Archive for the ‘Advocacy’ Category

Why Cascade opposes the Columbia River Crossing boondoggle

Monday, April 22nd, 2013 by

For the past five years the Cascade Bicycle Club has been opposed to the Columbia River Crossing mega-highway, a Vancouver-Portland area project now at the center of heated legislative negotiation.

Although the current corridor is far from ideal for people on bicycles, the proposed $3.2-$3.6+ billion project does little to improve the situation. The mega-project would divert several billion dollars away from higher transportation priorities while fueling costly sprawl that’s bad for families who want to bike in their neighborhood.

Every organized bicycling or pedestrian group that has taken a CRC position is opposed to the current plan – including the BTA, Bike Walk Vote and the Cascade Bicycle Club.

Huge Opportunity Cost for a Non-Functioning Project

The biggest reason Cascade opposes the CRC is its opportunity cost: every one of the billions of dollars we spend on this boondoggle can’t be spent on Washingtonians’ higher transportation priorities — providing safe transportation choices and maintaining the roads and trails we already have.

As we work hard to find a few million dollars to fund dozens of projects across Washington to make it safe for kids and families to bike, the state is hoping to spend billions on this single poorly-designed, non-functional highway expansion. To be clear: roughly half of the project’s cost is for five miles of highway expansion, while only one-quarter goes toward a new bridge and one-quarter to light rail.

One serious problem: the CRC’s hand-picked Independent Review Panel found the project’s value is questionable unless Oregon spends billions of more dollars in addition to the billions on this project, and there is no plan for that funding, amid a huge maintenance backlog. The Review Panel concluded: “Questions about the reasonableness of investment in the CRC bridge because unresolved issues remain to the south… threaten the viability of the project.”

Bad Design and Process

The CRC plan includes a steep new bridge which would require significantly more effort to bike across than the current spans, a five-block corkscrew detour to get to downtown Vancouver, and a long multi-use pathway under the car bridge, which many expect to feel unsafe to bicyclists, especially at night (more). These elements – safety, distance, hills – are top reasons the 60% of Washingtonians who want to bike more often do not.

Throughout the project’s design and planning, the project’s high-priced consultants shunted aside concerns and desires of people on bicycles, and cut back design elements to save money, while $575 to $650 million-dollar highway interchanges remained. The process was so egregious Oregon’s Bicycle Transportation Alliance resigned from the advisory board.

Bicycle-Unfriendly Land Use

As we strive to build communities that encourage families to bike, the CRC undermines that vision. By expanding highways, the CRC promotes longer travel distances and costly sprawl across Clark County and beyond. During a hearing this February in Oregon, one CRC proponent argued housing values would increase as far north as Chehalis.

Poor Project Management

Lastly, the CRC has a record of mismanagement, from its misdirected Purpose and Need Statement to the recent discovery, nine years into planning, that the new bridge would be too low for upstream boat traffic to travel under. It has shunted aside more affordable alternatives arguing they failed to retain passage for 100% of upstream vessels – something the CRC’s own design fails. When facts got in the way, an ODOT statement from the mid-2000s saying the current spans could serve for another 60 years was disappeared from ODOT’s website, and when facts were not compelling enough, CRC backers have used rampant fear-mongering about safety. The list goes on – including using traffic models based on $1.10 gas, models that aren’t designed to consider tolling, models that presume no land use changes from the project, and contracting practices that raise significant red flags.

Simply put, the CRC is an example of misplaced priorities, a project pushed by the well-heeled highway lobby at the expense of Washingtonians.

We can find a more affordable, functional solution in the corridor that better serves the values of Washington’s families. We urge the legislature to stop pouring millions of dollars into this dysfunctional boondoggle.

Read more at the Seattle Transit Blog and Sightline.

Cascade Bicycle Club Endorses McGinn, Bagshaw, Conlin and O’Brien

Thursday, April 18th, 2013 by

Today, Cascade Bicycle Club announced its early endorsements in Seattle. Cascade Bicycle Club issues early endorsements to a select group of previously endorsed candidates who have demonstrated a strong and consistent commitment to creating a better community through bicycling and have made substantial accomplishments on bicycling-related issues.

Cascade’s early endorsed candidates in Seattle include:
Mike McGinn – Mayor
Sally Bagshaw – Seattle City Council, Position #4
Richard Conlin – Seattle City Council, Position #2
Mike O’Brien – Seattle City Council, Position #8

Mike O'Brien

“Mayor McGinn has shown bold leadership in making our streets safer for everybody, whether they drive, haul freight, ride transit, bike or walk,” said Craig M. Benjamin, Policy and Government Affairs Manager for Cascade Bicycle Club. “He recognizes that sixty percent of people in Seattle want to bicycle more, but they are not doing it because they don’t feel safe. So he has shifted our bicycling investments toward physically protecting bike lanes from speeding car traffic and building more neighborhood greenways – low-speed, low-traffic streets that are safer for families.”

“Councilmember Bagshaw has worked hard to make bicycling so safe that Seattle families will let their eight year olds ride their bikes to school, to parks, to libraries and through their neighborhoods; and grandparents will choose to ride their bikes to the local neighborhood business district for a morning cup of coffee and newspaper,” said Evan Manvel, Director of Policy, Planning and Government Affairs.

“Councilmember Conlin has a track record of leadership in taking bold steps to advance bicycling, from supporting safety improvements that make our streets safer for everybody, to getting a bike lane planned on the new Portage Bay Bridge, to working with partner agencies and jurisdictions to secure tens of millions of dollars for investments in bicycling,” said Benjamin.

Richard Conlin

“Councilmember O’Brien has championed efforts to secure additional funding for bicycling infrastructure and the region’s early efforts to bring a bike share program to Seattle,” added Benjamin. “He sees what other cities are doing to support building a better community through bicycling and wants to see Seattle not just keeping up, but leading the way.”

“We’re proud to endorse these candidates because of their hard work to make our streets safer for our children and everyone who wants to ride,” said Mo McBroom, a Cascade Bicycle Club board member and chair of its Legislative and Endorsements Committee. “We look forward to working with them to connect our city with a complete network of protected bike lanes and neighborhood greenways.”

Over the next few months, Cascade will make endorsements in additional races across the Puget Sound region.

Please contact Craig M. Benjamin, Cascade’s Policy and Government Affairs Manager, at (206) 713 6204 or craig.benjamin@cascadebicycleclub.org for more information. 

Transportation Package: a missed opportunity

Wednesday, April 17th, 2013 by

Our transportation trends are clear: younger adults are driving a lot less than previous generations, more and more people are biking, and the number of older people who will need options other than drive-alone is increasing. Washington has previously adopted laws requiring cutting drive-alone trips, as well as laws requiring cutting climate pollution.

Matthew Green reports from Olympia

Cascade supports efforts to address Washington State’s significant backlog of transportation needs, and has been working for the past several months to promote a forward-looking revenue package to meet the core needs of our communities.

Given this context, and working with a large coalition of businesses, individuals and organizations, Cascade supported the Transportation for Washington “Opportunity for All” Action Plan sent to the legislature.

Unfortunately, the $8.4 billion draft transportation revenue package released this week goes in the wrong direction, and undermines our transportation and climate goals. We oppose it as written, and hope legislators will revisit their priorities.

Washingtonians agree: safety and maintenance should be our top priorities. We should make sure people have safe ways to drive, walk, bike and take transit to get to work, school and stores. And we should invest in maintaining the roads we already have before building more. Yet less than 11 percent of the draft package funds road maintenance, and less than 1% funds targeted safety improvements.

Those who wish to, or are forced to, move around Washington State by means other than driving get little; less than 3 percent of package’s funds would meet the needs of people who use transit, bike or walk. And cities and counties, which have enormous local transportation needs, would receive just 4 percent.

Meanwhile, the bulk of the funds raised would go to new or expanded highways. Just four highway mega-project expansions – expansion of SR 167/SR 509, expansion of I-405, expansion of I-5 in Vancouver, and extension of US 395 in Spokane – account for $2.8 billion upfront, and billions more in debt service. Poll after poll show road expansions are the lowest transportation priority of Washingtonians, but the well-heeled highway lobby continues to push these hugely expensive projects forward.

The package has some small bright spots: it continues modest revenues for ferries, freight and other improvements begun in 2012, and it authorizes local transportation benefit district to raise their own funds to meet some local needs. However, these elements could be approved by the Legislature separately.

The package also provides limited authority for local transit agencies to raise their own funds. Unfortunately, this authority expires in a few years, which will create yet another funding crisis, and it forces agencies to go to a public vote, even as the Legislature itself is avoiding a public vote on the overall package. Again, a better local option authority could be approved by the Legislature separately.

Unfortunately, this revenue package would not build a better transportation network that serves our neighborhoods and the people and businesses who safe places to drive, walk, bike and take transit. It would mainly build more highways, leading to more sprawling, bicycle-unfriendly development and more climate pollution. Washington State needs and deserves better.

It’s Simple: Neighborhood streets should be safe for bicycling

Tuesday, April 16th, 2013 by

The biggest factor in whether a person on a bicycle is injured or killed in a collision with a motor vehicle is how fast that vehicle is traveling.

Together, we have a chance to help slow traffic and make neighborhood streets across Washington State safer. That’s because the state Senate – including your Senator – will soon be voting on a bill that will make it easier for communities to lower speed limits on neighborhood streets.

This bill has been in the works for a couple of years, and has received support from most legislators. The obstacle has been getting a final vote in the Senate. But that vote, at last, is expected to happen in the next few days – as early as tomorrow! Your Senator’s vote could make the difference.

Tell your Senator to vote YES for safe neighborhood streets >>

Under current law, if cities or towns want to change a speed limit, they must conduct an expensive traffic engineering study.  House Bill 10451 lets cities decide whether they need to conduct a traffic engineering study before lowering a speed limit to 20 miles per hour on a neighborhood street. It’s that simple. It does not mandate any change; it simply provides cities and towns with local control and eliminates a bureaucratic hurdle. And it affects only neighborhood streets, not major streets.

Click here to tell your Senator to support the Neighborhood Safe Speeds Bill, SB 1045 >>

The House Transportation Committee has already passed this bill. The Senate Transportation Committee has passed the bill.

Now, for the last step, it needs to pass the full Senate. By encouraging your Senator to support it, you will support the efforts of people in local communities across Washington State working to make their neighborhood safer.

Stephanie Frans saves the day!

Monday, April 15th, 2013 by

It’s Monday morning and you’re biking to work. You’re riding along the Burke-Gilman Trail when you encounter a big patch of broken glass threatening to flat your tires and ruin the start of your week. So what do you do? Well, if you’re Stephanie Frans, you swing by Counterbalance Bicycles to borrow a broom and clean the mess up. Thank you, Stephanie, for saving the day!