Summary of Minnesota Complete Streets Legislation: S.F. 2461 (Lourey); H.F. 2801 (Obermueller); Omnibus Transportation Policy Bill, S.F. 2540, 6^th Engrossment, Sections 11-12, 52, 72; Minnesota Statues, 2010 Session, Chapter 351, enacted May 15, 2010.

Minnesota’s first statewide Complete Streets legislation was signed into law by Governor Pawlenty on Saturday, May 15, 2010, as part of the omnibus transportation policy bill, S.F. 2540, at sections 11-12, 52 and 72, Minnesota Statutes 2010 Session, Chapter 351.  Minnesota joins about 20 other states that have statewide complete streets policies in place. The law takes effect August 1, 2010.

About Complete Streets

Complete Streets is a term used to describe transportation planning and design processes that emphasize safety and accessibility for all users of roadways—drivers, pedestrians, transit riders, bicyclists, and others—regardless of age or ability.

The goal of Complete Streets transportation processes is to maximize the long-term benefits of investments in transportation by focusing on: safety; accessibility; promotion of public health; affordability of options for transportation users; cost-effectiveness; flexibility in planning to allow local communities to tailor road designs to meet local needs; plans that spur economic development and tourism; transportation systems and plans that reduce reliance on costly energy sources and help to protect rivers, lakes and air quality; reduction of traffic congestion; improving quality of life; and strengthening communities.

Below is a summary of the new Complete Streets legislation, as it appears in the omnibus transportation bill, S.F. 2540, 6^th Engrossment, sections 11-12, 52, and 72.

Section 11: Amends Minnesota Statutes 2008, section 162.02, subd. 3a, Variances from rules and engineering standards.

(a)    This provision allows the commissioner of transportation to grant variances from the rules and engineering standards for county state-aid highways developed under section 162.021 or 162.07, subd. 2. Any political subdivision that has a county state-aid highway within its borders, or that is proposing to add one, may make a written request to the commissioner for a variance from the rules or standards for the highway in question. The commissioner must comply with section 174.75, subd. 5, when evaluating a variance request related to a complete streets project.

(b)   The commissioner is required to publish notice of a request for a variance in the State Register and must give notice to all interested persons. The commissioner may grant or deny a request for a variance within 30 days of providing notice. However, if a written objection to the request for a variance is received within 7 days of providing notice, the commissioner cannot grant or deny the request until after a contested case hearing is held. If no one objects within the 7-day window and the commissioner denies the request without a hearing, the affected political subdivision may request a contested case hearing within 30 days of receiving notice of the denial, and the commissioner must grant that request.

(c)    A “political subdivision” is defined to include an agency of a political subdivision which has jurisdiction over parks, and a regional park authority.

Section 12: Amends Minnesota Statutes 2008, section 162.09, subd. 3a, Variances from rules and engineering standards.

(a)    The commissioner of transportation is given authority to grant variances from the rules and engineering standards for municipal state-aid streets under section 162.13, subd. 2. Any political subdivision that has a municipal state-aid street or is proposing to add one may make a written request to the commissioner for a variance. The commissioner must comply with section 174.75, subd. 5, when evaluating a variance request related to a complete streets project.

(b)   The commissioner must publish notice of each request in the State Register and provide notice to all persons known to be interested in the matter. The commissioner may grant or deny the request within 30 days of providing notice. However, if the commissioner receives a written objection to the request for a variance within 7 days of providing notice, the commissioner cannot grant or deny the request until after a contested case hearing is held.  If no one objects within the 7-day window and the commissioner denies the request without a hearing, the affected political subdivision may request a contested case hearing within 30 days of receiving notice of the denial, and the commissioner must grant that request.

(c)    A “political subdivision” is defined to include an agency of a political subdivision which has jurisdiction over parks, and a regional park authority.

Section 52: Adds section 174.75, Complete Streets.

Subdivision 1.  This provision defines “complete streets” for purposes of this section of law. The definition addresses the safety and accessibility needs of transportation users of all ages and abilities—motorists, pedestrians, transit users and vehicles, bicyclists, commercial and emergency vehicles moving along and across roads, intersections, and crossings—and encompasses virtually all phases of road activity, including planning scoping, design, implementation, operation, and maintenance. The definition specifies that consideration of the aforementioned needs must be addressed in a manner that is sensitive to variations in local context and recognizes that needs vary in urban, rural, and suburban settings.

Subdivision 2. This provision establishes parameters for the commissioner of transportation’s implementation of a statewide complete streets policy. The commissioner is required to consult with stakeholders, regional agencies, local governments, and road authorities before beginning implementation. After consulting, the commissioner is required address the relevant protocols, guidance, standards, requirements and training, and must also integrate related, context-sensitive principles for design solutions.

Subdivision 3. The commissioner is required to report on the implementation of the complete streets policy in the agency’s biennial budget submission, under section 174.02, beginning in 2011.

Subdivision 4. This provision encourages, but does not require, local road authorities to create and adopt complete streets road policies that reflect local context and goals.  Local road authorities may adopt a complete streets policy that incorporates or exceeds the state statutory scheme.

Subdivision 5. This provision requires the commissioner of transportation to follow certain procedures when evaluating requests for variances from engineering standards for Chapter 162 state-aid projects that are related to complete streets.

(a)    The commissioner must consider the latest edition of: (1) the American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials’ publication, A Policy on Geometric Design of Highways and Streets; and (2) for urban area projects, the Institute of Transportation Engineers’ publication, Context Sensitive Solutions in Designing Major Urban Thoroughfares for Walkable Communities. 

(b)   The commissioner must provide a political subdivision with written reasons for a denial of a request for a variance related to complete streets.

Section 72. Complete Streets Reports.

This provision requires the commissioner of transportation to report to the chairs and ranking minority members of the Minnesota House of Representatives and the Senate committees that have jurisdiction over transportation policy and finance by the 15^th of January of 2011, 2012, and 2014. The commissioner is required to make these reports available electronically. Print copies must also be made available, upon request.

(a)    By January 15, 2011, the Department is required to summarize its complete street initiatives, including the steps it has taken to expedite and improve the transparency of the state-aid variance process regarding complete streets. The report must outline the Department’s plans to develop and implement a complete streets policy, including identification of statutory barriers.

(b)   The report due by January 15, 2012 must: summarize the results of the collaboration under Minnesota Statutes, section 174.75, subd. 3; identify any modifications that have been made or recommended regarding protocols, guidance, standards, or other requirements to facilitate the implementation of complete streets; summarize the status of the department’s development of performance indicators; outline any other planned work relating to complete streets policy; and identify statutory recommendations for facilitating policy implementation.

(c)    The report due by January 15, 2014 must: provide an overview of the department’s implementation of complete streets policy; make note of updates regarding protocols, guidance, standards or requirements; make recommendations for supporting local implementation of complete streets under the state-aid standards variance process; and make statutory recommendations to facilitate implementation of complete streets policy.

The Public Health Law Center provides information and technical assistance on issues related to public health, but does not provide legal representation or advice. This correspondence should not be considered legal advice or a substitute for obtaining legal advice from an attorney. If you have specific legal questions, we recommend that you consult with an attorney familiar with the law of your jurisdiction.