HomeMy WebLinkAbout6.g. Resolution of Support for Statewide Complete Streets PolicyROSEMOL1NTEXECUTIVE SUMMARY
CITY COUNCIL
Special City Council meeting: February 1, 2010
AGENDA ITEM: Resolution of Support for Statewide
AGENDA SECTION:
Complete Streets Policy
Consent
PREPARED BY: Andrew J. Brotzler, PE, Director of Public
Works /City Engineer
AGENDA NO.
�-
ATTACHMENTS: Resolution, Complete Streets Report
APPROVED BY: DQJ
RECOMMENDED ACTION: Motion to adopt a resolution expressing support of a
statewide complete streets policy.
BACKGROUND:
In 2008, the Minnesota State Legislature directed the Commissioner of Transportation to review the costs,
benefits and feasibility of a Complete Streets policy. As part of this directive, a task force of state, county
and city representatives developed a draft document of background information and public comment on
Complete Streets for the Commissioner of Transportation. From this effort, the Commissioner of
Transportation has prepared the attached Complete Streets Report to be presented to the Minnesota State
Legislature.
As outlined in the report, "the goal of Complete Streets should be to 1) develop a balanced transportation
system that integrates all modes via planning inclusive of each mode of transportation (i.e., transit, freight,
automobile, bicycle and pedestrian) and 2) inclusion of all transportation users of all types, ages and
abilities."
In consideration of this goal, Council reviewed the attached resolution of support for the development of
a statewide Complete Streets policy.
Additional information for Complete Streets can be found on the Minnesota Department of
Transportation's web page at www.dot.state.mmus/pLymin
GAComplete Streets \02012010 CC Complete Streets Executive Summarydoc
CITY OF ROSEMOUNT
DAKOTA COUNTY, MINNESOTA
RESOLUTION —
A RESOLUTION EXPRESSING SUPPORT OF A STATEWIDE
COMPLETE STREETS POLICY
WHEREAS, the "Complete Streets" concept promotes streets that are safe and convenient for all
users, including pedestrians, bicyclists, transit riders, and motor vehicle drivers of all ages and
abilities; and
WHEREAS, the October 2009 public draft of the Minnesota Department of Transportation
Complete Streets Report includes the recommendation: "Mn /DOT should build on existing
Context Sensitive Solution practices and develop and implement a statewide "Complete Streets
policy.... "; and
WHEREAS, the Rosemount City Council recognizes the importance of complete streets, as shown
in its 2008 Comprehensive Plan update.
NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED, that the City of Rosemount encourages the
Minnesota legislature, with input and guidance from the Minnesota Department of Transportation,
to authorize the development of a statewide Complete Streets program, which would provide for the
development of a balanced transportation system, through appropriate planning, that integrates
multiple transportation modes, where appropriate, for transportation users of all types, ages and
abilities.
ADOPTED this 1" day of February, 2010.
William H. Droste, Mayor
ATTEST:
Amy Domeier, City Clerk
•, �• •-
_.�
.,� w��y
_.' f --
Complete Streets Report
A Report Commissioned for the Minnesota Legislature
Final REPORT
December 2009
Prepared by.
Minnesota Department of Transportation
Report Development Cost
As required in Minnesota Statute 3.197, this document must contain the cost of
preparing the report at the beginning of the report, including any costs incurred by
another agency or another level of government.
The Minnesota Department of Transportation contracted with SRF Consulting Group,
Inc. to write this report for a fee of $89,000. This fee included organizing, facilitating
and recording all committee meetings and drafting, editing and developing this final
report. The contract was amended by $9,800 to address public comments received from
a formal public comment period. Mn /DOT staff costs totaled $44,900.
Complete Streets Legislative Report
December2009
Acknowledgements
The development of this document involved a series of meetings, research, and
correspondence via email among three groups: a Project Management Team, Advisory
Committee and Technical Advisory Panel. These committees were extremely effective
in identifying key issues and concerns related to Complete Streets. Their involvement
and insight provided key stakeholder input in the development and oversight of this
document.
Mn /DOT would like to thank the following individuals and organizations for their
contributions to this report:
Project Management Team
John Powell, Co -Chair — City of Savage
Tim Quinn, Co -Chair — Mn /DOT
Merry Daher, Project Manager — Mn /DOT State Aid
Rick Kjonaas, Alternate Project Manager — Mn /DOT State Aid
Michael Marti — SRF Consulting Group
Renae Kuehl — SRF Consulting Group
Advisory Committee
Lee Amundson — Willmar Area Transportation Partnership
James Andrew — Metropolitan Council
Dennis Berg — Anoka County Commissioner
Gary Danielson — Minnesota County Engineers Association
Steve Elkins — Bloomington City Council
James Gittemeier — Duluth Metropolitan Planning Organization
Dan Greensweig — Minnesota Association of Townships
Mary McComber — Oak Park Heights
Karen Nikolai — Hennepin County Community Design Liaison
Shelly Pederson — Bloomington City Engineer
Mike Schadauer — Mn /DOT Transit
Mike Wojcik — Rochester City Council Member
Complete Streets Legislative Report
December2009
Technical Advisory Panel
Tim Anderson — Federal Highway Administration
Ron Biss — Transportation Accessibility Advisory Committee
Scott Bradley — Mn /DOT Context Sensitive Solutions
Marc Briese — City of Woodbury Traffic Department
Brian Gage — Mn /DOT Transportation Planning
Lynnette Geschwind- Mn /DOT Affirmative Action
Sue Groth — Mn /DOT Traffic
Michael Huber — Urban Land Institute
Amr Jabr — Mn /DOT Metro Operations and Maintenance
Tim Mitchell — Mn /DOT Office of Transit
Matthew Pahs - Mn /DOT Office of Freight and Commercial Vehicle Operations
Mike Robinson — Mn /DOT Duluth District
Jim Rosenow — Mn /DOT Office of Technical Support
Paul Stine — Mn /DOT State Aid Standards
Mukhtar Thakur — Mn /DOT Office of Technical Support
Barb Thoman — Transit for Livable Communities
Irene Weis — State Non - motorized Transportation Advisory Committee
We also acknowledge the contribution of additional individuals who gave presentations
and technical input at committee meetings:
Mitzi Baker — Olmsted- Rochester Planning
Greg Coughlin — Mn /DOT Metro State Aid
Beverly Farraher — Mn /DOT Metro Operations and Maintenance
Lisa Freese — Scott County
Maryanne Kelly - Sonnek — Mn /DOT Cooperative /Municipal Agreements
John Maczko — City of Saint Paul
Barbara McCann — National Complete Street Coalition
Sue Thompson — Mn /DOT Office of Investment Management
James Weingartz — Mn /DOT Project Development
Complete Streets Legislative Report
December2009
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Chapter 1: Executive Summary ................................................... ..............................1
Chapter 2: Description and Goals ............................................... ..............................5
Legislative Request
Complete Streets - Definition and Purpose
Report Goal
Study Approach
Chapter 3: Balancing Safety, Mobility, Efficiency and Cost ..... ..............................9
Balanced Approach
Relationship to Context Sensitive Solutions and Design
Context Sensitive Design and Solutions versus Complete Streets
Chapter 4: "State of the State" in Minnesota ............................. .............................11
Current Design Standards
Funding
Operations /Maintenance
Accessibility Compliance
Chapter 5: Lessons Learned from Interviews ........................... .............................17
Interview Background
Summary of Interview Findings
Chapter 6: Benefits, Feasibility ,Costs and Funding ............... .............................21
Benefits
Feasibility
Costs
Funding
Chapter 7: Implementation Strategies ........................................ .............................25
Chapter 8: Conclusions and Recommendations ....................... .............................27
Conclusions
Recommendations
Appendix A: 2008 Complete Streets Law
Appendix B: Mn /DOT's Scoping Process
Appendix C: Meeting Agendas and Summaries
Appendix D: Summary of Follow -up Interviews
Appendix E: Minnesota Transportation Design Resources Summary
Appendix F: Complete Streets Resources Summary
Complete Streets Legislative Report
December2009 iii
This page was left intentionally blank.
iv Complete Streets Legislative Report
December2009
Chapter 1:
Executive Summary
Legislative Request
This report is in response to the legislative directive to the Commissioner of
Transportation to study the costs, benefits and feasibility of implementing a Complete
Streets policy. (See Appendix A: Laws 2008, Chapter 350, Article 1, Section 94). In
doing so, this report summarizes key elements of the study, including:
• Compilation and review of a list of Complete Streets resources.
• Review of the state's current design practices regarding Complete Streets.
• Assessment of Complete Streets impacts to maintenance and operations.
• Review of other local, regional and state Complete Streets policies and best
practices and lessons learned from other jurisdictions.
• Review of the costs, benefits and feasibility of Complete Streets.
• Recommendations relating to the implementation of a Complete Streets policy.
Study Approach
The feasibility of implementing a Complete Streets Policy in Minnesota was one of the
many studies the 2008 Legislature assigned for completion for the Commissioner of
Transportation. The Commissioner assigned the Mn /DOT Division of State Aid for
Local Transportation (State Aid) to manage this task. State Aid formed a Project
Management Team that worked with an Advisory Committee and Technical Advisory
Panel. These groups consisted of elected officials and other representatives from
federal, state, county, city and township government as well as individuals with
expertise in roads, transit, bicycling, the Americans with Disabilities Act, planning and
community development, diverse populations, active living and health advocacy.
Balancing Safety, Mobility, Efficiency and Cost
Complete Streets does not mean "all modes on all roads "; rather, the goal of Complete
Streets should be to 1) develop a balanced transportation system that integrates all
modes via planning inclusive of each mode of transportation (i.e., transit, freight,
automobile, bicycle and pedestrian) and 2) inclusion of all transportation users of all
types, ages and abilities.
"State of the State" in Minnesota
Throughout the study, there were several technical presentations made by
practitioners /experts on current practices and how they relate to the Complete Streets
concepts; the presentations covered Mn /DOT and State Aid design standards, practices
and policies, operations and maintenance, funding, and the Americans with Disabilities
Act (ADA) compliance. In this report, the term "ADA" generally refers to accessibility
requirements, including the ADA, Section 504 of the Rehab Act and other pertinent
regulations.
Complete Streets Legislative Report Chapter 1
December 2009 Page 1
The existing design policies and manuals require updating and reconciliation to
eliminate inconsistencies and integrate all modes of travel regardless of jurisdiction.
The main areas of potential conflict were identified between current design practices
and Complete Streets: lane width, design speed and annual daily traffic threshold, level
of service and roadway classification.
Lessons Learned from Interviews
The American Planning Association /National Complete Streets Coalition provided
interview data (which they conducted) for five agencies. Follow -up surveys were
conducted to gather more detailed information on cost/benefit and implementation of
Complete Streets policies. This information was synthesized to determine the following
lessons learned:
• Implementation of Complete Streets is easier if all levels of government are involved
and the policy is developed by stakeholders.
• Complete Streets is inherent to Context Sensitive Solutions (CSS).
• Complete Streets requires a flexible design process.
• No benefit/cost data is available for Complete Streets policy.
Benefit, Feasibility, Cost and Funding
No specific benefit/cost data is available. However, a list of potential benefits and costs
associated with Complete Streets was developed.
Adopting a Complete Streets policy would complement Mn /DOT's existing Context
Sensitive Design policy and would further reinforce its principles. Complete Streets are
considered feasible on state, regional and local levels.
Implementation
Development and implementation of a Complete Streets process should follow a
phased sequential approach: establish need (which has been done by this study);
develop policy; reconcile differences in planning and design policies, guidelines and
manuals; implement; and review /measure /refine.
Recommendations
Being one of the first states to adopt a policy requiring Context Sensitive Design and
Solutions, Minnesota is already positioned to support a "Complete Streets" approach to
transportation investment. In addition, Mn /DOT staff have been actively working on
integrating ADA, CSS and bicycle /pedestrian principles within its agency. Three local
agencies (Hennepin County and the cities of St. Paul and Rochester) in Minnesota have
already adopted their own resolutions for Complete Streets, indicating that Complete
Streets are achievable at a local level.
Mn /DOT needs to be prepared to assist local agencies in developing their local
Complete Streets approach to assist with their specific project development needs.
The study's Advisory Committee identified several key recommendations:
Chapter I Complete Streets Legislative Report
Page 2 December 2009
• Mn /DOT is committed to partner with a broad coalition including local governments
to build on existing CSS practices and develop and implement a Mn /DOT Complete
Streets policy using the following phased sequential approach:
- Develop a Mn /DOT Complete Streets policy.
- Reconcile differences in planning and design policies, guidelines and
manuals.
- Implement.
- Review /measure /refine.
• Mn /DOT should review and revise conflicting information in Minnesota's state and
local design documents.
• Mn /DOT should further explore the feasibility of integrating its existing planning and
design manuals related to Complete Streets into one manual.
• Mn /DOT should integrate Complete Streets into Mn /DOT's new Scopinq Process
model (see Appendix B).
• Mn /DOT should identify ways to assist local governments in developing and
understanding funding sources and the constraints related to these sources.
• All agencies should develop an integrated transportation plan that addresses
connectivity for all modes for all users of all ages and abilities.
• Mn /DOT should serve as a resource to assist local agencies in developing their own
Complete Streets policies with the support of Mn /DOT's expertise in CSS, ADA,
bicycle /pedestrian planning, design and funding strategies.
• Mn /DOT State Aid should review the State Aid variance process and make it more
accessible and transparent.
If a policy is developed it is very important that all stakeholders be engaged to
address the key issues listed above and within this report.
Complete Streets Legislative Report Chapter 1
December 2009 Page 3
This page was left intentionally blank.
Chapter 1 Complete Streets Legislative Report
Page 4 December 2009
Chapter 2:
Description and Goals
Legislative Request
This report is in response to the legislative directive to the Commissioner of
Transportation to study the costs, benefits and feasibility of implementing a Complete
Streets policy.
Laws 2008, Chapter 350, Article 1, Section 94
COMPLETE STREETS
The commissioner of transportation, in cooperation with the Metropolitan Council
and representatives of counties, statutory and home rule charter cities, and towns,
shall study the benefits, feasibility, and cost of adopting a complete streets policy
applicable to plans to construct, reconstruct, and relocate streets and roads that
includes the following elements:
(1) safe access for all users, including pedestrians, bicyclists, motorists, and
transit riders;
(2) bicycle and pedestrian ways in urbanized areas except where bicyclists and
pedestrians are prohibited by law, where costs would be excessively
disproportionate, and where there is no need for bicycle and pedestrian ways;
(3) paved shoulders on rural roads;
(4) safe pedestrian travel, including for people with disabilities, on sidewalks and
street crossings;
(5) utilization of the latest and best design standards; and
(6) consistency of complete streets plan with community context.
The commissioner shall report findings, conclusions, and recommendations to
the senate Transportation Budget and Policy Division and the house of
representatives Transportation Finance Division and Transportation and Transit
Policy Subcommittee by December 5, 2009.
This directive follows national legislation that would add a provision to Title 23 of the
Code of Federal Regulations to ensure that future transportation investments made by
state Departments of Transportation and Metropolitan Planning Organizations create
appropriate and safe transportation facilities for all those using the road — motorists,
transit vehicles and riders, bicyclists and pedestrians of all ages and abilities.
• H.R. 1443 Complete Streets Act of 2009
• 'S. 584: Complete Streets Act of 2009
Complete Streets — Definition and Purpose
Definition:
Complete Streets are designed and operated to enable safe access for all users.
Pedestrians, bicyclists, motorists and bus riders of all ages and abilities are able to
safely move along and across a complete street. (Taken from the National Complete
Streets Coalition web site).
Complete Streets Legislative Report Chapter 2
December 2009 Page 5
Complete Streets policies encourage agencies to ensure that road projects are
designed to meet local needs, be sensitive to context and emphasize that all modes of
transportation and all users are considered in the planning and project development
processes. Complete Streets policies are intended to provide a transportation network
that promotes physical activity, accessibility, environmental quality, safety and mobility.
This is best accomplished in planning. Examples of Complete Streets goals and
principles (not listed in any particular order of importance) include:
• Reduce crash rates and severity of crashes.
• Improve mobility and accessibility of all individuals including those with disabilities in
accordance with the legal requirements of the ADA.
• Encourage mode shift to non - motorized transportation and transit.
• Reduce air and water pollution and reduce noise impacts.
• Increase transportation network connectivity.
• Maximize the efficient use of existing facilities.
• Strive for tax supported investments to provide maximum benefits to the community
and all user groups.
• Safely integrate intermodal connections across the transportation network.
• Promote safe and convenient access and travel for all users (pedestrians, bicyclists,
transit riders) and people of all abilities as well as freight and motor vehicle drivers.
Chapter 2 Complete Streets Legislative Report
Page 6 December 2009
Report Goal
This report summarizes key elements of the study including:
• Compilation and review of a list of Complete Streets resources.
• Review of the state's current design practices regarding Complete Streets.
• Assessment of Complete Streets impacts to maintenance and operations.
• Review of other local, regional and state Complete Streets policies and best
practices and lessons learned from other jurisdictions.
• Review of benefits, feasibility and costs of Complete Streets.
• Recommendations relating to the implementation of a Complete Streets policy.
Study Approach
The feasibility of implementing a Complete Streets Policy in Minnesota was one of the
many studies that the 2008 Legislature assigned for completion to the Commissioner of
Transportation. The Commissioner assigned the Mn /DOT Division of State Aid for
Local Transportation to manage this task. State Aid formed a Project Management
Team that worked with an Advisory Committee and Technical Advisory Panel. These
groups consisted of elected officials and other representatives from federal, state,
county, city and town government as well as individuals with expertise in roads, transit,
bicycling, ADA, planning and community development, diverse populations, active living
and health advocacy.
Throughout the study, the team reviewed, discussed and synthesized the information
listed above at a series of meetings (see Appendix C - Schedule of Meetings). An
integral part of these meetings included presentations from leading practitioners on key
topics, which included:
• National perspective on Complete Streets, including information on benefits and cost
• Design standards
- Geometric Standards and Context Sensitive Design
- State Aid Standards (local government)
- Bicycle /Pedestrian Policy and Practices
• Funding
- Cost Share Policy (motorized and non - motorized facilities)
- Special Cooperative Projects
- Local Perspectives (city and county)
• Operations and Maintenance
• ADA regulations and compliance
Complete Streets Legislative Report Chapter 2
December 2009 Page 7
During another phase of the study, the team reviewed Complete Streets policies of
other local, regional, and state agencies. The initial plan was to conduct phone surveys
of several agencies that had implemented Complete Streets policies and summarize the
findings. However, the American Planning Association (APA) is working with the
National Complete Streets Coalition (NCSC) in completing a similar task. Rather than
duplicate this effort, the APA/NCSC shared their interview findings with this legislative
study with the agreement that any additional follow -up surveys conducted by the
Minnesota study would be shared with APA/NCSC. One key area that the earlier
surveys did not focus on was the policy development and implementation phase.
Therefore follow -up surveys were conducted by the study consultant with several
agencies selected by the advisory committee based on agency jurisdiction, climate
similarity, where they are in their Complete Streets policy development and the
substance of their policies.
Chapter 2 Complete Streets Legislative Report
Page 8 December 2009
Chapter 3:
Balancing Safety, Mobility, Efficiency and Cost
Balanced Approach
The purpose and effectiveness of a transportation system is relative to the user: transit
rider, freight carrier, motorist, bicyclist, pedestrian regardless of age and ability.
The growing emphasis on balancing community values in the development of
transportation projects was formalized with the passing of the National Environmental
Policy Act of 1969. Congress intended that the effective implementation of NEPA results
in a balancing of safety, mobility, economic and environmental considerations.
In the late 1990s, a new set of principles was developed that placed transportation,
community and environmental goals on equal footing and produced an approach to
make it happen: Context Sensitive Solutions. In Section 6008 of SAFETEA -LU,
Congress endorsed these principles as an important element of projects funded by the
Federal Highway Administration. In addition, as part of TEA -21, a planning process
establishing Area Transportation Partnerships was implemented, which allows local
partners to be involved in project selection.
Relationship to Context Sensitive Design and Solutions
(References to Context Sensitive Design and Solutions and Context Sensitive Solutions
refer to the same philosophy and body of principles, CSS has become the national
term.)
Initially, Context Sensitive Solutions was project specific; however, as it evolved, CSS
has gone beyond the project phases of transportation program delivery and into a wider
understanding and implementation of community and environmentally sensitive
planning and design. As part of an education and outreach effort, Mn /DOT co- hosted
the Midwest Context Sensitive Design and Solutions Workshop in 2005, which included
an "Integrating CSS into Systems Planning" module.
CSS is a multi - disciplinary, collaborative approach that involves all stakeholders to
develop a transportation facility that fits its physical setting and preserves scenic,
aesthetic, historic and environmental resources, while maintaining safety and mobility.
CSS is an approach that considers the total context within which a transportation
improvement project will exist. CSS principles include the employment of early,
continuous and meaningful involvement of the public and all stakeholders throughout
the project development process.
In the fall of 2009, Mn /DOT assigned a director to lead CSS within the agency.
Complete Streets Legislative Report Chapter 3
December 2009 Page 9
Mn /DOT's approach to CSS emphasizes six key principles:
• Balance safety, mobility, community and environmental goals in all projects.
• Involve the public and affected agencies early and continuously.
• Use an interdisciplinary team tailored to project needs.
• Address all modes of travel.
• Apply flexibility inherent in design standards.
• Incorporate aesthetics as an integral part of good design.
Context Sensitive Solutions versus Complete Streets
HR 1443/S 584 The Federal Complete Streets Act of 2009 defines Complete Streets as:
"A roadway that accommodates all travelers, particularly public transit
users, bicyclists, pedestrians (including individuals of all ages and
individuals with mobility, sensory, neurological, or hidden disabilities), and
motorists, to enable all travelers to use the roadway safely and efficiently."
Some references differentiate CSS and Complete Streets as "project' oriented versus
"process" oriented. The consensus is that Complete Streets must begin within the
"planning" process (versus design). To address this, the APA is preparing a Best
Practices Manual on Complete Streets, which is scheduled to be available in January of
2010.
Complete Streets does not mean "all modes on all roads "; rather, the goal of Complete
Streets should be to 1) develop a balanced transportation system that integrates all
modes via planning inclusive of each mode of transportation (i.e., transit, freight,
automobile, bicycle and pedestrian) and 2) include transportation users of all types,
ages and abilities.
One of the focuses of integrated modal planning would be to designate routes or
corridors that would provide mobility for that mode throughout the network. A long -term
goal of Complete Streets focuses on road users and is about making multi -modal
inclusion routine, so that multi -modal design does not require retrofits and the
transportation system safely and conveniently serves all modes and all users of all
abilities.
Mn /DOT's 2006 op lice requiring CSS and Design on all Trunk Highways was a catalyst
to having this design approach become the "standard." Most projects designed in the
last few years have used CSS principles including strong public participation; this
includes State Aid and local government projects. With a typical roadway /project life
cycle of 30 to 50 years, depending on the network size and agency budget, it could
feasibly take an average agency more than 50 years to fully rebuild their network to
CSS standards.
Chapter 3 Complete Streets Legislative Report
Page 10 December 2009
Chapter 4:
"State of the State" in Minnesota
Current Design Standards
At the May 11, 2009, Advisory Committee meeting, a panel of experts from Mn /DOT
and State Aid gave a presentation on Mn /DOT and local design standards, practices
and policies. A full meeting summary is presented in Appendix C. Key items discussed
were standards, design resources available and inconsistencies between them.
Transportation Design Resources
There are many design resources used in Minnesota that describe rules, guidelines,
procedures, specifications and references for corridor design. There is no strict
hierarchy among them, as each resource has a unique role and is intended to
complement the others while offering unique information. In Appendix E, a table listing
detailed descriptions and websites of all resources used in Minnesota is presented. The
following are a few key design resources currently used in Minnesota:
• The American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials
( AASHTO) published A Policy on Geometric Design of Highways and Streets
(Green Book), which is a national policy that was developed through AASHTO and
includes pooled knowledge of standard practices. This AASHTO policy is intended
as a guideline and NOT as design standards; however, certain criteria have been
adopted by the FHWA as standards for the National Highway System (NHS).
Additionally, this policy is often used by states as the basis for their individual
policies. This does not have enforceability on designs on MN transportation facilities.
• The Mn /DOT Road Design Manual was developed using many practices
established in the Green Book; however, it has criteria and value ranges that differ
from AASHTO criteria. The Mn /DOT Road Design Manual can be considered the
"hub" of transportation design in Minnesota - the starting point for a Trunk Highway
design project. It establishes uniform design practices statewide but also provides
enough flexibility to encourage independent design. It is primarily intended for
design of the Trunk Highway system, and governs thirteen critical design criteria on
trunk highways but it can also be used for local roads.
• Mn /DOT's Bikeway Facility Design Manual, Minnesota Manual on Uniform
Traffic Control Devices and Bridge Design Manual are examples of specialized
manuals that are typically used in tandem with the Mn /DOT Road Design Manual.
These specialized manuals complement the information provided in the Mn /DOT
Road Design Manual, while offering more specific design guidance.
• Mn /DOT's State Aid Manual is a stand -alone resource that is required when
designing for State Aid roads using State Aid funds. While most of the important
design practices in this manual are the same as those in the Mn /DOT Road Design
Manual, it identifies some criteria and value ranges developed by a statutory
committee of city and county engineers for the specific needs of their State Aid
roads which require formal variances for deviations. Mn /DOT's State Aid Manual is
Complete Streets Legislative Report Chapter 4
December 2009 Page 11
not nearly as detailed or comprehensive and requires the use of other resources for
additional guidance. Local non -State Aid roads do not need to adhere to these
standards; however, local agencies tend to default to State Aid standards, even on
non -State Aid routes, to provide consistency within their jurisdictions.
Integration of the existing Minnesota design manuals into one manual has been
suggested; however, the feasibility of this needs to be further explored.
Design Manuals /Guides Highlights
The following is a list of key points as well as inconsistencies related to design
manuals /guides currently used in Minnesota:
• Tables 4 -1 and 4 -2: Bikeway design selection for urban and rural cross sections
from Mn /DOT's Bikeway Facility Design Manual are the most highly used tables in
the manual.
• Bikeway design guidance on bicycle lane width in the State Aid design chart
8820.9936 conflicts with data in tables 4 -1 and 4 -2 in the Bikeway Facility Design
Manual listed above. These need to be reconciled.
• Minnesota is unique in that State Aid design standards are defined via State Aid
Rules as law.
• There is a perception that State Aid rules yield inflexible design favoring motorized
traffic; however, approximately 90 percent of all variances to State Aid rules have
been approved. Information about the variance process is available in Section VII of
Chapter 1 of the 2007 State Aid Manual.
httr): / /www. dot. state. mn. us /stateaid /manual /samO7 /chapterl /1- 7.html
• Local agencies tend to default to State Aid standards.
• Mn /DOT's Road Design Manual, Bike Facility Design Manual and Technical
Memorandum on Context Sensitive Design and Solutions all stress the importance
of integrating pedestrian and bicycle elements into all projects.
• Mn /DOT's Road Design Manual:
- Considers pedestrian and bicycle elements as "other design criteria"
rather than a fundamental design criteria.
- Lacks direction on how to design sidewalks and bicycle lanes.
- Contains multiple instances where text is used to describe pedestrian and
bicycle features, but no graphic exists to depict it.
- Provides graphics for pedestrian integration that does not always depict
ADA compliance.
- Directs the provision of pedestrian /bicycle facilities when warranted;
however, without existing facilities, it is difficult to gauge the demand.
Chapter 4 Complete Streets Legislative Report
Page 12 December 2009
• A Complete Streets policy would need to:
- Review /revise conflicting design documents regarding:
• Lane width
• Design speed
• ADT threshold
• Level of Service
• Roadway classification
- Update the Road Design Manual to provide more prevalent and clear
direction on the design and integration of pedestrian and bicycle facilities
with roadways and include up -to -date accessibility standards.
Funding
At the June 24, 2009, Technical Advisory Panel meeting, representatives from Mn /DOT,
a county (Scott) and a city (Saint Paul) gave presentations on funding resources and
coordination for roadway projects. The goal was to better understand the funding that
exists (i.e., how to creatively use multiple funds on one project to facilitate Complete
Streets and clarify if funding sources limit modes or specifically if they funded one mode
but were not flexible to fund another). A meeting summary is presented in Appendix C.
Key items discussed included:
• State of Minnesota transportation funding sources are obtained through the
collection of state and federal revenues (i.e., fuel, tire, truck/trailer sales and heavy
vehicle use sales taxes). Special cooperative projects are an option to include
multiple agencies, funds and project needs.
• There is not one central resource that agencies can use to get information about all
funding sources available.
• Identifying funding can be difficult if the project needs do not align with the specific
funding source constraints. In addition, if an agency would like to use multiple
funding sources on one project, the timeframe that the funding is available from each
source may not align.
A Complete Streets policy would benefit from a complete list of funding sources
available and the constraints related to these sources.
Mn /DOT's 2006 op IicY requiring CSS on all Trunk Highways was a catalyst to having
this design approach become the "standard." Most projects designed in the last few
years have used CSS principles including strong public participation; this includes State
Aid and local government projects.
Complete Streets Legislative Report Chapter 4
December 2009 Page 13
The State of Minnesota transportation funding sources funded through the collection of
state and federal revenues including fuel, tire, motor vehicle sales, motor vehicle
registration, truck/trailer sales and heavy vehicle use taxes are distributed through the
Highway Users Tax Distribution Fund, which is set by constitution as follow:
• 62 percent goes to the Trunk Highway Fund
• 29 percent goes to County State Aid Highway Fund
• 9 percent goes to the Municipal State Aid Fund (cities with populations greater than
5,000)
Various funding sources may be available to assist with funding Complete Streets. A
general list of potential funding sources (although not complete) is provided below.
• Federal Aid
- Earmarks, high priority, special programs (e.g., Safe Routes to School)
- Metropolitan Planning Organization facilitated programs
- Congestion Management and Air Quality
- Surface Transportation Program
- Transportation Enhancements
- Recreational Trails Program
- National Scenic Trails
- Transit and Federal Transit Administration
• State Trunk Highway program - Partnering is available on Trunk Highway projects
for sidewalks /trails.
• State Aid - Rules /standards allow for funding /match (of federal funds) for
trails /sidewalks /lane widening
• City /County funds (e.g., individual park and recreation departments)
• Other agencies (e.g., Department of Natural Resources)
• Private donations (Public /Private Partnerships)
• Livable Communities Grant
• Capital Improvement Bonds
• Street Improvement Bonds
• Park dedication fees
• Stormwater funding
Chapter 4 Complete Streets Legislative Report
Page 14 December 2009
Operations /Maintenance
At the July 29, 2009, Technical Advisory Panel meeting, a representative from
Mn /DOT's Maintenance Department gave a presentation on maintenance and
operations practices. A meeting summary is presented in Appendix C.
Key items discussed included:
• It is important for designers to work with maintenance staff among others during the
design process to ensure that maintenance and functionality are balanced.
• Because of limited budgets /fixed finances, any additional infrastructure will require a
reprioritization of maintenance and operations practices.
• The level of maintenance needed differs by mode (e.g., sweeping practices are
different for a motor vehicle than a bicycle).
• The Mn /DOT Metro District recently adopted a snow removal policy, indicating snow
removal priorities of roadways first, followed by trails. This prioritization was based
on use.
• A Complete Streets policy should outline implementation steps that include the
consideration of maintenance and operations practices. including:
- Developing design standards for Complete Streets that involve operations/
maintenance staff in the development.
- Developing a design exception process that involves operations/
maintenance staff in the design.
- Identifying funding and roles for operations /maintenance of the built
facility.
- Defining and assigning snow removal priorities on sidewalks and ramps to
improve accessibility.
Accessibility Compliance
At the July 29, 2009, Technical Advisory Panel meeting, a representative from
Mn /DOT's Affirmative Action Section gave a presentation on accessibility requirements
including the ADA, Section 504 of the Rehab Act and other pertinent regulations. A
meeting summary is presented in Appendix C.
Key items discussed included:
• By law, new projects are required to be designed and maintained to be compliant
with the ADA.
• All projects will be evaluated for accessibility needs.
• Title II of the ADA (1990) is the transportation - related section and requires all
agencies to develop a transition plan to indicate how they intend to update their
facilities to meet the ADA standards.
• Mn /DOT is currently developing a transition plan as required by the ADA.
Complete Streets Legislative Report Chapter 4
December 2009 Page 15
• All responsible staff needs to be educated on accessibility and fully understand their
role in all phases of service delivery.
In addition, as a part of the development of Mn /DOT's Transition Plan, the agency
elected to adopt the US Access Board's Public Right of Way Accessibility Guidelines
(PROWAG) as its primary guidance for public facility design (with the exception of
round -a- bouts).
Chapter 4 Complete Streets Legislative Report
Page 16 December 2009
Chapter 5:
Lessons Learned from Interviews
Interview Background
As part of this study, a review of other local, regional and state Complete Streets
policies was completed. The initial plan was to conduct phone surveys of several
agencies that had implemented Complete Streets policies and summarize the findings.
However the American Planning Association (APA) is working with the National
Complete Streets Coalition (NCSC) in completing a similar task. This information is
being complied into a Best Practices Manual on Complete Streets report, which is being
developed by the APA/NCSC and highlights more than 20 agencies with Complete
Streets and is scheduled to be available on the APA website in January of 2010.
Rather than duplicate this effort, the APA/NCSC shared their interview findings from five
agencies with the Minnesota study with the agreement that any additional follow -up
surveys conducted by Minnesota would be shared with APA/NCSC. One key area that
the earlier surveys did not focus on was the policy development and implementation
phase. Therefore, follow -up surveys were conducted by the study consultant with
several agencies selected by the advisory committee based on agency jurisdiction,
climate similarity, where they are in their Complete Streets policy development and the
substance of their policies: a summary of these surveys is included in Appendix D.
The five agency interviews summarized for this report include:
• City of Charlotte, NC — Policy statement included in the design guidelines:
Transportation Action Plan (adopted in May 2006) and Urban Streets Design Guide
(adopted October 2007).
• Louisville, KY Metro Government — Ordinance (passed in 2008), design guidelines
and a policy statement added as an addendum to the city's comprehensive plan.
• Massachusetts Highway - Statute (instituted in 1996) and a policy statement
included in the design guidelines (completed in 2006).
• Oregon State — Statewide statute (Occurred 38 years ago)
• Seattle, WA — Ordinance including policy statement (Passed in 2007)
Summary of Interview Findings
The following is a summary of findings from the five interviews:
• Complete Streets are easier to implement if all levels of government within a state
are concurrently applying Complete Streets principles. This minimizes differing
design standards being applied by the various agencies with jurisdiction over
roadways (e.g., city, county and state).
• Implementation of Complete Streets is easier when there is support for the policy by
elected officials and /or upper agency management.
Complete Streets Legislative Report Chapter 5
December 2009 Page 17
• All stakeholders should be actively involved in developing a Complete Streets design
guide, as this will result in wider acceptance of the final design guide by the
stakeholders.
When implementing Complete Streets, clarity should be established about how
Complete Streets principles will be applied. All interviewed agencies are applying
Complete Streets procedures to new and reconstruction projects already in the
pipeline. Having a policy does not trigger a redirection of funds to retrofit projects
aimed specifically at policy compliance. Complete Streets implementation calls for a
comprehensive, clear and transparent planning and design processes that:
- Requires planners and designers to shift perspective and consider all
transportation modes and all abilities at the beginning of a project.
- Engages all project stakeholders early in the design process.
- Assembles teams with members who have a working knowledge of needs
and guidelines for each of the transportation modes.
- Analyzes how to reasonably integrate various transportation modes and
considers design trade -offs to best meet multiple transportation objectives.
- Are sensitive and responsive to the project's context.
- Uses flexible design standards.
• "One size fits all" design or design based on functional roadway classification does
not work for Complete Streets. Complete Streets design needs to be based on
context and need.
• In certain circumstances (e.g., low volume, rural roadways or low speed residential
streets), having automobiles, bicycles and pedestrians share the vehicle travel lane
was considered a reasonable integration of their needs.
• It is beneficial to establish a formalized Complete Streets process, as it provides a
framework that helps initiate implementation of Complete Streets projects. Complete
Streets implementation will evolve after the agency gains some experience with
initial projects.
• Most agencies saw Complete Streets as an integral component of active living and
smart growth planning efforts.
• Several agencies had established a stakeholder committee to review and make
decisions regarding design exceptions, which they found to be beneficial.
• After implementing some initial Complete Streets projects, designing for Complete
Streets is now considered standard practice by the agencies implementing them.
• The Complete Streets design process has resulted in improved coordination and
communication between the various project stakeholders.
• Application of flexible design standards may be perceived as risky by agency
attorneys and engineers, as they see the process opening the agency up to lawsuits
or putting their professional licenses at risk.
Chapter S Complete Streets Legislative Report
Page 18 December 2009
• The interviewed agencies were not able to provide any benefit -cost data, but the
interviews did highlight the following generalized findings:
- A comprehensive planning and design process that integrates Complete
Streets principles into roadway improvement projects is more cost -
effective than later retrofitting Complete Streets components into
roadways. One exception to this was restriping roadways.
- For urban projects with spatial constraints, the primary issue is not cost,
but allocation of available space between various transportation modes
and functions.
- There will likely be additional costs associated with implementing
Complete Streets, but interviewed agencies felt the end product provided
a better long -term value.
- While cost is always a consideration, it is not an excuse to not implement
Complete Streets. Project planners and designers must balance and
safely integrate the needs of the various modes within the space available
in a cost - efficient manner.
Complete Streets Legislative Report Chapter S
December 2009 Page 19
This page was left intentionally blank.
Chapter S Complete Streets Legislative Report
Page 20 December 2009
Chapter 6:
Benefits, Feasibility, Costs and Funding
Several Advisory Committee members as well as practitioners who presented to the
committee expressed concern with the cost of implementing Complete Streets and
uncertainty of the value placed on Complete Streets by the public. As part of this study,
benefit and cost data on Complete Streets practices was requested of several agencies
nationwide that currently have policies as well as from the National Complete Streets
Coalition. Although all of these agencies responded that no benefit/cost analysis was
available, several informal cost - benefit calculations have been made by these
jurisdictions, and they have found the benefits to outweigh the costs.
A potential list of benefits and costs associated with Complete Streets was developed
by the Advisory Committee and technical Advisory Panel.
Benefits
Benefits may be discussed in qualitative terms if they are difficult to quantify and may be
both short- and long -term benefits, such as the following:
• Safety — reduction of conflict and encouragement of more predictable interaction
among motorists, bicyclists and pedestrians of all ages and abilities.
• Environmental — less air and noise pollution.
• Maintenance — less use of roads by automobiles if significant mode shifts occur.
• Congestion — integration of transit and non - motorized modes can reduce local
congestion if a mode shift occurs.
• Health — increased physical activity, potentially reduced pollution and reduction in
healthcare costs.
• Accessibility — approximately one -third of the population cannot or does not drive a
car; increased compliance with the ADA policy will provide better access for people
of all ages and abilities.
• External costs — reductions correlated with less costly modal choices.
• Economic activity and property values
• Social interactions related to quality of life
In June 2009, the Center for Disease Control released a report titled Recommended
Community Strategies and Measurements to Prevent Obesity in the United States,
which recommends the adoption of Complete Streets policy as a strategy for obesity
prevention. The Minnesota Obesity Plan (pg 46) endorses Complete Streets.
Complete Streets Legislative Report Chapter 6
December 2009 Page 21
Feasibility
In theory, Complete Streets is not revolutionary; it is essentially practicing coordinated,
thorough and timely planning and design. In 2006, Mn /DOT adopted a policy to use
CSS on all projects to create excellence in transportation project development. One of
the six key principles of Mn /DOT's approach is to "address all modes of travel."
Adopting a Complete Streets policy would complement Mn /DOT's existing CSS policy
and further reinforce its principles. In addition, Mn /DOT staff have been actively
working on integrating the ADA, CSS and flexibility in design and bicycle /pedestrian
principles within the agency.
As noted earlier, although there are some incremental additional costs associated with
Complete Streets (right -of -way, bicycle lanes, etc.), they are often offset by the benefits
(providing for all modes and users, health and environment). Based on these findings,
Complete Streets in Minnesota is considered feasible on state, regional and local levels.
Complete Streets cannot be looked upon as a prescriptive design or outcome; it is a
process based on guiding principles. Planners, designers and local community
representatives will need to coordinate in order to better understand the needs of
different users of a corridor. Looking beyond the site and understanding existing and
planned destinations in the area will be necessary to determine design details needed
to comply with a Complete Streets Policy.
Three Minnesota agencies (Hennepin County and the cities of St. Paul and Rochester)
have recently adopted Complete Streets resolutions, indicating that Complete Streets
are feasible in Minnesota on a local level.
Hennepin County
Hennepin County's op Ijcy was approved unanimously on July 14, 2009, and the county
is developing a methodology to conduct an inventory and assessment of its facilities.
City of Rochester
Though Rochester has had long- standing policies requiring the integration of pedestrian
facilities into the transportation system, they have already experienced early success
with their Complete Streets Policy. Rochester anticipates that their Complete Streets
Policy will have a stronger impact on repaving, rehabilitation and reconstruction projects
than on new construction.
So far, these agencies have reported minimal change in their design approach, as
evaluating user needs in the design phase of a project has always been standard
practice. While this is true for new construction, it should be noted that reconstruction
and road projects related to other road authorities have resulted in significantly
increased efforts to accommodate bicycles, pedestrians and transit. There are currently
several additional agencies going through the policy development process.
Costs
Potential additional costs could include:
Chapter 6 Complete Streets Legislative Report
Page 22 December 2009
• Purchase of additional right -of -way
• Increased travel time for motor vehicles
• Shifting of traffic to other routes in network
• Additional infrastructure to maintain and operate
Costs for Complete Streets may be reduced by minor changes in the planning and
design processes, including:
• Shift in the planning and design approach — a Complete Streets approach would
integrate the needs of all user modes early on in the project development/
planning process, rather than trying to "fit them in to" the design later on in the
process.
• Be opportunistic — for example, if a resurfacing or utility project is scheduled,
seek out opportunities to include Complete Streets elements within the project.
• Keep the network vision in mind — review a project in relation to building an
interconnected network of facilities for all modes; work to eliminate barriers within
the networks whenever reasonable.
• Design to minimize operations and maintenance costs for all corridor features.
• Establish a clear process for prioritizing operations efforts that is understood by
decision makers, users and maintenance staff.
• Design incrementally — implement Complete Streets as projects arise and a
network will develop over time.
• Retrofitting is costly and should be avoided or addressed as part of a strategic
capital program (however, in some cases, the benefits of a retrofit may outweigh the
costs).
• Use multiple funding sources for one project.
Complete Streets Legislative Report Chapter 6
December 2009 Page 23
This page was intentionally left blank
Chapter 6 Complete Streets Legislative Report
Page 24 December 2009
Chapter 7:
Implementation Strategies
As of the publication of this report, 101 agencies in the nation have implemented some
form of a Complete Streets policy, including 16 states. Lessons learned from agency
interviews and information provided by the National Complete Street Coalition indicates
that the best process to successfully implement a Complete Streets program is a
sequential, phased approach:
• Establish the need for a Complete Streets policy (which this study has done).
• Develop a policy.
• Revise planning and design policies and manuals to complement a Complete
Streets policy.
• Implement in daily practice.
• Refine as necessary.
The systematic provision of Complete Streets can be advanced using different types of
policies, including resolutions, legislation /ordinances, tax ordinance, executive order,
internal policy, plan and manuals /standards. The policy developed may differ based on
the type and size of the agency implementing it, but general elements of a good policy
include:
• Emphasize safety for drivers, bicyclists and pedestrians of all ages and abilities.
• Emphasize an interconnected network of facilities for all modes.
• Provide practical and flexible design standards.
- Including guidance and support for deviating from standards when
appropriate
• Provide broad direction that is general (not prescriptive and minimizes specifics).
• Address multiple jurisdictions (State, MPO, local).
A balanced Complete Streets policy can result when its development includes input
and final support from a broad spectrum of transportation stakeholders, including:
• Experts from all modes
• Elected officials
• Professional planners and designers
• All levels of government
Complete Streets Legislative Report Chapter 7
December 2009 Page 25
Agencies that have been successful in developing and implementing a Complete
Streets program have found that the process can take several years, but results in an
end product that is useful and requires minimal modifications. An example is the State
of Massachusetts, which is a recognized leader in the development of its Complete
Streets program. A state law was enacted in the 1990s followed by the development of
a new state design manual which includes a multi -modal Level of Service for
intersections, along with many other enhancements.
Chapter 7 Complete Streets Legislative Report
Page 26 December 2009
Chapter 8:
Conclusions and Recommendations
Conclusions
The meetings, discussions, presentations, interviews, research and synthesis included
as part of this study lead to the identification of several key conclusions:
Study Content
• The purpose of this study was not to develop a policy, but to identify the benefits,
feasibility and cost of implementing a Complete Streets policy in Minnesota and
provide recommendations relating to the implementation of a Complete Streets
policy.
• Complete Streets does not mean "all modes on all roads "; rather, the goal of
Complete Streets should be to 1) develop a balanced transportation system that
integrates all modes via integrated modal planning inclusive of each mode of
transportation (transit, freight, automobile, bicycle and pedestrian), and 2) inclusion
of all transportation users of all types, ages and abilities.
Implementation
• More than 100 agencies have implemented Complete Streets policies in the United
States, including 16 states.
• Complete Streets must start at the planning stage. Better and mutually supportive
integration of transportation and land use planning across all jurisdictions is
recognized as extremely important toward enabling and supporting complete streets.
• Implementation of a Complete Streets process typically focuses on new
construction /reconstruction. However, opportunities exist to implement Complete
Streets on existing facilities (e.g. re- striping).
• APA/NCSC is in the process of completing report on the best practices of Complete
Streets, which will be available in January 2010.
• Conventional transportation planning has often focused mobility of motor vehicles,
using auto -based measures. A recent study at the University of MN Center for
Transportation Studies (Report #9 in the series Access to Destinations Study), has
demonstrated a method for transportation planning that includes pedestrian and
bicycle accessibility that could assist in prioritizing projects to achieve true Complete
Streets.
Design
• There is an 'outcome' lag. Many of the Complete Streets concerns arose from past
design practices that have been improved over the years. As projects are
developed, CSS and Complete Streets principles are being driven by SAFETEA -LU
and ADA.
Complete Streets Legislative Report Chapter 8
December 2009 Page 27
• There is not a simple "one size fits all" design. Each project needs to be designed
based on user needs and contextual factors. The policy should not be prescriptive
and should allow flexibility in design.
• Minnesota's existing transportation planning and design guidelines require revisions
to eliminate inconsistencies and integrate all modes of travel. A Complete Streets
approach needs to recognize the difference between urban and rural settings. The
main areas of potential conflict between current design practices and Complete
Streets are lane width, speed, average daily traffic, level of service and roadway
classification.
• The Complete Streets design process does not focus on functional class.
Consistent with CSS, the design process must consider all modes and community
context, including development and land use plans.
• Developing a design exception review process is a recommended component of the
Complete Streets process.
Operations and Maintenance
• Involve maintenance and operations staff in the design process to minimize long-
term maintenance costs.
• Define snow removal priorities on sidewalks and ramps to improve accessibility.
Costs, Benefits and Feasibility
• Quantifiable benefit/cost analyses have not been performed for Complete Streets
implementation. The general consensus is that the benefits of Complete Streets
balance the incremental costs.
• Although there are potentially some incremental additional costs associated with
Complete Streets, they are often offset by the benefits. Therefore, Complete Streets
are considered feasible on the state, regional and local levels.
Funding
• There is not one central resource that agencies can use to get information about all
funding sources available.
• Finding funding can be difficult if the project needs do not align with funding
requirements. In addition, if an agency would like to use multiple funding sources on
one project, the timeframe the funding is available from each source may not align.
• Public /Private Partnerships are another possible source of funding.
Chapter 8 Complete Streets Legislative Report
Page 28 December 2009
Policy Elements
Any Complete Streets Policy must strive to improve safety. According to the NCSC, an
ideal policy has the following elements:
• A vision for how and why the community wants to complete its streets.
• Specifies that 'all users' includes pedestrians, bicyclists and transit passengers of all
ages and abilities as well as trucks, buses and automobiles.
• Street connectivity to create a comprehensive, integrated, connected network for all
modes.
• Adoptable by all agencies to cover all roads.
• Applications for both new and retrofit projects, including design, planning,
maintenance, and operations for the entire right of way.
• A clear procedure that requires high -level approval of exceptions.
• Best design standards while recognizing the need for flexibility in balancing user
needs.
• Solutions will complement the context of the community.
• Performance standards with measurable outcomes.
• Specific next steps for implementation of the policy.
Additional elements identified by the study committees may include:
• Adaptive lighting and maintenance impacts management (primarily snow,
landscaping and lighting).
Recommendations
Being one of the first DOTs to adopt a policy requiring Context CSS and with its new
Strategic Vision, Mn /DOT is already well positioned to support Minnesota in a Complete
Streets approach to transportation investment. In addition, Mn /DOT staff have been
actively working on integrating the ADA, CSS and bicycle /pedestrian principles within
the agency. Three local agencies (Hennepin County and the cities of St. Paul and
Rochester) in Minnesota have already adopted their own resolutions for Complete
Streets, indicating that Complete Streets are achievable at a local level.
Mn /DOT needs to be prepared to assist local agencies in developing their local
Complete Streets approach to assist their specific project development needs.
The study committee has identified several key recommendations:
• Mn /DOT is committed to partner with a broad coalition including local governments
to build on existing CSS practices and develop and implement a Mn /DOT Complete
Streets policy using the following phased sequential approach:
- Develop a Mn /DOT Complete Streets policy.
Complete Streets Legislative Report Chapter 8
December 2009 Page 29
- Reconcile differences in planning and design policies, guidelines and
manuals.
- Implement.
- Review /measure /refine.
• Mn /DOT should review and revise conflicting information in Minnesota's state and
local design documents.
• Mn /DOT should further explore the feasibility of integrating it's existing planning and
design manuals related to Complete Streets into one manual.
• Mn /DOT should integrate Complete Streets into Mn /DOT's new Scoping Process
model (see Appendix B).
• Mn /DOT should identify ways to assist local governments in developing and
understanding funding sources and the constraints related to these sources.
• All agencies should develop an integrated transportation plan that addresses
connectivity for all modes for all users of all ages and abilities.
• Mn /DOT should serve as a resource to assist local agencies in developing their own
Complete Streets Policies with the support of Mn /DOT's expertise in CSS, ADA,
bicycle /pedestrian planning, design and funding strategies.
• Mn /DOT State Aid should review the State Aid variance process and make it more
accessible and transparent.
If a policy is developed it is very important that all stakeholders be engaged to address
the key issues listed above and within this report.
Additional resources on Complete Streets are available in Appendix F.
Chapter 8 Complete Streets Legislative Report
Page 30 December 2009