1. 1 ODOTs Complete Streets Initiative

2. 2 Tipping Point for Complete Streets

3. 3 Grassroots Focus

4. 4 Federal Focus Complete 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. 5 DOT 2010 Policy Statement US DOT has formulated key recommendations for state DOTs and 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. 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. 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

9. Increasing Investments Access the complete report at: www.PeoplePoweredMovement.org/Benchmarking

10. Complete Streets Policy Draft policy developed and being reviewed for adoption Developed by internal staff and local government representatives

11. 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. 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

13. Draft Policy Highlights Design 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

14. Draft Policy Highlights Engineering judgment should be used to develop a typical section that accommodates all modes of transportation while balancing various safety concerns.

15. 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.

16. Draft Policy Highlights Accommodation shall be made and documented through the PDP. District environmental coordinators will verify policy compliance. Training/QARs will be conducted.

17. 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. 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.) 12 th Street (Canton)

19. 19 Opportunities for Change

20. 20 Less than ideal Ideal

21. 21 Re-Allocating Space

22. Shoulder bikeways on rural roads

23. Shared-lane markings Sharrows

24. 24 Challenges Funding Maintenance Community Tradeoffs Design Standards ROW Divided Public Opinion

25. 25 Car-Centric

26. 26 Transportation Choices

27. 27 For more information... Michelle May, ODOT Safety Program michelle.may@dot.state.oh.us Heather Bowden, ODOT Bike/Pedestrian Planner heather.bowden@dot.state.oh.us