Skip to main content

Fix it first in practice

VDOT Crew pulling ditches in a Work Zone on west bound Route 60.

One of our recently launched principles, fix it first, targets maintenance over expansion, advocating for federal highway dollars to be spent repairing old roads and bridges before expanding or building new ones. So, what would it look like in practice to implement this principle into the federal transportation program, to shift our states’ priorities away from grand openings and toward more resilient transportation infrastructure?

VDOT Crew pulling ditches in a Work Zone on west bound Route 60.
(D. Allen Covey, VDOT)

The problem

Make no mistake, requiring repair and maintenance before expansion would represent a complete reorientation of our transportation program. While some states certainly do better than others, the majority of them are ignoring or deprioritizing certain maintenance needs in favor of building new roads. And arguably none are creating long-term plans for financing the ongoing maintenance of those new roads or bridges. Which is why every five years, we hear the same rhetoric about why we need a massive increase in federal transportation investment to “fix our crumbling roads and bridges,” and why conditions rarely change. It’s a loop cycle.

A few years ago, before the passage of the 2021 five-year infrastructure law (the IIJA), we heard endless speechifying on Capitol Hill about the decaying infrastructure. Thousands upon thousands of deficient bridges. Bad roads. Unfathomable backlogs of neglected maintenance and repair. But with that historic infusion of infrastructure money in hand from the IIJA, state DOTs and a collection of senators lost their minds that USDOT would even deign to suggest that repair be prioritized first with that money.

It shouldn’t be a revolutionary principle: Federal dollars should not be spent on new roads and bridges if our existing ones are at risk of or already breaking down. The need for this reprioritization primarily stems from the staggering lack of priority that maintenance has historically been given. Instead of fulfilling repairs, our dollars are spent on expansion, resulting in the overwhelming 830 billion-dollar maintenance backlog.

If you have a flat tire, you don’t take a cross-country road trip before getting the tire replaced. We should have the same approach to our transportation infrastructure. In this video, bridges in Fife, Washington and East Providence, Rhode Island had to be closed due to safety concerns after decades of delayed maintenance. The closures reduced traffic flows to local businesses, causing significant concerns amongst local business owners seeing their revenues dip. Delayed maintenance also impacts access to necessary resources, such as healthcare, and can exacerbate damages caused by natural disasters, reducing our resilience to extreme events. On the other hand, investing in repairs holds numerous opportunities to improve quality of life and increase economic growth. If we invested only $1 billion per year into resolving delayed maintenance, an estimated 13,000 direct and indirect jobs would be created.

comic illustration
Illustration produced for T4America by visual artist Jean Wei. IG/@weisanboo

Implementing the principle

To reorient our federal program around repair and maintenance we’ll have to get to the root of the problem: policy, the resistance of state DOTs and their elected leadership to this idea, and a mistaken belief that new roads and lanes are the only viable strategy to reduce congestion, connect people to opportunity, and create economic benefits.

Congress came close in 2020 during the run-up to what eventually became the IIJA. In the House of Representatives, a much stronger and superior five-year reauthorization proposal (the INVEST Act) included an amendment from Rep. Jesús “Chuy” García (D-IL) and Rep. Mike Gallagher (R-WI) that would have enshrined our ix-it-first principle into federal transportation policy. The amendment included three small but transformative changes to the bill:

  1. Require a maintenance plan for building new capacity.
  2. Require benefit-cost analyses (BCAs) on new capacity projects.
  3. Include a range of new performance measures in BCAs.

Although small, these changes would have ensured that our federal dollars were spent responsibly, that expansions would not crumble just a few decades after being built and that new capacity projects have considered a wide range of accurately predicted benefits.

Unfortunately, this and some of the other best parts of the superior INVEST Act were removed during negotiations with the Senate to produce the final 2021 Infrastructure Investments and Jobs Act (IIJA). This amendment is only one example that prioritizing maintenance is not an unpopular opinion, but it does happen to be less popular than a ribbon-cutting photo op. If state’s are going to prioritize spending on maintenance, it has to come from the top. As a former Mississippi DOT Commissioner told us a few years ago, left to their own devices, states will continue taking the blank checks to build new things. “If you want us to prioritize maintenance, then you’re going to have to tell us ‘you gotta do it!’”

Replicating the policies in the INVEST Act would be a good starting point, but the maintenance goals can be strengthened through a few other key details. The federal government could create strict requirements on deferred maintenance before states are permitted to utilize that funding for new builds. A strong example of this are transit formula funds, which currently prioritize funding maintenance over expansion. Furthermore, ties to federal dollars would require the federal government to develop stronger tracking methods on how state funds are being spent on maintenance. Additionally, the federal government should embed additional requirements to more accurately define the beneficiaries of expansion projects. Through stronger BCAs, the federal government can ensure that funds are being spent to improve the quality of life of those living in the communities near new projects.

So, why hasn’t this happened yet?

The longstanding myth that expanded roadways improve congestion has been debunked. Furthermore, expansion actually makes traffic worse. This idea is referred to as induced demand, and is an economic term that illustrates how an increased supply in something will make people want and/or use it more.

But most state DOTs still view expansion as the only tool in their toolbox, and are highly resistant to being good stewards if it comes at the expense of long-planned new highways and expansion projects. Shortly after the 2021 release of the IIJA, Federal Highway Administration Deputy Administrator Stephanie Pollack shared a memo gently urging states to prioritize repair over new capacity projects. As noted earlier, congressional reps carrying water for their state DOTs lost their minds at the humble suggestion (no requirement!) that they should prioritize repair. The outcry was so intense that USDOT had to recall the non-binding memo.

This controversy overshadowed the fact that their voters back home actually believe that repair is the best use of infrastructure dollars, as well as the fact that a majority also believe that new roads or lanes either don’t affect congestion or make it worse. (Focus groups we’ve conducted in the past have also shown that voters are shocked to discover that there are no requirements for repair first. Many assume there are.)

Now is the time for our federal government to ensure that our roads and bridges are in a good state of repair before expanding a system with insufficient plans to ensure it will stand the test of time.

It’s Fix It First Week

Click below to access more content related to our second principle for infrastructure investment, Fix it first. Find all three of our principles here.

  • Fix it first in practice

    One of our recently launched principles, fix it first, targets maintenance over expansion, advocating for federal highway dollars to be spent repairing old roads and bridges before expanding or building new ones. So, what would it look like in practice to implement this principle into the federal transportation program, to shift our states’ priorities away…

  • We can’t afford to keep avoiding repair

    When decision-makers fail to prioritize basic maintenance and repair, everyday Americans pay the price—in increased costs, increased time on the road, and suffering local economies. We can’t keep wasting taxpayer dollars without a clear plan to maintain what we’ve already built.

  • It’s time to stop expanding and start maintaining

    To reshape our transportation system and address staggering maintenance needs, we must prioritize repairing existing infrastructure before expanding our roadways any further.

Complete Streets make a difference

People cycle and walk down a green path near a transit stop.

Though it’s an uphill battle, national efforts to prioritize safety over speed really can gain momentum and achieve results. The Complete Streets movement is one such example.

People cycle and walk down a green path near a transit stop.
A street in Portland, OR features a bike path, transit, and space for people walking. (Travis Estell, Flickr)

The term Complete Streets refers to an approach to planning, designing and building streets that enables safe access for all users, including pedestrians, bicyclists, motorists and transit riders of all ages and abilities. While every complete street is unique depending on a community’s local context, these streets ultimately support a variety of transportation options and enhance the quality of life for residents by promoting safety, accessibility, and sustainability.

While it wasn’t always this way, an overemphasis on vehicle travel at the expense of all other modes of transportation has resulted in incomplete streets being the default approach to transportation in the U.S. It’s our hope that decision-makers at every level will change that by prioritizing safety over speed.

The early days

The term “Complete Streets” was first coined in 2003 by Barbara McCann, who now serves as the Senior Advisor to the Associate Administrator for Safety at the Federal Highway Administration. Two years later, she helped form the National Complete Streets Coalition, now a program of Smart Growth America. This coalition has played a crucial role in advocating for Complete Streets policies and practices over the last 20 years.

One of the landmark moments in the movement’s history occurred in 2009 when the National Complete Streets Coalition released its first Complete Streets Policy Guide. This guide provided a comprehensive framework for communities to develop their own Complete Streets policies. An updated policy framework, released last year, which serves as a national model of best practices to create a policy at any level of government. Click here to see the updated framework.

Successes and ongoing challenges

The impact of Complete Streets policies can be seen in numerous cities across the United States. For example, the city of Portland, Oregon, is renowned for its successful implementation of Complete Streets principles. Portland’s emphasis on cycling infrastructure, pedestrian-friendly design, and transit options has contributed to its reputation as a model for sustainable urban transportation.

Similarly, New York City’s implementation of Complete Streets features, such as protected bike lanes and pedestrian plazas, has transformed its streetscape, making it safer and more accessible for residents and visitors alike. These examples underscore the potential of Complete Streets to create more vibrant, equitable, and sustainable urban environments.

Despite the successes, the Complete Streets movement faces several challenges. Implementing these principles often requires overcoming entrenched interests and overcoming budgetary constraints. Additionally, achieving broad public support and ensuring that all community members benefit from Complete Streets projects can be complex. The number of people hit and killed while walking continues to rise across the country, reflecting the need for decision makers at every level to prioritize safety over speed. Click here for the National Complete Streets Coalition’s reflections on the path ahead.

The Complete Streets movement reflects a growing recognition of the need for transportation systems that serve all members of society, and change is far from over. Over the past 20 years, the concept has evolved from a visionary idea to a widely accepted approach that is reshaping the way we think about and design our roadways. As cities continue to embrace Complete Streets principles, they pave the way for more equitable, sustainable, and livable communities, setting a new standard for how we envision and experience our public spaces.

The loss of transportation choices in the U.S.

A person wearing a hood and heavy coat faces a busy street filled with cars and stoplights with no way to cross

Investments and policies that support car travel at the expense of all other transportation options have helped create a culture of driving in the U.S. Investing in a variety of transportation choices, like opportunities to bike, walk, and take public transit, would improve safety and accessibility for all.

A person wearing a hood and heavy coat faces a busy street filled with cars and stoplights with no way to cross
(Viktor Nikolaienko, Unsplash)

The ghost of walkable streets’ past

Before the car started to take off in the early 1930s, streets were for everyone. Wagons, walkers, bikers, horses, they all utilized the street to get to daily activities and destinations. Pre-Industrial Revolution Americans would walk between 10,000 and 18,000 steps per day, and high rates of walking and biking to work or school continued throughout the late 60s. Because the street was so widely used by many different forms of transport, it functioned as a public space, a place where children could play as much as cyclists could bike to the store.

Three cyclists travel down a wide path in this black-and-white photo
NYC Parks Photo Archive

When cars began rising in popularity in the 1920s, they entered a space not designed for them, posing a danger to other travelers. The public grew alarmed at rising death tolls and vehicle crashes, calling for reduced vehicle speeds and more protections from the car. Automakers, dealers, and enthusiasts flipped their narrative, advocating for legislation and funding campaigns that sought to regulate and restrict where people could walk and bike.

The latter campaign succeeded, but it didn’t make our streets safer. Instead, streets ultimately became a place where quick, convenient car travel is often prioritized over the safety and comfort of all other road users. In 2022, the number of people hit and killed while walking reached a 40-year high.

The illusion of choice

Post-WWII in the United States was a time of world-building, of focusing on creating a brighter future for the country in the aftermath of destruction. The infrastructure that came along with this shift made suburban lifestyles the ideal, and the car a symbol of freedom. A combination of economic incentives and a deprioritization of dense, mixed-use development led to sprawling cities with destinations spread far apart, connected by high-speed roadways.

Today, Americans are driving more for the same basic tasks. Research from Transportation for America and Third Way found that households in both rural and urban areas are driving significantly farther per trip as of 2017 than they were in 2001 to accomplish their commutes and daily tasks. Often, driving is the only convenient, safe, and reliable transportation option available, requiring households to shoulder the cost of a vehicle in order to access their daily needs. When people can’t afford regular access to a vehicle, when their car breaks down, or when they otherwise don’t have the ability to drive, they must navigate a transportation system that wasn’t built for them.

A lack of safe transportation options leads to reduced access to economic opportunity, increased risk of being hit by a vehicle, and higher rates of air pollution. These trends are felt by everyone, but they have the harshest impact on low-income communities and communities of color.

We need Complete Streets

Decisions made in the past have left our streets incomplete, prioritizing one way of travel over a wealth of other options. Complete Streets are streets that are safe for all users and that connect community members to the resources they need. This blog is the first installation of a four-part series on the Complete Streets movement. Keep an eye out for our next blog, where we’ll dissect the origins of the Complete Streets movement and what it aims to achieve.

“Short-term action, long-term change”: How quick builds are bringing innovation to safe streets implementation

Two children wheel materials down a closed street as multiple generations work together to install small barriers to protect road users.

Quick-build projects prioritize affordable, rapid, and temporary solutions to inaccessible and unsafe streetscape conditions. Through this approach to project implementation, communities are able to set an example that establishes the need and precedent for continued change in their urban environment.

Two children wheel materials down a closed street as multiple generations work together to install small barriers to protect road users.
Short-term, low-cost projects can deliver valuable insights and bring the community together. (City of Fayetteville, AR)

What are quick builds?

Smart Growth America has a variety of resources on how quick builds develop and what they can achieve. Access them here.

In recent years, the practice of installing rapid, low-cost, and temporary improvements to public space has gained popularity. These initiatives, often called “tactical urbanism” or “quick builds” emphasize action, prioritizing short-term projects designed to improve street safety, public spaces, and enjoyability of the streetscape for all users.

There are many groups around the country utilizing quick builds in their communities, and all share a common goal of using low-cost materials to experiment with and gather input on potential design changes. While quick builds can create impressive changes to spaces, their real power lies in illustrating what works, what doesn’t, and what our urban spaces should look like.

Quick-build projects may look and work very differently depending upon the community’s needs; however, the approach remains similar. These initiatives work in the gray area, opting to avoid bureaucratic processes or expensive materials which delay changes to public spaces. They’re especially useful when a community needs to inspire action because it draws attention to perceived shortcomings, widens public engagement, deepens understanding, gathers data, encourages people to work together, and tests solutions.

Smart Growth America has been integrating quick builds into their Complete Streets initiatives through technical assistance projects across the country, testing new street designs and innovating best practices. In November 2022, Smart Growth America launched their most recent Complete Streets Leadership Academy (CSLA), a series of virtual sessions and in-person workshops designed to support community-led quick-build projects on state-owned roads. One of the goals of these projects was to strengthen relationships between state DOTs and local jurisdictions to help pave the way for further change.

Mike Lydon and Anthony Garcia’s book, Tactical Urbanism: Short-term Action for Long-term Change, illustrates examples of how the approach can be utilized and includes a toolkit to guide project planning and implementation. According to the guide, any initiative utilizing Tactical Urbanism should consist of three main principles: safety enhancement, ability to adapt across project implementation, and constant innovation.

side-by-side photos of Times Square before and after the pedestrian plaza was installed. On the left, cars travel down a busy throughway near a wide sidewalk. On the right, the entire space is filled with people sitting under red umbrellas or walking to nearby businesses.
Before and after image of pedestrian infrastructure added in NYC. (Flickr, New York City Department of Transportation)

Small actions lead to big changes across the nation

Projects like quick builds have been utilized to make significant changes to urban spaces since the early 2000s. Former New York City Department of Transportation Commissioner, Janette Sadik-Khan, has stated that a rapid quick-build-style approach was key to her work in New York City from 2007-2013. Sadik-Khan’s initiatives during the time included the implementation of 400 bike lanes, the launch of CitiBike, the building of 60 pedestrian plazas, and, most notably, the closure of car access on Broadway through Times Square.

The projects utilized quick-build approaches such as rapid implementation and the use of impermanent materials, and with support from leadership and funding to back them up, the eventual development of these initiatives into permanent structures points to quick build projects’ ability to push design changes across the finish line. The precedent set by Sadik-Khan has changed the way the country thinks about transportation, an impact we can see across the nation as multi-modal transportation initiatives expand.

With innovation and adaptation as key principles in these temporary and low-cost projects, it’s no surprise that the advocacy strategies for the approach have evolved over time. One example of this is the work of Vignesh Swaminathan, known on TikTok as Mr. Barricade. Not only have his short social media videos inspired and educated people around the world, but his work as a consultant put more quick builds into practice.

In 2019, Swaminathan worked with the City of San Jose, California to lay ten-miles of temporary protected bike lanes. Swaminathan helped the city save on the installation by coordinating lane installations with planned repavings and the use of plastic vertical bollards and bus stop islands. The city eventually plans to replace the plastic barriers with concrete islands, making the lanes permanent.

Colorful paint along a curb leads to a concrete curb extension in this before and after photo.
At the corner of Church and Center, a temporary project turns led to permanent intersection improvements. (City of Fayetteville, AR)

Shaping progress with community engagement

Some government leaders are using temporary, low-cost projects to put power into people’s hands. In Fayetteville, Arkansas, the city government has created an online application for citizens to gain approval for projects which will ultimately influence the city’s planning and development. The city has also developed a guide to community-led tactical urbanism which helps residents plan and implement projects. If government entities want to have an impactful role in urban infrastructure evolution, they can’t act alone—these processes require mutual trust, community buy-in, and participatory community feedback.

When government officials, practitioners, and community members come together to reap the benefits of quick builds, the practice can bring multimodal streetscapes to life. This provides an opportunity to test the effectiveness and popularity of design changes. Quick builds offer a mechanism to make small short-term safety improvements again and again, teaching us how to make our streets safer in the long term, too.

New survey: Accessible Streetscapes for the Disability Community

A young child in a wheelchair travels down a bike lane on a narrow, calm street

A new survey created in collaboration with Smart Growth America, the International Parking & Mobility Institute, and the Disability Rights Education & Defense Fund aims to collect the experiences of people with disabilities navigating our streets. This information will contribute to best practice guidelines illustrated in our upcoming Accessible Streetscapes Design Guide. The survey will remain open through June 7—share your experience today.

From the parking meter and beyond: The origins of the Accessible Streetscapes Design Guide

In 2018, Transportation for America’s Policy Director, Benito Pérez, helped launch the District’s Department of Transportation Red Top Meter Program while working as Curbside Operations Manager with DDOT. Through the program, the department implemented parking meters with distinct red tops along curbside parking spaces with accessible access to the sidewalk. These meters reserve parking spaces for persons with disabilities and allow additional parking time. While programs such as the Red Top Meter Program can help to improve accessible access to the sidewalk, Pérez noticed a need for transportation practitioners to consider the accessibility of the entire streetscape. Projects that improve access to the curb can only be meaningful when the streetscape itself is accessible to all people, including people with disabilities.

What is the Accessible Streetscapes Design Guide?

Smart Growth America is collaborating with the International Parking & Mobility Institute, the Accessible Parking Coalition, and the Disability Rights Education & Defense Fund to create a first-of-its-kind resource: an Accessible Streetscapes Design Guide. The purpose of this design guide is to compile recommendations and best practices to improve accessibility across the entire streetscape, including parks, plazas, sidewalks, intersections, and more.

This guide further seeks to include considerations for a wide range of physical and cognitive abilities that historically have not been represented in legislation. Thirty-three years ago, the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) was passed, marking a notable milestone in the history of federal civil rights legislation for people with disabilities. The passage of this landmark legislation is cause for celebration, but at the heart of disability advocacy lies the consensus that the ADA was always meant to be a starting point, not the end game. Just last year, the Public Right-of-Way Accessibility Guidelines (PROWAG) was published by the U.S. Access Board in an effort to address the public right-of-way accessibility requirements left out of the ADA. These two examples of legislation illustrate meaningful steps towards more accessible spaces, yet ADA is limited in scope, PROWAG is limited in enforcement, and both are limited in their inclusion of persons with cognitive disabilities.

The forthcoming design guide hopes to provide a starter resource that can support practitioners as they implement policies and projects to design a streetscape that serves all who use it.

The Accessible Streetscapes Design Guide Survey

To create a design guide that reflects the needs of those who experience the challenges of navigating an inaccessible world, we developed a survey for streetscape users with disabilities in collaboration with the International Parking and Mobility Institute and Disability Rights Education & Defense Fund. The responses to this questionnaire are essential to designing recommendations that improve access for that community and will be at the core of the Accessible Streetscapes Design Guide.

With feedback collected from this survey, Smart Growth America and its partners will enhance the Accessible Streetscapes Design Guide with firsthand user feedback. To create a more equitable and accessible future, the perspectives of those most affected by our current system and its future changes must be included in all decision-making processes, from design to implementation.

If you identify as a member of the disability community, we would appreciate your contribution to the survey. Access the survey here.

If you are an organization, government entity, or just interested in distributing this survey, please reach out to us using this Google Form.

Tell your senator, now is the time for Complete Streets!

Close-up of Capitol building

Two new bills introduced to Congress by Senators Ed Markey and John Fetterman make Complete Streets a minimum design mandate, redefining our road design standards and ensuring funding for the implementation of Complete Streets projects. Let Congress know these bills can’t wait!

Close-up of Capitol building
Photo by S Chia on Flickr.

The Complete Streets process and approach to road design emphasizes safe access for all road users, including pedestrians, bicyclists, motorcycles and transit users, by prioritizing infrastructure that meets the needs of those who have historically been left behind by traditional transportation approaches. Senators Markey and Fetterman have put forward a pair of new bills that would make Complete Streets a minimum design mandate, taking the first steps toward a new safety mindset that will ensure all road users have access to safe, equitable transportation options. Learn more about these two bills below.

Building Safer Streets Act

Earlier this Congress, (just some months and a speaker ago), Senator John Fetterman introduced the Building Safer Streets Act with companion legislation introduced in the House of Representatives by Congressman Seth Moulton. This bill, introduced on October 30, 2023, aims to tackle America’s road safety crisis by modernizing our nation’s dangerous road design standards that led to over 40,000 fatalities over the past decade. To accomplish this goal, the bill would set new standards for safer streets by reforming the development process for the Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices (MUTCD) and redefining how road projects should integrate transit, multimodal, and safety features. (To understand why reforming the MUTCD matters, see our statement on its most recent update.)

Further, the Building Safer Streets Act would streamline FHWA road design practices, require the FHWA to publish new guidance to help develop multimodal streets that work in local contexts, and would no longer allow the value of time metric to be misused to increase dangerous speeds when evaluating project benefits. Ensuring benefits to all communities, the bill would change the Safe Streets for All program to give greater consideration and federal support for small and rural communities.

Complete Streets Act

On January 25, 2024, Senator Ed Markey reintroduced the Complete Streets Act with companion legislation reintroduced in the House of Representatives by Congressman Steve Cohen. This bill will provide safe and accessible transportation access for all road users by prioritizing pedestrians, bicyclists, and public transit users.

To achieve this goal, the Complete Streets Act will ensure that a greater portion of states’ federal highway funding be directed toward the development of a Complete Streets Program. These programs will allow eligible entities throughout the state to utilize program funding for technical assistance and capital improvements to support the implementation of improved sidewalks, bike lanes, crosswalks, and bus stops. Furthermore, this bill will also require states to incorporate Complete Streets standards into projects that change roadways, including construction and maintenance projects.In addition it pushes for the formal adoption of PROWAG and pushes for enhancements that are cognizant of people with physical, vision, hearing, and cognitive disabilities.

Help support these bills. Click here to ask your senator to be a cosponsor.