The premise sounds sensible. As the city of Vancouver’s website states: “Complete Streets are streets for everyone. Whether people are traveling by car, bicycle, transit, or as pedestrians, they need safe, comfortable and convenient travel routes.”
Indeed, cities and counties must take a futuristic view of transportation, preparing for changing demographics rather than clinging to the ideas of the past. But as Clark County officials consider adopting a Complete Streets ordinance, questions must be asked. Among them: How would the program impact costs of street construction and maintenance? And would the program limit access for automobiles in favor of less-popular modes of transportation?
Before answering those questions, it is important to acknowledge that urban areas are finally taking a balanced approach to development after decades of car-centric construction. The result of one-track development has been sprawling urban areas that are increasingly clogged with cars on streets unprepared for growing populations.
Complete Streets guidelines are part of a wave of intelligent design that aims to make those areas more accessible and inhabitable. As Eric Giacchino, board president of Bike Clark County, said: “It’s been a long time coming. I think as we see the demographics of Clark County and Vancouver change, people will look for alternative modes of transportation.”
There might be some truth to that, but local governments must understand that automobiles will continue to be the preferred form of transportation. While we can desire for more people to leave their cars at home, that desire is not rooted in reality. The number of miles driven by Americans continues to increase each year.
All of which brings us to Clark County’s consideration of a Complete Streets policy. Such a policy calls for the inclusion of sidewalks, crosswalks, bike lanes, and transit stops. In one example, it might lead to a four-lane road being converted to one lane in each direction with a left-turn lane in the middle and bike lanes on each side. While new construction in the county typically includes such provisions, the adoption of an official plan makes sense; state law dictates that only local governments with such a policy are eligible for funding.
Still, there remains the question of cost. According to Smart Growth America, which promotes Complete Streets design, the Washington State Department of Transportation found that the process saves about 30 percent on costs when rehabilitating highways that serve as main streets in small towns. A study in Charlotte, N.C., found that “incorporating Complete Streets elements such as bike lanes and sidewalks slightly increases the cost of a project” but “market fluctuations in construction costs play a more significant role”; and other projects have found savings by following such guidelines.
Benefits from making transportation more accessible for all citizens would offset the planning or construction burdens of following Complete Streets. Notably, the proposed Clark County ordinance arose out of the Aging Readiness Task Force, which looked at how local government can better serve residents.
Many of those residents are leery about changes to how streets and developed and constructed, concerned about whether well-meaning plans will increase costs but provide few benefits. Yet while we urge caution when Clark County councilors consider the ordinance next month, we are intrigued by the benefits of Complete Streets planning.
