Andrés’ chickpea curry with potatoes and spinach

This decision I’ve made has been months in the making. We had been experimenting with plant-forward and plant-based recipes at home for some time. Then earlier this year, American pop singer Billie Eilish made a blunt statement during an interview that proceeded to go viral— that eating meat is inherently wrong, and that doing so is incompatible with loving animals. The backlash on social media was intense. I myself felt very uncomfortable when I watched the interview. For what it’s worth, I feel the remark lacks nuance. How many people across the world, with just how entrenched the meat industry is in our global economy and local customs, even have access to suitable, culturally relevant plant-based alternatives. However, it was the dialogue around Eilish’s comments from vegetarian and vegan content creators on social media that resonated with me, particularly from a personal well-being and an environmental perspective.

Veganism re-entered the news cycle last month after Texas’ Attorney General Ken Paxton won a runoff election for the state’s open Senate seat to face State Senator James Talarico in the general. In the days following, Paxton launched a series of false accusations about Talarico to paint him as out of touch with Texas voters, including that he is a ‘low-testosterone vegan.’ Talarico responded with a photo op at a barbecue restaurant, where he discussed rising operating costs Texas farmers face over a plate of brisket. I understand the culture war element of this news story, and that barbecue is integral to Texas culture. But I couldn’t believe just how visceral the reaction to Paxton’s claims was—including from Talarico himself—all over what a man eats.

It reminded me of the confused and frustrated reaction I get from folks in my life when I tell them I don’t own my own car, I take the bus to work, or I biked to meet them for dinner on a work meeting.

And that’s when it clicked for me.

Let’s establish some working definitions before we continue.

Veganism is a relatively straight forward concept: it is a practice and philosophy associated with abstinence from consuming animal products of any kind, be they for food or fashion or any other purpose.

The definition of urbanism (for the purpose of this post, new urbanism) is a little more nebulous depending on the context. However, I’ll refer to urbanism as a movement that promotes walkability, improved public transit, and multimodal cohesion as a means of creating vibrant neighborhoods.

Although both philosophies differ in how they’re realized (the former through individual actions and the latter through policy and market forces), they both seek to influence consumption behaviors to protect the environment and promote personal well-being. They also challenge two established customs in the United States.

The saying goes that any given thing can be as American as apple pie, but I’d arque that few customs are more American than car dependency and meat consumption. Almost 7 out of 10 Americans commute to work alone in their own vehicle. An even higher proportion -90% - include meat as a part of their diet. This level of dependency on cars and meat comes with an environmental cost. The US transportation sector, almost entirely made up of car and plane travel, is the single largest greenhouse gas emitter out of any industry. The production of meat, meanwhile, uses a significant amount of water and produces substantial waste at every step of the process, from cultivation to consumption..

There are also moral ramifications to be considered when discussing car dependency and meat consumption. Car infrastructure is responsible for a rise in pedestrian and cyclist deaths, while residents of communities bifurcated by freeways experience poorer health outcomes than their counterparts in other neighborhoods. As for the meat production industry, workers and animals face squalid workplace and living conditions respectively. The environmental impact of meat consumption disproportionately impacts low-income communities oftentimes neighboring these facilities, mostly in the form of air and water pollution.

Urbanism and veganism identify an immoral carnage of our planet and living beings brought on by these two consumption practices so engrained in our culture that to not participate in them is viewed as strange and antithetical to masculinity. Both of these philosophies also call for behavior changes to better our environment while also taking care of ourselves. It’s time these two groups saw their separate struggles as a shared effort.

To my readers who are even occasional pedestrians, bicyclists, transit riders, or carpoolers— I encourage you to consider doubling your efforts to the tune of a ‘meatless Monday,’ a vegan meal prep, or even a more long-term lifestyle change. And to those of you reading who are pescatarians, vegetarians, or vegans— I ask the same of learning more about viable transportation alternatives available to you and incorporating them in your commute or an occasion so that together, we can combine our efforts for cultural change to save our planet.

I’ll preface this post by saying that I’ve wanted to write on this topic for a *very* long time, perhaps since I started writing this blog nearly four years ago. I think I just needed the right inspiration, and last week I found it from an unlikely source.

Ken Burns’ Prohibition is a three-part documentary series that explores the temperance movement in the United States throughout the late 19th century and the early 20th century, culminating in the passage of the 18th Amendment of the Constitution barring the sale and distribution of alcoholic beverages in 1919. Divisions along geographic and religious lines were especially stark leading up to and during Prohibition— the predominantly white Protestants of rural America were by and large in favor of the measure, while the Catholic immigrant urban class viewed banning alcohol as discriminatory and asinine amidst flagrant disregard for the law from bootleggers and politicians alike.

As I was watching, I couldn’t help but think about the parallels between then and the divisions that persist in our country a century later. Nowadays, the urban/rural divide can be best defined by political ideology and affiliation. Although neither is a monolith, the country’s modern progressive movement is centered in its cities and inner suburbs, while rural America remains quite conservative. This generally correlates to presidential election results, as Donald Trump’s electoral success has been largely attributed to his base of white, rural, evangelical voters. Much of his movement has also been built on a disdain for urban American, fomenting sentiments that have existed since even before Prohibition. For the past century, the messaging has been relatively consistent— America’s cities are simultaneously dangerous dens of crime and corrupt concentrations of power, both of which siphon off from real, hardworking people in middle America. It’s been used to justify positions on a myriad of issues: D.C. statehood (or the lack thereof), school choice, and highway construction.

The rationale behind freeway building as a tool of urban renewal from traffic engineers, many of whom came from a rural background themselves, was that constructing thoroughfares through depressed neighborhoods would eliminate urban slums while connecting suburbanites and rural communities to downtown cores to boost economic development. Generations later, our urban freeways continue to spur further sprawl beyond the suburbs, drawing the ire of urban progressives and rural conservatives alike. What used to be farms and fields and forests are now cheaply-built subdivisions and sprawling parking lots and big box stores. All of this infrastructure is expensive to maintain, resulting in local governments raising property taxes or cutting vital public services just to maintain the ever-expanding infrastructure.

The enemy of sprawl

It should be a surprise to few readers where my politics lie. I’m very much a left-leaning individual with significant criticisms of the American capitalist, imperialist system who values the critical public services our tax dollars fund and believes the ultra-wealthy should be taxed substantially higher to improve these services. This puts me very much at odds with the opinions of the average Trump voter, but I would argue not necessarily the values. In theory, the average conservative and myself both want to see our tax dollars utilized prudently, regardless of how we might differ on what the definition of prudence is. However, we both likely view urban sprawl in a negative light. The homes built in the suburbs nowadays are exorbitantly expensive and are taking over previously natural lands. With downtown commuters living further and further out in the suburbs, traffic is getting worse and worse, and taxes are getting higher and higher while services are getting worse and worse. Depending on your perspective, government zoning regulations that require what housing a developer can build and how much parking a developer must provide are also to blame for the current state of infrastructure.

I think we can all agree that expensive housing, congested roads, and higher taxes are all bad. Not only are taxes higher because there’s more infrastructure to maintain, but less of the land in sprawling suburban communities is taxable than in denser, urban areas. Driveways, parkways, and parking lots are all just impervious slabs of asphalt that don’t generate any revenue and require constant maintenance. When cities build up and not out, there is more property to tax and less burden is shifted on residents and local residents. Dense, affordable housing is both a tax-effective and a land-preserving alternative to the sprawling, expensive homes that dominate the suburban landscape, and are especially critical in a era of an affordability crisis with housing as the epicenter.

That same tax revenue can be used to address another pressing issue in America’s car-dependent metropolitan areas— traffic congestion. The average Charlotte commuter loses the equivalent of two days a year sitting in traffic, oftentimes due to the fact that the vast majority of commuters are traveling by single-occupancy vehicle. Conversely, a modest investment (compared to what we already spend on highway construction) in commuter alternatives such as public transportation is a far more fiscally responsible strategy to maintain regional growth. Not only does it accommodate denser, more affordable housing that staves off sprawl into rural areas, but it takes drivers off the road who make the financial decision to take public transportation. It eases the burden of transportation, the second-highest household budget cost in both money and time. Even if folks only ride public transportation occasionally, it puts less wear and tear on their vehicles and delays having repairs and even replacements. And most importantly, it takes (some of) those drivers who just don’t know what they’re doing behind the wheel off the road, reducing the likelihood of accidents that only worsen the current state of congestion.

Whether we are progressive urbanites or conservatives in middle America and rural communities, we have significantly more in common than Prohibition, Donald Trump, or any other force might have us believe. Better cities is something that helps both of our ecosystems thrive and reach their true potentials.

Conservative urbanism

All of the reasons I’ve shared above as to how proper urbanization lends itself to conservative values are more measurable— you can see housing prices, traffic congestion, and taxes go up and down. However, urbanization helps spur cultural change that can’t be quantified. Neighbors aren’t isolated from one another and can develop bonds. Kids can walk or bike to a neighborhood school or park. Families can have neighborhood cookouts. So much more is possible in neighborhoods when cars and car infrastructure take up less space, time, and money for families. Ignoring the blatant racist dogwhistle behind ‘make America great again,’ there’s a kernel of truth in that ideal for many conservatives where their country is becoming unrecognizable. Enabling dense housing and public transportation in our urban cores not only reduces sprawl and taxes, but it promotes (in theory) those same values of an America once lost that many on the right yearn for.

These car commuters are currently feeling the pressure from high gas prices in the wake of the conflict with Iran and subsequent blockades. As of the date of publication, the North Carolina state average price per gallon sits at $4.22; in Raleigh it’s $4.24, while in Durham it’s a whopping $4.26. It’s also gotten more expensive to own a car in North Carolina— the average monthly used car payment in the state is nearly $600, while insurance premiums have steadily climbed in the past five years. This meteoric rise in the cost of car ownership translates to less disposable income for even comfortable wage earners, boding poorly for local businesses who rely on their community’s patronage. Shift workers now need to work more hours just to break even, meaning even less time spent with their families.

This is not sustainable.

Are we expected to just work harder, work longer, and spend less just so we can meet our basic needs for where we need to get to? Why should we have to shoulder the cost of auto-dependency? Here in North Carolina, the state Department of Transportation owns a majority of major roadways running through our city. They decide what modes of transport are prioritized on those thoroughfares. Their priority is not to alleviate the significant costs of car ownership and dependency, but to maintain that status quo at all costs. Even their most attention-grabbing project of late, the proposed I-77 toll lane expansion through uptown Charlotte, just adds to the many expenses of car ownership.

Needless to say, the state isn’t very interested in promoting alternative, more affordable modes of transport. That’s all the more reason why our local governments need to prioritize it. Considering the vast majority of car trips are within three miles of the home, that’s a radius that municipalities have significant more control over. Getting kids to school, going to the grocery store, going out for food or coffee, or even transporting local workers can all be car-free trips when development is zoned and designed to accommodate walking or bicycle commuting as transport modes. Adequately funding public transportation options can make the difference of hundreds of dollars a month for commuters who would otherwise spend their money on gas, parking, and maintenance costs for their car they currently drive to work every day. The state even has the opportunity to fund and expand the wildly-popular NC by Train service to provide increased frequencies between Charlotte and Raleigh and expand routes to more communities statewide as an alternative to driving up and down I-85, I-40, or I-77.

The affordability crisis has generally been contextualized in the public discourse within the contexts of housing and food. However, current affairs have demonstrated just how unaffordable our existing transportation system is. Much like with where we live and what food we eat, we deserve transportation options that efficiently get us to where we need to go, give us back time wasted in traffic, and save us money spent at the pump.

Last month, I asked my partner and best friend of three years to marry me and she said yes!

Melanie has been my biggest cheerleader throughout my career and my blogging. Over the years, she’s proofread posts and offered her personal experience on multiple occasions for my writing. She’s been fully supportive of me as I plan my next moves, walking with me every step of the way. Melanie also kicks ass and takes names at her job at UNC, as a dog mom to Beau, and as a volunteer with Durham’s Animal Protection Society, and I’m excited to start this next chapter together.

I also feel compelled to share some from the recent conversations we’ve had as our relationship has become more serious. Chiefly among them is that we want to eventually raise a family together. Although we were both raised in the suburbs, it should come to no surprise to my readers that we want to raise a family in a more urban environment— one where we can walk to get groceries and coffee, our children can bike to school and the park, and we’re only a bus commute away from work. This all comes with the stipulation that we would have a family car, but that our family would have an array of safe and accessible transportation alternatives that would enable us to exist as a one-car household.

I speak for myself when I say I grew up with a less than positive image of cities, primarily because of preconceived notions of crime. My mother’s side of the family was part of a mass postwar exodus of urban, white families to the suburbs spurred on by the advent of the automobile and increased socioeconomic mobility among Black residents. Consequentially cities across the country lost a significant source of tax revenue, both from the fleeing residents and the businesses that left with them. Vacant downtown lots in turn became cheap municipal parking for suburban car commuters, just another piece of costly infrastructure for cities to maintain. This arrangement remains entrenched in many American cities to this day— in Durham, parking is abundant and affordable, and is free on weekends to promote patronage.

American cities now face a new challenge in the 21st century. As downtowns have become revitalized (or gentrified, depending on your perspective) and crime rates have fallen, more and more, residents struggle to afford staying, especially young families. The numbers speak for themselves: cities like Boston have seen the proportion of households with children dwindle to 20%, far below the national average of 39%. The sprawling, suburban, car-dependent neighborhood, alienating as it can be, becomes by and away the most affordable option for young families.

Cities ought to have a vested interest in retaining and attracting young families. Building denser, more affordable housing can help bring homeownership within reach for expecting and new parents. Providing sustainable transportation alternatives enables one-or even zero-car living; essentially halving a household’s transportation budget. Hosting more grocery stores, daycares, and other necessities within walking distance not only reduces the hassles of baby/child transport, but affords children the opportunity to exist in the space around them more freely, interact with their environment, and build confidence (all under adult supervision in their earliest years). Only then can urban environments across the country meet the needs of a modern young family and promote more sustainable and affordable lifestyles.

Melanie and I are excited to embark on this next chapter of our lives together. We’ve been fortunate to spend our time together living within walking distance of our favorite neighborhood breakfast spots, biking distance from downtown Durham, and a bus ride from work, all of which give us the opportunity to spend our time exploring and making countless memories together.

Check out these playing cards they’re giving away to students!

Chief among these modes is the school’s Wolfline fare-free bus network. I’ve written in the past about the excellent and ever-expanding service provides. In recent weeks, the system has announced a series of re-routes to compliment GoRaleigh’s service changes. Although GoRaleigh collects fares, NC State students living off-campus have access to free GoPasses as a means of incentivizing bus commuting.

Fare-free service for college students is a substantial benefit supporting those who oftentimes have no other methods of transportation and may not be able to afford transit fare over the course of a semester. In addition to providing fare-free service to all riders through subsidization from the University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill is constructing bus-only lanes along major transit corridors in the coming years to improve travel times on the system’s busiest routes. Second only to money, time is a critical resource for busy college students juggling coursework, extracurriculars, jobs, and a social life.

The flexibility offered by fast, frequent, and fare-free transit rivals that of personal vehicle ownership for a fraction of the cost for both the student and the university. However, these networks must also consider safety— both from interpersonal and traffic violence— when advancing commuter alternatives are critical to consider for building more accessible transportation system. Adequate lighting and emergency resources at bus stops, connected sidewalks, and protected bicycle lanes all establish the foundation for affordable, available, and accessible transportation that meets the needs of a busy students population.

Campuses like NC State and UNC-Chapel Hill incorporate these elements into their transportation networks as Raleigh and Chapel Hill continue to develop their infrastructure to enable car-lite lifestyles among their student residents. I wondered to myself how these two schools stacked up against their peer institutions on transportation connectivity.

So:

• I incorporated all of the ACC schools in this comparison (or shall we say ‘tournament bracket’) except Cal because they’d automatically win and Notre Dame because they aren’t a true ACC member

• I seeded the schools by undergraduate student enrollment (e.g., Georgia Tech has the highest student enrollment among the 16 schools, Wake Forest has the lowest)

• I took the scores from Walkscore.com to determine each school’s pedestrian, transit, and bicycle access and advanced whichever school has a higher score for the majority of categories to the next round

And with that, it’s ACC Tournament time!

Americans have a love affair with oil compared to our Western peers. 6 in 10 households in the United States own two or more vehicles; over a fifth of all households own three or more. We have a heavy reliance on oil to get us to work, our children to school, and to run the errands that support our daily functions. This is in large part due to the infrastructure available to the vast majority of Americans and a culture that emphasizes private transportation more than European countries of a similar wealth status.

As a result, access to oil has influenced American policy both domestically and abroad. Gas shortages in the 70s crippled our economy. Control over oil has impacted our relationships with the most powerful countries in the Middle East. Most importantly, oil has led to our intervention in numerous countries. We invaded Kuwait in the 90s, Iraq in the 2000s, and have seized control of Venezuela’s oil reserves after abducting their embattled president, Nicolás Maduro earlier this month. These interventions have led to deaths of civilians and American soldiers alike, and will continue to foment destruction and death to satisfy our country’s appetite for oil in vain.

Access to and control over oil will continue to inform the direction of American public policy so long as it’s inextricably tied to economic opportunity for its citizens. A car-independent future is necessary for an oil-independent future that does not jeopardize the livelihood of those living under American-backed occupation. Not only does our planet rely on a fossil fuel-free future, but so does our peace.

We spent our Thanksgiving holiday last month with my partner’s family outside of Charlotte, spending time with loved ones and playing with all the nieces and nephews. It was a great opportunity to unwind and eat some incredible Thanksgiving food.

My take on my family’s huminta recipe, a Bolivian corn cake perfectly suited for Thanksgiving dinner

But the traffic getting to, from, and around Charlotte dominated the weekend. It’s only marginally less congested other times of the year. It’s easy for traffic to build up on I-85, Gaston County’s only major interstate connection to Charlotte, considering the ever-expanding population that is funnelling onto the same highway. On average, Charlotte commuters spend nearly two days a year sitting in congestion; the second-highest figure in the country. Furthermore, public transportation infrastructure across the region is lacking— consequentially, 95% of area residents own a car, indicating a strong, regional reliance on the automobile.

Charlotte has begun taking steps to remedy this disparity in transportation alternatives. Last month, Mecklenburg County residents voted in favor of the ‘Yes for Meck’ ballot initiative to better fund public transportation and street safety projects. Mecklenburg County is currently one of the few in North Carolina that levies a sales tax dedicated to funding transit, and the only in the greater Charlotte area.

I-85 traffic builds up easily between Charlotte and Gastonia

‘Yes for Meck’

‘Yes for Meck’ enacts a half-cent sales tax to raise funds for the establishment of a metropolitan public transportation authority. This agency will oversee the execution and oversight of bus service expansion, up to 15-minute frequencies on popular routes, and passenger rail construction, including to North Mecklenburg via the Red Line commuter rail and to Charlotte-Douglas Airport via the Silver Line light rail. This would be in addition to managing the already-existing Lynx Blue Line light rail connecting UNC-Charlotte’s campus, Uptown Charlotte, and South Charlotte, and the Lynx Gold Line streetcar service across Uptown. The sales tax increase will also fund capital projects aimed at street safety for pedestrians and cyclists to promote first/last-mile connections to transit.

The Lynx Blue Line passing through Charlotte’s South End neighborhood

In total, the anticipated expansion of Charlotte’s public transportation network will introduce frequent, reliable transit service to thousands of new riders. City estimates project that approximately 450,000 county residents will be within a 10-minute walk from a transit stop with 15-minute headways. This frequency and reliability will go a long way towards rivaling single-occupancy vehicle commutes and encouraging mode shift among Charlotte residents. However, Charlotte’s light rail currently suffers from a negative public perception in light of recent high-profile instances of violence onboard. Safety measures would be necessary if ridership is to meaningfully increase.

But what about the suburbs?

However, much of Charlotte’s traffic comes from its suburban counties, none of which are currently included in the newly- approved transportation authority nor have substantial transit networks of their own. The Queen City’s suburbs, including my partner’s hometown in Gaston County, are conservative bastions with residents reticent to support a ballot measure increasing taxes. Ironically, investment in transit would reduce cost of transportation expenses, traffic congestion on major roads, and government spending on endless road repair and construction projects.

Well-funded transit also has the capacity to promote economic growth in Charlotte’s satellite cities and generate tax revenue, reducing the need to levy higher taxes on county residents in the long run. While a regional transit system with investment from suburban counties would promote denser development, combating the rampant sprawl in the area, it would have to compete with strong car dependency in the suburbs and is limited in its ability to address congestion brought on by interregional traffic.

Statewide solutions

NC By Train is a well-established and popular state-sponsored passenger rail service. Operating four roundtrip daily trains from Charlotte to Raleigh via the Piedmont route, NC By Train served over 600,000 passengers this past year, continuing the trend of increasing ridership numbers every year since the pandemic. Its proposed service expansions would reach hundreds of thousands of new passengers in Asheville, Wilmington, Winston-Salem, and other communities.

NC By Train’s Corridor ID awards, indicating priorities for future service corridors

This expanded service can establish mobility hubs and provide commuter-level frequency between North Carolina’s two largest cities, including in Charlotte’s northeastern suburbs in Cabarrus County. Despite its popularity, NC By Train relies on a hostile General Assembly for funding. Nevertheless, NC By Train serves as a valuable gateway into transit use for new and curious riders fed up with their car commutes. A truly statewide rail system can make up the backbone of a comprehensive public transportation network for the greater Charlotte area and beyond.

Conclusion

Public transportation in North Carolina faces an uphill battle. The General Assembly isn’t eager to fund non-automobile infrastructure projects and even its most urban communities are planned around the car. However, there’s growing interest and as of last month there’s a little more funding for transit in the state’s largest city. ‘Yes for Meck’ provides a path forward for addressing greater Charlotte’s growing pains. A coordinated effort incorporating well-funded regional transit systems and a robust statewide passenger rail network can reduce traffic even on Charlotte’s most congested roads and highways and return the equivalent of two days and hundreds of dollars to commuters.

Earlier this month, the Trump administration announced its intention to deploy Immigration & Customs Enforcement (ICE) officers to Charlotte amidst a wave of targets on blue cities across the country. This was after North Carolina GOP officials, fresh off their latest victory delivered to the national party with a mid-decade congressional district gerrymander, cashed in on their favor and requested the White House send troops to patrol North Carolina’s ‘crime-ridden’ cities. Federal agents have since been deployed across the state— even right here in Durham.

The actions taken by ICE in North Carolina cities and beyond have been heavy-handed if not extrajudicial. They’ve blatantly targeted workplaces, grocery stores, and restaurants staffed or patronized by immigrant populations, predominantly those of Latino descent. They’re policing our streets, our roadways, and our public transportation for anyone they may suspect doesn’t have sufficient documentation on hand, regardless of their legal status. They’re arriving in dramatic fashion to immigration court hearings ready to haul away those navigating a purposefully difficult system.

They’re doing this because the anti-immigrant movement has never been about combatting ‘illegal aliens who don’t work and don’t follow the rules’— that much is obvious if they’re targeting workplaces and courthouses. These masked ghouls and the politicians and systems who’ve enabled their antics are racist and it’s high time we call them such.

The presence of federal agents in our cities does little to address real safety issues community members face (see the reaction to the murder of Iryna Zarutska on Charlotte’s public transportation at the hands of an American citizen earlier this year). If anything, ICE deployment has ripped hundreds of North Carolina families apart just in the past week, with thousands more isolated in their homes for fear of deportation or arrest regardless of their immigration status.

Instilling fear in our community does not improve safety, but it does provide the opportunity to us to band together in a time of need for the most at-risk among our neighbors. Our cities ought to be thriving hubs of commerce and culture where all residents can live, work, learn, and play however they so choose as long they don’t do harm unto others. ICE is not welcome in our community so long as they come seeking to disrupt this harmony.

A few opportunities to get involved in the resistance against federal oppression here in North Carolina:

Siembra NC is a grassroots organization focused on defending Latino communities in North Carolina from exploitation, eviction, and deportation. They operate the Ojo Obrero tracking app, which monitors ICE movements and activities across the state and enables real-time reporting among users. They also host virtual and in-person trainings on ICE agent identification, civil disobedience, and other necessary resistance tactics. I would highly recommend tapping into these resources to stay in the know on pertinent ICE activities in your community and beyond.

The Carolina Migrant Network provides legal support to individuals impacted by ICE deportation efforts. They also provide guidance and raise awareness about knowing your rights when engaging with law enforcement or border patrol officials in any capacity.

Your neighborhood listserv or city subreddit may also provide details on how to get involved more locally. This is how I got involved with the Durham School-Based Care & Protection Teams. These neighborhood-based adult volunteer groups are tasked with fostering a caring and welcoming environment for students arriving to and leaving from school and, if necessary, verifying any ICE sightings within the vicinity and identifying community needs in light of the deployment.

Finally, local food shelters, community health clinics, and other support systems will likely be overwhelmed by the Thanksgiving/holiday crunch and the increase of families unable to work or go to school due to fear of deportation. Consider making an in-kind or monetary donation to them, especially if they highlight this need in light of recent circumstances.

I frankly don’t have much else to say. This has been an exhausting time, and I’d consider us very fortunate if the worst is truly behind us. I’ll end with this reflection: our cities and towns and neighborhoods and communities should be places of belonging, void of any condition of legality. People in our workplaces, schools, places of worship, and other community spaces shouldn’t be subject to the level of terror exacted by this administration. This is not what makes America great.

I’m wishing each of you a safe and restful weekend, Thanksgiving holiday, and rest of the year.

Earlier this week, Democratic candidate Zohran Mandani secured a decisive victory in the New York City mayoral election. A democratic socialist and current state assemblyman, Mayor-elect Mamdani’s campaign has focused on building a more affordable city— freezing the rent, operating municipal grocery stores, and providing fast and free bus service for all New Yorkers.

Mayor-elect Mamdani made fast and free buses a flashpoint for his affordability-focused campaign

The bus has become central to redistributive policy discourse, with fare-free service considered an attainable (albeit ambitious) goal for many transit authorities. For one, bus ridership in cities across the country is overwhelmingly low-income— in Durham, the figure is 88%. The reasoning goes that eliminating fare collection on buses benefits the disproportionately low-income ridership. Riders also spend less time stopped for fare collection, and experience fewer altercations with the operator or between other riders, providing a faster and safer ride.

Durham is one of the largest bus systems in the country to operate fare-free network-wide, having suspended fare collection during the COVID-19 pandemic. Other mid-sized cities have had varying levels of success with fare elimination— Richmond, VA has seen substantial transit ridership increase and plans to expand its Bus Rapid Transit (BRT) service, while funding and safety concerns in Kansas City have led the system to reinstate fares there. However, eliminating fares is a major political hurdle and begs the question: what good is free bus service if the bus doesn’t take you where you need to go, when you need to go, and in a timely manner?

For the bus to truly be a redistributive public service, it must accomplish these other goals— to be relevant, fast, and frequent. Durham’s current local and regional bus service suffices these requirements in small pockets of the city, predominantly downtown where the vast majority of bus ridership can't afford to live. So, here’s a GoDurham and GoTriangle rider’s take on how to build a better bus system for the Bull City.

A relevant bus

The GoDurham bus system currently operates 12 routes, all of which start and end at the downtown Durham bus station. The City has acknowledged that this hub and spoke system is inconvenient for crosstown riders and is launching routes that would accommodate those riders and bypass the downtown station. One other opportunity to reduce the number of transfers needed is to through-run routes so less riders require transfers. For example, a route running from Duke University Hospital to East Durham would enable riders to ride directly there, with the option to transfer elsewhere via the downtown station.

GoDurham’s Route 13 marks the system’s first crosstown service, with additional routes set to begin service in the years to come

A fast bus

Eliminating onboard fare collection only marginally improves on-time performance for bus routes. Fast buses need a series of intrastructure improvements. For example, bus pullouts at stops along most routes reduce vehicle traffic buildup. Bus-only lanes with platform boarding and traffic signal priority along high-frequency corridors maintain speedy service. Even placing bus stops just past traffic signals improves on-time performance. Durham’s recently-released Bus Rapid Transit (BRT) service concept incorporates many of these infrastructure improvements.

A visual concept of Durham’s Bus Rapid Transit (BRT) line

A frequent bus

The changes listed above only serves riders so much until it takes the secret sauce to boost service to a level that rivals private vehicle ownership— frequency.

Buses arriving every 15 minutes ought to be a standard. For peak service, buses arriving every 12 minutes mimics substantially higher frequency- should a rider miss their bus, they likely have to wait at their stop or the station for less than ten minutes. This is a game-changer from the current service, where many riders wait for half-an-hour for their first, second, on even third bus to arrive.

I’ve included below a concept map a what a GoDurham system incorporating these changes might look like. I based this concept on the Short Range Transit Plan set by the City.

Conclusion

Better bus service for Durham residents is not a luxury. Buses that run where riders need to go, faster, and more frequently can expand economic opportunity in communities where it’s needed most. It can save Durham residents valuable time whether they drive downtown to work daily or take three buses a day to reach two jobs on opposite sides of town.

The bus, at its highest capacity, can reduce congestion on our city’s streets and highways and keep Durham moving.

This monumental investment, bolstered by federal funding, expanded mobility opportunities in rural communities across the state not served by existing passenger rail infrastructure. As the prominence of automobile travel rose steadily over the next 50 years, passenger rail service dwindled until the federal government consolidated all remaining rail lines under Amtrak in the early 1970s.

Presently, automobile travel remains the dominant transportation mode for an overwhelming majority of North Carolinians. It has transformed the landscape of our cities and rural communities alike. It has simultaneously connected communities and decimated neighborhoods. It has reoriented our communities around the car— highways, driveways, parking lots, and gas stations take up significant space in our downtown and residential areas.

In stark contrast, Amtrak's service in North Carolina has hardly expanded in the last 50 years. The lone exception has been the Piedmont line running between Charlotte and Raleigh with various stops. Piedmont ridership has increased by 55% since 2019 (2023 data) as Amtrak's state affiliate, NC By Train, has increased operations to five daily bi-directional trains, including Amtrak’s daily Carolinian service to DC and New York. A sixth daily train is in the works for the near future. The Corridor ID program has also identified numerous opportunities to study expansion to communities across the state, including:

• Asheville to Salisbury;

• Charlotte to Atlanta, GA;

• Charlotte to Kings Mountain;

• Charlotte to Washington, DC;

• Fayetteville to Raleigh, and;

• Wilmington to Raleigh

A map of prospective passenger rail lines in North Carolina (NCDOT)

North Carolina, the ninth-most populous US state and one of the fastest-growing as of this article’s publication, requires significant investment in its passenger rail service amidst record growth, ridership and traffic congestion. So, here it goes— turning North Carolina into ‘the Good Rails State.’

First, it goes without saying that financing a robust passenger rail system requires a level of state and federal commitment that is sparsely found the current political climate of slashing budgets and social programs. However, state and federal leaders would be wise to consider such alternatives to address our worsening housing, transportation, and environmental issues, all of which are of major concern to their constituents here in the Tar Heel State.

Second, we need to establish the mathematical foundation behind the feasibility of a statewide passenger rail system. I used a travel demand model utilizing a population gravity score and distance multiplier to determine the optimal level of service between any two metropolitan areas. See an explanation of the equation below, along with a demonstration using North Carolina’s two largest metropolitan areas:

For those interested in learning more about this model, I highly recommend watching this video from City Nerd, where he uses this model within the context of American high-speed rail. I took the model he utilizes and adjusted the train speed to reflect an upgraded standard of passenger trains in North Carolina operating at a speed of 100mph.

Third, we need to define the roles of different government entities in this expansion:

• Amtrak would operate long-distance rail service (greater than 750 miles) through North Carolina, and;

• NCDOT would operate state-supported rail service within North Carolina and to neighboring states under the ‘NC By Train’ brand and state-supported thrice-daily bus service to connect major destinations not accessible by rail under the ‘Carolina Coach’ brand.

With the math and format behind this passenger rail network concept explained, here is the result…:

Along with a listing of routes…:

… and city pairings within the improved network by metropolitan area:

This system accomplishes several goals, including:

• Fulfilling all of NCDOT’s Corridor ID submissions;

• Meeting the optimal number of daily, round-trip rail service for each potential route along with other major rail connections (e.g., Fayetteville to Charlotte), and;

• Providing faster, more frequent, and more relevant rail service to a majority of North Carolina residents.

A passenger rail system of this caliber would expand mobility options to the thousands of North Carolinians who cannot drive or the millions who would prefer to take a train to work, catch a bus to college, or otherwise utilize public transportation in their everyday lives. It would bring the train in play as a viable option for traffic management around sporting events and fairs, beach and mountain season, and college move-in. It would expand options for interstate travel for major destinations such as DC and Atlanta. But most importantly, it would stem the ever-worsening congestion seen on many of our local streets, roads, and highways.

Would you be more likely to ride the train if our passenger rail system were this expansive? Do you think it’s worth it for our state and federal lawmakers to prioritize rail service in our transportation system? Leave your thoughts in the comments below!

I’m excited to share a project I’ve been working on this past summer that I plan on launching right here on this platform. Keep your eyes peeled for another notification from me later this week. Until then, whether you’ve been a subscriber for three weeks or three years— thank you for supporting my work!

Under normal circumstances, Americans would recognize our government implementing martial law on three-quarters of a million of their fellow country-people who are already taxed without representation (sounds familiar, no?). However, the rhetoric President Donald Trump has used is specially curated to divide us from Washingtonians, not unite us. In press conferences and social media posts, he's described DC as a violent crime-ridden city, with his allies and supporters following suit.

There is a narrative that has permeated American culture and daily life about the city— one not of opportunity and community, but of danger and crime. Television and print news depicts cities as violent environments where robberies, assaults, and even fatalities at the hands of fellow humans are a common occupancy. But is this really true?

From a transportation perspective, which has often been the focus of this platform, public transportation methods are far safer than driving when it comes to collision fatalities, be they as a motorist or an outside pedestrian/cyclist:

Data from Scientific American

Instances of serious crime have fallen on public transportation since the COVID-19 pandemic as well, while motor vehicle theft and road rage incidents continue to rise. This is despite a persistent narrative that riding the subway or the bus is more dangerous than driving simply because of the people who use them, particularly those of a lower socioeconomic status, or who may not have stable housing or may be experiencing mental illness.

That’s not to say that property or violent crime are nonexistent on our subways and buses. They happen and are a serious danger to passengers, transit operators, and even the perpetrators (see the killing of Jordan Neely on the New York subway). However, the sensationalism of extreme instances of crime on public transportation is akin to that of commercial airplane crashes— they’re so rare that stories of such magnitude garner news coverage that the slew of road rage and car collision fatalities don’t because of their frequency.

The current dialogue surrounding the Trump Administration's takeover of the Nation's Capital highlights the divide between urban and rural America in today’s political climate. The fact is, both worlds (as that is how it feels nowadays) rely on one another to sustain themselves and our country. Urban tax dollars build and maintain rural infrastructure. Rural agriculture feeds urban families. This economic and cultural trade-off between the two has become lost amidst heightened polarization.

Rural America can in part thank sprawl for this. Often called ‘urban sprawl,’ there's nothing urban about the car-dependent, cookie-cutter developments that have popped up across what was once farmland miles outside of the city core. Sprawl has raised home prices, congested roads, strained utilities, and stretched tax dollars thin and is often addressed by raising taxes on those who never asked for any of this to begin with. The same sprawl has retrofitted our once-dense urban spares to allow motorists to dominate other more suitable forms of transportation into irrelevance and derelict. The most unruly of motorists have made our streets less safe as a result, as car collisions contribute significantly to serious injuries and fatalities in our communities and become more common as our roads become wider and our highways more plentiful.

The result is an increasingly homogeneous and alienated suburban society that isn't position to accomplish the goals of an urban or rural community terribly well. Our reliance on the foreign auto manufacturer, the transnational conglomerate, the private equity firm, or the real estate investor grows at the expense of the American worker, family, and community, be they urban or rural.

Our experiences as everyday Americans—the city-dweller, the suburbanite, or the small-town resident—are far more similar than the media or our politicians would like us to think. They transcend identity politics and unite us not just as a common people, but against a common enemy which we happen to call different names depending on our political persuasion. The sooner we are to realizing that our problems with urban or rural communities, how we fear or look down at them, are rooted in the same practices of oppression by the same wealthy, powerful actors pitting us against one another, the sooner we can rebuild and restore. We can breathe new life into our cities with dense, affordable housing and fast, frequent public transit. We can curtail or even reverse sprawl and its harmful effects on our climate, economy, and the safety of our communities. Rural communities can better retain the very essence of their existence— vast lands, open roads, and an affordable way of life.

In a way, our safety relies on securing an affordable future for our urban and rural communities— one where they can live and move around as they please without worry of violent crime impacting us or our loved ones or a tyrannical government policing our communities to score political points. When our cities function as true cities ought to, we make our communities safer and more prosperous for all.

If you’re interested in staying in the know on transportation affairs in Durham, North Carolina, and beyond, make sure to subscribe below.

Subscribe now

As neighboring Raleigh opens its new Union Station Bus Facility (or RUS Bus) next month to improve connectivity between regional bus and rail service, Durham is seeing significant expansion both now and down the road in its transit service. For one, the Durham Raleigh Express route, or DRX, operated by GoTriangle will now connect Durham’s downtown bus terminal to RUS Bus.

Raleigh’s new RUS Bus facility will open for service on August 3rd.

Furthermore, GoTriangle is realigning and increasing existing bus service between the Bull City and Chapel Hill on the Route 400 and 405. Starting August 3rd, commuters between the two will now enjoy 15-minute service frequency, the first within the regionwide GoTriangle network to reach such frequencies.

Durham’s local bus service, GoDurham, will also see increased service later this summer. In addition to the service remaining fare-free for another fiscal year, GoDurham Routes 3 and 5 will all run more frequently to serve the Village/Glenn View Station Walmart and Southpoint/Hope Valley Commons areas respectively.

The City is also considering introducing Durham’s first Bus Rapid Transit (BRT) route, combining Route 3 and Routes 11/11B, serving Old West Durham and Duke University Hospital. The concept is currently in the feasibility study phase— you can learn more and fill out the survey here!

A rendering of BRT service from City of Durham’s website.

BRT presents the most significant investment in transit in Durham since the proposed light rail project that ultimately failed in 2019. For a fraction of the cost, residents can access fast, free, and convenient transportation alternatives to travel across town. I’ve written about what BRT could look like in Durham and across the Triangle— dedicated bus-only lanes, 12-minute service frequency or better, and a viable alternative to driving in one of the most car-dependent, sprawling metropolitan areas in the entire country.

BRT will expand educational and economic opportunities in a region world-renowned for its educational institutions and many expanding industries. It’ll alleviate the congestion on our busiest roadways built for a different time in our region’s history. It’ll enable denser, more affordable housing as the region also grapples with an affordable housing crisis and subsequent sprawl out to neighboring counties that equally can’t handle the rise in housing costs and congestion. It’s a smarter way forward for the Triangle.

Legend Jenkins was struck and killed by a driver while walking home from the grocery store. He and his brother were crossing West Hudson Boulevard, a four-lane road with a posted speed limit of 45 mph. He was seven years old.

There are several different ways Gaston County, a suburban county west of Charlotte, could go about addressing this tragedy. The municipal government could take steps to improve pedestrian safety along major vehicle thoroughfares in town. The police could charge the driver, a 76-year old woman, with manslaughter and at least revoke their license. Instead, Legend’s parents have been charged with involuntary manslaughter, felony child neglect, and misdemeanor child neglect for their role in allowing their children to leave to the grocery store unsupervised. They have since pled guilty.

I cannot imagine the pain these parents are going through— having lost one child and being deemed unfit to raise their other. I do think these parents could’ve taken additional precautions before allowing their children to cross the road nearby. It's unclear whether they had crossed the road with parental supervision before. There is no evidence that the driver was speeding or under the influence at the time of the collision. Quite the contrary, Legend and his older brother were not crossing inside a crosswalk.

There can be multiple truths at a time, but one thing is certain: the fact that the only takeaway from this tragedy being that Jessica and her husband Samuele are neglectful parents deserving of jail time is unacceptable. Legend's parents did not kill him. A driver who was following the rules of the road killed Legend, a road built with lanes wide and plentiful and marked at dangerously high speeds that not just prioritizes, but mandates, the single deadliest mode of personal transport along said road, carrying the punishment of incarceration, serious injury, or death for whoever defies this mandate.

The real tragedy is that we as humans built and maintain this system of perpetual harm, that this is a reality in communities across North Carolina where there have been numerous pedestrian injuries and deaths in the last year. The tragedy is that our state DOT perpetuates this harm in our communities by building deadly highways with little to no recourse for local calls for safely on these roads, with low-income, minority, disabled, younger, and older populations bearing the brunt of this destruction. The tragedy is that Legend Jenkins and countless others have died in preventable traffic collisions and the only takeaway from anybody in this situation with the power to do something is that Legend's parents are neglectful.

Our communities should be safe and accessible for all.

The trail also passes through a university-managed wetland complete with a storm water retention reservoir and a water fowl sanctuary. There are signs along the trail teaching passersby the characteristics and benefits of a wetlands ecosystem. It was an informative lesson on the importance of wetlands on top of an already excellent day for a hike!

The Al Buehler trail’s wetlands are not unique to Durham— the Ellerbee Creek Watershed Association (ECWA) maintains a wetland project closer to downtown. These artificial ecosystems have become all the more valuable as sprawl has jeopardized our natural-occurring wetlands. More freeways, more car-centric development, and more single-family homes on acre-large lots spread into land that is otherwise undisturbed wetland ecosystems. It’s important to note that the ECWA’s future is uncertain as the current federal administration continues to gut funding for conservation efforts and limit grant funding opportunities for non-profit organizations to apply for.

But why exactly do we need wetlands? To answer that question, we first want to establish a working definition for the term. A wetland consists of water at or below the ground’s surface, soil to saturate in water and produce organic matter, and plants that grow hydroponically. These wetlands support with stormwater retention by slowing water flow to reduce erosion, filters and improves water quality, and fosters new habitats for plants and animals vital to the ecosystem.

Wetlands require ground to soak in rainwater. When they’re replaced with ever-expanding impervious surface (e.g., asphalt for vehicles to drive on), there’s an increased instance of stormwater runoff with toxic particles leftover from vehicles. In larger quantities, this runoff can bring about flooding and destruction to infrastructure, property, and even life. Urban sprawl aggregates our existing natural water systems and wetlands in the name of lower density and maximum profit.

These impacted water systems can negatively affect flora and fauna reliant on them. This same toxic runoff coming from vehicle traffic works its way into the water these plants use and animals drink and can have adverse health effects on these species, igniting an imbalance in the ecosystem. Our drinking water can also be impacted, particularly in municipalities with lacking water filtration and sanitation systems.

Beyond the blatant air pollution coming from cars, the infrastructure necessary to support our car-centric society strains our water systems as well and can threaten the health of our ecosystems and communities. Conversely, building denser neighborhoods less reliant on the car preserves these vital wetland systems and keep our water clean and safe for plants, animals, and humans alike.

I see it from people from all over the state:

… and those from South Carolina as well:

But in what context are these cities and states full?

It is often in the context of cars. There is too much congestion, too little available parking for longtime residents who have become accustomed to a certain standard of efficiency when driving around town.

This is a perfectly valid reaction to such a conundrum. It’s arguably more understandable in the context of housing, where much of the housing being built in the community is designed for those moving from afar with increased spending power. It’s a necessary reaction in the context of a community, particularly one that has been historically marginalized, being displaced in the name of ‘progress’ or ‘renewal’ for the aforementioned newcomers.

However, there are plenty of contexts where it’s an ill-informed conclusion. Who is saying it, where they’re referring to, and what they want done about it all influence that outcome. It’s also important for us to consider that wealthier residents reap the benefits of the same population influx they may bemoan; new amenities and expanded economic opportunities they can directly utilize.

Regardless of status or other factors, this population will generally skew towards the ‘we’re full’ response. But is that entirely true?

These are the population densities, measuring how ‘full’ a city is, for the densest cities in the United States:

• New York, NY: 29k/sq mi

• San Francisco, CA: 19k/sq mi

• Boston, MA: 14k/sq mi

• Chicago, IL: 12k/sq mi

• Philadelphia, PA: 12k/sq mi

Conversely, these are the population densities for the principal cities of the largest growing metropolitan areas in the country:

• Austin, TX: 3k/sq mi

• Raleigh, NC: 3k/sq mi

• Orlando, FL: 3k/sq mi

• Jacksonville, FL: 1k/sq mi

• Dallas, TX: 4k/sq mi

• Houston, TX: 4k/sq mi

• Charlotte, NC: 3k/sq mi

• San Antonio, TX: 3k/sq mi

The difference in population density between these two groups of cities is dramatic. On the surface, the conclusion may be that these lower-density cities offer a better quality of life than the crammed major cities across the country. However, this sprawl is expensive for municipalities to maintain. Because residents pay lower taxes on sprawling properties with lower tax values, municipalities have even fewer funds to maintain more road surface. When it all shakes out, tax dollars from residents of these sprawling, low-density cities are inefficiently used and could be going much further to actually improve quality of life: sidewalks, bus stops, better schools, better parks, and more amenities.

Many of the fastest-growing metropolitan areas in the country are developing in a way that only places an added strain on these resources. Here’s some the most pressing issues facing low-density cities:

Housing

The characterizing feature of low-density cities and their surrounding communities is the single-family house, which has become the pinnacle of the American Dream. However, it’s become rapidly unachievable for many because of just how expensive it is to build. Single-family homes cost more to construct than their denser counterparts and require more sprawling infrastructure to build and maintain. Sprawl leads to higher obesity rates, traffic fatalities, emergency response times, and infrastructure costs, all of which are shouldered by the municipality and ultimately residents.

Despite these negative externalities, a majority of Americans— 57%— prefer sprawling communities where they have to drive to their destination over denser neighborhoods where more amenities are within walking/biking/transit-accessible distances. That still leaves over 40% of Americans who prefer walkable neighborhoods and cities, many of which are priced out of the few truly car-independent cities in the country. Because they’re so few and far between, there’s a profound market balance indicating that there’s much higher demand for density than there is sprawl.

Transportation

The more sprawl there is in our metropolitan areas, the more residents must rely on a personal vehicle to get around. These cities prioritize the most individualistic and most dangerous mode of transport. The fact that each person is driving their own vehicle increases instances of human vehicle error, leading to more delays, injuries, fatalities. Active and sustainable transportation alternatives alleviate existing infrastructure, but only when destinations are within walking/biking/transit-accessible distances.

Land use

This level of demand for personal vehicles requires significant space dedicated to cars— highways, driveways, parking lots, garages, and more. These spaces have two things in common: they take away space that would otherwise be used by people and they generate little to no tax revenue for municipalities. In fact, they cost far more for the taxpayers for municipalities to maintain. Reducing reliance on parking and other car-dependent infrastructure opens new opportunities for local governments and residents alike.

Municipalities can generate more tax revenue from denser development, less of which has to go towards endless road construction and maintenance. The added residents from this development isn’t as much of a strain on the municipality or the community because their added tax dollars outweigh their burden on community resources (e.g., competition in the housing market, vehicle traffic on major roads).

So no, your city is not full if our cities can reverse their direction on housing availability, transportation choices, and land use practices.

Benjamin Schachtman/WHQR

The Gary Shell Cross City Trail near Wrightsville Avenue.

While many people simply hop in their cars and trucks in the morning and head out to work, school, or to run errands, there are plenty in Wilmington — and around the state — who walk or ride a bike. That can be problematic in areas where the roads are designed to accommodate these "vulnerable road users."

This reporting was made possible in part by a grant from the Fourth Estate Fund.

New Hanover County boasts one of the highest percentages statewide of households that have no vehicle access at roughly 6%, according to data from the Census Bureau’s American Community Survey.

Individuals who lack access to a vehicle tend to include college students, older adults, and other populations with a significant presence in greater Wilmington that either can’t afford or don’t have the ability to operate their own vehicle. The same data show that in both the Northside and Southside neighborhoods, over a third of households have no vehicle access. Within the vicinity of the University of North Carolina at Wilmington and along the US 17 corridor north of Wilmington, roughly a fifth of households have no vehicle access.

Despite this sizable population of individuals who cannot drive a private vehicle, North Carolina’s infrastructure is far from accommodating for what the planning field refers to as ‘vulnerable road users’— pedestrians, cyclists, and individuals using mobility devices such as a wheelchair. Carolyn Caggia, a transportation planner for the Wilmington Metropolitan Planning Organization (WMPO), encourages the use of alternative transportation methods such as bicycling, walking, or utilizing public transit through marketing and outreach/education campaigns.

She points out that the greater Wilmington area averages 72 pedestrian crashes and 57 bicycle crashes annually. Paired with limited transit options in the greater Wilmington area, individuals that don’t or can’t drive their own vehicle can face dangerous and inconvenient commuting options.

Terry Lansdell is the director of BikeWalk NC, a statewide advocacy organization working to protect bicycle and pedestrian-friendly policies and project funding at the state level. In his work, he’s experienced the impact of poor infrastructure on vulnerable road users first-hand.

”Being able to safely transport yourself through whatever mode you chose, regardless of age, is so critical now more than ever as [North Carolina] has been classified as one of the worst states in America for… vulnerable road user deaths and injuries,” Lansdell says. “No one should die due to roadway violence,” he said

Caggia credits the area’s different bicycle and pedestrian facilities such as the Cross City Trail, which serves the University and other parts of town, as projects that “raise awareness about people biking and walking because there’s a designated place that drivers know that they’re going to be.”

“I think people feel safer to have a place where they’re going to be separate from traffic,” she continued, adding that these projects can ultimately encourage residents to walk and bike more frequently.

However, cities such as Wilmington face challenges in providing this type of infrastructure for vulnerable road users due to roadblocks at the General Assembly. Lansdell feels his organization has its work cut out for it, due to a 2013 State Transportation Initiative law prohibiting funding for stand-alone bicycle and pedestrian projects. This means any projects prioritizing vulnerable road users must either find funding from federal/local entities or pair the projects alongside ones serving motorists. In the Wilmington area, this includes the proposed multi-use path for the Cape Fear Memorial Bridge replacement.

Infrastructure-related successes for the bicycle and pedestrian safety movement have been mostly local and regional in scope. Rashawn King, program manager for the Triangle Trails Initiative, is bullish on the greater Research Triangle region’s greenway network. For the past six years, Triangle Trails Initiative has been the East Coast Greenway Alliance’s conduit for greenway development in the region through collaboration with local and regional entities.

King said that his organization’s “ultimate vision is to be national leaders for trails and greenway connectivity,” emphasizing the region’s current statewide leadership in greenway infrastructure. “The mobility aspect, when it comes to greenways and trails, plays a key role in the work that we do,” King explained. “We want to make sure that we come in to be able to assist our collaborative partners with making the mobility side of things … sturdier and sustainable for those who are going to be utilizing it.”

Greenways and trail infrastructure are just a piece in the puzzle of promoting safe walking and bicycling in North Carolina. In spite of barriers faced at the General Assembly, BikeWalk NC made inroads according to Lansdell, including “the passage of complete streets policies by NCDOT” which set safety standards for road construction incorporating bicycle and pedestrian pathways, says Lansdell. They’ve also done “work around funding bills to improve pedestrian safety, inclusion in the federally required Highway Safety Plan with our Friendly Driver Program,” and other efforts to establish best practices for bicycle and pedestrian safety in the state.

Changes in behavior and infrastructure are both aimed towards providing a safe travel experience for all vulnerable road users — students at UNC-Wilmington, long-time residents of the Northside neighborhood, and others across the greater Wilmington area that lack access to their own personal vehicle in an environment that is built entirely around private vehicle ownership.

“Safety is a big goal of ours,” said Caggia. “We want to be able to provide options for people who maybe can’t drive […] so giving them a safe place to do that is of utmost importance.”

First, a bit of history on the corridor— Hillsborough Street began as a major thoroughfare connecting the newly-planned capital city of Raleigh to settlements westward. As technology improved, a streetcar was constructed to run along Hillsborough Street from downtown Raleigh to the newly-founded North Carolina State University. It now serves as the cultural center of NC State’s campus, along with the neighboring all-women’s Meredith College.

For much of the road’s modern existence it hosted four travel lanes with two in each direction. Despite the density surrounding Hillsborough Street, it encouraged motorists to speed above 35mph and had limited facilities for vulnerable road users such as pedestrians and bicyclists. A pedestrian fatality in the late 1990s called to attention the dangerous design of such a fast and wide road running through a college campus and commercial corridor.

After consulting with community partners, the City of Raleigh embarked on a road diet, a type of planning project that resizes a thoroughfare to better fit its surroundings. The road diet reduced vehicle travel lanes from four to two and incorporated a redesign prioritizing traffic-calming, including wider sidewalks, pedestrian crosswalks, bicycle lanes, and roundabouts.

The result is a safer and more vibrant street for all road users. Vehicle crashes reduced by 23% while private investment along the corridor increased by $200 million. Hillsborough Street now hosts coffee shops, apartments, convenience stores, restaurants, bars, a Target, and more for students and non-students alike to patronize and gather at.

My personal favorite aspect of Hillsborough Street (because I am a raging nerd) is its frequent bus service. The Hillsborough Street bus corridor is served by three different transit providers:

• GoTriangle runs three routes that combine for 10-minute frequency between downtown Raleigh & Hillsborough Street;

• GoRaleigh runs three routes that combine for 7-minute frequency between downtown Raleigh & Hillsborough Street, and;

• NC State’s Wolfline service runs five routes that combine for 4-minute frequency between NC State’s campus & Hillsborough Street.

Hillsborough Street gets bus service correct in a way that few other parts of any city in North Carolina do. There are cut-ins along the street so buses can pull off to drop off and pick up passengers without impeding traffic. You hardly have to check your phone to see how to get to downtown Raleigh or back— there is abundant signage at Hillsborough Street’s many sheltered bus stops. By the time you’ve figured out which routes you need to catch, your bus will be arriving to your stop with another one right behind. It simplifies urban travel to a degree of spontaneity car ownership promises, except without the hassle of excessive traffic and parking.

Despite its near-impeccable bus service, there are several opportunities to build Hillsborough Street into an even more accessible space for all modes of transportation. The North Carolina Rail Road (NCRR) line connecting Raleigh to both Durham & cities south and Richmond & cities north runs parallel to Hillsborough Street through NC State’s campus. A station on campus for Amtrak or even regional rail service paired with additional bus connections to Carter-Finley Stadium, downtown Cary, and other destinations within close proximity would further expand mobility opportunities along the corridor. Expanding housing choices in the surrounding neighborhoods to incorporate more missing middle housing such as duplexes or townhomes would bolster Hillsborough Street’s density and subsequent commercial activity.

Even as is, Hillsborough Street is an envy for even a hardened NC State hater as myself (see UNC’s football record against NC State the last four seasons). The street provides unique opportunities (at least within our region) for people traveling through or grabbing a bite to eat alike. Other corridors in both college towns and major cities alike could learn a lot from Hillsborough Street’s traffic-calming measures and incorporation of multi-modal transportation into its built environment.

I’ve had difficulty putting into words my thoughts on the last couple of months, as I’m sure many of my readers have. Federal worker layoffs, constitutional violations, social program cuts, and an ever-present cloud of uncertainly have plagued our country since Donald Trump took office this past January. It’s left many of us dejected, afraid, and even angry on behalf of those most vulnerable to these shifts in governing. One element of the Trump administration’s policy actions that has particularly disturbed me is the dismantling and erasure of diversity, equity, and inclusion efforts within our government, and the ripple effect into other corners of American life with it. But what Trump’s most ardent supporters don’t understand— or don’t want to understand— is that it’s this diversity, equity, and inclusion that has built up our communities into what they are for hundreds of years.

First, to establish some working definitions:

• Diversity: the condition of having or being composed of differing elements

• Equity: freedom from disparities in the way people of different races, genders, etc. are treated

• Inclusion: the act/state of including/being included

For better or worse— whether it may be voluntary immigration to this country or forced enslavement and kidnapping to the New World— the United States has always been a melting pot. My trip to our nation’s capital this past weekend was a sobering reminder that despite the purge of diversity, equity, and inclusion from public life the majority of our communities are vibrant spaces made up of people from all sorts of backgrounds and lived experiences.

This cultural blend is evident in the Adams Morgan-Columbia Heights area I stayed in, host to a Vietnamese restaurant, Salvadoran pupuseria, Cuban coffee shop, Ethiopian restaurant, and more. There’s an economic argument yo be made for the variety in cuisine offered to neighborhood residents and visitors alike. Cultural centers, faith-based organizations, and all sorts of other establishments of all backgrounds coexist in the community as well. Folks come to the United States from all over the world— oftentimes due to the destabilization of their home countries at the hands of imperial powers such as our own country— seeking a community where they can build anew, and cities provide an excellent opportunity for them. The neighborhood’s density encourages cohesion and camaraderie with those who might be different from us, fostering a community that wouldn’t be possible in a less diverse, equitable, or inclusive city.

It’s easy for detractors to hide behind the commonly-used acronym ‘DEI.’ However, it’s more difficult to spell it out and say that you’re against ‘diversity, equity, and inclusion’ than some scary supposedly-radical acronym. If you’re going to espouse xenophobic viewpoints, you should have to say it with your chest and proclaim to all those around you what you believe. But surely nobody who believes in the ‘American Dream’ could be that opposed to diversity, equity, and inclusion that they’re willing to look away when the Department of Defense derogatorily labels Jackie Robinson’s webpage as a ‘DEI’ site and temporarily removes the page from their site, right?

In fact, diversity, equity, and inclusion have benefited all of us in one way or another. Expecting parents have diversity, equity, and inclusion to thank for paid parental leave. In our cities, sidewalks are (at least marginally) accessible for those using a mobility device such as a wheelchair in part because the voices of those with physical disabilities were elevated and heard and the American Disabilities Act was put in place for our infrastructure to meet (very) basic requirements. It’s thanks to diversity, equity, and inclusion efforts that I have the space and grace to correct someone if they mispronounce my name or celebrate and share my Latino heritage in my workplace and community alike.

We all have a lot to learn from another, and to think otherwise is foolish and ill-informed— no one of us has life and its many mysteries figured out. Instead, it’s our differences that have the capacity to strengthen our communities. Neighborhoods like Adams Morgan and Columbia Heights have their problems— even in spite of their diversity, they may not be as equitable or inclusive thanks to gentrification, crime, and other factors impacting our cities. However, we only do ourselves a disservice when we disincentivize diversity, equity, and inclusion programs and initiatives. Jackie Robinson himself was technically a ‘DEI hire,’ and there’s nothing wrong with that— he was signed by the Brooklyn Dodgers to play in the 1947 season with the expressed purpose of breaking the color barrier in professional sports.

To close this piece, I ask you to reflect on a short but impactful idiom that brings to mind the state of diversity, equity, and inclusion in our cities and communities: giving someone else a seat at the table doesn’t take yours away. Instead, the table becomes a more vibrant environment with folks of all backgrounds contributing to a lively and constructive conversation to address the problems and solutions our communities face.

I hope to also share the joy the city and our community can provide to each of us as well, even in trying times. Check out pictures from my weekend visiting family and friends in the District below!

I brought my bicycle up with me via the train from Durham and rode 15 miles

I also got a three-mile run in!

My friends who hosted me and I at Hunger Games trivia in Adams Morgan

Watching my March Madness bracket disintegrate in real-time

Ran into my tia and tio on my ride…

… and a friend of mine!

Sights of the Capitol building at Union Station…

… and nature on my train ride back to Durham!

Subscribe now