HomeMy WebLinkAboutItem VI-Complete StreetsCOMPLETE STREETSlocal policy workbook
www.smartgrowthamerica.org
2
1707 L St NW Suite 250 • Washington, DC 20036
202-207-3355 • info@completestreets.org
www.smartgrowthamerica.org
This workbook was written by Stefanie Seskin, with contributions from Barbara McCann.
We thank Rachael Kefalos Bronson, Nadine Doyle, Cynthia Hoyle, Renee Autumn
Ray, Ryan Snyder, Catherine Vanderwaart, and Amanda Woodall for their thoughtful
comments.
Photo credits
Page 9, clockwise from top left: Dan Burden, Walkable and Livable Communities Institute; Dan Burden,
Walkable and Livable Communities Institute; Tiffany Robinson, www.pedbikeimages.org; Elly Blue,
www.pedbikeimages.org
Page 16, from top: Amanda Inscore, www.news-press.com; Be Active Decatur, www.beactivedecatur.com
Page 26, from top: Seattle Department of Transportation; Dan Burden, Walkable and Livable Communities
Institute
Page 40: Adam Darin, www.pedbikeimages.org
Page 51: all photos by Dan Burden, Walkable and Livable Communities Institute
August 2012, updated Spring 2013
The Complete Streets Local Policy Workbook is licensed under a Creative Commons
Attribution-NonCommercial 3.0 Unported License, permitting non-commercial use with
attribution. Any of these conditions may be waived with permission.
http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/3.0/
Complete Streets Local Policy Workbook
The Public Health Connection 5
Introduction 6
How to Use This Workbook 7
Types of Policies 8
Pursuing the Right Type of Policy 12
Policy Elements 15
Vision 16
Core Commitment 19
Users and Modes 20
Projects and Phases 22
Exceptions 24
Best Practice Elements 29
Network 30
All Agencies and Roads 32
Design Guidance and Flexibility 34
Context Sensitivity 36
Performance Measures 38
Implementation Next Steps 43
Additional Elements 48
Paper to Practice 50
table of contents
4
Complete Streets Local Policy Workbook
the public health connection
It’s no coincidence that Complete Streets efforts have taken off in places that are also working
to prevent chronic disease. As residents, leaders, and public health organizations have worked
together to encourage healthier communities, they’ve identified many existing streets as
a barrier to more active lifestyles. Yet, when streets are ‘complete’ – safe, comfortable, and
convenient for people walking, bicycling, riding public transportation, and driving – people of all
ages and abilities have more opportunities to be active when they go from place to place, or
when they exercise for recreation. That transforms streets from a public health barrier to an
asset, enabling a greater return on the investment of public dollars..
In 2010, the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services created the Communities Putting
Prevention to Work (CPPW) program to help communities achieve their health goals, fight
obesity, and reduce tobacco use. Led by the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention,
sites participating in the CPPW program employ a powerful public health framework for
creating healthier environments: Policy, Systems, and Environmental Change – or PSE for short.
PSE recognizes that making the healthy choice the easy choice is a sure route to success in
promoting healthier behavior. These efforts will produce broad, high–impact, sustainable health
outcomes for participating communities.
While CPPW communities selected different interventions as a means to achieve improved
health outcomes, a great number chose Complete Streets as one of their focal areas. Some
of these communities took their first steps to Complete Streets through CPPW, while others
used the program to ensure effective implementation.
Within the PSE framework, this document aims to directly address the ‘P’ – by adopting a
Complete Streets policy – and influence the ‘S’ – by starting to change the everyday decisions
that influence our transportation system. Then, by building our streets with sidewalks, bicycle
facilities, accessible transit stops, and other infrastructure investments that encourage active
transportation, we will acheive the ‘E’. While we looked nationally for examples and ideas to
include in the following pages, many referenced polices are from CPPW sites that have worked
on Complete Streets in conjunction with their community partners:
• Birmingham, AL (CPPW Site: Jefferson County)
• North Little Rock, AR (CPPW Site: North Little Rock)
• Baldwin Park, CA (CPPW Site: Los Angeles County)
• Dunwoody, GA (CPPW Site: DeKalb County)
• Cook County, IL (CPPW Site: Cook County, IL)
• Rochester, MN (CPPW Site: Olmsted County)
• Nashville, TN (CPPW Site: Nashville-Davidson County)
• San Antonio, TX (CPPW Site: San Antonio, TX)
• Seattle, WA (CPPW Site: Seattle-King County)
• La Crosse, WI (CPPW Site: La Crosse County)
This document is one of several ways in which the Coalition’s work with CPPW sites is being
shared more broadly, to help more places in the U.S. achieve healthier communities through
engagement with transportation planning systems.
6
For decades, the fields of transportation planning and design focused on
moving able-bodied adults in automobiles, creating a system that provides
reasonably good mobility and convenience for millions of Americans.
However, the needs of travelers outside that group, including younger or
older people, those with disabilities, and those who travel by transit, bicycle,
or foot, have been routinely overlooked. Neighborhoods lack safe places to
walk or bicycle, and access to key community resources such as parks, shops,
grocery stores, and schools is now dependent on access to an automobile.
Thousands of people are injured or killed while walking or bicycling every
year, in part due to the inhospitable built environment. Buses move down
streets slowly and drivers – when not speeding along neighborhood streets
– are caught in traffic jams on major arterials.
The Complete Streets movement aims to develop integrated, connected
networks of streets that are safe and accessible for all people, regardless
of age, ability, income, ethnicity, or chosen mode of travel. Complete
Streets makes active transportation such as walking and bicycling
convenient; provide increased access to employment centers, commerce,
and educational institutions; and allow greater choice in traveling so that
transportation doesn’t drain a family’s piggy bank.
The term Complete Streets means much more than the physical changes
to a community’s streets. Complete Streets means changing transportation
planning, design, maintenance, and funding decisions. A Complete Streets
policy ensures that, from the start, projects are planned and designed
to meet the needs of every community member, regardless of their age,
ability, or how they travel. Doing so allows a community to save money,
accommodate more people, and create an environment where every
resident can travel safely and conveniently.
Complete Streets can be achieved through a variety of policies: ordinances
and resolutions; rewrites of design manuals; inclusion in comprehensive
plans; internal policies developed by transportation agencies; executive
orders from elected officials, such as Mayors or Governors; and policies
developed by stakeholders from the community and agency staff that are
formally adopted by an elected board of officials.
introduction
Complete Streets Local Policy Workbook
Rather than presenting a single model policy, we are offering a guide based on existing
examples from around the country to help walk you through developing the right
policy for your community. We strongly encourage you to think carefully about your
community’s needs, vision, and goals. Draw from existing best practices, but be sure to
tailor that language to best fit your community.
This workbook is designed to be used in conjunction with our latest edition of Complete
Streets Policy Analysis, where you can find many examples of well-written existing policy
language, often in your own region or state. Remember: good language is not specific to
the type of policy written, and inspiration can come from many sources.
In this workbook, you will find explanations of the various forms a Complete Streets
policy may take and the elements of an ideal Complete Streets policy. We describe
each element of an ideal policy and provide sample language that may inspire your
own efforts. We also ask probing questions to help you write the best policy for your
community.
The most successful policies are those that incorporate the thoughts and opinions of
a broad group of stakeholders: transportation planners and engineers, elected officials,
transit agencies, public health departments, and members of the community, to name just
a few. In writing a policy, you may want to:
• Host a National Complete Streets Coalition workshop on Policy Development.
This full-day, interactive workshop will help you bring together the right people
and work with two nationally-recognized experts in Complete Streets to begin
writing a policy and understand the implementation process.
• Host a half-day work session in-house, with representatives from various
departments and organizations, to begin answering the questions contained
within this workbook and collaborating on language.
• Convene a committee or sub-committee to develop policy language based on
the examples provided below and circulate the draft to other stakeholders.
This workbook is intended to be used during the development of a city or county
Complete Streets policy. Many of the same principles apply when developing a policy
for regional agencies or states. For more on crafting state legislation, please see
www.completestreets.org.
how to use this workbook
8
types of policies
The National Complete Streets Coalition recognizes many different types of policy
statements as official commitments to routinely provide for the needs of all users and all
modes present on the transportation network, including people of all ages and abilities
on bicycles, walking, waiting for and riding buses, driving cars, and delivering commercial
goods.
Through December 2012, more than 480 jurisdictions had formally committed to a
Complete Streets approach by adopting
some form of a policy. Nearly half of
these policies are resolutions and almost
one in five are legally binding ordinances.
The remainder is a mixture of policy
types, including departmental directives,
executive orders, plans, design guidelines,
city policies, and tax levies. The most
recent Complete Streets Policy Analysis
report updates this information and
provides links to the best examples of
each of these policy types.
Council-driven
Ordinance Ordinances legally require the needs of all users be addressed in
transportation projects and change city code accordingly. Ordinances may also apply to
private developers by changing zoning and subdivision requirements. Ordinances require
strong support from the community and elected officials, and are enforceable by law,
making them difficult to overlook. City departments and commissions often approve
ordinance language before it moves to the legislative branch, though broad partnerships
between all the actors may not be truly developed during this process. With strong
support from elected officials in place, ordinances are a worthy pursuit.
Resolution Issued by a community’s governing body, resolutions are non-binding, official
statements of support for approaching community transportation projects as a way
to improve access, public health, and quality of life. Resolutions are often a very helpful
first step, providing the political support for a Complete Streets approach. However, as
they do not require action, they may be forgotten or neglected if an implementation
plan is not created. If you do not yet have strong support from your elected leaders, a
resolution is likely your best choice; be sure to include clear implementation steps (page
43) to avoid losing momentum.
Legislation, 17%
Resolution, 49%
City policy,
15%
Executive order, 1%
Internal policy, 6%Plan, 9%
Design guidance,
3%
Complete Streets Local Policy Workbook
Council-approved
Plans Complete Streets policies can be found within community comprehensive plans
or transportation plans. The process of updating a plan, or adopting a new one, provides
an excellent opportunity to engage all sectors of the community. Plans are a good home
for basic Complete Streets policies, most often listed among the community’s goals for
the future, and they can provide some implementation guidance by identifying specific
corridors in particular need of increased multimodal planning and design. To be truly
effective within a plan, the Complete Streets approach must touch all aspects of the plan,
not just be mentioned in one chapter, or restricted to one mode. For example, a policy
should not be restricted to only the bicycle elements or applied only to streets included
on a bicycle and pedestrian plan. Plans must also be well regarded by the community and
inform the budget process, or else they risk gathering dust.
City policies A city council may also take action by adopting a Complete Streets policy
as official city policy. Generally, this means that a Complete Streets policy is developed
by an internal group of stakeholders, which may include representatives from planning,
engineering, public works, economic development, health, and/or elected officials, or
a broader group that includes residents and community stakeholders. This document
is then taken to the full Council for discussion and a vote. These policies tend to be
lengthier and more detailed than resolutions or ordinances, and can build partnerships
between agencies, community members, and decision makers in a more robust way than
resolutions or ordinances. Like resolutions, such policies are not legally binding; however,
the community, political, and agency support for change tends to be very high, resulting in
a shared, lasting push for implementation of the policy.
Design guidelines Communities may decide to integrate Complete Streets planning and
design into new design guidance for their streets. Creating new guidance is a great way
to ensure that each street project’s design is compliant with Complete Streets goals.
Manuals can take years to develop and can often happen without much public input.
However, simply changing important details such as street cross-section standards can
be done in a short time. The National Complete Streets Coalition encourages revisions
to design guidance – including development of new standards if appropriate – as a next
step in policy implementation.
Directives
Departmental policy A relatively uncommon, but still useful, policy adoption method is
for a city department to issue its own Complete Streets policy directive. These policies
are issued by the department head and usually created “in house” by that department.
They are more detailed in procedure change than resolutions or ordinances. Though
not mandated by law, such policies generally have good support from transportation
professionals and are likely to be accompanied by changes in practice to ensure
implementation. If departmental leadership is strong and committed to Complete Streets,
but elected officials’ support is wavering, this is a good option for your community.
10
Executive order Another uncommon policy is one issued by the city’s chief executive,
often the mayor. These executive orders are most helpful in defining the problem and
directing department heads to make the necessary changes. Though such policies reflect
strong political will, they only last as long as the current mayor sits in office, and may not
have sustained support from other elected officials, decision makers, and the community.
If you have a committed executive branch with oversight of departmental leadership, but
weaker support from the legislative branch, this type of policy can enable departments
willing to move ahead with Complete Streets changes.
Citizen vote
Tax levy Some communities have decided to pursue an additional tax that will fund
transportation improvements. Usually approved by a general vote of residents, these
levies have specific requirements and goals, which can include provisions to ensure
Complete Streets: pavement maintenance; sidewalk development and repair; tree
planting and care; transit enhancements; bicycle network implementation; improved
pedestrian crossings; and other needed work. Though uncommon, transportation
departments that show a commitment to improving streets for everyone can achieve
wide public support for additional taxation. This type of policy is best considered if your
community has used such measures in the past or if a broad-based advocacy campaign
can support the initiative.
Ballot measure Rare, though possible, is a citizen-led campaign for a Complete Streets
law enacted not by a body of elected officials but by direct ballot by the general voting
public. These measures are, like ordinances, enforceable by law and more difficult to
ignore. Campaigns in favor of ballot measures create a high level of community support
for Complete Streets, but important stakeholders such as transportation departments
and elected officials may be left out of the process. If your Council is unwilling to pass
an ordinance, but your transportation agency is more supportive and a network of
advocates can be activated, you may want to explore this option.
Complete Streets Local Policy Workbook
12
The development of a Complete Streets policy should take into account existing policy,
practice, and politics. Take some time to better understand how decisions regarding
transportation projects are made in your community by first working to answer the
following questions. As you write your policy, you will want to refer to these answers and
refine them.
pursuing the right type of policy
What is the decision-making process for transportation projects in our community? What
departments are involved? Who -- names and titles -- makes the decisions at each step? (Note:
It may be helpful to draw a flowchart to illustrate how projects move through departments, noting how the
process may change under different funding scenarios.)
What plans, policies, and procedures guide transportation decisions?
What do those policies and procedures already say about accommodating all users? How can
a Complete Streets policy strengthen them?
How are transportation projects selected for our Capital Improvement Program?
Who in the decision-making structure is already supportive of Complete Streets and can
become a champion for adoption and implementation?
Complete Streets Local Policy Workbook
After thinking about how a Complete Streets policy can change and add value to
your decision-making process, you can return to the question of the best type of
policy to pursue. You should identify the type of policy that would be most effective
in sparking change, while being realistic about the type of policy that can be passed
and implemented successfully. Many communities begin with a simple resolution that
then leads to a more complex internal policy. Or perhaps you’ll discover that your
community’s transportation plan is due for an update, so a Complete Streets policy could
be incorporated into that process. The following questions can help you determine the
type of policy to pursue.
How do we change policy now?
How can we get community support for these changes?
What type of policy would give us the support we need to do things differently?
14
Complete Streets Local Policy Workbook
The National Complete Streets Coalition promotes a comprehensive
policy model that includes ten elements. Though the concept of “Complete
Streets” is itself simple and inspiring, the Coalition has found, through
research and practice, that a policy must do more than simply affirm support
for Complete Streets.
The ten ideal elements refine the vision, provide clear direction and intent,
are accountable to a community’s needs, and grant the flexibility in design
and approach necessary to secure an effective Complete Streets process
and outcome.
The ten elements can be divided into four distinct parts:
• ‘Pre-policy’ work of establishing a compelling vision;
• Creating a strong core commitment to providing for all users and
modes in all projects;
• Rounding out that directive with supporting best practices; and
• Planning next steps for policy implementation.
Refer to the most recent Complete Streets Policy Analysis for additional policies that
have particularly good language in each of these ten elements.
policy elements
16
vision
Communities adopt Complete Streets policies for many reasons. Many local policies
originate from a desire to improve safety for people walking and bicycling to their
destinations and to encourage more walking and bicycling as a way to improve public
health. Improving access to public transportation by making it safer, easier, and more
attractive for all, including older residents and those with disabilities, is another driving
factor in many communities. Safe Routes to School proponents also see Complete
Streets as essential in providing complete, safe routes for children heading to school.
Some towns have rallied around a more equitable vision for transportation that provides
better access to employment and educational opportunities in all neighborhoods,
regardless of income or ethnicity.
A strong vision can inspire a community to follow through on its Complete Streets
policy. Just as no two policies are alike, visions are not one-size-fits-all either. Think about
what can motivate your community to consistently plan and design its streets to be
safe for people of all ages and abilities, regardless of how they travel. Draw from your
community’s history, including slogans, themes, mission statements, and past planning
efforts.
What are the benefits of adopting a Complete Streets policy in our community?
What reason for adoption (such as health, safety, or providing transportation choice) will
consistently rally support from the community, its transportation professionals, and its leaders?
What is our vision for Complete Streets?
Complete Streets Local Policy Workbook
18
Complete Streets Local Policy Workbook
core commitment
The heart of a Complete Streets policy is a clearly stated directive to include the needs
of all people, regardless of how they travel, into the everyday transportation decision-
making process. It also outlines explicit exceptions to the routine accommodation of
those users. The elements below are the most important to include in your policy. This
is the opportunity to refocus transportation priorities from moving vehicles to moving
people and goods.
The strongest policies are those that are clear in intent, saying facilities that meet the
needs of multiple users “shall” or “must” be included in all transportation projects, such
as in Birmingham, Alabama’s resolution: “The City of Birmingham shall scope, plan, design,
fund, construct, operate, and maintain all City streets to provide a comprehensive and
integrated network of facilities that are safe and convenient for people of all ages and
abilities traveling by foot, bicycle, automobile, public transportation, and commercial
vehicle.”
Note that this statement does not itself use the term ‘Complete Streets’. Your central
statement of intent should not refer to ‘Complete Streets elements’ as if such elements
are separate from ordinary roadway planning. Simply be clear that your intent is to
provide safe travel for everyone.
Over time, this clear statement of intent becomes a guidepost. Language that provides
clarity in purpose makes it easier for those tasked with implementation to understand
the new goals and determine what changes need to be made to fulfill the policy’s
objectives.
20
users and modes
A Complete Streets policy must begin with an understanding that people who travel
by foot or on bicycle are legitimate users of the transportation system and equally
deserving of safe facilities to accommodate their travel. No policy is a Complete Streets
policy without a clear statement affirming this fact, and it is therefore a requirement to
include both modes – walking and bicycling.
A safe walking and bicycling environment is essential to improving public transportation.
Explicitly stating intention to provide for public transportation customers and transit
vehicles can create new partnerships and a transportation network that encourages
healthy, active travel and reduces congestion.
Full integration of these modes into everyday transportation planning and design is
the desired outcome of a Complete Streets policy. You may want your policy to direct
accommodation of a fuller range of users, including motorists, drivers of commercial
vehicles, emergency vehicles, equestrians, and others.
Beyond simply the category of users is a more nuanced understanding that not all people
who move by a certain mode are the same. The needs of a father bicycling with a young
child are different from those of a woman in her twenties speedily riding her bicycle to
work. Older adults benefit from clear markings and signage when driving. People with
vision impairments need audible and tactile stimuli to travel safely and independently,
and those using wheelchairs need curb ramps and standard width sidewalks. An ideal
Complete Streets policy considers this range of needs and recognizes the importance
of planning and designing streets for all ages and abilities. It is also important to address
equity issues, taking into account potential past systemic marginalization of certain
communities because of race, ethnicity, or income.
Which users and modes will our policy include?
How will we address the needs of older adults, children, people with disabilities, minority
populations, and lower income residents?
Complete Streets Local Policy Workbook
users and modes
To ensure that the safety and convenience of all users of the transportation system
are accommodated, including pedestrians, bicyclists, users of mass transit, people
with disabilities, the elderly, motorists, freight providers, emergency responders, and
adjacent land users… (Bloomington-Monroe County Metropolitan Planning Organization, Indiana)
Develop as many street projects as possible in an affordable, balanced, responsible,
and equitable way that accommodates and encourages travel by motorists, bicyclists,
public transit vehicles and their passengers, and pedestrians of all ages and abilities.
(Dubuque, Iowa)
Refer to the most recent edition of the Complete Streets Policy Analysis report for more examples of
how to incorporate all users and modes in a policy.
sample language:
22
projects and phases
The ideal result of a Complete Streets policy is that all transportation improvements are
viewed as opportunities to create safer, more accessible streets for all users. A strong
Complete Streets policy will integrate Complete Streets planning into all projects beyond
new construction and reconstruction, and direct application of a Complete Streets
approach to rehabilitation, repair, major maintenance, and operations work.
Under this approach, even small projects can be an opportunity to make meaningful
improvements. In repaving projects, for example, an edge stripe can be shifted to create
more room for cyclists or a crosswalk can be added near a bus stop. In routine work on
traffic lights, the timing can be changed to better accommodate pedestrians walking at a
slower speed.
Complete Streets are achieved over time through single projects and through a series of
incremental improvements. Policies should reflect this reality and encourage prioritization
of projects to best make changes both big and small.
How will our policy address Complete Streets needs in scoping, planning, design, construction,
operations, and maintenance?
To which types of projects will the policy apply: new construction, reconstruction, resurfacing,
restoration, rehabilitation, operations, retrofits, and other maintenance work? Refer to your
earlier discussions about how transportation planning and design decisions are made.
How can we ensure consultant contracts reflect our Complete Streets goals? How can that
need be reflected in this policy?
Complete Streets Local Policy Workbook
projects and phases
That bicycling, walking, and public transit accommodations is a routine part of the
county design, construction, maintenance, and operating activities, and will be
included in the everyday operations of the transportation system in Lee County. (Lee
County, Florida)
In conjunction with projects relating to the design, planning, construction,
reconstruction, rehabilitation, or maintenance of Public Ways, departments, boards
and commissions of the Metropolitan Government shall: a. Give full consideration
to the accommodation of the transportation needs of all users, regardless of age or
ability, including those traveling by private vehicle, mass transit, foot, and bicycle...
(Nashville, Tennessee)
Complete Streets may be achieved through single projects or incrementally through
a series of smaller improvements or maintenance activities over time. It is the Mayor
and City Council’s intent that all sources of transportation funding be drawn on to
implement Complete Streets. The City believes that maximum financial flexibility is
important to implement Complete Streets principles. (Seattle, Washington)
Refer to the most recent edition of the Complete Streets Policy Analysis report for more examples of
policies that include all phases and types of projects.
sample language:
24
exceptions
Making a policy work in the real world requires developing a process to handle
exceptions to providing for all modes in each project. Determining exceptions during the
writing process can reassure those who are doubtful about the policy, but if they are too
broad they can make the policy meaningless.
There must be a balance achieved when specifying exceptions in policy language so
that the needed flexibility for legitimate exceptions does not also create loopholes.
The Coalition believes the following exceptions are appropriate with limited potential
to weaken the policy. They follow the Federal Highway Administration’s guidance on
accommodating bicycle and pedestrian travel and identified best practices frequently
used in existing Complete Streets policies.
1. Accommodation is not necessary on corridors where specific users are
prohibited, such as interstate freeways or pedestrian malls.
2. Cost of accommodation is excessively disproportionate to the need or probable
use. We do not recommend attaching a percentage to define “excessive” as
the context for many projects will require different portions of the overall
project budget to be spent on the modes and users expected; additionally, in
many instances the costs may be difficult to quantify. A cap on amount spent
for roadway improvements may be appropriate in unusual circumstances, such
as where natural features (e.g. steep hillsides, shorelines) make it very costly or
impossible to accommodate all modes. Any such cap should always be used in
an advisory rather than absolute sense. For more on the issue of cost, be sure to
reference the National Complete Streets Coalition’s webinar and fact sheet.
3. A documented absence of current and future need. This exception can be
problematic if the method for determining future need is not defined. Ensure
that an accountable person or committee is tasked with approving this
exception.
Many communities have included other exceptions that the Coalition, in consultation
with transportation planning and engineering experts, also feels are unlikely to create
loopholes:
1. Transit-specific facilities, such as bus shelters, are not required where there is no
existing or planned transit service.
2. Routine maintenance of the transportation network that does not change the
roadway geometry or operations, such as mowing, sweeping, spot repair, or
when interim measures are implemented in temporary detour or haul routes. Be
sure to check your internal procedures and policies regarding these activities so
that facilities such as bike lanes are swept in a timely manner.
Complete Streets Local Policy Workbook
The primary objective of Complete Streets is to provide safe accommodation for all
users of the transportation network. Additional exceptions begin to weaken this goal
and may create loopholes too large to achieve the Complete Streets vision. Engineers
and project managers are talented and creative problem-solvers and should be able to
address project-level barriers in ways that still achieve an environment supportive of all
users.
In addition to defining exceptions through good policy language, there must be a clear
process for granting them. We recommend a senior-level department head, publicly
accountable committee, or a board of elected officials be charged with approving
exceptions, as appropriate for your community. Doing so ensures that as a policy moves
into implementation, its intent is carried out and no exceptions are abused. The details
of your exceptions process may be expanded upon in later documents and updated
procedures, as part of implementing your policy.
What exceptions will be included in the policy?
How will they be approved, and by whom?
What kind of accountability measure will we use?
exceptions
26
exceptions
Facilities for all users will be considered in the construction, reconstruction, retrofit,
repaving, and rehabilitation of City streets, except under one or more of the following
conditions:
1. An affected roadway prohibits, by law, use by specified users, in which case a
greater effort shall be made to accommodate those specified users elsewhere,
including on roadways that cross or otherwise intersect with the affected
roadway; or
2. The costs of providing accommodation are excessively disproportionate to the
need or probable use; or
3. The existing and planned population, employment densities, traffic volumes,
or level of transit service around a particular roadway as documented by
[appropriate City plan or department] is so low that future expected users
of the roadway will not include pedestrians, public transportation, freight
vehicles, or bicyclists.
Documentation shall be publicly available and exceptions for City projects shall
be granted by [accountable person or committee, e.g. City Manger, Director of Public Works,
Complete Streets Advisory Committee]. For private projects, the owner shall document
the exception and approval shall be granted by [accountable person or committee, e.g. City
Council, Director of Planning].
Any exception to applying this Complete Streets Policy to a specific roadway project
must be approved by the City Council, with documentation of the reason for the
exception…Exceptions may be made when:
• The project involves a roadway on which non-motorized use is prohibited
by law. In this case, an effort shall be made to accommodate pedestrians and
bicyclists elsewhere.
• There is documentation that there is an absence of use by all except
motorized users now and would be in the future even if the street were a
complete street. (Missoula, Montana)
Refer to the most recent edition of the Complete Streets Policy Analysis report for more examples of
exceptions language.
sample language:
Complete Streets Local Policy Workbook
28
Complete Streets Local Policy Workbook
best practice elements
With the core of your Complete Streets policy now developed, you should think through
the other factors that will shape how to achieve that directive. The following elements
will ensure that your transportation decisions will create a comprehensive network of
safe, multimodal streets that reflect best practice in design and are appropriate to the
community context.
Though the National Complete Streets Coalition recommends that each of these
elements be addressed in your policy, you may choose to include only those that speak
most to your ability to fulfill them. If you are pursuing a resolution, you may choose to
refer decisions about some of these elements to those charged with implementing the
resolution’s intent.
30
network
To truly enable safe travel, a community must plan for a network to support their
movement across all modes. A good Complete Streets policy recognizes the need for
more than one or two “complete” streets, instead striving for a connected, integrated
system that provides transportation options to a resident’s many potential destinations.
A network approach is essential in balancing the needs of all users. Rather than trying to
make each street perfect for every traveler, communities can aim for a comprehensive
network of streets that emphasize different modes while still providing quality access for
each one. Ensuring streets are connected and blocks are short makes travel easier for
everyone; these goals should be considered in developing a Complete Streets policy.
How will the policy address the need to create a comprehensive, integrated network for all
users?
Will the policy apply to private development and subdivisions?
Do we have specific goals for increasing connectivity?
What opportunities might be available to connect non-motorized networks?
Do we have existing documents to help guide network-related decisions, and if not, can we
create them?
Complete Streets Local Policy Workbook
network
(A) The City of Baldwin Park will design, operate, and maintain a transportation
network that provides a connected network of facilities accommodating all modes of
travel.
(B) The City will actively look for opportunities to repurpose rights-of-way to
enhance connectivity for pedestrians, bicyclists, and transit.
(C) The City will focus non-motorized connectivity improvements to services,
schools, parks, civic uses, regional connection and commercial uses.
(D) The City will require large new developments and redevelopment projects to
provide interconnected street networks with small blocks. (Baldwin Park, California)
Refer to the most recent edition of the Complete Streets Policy Analysis report for more examples of
policies that address network and connectivity issues.
sample language:
32
all agencies and roads
Creating networks can be difficult because many agencies have a stake in the funding,
planning, and development of our streets. State, county, and local agencies, together with
private developers, build and maintain roads. Typical Complete Streets policies cover all
the roadways within a community’s direct control but not those of outside parties.
At the local level, it is often key for private developers to follow a community’s Complete
Streets vision when building new roads or otherwise significantly altering the right-of-way.
You may choose to include changes to zoning or subdivision codes or to right-of-way
standards in your Complete Streets policy or implementation plan to ensure newly built
or redesigned streets are aligned with your city’s Complete Streets policy.
It is important to note that partnerships with other agencies are important to creating
a truly multimodal network within and between communities. This means working
with other levels of government and departments within your community, such as the
regional planning organization and the public health department. Bringing everyone to
the same understanding can be difficult, but including these stakeholders in your policy
development process can help to develop stronger policy and provide opportunity for
collaboration during implementation.
What departments, agencies, and jurisdictions have some control or interest in our streets? At
what point(s) in our process do we include outside agencies, such as the state or county?
Do neighboring jurisdictions have Complete Streets policies, and how can we coordinate with
them? How will we communicate our Complete Streets vision to them? What efforts can we
make to ensure the network is complete for all users?
Will our policy include private development?
Complete Streets Local Policy Workbook
all agencies and roads
All relevant County agencies will review and revise as necessary their plans, manuals,
policies, processes and programs to foster the implementation of Complete Streets on
roadways not under the jurisdiction of Highway Department but subject to financing,
regulation of or otherwise involving an action by any county agency. Such projects
shall include, but not be limited to, privately-built roadways and projects on non-
county roadways funded in part or entirely by county funds. (Cook County, Illinois)
This policy requires consideration of complete streets elements by the Planning and
Zoning Commission and Board of Zoning Appeals, in appropriate circumstances.
Accordingly, the city strongly encourages all developers and builders to obtain and
comply with, as appropriate, these standards.
This policy is intended to cover all development and redevelopment in the public
domain with Festus… This also includes privately built roads intended for public use.
As such, compliance with these principles may be factored into decisions related to
the city’s participation in private projects and whether the city will accept possession
of privately built roads constructed after the passage of this resolution. The city
administrator, on a case-by-case basis, may exclude routine maintenance from these
requirements.
…It shall be a goal of the city to foster partnerships with the State of Missouri,
Jefferson County, neighboring communities, and Festus Business Districts in
consideration of functional facilities and accommodations in furtherance of the city’s
complete streets policy and the continuation of such facilities and accommodations
beyond the city’s borders. (Festus, Missouri)
Refer to the most recent edition of the Complete Streets Policy Analysis report for more examples as
you begin to draft policy language that describes how you will work with other agencies an interested
parties.
sample language:
34
design guidance and flexibility
It is not necessary for the policy to require creation of entirely new design guidelines.
Consider what design guidance your community already uses and whether it reflects
current best practices. Communities adopting a Complete Streets policy should use the
best and latest design standards available to them, such as existing design guidance from
the American Association of State Highway Officials (AASHTO), state Departments of
Transportation, the Institute of Transportation Engineers, the National Association of
City Transportation Officials, the Americans with Disabilities Act, the Public Right-of-Way
Accessibility Guidelines (PROWAG), or the Model Design Manual for Living Streets.
In some cases, communities will use their own recently updated design guidance or
augment it with national criteria. Note any design manuals, including those used by the
community or those noted above, that could be referenced by your engineering and
planning staff in your policy.
Intertwined with the need to use the best currently available guidance is the need
for a balanced approach to transportation design that provides flexibility to best
accommodate all users and modes given the unique characteristics of the surrounding
community. Add language to your policy that recognizes the need for some roads
to offer greater or lesser degrees of accommodation for each type of user, while still
ensuring basic accommodation is provided for all permitted users.
What guidance or criteria do we use in street design? When were they last updated? Who is
responsible for approving them? Do they differ with changes in funding source?
What manuals and guidance will our policy reference – American Association of State Highway
Transportation Officials, U.S. Access Board, Institute of Transportation Engineers, National
Association of City Transportation Officials, state Department of Transportation, Model Design
Manual for Living Streets?
How can we address design flexibility and the need to balance all users within the policy?
Complete Streets Local Policy Workbook
design guidance and flexibility
…To create a connected network of facilities accommodating each mode of travel that
is consistent with and supportive of the local community, recognizing that all streets
are different and that the needs of various users will need to be balanced in a flexible
manner.
…The City will generally follow accepted or adopted design standards when
implementing improvements intended to fulfill this Complete Streets policy but will
consider innovative or non-traditional design options where a comparable level of
safety for users is present. (Rochester, Minnesota)
…in keeping with the goals of proper accommodation of all forms of travel and in
keeping with the design specification of the Master Street Plan, recognizing that all
streets are different, and in each case, user needs must be balanced. (North Little Rock,
Arkansas)
Refer to the most recent edition of the Complete Streets Policy Analysis report for more examples in
addressing flexibility and referencing the best and latest in design guidance.
sample language:
36
context sensitivity
An effective Complete Streets policy must be sensitive to the type of neighborhood
and the land uses along roadways; this is related to the above discussion on flexibility in
design. Being clear about this in the initial policy statement can allay fears that the policy
will require inappropriately wide roads in quiet neighborhoods or miles of little-used
sidewalks in rural areas. Including a statement about context can help align transportation
goals and land-use planning goals, creating livable, strong neighborhoods.
How will the policy take adjoining land use and community context into account?
Does our community already have a vision for development that the policy can tie into?
How will the policy address the differences in applying a Complete Streets approach to rural,
suburban, and urban areas?
How will local stakeholders, including adjacent residents and merchants and frequent users of
the corridor, be involved in the planning and design process?
How can we encourage our streets to reflect and strengthen the unique qualities of our
neighborhoods?
Complete Streets Local Policy Workbook
context sensitivity
sample language:
The implementation of this Policy shall reflect the context and character of the
surrounding built and natural environments, and enhance the appearance of such.
(Dayton, Ohio)
Solutions should be developed to fit within the context(s) of the community and those
solutions should be flexible so that the needs of the corridor can be met. (Dunwoody,
Georgia)
Refer to the most recent edition of the Complete Streets Policy Analysis report for more examples of
policies that link transportation needs, adjacent buildings, and surrounding communities.
38
performance measures
As governments look to become more responsive, transparent, and accountable,
performance measures are increasingly important to successful policy development and
implementation. Including systematic collection and reporting of data into a Complete
Streets policy can provide clarity on how a community’s transportation projects are
meeting citizens’ needs and elected officials’ goals for the transportation network.
Performance measures ensure compliance with the policy, but also enable more
informed decision-making by providing clarity to planners, designers, and engineers on
expected outcomes.
Communities with Complete Streets policies measure success in a number of different
ways, from system-wide multimodal performance measures to project-level indicators.
Some community-wide measures may simply aggregate a project-level measure across
many projects, such as the total number of accessible curb cuts, and others may address
non-project specific issues, such as improved air quality. Below is a partial list of measures
your community may want to include, starting from simple outputs to more challenging
outcomes:
• Linear feet of new or reconstructed sidewalks
• Miles of new or restriped on-street bicycle facilities
• Number of new or reconstructed curb ramps
• Number of new or repainted crosswalks
• Number of new street trees/percentage of streets with tree canopy
• Percentage completion of bicycle and pedestrian networks as envisioned by city
plans
• Efficiency of transit vehicles on routes
• Percentage of transit stops with shelters
• Percentage of transit stops accessible via sidewalks and curb ramps
• Multimodal Level of Service (MMLOS)
• Auto Trips Generated (ATG)
• Decrease in rate of crashes, injuries, and fatalities by mode
• Transportation mode shift: more people walking, bicycling, and taking transit
• Rate of children walking or bicycling to school
• Vehicle Miles Traveled (VMT) or Single Occupancy Vehicle (SOV) trip reduction
• Satisfaction levels as expressed on customer preference surveys
Given the complexity and range of performance measures employed, some policies will
opt to focus on creation and deployment of new metrics during implementation, but the
need for such measures should be mentioned in the policy document. You may want to
do more research about performance measures; a good place to start is with the fifth
chapter of Complete Streets: Best Policy Adoption and Implementation Practices from the
American Planning Association.
Complete Streets Local Policy Workbook
How will we know if the policy is achieving our goals? What performance measures are
important for our community?
What are our current performance measures? Can we adjust any of them to help track how
well we serve all users?
What kind of short-term performance measures should we track (e.g. miles of new bike lanes,
increase in bus reliability, decreased crash rates)?
What kind of long-term goals should we look to achieve (e.g. improved air quality, lowered
obesity rate)?
What departments and agencies can help with data collection and benchmarking?
performance measures
40
Measure the success of this complete streets policy using the following performance
measures:
a. Total miles of on-street bicycle routes defined by streets with clearly marked
or signed bicycle accommodation
b. Linear feet of new pedestrian accommodation
c. Number of new curb ramps installed along city streets
d. Number of new street trees planted along city streets (Roanoke, Virginia)
Performance measurement will be by, but not limited to, the miles of bicycle routes
created; new linear feet of pedestrian accommodation; increase in use of public
transportation, bicycling and walking; the miles of connection added between trails;
the increased efficiency of traffic flow through the use of sophisticated traffic control
devices, turn lanes, traffic circles, and the leveling or decrease of transportation-
related accidents. (Bellevue, Nebraska)
Refer to the most recent edition of the Complete Streets Policy Analysis report for more examples as
you begin drafting policy language that ennumerates new or existing performance measures.
sample language:
performance measures
Complete Streets Local Policy Workbook
42
The Coalition has identified four key steps to implement a Complete Streets
policy effectively:
1. Restructure or revise related procedures, plans, regulations, and other processes
to accommodate all users on every project. This includes incorporating
Complete Streets into plans as they are updated, changing city code to support
Complete Streets activities and related initiatives, and/or modifying procedural
documents such as checklists and decision trees.
2. Develop new design policies and guides or revise existing to reflect the current
state of best practices in transportation design. Communities may also elect to
adopt national or state-level recognized design guidance.
3. Offer workshops and other educational opportunities to transportation staff,
community leaders, and the general public so that everyone understands
the importance of the Complete Streets vision and how they can aid
implementation.
4. Develop and institute ways to measure progress and performance and collect
and disseminate data on how the streets are serving all users. This is an
opportunity to more fully explore the performance measures you discuss in the
policy document.
Complete Streets Local Policy Workbook
implementation next steps
A formal policy commitment to Complete Streets is only the beginning. All types of
Complete Streets policies should include discussion of the next steps to take toward
implementation; preferably, the policy should state who will develop an implementation
plan, and when it will be completed.
The tactics you will use to accomplish each of the four steps should reflect the specifics
of your community and may vary from those in other communities. You do not need to
fully detail how each step will be accomplished in your initial policy statement, but you
should provide some rough direction and timelines to ensure accountability and action.
Consider assigning oversight of implementation to a committee of multiple stakeholders,
such as representatives from relevant departments, elected officials, and advocates, or to
a committee already in place. Committees can provide additional resources by holding
educational events or researching tools for the community’s use. You might also include
a reporting requirement so that elected officials and the general public are regularly
updated on progress.
One of the most important items to consider in implementation planning is how projects
are selected and prioritized for funding. Too often, great goals are set by communities
only to be thwarted by mismatched prioritization procedures that give extra weight
to auto-centric projects and award little or no points, and in some cases deduct points,
for projects that enhance access or mobility for those on foot, riding bicycles, or taking
public transportation. Though rare to date, a powerful provision is to specify that changes
will be made to the way transportation projects are prioritized, and thus chosen for
construction.
44
implementation next steps
How detailed is the policy we are writing, and what parts of it will require further
development during implementation planning? Who will coordinate those efforts? Should that
person or group of people be named in the policy?
How does the policy specify the four steps to implementation? Does it empower
implementation planners to make those decisions?
What other documents and procedures will need to be updated?
Do we need to change our project selection criteria?
Is there legislative action, such as modifying code, changing subdivision requirements, and
modifying zoning, needed?
Do we need to reevaluate and modify our design guidance?
Complete Streets Local Policy Workbook
implementation next steps
What kinds of data do we need to collect, but don’t now?
Are there new performance measures we will need to develop?
How can the policy support the provision of additional and ongoing educational opportunities
about Complete Streets for our transportation staff, community leaders, residents, and other
departments and agencies?
Will we establish a committee to direct implementation activity, and who will serve on it?
What accountability measures will we include to ensure these steps are taken?
What are we doing to take advantage of all funding opportunities?
46
implementation next steps
The City views Complete Streets as integral to everyday transportation decision-
making practices and processes. To this end:
1. The [Department of Transportation, Department of Public Works, and the Department
of Planning and other relevant departments, agencies, or committees] will incorporate
Complete Streets principles into the [Comprehensive Plan, Transportation Master
Plan, the Transit Plan, the Pedestrian and Bicycle Master Plans, and other appropriate
plans] and other manuals, checklists, decision trees, rules, regulations, and
programs as appropriate.
2. The [Department of Transportation, Department of Public Works, or other appropriate
agency] will review current design standards, including subdivision regulations
that apply to new roadway construction, to ensure that they reflect the best
available design guidelines, and effectively implement Complete Streets.
3. When available, the City shall encourage staff professional development
and training on non-motorized transportation issues through attending
conferences, classes, seminars, and workshops.
4. City staff shall identify all current and potential future sources of funding for
street improvements and recommend improvements to the project selection
criteria to support Complete Streets projects.
5. The City shall promote project coordination among city departments and
agencies with an interest in the actives that occur within the public right-of-
way in order to better use fiscal resources.
6. An annual report will be made to the City Council by the [Department of
Transportation, Department of Public Works, Department of Planning, City Manager,
or other city administrative body or committee] showing progress made in
implementing this policy.
7. A Complete Streets Advisory Council is hereby created to serve as a resource
and a collaborative partner for City elected officials, municipal staff, and [other
City Boards, Committees and Commissions].
a. The Council is to be composed of [odd number] voting members
appointed by the Mayor with approval by the City Council who are
interested in achieving Complete Streets and who want to explore
opportunities for pedestrians, bicyclists, transit riders, and people with
disabilities. Representatives shall be from [name specific organizations and
stakeholder constituencies, including transportation professionals, public health,
sample language:
Complete Streets Local Policy Workbook
implementation next steps
parks, schools, groups representing older adults, people with disabilities, bicyclists,
pedestrians, or transit users].
b. [Establish membership terms – usually two to four years, alternating term
limits so that all members are not renewed on the same date.]
c. The duties of the Council shall include, but not be limited to, examining
the needs for bicyclists, transit users, motorists, and pedestrians of
all ages and abilities; conducting a baseline study of current practices
and accommodations; developing appropriate inter-departmental
performance measures including [reference performance measures section];
promoting programs and facilities for pedestrians, bicyclists, and transit
users; and advising appropriate agencies on best practices in Complete
Streets implementation.
d. The Council will meet quarterly, provide a yearly written report to City
Council evaluating the City’s progress, and advise on implementation.
The Departments of Public Works and of Planning shall be designated as the lead
departments in implementing the Complete Streets Policy (hereinafter “the Lead
Departments”), and they shall be assisted in this effort by the Wyandotte County
Health Department.
The Lead Departments should jointly evaluate how well the streets and transportation
network of the City are serving each category of users and how well they conform to
the Complete Streets philosophy. The Directors of each Department are authorized
to prepare recommendations for changes to standards, design criteria, planning
ordinances or other guidelines that may be needed to further the goal of providing
Complete Streets.
The Lead Departments are directed to actively solicit and incorporate the guidance
of the community and community partners in preparing the evaluation and
recommendations, including the guidance of the Mayor’s Healthy Communities Task
Force. (Wyandotte County, Kansas)
The Department of Transportation is directed to report to the Mayor and City
Council annually, on the anniversary of the effective date of this Resolution, on
the Department’s progress towards implementing Complete Streets throughout
Baltimore. These reports must incorporate performance measures established to
gauge how well streets are serving all users... (Baltimore, Maryland)
Refer to the most recent edition of the Complete Streets Policy Analysis report for more examples as
you draft your policy’s next steps.
48
additional elements
Complete Streets policies are rarely developed outside of a community’s other interests
and activities, such as public health campaigns, safety initiatives, and master planning.
You may find it helpful to couple your Complete Streets policy campaign with another
popular initiative such as Safe Routes to School, building on existing momentum and
community engagement. You may be able to reach a larger audience and establish a
broader partnership among key community stakeholders.
As you move through the process of developing a Complete Streets policy, other related
topics may arise, such as stormwater management. Cross-referencing your policy in these
other processes can strengthen it. However, simplicity has its virtues in the policy arena,
and a clear intent to provide for all users should not be lost in a broader debate.
Are there other notable pieces that we should include in our policy but are not covered by
the ten elements discussed earlier?
Where do they fit?
How can we effectively cross-reference Complete Streets with other policy changes?
Will they complicate or detract from the Complete Streets directive?
Complete Streets Local Policy Workbook
sample language:
Green Complete Streets are streets that safely accommodate all users of the right-of-
way, including pedestrians, people requiring mobility aids, bicyclists and drivers and
passengers of transit vehicles, trucks, automobiles and motorcycles, while at the same
time incorporating best management practices for addressing stormwater runoff. (La
Crosse, Wisconsin)
4C. Landscaping and amenities are encouraged to provide shade, create buffers, and
promote aesthetically welcoming environments within the public right-of way.
4D. San Antonio will encourage “green infrastructure” and Low Impact Development
(LID) principles on Complete Streets to help manage stormwater runoff and provide
landscaping amenities.
4E. Public Art integrated into the streetscape will be considered to help identify
unique areas throughout the City and define the context in which the street exists as
identified by community stakeholders.
4F. Cultural Corridors and other areas where “place-making” is important for
economic development and community revitalization will make optimal use of the
public rights-of- way to support private investment. (San Antonio, Texas)
Refer to the National Complete Streets Coalition website for additional information on other
related elements you may want to include in your Complete Streets policy.
50
This workbook is meant to help communities of all sizes develop
appropriate, actionable, and strong Complete Streets policies. Strong policies
are the first step in changing how transportation decisions are made and
how our streets look.
It is not the only step, however. The National Complete Streets Coalition is
actively working toward creating a standard for policy implementation that
will help communities like yours understand the variety of activities that will
create lasting change. Keep up with our work at www.completestreets.org.
paper to practice
Complete Streets Local Policy Workbook
1707 L St NW Suite 250 • Washington, DC 20036
202-955-5543 • info@completestreets.org
www.smartgrowthamerica.org
This tool was developed with support from the Centers for Disease Control and
Prevention. Its contents are solely the responsibility of the authors and do not necessarily
represent the official views of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.