PRINT | PDF

Safe Routes

Nicole Steddom (author), Jonathan Rosenbloom & Christopher Duerksen (editors)

INTRODUCTION

Creating protected walking paths to school, work, and nature is vital to make walking and biking more attractive. When people walk more, they are healthier, and they reduce greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions and other pollutants associated with driving gas-powered cars. This ordinance seeks to increase walking by requiring or encouraging the development of “Safe Routes.” Safe Routes is a national initiative focused on creating safe pathways for children to get to school by walking or biking.[1] Building off the national Safe Routes campaign, many municipalities have embedded safe routes into their codes and creatively expanded walking and biking routes in order to benefit a broader array of citizens.

Local governments may design these ordinances to require the creation of safe routes or they may create incentives to encourage developers and home owners to incorporate safe routes into the properties. Many communities have realized the environmental benefit of reducing the number of vehicles on the road, and have simply required that developers provide trails or other walkways to local schools.[2] Other municipalities require developers to perform a safe routes analysis, while others require schools to be built in particular places or set maximum walking distances from neighborhoods to schools.[3] Some local governments have incentivized the creation of safe routes by making them a requirement in order to receive certain incentives, certificates of occupancy, or building approvals.[4]

EFFECTS

Creating safe routes to school, work, and nature encourages walking and bicycling which not only improves citizens’ health, but it also serves to reduce GHG emissions by giving safe alternatives to vehicular transport. Safety is of course a first priority. Pedestrians have a two times greater likelihood of being hit by a car where there are no sidewalks.[5] In 2009, approximately 23,000 children were injured or killed while walking or bicycling in the U.S.[6]  Medical costs for children and their families were around $839 million in 2005 when treating children’s bicycling and walking fatalities.[7]

The second priority for creating safe routes to work, school, and nature is health. Two miles of walking is the equivalent of two-thirds of the recommended daily activity for children.[8] Obesity is on the rise for children and adults. Creating an incentive to do something as simple as bicycling or walking can make a significant difference in rates of obesity. It is estimated that one-fourth of health care costs in the U.S. can be attributed to obesity.[9] The cost can be almost $14 billion a year for childhood obesity.[10] Walking and/or bicycling can also improve a child’s academic performance. Studies have shown that children who engage in physical activity before class are more attentive, learn better, and experience an increase in memory.[11]

The third priority for creating safe routes to work, school, and nature is environmental. According to Safe Routes Partnership, “returning to 1969 levels of walking and bicycling to school would save 3.2 billion vehicle miles, 1.5 million tons of carbon dioxide and 89,000 tons of other pollutants—equal to keeping more than 250,000 cars off the road for a year.”[12] Although development and sprawl over the last fifty years may make a return to 1969 levels extremely difficult, even a 5% increase in “walkability” for a neighborhood can reduce vehicular miles by 6%.[13] It is estimated that one-third of schools are in “air pollution danger zones.”[14] Asthma is on the rise in children, and children that are routinely exposed to traffic pollution have a much greater likelihood of developing heart and lung problems as adults.[15] Creating safe routes for children to walk to school and nature can reverse these trends, while saving money.

EXAMPLES

Cibolo, TX

In Cibolo’s Code of Ordinances, there are a wide variety of sustainable goals.[16] The City’s application of mixed-use development in this particular ordinance focuses on transportation networks and how pedestrians and bike enthusiasts can coexist in a manner that is efficient for vehicles, and attractive for pedestrians or bicyclists.[17] Pertinent to the idea of Cibolo’s safe routes is the concept of block design.[18] The overall goal of block design is primarily to “create pedestrian-oriented development by establishing a well-defined pattern of walkable blocks and intersecting streets, attractive and well-designed streetscapes that are human-scaled and pedestrian friendly.”[19]

There is also an extensive discussion in the code that deals strictly with pedestrian and bicycle access.[20] Cibolo has created standards that must be complied with in all new development such as access from the site of development to public bike paths or greenways.[21] Other standards require sidewalks through parking lots, primary entrances to buildings with connections to greenways or trail systems, and connections between developments, adjacent uses, and perimeter sidewalks. These pathways must have direct pedestrian and bicycle compatibility.[22]

To view the provision, see Cibolo, TX Code of Ordinances § 4.7 (2017).

Pima County, AZ

Like many jurisdictions, Pima County, Arizona provides general standards for subdivisions.[23] In Pima County, however, there must be a safe route linkage between schools and subdivisions. Those linkages must be one and a half miles for elementary schools and two and a half miles for middle schools.[24] Pima County requires that developers submit safe routes plans to school boards. Such plans must be submitted after having met with the school district and discussed the plat or development plan.[25] There must be ten acres set aside in the subdivision for public recreation areas. Further, design and development must be sensitive to the native environment and may include trails.[26] Recreation area plans must be submitted for review at thirty, sixty, ninety, and one hundred percent completion stages.[27]

To view the provision, see Pima County, Arizona Code of Ordinances § 18.69.090 (2017).

ADDITIONAL EXAMPLES

North Las Vegas, Nevada Code of Ordinances § 17.24.140 (2018) (providing a “menu” of sustainability options which include transportation, biking, and pedestrian traffic).

Buncombe County, North Carolina Code of Ordinances § 78-650 (2017) (providing a point system to earn credit for incorporating safe routes to school).

Rolling Hills, California Code of Ordinances § 17.27.010 (2017) (implementing transportation demand and trip reduction measures).

Indianapolis - Marion County, Indiana Code of Ordinances § 744-301 (2017) (accessing connectivity (path, sidewalk, etc.) standards for new developments).

ADDITIONAL RESOURCES

UNC Highway Safety Research Center, Safe Routes: National Center for Safe Routes to Schoolhttps://perma.cc/BY3G-CCDM (last visited July 2, 2018) (National Center for Safe Routes to School).

Safe Routes to School National Partnership, Healthy Communities: Quick Facts and Stats, https://perma.cc/JYU8-39QV (last visited July 12, 2018) (information about Safe Routes for school).

National Recreation and Parks Association, Safe Routes to Parks, https://perma.cc/DGN8-U5BN (last visited July 12, 2018) (initiative to create routes to parks).

Collier County Government, Rural Land Stewardship Area (RLSA) Overlay Program, https://perma.cc/3CQ8-XSCA (last visited July 2, 2018) (explaining the RLSA program in Collier County).

U.S. Department of Transportation, A Resident’s Guide for Creating Safer Communities for Walking and Biking (Jan. 2015), https://perma.cc/WMT4-N2F7 (describing steps that can be taken by residents to increase walking and biking in their community).

Local and Regional Government Alliance on Race & Equity, Racial Equity Toolkit: An Opportunity to Operationalize Equity (Oct. 30, 2015), https://perma.cc/CDN7-5Q7Y (outlining ways in which local governments can create policies to eliminate racial inequality).

ChangeLab Solutions, Complete Parks: Creating and Equitable Parks System, https://perma.cc/8V6M-CCN3 (last visited July 2, 2018) (tools to create equitable park systems in all neighborhoods).

ChangeLab Solutions, A Guide to Building Healthy Streets: How Public Health Can Implement Complete Streets, https://perma.cc/L33K-VUGM (last visited July 2, 2018) (providing tools to make streets safer and more accessible for bikers and walkers).

Safe Routes to School National Partnership, Safe Routes to School Meets Safe Routes to Parks (Dec. 17, 2015), https://perma.cc/P943-7W2L (strategies to increase physical activity in the lives of residents by increasing the safety of streets for bikes and pedestrians).

CITATIONS

[1] UNC Highway Safety Research Center, Safe Routes: National Center for Safe Routes to School, https://perma.cc/BY3G-CCDM (last visited July 2, 2018).

[2] Pima County, Arizona Code of Ordinances § 18.69.090 (2017).

[3] McKinney, Texas Code of Ordinances § B-2 (2018).

[4] St. Lucie County, Florida Land Development Code § 4.05.08 (2017).

[5] Safe Routes to School National Partnership, Healthy Communities: Quick Facts and Stats, https://perma.cc/JYU8-39QV.

[6] Id.

[7] Id.

[8] Id.

[9] Id.

[10] Id.

[11] Id.

[12] Id.

[13] Id.

[14] Id.

[15] Id.

[16] Cibolo, Texas Code of Ordinances § 4.7 (2017).

[17] Id.

[18] Id.

[19] Id.

[20] Id.

[21] Id.

[22] Id.

[23] Pima County, Arizona Code of Ordinances § 18.69.090 (2017).

[24] Id.

[25] Id.

[26] Id.

[27] Id.


Please note, although the above cited and described ordinances have been enacted, each community should ensure that newly enacted ordinances are within local authority, have not been preempted, and are consistent with state comprehensive planning laws. Also, the effects described above are based on existing examples. Those effects may or may not be replicated elsewhere. Please contact us and let us know your experience.