PCSR INFO 05-10-2005 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

20 Planning May 2005 PLANNING PRACTICE and more enlighrened approach to highway construction." The new policy requires the commonwealth to "initiate all highway con- struction projects with the presumption" that they will accommodate bicycling and walking. Elsewhere, metropolitan planning organi- zations, counties, and cities have also used the federal guidance as a model, or in some cases, have crafted their own policies. .Santa Barbara's general plan, adopted al- st three years before California's statewide 2001 directive, calls for "achieving equality of choice and convenience among modes." In Columbia, Missouri, new street standards call- ing for narrower roads and wider sidewalks were pushed by public health advocates and by Mayor Darwin Hindman, who firmly believes in the health benefits of walking and bicycling. Many local policies have been adopted through internal directives or revised plan- ning documents, but at least two local govern- ments-in Illinois and California-have passed broadly worded council resolutions or ordi- nances, and MPOs in Ohio and California are requiring local governments using MPO-ad- ministered funds to meet complete street stan- dards. In California, Sacramento has joined San Diego in requiring that roads built with funds raised through voter-approved bonds accommodate pedestrians and cyclists. Farthest along For a vision of the future of complete streets, visit Oregon. The state adopted the idea long tt;ore an.yone else and codified it into state . Legislators passed a "Bike Bill" in 1971, a out the same time as the state's innovative land-use planning laws were taking shape. The bill, which required bicycle and pedes- trian facilities on all new roads, streets, and highways, was considered a tough sell, recalls Michael Ronkin, head of the Oregon DOT's bicycle and pedestrian program. The measure was sponsored by a conservative Republican from the southern part of the state, who at the same time was promoting bills to regulate dynamite and to tax church property. "Of the three," says Ronkin, the legislator "was told the bike bill was least likely to pass." But pass it did. The measure, which allows highway funds to be used to retrofit all roads, also requires that at least one percent of the state's highway fund be spent on bicycle and pedestrian ways. The impact of the law is obvious across the state. In Corvallis, 95 percent of arterial roads include bike lanes. In Portland, the rapid growth of the bike lane network since 1990 has been linked to dramatic increases in bicycle com- muting. And even in suburban and rural areas, bike lanes and sidewalks are common. But Oregon's work is far from done. Early implementation ignored pedestrians, and de- sign standards were poor. It took years to make transportation engineers and designers aware of the requirement. Now, in the state's fourth decade of building for all modes, state and local bicycle and pedestrian planners are working on the thorniest design problems. "We've already gotten the low-hanging fruit; now we have to get out the big ladder," says Ronkin. Bigger issues ofland use and street connec- tivity still playa huge role in decisions to walk or cycle. In Oregon's experience, adding bike lanes and sidewalks to roads that are being widened from two to five lanes is not enough to mitigate the increased traffic volumes: Walk- ing and cycling are still likely to decline. Nonetheless, Ronkin says, roads must make these accommodations. "It is all a part of rethinking how roads function and whom they serve," he says. Unique streets While the idea of complete streets is based on consistency-every time you build or recon- struct a road, make it multimodal-in prac- tice, every project is unique. In a rural area, a complete street may be a two-lane road with a paved shoulder. In a congested urban area, it may feature an extra-wide sidewalk and ref- uge islands for pedestrians. It does not neces- sarily have to include bike lanes, however, because cyclists can travel safely with the slow- moving automobile traffic. Truly complete streets expand beyond bicy- cling and walking to consider disabled users and transit riders. Every street cross ~ection requires balancing the needs of many users in a way not considered in typical highway design manuals. "For pedestrians who have disabilities, the weak link is the sidewalk," says Lois Thibault of the U.S. Access Board, an independent federal agency that develops accessibility guide- lines. She notes that walking is the only inde- pendent mode of travel for people who are blind. "Complete streets build a network," she says, "and that's what everyone needs." Sidewalks are a necessity for disabled travel, but details such as curb ramps and audible crossing signals are critical as well. Planning for disabled people is certainly not a new issue. Projects built with federal highway funds have been required to be acces- sible to all travelers since 1973, and the Ameri- cans with Disabilities Act of 1990 broadened the requirement to apply to all facilities, re- gardless of funding. Even with this history, however, imple- mentation has been slow. That's because, in