Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
1
ODOT’s Complete StreetsInitiative
2
Tipping Point for Complete Streets
3
Grassroots Focus
4
Federal FocusComplete Streets Act of 2009
• Has not passed but directs state DOTs and MPOs to adopt policies and apply them to federally funded transportation projects.
• States that do not comply could have a small percentage of their transportation funds directed toward safety projects.
5
DOT 2010 Policy Statement
US DOT has formulated key recommendations for state DOTsand communities:
• Treat walking and bicycling as equals with other transportation modes.
• Ensure convenient access for people of all ages and abilities. • Go beyond minimum design standards. • Collect data on walking and biking trips. • Set a mode share target for walking and bicycling. • Protect sidewalks and shared-use paths the same way
roadways are protected (for example, snow removal) • Improve non-motorized facilities during maintenance projects.
6
State Focus
“As the demand for populous, walkable
neighborhoods also matures in Ohio,
there will be a growing need to fund
“complete streets.”
8
Preparing for the Future
Over the coming decades, more people will walk, bike and ride mass
transit to reach jobs and essential services. Trends being driven by:• Changes in technology• Concerns about climate change/pollution (26% of CO2 from
transportation sources in Ohio) • Concerns about energy dependence• Fluctuations in energy costs• Aging populations (26% of Ohio population over 60 by 2030)• Obesity rates (30% of Ohio adults)• Tightening federal, state and local budgets , which will make it
increasingly difficult to add and maintain new infrastructure
Increasing Investments
Access the complete report at: www.PeoplePoweredMovement.org/Benchmarking
Complete Streets Policy
• Draft policy developed and being reviewed for adoption• Developed by internal staff and local government
representatives
Draft Policy Highlights
• Complete streets shall be considered through the planning, design, construction, maintenance and operation of new and rehabilitated transportation facilities within public rights of way.
• These include facilities that are owned or maintained by ODOT and improvements for which Metropolitan Planning Organizations (MPOs) and local governments are receiving federal funding allocated by ODOT.
12
Factors driving investment …
• Land use• Population densities• Gaps in connectivity• Adopted area comprehensive plans• MPO bicycle and pedestrian plans• Crash incidents• Key community facilities such as schools, and
employment centers
Draft Policy HighlightsDesign considerations include, but are not limited to:• Walkways/sidewalks• Bike lanes, shared lanes, wide paved shoulders• Special bus lanes• Comfortable and accessible transit stops• Frequent and enhanced crossing opportunities• Median islands• Accessible ped signals• Curb extensions • Landscaping
Draft Policy Highlights
Engineering judgment should be used to develop a typical
section that accommodates all modes of transportation
while balancing various safety concerns.
Draft Policy Highlights
Not all streets and roads may need treatments to be complete.
• Many low-speed, low-volume residential streets can be considered complete because people and vehicles interact safely in the right-of-way.
• Other roads may have
limited current or projected
demand .
Draft Policy Highlights
Accommodation shall be made and documented
through the PDP. District environmental coordinators will
verify policy compliance. Training/QARs will be conducted.
Draft Policy Highlights
A Complete Streets Review Committee may be created to
review:
• Projects with costs exceeding $5 million• Projects in which the primary objective/purpose and need
statement is based on Complete Streets.
18
Pilot Projects
• Dayton Tech Corridor• Broadway Street Road Diet (Dayton)• Summit and Fourth (Columbus) • W. Broad Street Corridor• 70/71 Split (Columbus)• SR 3 (Blendon Twp.)• 12th Street (Canton)
19
Opportunities for Change
20
Less than ideal Ideal
21
Re-Allocating Space
Shoulder bikeways on rural roads
Shared-lane markings “Sharrows”
24
Challenges
• Funding• Maintenance• Community Tradeoffs• Design Standards• ROW• Divided Public Opinion
25
Car-Centric
26
Transportation Choices
27
For more information ...
Michelle May, ODOT Safety Program
Heather Bowden, ODOT Bike/Pedestrian Planner
