Download - Bicycle Pedestrian Advisory Committee 2009

8/7/2019 Bicycle Pedestrian Advisory Committee 2009

1/18

UNIVERSITY OF NEW ORLEANS

State Project No. 737-99-0929

July 2009 New Orleans, Louisiana

A Project of the

Regional Planning Commission and the

Louisiana Department of Transportation and

Development

Bicycle Pedestrian

Advisory CommitteeInformation, Examples and Recommendations for the

New Orleans Metro olitan Area


2/18

StateProjectNo.737990929

FundingforthisevaluationwasprovidedbytheLouisianaDepartmentof

TransportationandDevelopmentHighwaySafetyDepartmentthrougha

grant to the Regional Planning Commission for Jefferson, Orleans,

Plaquemines,St.BernardandSt.TammanyParishesfortheGreaterNew

Orleans Pedestrian and Bicycle Program. The evaluation was

accomplished by theUniversityofNewOrleans Pedestrian andBicycle

Resource Initiative under the auspices of the New Orleans Regional

PlanningCommission.


3/18

TableofContents

Page

Introduction................................................................................................ 1

OverviewofAdvisoryCommitteeStructure......................................... 1

Structure......................................................................................... 1

Scale................................................................................................ 1

MeetingFrequencyandNumberofMembers............................... 1

CommitteeSummaries

Oakland,California................................................................................ 2

Austin,Texas......................................................................................... 3

PugetSoundRegion,Washington........................................................ 4

StateofMaryland................................................................................. 4

SanFrancisco......................................................................................... 5

KansasCity ........................................................................................... 6

Recommendations..................................................................................... 6

InformationResources............................................................................... 9


4/18

Introduction

Thisdocument is anoverviewof keybicycle/pedestrianadvisory committees throughout the

country. Fivewellcrafted exampleswere selected toprovide anoverviewof thediversityof

committee structures and scales. The committees examined are Austin, California East Bay

Region,Oakland,KansasCityRegion,andPugetSoundRegion.

Thereport isstructured into3sections.First,anoverviewof thestructuresandscalesof the

surveyed committees is provided. The next section provides detailed profiles of the

communities to add depth to how they operate. Finally, a suggested structure for the RPC

AdvisoryCommitteeisproposed.

OverviewofAdvisoryCommitteeStructures

Structure There are two distinct structuralmodels of organization used by the surveyed

committees:

Model1AppointedModelCommittee members are typically appointed by a transit or planning

departmentonabasisoftechnicalexpertise.

Meetingsareheldonceamonthinacityhallorsimilarlypublicchamber,and

areopentothepublic.

The committees of Oakland, Seattle, and Kansas City are examples of this

model.

Model2CitizenParticipationmodelComposed of ordinary citizens interested in promoting alternative

transportationandmakingconditionsbetterbicyclistsandpedestrians.

Typicallymeetonceamonthandappearbeforethecitycouncilwhenspecific

issuesareupforvote.

AustinandtheSanFranciscoEastBayareexamplesofthismodel.

Scale Advisorycommitteesoccuronbothacitywideandregionalscale.Theselectedscalefor

the committee isusuallydeterminedbasedon the typeoforganization that isorganizing the

committee. Regional organizations usually focus on a broad geographic representation of

members. City organizations tend to pullmembers fromwithin their specific boundaries. In

someregions,thereisamixofbothcitybasedandregionalcommitteesthatshareinformation

andworktogetheronissuesdependingonthescaleofaparticularprojectorissue.TheOakland

andCaliforniaEastBayRegionareexamplesofthisoverlapincommitteestructures.

Meeting Frequency and Number of Members Advisory committees generally meet every

month to twomonths. This allows them to keep tabson keydevelopments. Thenumberof


5/18

BICYCLEANDPEDESTRIANADVISORYCOMMITTEERECOMMENDATIONS FORTHENEWORLEANS

METROPOLITANAREA

2 | P a g e

committeemembersinsurveyedorganizationsvariesfrom9to21.Theredoesnotappeartobe

acleardecisionframeworkforthenumberofmembers.

KeycharacteristicsofthesurveyedcommitteesarecompiledinTableOnebelow.

TableOne:CharacteristicsofSurveyedCitiesandRegions

Organizationname Scaleof

Focus

Modeltype #offull

standing

members

Meeting

Frequency

AUSTIN BicycleAdvisory

Council(BAC)

Citywide Citizen

based

9 1/mo

OAKLAND PedestrianBicycle

AdvisoryCommittee

(PBAC)

Citywide Appointed 9 1/mo

PUGETSOUND Bicycle/Pedestrian

AdvisoryCommittee

(BPAC)

Regional Appointed 17 1/mo

CALIFORNIA

EASTBAY

REGION

EastBayBicycle

Coalition

Regional Citizen

based

N/A 1/mo

KANSASCITY

REGION

BicyclePedestrian

AdvisoryCommittee

Regional Appointed 21 Onceevery

twomonths

MARYLAND MarylandBicycleand

PedestrianAdvisory

Committee(MBPAC)

Regional No.1 21 Onceevery

twomonths

CommitteeSummaries

Oakland,CATheCityofOaklandBicycle/PedestrianAdvisoryCommittee(BPAC)

TheCityofOaklandsBicycle/PedestrianAdvisoryCommitteewasestablishedin1995.Itsstated

goalistoensuresensitivitytobicycleandpedestrianissuesinthedesignandimplementation

ofallpublicworksprojectswhich impactbicyclesandpedestrians.This task isaccomplished

withtheassistanceofoutsidevolunteersandresourceswheneverpossible.

TheOaklandBPAChas9membersand ismainlycomposedof representatives fromplanning,

lawenforcement,andotherrelevantagencies.ThecommitteemeetsonceamonthatCityHall.

Themeetingsareopentothepublic.

TheCityofOaklandBPACsdutiesincludethefollowing:

ReviewofthetransportationelementofOaklandsGeneralPlan.Goalistocreateabike/pedestriansubelementtothetransportationsectionoftheGeneralPlan.


6/18


METROPOLITANAREA

3 | P a g e

Reviewofexistingconditions.Reviewandclassifybicycleandpedestrianlanesandroutes, identifyhazardsand impediments,andrecommend locationsand typesof

bicycleparking.

Reviewofroadandconstructionprojects.Reviewupcomingprojectsandassessthefeasibilityofincorporatingbicycleandpedestrianfacilities.

Recommend project development and funding. Target funding sources andrecommendcapitalimprovements.

Reviewissuesrelatedtoenforcement. Provideinputtothepolicedepartmentonbicycleandpedestrianissues.

Participate ineducationalefforts.Reachout toschoolsandcommunityprogramspromotingbicyclesafety.

Legislation.Analyzeimpendinglegislationthatwillaffectbicyclistsandpedestrians.

Austin,TXBicycleAdvisoryCouncil(BAC)

Thiscitizenorganization,startedinthemid1990s,consistsof9fullstandingmembersand10

alternates.Representativesareselectedbothgeographicallyandbasedoninclusionofkeyuser

groupswithatleastonefullstandingmemberrepresentingeachofthefollowinggroups:

SouthAustin. CentralAustin. NorthAustin. Thecompetitivebicyclingcommunity. Therecreationalbicyclingcommunity. Theutilitarianbicyclingcommunity.

ThecommitteemeetsonceamonthwiththecitysDepartmentofPublicWorksBicycleand

PedestrianProgramstafffordiscussionandresolutionofbicyclefacilityissues.

AlladultAustinresidentsareeligibleformembership.Amembershipsubcommitteewas

establishedtoreviewmembershipcredentialsandmakerecommendations.Membersare

obligedtoserveatwoyearterm.Threeconsecutiveabsencesfrommeetingsresultsina

memberstermination.

Thepurposeoftheorganizationasoutlinedintheircharterisasfollows:

Section

1:

Bikeway

Policy

Reviewandmake recommendationsonplanningdocumentspreparedbyCity

departmentsandotherjurisdictionsaffectingtheuseofthebicycle.Theseshall

include but are not limited to the Comprehensive Plan, Arterial Streets

Classification Policy, Neighborhood Plans, areawide Development Plans, and

siteplans/subdivisionapplications forprivatedevelopment.Reviewandmake

recommendations regarding funding priorities for the Bicycle and Pedestrian

ProgramactivitiesandCapitalImprovementProjectsastheyrelatetobicycling.


7/18


METROPOLITANAREA

4 | P a g e

Provide relevant bicycle information and recommendations to the Urban

TransportationCommission,onaregularbasis.

Section2:BikewayImplementationReview and make recommendations on Capital Improvement Projects

developedbyCitydepartmentsandoutsideagencies toensure thatadequate

considerationisgiventobicycles.Reviewandmakerecommendationsregarding

Bikeway Signing and ImprovementPlans.AdviseDepartmentofPublicWorks

staffon issuesrelatedtopublic involvement inBikeway improvementprojects

withthegoalofdevelopingaconsensusamongtheaffectedpublic.

Section3:EducationandEnforcementAdviseCitystaffonissuesrelatedtopromotingbicyclesafetyandeducation.

Section4:CitizenInputEncouragecitizenparticipation in identifyingproblemareas,reviewingexisting

facilities,andplanningandimplementingofnewprojectsandprograms.

Section5:AdvisetootherJurisdictions/EntitiesReviewandmakerecommendationsonplanningdocumentspreparedbyother

jurisdictionsentities (i.e.TravisCounty,CAMPO,etc.)affecting theuseof the

bicycleasatransportationandrecreationalmode.

PugetSoundRegion,WashingtonBicycle/PedestrianAdvisoryCommittee(BPAC)

TheBPACadvisestheRegionalCouncilstaffonvariouspedestrianandbicyclerelatedissues.The

committeemeetsonceamonth;themeetingsareopentothepublic;andthemeetingagendas

arepostedonline.Thecommitteeprovidesinputonthefollowingtopics:

Bestpracticesfordevelopingbicycleandpedestrianfriendlycommunities. Designguidelinesforregionalgrowthcentersandtransitstationareas. Planimplementationandperformancemonitoring. Methodologiesformeasuringbicycleandpedestriandemand. Outreachandeducationonthevalueandbenefitsofnonmotorizedtransportation. TransportationImprovementProgram(TIP)projectselectionpolicyframework. EnhancementsProgramprojectselectionpolicyframework.Comprehensive

plan

certification

and

review

process.

StateofMarylandMarylandBicycleandPedestrianAdvisoryCommittee

TheMarylandBicycleandPedestrianAdvisoryCommittee(MBPAC)wasestablishedin1991and

advisestheMarylandstategovernmentonissuesdirectlyrelatedtopedestrianandbicycle

issues.Thecommitteeconsistsof21memberswhoareappointedbythegovernor,andare

representativeofvariousregionsandspecificinterestgroups.Thefollowingstateagenciesare

representedonthecommittee:


8/18


METROPOLITANAREA

5 | P a g e

MarylandDepartmentofBusinessandEconomicDevelopment MarylandDepartmentofDisabilities MarylandDepartmentofHealthandMentalHygiene MarylandDepartmentofNaturalResources MarylandDepartmentofPlanning MarylandDepartmentofTransportation MarylandStateDepartmentofEducation MarylandStatePolice

ThefullMBPACmeetsonabimonthlybasis,whilespecialsubcommitteesmeetonanas

neededbasis.Theorganizationcurrentlyhasfoursubcommittees,ofwhicheachmemberis

assignedtoatleastone:

CommutingandTransportationPrimarilyresponsibleforadvisingMDOTontheMasterBicycleandPedestrianPlananditsrelationshiptolocalefforts.

EducationandAwarenessPromotesactivities,programsandpoliciesthatfosterbicycleandpedestriansafetyeducationacrossallagegroups;alsopromotesgreater

awarenessofthemissionandworkoftheMBPAC.

LegislativeandGovernmentAffairsPrimarilyresponsibleforreviewingandcoordinatinginformationconcerninglegislationrelatedtoMBPACissuesandprograms;

alsoresponsibleforfacilitatinganddevelopingstrongrelationshipswithlocalofficials.

TourismandProductDevelopmentPrimarilyresponsibleforpromotingandprotectingMaryland'soffroadtrailsystemwhilesupportingMarylandStateagencies,pr

ovidingguidanceonprogramstrategiesthatpromoteMaryland'strailsandtourismreso

urces.

SanFranciscoRegionsEastBay,CaliforniaEastBayBicycleCoalition

The EBBC is a nonprofit citizen organization that was founded in 1972. It offers a paid

membership, with benefits that include discounts to certain bicycle shops and a monthly

newsletter.Theorganization isactive inavarietyofways,withspecificgoals that include the

following:

Findingcommunityliaisonsforall33citiesthatEBBCrepresents. Promotingbicycleadvisorycommittees. CoordinatingtheannualBiketoWorkDayintheEastBay. Bicycleaccessonallroads,atallfacilities,andonalltransitforbothsidesofthehills. ImprovingBARTaccessandparking. Obtainingsafeandconvenientbicycleparkingindowntownareasandotherkeydestinations.

Watchdogthespendingoftransportationdollars. EachyearEBBCsupportslegislationtopromotebicyclingandadoptsspecificcampaignstoclosegapsandimproveaccess.


9/18


METROPOLITANAREA

6 | P a g e

KansasCityRegion,Kansas&MissouriBicyclePedestrianAdvisoryCommittee

The metropolitan planning organization of Kansas City (MARC) established an advisory

committee tooversee the implementationof theirLongRangeTransportationPlan.Meetingsareheldonceamonthandopen to thepublic.Meetingminutesareheldonline.Committee

members are drawn from several categories: local cities within the region, FHWA

representatives, stateDOTs, and local advocacy,public health, and police organizations. The

committeecurrentlyhas21members.

Recommendations

The following recommendations were identified by reviewing the organizational

structureofBicyclePedestrianAdvisoryCommitteesacrossthecountryandevaluating

thespecificneedsoftheRPC.Theserecommendationsparticularlydrawontheexample

ofthePugetSoundBPAC,whoseresourcesandmethodsaretransparentandpublicly

available.Representativesfromtheorganizationwerepatientandgenerousenoughto

offerinsightstothePBRIoverthecourseofdraftingthisdocument.

Thecommitteeshouldberegionalinscope.GiventheRPCsmandatetoservethe

metroregion,aregionalcommitteestructureisrecommended.Thecommitteeshould

includeallmetropolitanparishesservedbytheRPCinthekeyRPCdecisionsrelatedto

activetransportation.

Committee members should be broadly representative and selected through an

application process. Committee members should represent the metropolitan

communitybothgeographicallyand intermsofkeyusersegments.Thereshouldbea

representativeforallparishesservedbytheRPC.Thereshouldberepresentativesfrom

key user groups includingwalking and biking advocates, transitusers, and other key

active transportation representatives. There should be representatives from the

healthcare community aswell as other relevant agencies, such as law enforcement.

Members should be selected through an application process. This helps to build

commitmentandencouragesengagedrepresentativestoparticipate.

Memberscouldincluderepresentativesfrom:

DepartmentofTransportation

Bicycleandwalkingadvocatecommunity(MetroBicycle

Coalition,etc)

RPC

RTA,JPTA,SBT

Publichealthandsafetycommunity

Parishandcitygovernments


10/18


METROPOLITANAREA

7 | P a g e

Thecommitteeshouldaddressbicycle/pedestrianissuesrelatedtotheTIP.ThePuget

Soundareahasawebsite(http://www.psrc.org/projects/tip/index.htm)thatidentifiesallprojectsreceivingTIPfundingandhowmuchtheyarereceiving.Thewebsitealso

outlineseligibilityforTIPfundingindetail.Asimilarwebsiteisrecommendedforthe

NewOrleansregion. KeyprojectswithintheTIPwithbicycle/pedestriansignificance

maybeidentifiedthatneedgreaterattention.Inaddition,completestreetspoliciesthat

impactthebroaderTipprojectsuiteshouldbeconsidered.

The committee should contain 15 to 20members. The Puget Sound BPAC has 17

members; Kansas Citys regional committee has 21. Citywide organizations average

around9.

Subcommitteesshouldbeestablishedasneeded.Somesubcommitteestoconsider

wouldbe:

SpecificParishsubcommitteestofocusondetailedneedswithintheparishes.

Bicycleandpedestrianoutreachandeducation,whichwouldreachouttoyoung

bicyclistsatschooland inafterschoolprogramstoensurethatbicyclesafety is

learnedandpracticedearlyon.

Commuterneeds,whichwouldaddress issuesrelatedtobicyclecommuters in

theregion.

Tourism development,whichwould assist inmeeting bicycle demand in the

touristcommunityandfacilitatingbicyclingforthoseunfamiliarwiththearea.

Meetingsshouldbeheldatleastbimonthly.Bimonthlymeetingsshouldbefrequent

enoughsolongasspecializedsubcommitteescontinuetomeetasneeded.

Meetingsshouldbeopentothepublicandinformationdiscussedthereinshouldbe

madeeasilyaccessible.Meetingsshouldbeheldinapublicforumthatisconveniently

accessibletothepublic.Minutesshouldbetakenandpostedonline.

The New Jersey Bicycle and Pedestrian Resource Center, Alan M. Voorhees

TransportationCenter (VTC),RutgersUniversityconductedanevaluationof statewide

bicycle and pedestrian advisory groups and published their findings and

recommendationsinthe2006documentBuildingaBetterBPAC:StatewideBicycleand

PedestrianAdvisoryGroupBestPractices.Thisdocument,while focusedonstatewide

advisory committees, provides an excellent overview of key issues related to

bicycle/pedestrian committeemanagement. The following key recommendations are

drawnfromthisevaluation.


11/18


METROPOLITANAREA

8 | P a g e

Grouppurpose.ThemissionstatementfortheBPACshouldbeclearandaccuratewithspecificgoalsandobjectivesstated.

Groupstructure.Establishgroupbylaws,andstructuremembershipinawaythatencouragesmemberparticipation. Groupfunction.Providestaffsupporttoachievethegoalsofthegroupandorganizemeetingstobewellorganizedandproductive.

(NewJerseyBicycleandPedestrianResourceCenter.2006)


12/18


METROPOLITANAREA

9 | P a g e

InformationandResources

CityofOakland.Bicycle/PedestrianAdvisoryCommitteeCharter.1995.

http://www.oaklandpw.com/AssetFactory.aspx?did=1569

PugetSoundRegionalBicyclePedestrianAdvisoryCommitteewebsite:

http://www.psrc.org/boards/advisory/bpac.htm

KansasCityRegionsBPAC:

http://www.marc.org/Transportation/committees/bpac.htm

MarylandBicyclePedestrianAdvisoryCommittee:

http://www.mdot.state.md.us/Planning/Bicycle/MBPAC.html

EastBayBicycleCoalition

http://www.ebbc.org/?q=about

The New Jersey Bicycle and Pedestrian Resource Center, Alan M. Voorhees

Transportation Center (VTC), Rutgers University. Building a Better BPAC: Statewide

BicycleandPedestrianAdvisoryGroupBestPractices.July2006.


13/18

TechnicalMemo:SuggestedStepsfortheImplementationofthe

RPCsCompleteStreetsAdvisoryCommittee

February4,2009PreparedbythePedestrian/BicycleResourceInitiativeattheUniversityofNewOrleans

IntroductionThisdocumentprovidesasummaryofthesuggestedprimarygoalsfortheRPCsComplete

StreetsAdvisoryCommittee.Nationalresearchidentifiesculturalchangeattheagencylevelas

avitalaspectofthetransitionfromtraditionaltransportationpolicytocompletestreetspolicy.

Thenationalexperienceindicatesthataneducationalcomponentisthefirstkeysteptowards

initiatingculturalchange.Thispaperidentifiestwomajorcomponentsofcompletestreets

education:

Buildingawarenessofthebenefitsofcompletestreetsbyfortheinstitutionitselfandforthewidercommunity

Directlyaddressingpotentialconcernsoverimplementingcompletestreetswithintheinstitution.

Thiseducationprocessbuildsmomentumforculturechangeandhelpsinstitutionsmove

towardsthemoretechnicalaspectsofactualimplementationofthecompletestreetspolicy.

Thisdocumentoutlinesafourstepprocedureforimplementationofcompletestreetspolicies

consistingofrestructuringprocedures,redevelopingdesignmanuals,retrainingstaff,and

redevelopingperformancemeasures.

NeedforanEducationalComponentTheimplementationofcompletestreetspolicycentersonmakingmultimodalaccommodation

routinesothatmultimodalroadsdonotrequireextrafundsorextratimetoachieveandon

changingtheeverydaypracticeoftransportationagenciessothateverymodeshouldbepart

ofeverystageofthedesignprojectinjustabouteveryroadproject(LaplanteandMcCann

2008pg.25).Inordertoalteragencypractices,astrongfocusshouldbeplacedoncultural

changeandmovementawayfromanorientationtowardbuildingprimarilyforcars(National

CompleteStreetsCoalition2009). Thus,aneducationalcomponentshouldbeincludedasone


14/18

ofthefirststepstowardimplementingandencouragingthecreationofacomprehensive

completestreetspolicy.

DemonstratingtheBenefitsofCompleteStreetsInordertoelicitaculturalchangeandrefocustransportationtoaddressallusers,thebenefits

ofimplementingacompletestreetsprogramtotheagencyandcommunityneedtobe

established.TheNationalCompleteStreetsCoalitionseparatesthesebenefitsintothree

categories:

Improvedsafety Decreasedoildependenceandgreenhousegasemissions Morelivablecommunities(NationalCompleteStreetsCoalition2009).

TheLouisianaCompleteStreetsWorkGroupfurtheraddsseveraladditionalbenefitsincluding:

Increasedmobilityandsafetyforchildren,disabled,andelderly Promotionofactivelivingandimprovedhealthoutcomes Reductionofautomobileemissions Enhancedeconomicdevelopmentopportunities Lowerhouseholdtransportationexpenses(BurkKleinpeter2010pgs.36).

Onepotentialwaytocomprehensivelyaddressthesebenefitsandmoveagenciestowards

completestreetspoliciesistoengagetheNationalCompleteStreetsCoalitionintheirfullday

implementationworkshops.TheCompleteStreetsAdvisoryCommitteecanusethisexampleas

amodelforbuildingmomentumandasasourceforpotentialspeakers.

DiscussingConcernsoverCompleteStreetsTheeducationalcomponentoftheprocessshouldalsoprovideaforumtovoiceconcernsover

keyimplementationbarrierssurroundingperceptionsofincreasesincost,maintenance,and

liability.Addressingtheseconcernsdirectlycanhelpaddressskepticalagencypersonneland

helptobuildmomentumforpolicyimplementation.

PerceivedAdditionalCostforCompleteStreetsImplementationTheperceptionofincreasedcostsassociatedwithacompletestreetspolicyisamajorbarrier

thatcanhamperpolicyadoption.TheLouisianaCompleteStreetsWorkGroupfocusesonthe

extracostsofcompletestreetsasstemmingfromaculturalmisconceptionofmultimodal

transportationasprovidingextraamenities(BurkKleinpeter2010,pg.6).Furthermore,extra

costsaredirectlyrelatedtothedegreetowhichthetransportationagencyisalreadymeeting

theneedsoftheusergroup(BurkKleinpeter2010,pg.6).Awellplannedcompletestreet

policyimplementedattheonsetofaprojectcanensurethatcostsarekeptlowandcan

preventadditionalcostlyretrofitprojects(NationalCompleteStreetsCoalition2009).Various


15/18

costeffectivemeasuresarealsoavailable,includingcurbbulbouts,increasingcrosswalksignal

timing,andconvertingtocloseddrainage(NationalCompleteStreetsCoalition2009).

Pugliese(2008)identifiesarangeofcostsassociatedwithcompletestreetimplementation.

Thesecostsrangefrom2.5to5percentofaprojectstotalcostinFloridatoaslowas0.2to0.4

percentofthestatesimprovementbudgetinIllinois.AlthoughtheNationalCompleteStreets

Coalitiongivessomespecificnumbers,suchas$2,000dollarstoaddcountdownsignalsatan

intersectionorsavingsof16.5%inaBrownCounty,WIroadimprovement,itplacesalarger

emphasisontheconceptofcompletestreetsasaninvestmentthatwillsavemoneyinthelong

runbothforthelocalityandthecitizens.

ExtraCostofMaintenanceThecostsofmaintainingcompletestreetsaresomewhatmoredifficulttodiscernandrely

largelyonthestatetodefinewhethermaintenanceresponsibilitylieswiththestate,the

locality,

or

even

the

individual

property

owner

(Burk

Kleinpeter

2010,

pg.

9

10).

However,

if

multimodalfeaturescanbeintegratedasanintegralcomponentinstreetdesignand

construction,anyextracostsincurredwillsimplybecomeaportionofthestandardcostof

maintenance.

IncreasedLiabilityConcernsoverliabilitycanbeaddressedthroughtheconceptthatcompletestreetsprovidea

systematicwaytoimprovesafetyfor[all]usersandshouldreduceliabilityoverall(Burk

Kleinpeter2010pg.9).VariousapproachessuggestedwithintheMUTCDandFWHAplacethe

responsibilitytoprovidereasonablysafeaccommodationsforthesepedestriansandbicyclists

inthedomaintotheDepartmentofTransportation(BurkKleinpeter2010pg.9).Complete

streetdevelopments,thus,serveakeyroleinminimizingliabilitybyintroducingnewinitiatives

toserveandprotecttheseusers.

ImplementationProcessTheeducationalprocessshouldpavethewayfortheculturalchangenecessarytobeginthe

processofcraftingandimplementingacompletestreetspolicy.TheNationalCompleteStreets

Coalition,theLouisianaCompleteStreetsWorkGroup,andLaplanteandMcCann(2008)define

fourmainstepsforimplementationasseeninFigure1anddetailedbelow.

(1)RestructuringProcedures

AsdefinedbytheLouisianaCompleteStreetsWorkGroup,restructuringproceduresinvolves

ensuringthatallusersarefullyintegratedintoallstagesofprojectdevelopmentbyeither

integratingorcreatingnewprocessesbywhichprojectsaredeveloped(pg.17).Charlotte,

NorthCarolinahasdevelopedaclearprocessforaddressingandincorporatinguserneedswhile

designingandplanningprojects,asseeninFigure2(CharlotteDepartmentofTransportation


16/18

2007pg.52).Thisprocessprovidesaclearframeworkoftheprocedurestoaddressuserneeds

andapplycompletestreetdesignsonacasebycasebasis.

(2)RedevelopingDesignManuals

Rewritingdesignmanualsensuresthatexistingdesignguidelinesaddressalluserneedsand

thusencouragetheconstructionofcompletestreets.TheCharlotteimplementationmethod

emphasizesdevelopingacleardefinitionofanyexceptionstodesignguidelines(Charlotte

DepartmentofTransportation2007pg.2).Suchexceptionsshouldbeprovidedforconditions

whereitisgenerallyinappropriatetoprovidebicycleandpedestrianfacilitiessuchas

interstates,caseswherethecostwouldbeexcessivelydisproportionatetotheneedor

probableuse,orareaswherethereisnotadevelopedneed(BurkKleinpeter2010pg.13).

(3)RetrainingStaff

Oncethedesignguidelinesareinplace,staffshouldberetrainedtomakesurethereisa

generalawarenessandunderstandingofanychanges.TheStateofLouisianashouldbemaking

suchtrainingavailabletoMPOstaffthroughoutthestateaccordingtotheInterimReportofthe

CompleteStreetsWorkGroup(BurkKleinpeter2010pg.20).

(4)RedevelopingPerformanceMeasures

Finally,newmethodsformonitoringtheeffectsoftheimplementationofcompletestreet

policyshouldbeestablishedandcontinuousdatashouldbecollectedtodetailwhatuserneeds

arebeingmet.Performancemeasureswillalsoprovideamethodtodetermineareasforfuture

improvementandcontinuedimplementationofcompletestreetspolicy.

ProposedStepsforImplementationofCompleteStreetsAdvisoryCommitteeTheThunderheadAlliancefocusesontheadvocacyapproachasawaytoeducatedecision

makersandthepublicaboutprioritizingourstreetscapesdifferentlyandonemployingpolicy

creationandimplementationasawaytopushtransportationagenciestowardscultural

change(ThunderheadAlliance2006pg.30).Thekeystepsinthedevelopmentofthe

CompleteStreetsAdvisoryCommitteefocusonbeginningtheprocessofculturalchangeand

affectingchangethroughthestructuredcreationofacompletestreetspolicy,asdetailed

below.

InitialEducationalComponenttodemonstratetheneedforandbenefitsofculturalchangethroughbringinginexpertspeakersandprovidingaforumtovoiceconcerns

RestructuringProcedurestoensurealluserneedsaremetduringanystageofdevelopmentRedesigningDesignManualstoprovidecompletestreetdesignguidelinesthatareconsideredforanyprojectRetrainingStafftofullyaddressnewproceduralanddesignmethodsRedevelopingPerformanceMeasurestotrackchangesanddetermineareasforimprovement


17/18

WorksCitedBurk,Kleinpeter,Inc.(January2010).InterimReportfortheSecretaryofTransportation.

CompleteStreetsWorkGroup,LouisianaDepartmentofTransportationandDevelopment.

Retrievedfromhttp://www.lesstate.org/brchapter/.

Kanup,Sue,GayleStallings,DavidCrites,DaveSnyder,andBarbaraMcCann.GuidetoComplete

StreetsCampaigns.ThunderheadAlliance.Retrievedfrom

www.peopleempoweredmovement.org.

Laplante,JohnN.andMcCann,Barbara(May2008).CompleteStreets:WeCanGetTherefrom

Here.JournaloftheInstituteofTransportationEngineers.Retrievedfrom

http://www.completestreets.org/completestreetsfundamentals/resources/.

NationalCompleteStreetsCoalition(2009).CompleteStreetsFAQ.Retrievedfrom

http://www.completestreets.org/completestreetsfundamentals/completestreetsfaq/.

Figure 1: Fours Steps for Implementationof Complete Streets Policy

Figure 2: Six Step Process for Analyzing User Needs

Source: Louisiana Department of Transportation and

Development, Complete Streets Work Group, Interim Report

for the Secretary of Transportation, January 14, 2010,prepared by Burk-Kleinpeter, Inc.

Source: Urban Street Design Guidelines. Charlotte, NC, USA: Charlotte

Department of Transportation, October 2007. Accessible via

www.charmeck.org/departments/transportation/urban+street+design+guidelines.htm.


18/18

NationalCompleteStreetsCoalition(2009).CompleteStreetsPolicyBrochure.Retrievedfrom

http://www.completestreets.org/changingpolicy/workshops/.

NationalCompleteStreetsCoalition(2009).CostofCompleteStreets.Retrievedfrom

http://www.completestreets.org/completestreetsfundamentals/factsheets/costs/.

Pugilese,Philip(November2008).CompleteStreetsprovidealltheelementsofmultimodal

transportation.19thNationalTrailsSymposium.Retrievedfrom

http://www.americantrails.org/resources/trans/completestreets08.html.

UrbanStreetDesignGuidelines.Charlotte,NC,USA:CharlotteDepartmentofTransportation,

October2007.Accessiblevia

http://www.charmeck.org/Departments/Transportation/Urban+Street+Design+Guidelines.htm.

UrbanStreetDesignGuidelinesImplementationProcess.Charlotte,NC,USA:Charlotte

DepartmentofTransportation,October2007.Accessiblevia

http://www.charmeck.org/Departments/Transportation/Urban+Street+Design+Guidelines.htm.