PO Box 10581Portland, OR 97296

503 757 8342www.americawalks.org

On Thursday, February 5th, America Walks launched the "Inspiring Stories" Webinar series with a presentation titled "Elected Officials Walk the Walk." Based on America Walks recently published Case Studies, this webinar focused on three local elected officials who have used their status as political leaders to advance walking and walkability. America Walks was pleased to be able to offer the opportunity to share the expertise of these leaders and encouraged by the discussion that followed. All three presenters had increased walking and advanced walkable design in their home communities in different ways that had been highlighted in a series of Case Studies (link) published by America Walks. First, Councilwoman (and Mayor Pro Tem) Barbara Hoppe of Columbia, Missouri (link) described her successful campaign to convince city traffic engineers to reduce neighborhood speed limits. Former Board Member Chris Zimmerman of Arlington County, Virginia (link) focused on his approach to community engagement and education initiatives, which led to numerous policy and built environment changes that helped transform Arlington into one of the most celebrated examples of a modern, walkable, transit-oriented urban community. And, finally, Oklahoma City Mayor Mick Cornett (link) shared experience of when he famously "put his city on a diet," leading to citizens shedding a combined million pounds in excess weight and supporting $777 million in new taxes to fund projects focused on health, walkability, quality of life, and economic development. The knowledgeable presentations were followed by a dynamic discussion with questions from attendees, some of which were unable to be immediately addressed. America Walks is pleased to continue the conversation by providing information and answers to some additional questions. How do you encourage better pedestrian crosswalk yielding by cars? The most effective way to reduce traffic speeds and increase crosswalk yielding compliance is through good design. Built environment features such as bulb-outs, central islands, narrower vehicle lanes, textured crosswalk surfaces, buildings close to the sidewalk, street trees, and other elements that prevent long sight distances for drivers all serve to calm traffic and improve crosswalk safety. What are the first steps to making a community walk friendly? What advice do you have for this process? While every community is different, some key "first steps" would include reaching out to key stakeholders such as public health professionals and police officers; holding a pedestrian safety summit or walkable community workshop, studying your local street design standards and zoning codes, and starting to count pedestrians. For more information, America Walks and Sam Schwartz Engineering has published Steps to a Walkable Community (link), a comprehensive guide containing more than 100 tactics and case studies, and this is a great place to start. Can you speak to the issue of the importance of collecting and using data. The metric that best demonstrates success is the increase in pedestrian traffic, and yet counting pedestrians is not

done in many jurisdictions. Columbia was one of four communities that each received a $29 million federal "Nonmotorized Transportation Pilot Program" grant in 2005. Tracking pedestrian (and bicycle) activity was required, and an annual counting protocol was developed and adopted by the City of Columbia in partnership with the University of Missouri. The data collected shows more than a tripling of walking trips over recent years. In general, America Walks recommends a counts program for all communities that wish to enhance their walkability - it enables you to track success, shows where infrastructure improvements are needed, and provides community talking points. Collecting pedestrian data is one of seven recommended strategies in Secretary of Transportation Anthony Foxx's recent Mayors' Challenge (link) program. Can you talk more about the "no-no" of surface parking between building and sidewalk - why is that a "no-no?" Surface parking between the sidewalk and the building is not pedestrian-friendly because it gives prominence to the automobile vs. pedestrian and transit-friendly development. Many zoning codes in the US disallow parking between commercial uses and the sidewalk in order to promote convenient pedestrian access between the use and public sidewalks and transit facilities; therefore promoting walking and transit use. Zoning codes that have maximum building setbacks (i.e. buildings must be close to sidewalks) along main streets and transit streets also help promote pedestrian-friendly environments. Additional Comments from Panelist Chris Zimmerman The comments below were submitted by Chris Zimmerman in answer to questions posted during the February 20 webinar. How do you address sidewalk maintenance and snow removal in your new sidewalk program and what is the adjacent property owner's responsibility? Snow removal is a different matter. Wasn't dealt with until years after the policy change on sidewalk construction and maintenance. A few years ago (3 or 4), after some bad winters, the County Board approved an ordinance to require property owners to clear sidewalks after snowfall. Similar to ordinances common around the country (at least in northern communities), with lots of escape valves for hardship situations. Interesting thing is that the impetus came from walkability and transit advocates (especially younger folks), who were fed up with not being able to get to their bus stops. A major factor was that much property along arterial streets is multifamily housing. Owners would pay to plow their parking lots, but snow would pile up on the adjacent sidewalk. We said, if they can clear the parking lot and driveway, they can clear the sidewalk. How did you work with transportation staff and others to make sure that the Complete Streets policy was actually implemented and not just another paragraph in the comp plan? Step-by-step. In our case, the practice preceded the adoption of the CS policy. That is, we fought over the implementation first, particularly through neighborhood traffic calming, and then arterial traffic management. New policies and practices emerged, which then were embodied in the revamped transportation master plan (including, by then, the explicit use of the "complete streets" terminology). But the real answer is that, over time, the institutional leadership and personnel

turned over, with new folks committed to a progressive approach. (By the time I left, we had a Transportation Director and Chief Traffic Engineer who got to work on their bicycles. The Chief Engineer didn't even own a car.) In the long run, successful implementation depends on having staff who are believers. Have building codes changed in Arlington so that new developments are more walkable? If so, has there been pushback from developers? Not sure about the term "building codes." The building code is essentially the IBC; it's in statute, and the County can't do anything about it. However, there's nothing in building code that prevents the construction of development that supports a walkable environment. If the question is really about the "development code" -- that is, the locally-prescribed rules governing site plan approvals -- then yes, we did change those. Mostly gradually, over a period of years, making them more prescriptive in certain terms. (Especially with regard to things like placement of curb cuts, location of loading docks, facade permeability at the ground plane, etc.) And yes, there was push-back. In the early days there were lots of complaints that things just couldn't be built that way. Or no one would want to. Or it would cost to much. In the end, they do what they have to to get approved. Then they discover that their property is more valuable than they had even hoped. Then they come back to do more. Eventually, the first proposal is in line with the policies, and you don't have to argue about it any more.