9 petitions

Update posted 4 days ago

Petition to David Gantt, Phil Steck, Thomas O'Mara

Enact a 3' Safe Passing Law to Protect New York State Bicyclists Now

New York State leads the nation for bicycle and pedestrian crashes. While NYBC has expanded Safe Cycling education and other efforts with partners around the state, there is one thing our state can do to make bicycling safer - enacting a 3' Safe Passing Distance law.  The current Vehicle & Traffic statutes DO NOT explicitly state a motorist must provide at least 3' of space between the vehicle and the bicyclist being overtaken - only that they must pass "carefully" (VTL 1122). As a bicyclist, what is safe for you is often not what feels safe to someone inside a motor vehicle!  3' Safe Passing Distance means ... Clear messaging about how to pass a bicyclist on the road ... A basis for high-visibility education to drivers about sharing the road with bicyclists ... A means for enforcement of unsafe passing by drivers of motor vehicles ... A public policy response to the most common reason for the death of a person on a bicycle that can become effective statewide in a short period of time Earlier this year, NYBC conducted a survey of the New York State bicycling community. The majority of respondents indicated that 3’ Safe Passing is their top legislative priority. 3’ Safe Passing is now the standard in 27 states. This law establishes that motorists must give bicyclists three feet of space between the bicycle and a vehicle on the road. Sign our petition today to ask Assemblyman David Gantt, Chairman of the Assembly Standing Committee on Transportation, and Senators Phil Steck and Thomas O'Mara to allow a vote on the bill during the upcoming 2018 legislative session. 

New York Bicycling Coalition
869 supporters
Update posted 2 weeks ago

Petition to U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Keith Weaver, Scott E. Bennett

Save the historic Big White River Bridge!

What We're Trying To Do and Why: The Friends of the Historic White River Bridge at Clarendon is a 501(c)3 non-profit that came together in 2014 around the cause of saving the historic Big White River Bridge for two reasons: It is a national treasure (listed on the National Register of Historic Places maintained by the U.S. Department of Interior), a gorgeous landmark worthy of preservation (see video) It will play a vital role as part of a larger effort to develop outdoor and eco-tourism in the Arkansas Delta, a region that is simultaneously one of the most beautiful and the most poor in the United States. Specifically, our mission is to adapt the historic bridge for use by cyclists, hikers, pedestrians, and wildlife / bird watchers, so that it can serve as a vehicle for tourism-based economic development in the Arkansas Delta. If successful, the converted bridge will be one of the longest and most scenic pedestrian and cycling bridges in the United States, as well as one of the longest elevated bird viewing platforms in the world, complete with spectacular viewing afforded by the Mississippi Flyway of migratory birds which hourglasses to its narrowest point in this area.   What We've Done So Far: With the Arkansas Highway & Transportation Department on the verge of letting bids to demolish the bridge (in fulfillment of an agreement made with U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service that enabled them to build the vehicle bridge that replaced the historic bridge), the Friends of the White River Bridge filed suit.  What We're Asking: All we are asking is that these agencies conduct the proper studies and analyses to ascertain whether the destruction of this magnificent landmark serves a greater good or would be a tragic mistake based on outdated and/or incomplete information. [See "The Details" section at the very bottom if you want the full scoop] Specifically, we are petitioning the following agencies to take the following actions to ensure this vital decision is made with the best possible information in hand:   ITEM 1: Arkansas Highway & Transportation Department (AHTD): Commit to the preservation of the entirety of the historic White River Bridge (per the provisions of USC Title 23, Chapter 1, Section 144(g) and the Arkansas Historic Bridge program) – including the still extant western and eastern approaches – should either of the following occur: AHTD is relieved of its obligation to the U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service to demolish the bridge, OR... AHTD learns after conducting the proper study on the impact of the demolition of the bridge on bicycling that a sufficiently negative impact will result ITEM 2: Cache River National Wildlife Refuge / U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service: Commit to release AHTD of its obligation to the demolish the historic White River Bridge should either of the following occur: An updated hydrological study reveals that the demolition of the historic Bridge is not ecologically necessary, OR... It is determined by a proper study and analysis that the demolition and removal of the historic Bridge may negatively affect the threatened Rabbitsfoot mussel or its designated critical habitat Bottom Line: Given the tremendous enthusiasm for saving the historic bridge, the irreparable harm that would come from its destruction, the enormous potential upside to the region if the bridge is adapted as planned, and the lack of any urgent need to demolish the bridge, we ask that the relevant agencies simply take their time, conduct the proper studies with an open mind, and make every reasonable effort to accommodate those who wish to preserve this magnificent structure and enable it to enrich the lives of all who encounter it.    ===========================================OPTIONAL READING: The Details: The basis of our case is built on three arguments, all of which have merit:  Change of Circumstances: Hydrology – The argument for removing the bridge is primarily based on an outdated and obsolete hydrology study conducted in 2003. As part of construction on the new bridge, a lengthy berm (which was highlighted in the original study as the primary cause of water flow concerns) was removed. Our position is that the removal of the berm has created such a substantial change in water flows that a new hydrology study is required. If the problems that demolishing the bridge were intended to solve have already been solved, there's no reason to move forward. The U.S. Geological Survey, who did the original hydrology study, has indicated that a new study would make sense. Change of Circumstances: Endangered Species – The Rabbitsfoot mussel, which occupies the White River, was listed as a threatened species in 2013. In 2015, the area in the vicinity of the historic bridge was designated as critical habitat for the Rabbitsfoot mussel. When the plans were originally made to demolish the historic bridge after constructing the new one, these environmental issues were not considered. A quick subsequent study was done, but it is our contention that this study was inadequate. Violation of State Law: Impact on Bicycling Was Not Considered – Ten years ago when the Highway Department considered alternatives to tearing the bridge down, it never considered the impact on bicycles even though Arkansas law required it to do so. So not only should this obligation be fulfilled, but given the growth in bicycling regionally and nationally, revisiting this crucial obligation is simply the right thing to do. 

Friends of the Historic White River Bridge at Clarendon
1,541 supporters
Started 4 months ago

Petition to James V. Hunt, Sr., Cathy Altenbern, Gary O. Thordburg, Boyd Bogle, Bob Weigel

Stop Ticketing people for Walking Hand in Hand in Belle Meade, TN

The officials in Belle Meade have effectively made it illegal for a couples to walk hand-in-hand, side-by-side down the road. Yes, you read that right. Current city law only allows people to walk, jog, or bike in single file - alone.  Officers are being forced to ticket people for walking and biking side-by-side with their loved ones. Mayor James V. Hunt Sr. has told his officers to provide "no mercy" for violators.  The current law hurts the community and criminalizes people who want to walk side-by-side with their family members, friends, and neighbors.   WHY DO THEY DO THIS?  We're told that this law exists for the safety of walkers, joggers, and bicyclists. In fact, the law was designed to be more restrictive than state law and attempts to keep people out of the community. Pedestrian and bicycle advocates agree that this law discourages people from walking, jogging, and riding bikes.   The current law has been in place since advocates tried to make space for walkers and bikers in 2000.  In response, the council even went so far as to ban baby strollers from the street! A petition at the time also made the claim that pedestrian infrastructure would "ruin the character of Belle Meade."    In 2011, the law was amended to finally allow people to use strollers again, but the law has not been amended to allow people to walk and bike side-by-side.   Curious about the current city code? Read it here.  Here's a brief recap of current rules:  "Every person running, walking, jogging, or otherwise traveling by foot upon a street or roadway other than Belle Meade Boulevard shall travel single file facing approaching vehicular traffic no more than eighteen (18) inches from the left edge of the pavement." "Every person operating a bicycle upon a street or roadway, within the City of Belle Meade, shall ride single file... "   HERE'S WHAT WE WANT The Mayor and City Council of Belle Meade should change the code and stop ticketing people for walking and biking side-by-side down Belle Meade Blvd.    Furthermore, they should follow the guidance of traffic engineers and redesign the road to support people who want to walk and ride bikes with their neighbors. Let's re-stripe the road to provide a separate place for walkers, bikers, and joggers, giving vehicles their own dedicated lane.  Want to join our fight? Sign this petition!  

Austin Bauman
22 supporters
Started 4 months ago

Petition to Midpeninsula Regional Open Space Administration Office, Santa Clara Valley Open Space Authority, Matt Anderson

Electric Bike Open Space Access

Bay Area Open Space Electric Bicycle Access An open letter to our community leaders and outdoor enthusiasts: The Bay Area is home to some of the best trails for riders of all ages and experience levels. Trail access has always been a hot point with various advocacy groups muscling for equal access. Sales of Electric Mountain Bike, or E-MTB are growing exponentially in the Bay Area as all major manufacturers are releasing their own models. Nobody wants to buy a new bike only to find that their favorite trails are now illegal to ride. E-MTBs are human powered and should be categorized as such. There is no throttle and the rider has to be pedaling for the bike to work. This must be the biggest distinction from motorized vehicles and mopeds. The human is doing the work to make the vehicle move. One of the biggest hurdles to overcome is categorization. We don’t want to upset non-electric advocacy groups that are fighting for access to trails that are currently illegal to bicycles of any type. They are fighting the same fight in a different light. We only want access to trails that are currently legal to ride bicycles. E-MTBs are slower uphill than expert and professional riders on a traditional non-electric race bike. Electric bikes generally have governors that prevent the bike from exceeding 28 mph assisted although most E-MTBs have a max motor assist speed of 20 mph due to the tuning of the motor. All bicycles are limited to 15 mph on most trails in our trail systems. All bicycles will follow the same speed limit laws. Generally, E-MTBs also have much superior braking systems that produce better stopping power and allow greater control especially going downhill. A traditional mountain bike will cause more soil erosion than an E-MTB due to the higher tire pressure, narrower tire profile and lower coefficient of traction. E-MTBs run a wider tire at a much lower pressure that forms around terrain rather than plowing through it. This better traction translates to less skidding, better cornering with less wash out and ultimately less soil movement. In short, E-MTBs cause significantly less trail damage and erosion than any traditional bicycle. As far as nuisance complaints go, E-MTB motors are silent and the bikes make as much sound as a normal bicycle. Also, riders are people, and as such there is always a spectrum of respect for other people and the trails. There are disrespectful runners, horse back riders and bicyclists alike. These laws should accommodate law abiding respectful people not their disrespectful counter parts. What is arguably the biggest reason to open trails to E-MTBs would be to allow access to people who could not otherwise enjoy or even reach our beautiful spaces. We have seen dozens of people that can’t ride a traditional mountain bike anymore, either due to injury, illness, physical limitation or disability. They want to be outside. Families will be able to carry their small children and gear. Older people will be able to keep up with family and friends. They want to explore the same pristine wilderness that we all enjoy. We have seen men and women that are riding trails they haven't been able to ride for decades back on their favorite trails they used to ride. This would not have been possible for them without electric assist. Can we as community members band together to end the vitriol and realize we all have the same desire to go out and enjoy nature? Can we share our Open Spaces so everyone can enjoy them? Open Space is something to be proud of and something to be fully supportive of as a community of outdoor-oriented people. As more people can get out to enjoy and appreciate nature more people will vote to protect it.       

Torr Hage
49 supporters