San Diego community coalition at the RWJF Community Connectors Convening in Atlanta. (Smart Growth America)

Mundo Gardens and UCP are pieces of a larger community-driven movement that has been in the making over the past two decades on reconnecting their community and mitigating social determinants of health. Community conversations have scoped out the Greenspace Corridor Project, which would unify National City and Southeast San Diego through reforestation, cultural art, and community. This project aims to accomplish various tasks, including but not limited to, 1) dismantling the 43rd Street exit ramp from I-805 and the defunct SR-252 built segment, 2) creating a community park on the reclaimed highway land centered on community culture, community health, and the natural environment, 3) stimulate social equity investment in the community, and 4) reconnecting the greater community to its culture and heritage.

The National City / Southeast San Diego community coalition, which is advancing the Greenspace Corridor Project, has made great strides in building its community network, which now includes city staff from National City, Council of Equity Advocacy San Diego, Kumeyaay Community College, Tocayo Engagement, SANDAG staff, Caltrans District 11 staff, among others.

This coalition joins other community coalitions around the country selected in July 2023 to be part of the Community Connectors program. This program has allowed the National City / Southeast San Diego community coalition, alongside their peers, to access technical assistance and capacity building support to advance their community project. In November 2023, the coalition met alongside their peers in Atlanta for a Community Connectors convening. At that convening, the National City / Southeast San Diego community coalition was able to map out project challenges and possible wins, plus flesh out a preliminary implementation plan.

In March 2024, the community coalition received double good news: two major wins in their collective advocacy and outreach efforts to support and fund the Greenspace Corridor Project. On March 12, 2024, Caltrans announced the coalition as one of three grant winners of the state’s Reconnecting Communities: Highways to Boulevards pilot program, totaling around $50 million for planning and implementation efforts that advance the project. The very next day, USDOT announced the coalition also won a $2 million Reconnecting Communities & Neighborhoods Program planning grant.

Looking to the future

Community members gather beneath the 43rd Street exit, a large check in hand, ready to tackle their project
National City / Southeast San Diego community coalition at the Caltrans Reconnecting Communities: Highways to Boulevards press conference. (City of San Diego)

The Greenspace Corridor Project holds much promise with a strong and emboldened coalition that now has seed funding to actualize their project. However, the work is only beginning, as the coalition will now begin the figurative and literal cultivation of their community garden. Later in 2024, the National City / Southeast San Diego community coalition will organize and deliver a community convening aimed to advance the conversation held in Atlanta and more fully flesh out a project implementation plan. The coalition also aims to enhance community engagement, storytelling, and outreach to raise awareness on the project and broaden stakeholder support. Lastly, the coalition aims to continue to pursue additional local, state, and federal resources to realize the community park that is centered on community health, culture, and economic opportunity, expanding what started as a small pocket farm from the hands of Mr. Nuñez.

Two years in, progress still needed for reconnecting communities

Black and white aerial image of a highway separating a neighborhood from a row of businesses

In March 2024, the Office of the Secretary at USDOT announced awards for the Reconnecting Communities Program. This program is intended to improve access to daily needs and repair past harms by removing or mitigating divisive infrastructure, particularly in disadvantaged communities. This year, funding was expanded from last year’s awards, but will these funds meet the program’s goals?

Black and white aerial image of a highway separating a neighborhood from a row of businesses
The Reconnecting Communities Program presents an opportunity to address past harms. (Unsplash, Judah Estrada)

As we explained in our report Divided by Design, low-income communities and communities of color have been and continue to be disproportionately harmed by our approach to transportation in the United States. Past decisions, including routing the Interstate Highway System through communities of color, dividing and often demolishing them in the process, still shape our built environment. Without change, people living in communities divided by harmful infrastructure are more likely to be exposed to air pollution, face an increased risk of being hit and killed while walking, and experience reduced access to jobs and opportunity.

A small program to knit communities back together

Last year, we reviewed the first round of awards from the Reconnecting Communities Pilot Program, a discretionary grant program aimed at mitigating the damage caused by divisive infrastructure. The second round of awards, announced this year, was combined with the Neighborhood Access and Equity (NAE) program, forming the Reconnecting Communities and Neighborhoods Program (which we’ll call the Reconnecting Communities Program). It’s important to note that because NAE funds were allocated all at once, these past two rounds of investment represent the majority of federal funds dedicated to reconnecting communities projects. So how is this investment going?

Many federal infrastructure grants and formula funds go toward highways in some capacity—our recent analysis of state spending found that about 25 percent of federal formula funds are being used for highway expansions. By comparison, safety projects and reconnection projects do not receive the same amount of investment or attention. The Reconnecting Communities Program, though relatively small (roughly $3.3 billion this year) compared to federal formula programs, presents an important opportunity to finance projects that prioritize reconnecting communities.

A lot of the communities that were awarded funding utilized their awards for the Reconnecting Communities Program’s exact intent—they’ve begun work on constructing pedestrian bridges or bike infrastructure, or they’re using the funds to study the feasibility of new routes to bike, walk, and use public transit in their cities. For example, the City of Milwaukee received a $36 million construction grant to build bike and pedestrian infrastructure, as well as transit, along its 6th Street corridor, widened in the 1960s to accommodate vehicle flow from I-94 and I-43, two divisive highways that demolished Black and Brown homes in the mid-1900s. The new project will allow the surrounding neighborhoods to access jobs and services downtown. The Port of Los Angeles received a $5 million grant for a waterfront pedestrian bridge. This project aims to construct a pedestrian bridge over two main freight line tracks, connecting the community to greenspace along the water.

Perpetuating divides

Despite many of these projects using their grant money towards needed improvement and connections, some of the grant funding will not be fully utilized to connect communities. For example, projects that add safety features for people walking and biking around large, dangerous roadways are improvements overall, but they won’t go far enough to truly address divisive infrastructure. These projects would likely be a better fit for larger, more flexible funding sources than a small, specific program like the Reconnecting Communities Program. By using reconnecting communities funds to skirt around divisive infrastructure rather than address it head-on, we risk missing out on more ambitious initiatives to reduce and repair harm.

Aerial photograph of I-5 in Rose Quarter, showing several wide lanes that divide the community
I-5 Rose Quarter area as of 2022. (Flickr, Oregon Department of Transportation)

One of the more egregious examples of an awarded project would be the I-5 Rose Quarter Improvement Project in Oregon. The planned expansion of I-5 in Rose Quarter has faced resistance for years, including from young climate activists at the nearby middle school already exposed to harmful air pollution from the existing highway. ODOT’s plans to cap the highway (while still expanding it) received $450 million in funding from the Reconnecting Communities Program. In this case, the program will mitigate a new harm, not repair a mistake from the past.

The I-5 project is not alone—America Walks identified four projects that received funding from the Reconnecting Communities Program that will ultimately lead to more displacement and approach reconnecting communities as an afterthought. The program is intended to address past divides, but as current decision-making continues to perpetuate harm, this small federal program must bridge an ever-widening gap.

Looking ahead

The Reconnecting Communities Program represents a start to bringing communities together and supporting safe, low-cost, and low-emission travel. The program is still new, and the next reauthorization will present an opportunity to strengthen and expand it. In the meantime, USDOT has an opportunity right now to improve on the substance of the projects that are awarded. USDOT should place a larger emphasis on purposefully moving away from highway systems and provide examples of projects that improve safety and connectivity, such as bike infrastructure and bus rapid transit. In addition, advocacy at the local and federal levels can continue to raise awareness of the importance of connecting communities and building safe streets.

Our current transportation system prioritizes the movement of vehicles over all else, and communities of color and low-income communities have often paid the price. To make a substantial impact in addressing community divides, local and federal agencies will need to take a closer look at how their existing models and practices enable further harm, and work to reshape the system for the better. Learn more here.

“Short-term action, long-term change”: How quick builds are bringing innovation to safe streets implementation

Two children wheel materials down a closed street as multiple generations work together to install small barriers to protect road users.

Quick-build projects prioritize affordable, rapid, and temporary solutions to inaccessible and unsafe streetscape conditions. Through this approach to project implementation, communities are able to set an example that establishes the need and precedent for continued change in their urban environment.

Two children wheel materials down a closed street as multiple generations work together to install small barriers to protect road users.
Short-term, low-cost projects can deliver valuable insights and bring the community together. (City of Fayetteville, AR)

What are quick builds?

Smart Growth America has a variety of resources on how quick builds develop and what they can achieve. Access them here.

In recent years, the practice of installing rapid, low-cost, and temporary improvements to public space has gained popularity. These initiatives, often called “tactical urbanism” or “quick builds” emphasize action, prioritizing short-term projects designed to improve street safety, public spaces, and enjoyability of the streetscape for all users.

There are many groups around the country utilizing quick builds in their communities, and all share a common goal of using low-cost materials to experiment with and gather input on potential design changes. While quick builds can create impressive changes to spaces, their real power lies in illustrating what works, what doesn’t, and what our urban spaces should look like.

Quick-build projects may look and work very differently depending upon the community’s needs; however, the approach remains similar. These initiatives work in the gray area, opting to avoid bureaucratic processes or expensive materials which delay changes to public spaces. They’re especially useful when a community needs to inspire action because it draws attention to perceived shortcomings, widens public engagement, deepens understanding, gathers data, encourages people to work together, and tests solutions.

Smart Growth America has been integrating quick builds into their Complete Streets initiatives through technical assistance projects across the country, testing new street designs and innovating best practices. In November 2022, Smart Growth America launched their most recent Complete Streets Leadership Academy (CSLA), a series of virtual sessions and in-person workshops designed to support community-led quick-build projects on state-owned roads. One of the goals of these projects was to strengthen relationships between state DOTs and local jurisdictions to help pave the way for further change.

Mike Lydon and Anthony Garcia’s book, Tactical Urbanism: Short-term Action for Long-term Change, illustrates examples of how the approach can be utilized and includes a toolkit to guide project planning and implementation. According to the guide, any initiative utilizing Tactical Urbanism should consist of three main principles: safety enhancement, ability to adapt across project implementation, and constant innovation.

side-by-side photos of Times Square before and after the pedestrian plaza was installed. On the left, cars travel down a busy throughway near a wide sidewalk. On the right, the entire space is filled with people sitting under red umbrellas or walking to nearby businesses.
Before and after image of pedestrian infrastructure added in NYC. (Flickr, New York City Department of Transportation)

Small actions lead to big changes across the nation

Projects like quick builds have been utilized to make significant changes to urban spaces since the early 2000s. Former New York City Department of Transportation Commissioner, Janette Sadik-Khan, has stated that a rapid quick-build-style approach was key to her work in New York City from 2007-2013. Sadik-Khan’s initiatives during the time included the implementation of 400 bike lanes, the launch of CitiBike, the building of 60 pedestrian plazas, and, most notably, the closure of car access on Broadway through Times Square.

The projects utilized quick-build approaches such as rapid implementation and the use of impermanent materials, and with support from leadership and funding to back them up, the eventual development of these initiatives into permanent structures points to quick build projects’ ability to push design changes across the finish line. The precedent set by Sadik-Khan has changed the way the country thinks about transportation, an impact we can see across the nation as multi-modal transportation initiatives expand.

With innovation and adaptation as key principles in these temporary and low-cost projects, it’s no surprise that the advocacy strategies for the approach have evolved over time. One example of this is the work of Vignesh Swaminathan, known on TikTok as Mr. Barricade. Not only have his short social media videos inspired and educated people around the world, but his work as a consultant put more quick builds into practice.

In 2019, Swaminathan worked with the City of San Jose, California to lay ten-miles of temporary protected bike lanes. Swaminathan helped the city save on the installation by coordinating lane installations with planned repavings and the use of plastic vertical bollards and bus stop islands. The city eventually plans to replace the plastic barriers with concrete islands, making the lanes permanent.

Colorful paint along a curb leads to a concrete curb extension in this before and after photo.
At the corner of Church and Center, a temporary project turns led to permanent intersection improvements. (City of Fayetteville, AR)

Shaping progress with community engagement

Some government leaders are using temporary, low-cost projects to put power into people’s hands. In Fayetteville, Arkansas, the city government has created an online application for citizens to gain approval for projects which will ultimately influence the city’s planning and development. The city has also developed a guide to community-led tactical urbanism which helps residents plan and implement projects. If government entities want to have an impactful role in urban infrastructure evolution, they can’t act alone—these processes require mutual trust, community buy-in, and participatory community feedback.

When government officials, practitioners, and community members come together to reap the benefits of quick builds, the practice can bring multimodal streetscapes to life. This provides an opportunity to test the effectiveness and popularity of design changes. Quick builds offer a mechanism to make small short-term safety improvements again and again, teaching us how to make our streets safer in the long term, too.

Congressional briefing emphasizes electrification and public transit to meet climate goals

The sun rises behind the U.S. Capitol, casting the dome in a golden glow

54 years since the first Earth Day, the US is still focusing on highway expansion. In light of increasing greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions, due in part to the Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act (IIJA), Transportation for America and its partners engaged the Future of Transportation Caucus to brief Congress on transportation decarbonization. We explained that to truly decrease emissions we need to electrify transportation systems and support travel options beyond private vehicles.

The sun rises behind the U.S. Capitol, casting the dome in a golden glow
The U.S. Capitol at sunrise. (Wikimedia Commons)

In a briefing on Capitol Hill, T4A Policy Associate Corrigan Salerno showed how highway expansion funds in the IIJA dwarfed historic investments in public transit leading to disastrous GHG emissions increases. The short and sweet of it is that mode-shift needs to be coupled with electrification to decrease our GHG emissions. Taylor Reich from the Institute for Transportation & Development Policy explained that coupling electrifying transportation with mode shift (opportunities to travel outside of a car) will save the government and private citizens trillions, lower energy consumption, and lower emissions.

Miguel Moravec from the Rocky Mountain Institute and Move Minnesota advocate Katie Jones described how states are already incorporating electrification and mode shift into policy. Minnesota’s Climate Action Framework and Colorado’s GHG Transportation Planning Standard require transportation infrastructure projects to abide by local GHG reduction targets. Thanks to these regulations, major highway expansion plans have been set aside in favor of bus rapid transit, active transportation networks, and transit oriented development.

The path forward

Most of the funding for highway expansion projects comes from formula funds with few strings attached, giving state departments of transportation (DOT) the option to expand aggressively. With the Senate voting 53-47 against mandating DOTs and metropolitan planning organizations (MPO) to track their GHG emissions, Congress is not helping increase transparency into our state transportation investments or halt endless highway growth.

Colorado and Minnesota are already implementing solutions and Maryland is trying to catch up. The federal government must meet their decarbonization efforts by bringing these state-level approaches to a national scale.

And there’s a path forward to do just that. Legislation such as Senator Markey’s GREEN Streets Act requires minimum standards for GHG, vehicle miles traveled (VMT), and air pollution reductions. It would also require DOTs and MPOs to publicize the environmental and health impact data for large expansion projects.

We already know that transportation decarbonization is necessary for fighting climate change. Electrifying all cars, a lofty goal on its own, won’t be enough to solve our climate crisis. Goal setting and transparency are integral to decarbonization. Without building more public transportation, establishing more active transportation infrastructure, and giving people the freedom to travel outside of a car, we won’t make significant progress. To truly respect our planet, our federal leaders must do more to address mode shift and electrification.

Four young professionals stand inside the House Chamber, smiling at the camera
The four presenters at the briefing (from left to right): Miguel Moravec, Katie Jones, Taylor Reich, and Corrigan Salerno.

There’s a climate cost to America’s freeways, and it’s not paid equally

A freeway laces through Seattle as smog descends on the city's skyline

The environmental impacts of the Interstate Highway System continue to harm communities of color through health hazards, pollution, and displacement.

A freeway laces through Seattle as smog descends on the city's skyline
A highway snakes through Seattle, Washington (Flickr photo)

The sprawling roadway network of the Interstate Highway System (IHS) is a ubiquitous feature of life in America. Long drives along vast stretches of freeway have come to symbolize mobility and freedom in cultural memory, obscuring the insidious nature of the creation of the highway system and its legacies of environmental racism and inequality.

These legacies are not abstract; they have tangible effects in terms of pollution, population displacement, and environmental degradation. To illustrate this point, we’ll start with a story.

The community of Shiloh in Coffee County, Alabama

Highways can endanger lives by exacerbating negative health and safety outcomes. This is exemplified in the ongoing injustices against the predominantly Black community of Shiloh in Coffee County, located in the rural south of Alabama, where the expansion of Highway 84 from 2 to 4 lanes has compounded flooding impacts for the residents. Completed in 2018, the highway expansion project elevated the roadway significantly higher than the existing terrain and neighborhood.

When it rains, the water from the highway is diverted towards people’s homes (as you can see in this video from ABC News) as pipes in the drainage system are pointed in the direction of the neighborhood. Paved roadways are also particularly impervious to stormwater and create substantial run-off, which picks up additives such as rust, metals, and pesticides. The Shiloh community consistently experiences flooding, and with heavy rain becoming increasingly frequent due to climate change, the situation is only expected to worsen. Flooding has affected the structural integrity of homes and is raising alarming health concerns with residents reporting the appearance of mold. Physical damages and rising maintenance issues have forced the Shiloh community to contend with the difficult reality of investing in expensive repair projects or leaving their homes.

The Shiloh community has been working to bring awareness to the plight and adversity they have been experiencing for the past 6 years, in a political landscape that has largely neglected to address the severity of the environmental disaster created in their backyard. Alabama DOT (ALDOT) continues to maintain that no discrimination took place when they planned the highway widening project and that the flooding is not a consequence of the expansion. Following community complaints, three residents received settlements of $5000 or less in exchange for restrictive covenants on their property that release ALDOT from any responsibility of flood damage, which is the extent of any action taken by the state.

Robert Bullard, popularly known as the “father of environmental justice,” has also been collaborating with the community to demand accountability at the federal level. Their efforts culminated in an ongoing civil rights investigation from the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) and a visit from the U.S. Secretary of Transportation Pete Buttigieg in early April of this year. But so far, no real relief has been found. The residents that signed away their rights feel misled and misheard, with the fear that their homes—and all the wealth and history they hold—are being washed away.

A compounding price

While the community of Shiloh’s case is an extreme example, countless communities across the country are harmed by existing highways and highway expansion projects. The highway system was constructed in a way that cut through vibrant existing neighborhoods, plowing through the heart of communities of color. This build-out of infrastructure cemented racial divides and segregation, encouraging connectivity for certain communities at the expense of others.

Inequities produced by the highway system are reinforced daily, with communities neighboring freeways bearing a disproportionate share of environmental harm. The siting of highways has historically exposed low-income communities and communities of color to higher amounts of air, water, and noise pollutants which in turn produces higher risk for disease and illness. Research indicates that there is a higher exposure to air contaminants for these communities which increases risk for cardiovascular disease and lung problems, among other health concerns. Proximity to paved surfaces, which absorb more heat than natural surfaces, means that communities are subjected to extreme heat as well.

A man in a cowboy hat walks down the sidewalk next to a row of parked cars in Little Village, Chicago
Little Village, Chicago (Wikimedia Commons)

Residents of Little Village, a predominantly Hispanic community in Chicago, have had to contend with poor quality air as a constant feature of their neighborhood that is located in close proximity to Interstate 55. Despite this, a proposal was introduced to add new lanes to the highway, incentivizing increased traffic, leading to a higher concentration of air pollutants in the region and a litany of detrimental health effects. Similarly, a controversial expansion of I-45 in North Houston is set to start soon, which would displace communities and add to existing problems of air pollution.

One of the regulatory tools that the public has at their disposal to challenge administrative actions is the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA). Enacted in 1970, NEPA requires agencies to produce detailed statements on the environmental impacts of a project, potential actions to mitigate damage, and alternative projects with lower impact. Periods for public comment are integrated into the process as opportunities for affected communities to raise concerns and ensure that their considerations are involved in the decision-making process. Although NEPA gives the public a platform to voice their concerns about projects, it is not designed to stop these projects from being implemented, even if they may cause significant environmental harm. This means that infrastructure projects, such as highway construction and expansion, can continue to move forward even when the repercussions on environmental justice are clear.

Recent research and analysis conducted by T4A has found that trends of highway expansion are continuing to stay the same. Funding is being moved towards emissions-increasing roadway widenings at a critical moment in the climate crisis when our dollars should be spent towards robust public and alternative transportation options. Our transportation system is steeped in environmental racism and continues to function as a driver of inequality. It has created countless socio-economic benefits for certain communities at the tremendous expense of others. Changing weather patterns have also unearthed the fragility of our transportation networks and the need for resilience to allow them to withstand vulnerability.

As the current administration works towards building a future for transportation infrastructure that is equitable and sustainable, it is presented with an opportunity to radically redress historic inequities and meaningfully change how we invest our federal transportation dollars and prioritize who we invest in. Our report, Divided by Design, explains further. Read it here.

Powering up communities: New grant to accelerate electrification & smart growth

electric bikes line up at a docking station on a wide sidewalk in madison, wisconsin

Across the country, municipalities and transit agencies are beginning to embrace electrification in local transportation. They’re showing that the future of transportation does not have to be just electrified cars. And thanks to the Joint Office of Energy and Transportation, there’s a new funding opportunity to help local communities go electric.

electric bikes line up at a docking station on a wide sidewalk in madison, wisconsin
Electric bikeshare docking station in Madison, Wisconsin. (WORT News)

In our Smart Growth and EVs series, we outlined some of the electrifying strategies that work hand-in-hand with the existing benefits of smart growth development. Among them, we singled out e-bikes/e-micromobility, carshare, multifamily housing, curbside charging challenges, and charger-oriented development. While projects are ramping up across the country to build out the NEVI program’s new network of interstate charging stations, programs that support opportunities to walk, bike, and take public transit have often started not at the national level, but in our own backyards.

Thanks to flexible provisions in the Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act, a new grant program from the Joint Office of Energy and Transportation will put $54 million in funding in communities’ hands to help pilot and expand electric mobility options through smart growth strategies. The grant will support expanded access for people who can’t charge at home (like apartment dwellers), electric fleets, and managed charging to help fill in the gaps that larger programs might be missing.

Supporting electric fleets

Fleets of all sizes move forward under this grant—and for good reason. Electrified fleets can offer big bonuses for operators. Over the last few months, transit agencies and states have had the opportunity to apply for funding to expand clean bus fleets under the Low or No Emission Bus Program. However, they’re not the only entities that could use electric fleets to decarbonize mobility. Work to innovate and expand micromobility, light duty, and medium duty fleets are all eligible for this grant—and there’s been no shortage of innovative deployments in cities and localities already.

The Washington, DC region’s Capital Bikeshare system has seen ridership explode as of late. The DC region itself is full of hills, and when it comes to protective, modern bike infrastructure, DC is falling behind its peer cities. Despite that, ridership continues to grow. In March 2024, the bikeshare system saw over 430,000 trips, up over 50 percent from the previous year and continuing a trend of record use. There’s a culprit powering the trend—of all rides, about 50 percent were on the system’s newer e-bikes. And these big ridership boosts didn’t take much; only 1 in 7 bikes in the fleet are actually electrified. As a force for equitable mobility and transportation decarbonization, e-bike shares continue to stand out as a key strategy. (And this only scratches the surface once you consider the huge potential to reduce emissions from new e-bike subsidies, like those in Colorado and other states have).

Advancing EV carshare

Some localities have partnered with nonprofits to offer electric carshare that offers low-emission mobility to those who need it most. Evie Carshare in Minneapolis-St.Paul region, and Colorado Carshare in Denver metro help undercut costly car ownership by allowing people to use EVs only when they need them. Under this grant, non-profit organizations (like Evie Carshare and Colorado Carshare) and for-profits alike would be eligible for funding to plan, pilot and deploy fleets with awards up to $4 million.

Strengthening smarter charging infrastructure

Looking forward to a future powered by renewable energy and zero-emission fleets, one challenge will be balancing energy needs against generation capacity. Even today, increased demand for electricity from both EVs and development can be too much for existing utilities in certain areas. How municipalities and utilities will coordinate to increase capacity remains an open question. Managed charging helps alleviate these issues before they happen by leveraging software and systems to ensure that vehicles get charged at times most optimal for the grid and the vehicle. This program seeks to get ahead of these issues that dense, in-demand locations are very likely to face. And for many of those people who live in multifamily housing, new projects for charging models that minimize frustrating charger queues and enable curbside charging near essential destinations could make all the difference to electrify trips. Introducing mobility wallets that hold funds people could use for any mode (from transit, e-bikeshare time or EV carshare) could streamline charging even further.

Going beyond the main funding programs for electrification (like the National Electric Vehicle Infrastructure, Charging and Fueling Infrastructure, and Low or No Emission programs) it’s a great sign that the Joint Office is still looking for ways to deliver funding where it’s still needed and could offer scalable decarbonization benefits with improvements. This is especially true when the funding opportunities play so well with smart growth strategies.

New survey: Accessible Streetscapes for the Disability Community

A young child in a wheelchair travels down a bike lane on a narrow, calm street

A new survey created in collaboration with Smart Growth America, the International Parking & Mobility Institute, and the Disability Rights Education & Defense Fund aims to collect the experiences of people with disabilities navigating our streets. This information will contribute to best practice guidelines illustrated in our upcoming Accessible Streetscapes Design Guide. The survey will remain open through June 7—share your experience today.

From the parking meter and beyond: The origins of the Accessible Streetscapes Design Guide

In 2018, Transportation for America’s Policy Director, Benito Pérez, helped launch the District’s Department of Transportation Red Top Meter Program while working as Curbside Operations Manager with DDOT. Through the program, the department implemented parking meters with distinct red tops along curbside parking spaces with accessible access to the sidewalk. These meters reserve parking spaces for persons with disabilities and allow additional parking time. While programs such as the Red Top Meter Program can help to improve accessible access to the sidewalk, Pérez noticed a need for transportation practitioners to consider the accessibility of the entire streetscape. Projects that improve access to the curb can only be meaningful when the streetscape itself is accessible to all people, including people with disabilities.

What is the Accessible Streetscapes Design Guide?

Smart Growth America is collaborating with the International Parking & Mobility Institute, the Accessible Parking Coalition, and the Disability Rights Education & Defense Fund to create a first-of-its-kind resource: an Accessible Streetscapes Design Guide. The purpose of this design guide is to compile recommendations and best practices to improve accessibility across the entire streetscape, including parks, plazas, sidewalks, intersections, and more.

This guide further seeks to include considerations for a wide range of physical and cognitive abilities that historically have not been represented in legislation. Thirty-three years ago, the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) was passed, marking a notable milestone in the history of federal civil rights legislation for people with disabilities. The passage of this landmark legislation is cause for celebration, but at the heart of disability advocacy lies the consensus that the ADA was always meant to be a starting point, not the end game. Just last year, the Public Right-of-Way Accessibility Guidelines (PROWAG) was published by the U.S. Access Board in an effort to address the public right-of-way accessibility requirements left out of the ADA. These two examples of legislation illustrate meaningful steps towards more accessible spaces, yet ADA is limited in scope, PROWAG is limited in enforcement, and both are limited in their inclusion of persons with cognitive disabilities.

The forthcoming design guide hopes to provide a starter resource that can support practitioners as they implement policies and projects to design a streetscape that serves all who use it.

The Accessible Streetscapes Design Guide Survey

To create a design guide that reflects the needs of those who experience the challenges of navigating an inaccessible world, we developed a survey for streetscape users with disabilities in collaboration with the International Parking and Mobility Institute and Disability Rights Education & Defense Fund. The responses to this questionnaire are essential to designing recommendations that improve access for that community and will be at the core of the Accessible Streetscapes Design Guide.

With feedback collected from this survey, Smart Growth America and its partners will enhance the Accessible Streetscapes Design Guide with firsthand user feedback. To create a more equitable and accessible future, the perspectives of those most affected by our current system and its future changes must be included in all decision-making processes, from design to implementation.

If you identify as a member of the disability community, we would appreciate your contribution to the survey. Access the survey here.

If you are an organization, government entity, or just interested in distributing this survey, please reach out to us using this Google Form.

Progress for passenger rail in the South and beyond

A shiny passenger train chugs down the track in a southern town

Two recent developments at the federal level can help propel passenger rail expansion in the South and across the country. 

A shiny passenger train chugs down the track in a southern town
An Amtrak Crescent line train heads south. Wikimedia Commons photo.

Interstate Rail Compact Grant

The states of Mississippi, Alabama, and Louisiana make up the Southern Rail Commission (SRC), which has been steadfastly committed to expanding passenger rail service in the South for the past 40 years, most recently achieving success for the restoration of service on the Gulf Coast.

On March 14th, the Federal Railroad Administration (FRA) announced that the SRC, along with rail commissions in the Midwest and Mid-Atlantic won an Interstate Rail Compact (IRC) grant. The SRC will match 50 percent of the $400,000 they have been awarded and use these funds to hire more people, market passenger rail, conduct impact studies, and apply for more federal grants. In short, they can spend the money on everything but running the service itself.

The SRC has been fighting the good fight for decades. Passenger rail service in the United States has been on the ropes for decades, with much of the service in the South phased out in the 70s. The situation only worsened after Hurricane Katrina in 2005; passenger rail service has not been running on the Gulf Coast for nearly 20 years.

The grant spells good things for the ongoing fight for passenger rail. In addition to the restoration of service on the Gulf Coast, the SRC has several projects to support, including passenger rail extensions between Baton Rouge and New Orleans, Mobile to New Orleans, and Dallas to Atlanta. This grant will help them further advance their efforts.

Passenger Rail Advisory Committee

Hot off the heels of the IRC grant announcements, the Surface Transportation Board (STB) has publicly announced the membership of their new Passenger Rail Advisory Committee (PRAC). The STB’s duties related to passenger rail service have expanded in recent years, leading to the creation of the PRAC. This committee is intended to advise on increasing route efficiency, mediating between passenger and freight companies, and improving inter-city rail-related processes. Its formation is a testament to continued progress for passenger rail at the federal level, which we hope will translate to support for passenger service across the country.

Among the names of the 21 voting members lies our own chair, John Robert Smith, former Amtrak board member and former member/long-time advisor to the SRC. The inclusion of advocates like John Robert, who have dedicated decades in the pursuit of passenger rail service across the country, will be critical in supporting expansion efforts in the present day.

While these advancements for passenger rail are particularly good news for the South, they’re also proof of what’s possible in the rest of the country. The SRC continues to build upon their recent success in the Gulf Coast, showing what bipartisan leadership on interstate rail can accomplish. As support for passenger rail continues to evolve at the federal level, we hope more leaders will follow their example.

Webinar: Transportation electrification and smart growth in the U.S.

A parking space painted green with a symbol indicating the space is dedicated for EVs

On Tuesday, May 14 from 2 – 3 p.m., we’re partnering with the International Parking & Mobility Institute to offer a free webinar exploring smart growth strategies. Register here.

Many climate advocates and pro-climate decision-makers are focused on electrification as the primary, or even only, emissions reduction solution in the transportation sector. As transportation advocates and professionals, we know that electrification is essential but insufficient to achieve our greenhouse gas reduction goals. How do we push transportation electrification forward in a way that supports essential smart growth goals?

This webinar will be a discussion with transportation electrification experts and parking and mobility professionals to discuss how smart growth strategies should work with transportation electrification policy to maximize climate, equity, mobility, quality of life, and sustainability benefits. This roundtable will elevate strategies that are compatible with and support vibrant communities, uplifting walkability, access, transit, shared mobility, and micromobility. Register now.

Offers one AICP credit and one CAPP point. To earn the CAPP point, attendees must attend the live webinar.

Recordings will be sent to those who cannot attend in person, but may not use this webinar for CAPP application or recertification.

Learning objectives

  • Review and discuss the role of transportation electrification in the content of broader mobility ecosystems and Smart Growth.
  • Understand fundamental concepts of Smart Growth that can be applied to maximize climate, equity, mobility, quality of life, and sustainability benefits.
  • Explore how featured Smart Growth strategies work to amplify and reinforce transportation electrification and other new innovative technologies and processes.

Presenters

Chris Rall, T4A Outreach Director

Chris Rall has been with Transportation for America since 2010, originally serving as Oregon Field Organizer. Incrementally expanding his role and responsibilities, he became Outreach Director in 2019. Chris runs T4America’s membership program, keeps partners and allies apprised of developments on transportation policy and opportunities for innovation, and guides T4America’s amplification of the local voices so critical to reforming the United States’ transportation system. Chris manages T4America’s co-leadership role in CHARGE (Coalition Helping America Rebuild and Go Electric) in which he helps a broad coalition of energy and transportation advocates find synergies that advance zero-emission transportation and smart growth at the same time. Before joining T4America, Chris co-founded Green Wheels, a local transportation advocacy organization in Humboldt County, CA, and served as Policy Director for the Healthy Humboldt Coalition. Originally from New Jersey, Chris graduated from the University of California at Berkeley, and received his graduate degree from Humboldt State University. He is based in Portland, OR.

Corrigan smiles approachably in a professional suit and tie in front of a black and brick wall.
Corrigan Salerno, T4A Policy Associate

Corrigan conducts research, provides technical assistance, and advocates for sustainable, equitable transportation policy. He has led research into the climate impact of the IIJA, evaluated the walkability of hundreds of new NEVI program charging stations, and helps coordinate the CHARGE Coalition of labor, environmental advocates, and industry groups that advocate for effective electrification policy. Prior to joining Transportation for America, Corrigan worked as a research assistant at a federal contractor assisting the Federal Highway Administration, focusing on human factors projects related to the MUTCD and connected/autonomous vehicles.

Questions?

For more information, contact Kathleen Federici, M. Ed., Director of Professional Development at the International Parking & Mobility Institute.

Building back better: Reflections on the state of infrastructure repair in the U.S.

A long bridge over a river stops abruptly halfway across, with a quarter-long section lying crumped in the river below

Despite substantial federal funding available to address “crumbling roads and bridges,” our infrastructure’s state of repair is an ongoing issue, and climate change is only adding to the problem.

A long bridge over a river stops abruptly halfway across, with a quarter-long section lying crumped in the river below
The I-5 Bridge over the Skagit River collapsed in 2013 after a truck hit its trusses. Wikimedia Commons photo.

You don’t have to look far in history to see major infrastructure failures around the country. The same day as the Key Bridge collapse (a tragedy that was likely not due to a state of repair issue), in the Greater New Orleans metro area, the Chalmette Paris Road Bridge was closed due to hazardous structural integrity issues (i.e. it could collapse at any time). There also has been multiple notable roadway infrastructure failures in the past two decades: the I-95 bridge collapse in Philadelphia, PA; I-85 bridge collapse in Atlanta, GA; I-5 bridge in Skagit, WA;  DC-295 in Washington, DC; I-25 in Pueblo, CO; I-64 in Norfolk, VA; and most notably I-35W in Minneapolis, MN.

For the Philadelphia, Atlanta, and DC cases, the bridges were structurally sound, but failed due to a catastrophic event without safeguards to protect the structures. For the Skagit, Pueblo, Norfolk, and Minneapolis, flawed design paired with a changing climate and mobility patterns (i.e. vehicle weight and size) led to structural failures. And if we look beyond roadways and towards other modes of transportation in the US, top of mind is mechanical failures leading to East Palestine, OH train derailment, the 2007 DC MetroRail crash at Fort Totten (and again on DC MetroRail in 2015 with a train fire at L’Enfant Plaza), the 2017 NYC Subway Summer of Hell, and even a failing seawall that cofunctions as a pedestrian walkway at DC’s famed Tidal Basin (#ripstumpy).

What’s going on with our state of repair?

There are compounding factors that are threatening our nation’s mobility infrastructure. The most notable threat is our climate. With ever-fluctuating temperatures, precipitation (or lack thereof), and major weather events, the structural integrity of our infrastructure is being challenged. When originally built, a lot of our nation’s infrastructure was designed with the assumption of historical climate precedent going forward. Fluctuating temperatures affect building material, while precipitation impacts foundational integrity. When also subjected to increasing extreme weather events that stress the infrastructure, wear and tear accelerates.

Then there is the reality of changing travel patterns on our mobility system. A growing population paired with changing commuting patterns post-COVID pandemic that is stretching system demands for longer periods of time plus using different types of vehicles (that are bigger and heavier, including trains and ships) on our roadways, waterways, and railways is taking a toll on infrastructure designed with a different population and vehicle demand in mind.

There also are factors that are in the hands of transportation operators and decision makers. When the Silver Bridge collapsed between West Virginia and Ohio in 1967, one of the outcomes was the development of the National Bridge Inspection Standards. After the 1980 Skyway Bridge collapse, infrastructure design was altered for future projects to create structural redundancy and fortification. However, as alluded to earlier, changing climate and system demands may render design, maintenance, and inspection standards developed 40-60 years ago “functionally obsolete,” borrowing a term from bridge inspection standards. This also can be seen (or not seen) on the ground via the decreasing frequency and rigor of asset condition inspections.

And this can be attributed to a deteriorating focus on our transportation policy and investments aimed at fixing things first. There are leaders, such as Michigan Governor Gretchen Whitmer, who have made it a priority to rethink transportation policy and investments aimed at fixing things first, but unfortunately, that is still a troublesome rarity in light of these challenges to our nation’s mobility infrastructure state of repair. This is also paired with the lack of institutional knowledge at the federal and state legislative levels, deferring often to state DOT for guidance on policy and investments. Unfortunately, those same policies and investments are opaque to decision makers and the public, if not the state DOT itself not understanding their origins and being flexible enough to rethink strategies that haven’t worked for decades to yield different results.

Bridge inspectors investigate the wall of I-84 bridge, which has small amounts of debris.
Oregon DOT bridge inspection along Eagle Creek Viaduct on I-84 MP 40 after a fire. Flickr photo by ODOT.

What’s our path forward?

President Biden made commitments to rebuild the fallen Key Bridge within hours of the event, supported by key Congressional appropriators. There is a need for that same urgency across the entirety of the transportation system’s state of repair, which has breached $1 trillion in deferred maintenance, before disasters occur. There also is a need to rethink investment strategies and policies that encourage a reduction in vehicle miles traveled, which is corollary to reducing transportation’s GHG emissions, and in turn, slowing down climate change’s impact on our transportation system.

While decision makers hash out policies and investment strategies, the transportation industry needs to double down how they assess the state of repair in light of changing conditions. That means reassessing our nation’s assets and the climate and mobility demand assumptions that play into an asset’s condition. Digging into this further, that means understanding implications on existing and future building materials and asset designs, plus looking at how and what frequency an asset is assessed and future-proofed from catastrophic failure (whether by deterioration or an extreme event (whether induced by nature or not).

FTA helps deliver more buses for less

The Federal Transit Administration is working hard to ensure that the next rounds of the Low or No Emissions Grant Program and Buses and Bus Facilities Program do the most for riders—and the climate. Here’s how.

Read our original letter and our thank you to the FTA.

A bus rolls to a stop on a bustling city street as pedestrians walk down a wide sidewalk in the background

The Federal Transit Administration (FTA)’s Low or No Emissions Grant Program (Low No) and Buses and Bus Facilities Program have been delivering new transit vehicles to communities across the country since 2016. But when the Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act (IIJA, or the 2021 infrastructure law) passed, the bill supercharged the program. Funding for the Low No program increased over five times the previous levels, growing from $182 million for 49 awardees in fiscal year 2021 to $1.22 billion across 130 grant winners in fiscal year 2023. With all that money flowing into communities, the transition to zero emission transit systems should be accelerating at scale.

However, funding isn’t everything. Without proper policy in place, the way that funding is spent could mean less transit service per dollar, not more. According to the Eno Center for Transportation, zero emission buses purchased with federal funding cost more per bus than buses purchased without federal dollars.

Under the previous structure for the Low No program, transit agencies had flexibility to use federal dollars to customize their purchases nearly as much as they wanted, without sharing costs for extra features or preferences. And this doesn’t just create a nuisance—combined with other economic forces, this cost has worked to outweigh the benefits of historic funding increases. In battery electric bus manufacturer Proterra’s 2023 Chapter 11 bankruptcy filings, they claimed that excessive customization and long lead times for payments from transit agency customers played a role in their fall.

While some customization to meet performance needs is warranted, at the end of the day, a bus is a bus—frequency and network coverage matters above all for riders. So CHARGE, supported by the National Campaign for Transit Justice, sent a letter to the FTA urging for reforms to ensure that the IIJA’s historic funding is used more effectively to deploy clean buses in communities across the country.

In line with the administration’s equity and domestic industry goals, the FTA responded to our letter and updated the Low No and Buses and Bus Facility program to help ensure riders will get more buses, for less money, faster, while also making sure local manufacturing can work at scale. Along with new guidance, the FTA has made new changes to this year’s notice of funding, incentivizing applicants to minimize vehicle customization and reform procurement processes, helping more clean buses get out to communities faster than ever.

We thank the FTA for their responsiveness and willingness to pivot in its implementation of the IIJA to maximize the benefits it can provide, getting more buses to more people for fewer dollars.

Transportation for America co-leads the Coalition Helping America Rebuild and Go Electric (CHARGE). Learn more about the coalition here.

Rethinking the intersection to prioritize safety over speed

A cyclist crosses an intersection with the aid of a green bicycle crossing signal

The rising rate of pedestrian fatalities is a consequence of deadly design decisions that prioritize driver speed and convenience over the safety of all other road users. Today, we dig into one example: crosswalk signals.

A cyclist crosses an intersection with the aid of a green bicycle crossing signal
Flickr photo by Seattle DOT.

As communities work to advance safe streets, they must also ensure that these efforts lead to design changes that effectively integrate with the technology managing traffic flow for all users. Many walk signals are timed based on outdated standards that prioritize maximum green time for all motorized vehicle movements. Signal timing gets reviewed on a case-by-case basis, leveraging a manual last published in 2015 that isn’t supplemented often to consider the diverse needs of pedestrians, such as people with disabilities, seniors, cyclists, or parents with strollers.

Walk signals are just one example of how our infrastructure prioritizes the speed of vehicles over the safety of other road users. This practice comes at a deadly cost.

We are in the midst of a historic and alarming increase in the number of people struck and killed while walking, which has been on a steady rise since 2009, reaching levels not seen in more than 30 years. Speed is the number one culprit in these fatalities. Speed is also the best predictor of whether or not a collision will result in an injury or death. Design elements, including effective traffic signals, are essential to reducing speeds and improving safety.

If not designed correctly, intersections can be one of the most dangerous places where folks in and outside of cars interact. There are many recent examples of places that experience a high number of crashes at crosswalks. Saint Paul, Minnesota is a prime example of this. In 2016, Shelby Kokesch was killed while attempting to cross Kellogg Boulevard, a busy thoroughfare, from the Minnesota History Center. Though Kokesch used a marked crosswalk, it lacked a stop sign or a crossing signal. While one car pulled over to let Kokesch and her mother pass, the second vehicle—an SUV—did not stop.

At the time, Saint Paul responded with higher traffic enforcement around crosswalks, ticketing drivers who failed to stop at marked crosswalks and yield to pedestrians. During the crackdown, Sergeant Jeremy Ellison reflected, “An overwhelming response from people is, ‘I didn’t see them.’ People are not paying attention and they’re driving too fast.”

This is a design problem—and it has a design solution

Signalized intersections draw attention to pedestrian crossings and help ensure that traffic comes to a complete stop before travelers enter the crosswalk. Street design can be more influential on driver behavior than speed limits or enforcement alone. Complete Streets—an approach to designing streets that prioritizes the safety and comfort of people who walk, bike, and roll—can lead to slower driver speeds, reducing the risk of crashes and roadway fatalities for folks both in and outside of cars.

Designing an intersection with safety in mind can take a lot of different forms, such as shortening the length of an intersection by reducing the number of vehicle lanes—or by ensuring appropriate time to cross the street. Walk signals and walk signal timing also play an important role by giving pedestrians adequate time to cross. For example, leading pedestrian intervals allow pedestrians to begin crossing the street before cars turn right or left, signaling to drivers that pedestrians are present and making it easier for them to see and yield to other people using the road.

One aspect of a Complete Streets approach is practicing effective community engagement. Administering walk audits with a variety of road users, community residents, and decision makers can assist municipal planners in determining whether a signal offers enough time to cross the street. By implementing this approach, planners and engineers can experience a street in the same way as the people who travel on it every day. Using this method can allow cities and states to make their streets safer and more accessible.

Pedestrian fatalities will continue to rise until we prioritize the safety of all road users over the speed of a few. The effective use of crosswalk signals, combined with other elements of safe street design, can reduce the danger on our roadways and ensure that everyone can safely get to where they need to go. Learn more about a Complete Streets approach here.

Celebrating 20 years of Complete Streets

A calm tree-lined street in Brooklyn, NY hosts one lane of car traffic, a bike lane, street parking, and a median to shorten the crosswalk distance for pedestrians.

The term “Complete Streets” was coined two decades ago, and while a lot of progress has been made, the fight for safe streets is far from over. To commemorate 20 years of the Complete Streets movement, we’ve rounded up some resources that can help you keep up the fight.

A calm tree-lined street in Brooklyn, NY hosts one lane of car traffic, a bike lane, street parking, and a median to shorten the crosswalk distance for pedestrians.
Flickr photo by NYCDOT

Barbara McCann, the current Senior Advisor to the Associate Administrator for Safety at the Federal Highway Administration (and the first Founding Director of the National Complete Streets Coalition) wrote a blog post to commemorate Complete Streets’ 20-year anniversary.

Thousands of planners, engineers, and others in government, consulting, and public interest groups have worked … to make safety for all users routine in policies and in practice. Now more than 1,700 Complete Streets policies are remaking transportation projects across the country.

—Barbara McCann

But we know this work is far from over. One of our three guiding principles at Transportation for America is safety over speed, a rule that we hope will guide decision makers to reduce the speed of vehicles and prioritize the safety of people walking and rolling to their essential destinations. And while some key safety programs passed in the 2021 infrastructure law, the federal spending bill left even more money available for the deadly status quo, which means we’ll need to keep advocating for safer streets at the local, state, and federal levels in the years ahead.

Our colleagues at the National Complete Streets Coalition (NCSC) are doing the same—and arming advocates with tools to join the movement. Take a look at some of their most recent resources.

1. Policy Action Guide

In partnership with CityHealth, NCSC produced this guide to equip planners and practitioners with practical resources for overcoming barriers and navigating the complexities of policy implementation. From building coalitions to crafting compelling narratives, it offers a comprehensive toolkit for effecting change at the state and local level. Access it here.

2. Complete Streets Story Map

Spread the word about the Complete Streets movement. Whether you’re a planner, engineer, advocate, or new to the smart growth space, the Complete Streets story map (produced in partnership with CityHealth) can serve as an interactive tool that breaks down what makes a Complete Street and why they’re important. The tool also features two case studies—Pittsburgh, PA and Milwaukee, WI—that demonstrate how these communities achieved their Complete Streets vision. Learn more here.

3. Policy Evaluation Tool

NCSC evaluates and scores Complete Streets policies across the country using their Policy Framework (updated just last year). Now, advocates and policymakers can do the same, using a free and open-source tool to evaluate existing or drafted local, MPO, or state-level Complete Streets policies. Use the tool.

There’s more to come

Smart Growth America will soon release a summary of their 2023 Complete Streets Leadership Academies, where they partnered with states and local communities to implement safe street design on state-owned roadways. Stay tuned to see what they learned from this year-long technical assistance project in communities across the country—and keep following us here for more opportunities to advance street safety where you live.

It’s nearly impossible to understand how our tax dollars are spent on transportation

Highways overlap over a desert landscape in Arizona

T4America used artificial intelligence to find out how states are spending money from the Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act (IIJA). Two findings are clear: More money alone will still fail to produce change, and it’s far too complicated to figure out where our transportation dollars are going.

Highways overlap over a desert landscape in Arizona
Photo by Jared Murray on Unsplash

In negotiations over the 2021 infrastructure law, the Senate discarded most of the ambitious policy improvements in the House’s INVEST in America Act, instead opting to create scores of new good but small discretionary grant programs for lowering emissions or investing in transportation options while increasing funding overall for the same flexible pots of money that states can spend with few restrictions. Still, the White House and many senators assured us that this bill would lead to a climate victory—often pointing to the small pots of money set aside for emissions reduction efforts.

As the infrastructure law continues to fund thousands of projects, we’ve developed new tools using artificial intelligence to individually categorize project descriptions to categorize how that funding is being spent. And while our methods for analyzing federal transportation spending have evolved into the 21st century, state spending is firmly stuck in the last one, devoting more than $33 billion from the IIJA (so far) to highway expansion. It turns out that giving state DOTs more money with few strings attached results in even more of the same: emissions-increasing highway widenings.

According to recent news coverage, our analysis has struck a chord:





While new discretionary grant programs have been able to offset some of these emissions, relying on cities, transit agencies, and localities to pursue small amounts of funding to offset this massive influx of emissions has produced limited results.

It shouldn’t take dedicated national nonprofits to sort out this information

The simple truth is that it’s incredibly complex to find out where the money from IIJA is being spent by states, and even then, results in a relatively limited view. How can the public have a chance to decide if the $1.2 trillion in new infrastructure money in the IIJA was a smart decision when it’s so difficult to find out where that money is being spent?

While this analysis shines a light on more than 57,000 projects, it’s only the tip of the iceberg. While federal dollars are eventually tracked on USASpending.gov, state-funded projects are not tracked in any central location. There are billions of dollars that this analysis cannot account for, programmed away in over 50 different formats within their State Transportation Improvement Programs (STIPs) that spell out state spending plans across the country.

Federal sources could be improved as well. Of the projects we looked into, 56,106 were from the FHWA, which does a much better job of reporting and obligating funds to states compared to the FTA. And this dataset is changing every month. Already, over 2,000 new projects have been added to our initial USAspending.gov query since our first analysis—and we plan to revisit it in the future.

As a taxpayer, these federal dollars are coming out of your pockets. Yet the lack of transparency on how this money gets spent leaves much to be desired. Even more alarming than the lack of transparency is where the money is going. The new and widened roads that states built with the funding will not lead to freedom from congestion, but instead, might have just consumed dollars that could have been invested in alternatives to road congestion and the existing network of roads and sidewalks. Next time, if we want better outcomes for climate, connectivity, and the economy at large, our leaders need to be clear about how they’re spending our money. That means stronger policy in the next reauthorization, and better reporting as soon as possible.

Our analysis on state transportation spending isn’t over. Stay tuned for additional updates.

Demand a greener future for transportation. Tell your senator to support the GREEN Streets Act.

A hazy orange sunset descends over rows and rows of cars traveling down a highway

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.

A hazy orange sunset descends over rows and rows of cars traveling down a highway
Photo by Aleksandr Popov on Unsplash

Transportation is the largest source of greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions in the United States, and the bulk of them come from driving. To reduce these emissions, our transportation system requires more opportunities to travel outside of a car.

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.

Help support this bill. Click here to ask your senator to be a co-sponsor.

The IIJA is a climate time bomb. Will states defuse it?

A highway dotted with cars cuts through the natural landscape, creating a scar that mirrors the environmental harm of ever-increasing highway expansions

Despite the transportation sector being the biggest emitter of U.S. greenhouse gasses, our AI-powered analysis of over 57,000 infrastructure law-funded state projects shows that over a quarter of the law’s formula dollars are funding highway expansion projects that will drastically increase emissions. Will states reverse course with the last two fiscal years of funding? 

A highway dotted with cars cuts through the natural landscape, creating a scar that mirrors the environmental harm of ever-increasing highway expansions
Photo by Graham Ruttan on Unsplash

In a recent briefing with the American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials in Washington, DC, Delaware Senator Tom Carper took to the stage and reflected on the 2021 infrastructure law (also known as the Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act or IIJA), and its importance in the fight against climate change. While several Democratic senators have touted the IIJA as important for reducing emissions, as it currently stands, the landmark legislation has not made a positive impact.

While it is true that the IIJA gave states an unprecedented opportunity to use formula program dollars towards emissions-reducing projects, state DOTs also retained the flexibility and authority to invest in traditional, unsustainable road-building projects. Climate researchers found that states are key in determining if the infrastructure law would reduce emissions or use the new funding to make the current problem that much worse.

Keeping these two potential outcomes in mind, we set out to determine how states are actually using the IIJA’s historic funding. With the help of Artificial Intelligence (AI), we categorized thousands of infrastructure law federal award project descriptions (here’s an example) in line with the Georgetown Climate Center’s Transportation Investment Strategy Tool. We now have a picture of how states are using their federal program funding.

Through the analysis, we categorized over $130 billion in funding that has been reported as obligated (or designated to be spent) using IIJA funding from over 56,000 Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) projects, over 1,200 Federal Transit Administration (FTA) grants, and dozens of grants from the Office of the Secretary and Federal Railroad Administration.

While we’re still just scratching the surface of this massive data set, what we found does not paint a pretty picture.

Our findings

Pie chart with the follow title Analysis of reported obligated IIJA funding $ by investment categories: Data from AI-assisted analysis of 57,443 FTA, FRA, OST, and FHWA award obligations reported to USAspending.gov Data include: Highway expansion $33,506,244,027.20 Highway Resurfacing $36,377,911,153.17 LDV Electrification $138,625,649.44 Truck & Bus Electrification $211,959,511.00 Freight & Operations $1,740,979,406.89 Land Use, Active Modes, TDM $4,252,078,389.04 Transit and Passenger Rail $25,561,955,692.49 Other $28,615,727,527.86

Instead of using the historic funding levels to give people alternatives to congestion, pollution, and car dependency, our analysis finds that states have designated over $33 billion in federal dollars (over 25 percent of analyzed funds) toward projects that expand road capacity, doubling down on a strategy that has failed time and time again. Worse still, states and authorities are slow to designate funds for transit and other emissions-reducing projects and even slower to outlay (actually spend) funds relative to FHWA dollar spending, even as we’re running out of time to reduce emissions in the face of climate change. Only about 20% of FTA formula apportionments from fiscal year 2022 to 2024 are reported as obligated in this dataset, while 64% of FHWA formula apportionments are reported obligated, in line with reporting from USDOT. There is also concern that if IIJA funds are not obligated/designated to be spent within a specified period of time, they could expire (or lapse) and become unavailable for use.

To maintain just the literal surface of the nation’s massive inventory of roads, nearly 28% of analyzed funding has gone to highway resurfacing, a strategy that the Georgetown Climate Center’s Transportation Investment Strategy Tool found to help reduce emissions. Considering other infrastructural work unrelated to on-road emissions, we found that road maintenance accounts for more than half of all FHWA formula spending.

Bar Chart with the following title: Analysis of obligated FTA and FHWA formula funds: Data from project funding reported as obligated to USASpending.gov. Data include: FHWA Formula Total Obligations (reported) $103,198,290,931 Total FY22-FY26 Apportionment Estimates $273,132,500,000 FTA Formula Total Obligations (reported)$7,937,328,555 Total FY22-FY26 Apportionment Estimates $69,155,896,561

Our analysis includes only the information provided by the federal government on USAspending.gov. State DOTs and federal agencies are slow to update project spending data, and many discretionary awards are not yet uploaded to USAspending.gov, so this analysis does not reflect all of the IIJA’s spending. Instead, we intend this analysis to shine a light on how states are using the largest, most flexible, and often least understood chunk of federal funding—federal highway formula funds. Without federal guardrails on states or a drastic change in spending priorities, our analysis predicts a substantial increase in GHG emissions if current trends persist.

We’re only just approaching the midway point for the IIJA, which is set to expire on September 30, 2026. If states continue to fund and advance projects in the same way that they’ve done so far, the IIJA will have an alarming impact on the climate. If states do not change course, the IIJA is on track to produce an additional 178.5 million tonnes of CO2e GHG over baseline emissions by 2040. According to the EPA, this is the emissions equivalent of running 48 coal-fired power plants for a full year.

Bar chart with the following title: National Net Emissions Production by Transportation Investment Strategy showing emissions (of CO2e GHG) created by highway expansion, emissions reduced by other programs, and the subtotal cumulative emissions. Results show the IIJA is on track to produce 178.5 million tonnes of CO2e GHG over baseline by 2040.

While the IIJA could have been a win for the environment, across the country, states have instead used this once-in-a-generation level of funding to expand roadways the same way they’ve been doing for years. Considering the billions of federal dollars already spent on highway expansion projects, it’s going to take more than self-congratulation over the bill’s historic funding to undo the environmental harms. In light of our findings that state spending continues to undermine climate goals, the administration cannot compromise on reducing transportation emissions and must explore every means available. Congress needs to get real—the largest and most growing sector of emissions is transportation. If we want to tackle congestion and the climate crisis, instead of offering platitudes, the next transportation bill needs to offer clean mobility options, like transit, car share, active modes, and electrification—not just the same strategies that got us in this position in the first place.

United States Reported Obligation Strategy Breakdown

AI-assisted analysis based on data reported to USAspending.gov, updated 2/15/24. 

StrategyTotal $Total CO2 Saved
Other Non-Reducing$28,615,727,5280
System operations$1,490,802,9237,290,026
Electric transit buses$202,807,446979,560
Travel demand management$499,844,9502,214,313
Light duty EV’s: vehicles$106,276460
Light duty EV’s: infrastructure$138,519,373469,581
Land use/smart growth$47,297,073118,716
Electric trucks – MDT/urban$00
Electric trucks – HDT/short-haul$5,985,06510,653
Electric school buses$00
Hydrogen trucks – long-haul$3,167,0003,927
Freight/intermodal$250,176,484297,710
Passenger rail electrification$00
Micromobility: e-bike ownership subsidies$00
SGR: Bus$5,185,233,9992,385,208
Bicycle investment$1,879,072,466770,420
Bus service: efficiency$906,794,442299,242
highway resurfacing$36,377,911,15311,277,152
SGR: Urban rail$5,113,561,1671,278,390
Electric microtransit$30,785,4466,465
Intercity rail$8,751,313,5731,662,750
Transit fare reduction$00
Pedestrian investment$1,822,206,721236,887
Urban rail$1,513,168,610196,712
SGR: Commuter/intercity rail$2,737,602,045328,512
Micromobility: shared e-scooters & e-bikes$3,657,179219
Commuter rail$317,520,07315,876
Bus rapid transit$533,558,47821,342
Shared ride incentives$35,431,1881,063
Bus service: expansion$436,986,673-43,699
Highway expansion$33,506,244,027-69,022,863

Restoring Buffalo’s “Emerald Necklace”

A park extends down the center of two narrow streets

Humboldt Parkway, once home to vibrant public space, was destroyed by the Kensington Highway, displacing over 600 families and leaving a concrete gash through Buffalo’s network of city parks. With federal support, the Kensington Expressway project aims to reconnect the community.

The rendering below is not an accurate depiction of the Kensington Expressway project. After hearing from local advocates, we’re working to uplift the on-the-ground experience that paints a different picture than the one we initially shared.

In the meantime, take a look at this article that sheds more light on the situation in Buffalo and check the rest of our case studies that demonstrate the right way to heal the divides caused by divisive infrastructure…and the stories where those efforts have gone wrong.

A park extends down the center of two narrow streets
NYSDOT rendering of the Kensington Expressway Project

Tell your senator, now is the time for Complete Streets!

Close-up of Capitol building

Two new bills introduced to Congress by Senators Ed Markey and John Fetterman make Complete Streets a minimum design mandate, redefining our road design standards and ensuring funding for the implementation of Complete Streets projects. Let Congress know these bills can’t wait!

Close-up of Capitol building
Photo by S Chia on Flickr.

The Complete Streets process and approach to road design emphasizes safe access for all road users, including pedestrians, bicyclists, motorcycles and transit users, by prioritizing infrastructure that meets the needs of those who have historically been left behind by traditional transportation approaches. Senators Markey and Fetterman have put forward a pair of new bills that would make Complete Streets a minimum design mandate, taking the first steps toward a new safety mindset that will ensure all road users have access to safe, equitable transportation options. Learn more about these two bills below.

Building Safer Streets Act

Earlier this Congress, (just some months and a speaker ago), Senator John Fetterman introduced the Building Safer Streets Act with companion legislation introduced in the House of Representatives by Congressman Seth Moulton. This bill, introduced on October 30, 2023, aims to tackle America’s road safety crisis by modernizing our nation’s dangerous road design standards that led to over 40,000 fatalities over the past decade. To accomplish this goal, the bill would set new standards for safer streets by reforming the development process for the Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices (MUTCD) and redefining how road projects should integrate transit, multimodal, and safety features. (To understand why reforming the MUTCD matters, see our statement on its most recent update.)

Further, the Building Safer Streets Act would streamline FHWA road design practices, require the FHWA to publish new guidance to help develop multimodal streets that work in local contexts, and would no longer allow the value of time metric to be misused to increase dangerous speeds when evaluating project benefits. Ensuring benefits to all communities, the bill would change the Safe Streets for All program to give greater consideration and federal support for small and rural communities.

Complete Streets Act

On January 25, 2024, Senator Ed Markey reintroduced the Complete Streets Act with companion legislation reintroduced in the House of Representatives by Congressman Steve Cohen. This bill will provide safe and accessible transportation access for all road users by prioritizing pedestrians, bicyclists, and public transit users.

To achieve this goal, the Complete Streets Act will ensure that a greater portion of states’ federal highway funding be directed toward the development of a Complete Streets Program. These programs will allow eligible entities throughout the state to utilize program funding for technical assistance and capital improvements to support the implementation of improved sidewalks, bike lanes, crosswalks, and bus stops. Furthermore, this bill will also require states to incorporate Complete Streets standards into projects that change roadways, including construction and maintenance projects.In addition it pushes for the formal adoption of PROWAG and pushes for enhancements that are cognizant of people with physical, vision, hearing, and cognitive disabilities.

Help support these bills. Click here to ask your senator to be a cosponsor.