Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Bike Ped Funding topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
RPCs, lawmakers call for study of barriers to bike-ped projects and clarity on payback language in T bill
Summary
Regional planning commission speakers and several legislators urged a legislative study into regulatory and administrative barriers—including NEPA-related costs—that inflate the price of bicycle and pedestrian projects, and asked for clearer language in the T bill about when towns must repay transportation funds for canceled projects.
Regional planning commission representatives told legislators they want a short, focused legislative study on the regulatory and administrative barriers that make bicycle and pedestrian projects costly and delay construction, and they asked lawmakers to clarify a proposed T bill payback provision they say could discourage towns from pursuing federal grants.
RPC presenters and several legislators cited examples they said illustrate the problem: one presenter described a town completing 550 linear feet of sidewalk for about $39,000 using state funds, while a federally funded estimate for the same length was quoted at roughly $550,000. "Something is not right here," an RPC presenter said, adding that regulatory and federal requirements are a leading cause of cost escalation.
Representative Ollie told the panel the town faced what he called "the world's most expensive pedestrian bridge," citing NEPA timing during the pandemic as an example of how regulatory requirements and external events can multiply project costs. Representative Casey told the panel, "I think we kinda over regulated ourselves," in a discussion about whether some reviews and historic-preservation screenings are necessary for routine sidewalk work.
RPC presenters said the proposed change in T bill payback language—removing explicit reference to federal payback rules—could give agencies more discretion to require towns to repay state or federal funds after they cancel a project. RPCs asked for a pause on that change or a study to define clear criteria under which payback is required, arguing that towns sometimes cancel projects for reasons beyond "cold feet," such as cost escalation between scoping and construction.
Speakers described funding shortfalls for bike-ped projects: panel members said requests for bicycle and pedestrian funds have risen to tens of millions of dollars while annual available funding is only a fraction of the need. RPCs asked for clearer, simpler state funding streams and noted that small towns sometimes decline to apply for federal grants because of cost and complexity or inability to meet local matches.
Catherine, one of the speakers, urged a "step back" to add guardrails and predictability to the payback decision process so municipalities would not face uncertain financial obligations if they cancel projects. RPCs said they will work with VTrans, VLCT and legislative staff to draft clearer criteria and proposed language and to convene stakeholders before any final change is enacted.
Next steps, presenters said, include finalizing a draft study or guidance, coordinating with VTrans on the details, and presenting proposed language to the committee before crossover if possible.
