Best Practices and Recommendations for Metro Countywide Complete Streets Policy January 2014

Best Practices and Recommendations for Metro Countywide Complete Streets Policy January 2014 Executive Summary: The Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority (Metro) will be adopting a Complete Streets Policy in 2014. In order to ensure that this policy builds off best practices from across the country and includes concerns from local constituents in Los Angeles County, the Safe Routes to School National Partnership (National Partnership) and the Los Angeles County Bicycle Coalition (LACBC) have developed a series of recommendations regarding the components and implementation steps for this policy. Over the course of 2013, the National Partnership and LACBC hosted four stakeholder convenings comprised of community partners, agency staff, elected officials and business leaders. The findings from these meetings and best practices recommended by the National Complete Streets Coalition 1 are presented here to help inform Metro s countywide Complete Streets Policy. What are Complete Streets? Complete Streets is a policy initiative that changes the way that transportation agencies function, so that they routinely include pedestrian and bicycle components within the scope of highway and transit infrastructure projects. By including considerations of all modes early in project development, new infrastructure can be built to the highest design standards that accommodate all users. Complete Streets is not a program and does not have set-aside funds, but it changes the way transportation funds are spent. Complete Streets may vary significantly between urban, suburban and rural contexts, but all are designed to balance safety and convenience for all users, regardless of their mode of transportation, age or abilities. By modifying policies so that our transportation system incorporates the needs of people on foot, on bicycle, on transit and in private vehicles, we provide more mobility options for all residents. 1 http://www.smartgrowthamerica.org/complete-streets 1

Recommendations for Metro s Complete Streets Policy: Use Best Practices: The National Complete Streets Coalition has conducted extensive research into the components of successful Complete Streets policies. We recommend that Metro use the ten recommended 2 components of a successful Complete Streets policy as a starting point for Los Angeles County. We have provided sample language from the highest scoring 2012 countywide policies 3 for each of these components in Appendix A. Incorporate Input from Diverse Stakeholders: Based on input from the four convenings the National Partnership and LACBC hosted in 2013 the Complete Streets policy will need to address a wide range of goals such as economic development, equity, and context sensitive design elements. Learn from other California Regions: The San Diego Association of Governments 4 (SANDAG), Alameda County Transportation Commission, and the Bay Area Metropolitan Transportation Commission (MTC) 5 have adopted Complete Streets policies. These policies offer best practices for implementing Complete Streets within the context of California. Provide Clear Steps for Implementation: Metro will need to implement a series of changes after the adoption of the policy. These could include adopting Complete Streets performance measures, updating design guidelines, and creating a project checklist for new projects as well as supporting cities by developing a model Complete Streets ordinance for cities to adopt and identifying technical assistance support needed by local jurisdictions. How a Countywide Complete Streets Policy Will Strengthen Transportation Planning in LA County: A countywide Complete Streets policy is the most cost-effective way of ensuring that all transportation projects funded by Metro meet the agency s goals of reducing greenhouse gas emissions, reducing vehicle miles traveled (VMT), improving air quality, providing transportation options, reducing congestion, improving safety and reliability for all transportation users, improving transit access and encouraging walking, bicycling and transit. A Metro Complete Streets policy will provide a critical opportunity to implement and support these multiple goals and objectives that have been developed through a range of planning activities at the local, county, regional, state and federal levels of government. Many people in Los Angeles County are already traveling on foot or bicycle. The vast majority of Metro transit customers access Metro services walking and bicycling. Active Transportation 2 http://www.smartgrowthamerica.org/documents/cs-local-policy-workbook.pdf 3 http://www.smartgrowthamerica.org/documents/cs-2012-policy-analysis.pdf 4 https://www.dropbox.com/s/9s8f9zfs90vn4qg/sandag%20routine%20accommodations.pdf 5 http://www.mtc.ca.gov/planning/bicyclespedestrians/routine_accommodations.htm 2

modes (walking, bicycling and wheelchair) are the dominant access and egress modes for all riders; representing 85% of system access/egress at Rail/BRT stations and over 95% of total system access. 6 According to the 2009 National Household Travel Survey, 19 percent of all trips and 37 percent of trips to school in Los Angeles County are currently taken by walking,bicycling and transit. 7 Policies encouraging future development in existing urban areas around transit nodes will only increase this mode share. However, 38 percent of all roadway fatalities in Los Angeles County are people who were walking and bicycling. 8 The transportation network also has significant effects on public health with vast economic consequences. Sedentary lifestyles are responsible for obesity-related costs of approximately $6 billion annually in Los Angeles County. 9 By providing a transportation system that is safe and attractive for walking and biking, we can encourage people to be more physically active. Metro is currently undertaking the most ambitious locally-funded transportation program in the United States. As the primary transportation planner, coordinator, funder, designer, builder and operator for Los Angeles County, Metro has the important and unique opportunity to ensure that this investment is truly multimodal and integrated so that projects maximize co-benefits in safety, public health, environmental quality, and quality of life. Active transportation is an essential component of the overall transportation system that supports adopted regional transportation and land use strategies. A countywide Complete Streets policy will strengthen overall transportation planning within Metro by addressing the multi-modal potential of all projects during project development. Existing Policies Underpinning a Metro Complete Streets Policy: Los Angeles County/ Metro Policy: 2009 Long Range Transportation Plan (LRTP) 10 : Metro s 2009 LRTP lays out multiple objectives for improving transportation options in Los Angeles County. The LRTP supports increasing the number of trips taken by walking and bicycling and improving access to public transit. Yet, in the 2009 plan only one percent (1%) of over $300 billion is allocated toward bicycling and walking projects. A Complete Streets policy would leverage all investments to take advantage of opportunities to cost-effectively integrate bicycling and walking elements into other projects, which will improve the utility of the $163 billion expected to be spent on transit. In 2010, the Board adopted a directive to Enhance MTA Bicycle Policies and Programs, which increased bicycle funding in the Call for Projects and directed staff to develop policies and programs to better integrate bicycle travel within the current and future transit system. 6 Metro First/Last Mile Strategic Plan - Draft October 2013, page 9 http://media.metro.net/projects_studies/sustainability/images/path_design_guidelines_draft_november_2013.pdf 7 http://saferoutescalifornia.files.wordpress.com/2013/02/transportationfinance_lacounty_101_feb20.pdf 8 2010 SWITRS data http://saferoutescalifornia.files.wordpress.com/2013/02/transportationfinance_lacounty_101_feb20.pdf 9 http://media.metro.net/projects_studies/sustainability/images/path_design_guidelines_draft_november_2013.pdf 10 http://media.metro.net/projects_studies/images/final-2009-lrtp.pdf 3

In April 2011, the Board directed staff to develop a Health and Active Transportation Agenda, which includes short and long-term strategies for leveraging urban design, partnerships, and health. In July 2012, SCAG and Metro adopted the Joint Work Program 11 : Following the adoption of the 2012 RTP/SCS SCAG and Metro signed a Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) that outlines a series of joint planning and programming efforts. These include a Sustainable Transportation Demonstration Program, a First-Last Mile Strategic Plan, a Safe Routes to School Strategic Plan, and expediting active transportation funding. In December 2012, Metro adopted a Countywide Sustainability Planning Policy and Implementation Plan 12 : Metro s Countywide Sustainability Policy outlines steps that can be taken to expand and improve Metro s role as a leader in sustainability. This policy supports the adoption of a Complete Streets policy and multimodal performance metrics for transportation projects. First-Last Mile Strategic Plan 13 : This plan is pending adoption and lays out strategic investments that enhance access to the transit system at stations in a range of urban and suburban contexts. Regional Policy: The 2012 Southern California Association of Government (SCAG) Regional Transportation Plan and Sustainable Community Strategy (2012 RTP/SCS) 14 outlines transportation investments and land use changes that will help the region meet its greenhouse gas reduction targets under SB 375 and AB 32. The 2012 RTP/SCS also supports the adoption of Complete Streets policies by cities and County Transportation Commissions. State and Federal Policy: 2002, and 2008 DD-64-R1 15 : Caltrans Deputy Directive 64, Revision 1, states that, The California Department of Transportation provides for the needs of travelers of all ages and abilities in all planning, programming, design, construction, operations, and maintenance activities and products on the State highway system. In addition, it states, Addressing the safety and mobility needs of bicyclists, pedestrians, and transit users in all projects, regardless of funding, is implicit in these objectives. To do this, the policy requires the construction of a network of complete streets. The directive was first 11 http://rtpscs.scag.ca.gov/documents/scs/scag_metro_jointworkprogrammou.pdf 12 http://media.metro.net/projects_studies/sustainability/images/countywide_sustainability_planning_policy.pdf 13 http://media.metro.net/projects_studies/sustainability/images/path_design_guidelines_draft_november_2013.pdf 14 http://rtpscs.scag.ca.gov/documents/2012/final/f2012rtpscs.pdf 15 http://www.dot.ca.gov/hq/tpp/offices/ocp/complete_streets_files/dd_64_r1_signed.pdf 4

adopted in 2002 and then revised in 2008 to integrate the policy into all procedures and manuals, including the Caltrans Highway Design Manual. 2008, AB 1358 California Complete Streets Act 16 : The California Complete Streets Act requires cities to include Complete Streets when they update the circulation element of their general plans. According to the 2012 Office of Planning and Research Annual Planning Survey, 17 36 cities in Los Angeles County have reported completing this process. A Complete Streets policy at Metro would ensure that county policy supports local goals and objectives. US DOT Policy Statement on Bicycle and Pedestrian Accommodation Regulations and Recommendations 18 : This policy states, Every transportation agency, including DOT, has the responsibility to improve conditions and opportunities for walking and bicycling and to integrate walking and bicycling into their transportation systems. Furthermore, this policy states that, Transportation agencies and local communities should go beyond minimum design standards and requirements to create safe, attractive, sustainable, accessible and convenient bicycling and walking networks. 2013 Active Transportation Program: 19 The new Active Transportation Program implements MAP-21 in California and provides MPOs a new funding source to improve walking and biking to support new planning objectives and performance measures. Best Practices for Complete Streets Policies Complete Streets policies can be implemented at a city, county, state and even the federal level to influence project development. Key differences exist for each of these types of policies. A countywide Complete Streets policy would apply to any project planned, designed, constructed, operated, or funded by and through Metro. This would include major highway and transit projects, corridor projects and projects funded through Metro s Call for Projects. The ten components recommended by the National Complete Street Coalition for a strong countywide Complete Streets policy are listed below. Appendix A provides examples of language showing how other jurisdictions similar to Metro have addressed these components: 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. 16 http://www.leginfo.ca.gov/pub/07-08/bill/asm/ab_1351-1400/ab_1358_bill_20080930_chaptered.pdf 17 http://www.opr.ca.gov/docs/2012_apsr.pdf 18 http://www.fhwa.dot.gov/environment/bicycle_pedestrian/overview/policy_accom.cfm 19 http://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/billtextclient.xhtml 5

5) Encourages street connectivity and aims to create a comprehensive, integrated, connected network for all modes. 6) Directs the use of the latest and best design criteria and guidelines while recognizing the need for flexibility in balancing user needs. 7) Directs that Complete Streets solutions will complement the context of the community. 8) Is adoptable by all agencies to cover all projects. 9) Establishes performance standards with measurable outcomes. 10) Includes specific next steps for implementation of the policy. Stakeholder Input Since 2012 the National Partnership and LACBC have been convening the Active Transportation Coalition to bring together diverse stakeholders to discuss ways to increase opportunities for active transportation in Los Angeles County. In 2013 the National Partnership and LACBC focused the efforts of the Active Transportation Coalition around four convenings with distinct stakeholder groups including community based organizations, city and agency staff, elected officials and business leaders. These meetings provided valuable input into how a countywide Complete Streets Policy can achieve a broad spectrum of goals. Community-Based Organizations: 20 In March of 2013 the National Partnership hosted a countywide meeting with more than 40 participants to discuss active transportation policy. This meeting was mostly comprised of community-based organizations. Several key themes emerged regarding Complete Streets policies at both the county and city level of government, including: Develop a Complete Streets or multimodal policy for all Metro-funded projects Expand Metro s role as a Technical Assistance provider to assist cities in planning, designing and building active transportation projects Create an Active Transportation Division at Metro to plan and design larger projects Establish performance criteria for transportation projects to improve safety Include bicycle and pedestrian improvements in infrastructure bonds and legislative priorities Encourage local cities to adopt Complete Streets policies Agency Staff: 21 In June of 2013, the National Partnership hosted a second convening on active transportation policy. This meeting consisted of more than 60 participants, including a large number of agency staff, and featured a presentation on the Complete Streets policy by Metro. Participants focused on Metro s role as a regional agency and its ability to use the policy to incentivize Complete Streets projects through its role as a regional funding agency. The feedback from this meeting included: Develop active transportation performance measures and improve data collection for active transportation 20 http://saferoutescalifornia.org/2013/04/03/3-27-13_recap/ 21 http://saferoutescalifornia.org/2013/07/16/lac_atc_6-26-13_recap/ 6

Provide technical assistance and resources for cities with low rates of physical activity, high transit dependency, low income, high rates of violence and high collision rates Provide a model Complete Streets policy for local cities Make health and equity a priority in any new Complete Streets Policy Metro should allow some flexibility in standards to allow for experimentation Create a dedicated local source of funding for Complete Streets investments Include the cost of Complete Streets elements in the total project cost and prohibit value engineering from removing these elements Require maintenance projects to address Complete Streets Work to address CEQA guidelines related to level of service (LOS) and active transportation Initiate LOS reform in the new Congestion Management Program (CMP) and include Complete Streets requirements Elected Officials: 22 In September of 2013, the National Partnership and LACBC hosted a breakfast for Los Angeles County elected leaders and key staff from Metro, local cities, and school districts to discuss challenges and opportunities to making Los Angeles County more walkable, bike-able and transit-accessible. This was a rare opportunity to bring all three levels of government (Metro, cities, and school districts) into one room to discuss these issues. Feedback from elected officials included: Develop metrics and modeling capability to prioritize projects and collect adequate data about bicycle and pedestrian travel behavior Incorporate First-Mile/Last-Mile target investments in strategic transit-oriented areas Provide leadership for regionally significant projects that require inter-jurisdictional coordination such as corridor projects and First-Mile/Last-Mile projects Provide technical knowledge on integrating walking and biking into urban design, land use planning and transportation engineering Business Leaders: 23 In November 2013, the National Partnership and LACBC partnered with Fixing Angelenos Stuck in Traffic (FAST) to host a breakfast meeting for business leaders in the Los Angeles area to discuss the potential opportunities and challenges for a countywide Complete Streets Policy. This meeting built off of previous one-on-one listening sessions with business leaders in an effort to expand this ongoing dialogue and refine our recommendations for Metro. Feedback from Business leaders included: Provide a range of transportation options for the residents of Los Angeles County Provide educational opportunities to inform our communities about the benefits of Complete Streets. Provide standardization across cities through model policies this will help developers design projects to a recognized standard and make the development process easier Provide an alternative to using Level of Service as the sole means of measuring the strengths of a project to encourage multimodal projects 22 http://saferoutescalifornia.org/2013/09/25/lac_9-17-13/ 23 http://saferoutescalifornia.org/2013/11/20/econ_cs_lac/ 7

Provide a policy framework to ensure that Los Angeles County is competitive for federal and state funding Develop performance metrics and prioritization areas Involve businesses and developers in this discussion Opportunities for Implementation From feedback received through the four stakeholder meetings and the analysis of best practices from across the country, the following implementation strategies are recommended for consideration in Metro s Complete Streets policy. Examples of other jurisdictions that have implemented similar efforts are described for each recommended strategy. Project Initiation Checklist: Metro should consider developing a project initiation checklist(s) applicable to all Metro-funded capital projects and update the Call for Projects requirements for projects developed by local cities. The checklist(s) should include tools for collecting and evaluating the data required by applicable performance measures and should be coordinated with updates to the Transportation Improvement Program reporting process. The Bay Area Metropolitan Transportation Commission (MTC) currently has a checklist 24 that is intended for use on projects at their earliest conception or design phase so that any pedestrian or bicycle consideration can be included in the project budget. Complete Streets Ordinance Requirement: Metro should consider requiring cities to adopt a Complete Streets ordinance to quality for the 2015 Call for Projects to ensure that local circulation elements comply with AB 1358. To assist cities with this process, Metro could develop a model Complete Streets ordinance that cities can use as a template. MTC 25 and the Alameda County Transportation Commission require cities that apply to their grant programs to have adopted a complete streets ordinance and provide model ordinances. Performance Measures/Project Evaluation Standards: Metro should develop a set of Complete Streets performance measures and project evaluation standards with measurable outcomes that would be used to evaluate all projects included in the Federal Transportation Improvement Program (FTIP), State Transportation Improvement Program (STIP) and Long Range Transportation Plan (LRTP). These will allow staff to report back annually on the implementation of Complete Streets in all projects funded by Metro. Performance measures could include County goals, as well as federal and regional performance measures developed by SCAG and MAP-21. The San Diego Association of Governments (SANDAG) is currently developing a set of Project Evaluation Standards 26 and Performance Measures to ensure that Complete Streets are included in all projects. 27 24 http://www.mtc.ca.gov/planning/bicyclespedestrians/routine_accommodation_checklist_final.pdf 25 http://www.alamedactc.org/files/managed/document/8722/mtc_complete_streets_obag_guidance_final_8112.pdf 26 http://www.sandag.org/uploads/meetingid/meetingid_3608_16223.pdf 27 http://www.sandag.org/uploads/meetingid/meetingid_3611_16624.pdf 8

Station Area/First-Last Mile Inclusion: Metro should consider developing guidelines for incorporating bicycle and pedestrian access improvements into the project scope of all future transit projects aligned with Federal Transit Administration eligibility, which includes one half mile for pedestrian improvements and three miles for bicycle improvements. These requirements could apply to ongoing Metro projects, particularly those in the environmental or preliminary engineering stages. Metro has recently released its draft First-Last Mile Strategic Plan 28 which outlines strategies that can be used to improve active transportation access to transit. By requiring that all future projects are scoped to include the recommended elements, Metro could ensure the implementation of this plan. Technical Assistance: To assist local cities in developing Complete Streets networks, Metro should consider providing technical assistance aimed at expanding the inclusion of the most up to date Complete Street design standards. Metro could also assist low-resourced cities in developing projects and planning efforts. SANDAG requires specific bikeway and pedestrian facility types (such as bike lane, curb extension, etc) to be included in projects based on the project scope. 29 SANDAG allows cities with bicycle or pedestrian master plans to use projects defined within those plans as substitutes to its proposed facility types. MTC 30 and Alameda County 31 both provide ongoing training and technical assistance to ensure that projects include the most up to date design standards. Unconstrained Active Transportation Project List: Metro should develop an unconstrained list, (meaning not limited to existing funds) of active transportation projects to be included in future Long Range Transportation Plan updates, SCAG s 2016 Regional Transportation Plan/ Sustainable Communities Strategy (RTP/SCS) and potential revenue opportunities. The project list could be developed through Metro s upcoming Active Transportation Strategic Plan and incorporate access improvements for all Metro Rail/Bus Rapid Transit (BRT) stations, safety and access improvements along Metro s freeway/arterial projects, local pedestrian/bicycle/safe routes to school plans and any active transportation project lists developed by councils of government. Congestion Management Program Update: Metro should consider updating its Congestion Management Program to promote the development of Complete Streets. In 2013, SB 743 32 required the Office of Planning and Research to develop an alternative to Level of Service for determining whether a project triggers significant traffic impacts. This legislation could complement any changes to performance measures Metro uses to assess congestion in the future, allowing for more widespread implementation of Complete Streets in Los Angeles County. 28 http://media.metro.net/projects_studies/sustainability/images/path_design_guidelines_draft_november_2013.pdf 29 https://www.dropbox.com/s/9s8f9zfs90vn4qg/sandag%20routine%20accommodations.pdf 30 http://www.mtc.ca.gov/planning/complete_streets/ 31 http://www.alamedactc.org/app_pages/view/11642 32 http://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/billnavclient.xhtml?bill_id=201320140sb743&search_keywords= 9

Reporting Requirements: The Complete Streets policy could include requirements for Metro staff to report back regularly on their progress implementing the policy. MTC 33 and SANDAG 34 both require regular reports on the implementation of their Complete Streets policies. 33 http://www.mtc.ca.gov/planning/bicyclespedestrians/routine_accommodation_study.pdf 34 https://www.dropbox.com/s/9s8f9zfs90vn4qg/sandag%20routine%20accommodations.pdf 10

Appendix A A number of Complete Streets policies across the nation have been identified as examples of best practices by the National Complete Streets Coalition. 35 Below is example language from a number of those policies addressing the ten components recommended by the National Complete Streets Coalition to be included in a countywide Complete Streets policy. Ten Components of a Complete Streets Policy 36 1) Includes a vision for how and why the community wants to complete its streets. For example: Hennepin County Complete Streets Policy 37 This Complete Streets policy was created under Hennepin County Board Resolution 09-0058R1. The resolution demonstrates the county s commitment to develop and maintain a safe, efficient, balanced and environmentally sound county transportation system and to support Active Living integrating physical activity into daily routines through activities such as biking, walking, or taking transit. The county strives to be a leader in providing opportunities and choices for its residents, and believes that a well-planned transportation system that includes Complete Streets demonstrates this leadership. 38 The transportation network in the Miami Valley will become measurably better connected, safer, and more accessible for all users of the public right-of-way, regardless of their mode of transportation, age or abilities, as transportation projects throughout the Region are designed and constructed using complete streets principles. This effort to make the system more complete will take advantage of opportunities presented by necessary reconstruction and expansion of the system whenever practicable. Mid-Ohio Regional Planning Commission 39 Building complete streets provides many benefits to residents, business owners, developers, and the community as a whole. First and foremost, embracing the complete streets concept will create balanced transportation systems by providing accessible, safe, and efficient connections between destinations. It will bolster economic growth and stability while increasing property values. It will ensure job growth, reduce crashes through safety improvements, improve public health and 35 http://www.smartgrowthamerica.org/documents/cs-2012-policy-analysis.pdf 36 http://www.smartgrowthamerica.org/complete-streets/changing-policy/policy-elements 37 http://www.hennepin.us/files/hennepinus/housing%20community%20works%20and%20transit/community 37 %20Development/Active%20Living/Complete%20Streets%20Policy%20Bd%20approved%207142009.pdf 38 http://www.mvrpc.org/sites/default/files/mvrpccspolicyfinal.pdf 39 http://www.morpc.org/trans/completestreets_morpc_cs_policyfinal2010-03-31.pdf 11

fitness, reduce harmful emissions, and reduce the overall demand on our roadways by allowing people to replace motor vehicle trips with active transportation options. Secondly, integrating sidewalks, bike facilities, transit amenities, or safe crossings into the initial design of a project spares the expense and complications of retrofits later. 2) Specifies that all users includes pedestrians, bicyclists and transit passengers of all ages and abilities, as well as trucks, buses and automobiles. For example: Bloomington/Monroe County Metropolitan Planning Organization 40 The Complete Streets concept is an initiative to design and build roads that adequately accommodate all users of a corridor, including pedestrians, bicyclists, users of mass transit, people with disabilities, the elderly, motorists, freight providers, emergency responders, and adjacent land users. This concept dictates that appropriate accommodation(s) be made so that all modes of transportation can function safely and independently in current and future conditions. This policy defines Complete Streets by this outcome: All current and projected users of the public right-of-way should be able to safely and conveniently reach their destinations along and across a street or road, regardless of their chosen mode of transportation, in order for that street or road to be considered complete. All users include: pedestrians, cyclists, transit and school bus riders, people with disabilities, motorists, freight haulers, service personnel, and emergency responders. All users includes a wide range of ages from school-aged children to the elderly. Bay Area Metropolitan Transportation Commission 41 These recommendations are intended to facilitate the accommodation of pedestrian, which includes wheelchair users, and bicyclists needs into all projects where bicycle and pedestrian travel is consistent with current adopted regional and local plans. In the absence of such plans, federal state, and local standards and guidelines should be used to determine appropriate accommodations. 3) Applies to both new and retrofit projects, including design, planning, maintenance, and operations, for the entire right of way. For example: Mid-Ohio Regional Planning Commission This Complete Streets policy applies to all projects, including the new construction, reconstruction, rehabilitation, repair, maintenance, or planning of roadways, trails and other transportation facilities that will use federal funds allocated through MORPC. Bay Area Metropolitan Transportation Commission 40 http://bloomington.in.gov/media/media/application/pdf/4425.pdf 41 http://www.mtc.ca.gov/planning/bicyclespedestrians/routine_accommodation_study.pdf 12

Projects funded all or in part with regional funds (e.g. federal, STIP, bridge tolls) shall consider the accommodation of bicycle and pedestrian facilities, as described in Caltrans Deputy Directive 64. These recommendations shall not replace locally adopted policies regarding transportation planning, design, and construction. This policy applies to all roadway projects that request MVRPC-controlled Surface Transportation Program (STP) and Congestion Mitigation/Air Quality (CMAQ) federal funds Alameda County Transportation Commission 42 It is the policy of the Alameda CTC that all transportation investments shall consider the needs of all modes and all users. All investments will conform to Complete Streets requirements and Alameda County guidelines to ensure that all modes and all users are considered in the expenditure of funds so that there are appropriate investments that fit the function and context of facilities that will be constructed. 4) Makes any exceptions specific and sets a clear procedure that requires high-level approval of exceptions. For example: All MVRPC-funded STP/CMAQ projects will consider Complete Streets principles and possible treatments at the time of the initial application for funding. If the project sponsor determines that additional complete streets treatments are not warranted, they may request an exception for one or more of the following reasons: o Where bicyclists and pedestrians are prohibited by law from using the roadway. Bicycles and pedestrians are legally permitted to travel on or along all streets and roads in Ohio with the exception of limited access highways. o Where the street or road is already adequately designed to accommodate all users, and thus is complete without further enhancements. To qualify for this exception, the project sponsor must document how this street or road currently addresses the needs of all users. o Where the cost of establishing bikeways or walkways would be excessively disproportionate to the need or probable use. In accordance with federal guidelines, excessively disproportionate is defined as exceeding twenty percent of the cost of the total transportation project (including right of way acquisition costs). This exception must consider probable use through the life of the project, a minimum of 20 years. o Where the project consists of maintenance, repair or resurfacing of an existing cross-section only. However, resurfacing projects often offer a lowcost opportunity to adjust lane width or add a bike lane simply by changing the pavement markings on a road, and therefore resurfacing projects should, at the discretion of the project sponsor, be considered an opportunity to make 42 http://www.alamedactc.org/files/managed/document/6898/alameda_tep_final.pdf 13

o o o a street or road more complete. Projects that include adding lanes, shoulders or involve replacement of the full pavement structure are not considered maintenance or repair and do not qualify for this exception. Where the project consists primarily of the installation of traffic control or safety devices and little or no additional right-of-way is to be acquired. However whenever new traffic control detection devices are installed they must be capable of detecting bicycles. All new pedestrian crossing devices must also meet the most current accessibility standards for controls, signals and placement. Where the Average Daily Traffic count (ADT) is projected to be less than 1,000 vehicles per day over the life of the project and there is sufficient opportunity for a vehicle to change lanes to pass a cyclist or pedestrian. Where scarcity of population or other factors indicate an absence of need for current and future conditions. This exception must take the long view and consider probable use through the life of the project, a minimum of 20 years. San Diego Association of Governments 43 When an agency determines not to include bicycle or pedestrian accommodations in a project because the cost of doing so would be excessively disproportionate to the need or probable use, the agency must include a notice of that decision in the notice of the public hearing required by Sections 5(A) and Section 6 of the Ordinance. In submitting the project to SANDAG for inclusion in the TransNet Program of Projects as part of the Regional Transportation Improvement Program (RTIP) process, the agency must notify SANDAG that bicycle and/or pedestrian facilities, as described in Table 1 or in its bicycle or pedestrian master plan, will not be included in the project along with written justification for that decision. The decision and justification is subject to review and comment by SANDAG through the Bicycle-Pedestrian Working Group, which would forward its comments to the SANDAG Transportation Committee. The Independent Taxpayer Oversight Committee also would review and comment on such projects as part of its role in the RTIP process. The Transportation Committee in approving the TransNet Program of Projects must make a finding that the local decision not to provide bicycle or pedestrian facilities is consistent with the provisions of this Ordinance prior to approving the project for funding under the TransNet Program. If this consistency finding is not made, the agency would have the opportunity to revise its fund programming request for consideration in a future RTIP amendment. 5) Encourages street connectivity and aims to create a comprehensive, integrated, connected network for all modes. For example: 43 http://www.sandag.org/organization/about/pubs/policy_031.pdf 14

Every effort should be made to provide a continuous, uninterrupted network accessible to all users and modes. A well-connected network considers connectivity throughout the lifespan of a transportation project, and takes into account the needs of both current and projected users. 6) Directs the use of the latest and best design criteria and guidelines while recognizing the need for flexibility in balancing user needs. Context-appropriate facilities will be designed to the best currently available standards and guidelines. 7) Directs that Complete Streets solutions will complement the context of the community. There is no one design standard that achieves the complete streets outcome. Designs for particular projects will be context-sensitive, considering adjacent land uses and local needs, and incorporating the most up-to-date, widely-accepted design standards for the particular setting, traffic volume and speed, and current and projected demand. Each project must be considered both separately and as part of a connected network to determine the level and type of treatment necessary for the street to be complete. Mid-Ohio Regional Planning Commission Designs shall include accommodation of all users and be sensitive to the context of the project setting. It is important to note that Complete Streets may look different for every project and road type. For example, wide lanes or paved shoulders may be sufficient in a rural area, whereas sidewalks and/or bike lanes are needed in an urban setting. Also, when re-striping projects are considered, where the right-of-way will not change, options such as bike lanes, sharrows, and pedestrian crosswalks could still be implemented. More information and examples will be provided as part of the checklist and toolkit. 8) Is adoptable by all agencies to cover all projects. For example: Mid-Ohio Regional Planning Commission MORPC will promote the Complete Streets concept throughout the region and, therefore, recommends that all local jurisdictions and the state adopt comprehensive Complete Streets policies, consistent with the Regional Policy. MORPC will seek incorporation of the Complete Streets concept and policy into the development of all transportation infrastructures within the region at all phases of their development, including planning and land use control, scoping, design approvals, implementation, and performance monitoring. 15

MVRPC encourages local and state jurisdictions/ organizations to review and revise their local ordinances/policies to reflect complete street design guidelines and to apply these guidelines to local projects as appropriate. In addition, MVRPC encourages private developers to apply complete streets principles to their projects. We also encourage neighboring regions to utilize these principles in order to ensure connectivity across jurisdictions and regions. 9) Establishes performance standards with measurable outcomes. For example: The success of this policy will be measured in the following quantitative ways: o Increase in the percentage of STP and CM/AQ project applications which include complete streets elements o Increase in number of on-street bicycle routes, defined by streets and roads with clearly marked or signed bicycle accommodations o Increase in accessible, covered bus shelters added to the regional transit system o Increase in member jurisdictions which adopt Complete Streets policies o Increased number of jurisdictions in the Region achieving or pursuing Bike- Friendly Community status from the League of American Bicyclists. The success of this policy will be measured in the following qualitative ways: o Surveys of bicyclists, pedestrians, motorists, people with disabilities and transit users concerning their ability to reach desired destinations safely and conveniently o Surveys of project sponsors concerning the value and fairness of this policy. 10) Includes specific next steps for implementation of the policy. For example: Bloomington/Monroe County Metropolitan Planning Organization The BMCMPO shall, at a minimum, evaluate this policy prior to the adoption of the Long Range Transportation Plan. This evaluation shall include recommendations for amendments to the Complete Streets Policy and subsequently be considered by the Citizens Advisory Committee, Technical Advisory Committee and Policy Committee. Recommendations for amendments shall be distributed to the Local Public Agencies prior to consideration by the BMCMPO Committees. Roadway projects listed in the TIP shall clearly be identified as Complete Streets Compliant or Complete Streets Exempt. Mid-Ohio Regional Planning Commission This checklist 44 accompanies the Regional Complete Streets policy and is developed to assist project sponsors in defining and designing their projects in adherence to the policy. A Complete Streets toolkit will be developed over the next year to provide 44 http://www.morpc.org/trans/completestreets_morpc_cs_checklistfinal2010-03-31withappendices.pdf 16

more detailed information on engineering, design, educational, and enforcement strategies. More specifically, the toolkit will elaborate on many of the items discussed in the checklist and Appendix 1. A toolkit will be developed and provided to each community in modules as they become available. The objective of this toolkit is to assist project sponsors in developing Complete Streets projects. This toolkit will contain model policies, sample design standards, examples for land use and zoning practices, educational and enforcement strategies, and information on other resources. MVRPC staff will provide guidance on how to comply with this policy during the project solicitation process. MVRPC will also make project sponsors aware of training and educational opportunities concerning complete streets, including resources that address specific design issues. This policy will be periodically reviewed and revised in parallel with the MVRPC Long Range Transportation Plan Update. The Project Evaluation System has been modified to reflect this policy and points will be awarded for the addition or improvement of complete streets elements to a project. 17