I like to talk about Complete Streets as a policy initiative – because it is about using existing, mainstream transportation funds differently. On the federal level, since we’re asking for a policy change and not a new funding program, we’ve sidestepped the debate about money and where it is going to come from.
But the recent actions of President Obama, and the US Department of Transportation, are showing us the way toward mainstream transportation programs that take all users of the transportation system into account.
At first glance, a push for $50 billion to rebuild 150,000 miles of roads could be a disaster – if it simply lays fresh asphalt on miles of roadway without a sidewalk or decent bus stop in sight. But the Council of Economic Advisers’ report on Infrastructure Investment (.pdf), released in conjunction with the President’s announcement, makes an eloquent argument for the economic benefits of investments that expand transportation choices and makes awards based on project merit. And the team at the USDOT is coming up with some interesting ways to do that. One program may follow the lead of the Education Department’s Race to the Top, with pre-qualifying criteria. No definitive word yet on what those criteria may be, but of course we thought up one benchmark right away (by the way, we’re at 173 of them, and counting).
The DOT also wants the merit-based funding to address transportation at a network level. As Undersecretary for Policy Roy Kienitz put it in a recent House forum, the program would support regions and states who can say, “Here’s our vision for a network – please help us complete it.” This is a critical point. So much of implementing a Complete Streets policy is in closing gaps, making small, incremental fixes, and focusing on creating diverse yet continuous safe networks for people as they walk, bicycle, and take public transportation.
A network approach recognizes the importance of what I like to call the ‘capillaries’ of the transportation system: the walking and bicycling routes necessary for short trips and for accessing the main arteries of the system. For example, for years Georgia used project funding to improve Buford Highway in suburban Atlanta for automobile travel – but by ignoring the network, the road has long been a dangerous barrier for low-income workers trying to use the buses that run along it. And, it is likely clogged with extra cars as people decide it is safer to drive a quarter mile than to walk or bicycle. Without curb ramps on surrounding streets, the best new rail line will be off-limits to a resident leaving his or her home using a wheelchair. A Complete Streets approach is as essential to the national interest as the big projects that get most of the funding.
The Council of Economic Advisers’ report makes this point when it highlights recent research showing that Charlotte, North Carolina’s new light rail system has increased physical activity levels among those who switched to it for the commute to work. The health benefits from this infrastructure investment could reach $12.6 million by 2015. Charlotte is making the most of its light rail investment with a strong Complete Streets policy that makes possible all those walks to reach the rails.
So, the bottom line is that we do need to talk about money – about how to create funding sources that encourage a Complete Streets approach. The President’s initiative starts that conversation, and holds the promise of breaking the funding logjam that has left us with an outmoded federal transportation program.