Trump's War on Bike Lanes: DOT Declares Pavement "Hostile Territory" in Infrastructure Purge
Administration rescinds millions in safety grants for bike lanes, road diets, and pedestrian projects, labeling them "hostile to motor vehicles."
WASHINGTON, D.C. – The Trump administration has escalated its culture wars to a new frontier: bicycle infrastructure and pedestrian safety projects. In a move that reveals the administration's ideological priorities, the U.S. Department of Transportation has moved to rescind millions of dollars in previously awarded federal grants, informing local governments that their projects are being canceled because they are "hostile to motor vehicles"13.
This campaign targets a wide array of initiatives—from urban bike lanes and recreational trails to proven safety treatments like road diets—effectively punishing communities for investing in safety and quality of life. The administration's rationale represents a fundamental misunderstanding of modern transportation planning and pedestrian safety needs.
Beyond Road Diets: The Full Scope of the Infrastructure Purge
While road diets have become a focal point, the administration's infrastructure grant cancellations extend far beyond street redesigns. The purge targets everything from riverfront recreational trails to downtown pedestrian improvements, revealing a comprehensive hostility toward any project that doesn't exclusively serve automobiles.
The common thread connecting these diverse projects is their focus on multi-modal transportation—creating infrastructure that serves cyclists, pedestrians, and public transit users alongside drivers. This approach, widely endorsed by urban planners and safety experts, stands in stark contrast to the administration's car-centric worldview.
Understanding Road Diets: The Safety Strategy Deemed "Hostile"
At the heart of this controversy are road diets—a proven traffic safety strategy that the Trump administration has labeled "hostile." Contrary to the administration's characterization, road diets are engineered to improve safety for all road users, including drivers.
A road diet, also known as a roadway reconfiguration, typically involves converting a four-lane undivided roadway into three lanes—two through lanes plus a center turn lane. This simple redesign creates space for bicycle lanes while maintaining vehicle capacity and dramatically improving safety.
The Federal Highway Administration categorizes road diets as proven safety countermeasures with documented crash reduction benefits of 19% to 47%. They represent just one of many evidence-based safety strategies now under attack.
The Human Cost: Communities Lose Critical Safety Projects
The DOT's infrastructure purge has targeted a wide range of projects that promote safety and community wellness. The wave of cancellations began on September 9, 2025, with the administration stating its priority is "preserving or increasing roadway capacity for motor vehicles"12.
San Diego County, California
A planned road improvement project that would have added bike lanes and roundabouts to improve safety without disrupting traffic flow1.
Official Rationale: "Appears to reduce lane capacity and a road diet that is hostile to motor vehicles"23
Boston, Massachusetts
The "Roxbury Resilient Corridors" project would have brought pedestrian safety improvements, EV charging stations, and transit upgrades to underserved communities12.
Official Rationale: Project would change "current auto-centric configuration" and could "impede vehicle capacity and speed"12
Safety in the Crosshairs
These cuts target infrastructure proven to save lives at a time when pedestrian fatalities are approaching historic highs. The administration is gutting programs like Safe Streets and Roads for All and RAISE grants despite their proven safety benefits2.
Local officials have expressed frustration with the administration's rationale. Rick Dunne, executive director of the Naugatuck Valley Council of Governments, questioned the logic: "They're defining quality of life for Americans as enhancing automobile operations... Increase vehicle travel, increase pollution, increase safety risks"12. The county engineer for McLean County, Illinois, noted that a canceled trail project along Route 66 would not affect car travel and would actually promote safety by getting bicyclists and pedestrians off the road. The response was a form letter declaring it hostile1.
🚦 The Real Hostility: Putting Politics Over Public Safety
The Trump administration's war on bike lanes and pedestrian infrastructure represents a dangerous prioritization of ideology over evidence-based policy. It's a comprehensive attack on safety projects that extends far beyond any single treatment like road diets.
It would be laughable if it weren't so dangerously ideological—a phrase that fits only after considering the real-world harm inflicted on towns and cities simply for seeking safer, more livable streets. The real hostility lies not in paint on pavement, but in a federal government that dismisses the well-being of its people.
💬 Join the Conversation
What are your thoughts on these transportation policy changes? Share your perspective in the comments below.
References
- AP News. (2025). Trump's transportation department pulls trail and bike grants it deems 'hostile' to cars.
- Common Dreams. (2025). Trump Admin Cancels Grants for Pedestrian Safety and Bike Lanes, Calling Them 'Hostile' to Cars.
- Bloomberg. (2025). Trump Cancels Trail, Bike-Lane Grants Deemed 'Hostile' to Cars.
- Road.cc. (2025). Donald Trump cancels grants for bike lanes because they're "hostile to motor vehicles".
- League of American Bicyclists. (2024). What a Trump Department of Transportation could mean for bicycling and walking.
Comments
Post a Comment