Think complete streets policies are just for urban areas? The complete streets movement's new hero is Sen. Mark Begich -- of Alaska. Photo courtesy of Sen. Begich's office.

Deron Lovaas of NRDC said in his blog post about the bill that certain improvements to the legislation made it a standard-bearer for how transportation bills should be written:

Senators Lautenberg, Cantwell and Begich played key roles in improving the title by including a version of the FREIGHT (an acronym sparing us the mouthful of “Focusing Resources, Economic Investment, and Guidance to Help Transportation”) Act as well as a “complete streets” policy to accommodate bicyclists and pedestrians. This means that the title now has actual performance objectives, allows for funding to be used for rail as well as highway investments to improve goods movement, and that there would be an office at DOT tasked with implementing an actual national plan for freight investments.

Jesse Prentice-Dunn of the Sierra Club adds that the freight provisions “treat our movement of freight as a multi-modal system, not just a web of highways.”

The street safety (or “complete streets”) amendment [PDF] introduced into the Commerce bill by Sen. Mark Begich (D-AK) deserves attention for its special focus on non-motorized modes. The amendment says the Secretary of Transportation “shall establish standards to ensure that the design of Federal surface transportation projects provides for the safe and adequate accommodation, in all phases of project planning, development, and operation, of all users of the transportation network, including motorized and non-motorized users.”

States with their own complete streets policies would get a waiver from the federal policy, as long as their policies are in compliance.

A federal law — as opposed to individual city or state ordinances — is important because “streets don’t end at the borders of their jurisdictions,” according to Barbara McCann, director of the National Complete Streets Coalition. “We’ve had many jurisdictions that have complete streets policies say that they need and want that consistency.”

Some state DOTs have expressed a desire for more guidance on how to adopt complete streets policies. This amendment would provide that guidance straight from the top and allow USDOT to ensure compliance.

Though the overall bill was passed on a party-line vote of 13 to 11, the complete streets amendment passed unanimously — recognizing, according to McCann, “that every transportation project has to be a safety project.”

The performance objectives in this title provide a useful model for others in the bill, Lovaas said, and the EPW portion that passed a few weeks ago could have used some stronger language on that front. “The highway program desperately needs a national plan as well, and performance objectives to make sure federal taxpayer dollars aren’t wasted by state governments,” Lovaas said. “The era of unplanned, unaccountable federal spending needs to come to an end.”

Performance measures could potentially be added to the EPW highway title on the floor of the Senate, but it would be a hard sell: Democrats and Republicans have sharp disagreements over what kinds of performance should be measured — for example, whether reducing carbon emissions or reducing federal bureaucracy should be the standard. We’ll be watching the Banking Committee to see what kinds of performance metrics are included in its transit title.

Prentice-Dunn of the Sierra Club also cheered the inclusion of national transportation objectives and goals. By establishing the vision for what our transportation system should achieve, he said, those provisions represent a critical move away from ”an earmark-laden system” and toward a more strategic one.

“Key among those objectives is the goal of energy conservation and reducing transportation energy use,” he wrote. “Our transportation system drives our addiction to oil, guzzling roughly two-thirds of all the oil used nationwide. By reducing transportation energy use, we will cut our dependence on oil.”

With a small group of helmet-toting onlookers in the wings, the City Council finally gave their nod to a complete streets ordinance — the culmination of more than five years’ struggle.

This photo shows one of the few streets in Cleveland with bike lanes. But if the city's new complete streets ordinance is to be taken seriously, more are on the way. Photo: Green City Blue Lake

Finally, there was a sense that change was coming, that the value of traveling by foot, bike and bus was valued and understood.

Flash back to 2005, when the first seeds of this victory were being sown. It was then that an environmental advocacy group called EcoCity Cleveland, now Green City Blue Lake, first lobbied Cleveland City Councilman Matt Zone to put forward a complete streets ordinance.

But Cleveland wasn’t ready yet. It would take contributions by local philanthropic organizations, mass strategy meetings and even a spirited (but ultimately unsuccessful) fight with the Ohio Department of Transportation before this law would pass.

About a year prior to the introduction of that first, doomed ordinance, EcoCity Cleveland joined forces with two bedrocks of the local philanthropic community, the Cleveland and Gund foundations, to help the city develop a sustainability agenda. The two philanthropies — which still retain their economic might from Cleveland’s heady industrial days — combined to fund the creation of a “Director of Sustainability” position for the city of Cleveland. The position was designed so that after three years, it would pay for itself through energy and waste savings.

They chose a man named Andrew Watterson to head the new division. Two years ago, he planned and hosted a multi-day “Sustainability Summit” — a significant event at which the entire community was invited to share their vision for Cleveland.

Hundreds of Clevelanders came together to develop a strategy for a greener, healthier city. Participants were divided into committees based on their interests. One of the 28 groups that emerged was the Sustainable Transportation Action Team (STAT).

“There was no one in the community advocating for multi-modal transportation; that conversation just was not happening at all,” said John Mitterholzer, a STAT member and environmental program officer with the Gund Foundation, which lists the revitalization of Cleveland as one of its primary goals. “I think the summit, to its credit, really brought together a bunch of people that also saw this as an issue.”

“For the first time, we were bringing together a group of people and recognizing that we need to do things differently,” he added.

At around this time, the Ohio Department of Transportation was planning to rebuild Cleveland’s Innerbelt Bridge, a structurally deficient, highly trafficked arterial leading into downtown from the southwest side. STAT made it a short-term goal to ensure that the $300 million bridge would include bike and pedestrian accommodations. They named their campaign “Access for All.” Again, the foundations lent their support.

Access for All staged demonstrations. They won the backing of local media organizations (and national media, including Streetsblog). They held negotiations with the Ohio Department of Transportation.

Ultimately, however, ODOT determined it would be “too expensive” to add cycling and pedestrian infrastructure to the bridge. As consolation, they committed to $6 million in bicycle and pedestrian improvements for another bridge which they considered to be a close alternative.

It was a crushing defeat for the new group, but it tilted the political dynamic just slightly in cyclists’ favor, said Mitterholzer.

“We didn’t get the bike lanes on the bridge but ultimately I think we got a lot more,” he said. “We got political will for a lot of these things.”

Following the Innerbelt Bridge campaign, STAT refocused on the original goal it developed at the Sustainability Summit: complete streets. Meanwhile, a number of other forces were conspiring to help.

Over the past two years, Cleveland’s Critical Mass has been booming, culminating in nearly 450 riders at the August 2011 ride. Growth in the cycling community was further amplified by the creation of a unified cycling advocacy group. Bike Cleveland appointed a board and held a two-day summit attended by more than 100 people to mark their official debut earlier this month. They plan to hire full-time staff within the year. (Full disclosure: I am a board member with Bike Cleveland.)

In late 2009, Cleveland cyclists lobbied the Ohio Department of Transportation for bike lanes on Cleveland's Innerbelt Bridge. The campaign failed, but it ultimately moved the political needle around transportation priorities. Photo: Rust Wire

This spring, STAT members began a new push to put complete streets legislation before City Council. The bill was introduced in March. But then some revisions and foot dragging followed. Finally last week, it came up for consideration.

When the ordinance at last received its final “aye” Monday night, the advocacy community was elated. “This is BIG,” wrote the owner of a local bike store on Facebook. “I was there,” wrote one community activist.

Cleveland still has a long road ahead. City Hall isn’t known for being innovative, and the complete streets vision now meets a transportation department where car capacity is still seen as the highest cause.

But there are encouraging signs from within the city establishment. For example, Cleveland’s ordinance requires that 20 percent of every road project’s budget be spent on “green” amenities like permeable pavement, or cycling and walking amenities. City Council went further, inserting a rider into the legislation that requires the council member from the affected ward to be notified before a road project is exempted from the requirement.

The advocacy community is energized. Change is in the air. Cleveland was the first community in Northeast Ohio to pass a complete streets ordinance, and now a couple of the surrounding suburbs are now moving in that direction.

In a lot of ways, however, Cleveland’s work has just begun.

“Its time to celebrate it and thank the mayor for a good policy,” said Mitterholzer. “But we also have to make sure it’s implemented.”

The transportation committee of CB 11 voted to bring the complete street design for First Avenue, shown here in the East Village, to East Harlem. Photo: NYC DOT.

The transportation committee of Manhattan Community Board 11 wants to see protected bike lanes on First and Second Avenues, which the city promised for East Harlem last year and then delayed. Joined by City Council Member Melissa Mark-Viverito, who spoke strongly in favor of the project, the committee endorsed plans to build protected lanes between 96th Street and 125th Street on both avenues in a vote of 5-1, with two abstentions.

Officials from the Department of Transportation presented plans to build parking-protected bike lanes on both avenues to the committee last night, saying they would have the same design as on First Avenue south of 34th Street. On that stretch of road, said DOT, the protected bike lanes and pedestrian islands have greatly improved safety — injuries are down 37 percent there — without leading to increased congestion.

2010 conditions on First Avenue at 117th Street. Photo: James Garcia.

DOT bike and pedestrian director Josh Benson said that construction could start as soon as next spring, though he didn’t commit to building out all thirty blocks of each avenue at once. Because First Avenue already has a buffered bike lane, he said, work would start on Second. No work would be done in the Second Avenue Subway work zone south of 100th Street until construction there was complete.

Mark-Viverito took the floor immediately after DOT’s presentation to highlight her support for the plan. City streets need to balance the needs of everyone in the community, she said, “and bikers are a part of that.” In East Harlem, she argued, the need for safe cycling is particularly acute: The neighborhood has high obesity and asthma rates as well as a large senior population in need of shorter road crossings. She also noted that East Harlem was only getting these lanes after being dropped from the early rounds of construction and added back in after sustained activism from the community.

Mark-Viverito also forcefully laid out the case for parking-protected bike lanes. “I don’t think what we have in this community are bike lanes,” she said. “They don’t offer a level of protection and they’re not respected, since they’re just painted on the ground.”

The debate wasn’t unanimous — one community board member worried that with the bike lane, a double-parked car would narrow an avenue to only two through lanes, and a local health teacher complained about the 166 parking spaces that would be removed in the plan — but most who spoke were in favor of the plan.

“I’m not only a cyclist but a mom with four kids who all cycle, and also a driver. It makes complete sense,” said committee chair Peggy Morales, who voted for the lanes, after the meeting. Morales was only a block away when local cyclist Marcus Ewing was doored and killed by a truck last October. “We should be able to go cycling without having to take our lives into our own hands,” said Morales. “This is long overdue.”

The full board of CB 11 will vote on the bike lanes on September 20th. The transportation committee of the Upper East Side’s CB 8 will vote on the lanes in their district tonight.

Complete streets wouldn’t be state policy (it becomes official 180 days from now, in mid-February) if it weren’t for committed safety advocates. AARP, the Tri-State Transportation Campaign, Transportation Alternatives, the New York League of Conservation Voters and an environmental movement which named complete streets one of five “Super Bills” all did the hard work to take a policy that died in the Assembly last year successfully through Albany this time around. Inside government, officials from the state DOT and Cuomo’s office helped hammer out the details of the bill while Assembly Member David Gantt and Senator Charles Fuschillo served as lead sponsors in their chambers.

And a profound measure of credit goes to Sandi Vega. Vega’s daughter Brittany was killed last year walking across Long Island’s SunriseHighway, one of the region’s very deadliest roads. Vega honored her daughter’s memory by becoming a passionate fighter for complete streets.

Whether in rural or urban contexts, the new complete streets law will enhance safety for all users on the street. Image: TSTC

Governor Andrew Cuomo will sign complete streets legislation into law, his office announced in a press release today. Once signed, the law will require all major transportation projects in the state to consider all users, including pedestrians, cyclists and motorists.

“New York’s roadways should safely accommodate all pedestrians, motorists and cyclists, and this legislation will help communities across the state achieve this objective,” Governor Cuomo said in a press release. “Complete Streets designs recognize measures that will make streets safer for New Yorkers of all ages and abilities.”

The law will cover all state Department of Transportation projects in addition to local projects which are overseen by the state DOT and which receive federal and state funding. The governor’s press release lists sidewalks, bike lanes, crosswalks, pedestrian walk lights, bus pull outs, curb cuts, raised crosswalks, ramps, and traffic calming measures as possible design features that might be part of a complete street, depending on the location and context.

Cuomo was expected to sign the complete streets bill after it passed the state legislature unanimously. The bill died in the Assembly in 2010 but after some revisions and a renewed advocacy push finally made it through Albany this June.

“We believe this new law is a key ingredient to build livable communities across New York State where people can age and live independently as long as possible,” said AARP New York legislative director Bill Ferris. Ferris said he was confident that the law would be implemented quickly and effectively, as both the state DOT and the governor’s office were involved in the crafting of the latest version of the bill.

“We’re very excited that Governor Cuomo is moving forward with this,” said Nadine Lemmon, the Tri-State Transportation Campaign’s Albany legislative advocate. “It’s definitely important for smart growth, for bringing back our downtowns. It’s going to be huge for safety.” Because the state policy only affects large projects, Lemmon said she hoped to see local communities pass their own complete streets policies to complement it. No town in Westchester County has yet passed its own policy, she said, though a number of Long Island towns have.

The state legislature earned a solid B on sustainable transportation issues this term, according to a report card issued Wednesday by the New York League of Conservation Voters. Legislators earned top marks for passing complete streets legislation and a transit funding lockbox, but were penalized for their continued attacks on the MTA’s budget.

Transportation was one of four issue areas covered by the NYLCV scorecard, which can be read in full above. Since the group can endorse candidates for elected office, while no New York group focused solely on transportation can, their prioritization of these issues adds political heft to transportation advocacy efforts.

The NYLCV grade is based on four goals. The group wanted the legislature to stop stealing dedicated funds from transit riders, pass lockbox legislation to make future raids more difficult, protect the payroll mobility tax, and pass complete streets legislation.

For passing the lockbox and the complete streets bills, legislators earned an A. The State Senate brought down the legislature’s score by voting to phase out the payroll tax; because that proposal went nowhere in the Assembly, overall the legislature earned a C on that issue. For taking another $100 million from the MTA for use elsewhere in the budget, Albany earned a D.

A few of NYLCV’s priorities from earlier this year didn’t make it into the final scorecard. Notably, a Cuomo campaign plan to create a smart growth competitive grant program and a call for finding new revenue to pay for the MTA’s unfunded capital plan were both included in the group’s January policy agenda, but were not scored in Wednesday’s document. The year is only halfway through, of course.

It is striking that, when it comes to Albany and transit legislation, sustainable transportation advocates are forced to stay on the defensive. The two transit-related provisions were only about protecting what is already supposed to go to transit riders, and Albany couldn’t even pull that off in full. In 2010, the NYLCV candidate questionnaire avoided asking about transit funding entirely, on the grounds that there just wasn’t any hope of forward progress. That dynamic will have to change fast; the MTA’s capital program will be largely unfunded as of the end of the year.

As the Tri-State Transportation Campaign points out on its blog, Cuomo’s signature is still needed to turn the complete streets and lockbox bills — as well as important legislation like the city’s livery taxi plan and a bill enabling cities to set up land banks to deal with vacant and abandoned properties — into law. All eyes now turn to the governor’s mansion.

Whether in rural or urban contexts, complete streets make sure there is room for all users to have safe space on the street. Image: TSTC

Complete streets legislation passed both houses of the state legislature unanimously yesterday. With Governor Andrew Cuomo expected to sign the legislation, safer and more inclusive road design should be coming soon to streets across the state.

“Everyone knew that something had to be done,” said AARP New York legislative director Bill Ferris, “so the political will was there.” In the five largest upstate counties, a pedestrian is killed by a car every ten days. On Long Island, a pedestrian is killed once a week, and in New York City, once every two and a half days. Older pedestrians are disproportionately killed in traffic crashes.

Complete streets legislation would require planners to take account of all users, including those on foot, on a bicycle, or with limited mobility, when designing a road that receives state or federal funds.

After stalling out in the Assembly in the past, the complete streets bill passed this year due to some changes to the legislation’s language and support from the governor’s office, said Ferris. “The argument that it was an unfunded mandate was put to bed,” he explained, by including a provision clarifying that municipalities wouldn’t have to spend more on complete streets projects than what was already allocated from state and federal funding. Since the governor’s office participated in the crafting of that language, explained Ferris, “we believe that the governor will sign this into law.”

In addition to support from Cuomo’s office, the complete streets bill was able to continue forward in the Senate despite the change Democratic to Republican control, thanks to support from the new chair of the transportation committee, Charles Fuschillo. “Senator Fuschillo picked up the reins on this issue from last year and pushed it over the top,” said Ferris.

Assuming that the complete streets bill is signed into law, Ferris said that AARP will next be looking into ensuring that there is sufficient funding for pedestrian and bike projects and the state DOT’s Safe Seniors program.

After a number of delays, CB 12 convened the special forum last Thursday night, with community members, advocates and city officials all participating. Now that the groups have met and discussed topics of interest, the normal public process between the community board and the Department of Transportation for developing new bike infrastructure and street safety projects may move ahead.

With the Hudson River Greenway serving as the central artery for bike traffic in the area, greenway issues were of top concern at the forum. Participants discussed the so-called lighthouse link, which would extend the greenway at water level past the George Washington Bridge, allowing pedestrians and cyclists to avoid the steep hill they must currently climb. They also brought up the entrance to the greenway at 181st Street, which lets off at a one-way highway on-ramp and forces cyclists exiting the greenway to walk their bikes along the sidewalk. The street used to be bi-directional, but one lane was eliminated and replaced with curb parking when the highway entrance re-opened last year.

Local advocates also raised the prospect of building the Dyckman greenway connector, a proposed separated bike lane that would connect the greenways along the Hudson and Harlem Rivers. The connector has so far been left out of DOT’s plans for Inwood but could get a big boost from CB 12 support.

Jonathan Rabinowitz, a member of the local advocacy group Bike Upper Manhattan, was at the meeting and filed the following report.

***

[The] bike lane forum held by Manhattan Community Board 12 was well attended by bicyclists and complete streets advocates. We heard from Hayes Lord of DOT’s Bicycle Program, John Mattera, the Parks Greenway planner, Aja Hazelhoff of Transportation Alternatives, Rich Conroy of Bike New York, Christine Berthet from the Transportation Committee of Manhattan CB 4 (Hell’s Kitchen), Tila Duhaime of the Upper West Side Streets Renaissance, and Brad Conover of Bike Upper Manhattan (my group).

Two of the board’s traffic & transportation committee members were absent, but three board members who spoke up, Gloria Vanterpool, Yosef Kalinsky, and Mitchell Glenn, were very positive about the forum. Gloria, who is the chairwoman of the Committee on the Concerns of the Aging, said that she had never learned to ride a bike but that she was impressed with the complete streets arguments and would support more bike lanes in Washington Heights and Inwood. Another T&T committee member, Edith Prentiss, an advocate for wheelchair users, pointed out that for changes in the streetscape to be successful, the changes would require local disabled residents to be retrained in the new traffic patterns.

The question of adding a bicycle facility to Riverside Drive between West 181st St and the Henry Hudson Parkway onramp was answered by the city thus: “We’re hoping to have some design resolution in the very near future.” Tila was the most eloquent of the several speakers who commented negatively on the current design, saying that she wondered why those eight people parking on Riverside Drive were so important that their spaces could block the installation of safe bicycle facilities for the thousands of cyclists who use the Hudson River Greenway.

John Mattera from Parks spoke about building a ramp from the current Greenway’s northern terminus at Riverside Drive just south of Dyckman Street down to Dyckman Street. That project, which covers a 60 foot drop in altitude, would need two hairpin turns for a safe ramp and cost $4 million to complete.

John also spoke about the new “Lighthouse Link Greenway,” which would initially extend south in Fort Washington Park from the Dyckman Marina for about a mile, not all the way to the Little Red Lighthouse at the foot of the George Washington Bridge. To connect this path to the Greenway at the lighthouse would cost about $15-16 million, the same cost as the new path between 84th and 91st Streets. This new path would have lights and stone benches as well as lookout points for river vistas.

The highlight of the evening, in my opinion, was Christine’s statement that “the bike lane that is the most friendly to your grandmother, to your children, is the protected bike lane.”

T&T Committee Chair Yosef Kalinsky said that there was a strong sentiment to making the streets safer, to connecting communities, and that this could be put into a resolution for the full board in September, at the next meeting of his committee.

One useful tidbit I learned from DOT: Sharrows require 27 foot wide streets; dedicated lanes require 30 foot wide streets, and “On-Street Bicycle Paths,” the current terminology for Grand-Street–type bike lanes, require 34 foot minimum width. Hayes didn’t use the “Class I, II, or III” terminology, which I had thought was confusing.

DOT's plan for 181st Street includes a part-time bus lane and pedestrian safety features, but it's less ambitious than other options the agency presented last year. Image: NYC DOT

With five bus lines, two subway stops, a busy commercial strip, the only entrance to the Hudson River Greenway for blocks, and major bridge crossings at both ends of the street, Washington Heights’ 181st Street is a tangle of cars, buses, bikes and pedestrians. For years, DOT has been looking to redesign the corridor entirely, with the goal of finding a way to serve all those different needs.

In a plan presented to the local community board last Monday [PDF], DOT finally came out with its proposal for the street. With a slew of pedestrian safety improvements and a bus-only lane designated for the evening rush hour, the plan should be a major improvement for the neighborhood, but like other recent redesigns on 34th Street and First and Second Avenues, it’s far less ambitious than what could have been.

As recently as last fall, DOT was considering a protected bus lane for this project. Local elected leadership seemed split. At a presentation on the project to Community Board 12, an aide to Denny Farrell conveyed the Assembly member’s opposition to a major reconfiguration, while local City Council member Ydanis Rodriguez seemed open to the ambitious reallocation of space, telling CB12, “We have to make a certain level of radical change in how traffic is organized in that area.” The changes on the table now are positive, but not radical improvements.

Currently, 181st Street has two travel lanes and a parking lane in each direction on the wider blocks east of Broadway, narrowing to a single travel lane and parking lane on the blocks west of Broadway. The proposed changes mostly focus on the eastern section, as no buses continue on to the narrower section.

Under the proposed design, pedestrians will be safer thanks to a curb extension at the intersection of 181st and Haven Avenue, leading pedestrian intervals where 181st meets Broadway and Fort Washington Avenue, and, if the community board wants them, pedestrian refuge islands at St. Nicholas Avenue. Longer-term plans to extend the sidewalks at St. Nicholas and Amsterdam Avenues would calm traffic further.

For bus riders, the curbside parking on the south side of 181st Street would be replaced with a dedicated eastbound bus lane from 3:00 p.m. to 7:00 p.m., improving reliability by clearing the way for Bronx-bound buses at the very beginning of their routes. On the block between Audobon and Amsterdam Avenues, which a DOT spokesperson said was where buses suffered the biggest delays from congestion, the bus lane would be in effect from 7:00 a.m. to 7:00 p.m.

The entire project is part of DOT’s Congested Corridors program, and the plan includes left-turn bays to help traffic move more smoothly. Curb parking will be replaced with loading zones during designated times, intended to minimize the rampant double parking along 181st. By keeping the through lanes clear, said the DOT spokesperson, these features will also keep buses moving smoothly.

Finally, the plan calls for a few new safety features on north/south streets intersecting 181st, including a southbound bike lane on Fort Washington between 183rd and 181st Streets and a traffic-calming center median on St. Nicholas between 183rd and 179th.

An option the DOT chose not to pursue would have given 181st Street New York City's first physically separated bus lanes.

That’s a fair number of changes to a stretch barely over half a mile long, but it’s much less than what was on the table in October. One option, for example, would have built New York City’s first physically separated bus lanes on 181st. With one in each direction and a raised bus stop mid-street, that plan would have provided one fewer traffic lane and one fewer parking lane than the current plan, but done much more for transit riders.

Another option was an approach that would have made 181st a real multi-modal street. With large sidewalk extensions on the whole corridor, a buffered bike lane and a bus lane, this discarded option would have redistributed space from drivers to every other user of the street.

In another rejected option, 181st Street would have become a true complete street, with extra room for pedestrians, cyclists and bus riders.

One reason DOT trimmed its sails was the decision to maintain two-way automobile traffic along 181st. In addition to Farrell’s aide, a former chair of CB 12 and several other local residents expressed opposition to a one-way street in October, and the DOT spokesperson confirmed that the department acceded to that request. Council Member Rodriguez did not respond to Streetsblog’s request to comment for this story.

There were also technical problems with the more ambitious options, he said. In the protected busway scenario, buses would have difficulty turning into a physically separated busway, the spokesperson said, while in the multi-modal proposal, cars cutting across the unprotected bus lane to park would slow buses. Given the success of offset bus lanes on First and Second Avenues, however, at least the second objection seems easily overcome.

A map of New York-area pedestrian fatalities. Because so many people in the region walk, pedestrian safety measures can prevent a large number of deaths and injuries. Image: Transportation for America

Despite streets that remain far too dangerous for walking — 3,485 pedestrians were killed in traffic crashes during the past decade in the New York metro area alone — efforts to pass a complete streets bill are still stalled in the state legislature.

The legislation, which would require all street projects that receive state and federal funding to accommodate the needs of everyone who uses the street, has passed the Senate Transportation Committee but hasn’t even been introduced in the Assembly yet. With less than a month left in the legislative session, a complete streets bill is going to need powerful supporters to clear the Albany gauntlet.

The Tri-State Transportation Campaign is urging complete streets supporters to go straight to the top: Governor Andrew Cuomo.

One of the most powerful letters to the governor comes from Sandy Vega. Vega’s daughter Brittany was killed last year while crossing Long Island’s Sunrise Highway, the second-deadliest road in the New York region. She wrote:

Dear Governor Cuomo,

I need your help. New York State needs a Complete Streets law, now, and I am requesting your support and advocacy to make sure this bill is passed before the legislature goes home.

New York has some of the most dangerous roads in the nation, and it is time to stop the carnage. In the fall of 2010, my daughter, Brittany Vega, a 14-year-old walking to school on Long Island, was struck and killed by a car while crossing the road. This particular road, Sunrise Highway, is a 6-lane, arterial road that bisects the central business and residential areas of our hometown in Wantagh. With no count-down clock, there was no way Brittany could tell how long she had to get across. With no pedestrian island in the roadway, she had no safe refuge. She made a guess, and it cost her life.

Complete Streets design principles assure that when roads are built or redesigned, they take into account the needs of all users of the roads, not just cars. Simple changes in road design—such as count-down clocks, better crosswalks, protected bike lanes, and traffic calming devices—can dramatically reduce the number of fatalities on our roads. Complete Streets are safe streets: streets that encourage economic development and assure our seniors can stay in their homes and walk to services, and that our children can make it safely to school. Complete Streets are also environmental streets—providing people with transportation choices that can help to cut down on the congestion and smog that are impacting our health and climate.

Following your lead, in March, advocates for the bill met with those who were concerned that it was an “unfunded mandate.” Both sides were able to come to an agreement and shake hands over new language that everyone was comfortable with. That new bill has been introduced in the Senate, with bi-partisan support, and is moving. However, it is my understanding that the Assembly is waiting for comments from your office before moving the bill in the Assembly.

I urge you to support and find a way to help pass the State Complete Streets bill (S5411) so that our future roads take into account the needs of all users—including users like my daughter.

Sincerely,

Sandi Vega

Complete streets provide safe spaces for all users, not just motorists. Photo: Streetswiki

Earlier this week, 12 senators, led by Tom Harkin (D-IA), introduced the Complete Streets Act of 2011 (S.1056), a companion to the House bill we reported on a few weeks back. The purpose of the bills is to push states and metropolitan planning organizations to fully consider incorporating pedestrian and bicycle safety measures when roads are built or reconstructed.

Like the House version, the Senate bill would require states and MPOs to craft and adhere to complete streets policies. It goes further than the House bill, however, in that it also requires agencies to consider cyclists, pedestrians, and transit when building roads with federal funds. Both bills have been weakened from a previous incarnation, however — they no longer carry penalties for noncompliance.

Complete streets are streets with safe places for everyone, whether they’re in a car, on foot, on a bicycle, or riding transit. Some “street treatments” that are used to make streets more complete are sidewalks, bike lanes, special bus lanes, comfortable and accessible public transportation stops, frequent and safe crossing opportunities, median islands, accessible pedestrian signals, curb extensions, narrower travel lanes, and roundabouts, just to name a few.

Twenty-five states and more than 200 local jurisdictions have adopted Complete Streets policies. Every state except Maine, Nevada, Alaska and South Dakota has at least one city or town that has enacted a Complete Streets policy, according to a recent report [PDF]. According to the National Complete Streets Coalition:

The power of the Complete Streets movement is that it fundamentally redefines what a street is intended to do, what goals a transportation agency is going to meet, and how the community will spend its transportation money. It breaks down the traditional separation of “highways,” “transit,” and “biking/walking,” and instead focuses on the desired outcome of a transportation system that supports safe use of the roadway for everyone, by whatever means they are traveling.

The importance of the legislation is underscored by this week’s release of “Dangerous by Design,” a report by Transportation for America on pedestrian fatalities caused, many times, by streets designed without consideration for people on foot.

Bill sponsor Tom Harkin understands the connection between autocentric street design and health and safety. “In many places across the country, there is a complete lack of sidewalks and bike lanes,” said Sen. Harkin in a statement upon release of the legislation. “This not only makes our roadways more dangerous for pedestrians, it discourages people from being more active by walking or riding a bike.”

While complete streets advocates were able to get a Republican co-sponsor, Steve LaTourette, in the House, they had no such luck in the Senate. The only non-Democrat among the 12 co-sponsors is Independent Bernie Sanders of Vermont.

However, Republicans at the state and local level have supported such legislation, as do a wide range of organizations that have signed on. Here’s a list of supporters:

• AARP
• Alliance for Biking and Walking
• America Bikes
• America Walks
• American Association for Health Education
• American Planning Association
• American Public Health Association
• American Public Transportation Association
• Association of Pedestrian and Bicycle Professionals
• Bicycle Transportation Alliance
• Defeat Diabetes Foundation
• League of American Bicyclists
• NARP
• National Association of Area Agencies on Aging
• National Association of Realtors
• National Center for Walking and Biking
• National Complete Streets Coalition
• Paralyzed Veterans of America
• Rails-to-Trails Conservancy
• Safe Routes to School National Partnership
• Sierra Club
• Smart Growth America
• Transportation Choices Coalition
• Transportation for America
• Trust for America’s Health
• YMCA of the USA

A map of New York-area pedestrian fatalities. Because so many people in the region walk, pedestrian safety measures can prevent a large number of deaths and injuries. Image: Transportation for America

Compared to other American regions, the New York metro area is, by and large, a safe place to walk. Only two large metros, Boston and Cleveland, perform better on Transportation for America’s pedestrian danger index, as described in the new report, “Dangerous By Design,” which Tanya covered earlier today on Streetsblog Capitol Hill.

The index measures how likely someone is to be killed while walking, given the total number of pedestrian fatalities and the amount people walk. New York and its suburbs are sufficiently compact to make walking a common activity, and the region has enough pedestrian infrastructure to keep people relatively safe as they do it.

But New York isn’t doing so well when it comes to the total number of people killed while walking. With an average of 1.9 pedestrians per 100,000 residents killed in crashes each year, the region ranks 13th worst in the nation, with only slightly fewer pedestrian fatalities per capita than Houston. Between 2000 and 2009, 3,485 pedestrians in the New York area pedestrians were killed in traffic crashes.

So while New York’s transit-oriented transportation system makes the area much safer than the typical American region, the “Dangerous By Design” numbers should still be a wake-up call: With so many pedestrians on the street, New York and its suburbs need to be that much safer for people on foot.

One of Transportation for America’s recommendations is particularly timely for the New York region: passage of complete streets policies. A proposed complete streets law for New York, which would have required projects with state and federal funding to be designed with all users in mind, passed the State Senate last year but died in the Assembly. An updated version of the bill is in front of the legislature right now, but needs a push in both houses if it is to become law.

Assembly Speaker Sheldon Silver could make a slew of transportation bills move through his chamber or let them languish as in years past. Photo: Daily News

This year’s legislative session is rapidly coming to a close in Albany. With the state legislature wrapping up its regularly scheduled official business on June 20, the Capitol is entering a period of intense activity as legislators and lobbyists make a final push for their priorities.

Albany has some big items on its agenda this month: rent regulations, a property tax cap, ethics reform, and gay marriage. Somewhat below the radar, the push is on for a number of street safety and sustainable transportation priorities as well. Time is of the essence, as advocacy momentum built up over the year dissipates after the session ends. Bills that falter this time around will have to start over again after the legislature reconvenes in January.

If support gels for any of the following bills, the legislature can act extremely quickly to turn them into law. That’s especially true in the Assembly, where Speaker Sheldon Silver controls a large majority and where most of this legislation is currently stalled or has died in past sessions.

Complete Streets

Complete streets legislation would require planners to consider the needs of all road users when designing a road receiving state and federal funding. Last year, it passed the State Senate but stalled out in the Assembly.

After talking with the legislation’s opponents, complete streets supporters made some revisions to the language, and an updated version of the bill is headed to the Senate Transportation Committee today, said Nadine Lemmon, the Tri-State Transportation Campaign’s Albany legislative advocate. As now written, the complete streets bill would cover the large set of projects that already need to conduct extensive reviews as part of the federal approval process, which involves filling out thick binders of paperwork. “We’re targeting projects that already have to do a lot of review and we’re just adding two pages to their world,” said Lemmon.

Purely local projects wouldn’t be covered, but Lemmon argued that as towns or counties prepare complete streets plans on some projects, they’d grow more familiar with the concept, leading to what she called a “trickle down effect.”

In the Senate, the complete streets bill is sponsored by both Charles Fuschillo and Martin Dilan, the chair and ranking member of the Transportation Committee, respectively, along with twelve other senators. In the Assembly, however, the companion legislation hasn’t been introduced yet. That said, Lemmon reported that preliminary conversations about the bill with both the governor’s staff and state DOT officials have been encouraging.

Automated Enforcement for Speeding and Red Lights

Using automated cameras to enforce the speed limit would save lives, but local governments need state approval to do so. Legislation to allow New York City to install such cameras was introduced in the Assembly by Manhattan rep Deborah Glick last week, said Transportation Alternatives State Policy Director Lindsey Lusher Shute. The bill is now in front of the transportation committee. Companion legislation hasn’t been introduced yet in the Senate, she said, though she thinks that Brooklyn Republican Marty Golden may sponsor it.

Though the bill currently has 12 co-sponsors, “it’s going to take quite a few more sponsors and attention by the transportation committee to move,” said Lusher Shute, especially “given the reluctance of the chair to adopt more automated enforcement legislation.” Transportation Committee chair David Gantt killed legislation to allow bus lane enforcement cameras in 2008. Concluded Lusher Shute, “It’s not as close as we’d like.”

Another Golden-sponsored bill, to allow New York City to increase the number of life-saving red light cameras in use from 150 to 300, has moved quickly through the Senate. It passed through committee there and now only awaits a floor vote. Again, however, the Assembly version is stuck in the transportation committee.

Transit Funding Lockbox

The broad array of groups supporting legislation to make it harder for Albany to steal dedicated transit funds is headed up to the Capitol today, said Lusher Shute. The coalition includes transit advocates, labor and business leaders.

The bill is currently in front of the Assembly Ways and Means Committee and Senate Finance Committee. Assembly sponsor Jim Brennan urged supporters to contact Ways and Means chair Denny Farrell at a press conference last week.

Lusher Shute sounded optimistic about the lockbox’s chances. “There are tons of groups behind it,” she said, and legislators’ memories of recent fare hikes and service cuts are fresh. “It’s very possible that we could move that this session.”

Crossover Mirrors

An effort to require large trucks on New York City streets to be equipped with mirrors that enable drivers to see pedestrians in the blind spot in front of the cab got a big boost last week, in the form of a mayoral press conference supporting the bill. By standing with the bill’s sponsors, Golden and Brooklyn Assembly Member Joan Millman, Mayor Bloomberg showed that the legislation is a top priority for the city.

Yesterday, the bill passed the State Senate, where it was sponsored by Golden. In the Assembly, the bill is still in front of the transportation committee, but the Daily News reports that it could clear the whole chamber as soon as tomorrow.

Over the last four years, New York City has seen a transportation renaissance on its streets, striking a better balance by providing more space for walking, biking, and transit.

As with any departure from the status quo, it can take a while for everyone to grow accustomed to the changes. So Streetfilms decided to look at three of NYC’s most recent re-designs — Columbus Avenue, First and Second Avenues, and Prospect Park West — and show how pedestrians, cyclists, and drivers benefit from safer, calmer streets. We talked to transportation engineers with decades of experience, elected leaders, community board members, people on the street, and business owners to get their take on the new configurations.

The truth is, no matter how hard some media outlets try to spin it otherwise, these new street safety projects have broad community support. And while the story of these changes often gets simplified in the press, the fact is that the benefits of the redesigns go far beyond cycling. A street with a protected bike lane also has less speeding, shorter pedestrian crossings, less lane-shifting and more predictable movements for drivers, and the opportunity to add more trees and plantings. Injuries to pedestrians, cyclists, drivers, and car passengers drop wherever the new designs go in. And on the East Side, these improvements have been paired with dedicated bus-only lanes with camera enforcement, making service more convenient and attractive for thousands of bus riders.

At 11 minutes, this is one of our longest Streetfilms. We cover a lot of ground here, and we hope it’s illuminating no matter what side of the issue you fall on.

A complete street accommodates all road users, not just motorists. Photo: Urban Milwaukee

The bill mandates the consideration of the “safety and convenience” of all users in “all phases of project planning and development. State DOTs and metropolitan planning organizations would have to take “pedestrians, bicyclists, public transit users, children, older individuals, individuals with disabilities, motorists, and freight vehicles” into account when developing transportation projects.

Rep. Matsui said in a statement:

Especially at a time when gas prices are putting enormous pressure on the pocketbooks of American consumers, more and more people are looking for alternatives to driving. However, far too often, our roads are designed with one thing in mind – trying to move vehicle traffic as quickly as possible. The risks of such design are apparent in the number of pedestrian and bicyclist deaths and injuries we see every year, and often discourage more people from considering other transportation methods. By completing our streets, we can open up our roadways to pedestrians and cyclists – helping to ease congestion and providing an alternative to gas powered vehicles. In doing so, we take strides to fight air pollution and global warming and improve our public health and safety.

LaTourette’s support for complete streets came as a result of advocates flooding his office with complaints after he ridiculed bicycling as a mode of transportation and a jobs engine in a committee hearing last year. Perhaps if he’d never made those disparaging remarks he would never have discovered the groundswell of support for active transportation and wouldn’t be the complete streets champion he is today.

Rep. Steve LaTourette (R-OH) co-sponsored the bill. Photo: Politico/John Shinkle

The bill would require that states and metropolitan planning organizations craft and adhere to a complete streets policy, with guidance from the USDOT, that would apply to all federally funded projects. States or MPOs would need senior-level approval and documentation to get an exemption. It doesn’t apply to existing roads or new projects whose planning is already well underway.

The bill also calls on the Architectural and Transportation Barriers Compliance Board to publish new accessibility standards for pedestrian facilities.

A similar bill was introduced in 2009 with stronger penalties, modeled on seat belt provisions, for non-compliance. Advocates got some pushback on that and let them go this time around.

The Safe and Complete Streets Act is a “marker” bill, meaning it’s not expected to pass as a standalone bill. “It gives us an opportunity to talk about what we want to see in the final authorization bill,” said Barbara McCann of the National Complete Streets Coalition.

The bill’s introduction comes just a week after the Coalition released its report on complete streets policies from around the country. “It shows how broad and deep the complete streets movement has become,” said McCann. “These communities need federal investments, also, to take into account the needs of all users. This isn’t something coming down from the top, it’s coming up from the bottom.”

Reps. Matsui and LaTourette are circulating a “Dear Colleague” letter [PDF], urging other members of Congress to sign on to the bill. “As Congress moves to update the nation’s transportation priorities,” they wrote, “it is essential that we make policy changes to ensure our transportation investments create streets and roads that are safe for everyone who uses them whether they are driving, walking, riding a bicycle, or getting on a bus.” Advocates can send the letter to their representatives and ask them to co-sponsor the bill.

Complete streets policy adoption nationwide. Image: National Complete Streets Coalition

With adoptions in more than 200 localities and 23 states, complete streets policies have nearly doubled in number every year over the last three, according to a new report by the National Complete Streets Coalition.

Of course, all policies aren’t created equal, and the coalition separates the strongest — those that can serve as models for upcoming states and municipalities — from the less ambitious. Its top ten, representing cities, counties and states of varying sizes and geographic regions, appears after the jump.

These jurisdictions were recognized based on their adherence to a set of best practices. Outstanding policies were credited for aiming to create integrated networks for a variety of modes. They also received credit for demonstrating a clear intent to cover all roads. In addition, standouts included a set of “next steps” for implementing their vision, among other criteria.

“Recent polls show that voters’ top priority for infrastructure investments are safer streets for our communities and children,” writes Barbara McCann, coalition executive director. Policies recognized by the group were adopted by:

• New Jersey Department of Transportation
• Louisiana Department of Transportation
• State of Minnesota
• State of Connecticut
• Mid-Ohio Regional Planning Commission (Columbus)
• Bloomington/Monroe County, IN Metropolitan Planning Organization
• Hennepin County, MN
• Lee County, FL
• Salt Lake County, UT
• Crystal City, MO
• Roanoke, VA
• Missoula, MT
• Herculaneum, MO
• New Haven, CT
• Tacoma, WA

The authors are careful to note that their rankings are based only on the quality of the policy, and not on successful implementation. The coalition will examine that issue in an upcoming report.

But last year, US DOT gave that requirement some teeth, issuing a directive specifying that “due consideration” should include “the presumption that bicyclists and pedestrians will be accommodated” in project designs paid for with federal government dollars.

AASHTO's John Horsley has complained that a new US DOT directive would make it too hard for state DOTs to ignore the needs of cyclists and pedestrians. Photo: Flickr, Commission for Environmental Cooperation

Well, surprise! State DOTs aren’t happy about it. In a supplement [PDF] to a letter [PDF] to US DOT yesterday, John Horsley, executive director of the Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials, urged federal officials to reconsider the requirement. “This regulation presents an undue burden on states to justify exceptional circumstances when not including provisions for bicyclists and pedestrians in a project,” he said.

Someone should tell Horsley — that was sort of the point. US DOT is trying to make it hard for state DOTs — using money from both taxpayers who drive and those who don’t — to completely ignore the needs of non-drivers.

In its directive, USDOT states that walking and bicycling should be considered equal to other modes.

“The establishment of well-connected walking and bicycling networks is an important component for livable communities, and their design should be a part of Federal-aid project developments,” said Transportation Secretary Ray LaHood. “Transportation programs and facilities should accommodate people of all ages and abilities, including people too young to drive, people who cannot drive, and people who choose not to drive.”

When asked about AASHTO’s objection to the new rule, spokeman Lloyd Brown said it was part of a list of recommendations that came from the organization’s members: state DOTs.

(Thanks to the Fairfax Advocates for Better Bicycling Blog for alerting us to this story.)

Complete streets legislation remains a top priority for street safety advocates in Albany, and PBS ran a nice feature last week on the issue. It starts at the 4:45 minute mark in this clip.

The program, New York NOW, has also made complete streets the subject of their weekly poll, and the two choices lay out the current terms of the debate pretty bluntly. Either complete streets are “necessary,” or they are “unfunded mandates.”

On one side are advocates like AARP, who point to the fact that a motor vehicle driver kills a pedestrian on Long Island’s streets once a week and once every ten days in the five largest upstate counties. On the other, the New York State Association of Counties continues to make complaints about the legislation that mostly serve to show they haven’t read it.

The poll is still open as of this afternoon if you’d like to cast your vote.

DOT's new interactive map of Jackson Heights, displaying the number of traffic crashes and pedestrian volumes at certain intersections.

NYC DOT’s Jackson Heights Transportation Study already has some of the snazziest online resources of any department project, but to get the full scoop on the changes due for the neighborhood, head over to one of the two public meetings being held tomorrow.

DOT says that the plan, developed at the request of neighborhood groups, will include improvements targeted at easing congestion, improving pedestrian and bike access, speeding bus service, making the streets safer, adding badly needed community space and tackling the thorny issues of parking and deliveries. The scope of that list suggests an exciting project.

Tomorrow’s meetings will offer a chance to sit down with DOT officials and other community members, work through the plans and offer feedback. The two sessions will be held from 10 a.m. to noon and 1 p.m. to 3 p.m. at P.S. 69, 77-02 37th Avenue (between 77th and 78th Street).

Elizabethtown, in the Adirondacks' Essex County, passed a complete streets policy in October. Photo: Tri-State Transportation Campaign.

Last year’s legislative session in Albany included a number of victories for supporters of smart growth and safer streets, including the passage of the Smart Growth Public Infrastructure Policy Act, Hayley and Diego’s Law, and bus lane camera enforcement for New York City. But the complete streets bill, which was passed by the State Senate and made it through the Assembly’s transportation committee, didn’t cross the finish line before the end of the session.

The bill has already been reintroduced by State Senator Martin Dilan in the current session, but it’s meeting some new opposition. Yesterday, the transportation committee of the New York State Association of Counties passed a resolution [PDF] urging the legislature to oppose the complete streets bill. The full association votes tomorrow.

The need for streets that are designed to protect all users is clear. In the five largest upstate counties, a pedestrian is killed by a car every ten days, according to the Tri-State Transportation Campaign and AARP. On Long Island, a pedestrian is killed once a week and in New York City, once every two and a half days. A disproportionate number of the victims are senior citizens.

The NYSAC resolution doesn’t directly deny the need for safer streets. But the committee argued that complete streets shouldn’t be a priority in a time of strained budgets and that the “diversion of effort and funding as mandated by complete streets proposals would further the deterioration of our infrastructure.” The resolution recommends that elected officials oppose the complete streets legislation.

The 62 counties represented by NYSAC represent a political force legislators are sure to notice. But as a letter to the transportation committee from Tri-State and AARP shows, this resolution doesn’t deserve to be taken seriously. Most of its objections stem from misreadings of the relatively simple complete streets bill.

For example, the NYSAC resolution calls for limiting the complete streets bill to dense areas and large projects, but those limits are already in the bill. As written, S 1332 only covers projects “that are eligible for both federal and state funding and are subject to Department of Transportation oversight,” a category that only covers major projects. Resurfacing and maintenance are also exempt.

Moreover, if it is determined that “the cost would be disproportionate to the need as determined by factors including, but not limited to, the following: land use context; current and project traffic volumes including non-motorized traffic; and population density,” a project would be exempt.

The bill’s authors have already responded to NYSAC’s critiques. NYSAC just seems not to have noticed.

The counties also misunderstand what “complete streets” entail. Their resolution warns that it might sometimes be physically impossible to “provide such enhancements as widening the size of the roadway to accommodate pedestrians and bikers on both sides.”

Of course, you don’t make a complete street by taking an existing road and slapping on two sidewalks and two bike lanes. You might find the space for a sidewalk by narrowing travel lanes to calm traffic. And as the National Complete Streets Coalition’s slideshow highlights, there’s no one kind of complete street. This residential street, for example, only has one sidewalk and asks cyclists to share the slow-moving, low-traffic street with motorists.

Some local governments are already passing their own complete streets policies, understanding that they can save lives, promote sustainable and active transportation, and lighten the loads that the state’s roads must bear. It’s too bad that rather than join them, the state Association of Counties is fighting against safety.