"Complete Streets" is an initiative by which cities, states, and other jurisdictions adopt a policy that future roadway projects will safely accommodate all users - pedestrians, bicyclists, motorists, transit riders and drivers of motor vechicles, and people of all ages and abilities, including children, older adults, and people with disabilities.  For decades, traffic engineers have designed streets, particularly urban arterials, primarily for the efficient movement of private motor vehicles. Residents across the U.S. are demanding street features that consider the needs of other users.  The cause has been taken up by the National Complete Streets Coalition, formed in 2005 by a number of transportation user and practitioner groups, including AARP, the American Planning Association, and America Bikes, and led by transportation advocate, consultant, and writer, Barbara McCann.

The complete streets framework includes not only retrofitting existing streets to increase safety for all, but changing project scoping, planning procedures, and design standards so that streets are routinely designed with all users in mind from the outset. A related concept, Context Sensitive Solutions , emphasizes designing roadways with the surrounding context in mind.

Street Classifications Drive Overdesigned Streets

Since World War II, U.S. street design standards have gotten away from traditional street grid pattern that disperses traffic more evenly. Instead, the use of a street hierarchy has been emphasized. Streets are classified into a system of increasing volume and speed: residential, collector, minor arterial, and major arterial. This classification philosophy, enshrined in professional manuals such as A Policy on Geometric Design of Highways and Streets (the "Green Book") [1], purposely de-emphasizes accommodations for users other than private vehicles on the highest volume streets. Although the Green Book has been revised over time to encourage all modes, the street hierarchy approach tends to lock into place the private-vehicle bias, leading to over-design of streets to accommodate ever higher volumes and speeds during the few congested hours of the day.

Major arterials typically space pedestrian crossing opportunities up to a mile apart, ignore the needs of bicyclists, and may not even provide sidewalks or anything more than a sign on a pole for a bus stop. Speed "limits" are set by measuring prevailing speeds and establishing the 85th percentile speed as the posted limit. As vehicle technology improves and vehicles travel ever faster, the speed limit is correspondingly ratcheted upward.

Little wonder then that pedestrian and bicycle deaths and injuries occur in such high numbers on urban arterials. Another result is that the sterile, hostile environments of urban arterials carve up neighborhoods, separate shoppers from available parking and school children from their schools. This type of environment creates a natural incentive to combine as many products and services as possible into a single destination. Hence the big box mega-stores such as WalMart, that offer everything from groceries to snowmobiles.

Complete Streets Policies

Since the early 2000's, state laws, local ordinances, and regional transportation funding agencies have begun a quiet revolution, adopting Complete Streets policies (though not always using this term). Such policies are not one-size-fits-all, and need not be threatening to traffic engineers. They generally require that, depending on the context, roadway construction projects must include consideration of its various users. For example, disabled access on a rural highway project may not be the best use of limited funding when urban streets competing for the same funds lacks similar accommodations.

In 2005, the Complete Streets Coalition was formed to advocate for and track the adoption of Complete Streets projects, as well as state and local Complete Streets policies and standards. The Coalition points as models to the Massachusetts Highway Department's Project Development and Design Guide [2] and the City of Charlotte, North Carolina's Urban Street Design Guidelines [3]. Importantly, both models include additional staff training and revised public processes to include input from all users in making street design decisions.[4]

 

Complete Streets - Federal Legislation

In 2009, complete streets legislation gained momentum because of a push for action on climate change and transportation reform.  Senator Tom Harkin (D-IA) and Representative Doris Matsui (D-CA) introduced the Complete Streets Act of 2009 in March to make streets, intersections and trails both more accessible and safer for walking and biking.  (Senator Harkin had previously attempted to pass a complete streets bill in 2005.)  The law would require that states and city planing agencies tie investments to policies that "meet the needs of pedestrians, bicyclists, transit riders and vehicles, as well as the needs of people of all ages and abilities" [5].

In July 2009, the House of Representatives passed a climate change bill that included a 'complete streets' component [6]:  mandating that state and local agencies encourage alternative forms of transportation (walk, bike, transit) through land use and transportation policies.

Implementing Complete Streets

Implementing Complete Streets policies involve four major changes [4]:

1. Revised roadway policies and standards -- These include such features as lane widths, design speeds, corner turning radii, the placement and design of crosswalks, incorporation of countdown timers, lead pedestrian intervals, bike lanes, and whether to add or leave street parking.

2. Revised decision process -- All users should be consulted to help determine the appropriate design for a new or rebuilt roadway.

3. Staff training -- Local traffic engineers and planners should receive training in best practices for accommodating all users. Most engineering schools provide no training on traffic calming, pedestrian, bicycle, or disability design.

4. Data collection -- Data on all users, not just vehicles, should be collected before and after a street retrofit. Consideration should be given to adopting multimodal performance standards, known as Level of Service standards, to track how well each user group is being served. Typically, Level of Service is only measured for vehicles, during the most congested hours of the day.

Design Techniques

Roadways considered to be "complete" are not of any one size or description. However, when focusing on urban arterials, a number of standard design techniques are typically used:

• Speeds are reduced to be more compatible with pedestrians and bicyclists. This is done by a combination of techniques, included among those listed below.
• Lanes are reduced in width (from 12 feet to 11 or even 10 feet).
• The number of lanes may be reduced, often from 4 to 3, which also improves safety for left turns and allows the most prudent driver to set the speed. This treatment is known as a road diet .
  
• Sidewalks, if missing, are installed.
  
• Curb cuts (driveways) may be consolidated to reduce walkway interruptions by moving vehicles.
  
• Raised medians are installed, which improves safety for crossing pedestrians.
• Universal design features are installed, including audible signals, curb ramps, and providing a 4-foot wide clear path of travel on the sidewalk, in accordance with the Americans with Disabilities Act and Public Rights-of-Way Accessibility Guidelines (PROWAG).
  
• Pedestrian crossings are enhanced with ladder-stye or zebra-style crosswalk markings, signal modifications such as a leading pedestrian interval or countdown timer , and as needed, flashing crosswalks -- lights embedded in the pavement that flash when activated by a crossing pedestrian.
• Street parking is maintained or installed, which helps to discourage speeding.
• Highway interchanges are modified to eliminate high-speed, free right turns. This is done by "squaring up" the interchange to resemble a typical 90-degree, signal-controlled intersection.
• Corner treatments are installed. These may include curb extensions, right-turn slip lanes, or tighter turning radii, all of which slow right turns and provide greater visibility for pedestrians.
• Transit accommodations are improved in a variety of ways.

 

Safer Design Standards for Urban Arterials

As mentioned above, in the U.S., urban arterials are especially dangerous for pedestrians and bicyclists, as well as for drivers.  The majority of pedestrian crashes and fatalities take place on arterial streets[7]. The reason is a deadly combination of dense land uses, driveways, pedestrians, stopping transit vehicles, and high-speed, high-volume vehicle traffic.  Research shows that typical safety fixes are in fact counterproductive, although few traffic engineers recognize this.  For example, researcher Dr. Eric Dumbaugh studied streets with supposed unsafe conditions (narrow lanes, street trees, land uses close to the street, street parking) and concluded:

Current safety objections to the use of livable street treatments are not based on empirical evidence, but are instead the result of a design philosophy that systematically overlooks the real-world operating behavior of road users[8].

The Congress of the New Urbanism+ and the Institute of Transportation Engineers collaborated on a breakthrough design manual, Context Sensitive Solutions in Designing Major Urban Thoroughfares for Walkable Communities[9].   Although some aspects of this treatment are somewhat conventional, the manual succeeds in endorsing known approaches and techniques for making existing or new urban arterial streets safer for all users, in effect making complete streets out of dangerous, incomplete ones.

ALSO ON THE LIVABLE STREETS NETWORK

• StreetFilms: Queens Boulevard: Complete Street Campaign Rally 
• Streetsblog Capitol Hill:  Flashback:  Obama Once Led Push for Complete Streets
  
• Streetsblog Capitol Hill:  National Complete Streets Bill Back in Play
  

• StreetFilms: From Tragedy to Advocacy: Mary Beth Kelly

• Streetsblog: MoDOT Lobbies Against Complete Streets; Lobbying Efforts Under Fire
  
  

REFERENCES

Each source is referred to by the same number every time it is cited. Please keep citation style consistent.

[1] American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials, A Policy on Geometric Design of Highways and Streets. 5th Edition. 2004.

[2] Massachusetts Highway Department's Project Development and Design Guide

[3] City of Charlotte, North Carolina's Urban Street Design Guidelines

[4] LaPlante, John, PE, PTOE, and McCann, Barbara. Complete streets: we can get there from here, ITE Journal, Institute of Transportation Engineers, May 2008, pp. 24-28.

[5] Senator Harkin, Rep. Matsui Introduce Complete Streets Act of 2009 (pdf).  Press Release from the National Complete Streets Coalition.  March 12, 2009  

[6] Congressional Climate Bill Includes ‘Complete Streets’ but not CLEAN-TEA.  Streetsblog Capitol Hill.  May 15, 2009.

[7]  Transportation for America and Surface Transportation Policy Partnership. 2009. Dangerous by Design: Solving the Epidemic of Preventable Deaths (and Making Great Neighborhoods).

[8] Dumbaugh, Eric. Safe Streets, Livable Streets: A Positive Approach to Urban Roadside Design, PhD. Thesis, Georgia Tech University.

[9] Institute of Transportation Engineers. 2007. Context Sensitive Solutions in Designing Major Urban Thoroughfares for Walkable Communities: An ITE Proposed Recommended Practice. In cooperation with the Congress for the New Urbanism .

 

PICTURE REFERENCES

Pictures are cited in the order they appear above. Please keep citation style consistent.

[1] Portland,OR, arterial complete street. Photo by Laura Sandt via Pedestrian Bicycle Information Center Image Library.

[2] Incomplete arterial street, Missoula, MT. Photo by Dan Burden via Pedestrian Bicycle Information Center Image Library.

[3] Complete residential collector street. Photo by Dan Burden via Pedestrian Bicycle Information Center Image Library.

[4] Complete street. Photo by Dan Burden via Pedestrian Bicycle Information Center Image Library.

 

FURTHER READING

• 
  
•