« What are You Guys Doing to Fix It? -- draft article for your review | Main
November 21, 2011
What are "Complete Streets" -- draft article for your review
From PCJ Editor Wayne Senville
Set out below is a draft article, What Are “Complete Streets,” by Hannah Twaddell prepared for publication in the Winter issue of the Planning Commissioners Journal. Hannah has reported on transportation topics in the PCJ for more than seven years.
As always, I encourage you to reply with any questions, comments, or other feedback you might have about this draft. We’re especially interested in hearing about any issues you’d like to see discussed that are not included in the draft. Also, if you'd had success with Complete Streets programs in your community or region, please consider taking a few minutes to let us know what you've accomplished.
*** If you use Linkedin, consider posting your comments under the Discussion item at: www.linkedin.com/groups?mostPopular=&gid=2463680 (you need to be a Linkedin member to access this page) OR email your feedback to me at: pcjoffice@gmail.com -- with a "cc" to Hannah at: hannah@twaddellassociates.com. For replies just sent to me, I'll assume it's OK to share your comments with the author unless you indicate otherwise in your email.
*** Please get back to us no later than Thursday, Dec. 1st.
-- DRAFT ARTICLE FOR YOUR REVIEW --
What Are “Complete Streets?”
by Hannah Twaddell
Over the past 140 years, American interest groups and engineering techniques for each type of roadway user have evolved separately. Our nation’s modern paved roadways were initially designed (and sometimes paid for) by bicyclists.[1] But their voices -- and most of their vehicles -- were overtaken in the early 20th century by the automobile users who ushered in the era of building high-speed highways.
In the 1970’s, bicyclists began again to lobby in earnest for better “bike/ped” facilities. Advocacy for improved public transit has since grown, as has our awareness of the need to make transportation systems safer for older adults, children, and people with disabilities. The complete streets movement provides a forum for all of these modal advocates to join forces with transportation engineers, planners, and community leaders in an effort to create truly multi-modal networks for 21st century travelers.
Complete streets are designed to be safe for everyone who uses them. In many places, especially in towns and cities, this can be quite a diverse group of folks. Roadway users may include drivers and passengers in cars, buses, delivery vans, 18-wheelers, and golf carts; fast-moving bicyclists who prefer riding in traffic; slower-moving cyclists (including children) who need to be separated from don’t want to ride near traffic; and pedestrians of all ages and abilities, including people handling wheelchairs or walkers, riding skateboards, roller blades, or segways, pushing baby strollers, and, oh yes, walking.
Could any street be designed to support all these types of travelers? Yes. Should every street be designed this way? No. But a complete street network should provide safe, convenient paths for everyone who needs to get from one place to another. The complete streets concept is not about trying to make each and every road in a community serve all possible users, but it does aim to make sure all users can navigate safely.
Complete Streets Policies
Complete streets policies, ranging from simple resolutions of support to sophisticated design guidelines, are increasingly popular tools for building truly multi-modal transportation systems. Whether they address federal, state, regional, or local levels, these policies are meant to change the transportation decision-making and design process so that roadway planners and engineers will “routinely design and operate the entire right of way to enable safe access for all users, regardless of age, ability, or mode of transportation.” [2]
The big change here is not so much that we plan and design networks for non-drivers, but that we routinely consider all travelers in roadway planning and project development. American communities develop lots of plans and projects for bicyclists, pedestrians, transit riders, and drivers. But we don’t usually do a very good job of coordinating these plans with each other. As a result, many of our modal systems are disconnected and inefficient. Considering the needs of all potential users every time we develop a roadway plan or project helps us to make better mental -- and ultimately physical -- connections.
Complete Streets policies are typically developed by community leaders, often at the urging of their constituents, for adoption by municipal councils, regional planning bodies, or state legislatures. [insert information on current federal legislation]
The National Complete Streets Coalition website <www.completestreets.org> has made more than 300 policies accessible on an interactive Google-map atlas, allowing users to peruse all the known U.S. jurisdictions that have formally committed to the Complete Streets approach. Thirty statewide policies are included, ranging from Oregon and California in the West to North Carolina, Florida, and Connecticut in the East.
Cities such as Santa Barbara, California, set goals for “achieving equality of convenience and choice” among various roadway users, while others, like Columbia, Missouri, focus on fostering healthy communities by emphasizing street standards for bicycling and walking. At the regional scale, the Columbus, Ohio MPO has directed all federally-funded projects to provide for people on foot, bicycle, and public transportation.
Most policies take the form of a relatively simple resolution of support. Others include specific legislation, ordinances, or design guidance for public decision-making and/or agency protocols.[3] One way or another, all Complete Streets policies publicly assert the commitment of a community, state, or agency to creating a multi-modal transportation network. They give a green light (pun intended) for engineers to give equal weight to all users in considering the design of a roadway project or system.
Having an established policy is “essential,” say national experts John LaPlante and Barbara McCann, “if disputes arise over projects using the new paradigm. Engineers empowered by this clear direction from their leadership often tackle the new problem of multi-modal accommodation with gusto, using problem-solving skills and trying innovative treatments.” [4]
-----------------------
Sidebar - Ten Key Elements of a Complete Streets Policy
from the National Complete Streets Coalition
<www.completestreets.org/changing-policy/policy-elements/>.
An ideal complete streets policy --
1. Includes a vision for how and why the community wants to complete its streets
2. Specifies that ‘all users’ includes pedestrians, bicyclists and transit passengers of all ages and abilities, as well as trucks, buses and automobiles.
3. Applies to both new and retrofit projects, including design, planning, maintenance, and operations, for the entire right of way.
4. Makes any exceptions specific and sets a clear procedure that requires high-level approval of exceptions.
5. Encourages street connectivity and aims to create a comprehensive, integrated, connected network for all modes.
6. Is adoptable by all agencies to cover all roads.
7. Directs the use of the latest and best design criteria and guidelines while recognizing the need for flexibility in balancing user needs.
8. Directs that complete streets solutions will complement the context of the community.
9. Establishes performance standards with measurable outcomes.
10. Includes specific next steps for implementation of the policy [5]
-----------------------
Complete Street Networks
Planning techniques and physical networks for different travel modes aren’t the only things that have evolved separately over the past century. Many suburban communities and newer cities have systematically separated houses from jobs, shops, and urban activity centers, connecting them with a few major arterial highways and a miscellany of local streets that often end at the “bottom of the bag” (known in French as the “cul-de-sac”). Transportation planning consists largely of trying to eliminate or at least slow down through traffic on local streets, and trying to deal with the congestion that results from forcing people to drive on main arterials for nearly every trip, no matter how short.
Most land use and transportation planners have come to understand that our sprawling suburban development patterns characterized by sparse, discontinuous street systems are environmentally, economically, and socially unsustainable. The question is how to evolve into something better. One useful approach is to change the way we design entire multi-modal networks, as proposed in “Planning Urban Roadway Systems,” a draft Recommended Practice published in August 2011 by the Institute of Transportation Engineers (www.ite.org).
The report presents a holistic view of how all streets, corridors, and networks can comprise a multi-modal system that fits local community contexts. It is grounded upon an understanding that the entire roadway right-of-way is a public space for all users, and it incorporates concepts of Complete Streets into an overall approach that involves defining and integrating different “layers” of surface transportation networks for pedestrians, cyclists, and transit riders, as well as drivers (cars and trucks) and rail systems for passengers and freight.
In addition to proposing an approach whereby transportation planners pull together a variety of modal networks into a cohesive system, the report recommends integrating arterial, collector, and local streets networks instead of continuing to treat arterials as the most important streets and largely ignoring the design and location of local streets and smaller collectors. Low-speed local streets can help to eliminate unnecessary vehicle trips by providing the bicycle and pedestrian connections to which they are well suited.
Well-connected systems of collectors and lower-speed commercial arterials can provide a unique array of transit, bicycle, pedestrian, and vehicle connections between neighborhoods and community centers, freeing up higher-speed arterial corridors to serve the longer distance vehicle trips for which they are designed.
Sidebar or call-out box --
Six Principles for Planning Urban Roadway Networks
Urban Roadway Systems Should --
1. Consist of a multimodal network that serves pedestrian, bicyclists, transit, the automobile, and trucks;
2. Be planned as layered networks serving all modes of passenger travel, plus a freight/goods movement network;
3. Have a high degree of connectivity to help provide multiple routing options for all users;
4. Have a network density appropriate to the land use patterns and urban form that are served;
5. Be planned with recognition of the role of roadways as public spaces that help shape urban environments and;
6. Be planned with consideration of environmental, social, and economic issues. [6]
Sidebar --
A Still Broader Concept: Living Streets
Another useful new resource for planning and designing complete street networks is the Los Angeles County Model Design Manual for Living Streets, published in 2011 (<www.modelstreetdesignmanual.com>). The book addresses principles to design streets for people of all ages and physical abilities and accommodate all travel modes, but also encompasses a broader concept called “living streets.” These include consideration of not only basic Complete Streets principles, but also strategies to advance economic vibrancy, equity, environmental sustainability, aesthetics, and more. In addition to chapters addressing each mode of travel and each realm of a street, the manual discusses “streetscape ecosystems,” placemaking, urban design, community engagement, and -- perhaps the greatest challenge of all -- approaches for retrofitting suburban streets.
About the Author:
Hannah Twaddell is principal of Twaddell Associates, LLC, a consulting practice specializing in community planning, public engagement, facilitation, and education. Based in Charlottesville, Virginia, the firm provides planning, facilitation, and educational services to communities, government agencies, and private organizations across the U.S. Prior to establishing Twaddell Associates, Hannah worked for nine years with Renaissance Planning Group and, prior to that, for 14 years with the Charlottesville-Albemarle, Virginia MPO/ Thomas Jefferson Planning District Commission.
Hannah’s articles on transportation planning topics appear regularly in the Planning Commissioners Journal. For a complete list, and to read excerpts, go to: <www.plannersweb.com/index/auth-q-t.html#twa_ha>.
[1] “19th Century Cyclists Paved The Way For Modern Motorists' Roads,” Carlton Reid, The Guardian Bike Blog, posted August 15, 2011.
[2] “What Are Complete Streets?” National Complete Streets Coalition.
[3] Atlas of Complete Streets Policies, National Complete Streets Coalition,
[4] Complete Streets in the United States, John LaPlante and Barbara McCann, TRB Annual Conference, January 2011.
[6] Planning Urban Roadway Systems, An ITE Proposed Recommended Practice, August 15, 2011, <www.ite.org>.
November 21, 2011 in *What's New at the PCJ, Transportation | Permalink
| Save to del.icio.us | |
martes, 22 de noviembre de 2011
¿Que son las Calles Compartidas (o integradas)?
via ht.ly
Suscribirse a:
Enviar comentarios (Atom)
No hay comentarios:
Publicar un comentario