Streetsblog Capitol Hill

Got five minutes to help strengthen and refine pedestrian advocacy? America Walks has put out a survey on walking habits, and they hope the answers will advance understanding of why people walk and what would motivate people to walk more. The survey explores, among other questions:

• What motivates and sustains avid walkers? What deters others?
• How did they start walking, and what are their routines?
• What makes a neighborhood walkable or not?
• What do walkers believe are the psychological and physical benefits?

America Walks is the only national organization dedicated exclusively to the rights of pedestrians. After 15 years of advocacy, it’s in the process of reinventing itself, partnering with organizations from AARP to the National Associations of Realtors to get more people “up off couch and walking out the door.”

The survey closes in early June. Click here to start.

Slate has posted this map to illustrate the concentration of “food deserts,” where large numbers of people don’t have access to fresh food. The USDA considers households more than a mile from a supermarket and without access to a car to be in food deserts, often with only convenience-store junk food for nourishment. In 2009, the agency found 2.3 million of these households. Here, Slate shows the preponderance of those households in Appalachia and the Deep South, and on Indian reservations.

Access to healthy food is just one reason to build walkable places with a mix of uses and diverse transportation options. The places on this map are where people have been stranded — how walkable can your neighborhood be if you can’t walk to buy fresh produce? Many of the people identified here are poor and can’t afford cars. Some are elderly or disabled and can’t drive.

The most vulnerable members of our communities are the ones most hurt by transportation policies that keep a singular focus on automobile transportation and ignore those who need other ways to get around. What Slate is calling a food desert, you could also call an unlivable neighborhood, where even residents’ most basic needs — like access to healthy food — are denied.

It makes intuitive sense that cycling and walking to work regularly would help people stay healthy, but until now there's only been anecdotal evidence suggesting that places where walking or cycling to work is common also have lower rates of obesity.

That changed in a significant way yesterday when the American Journal of Public Health published new findings from researchers at Rutgers, Virginia Tech, and the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) that show a clear link between high levels of walking and bicycling to work and positive health outcomes. The study was led by John Pucher, an urban planning professor at Rutgers.

The researchers analyzed health and travel data from a variety of sources, including the U.S. Census’ American Community Survey, and the CDC’s Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System.

Among the 50 states, obesity rates range from 19 percent to 35 percent, while rates of active commuting vary from two to nine percent.

The study found that there are significant connections between having a low obesity rate and a high rate of walking or biking to work. The same is true for diabetes. In statistical terms, about 30 percent of the variation in obesity among states -- and more than half of the variation in diabetes -- was linked to differences in walking and cycling rates.

Read more...

Two reports released last week underscored the increasing severity of America's obesity epidemic. And the eye-opening findings add to the mounting evidence that stopping the spread of obesity and its attendant health risks will require changes to the nation’s transportation system as surely as it demands altering our diets.

A report from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention released Tuesday showed the number of obese Americans has increased by 2.4 million since 2007. There are now nine states where more than 30 percent of the population qualifies as obese -- up from three states in 2007. (Just ten years ago, no state had obesity levels above 30 percent). 

The following day, Gallup released a ranking of the nation’s most and least obese states as part of a broader index of well-being. By its accounting, a cluster of states in the southeast -- West Virginia, Kentucky, Mississippi, Arkansas, and South Carolina -- have the highest rates of obesity, while the thinnest states, mainly in the west and New England, tend to have obesity rates about ten percentage points lower.

In the CDC ranking of states (which varies slightly from the Gallup ranking), Colorado and the District of Columbia are the only states with obesity rates under 20 percent, making their rate nearly 15 points lower than the most obese states. Their secret? During a press briefing, the CDC's Bill Dietz speculated that Colorado’s investment in biking and walking trails, as well as District residents' frequent use of public transportation, which goes hand in hand with walking and thus burns more calories than driving, are possible factors.

Indeed, if you look at rates of active commuting (walking and biking) in the most and least obese states, a revealing correlation emerges. Three of the five most obese states in the Gallup ranking are also among the five states with the smallest percentage of people who bike to work. At the other end of the spectrum, four of the ten thinnest states are among those where people bike to work most frequently. (The commuting rates come from Census data detailed in this League of American Bicyclists report.)

Read more...

Federal funding for pedestrian and bicycle projects reached a new high last year, according to a report released yesterday by the Federal Highway Administration. In terms of dollars, federal investment in walking and biking more than doubled compared to the previous high, set in 2007, thanks largely to an infusion of $400 million in stimulus funds.

The share of all federal transportation spending devoted to bike-ped projects also rose to an unprecedented level — all of two percent. Advocates for walking and biking applauded the trend while pointing out the potential for much greater federal commitment to active transportation.

"It continues to be an improvement, and it continues to be a tiny
fraction of the money that’s available to potentially be spent on
biking and walking," said Andy Clarke of the League of American
Bicyclists.

Subtracting the $400 million one-shot in stimulus funding, Clarke noted, yields a less impressive year-on-year increase. And part of the increase in reported bike-ped spending might also simply reflect better record keeping by state DOTs, as agencies document the construction of sidewalks and bike lanes as part of larger projects, according to Barbara McCann of the National Complete Streets Coalition.

The spending figures come from an update on the state of walking and biking that the feds release every five years. The original National Bicycling and Walking Study, released in 1994, set two major targets: to double walk and bike mode-share, from 7.9 percent of all trips to 15.8 percent; and to reduce pedestrian and cyclist fatalities by 10 percent.

Read more…

The connection between transportation reform -- an emphasis on land use that makes biking and walking as viable as auto travel for routine trips -- and health reform is one that's not often made, despite the best efforts of the Obama administration.

But a team of researchers led by Lawrence Frank of the University of British Columbia took a particularly novel approach to the relationship between transport and health for a study recently published in the journal Preventive Medicine. For their observations, the group eschewed Chicago, New York, Portland, or other highly walkable cities in favor of sprawl-heavy Atlanta.

Frank, Steve Winkelman of D.C.'s Center for Clean Air Policy, and Michael Greenwald of the Seattle-based firm Urban Design 4 Health used data from Atlanta's SMARTRAQ survey to map the amount of calories burned by various blends of walking, transit, and car use. That calorie-burning factor was dubbed the "energy index."

The "energy index" of Atlantans increased significantly as their neighborhoods grew denser, according to the study, and the number of calories they used on motorized travel shrank in denser, more walkable areas.

But interestingly enough, the study's density factor only examined residential properties -- and in neighborhoods where mixed-use development grew, bringing housing closer to commercial property, the energy used for driving and walking decreased, leaving Atlantans' "energy index" unaffected.

"This result likely demonstrates that the energy required to travel in a very mixed land use pattern is lower for both walking and driving — with no real impact on the relationship between the two modes," the study's authors wrote.

The authors also noted the significance of a documented link between dense residential development and public health in a city known more for its grinding traffic jams and struggling transit:

Read more...

Over the summer, Streetsblog Capitol Hill published a riff on the rhetorical stylings of White House budget director Peter Orszag that coined a new phrase: "Transportation reform is health reform."

The logic behind the principle stems from the health benefits of walking and biking, but also from the simple truth that fewer miles driven represents less air pollution -- and often, more time to spend on less sedentary pursuits.

As it happens, Orszag himself is living proof of transportation's connection to public health. He blogged today on the White House website about the "pedometer challenge" now going on at the Office of Management and Budget (OMB), which he heads, and included a video of OMB employees and their ped-loving boss (see above).

(h/t Ben Smith)

Back when the Senate kicked off its health care debate, Republicans tested out a new line of attack against health committee chairman Edward Kennedy's (D-MA) draft bill: Its investment in encouraging walking and biking amounts to inexcusable government waste.

Never mind that walking and biking have scientifically proven public health benefits. Never mind that the Federal Highway Administration is already promoting the activities the new health care bill would expand.

The Republicans pushed their anti-pork line against the legislation's "community transformation" grants for a time. But Sen. Mike Enzi (WY), the health committee's senior GOPer, ultimately failed in a bid to prevent the bill from spending money on sidewalks, bike paths, streetlights, and other health-related infrastructure items.

The House has recently begun its health care discussions, however. And none other than Rep. Michele Bachmann (R-MN) -- whose greatest hits include calling for an investigation into the president's patriotism -- is on the case against the bill's proposed public health grants.

Bachmann wrote on her blog:

Essentially, we’re talking about federal funding for bike paths, lighting, jungle gyms, and even farmers markets.

In the House bill, at least the spending is capped -- $1.6 billion per year.  The Senate bill leaves the sky the limit – leaving the amount of spending up to the Obama Administration.

While these projects may have merit, they certainly don't belong in a health care reform package.  With priorities like this running amok on Capitol Hill, is there any doubt that health care costs will only continue to skyrocket under government-run health care?

To return to an earlier theme, let's take Bachmann a bit too seriously for a moment. The chances that she will actually vote for Democratic health legislation are effectively zero. So we can safely assume that her goal here is to burnish her fiscal-conservative credentials by picking a project to deride as "pork."

How about the government's estimated $1 billion in unnecessary Medicare payments? Was Bachmann at all concerned when health industry lobbies said they'd rather not be bound by White House savings targets? Apparently not; it's people walking more that truly frightens the congresswoman.

(h/t Minnesota Independent)

Last week the Federal Transit Administration finally approved the Silver Line, a long-awaited addition to the capital region's transit system that will extend to suburbs in northern Virginia. There are still a few hoops to jump through to secure the necessary funding, but it looks like some relief is in sight for the area's crushing congestion.

Four of the line's stations are planned for Tysons Corner, a collection of malls and offices so unwalkable that traffic clogs streets when employees break for lunch. Only 17,000 people live there, but it provides 167,000 parking spaces for the hordes of commuters and shoppers who drive in on a daily basis. In this excellent NPR segment (listening to the audio is well worth the time), Robert Siegel looks at how Fairfax County officials are attempting to transform Tysons Corner into a more urban setting:

...a central part of the plan is to build residential housing, and plan for 100,000 people. But that means more than build apartment houses -- Tysons is also utterly inhospitable to pedestrians.

Clark Tyler, who chairs the Tysons Corner Land Use Task Force, says there are nine lanes of traffic near Tysons Corner Center, but the street lights give pedestrians only 40 seconds to cross them. Sidewalks mysteriously end.

So, what will the new Tysons be like? 

Read more...

The National Republican Congressional Committee ran this ad against Democratic challenger Kathy Dahlkemper in the race for Pennsylvania's third congressional district. It hits a few Gingrichian notes on how to address the country's energy problems before the announcer tells us incredulously:

Dahlkemper's wacky solution? She said we should make personal sacrifices, such as walking places and riding bikes. Hmm... Why don't we use dog-sleds, too?

That passage heaps on the fear and loathing with scare quotes, shots of an impossibly crowded sidewalk, and a bike bell sound effect. But guess what? Seven-term incumbent Phil English is heading back to Erie, and Kathy Dahlkemper is going to Washington. The AP breaks down her victory:

Mrs. Dahlkemper's advantage was viewed as being in the more urban areas of the district -- the cities of Erie, Sharon, Meadville and Butler -- where she was expected to benefit from longtime union support and Sen. Barack Obama's presence at the top of the ticket. Her challenge was to sway voters in the suburban and rural regions.

Think Dahlkemper's competition will bank on the same anti-urban message in 2010?