Complete Streets: A Primer
Complete Streets: A Primer
March 7, 2024
Complete streets is a multimodal approach to roadway design and safety that considers all users
of transportation infrastructure. A street is considered complete if it facilitates the safe movement
Jennifer J. Marshall
of users of all ages, abilities, and transportation modes. Additionally, transportation agencies and
Analyst in Transportation
researchers consider complete streets an approach that can assist communities in reaching safety,
Policy
accessibility, equity, connectivity, mobility, and environmental goals.
Complete streets encompasses physical changes to roadways (e.g., dedicated bicycle and bus
lanes) and sidewalks to specifically accommodate transit, pedestrians, and bicyclists alongside
personal motor vehicles. Complete streets also emphasizes other changes, such as adding lighting, planters, trees, and
benches, to improve the user experience of a street. The specific elements included in a complete streets design are context
sensitive and vary from place to place, but the principles can be applied in urban, suburban, and rural settings.
Section 11206 of the Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act (IIJA; P.L. 117-58) required states and metropolitan planning
organizations to fund the development of complete streets policies and complete streets prioritization plans through the
Metropolitan Planning Program (23 U.S.C. §104(d)) and State Planning and Research Program (23 U.S.C. §505). The IIJA
authorized related discretionary grant programs including Safe Streets and Roads for All (SS4A) and the Reconnecting
Communities Pilot Program.
The IIJA is the first law to establish requirements for complete streets standards and policies. There have been other efforts
from the executive and legislative branches. For example, since 2017, the Department of Transportation has identified
complete streets as a tool to improve roadway safety in the Safety for All Users Report, the Moving to a Complete Streets
Design Model report, and the National Roadway Safety Strategy. Between the 109th and 118th Congresses, at least 17 bills
related to complete streets have been introduced, including House and Senate companion bills.
Congressional Research Service
link to page 4 link to page 4 link to page 6 link to page 8 link to page 8 link to page 9 link to page 9 link to page 9 link to page 10 link to page 10 link to page 10 link to page 5 link to page 5 link to page 7 link to page 11 link to page 11 link to page 12 Complete Streets: A Primer
Contents
Introduction ..................................................................................................................................... 1
What Is a Complete Street? ............................................................................................................. 1
Goals and Considerations of Complete Streets ......................................................................... 3
Current Complete Streets Law and Funding ................................................................................... 5
Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act ..................................................................................... 5
Other Funding Sources .............................................................................................................. 6
Selected Recent Executive Actions ................................................................................................. 6
Safety for All Users Report ....................................................................................................... 6
Moving to a Complete Streets Design Model Report ............................................................... 7
National Roadway Safety Strategy ........................................................................................... 7
Complete Streets Formula Grant Match Waivers ...................................................................... 7
Figures
Figure 1. Example of a Complete Street in an Urban Setting ......................................................... 2
Figure 2. Example of a Complete Street Cross Section in a Rural Setting ..................................... 2
Tables
Table 1. Selected Opportunities and Challenges of the Complete Streets Approach ...................... 4
Table A-1. Complete Streets-Related Bills, 109th-118th Congresses ................................................ 8
Appendixes
Appendix. A ..................................................................................................................................... 8
Contacts
Author Information .......................................................................................................................... 9
Congressional Research Service
link to page 5 link to page 5 Complete Streets: A Primer
Introduction
Complete streets is a multimodal and multiuser approach to transportation planning and
implementation of public road infrastructure.1 The Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act (IIJA;
P.L. 117-58), enacted in November 2021, defined complete streets standards or policies as
measures that “ensure the safe and adequate accommodation of all users of the transportation
system, including pedestrians, bicyclists, public transportation users, children, older individuals,
individuals with disabilities, motorists, and freight vehicles.”2 The IIJA is the first federal
legislation to define the term complete streets standards and policies.
This report provides an overview of the concept of complete streets. The report first explains the
elements of complete streets in urban and rural settings, then outlines the goals and considerations
of complete streets policy. It also discusses the history of executive actions related to complete
streets and contains an Appendix identifying complete streets-related bills introduced from the
109th to the 118th Congresses.
What Is a Complete Street?
A complete streets approach encompasses various physical design elements, including travel
lanes for motor vehicles and for users other than cars and trucks. Such elements may include,
among other things, dedicated bicycle and bus lanes, sidewalks, mid-block pedestrian crossings,
traffic calming treatments, and street trees.3 Complete streets designs are based on context-
specific budget, location, and community goals. Figure 1 and Figure 2 provide visual examples
of complete streets in urban and rural settings.4
1 “Complete Streets” is capitalized in P.L. 117-58 in reference to “Complete Streets standards and policies,” “Complete
Streets prioritization plans,” and “Complete Streets projects.” CRS has determined that “complete streets” will be
uncapitalized throughout this report due to the broad use of the phrase “complete streets” within transportation policy;
Barbara McCann, Completing Our Streets: The Transition to Safe and Inclusive Transportation Networks (Washington,
DC: Island Press, 2013). Hereinafter cited as McCann, Completing Our Streets.
2 P.L. 117-58, Division A, Subtitle B, §11206.
3 According to the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) and the Institute of Transportation Engineers, to increase
the safety of roadways through traffic calming, vehicle speeds and vehicle volumes on a single street or within a street
network are reduced. U.S. Department of Transportation (DOT), FHWA, Traffic Calming ePrimer, 2018,
https://highways.dot.gov/safety/speed-management/traffic-calming-eprimer.
4 National Association of City Transportation Officials, “Streets,” in Urban Street Design Guide (Washington, DC:
Island Press/Center for Resource Economics, 2013); DOT, FHWA, Complete Streets Transformations: Six Scenarios to
Transform Arterials Using a Complete Streets Implementation Strategy, February 25, 2022.
Congressional Research Service
1
link to page 5 link to page 5
Complete Streets: A Primer
Figure 1. Example of a Complete Street in an Urban Setting
Source: National Association for City Transportation Officials, “Streets: Streets Design Principles,” in Urban
Street Design Guide (New York City, NY: Island Press, 2013), p. 6.
Figure 1 illustrates possible elements of a complete street in an urban setting, including dedicated
bus and bicycle lanes, on-street parking, pedestrian- and vehicle-oriented street lighting, shade
trees, benches, and curb ramps, among other features. This example shows how low-cost
interventions, such as pavement striping, can delineate boundaries of physical design elements
(e.g., where hatched marking separates the on-street parking from the bike lane). Pavement
striping could be used to analyze effectiveness prior to a more permanent and expensive
installation, such as flex posts or cement planter barriers.
Figure 2. Example of a Complete Street Cross Section in a Rural Setting
Source: U.S. Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Complete Streets Transformations:
Six Scenarios to Transform Arterials Using a Complete Streets Implementation Strategy, February 25, 2022, p. 15,
https://highways.dot.gov/sites/fhwa.dot.gov/files/2022-02/2022_CS_Transformations_Doc_508.pdf.
Figure 2 illustrates a complete street design that might be appropriate in a small town and rural
context. This street design includes lanes for cars, on-street parking on each side, sidewalks wide
enough for people using mobility devices, and shade trees. For some communities, the challenge
in implementing complete streets is identifying ways to incorporate space for pedestrians that
Congressional Research Service
2
Complete Streets: A Primer
separates them from vehicles.5 In this case, the design of this street could be considered complete
due to the presence of safe, accessible sidewalks for pedestrians of all abilities.
Goals and Considerations of Complete Streets
The core goal of complete streets is to improve the safety of all roadway users, especially
bicyclists and pedestrians.6 The Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) has identified other
goals of complete streets, including accessibility, equity, and connectivity. Researchers have
identified improving mobility and mitigating environmental impacts as additional goals.7
Explanations of how complete streets could achieve these goals are provided below.
• Safety: Change roadway design to impact user behavior. For example,
reconfiguring roadways with traffic calming techniques can reduce both
motorists’ speeds and roadway crossing distance for pedestrians and bicyclists.
These changes can lead to decreased crash risk and severity.8
• Accessibility: Remove barriers of access to transportation. For example, adding
curb ramps and ensuring sidewalk infrastructure does not have obstructions (e.g.,
fire hydrants) could remove barriers of access for assistive-mobility users.9
• Equity: Provide transportation options across race, gender, age, ability, or class.
For example, adding sidewalks may be an equitable solution for a community
that has a high number of zero-car households and a high number of
pedestrians.10
• Connectivity: Improve routes to destinations. For example, installing sidewalks
that connect frequented locations in a neighborhood can provide protected routes
for pedestrians to travel to multiple local businesses.11
5 Separating motorists from non-motorists decreases the number of points of conflict, which decreases the probability
of crash-related injuries and fatalities. Sheila Sarkar, “Evaluation of Different Types of Pedestrian-Vehicle
Separations,” Transportation Research Record, vol. 1502 (1995), pp. 83-95.
6 DOT, FHWA, Moving to a Complete Streets Design Model: A Report to Congress on Opportunities and Challenges,
March 2022, https://highways.dot.gov/sites/fhwa.dot.gov/files/2022-03/
Complete%20Streets%20Report%20to%20Congress.pdf (hereinafter cited as DOT, FHWA, Moving to a Complete
Streets Design Model).
7 Nancy Hui et al., “Measuring the Completeness of Complete Streets,” Transport Reviews, vol. 38, no. 1 (March
2017), pp. 73-95; Samuel W. Jordan and Stephanie Ivey, “Complete Streets: Promises and Proof,” American Society of
Civil Engineers, vol. 147, no. 2 (2021).
8 DOT, FHWA, Complete Streets Construction Cost Case Study: Resurfacing and Reconstruction of MN 28, MN 29,
and MN 104 in Glenwood, MN, FHWA-HRT-23-056, HRDI-20/05-23(WEB)E, 2023, https://highways.dot.gov/sites/
fhwa.dot.gov/files/FHWA-HRT-23-056.pdf; DOT, National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, Literature Review
on Vehicle Travel Speeds and Pedestrian Injuries, DOT HS 809 021, October 1999, https://one.nhtsa.gov/people/
injury/research/pub/hs809012.html.
9 DOT, FHWA, Complete Streets Construction Cost Case Study: 300 West Street Reconstruction Project, Salt Lake
City, UT, FHWA-HRT-23-060, HRDI-20/05-23(WEB)E, 2023, https://highways.dot.gov/sites/fhwa.dot.gov/files/
FHWA-HRT-23-060.pdf.
10 Executive Order 13985, “Advancing Racial Equity and Support for Underserved Communities Through the Federal
Government,” 86 Federal Register 7009, January 25, 2021.
11 DOT, FHWA, FHWA Guidebook for Measuring Multimodal Network Connectivity, FHWA-HEP-18-032,
Washington, DC, February 2018, https://www.fhwa.dot.gov/environment/bicycle_pedestrian/publications/
multimodal_connectivity/fhwahep18032.pdf.
Congressional Research Service
3
link to page 7 link to page 7 Complete Streets: A Primer
• Mobility: Ensure users of all modes are able to move around easily. For example,
installing traffic signals can create safer opportunities for pedestrians to cross
vehicular traffic.12
• Environment: Incorporate environmentally conscious elements in roadway
designs. For example, installing street trees along a road can absorb rainfall.13
There are opportunities and challenges associated with each of these goals. Table 1 identifies
examples of these opportunities and challenges.
Table 1. Selected Opportunities and Challenges of the Complete Streets Approach
Goal
Opportunity
Challenge
Safety
Decrease the number of traffic-related serious Reducing the number of on-street parking
injuries and deaths by installing traffic calming
spaces available or reducing motorists’ speeds
treatments to support decreasing motorists’
via traffic calming interventions may be
speeds
disliked by communities
Deter crime by increasing lighting and
Installing lighting and surveillance may add to
surveillance for pedestrians, bicyclists, and
construction and maintenance costs
parked cars
Accessibility
Create infrastructure that can be used by
Establishing limited right-of-way can lead to
people using all modes and any mobility or
reducing space for some users to
assistive device
accommodate othersa
Equity
Improve access to schools, jobs, and services
Accommodating multiple modes can increase
by creating more safe transportation options
construction and maintenance costs
for users of all modes and abilities
Connectivity
Remove physical barriers for pedestrians such
Completing networks for pedestrians can
as high-speed roadways without crossing
increase vehicle delay time to allow for safe
opportunities
crossing
Mobility
Decrease travel time for people traveling by
Accommodating additional modes could
transit, bicycle, or foot with dedicated right-
increase personal vehicle travel time along the
of-way and adjusted signal timing
corridor
Environment
Decrease stormwater runoff by increasing
Adding vegetation could create more street
vegetation along streets
maintenance responsibility and costs
Sources: CRS based on U.S. Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Traffic Calming
ePrimer, 2018, https://highways.dot.gov/safety/speed-management/traffic-calming-eprimer; Nancy Hui et al.,
“Measuring the Completeness of Complete Streets,” Transport Reviews, vol. 38, no. 1 (March 2017), pp. 73-95;
and Samuel W. Jordan and Stephanie Ivey, “Complete Streets: Promises and Proof,” American Society of Civil
Engineers, vol. 147, no. 2 (2021).
Note:
a. As used here, the term right-of-way refers to the public space located between private property boundaries.
The ability for governments to widen streets or add sidewalks is dependent on the quantity of rights-of-way
owned or able to be acquired.
12 DOT, FHWA, Complete Streets Construction Cost Case Study: Resurfacing of South Lawrence Boulevard (State
Road 21), Keystone Heights, FL, FHWA-HRT-23-057 / HRDI-20/05-23(WEB)E, Washington, DC, 2023,
https://highways.dot.gov/sites/fhwa.dot.gov/files/FHWA-HRT-23-057.pdf.
13 U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Green Streets Handbook, EPA 841-B-18-001, Washington, DC, March
2021, pp. 1-6, https://www.epa.gov/sites/default/files/2021-04/documents/
green_streets_design_manual_feb_2021_web_res_small_508.pdf.
Congressional Research Service
4
Complete Streets: A Primer
Current Complete Streets Law and Funding
Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act
Section 11206 of the IIJA required states and metropolitan planning organizations (MPOs) to
adopt complete streets policies and develop complete streets prioritization plans. The IIJA set
aside an estimated $93 million from the highway formula grant programs for these purposes.14
Section 11206 of the IIJA addressed complete streets in five subsections:
• (a) Definition of Complete Streets Standards or Policies
• (b) Funding Requirement
• (c) Activities Described (This section describes planning activities eligible for
funds in subsection (b).)
• (d) Federal Share
• (e) State Flexibility (This section provides states with flexibility to opt out of
subsection (b).)
Section 11206(b) contains a complete streets funding set-aside. It requires both states and MPOs
to spend no less than the 2.5% of funding apportioned to states through 23 U.S.C. §505, State
Planning and Research, and no less than the 2.5% of funding granted to MPOs under 23 U.S.C.
§104(d), Metropolitan Planning, to carry out activities as described in Section 11206(c) until the
Department of Transportation (DOT) has certified that the requirements have been met. When the
policy requirements are met, states and MPOs are no longer required to spend funds on complete
streets. In the IIJA, funding for complete streets derives from federal funds directed toward both
states and MPOs.15
Funds granted to MPOs under 23 U.S.C. §104(d) are administered by states on behalf of DOT
through contract authority.16 Under 23 U.S.C. §104(d)(2), states create a formula for distributing
the funds; the formula requires approval by DOT. States may need to change their formulas in
accordance with the set-aside requirement of IIJA Section 11206.
14 DOT, FHWA, “Bipartisan Infrastructure Law Fact Sheets: Metropolitan Planning Program,” February 8, 2022,
https://www.fhwa.dot.gov/bipartisan-infrastructure-law/metro_planning.cfm; DOT, FHWA, “Bipartisan Infrastructure
Law Fact Sheets: Surface Transportation Block Program,” October 26, 2022, https://www.fhwa.dot.gov/bipartisan-
infrastructure-law/stbg.cfm. Not less than 2.5% of the funding allocated to states according to 23 U.S.C. §505 and to
metropolitan planning organizations under 23 U.S.C. §104(d) is to be used to carry out activities as described in
subsection (c), Section 11206 of P.L. 117-58. The complete streets funding set aside from the Metropolitan Planning
Program (23 U.S.C. §104(d)) is approximately $57 million of the $2.28 billion that will be made available between
FY2022 and FY2026. The State Planning and Research Program (23 U.S.C. §104(d)) is 2% of funding of the Surface
Transportation Block Grant Program, and approximately $72 billion will be made available through the Surface
Transportation Block Grant Program between FY2022 and FY2026. Of the $72 billion, approximately $1.44 billion
will be made available for states through the State Planning and Research Program. Of the $1.44 billion, the funding set
aside for complete streets planning activities is $36 million. The total available through Section 11206(b) of P.L. 117-
58 is approximately $93 million, which includes $57 million for metropolitan planning organizations and $36 million
for states.
15 Under the Complete Streets Acts of 2019 and 2021 (H.R. 3663/S. 2077 and H.R. 1289/S. 425, respectively), which
were not enacted, the proposed complete streets program would have been completely funded and managed by states.
16 Contract authority allows states to obligate funding when the surface transportation reauthorization act is enacted.
Contract authority differs from the appropriated budget authority process in surface transportation funding, which
requires two legislative actions to begin implementation—an authorization and an appropriation. For more information
on contract authority, see DOT, FHWA, Funding Federal-Aid Highways, FHWA-PL-17-011, March 2017,
https://www.fhwa.dot.gov/policy/olsp/fundingfederalaid/FFAH_2017.pdf.
Congressional Research Service
5
Complete Streets: A Primer
Among other options, Congress may consider seeking analysis of the benefits and challenges for
states of changing their formulas and the impact, if any, on achievement of the complete streets
requirement. For instance, Congress could direct DOT, the Government Accountability Office, or
another entity to study the impact of IIJA Section 11206 on state formula structures and
administration processes for funding distributed under 23 U.S.C. §104(d). More generally, the
implementation of requirements in the IIJA might help inform congressional deliberations on the
type and extent of additional actions and programs, if any, that might be beneficial and the
advisability of amendment or repeal of current programs or requirements. To that end, Congress
may request updates from DOT on the progress of complete streets adoption nationwide.
Other Funding Sources
In addition to IIJA Section 11206, which designates funding specifically for complete streets
policies and planning, other new programs in the IIJA may support complete streets goals. Such
programs include two discretionary grant programs: Safe Streets and Roads for All (SS4A) and
Reconnecting Communities Pilot Program.17 From FY2022 through FY2026, SS4A is to make
available $5 billion, and the Reconnecting Communities program is to make available $1 billion.
Complete streets projects and activities also are eligible under many of the eight Federal-Aid
Highway Programs, including the Surface Transportation Block Program; Highway Safety
Improvement Program; Congestion Mitigation and Air Quality Improvement Program; Carbon
Reduction Program; and Promoting Resilient Operations for Transformative, Efficient, and Cost-
Saving Transportation Formula Program. Funds under these programs have some transferability
between programs, which allows for the customization of funding to accomplish safety goals
associated with complete streets. FHWA has prepared guidance on the formula and discretionary
federal funding sources that can be used to support complete streets projects.18
Selected Recent Executive Actions
Since 2017, several actions by DOT have supported state and local agencies’ development of
complete streets policies and plans.
Safety for All Users Report
In December 2017, DOT published the Safety for All Users Report, pursuant to requirements of
Section 1442 of the Fixing America’s Surface Transportation Act (FAST Act; P.L. 114-94) and
based on Senate committee guidance in S.Rept. 114-243.19 In the Safety for All Users Report,
DOT described policies and programs that promote safety for all users, including complete streets
17 The Safe Streets and Roads for All program is at P.L. 117-58, Division A, §24112. The Reconnecting Communities
Pilot Program is at P.L. 117-58, Division A, §11509.
18 DOT, FHWA, “Funding Safety for All,” FHWA-SA-23-011, September 2023, https://highways.dot.gov/sites/
fhwa.dot.gov/files/2023-10/complete_streets_poster_funding_safety_for_all_09132023.pdf.
19 DOT, Safety for All Users Report: A Report Developed by the U.S. Department of Transportation Under Section
1442 of the Fixing America’s Surface Transportation (FAST) Act, December 2017, p. 2,
https://www.transportation.gov/sites/dot.gov/files/docs/mission/safety/303201/safety-all-users-report.pdf. Section
1442(b) states that “[n]ot later than 2 years after the date of enactment of this Act, the Secretary shall make available to
the public a report cataloging examples of State law or State transportation policy that provide for the safe and adequate
accommodation of all users of the surface transportation network, in all phases of project planning, development, and
operation.” (FAST; P.L. 114-94); S.Rept. 114-243 pertained to S. 2844, the Transportation, Housing and Urban
Development, and Related Agencies Appropriations Act, 2017.
Congressional Research Service
6
Complete Streets: A Primer
policies as a recommended tool. DOT declared in the report that complete streets would become
part of subsequent policy initiatives.
Moving to a Complete Streets Design Model Report
In March 2022, FHWA issued a report to Congress entitled Moving to a Complete Streets Design
Model. The agency cited this report as a response to House committee guidance in H.Rept. 116-
152, for DOT to adopt a complete streets design model for non-access-controlled roadways.20
Such roadways comprise nearly 80% of the National Highway System’s mileage.21 The FHWA
report indicated that DOT could provide guidance on the statutory requirement to consider all
modes of transportation found throughout federal standards for infrastructure planning and
design. The FHWA report suggested that proactive guidance and technical support from DOT
could help state leadership and practitioners, MPOs, and local agencies adopt complete streets
principles.
National Roadway Safety Strategy
In January 2022, DOT released a National Roadway Safety Strategy outlining its approach to
eliminating roadway deaths.22 As part of the strategy, DOT adopted the Safe Systems Approach to
roadway design. The approach has five objectives: safer people, safer roads, safer vehicles, safer
speeds, and post-crash care. A comprehensive Complete Streets Initiative is described as one of
six key actions to achieve the safer roads objective. For the Complete Streets Initiative, DOT
committed to providing technical assistance to communities, incorporating complete streets
criteria in federal grant opportunities, incorporating lighting in roadway upgrades, and involving
transit providers in complete streets implementation.
Complete Streets Formula Grant Match Waivers
On January 5, 2023, FHWA published a memorandum approving a waiver of the nonfederal
match requirement of the funding described in Section 11206(d) of P.L. 117-58.23 Thus, states and
MPOs would not have to contribute local dollars to meet the complete streets funding
requirement described in Section 11206(d) of P.L. 117-58. The Federal Transit Administration
took action on March 10, 2023, to approve a waiver of the nonfederal match for the Metropolitan
Planning Program and State Planning and Research Program funding authorized at 49 U.S.C.
§5305 for complete streets planning activities for each fiscal year under Section 11206(d) of P.L.
117-58.24 The nonfederal match waiver is available until the state or MPO meets requirements of
Section 11206(d) of P.L. 117-58.
20 The agency’s report is DOT, FHWA, Moving to a Complete Streets Design Model. The House committee report is
H.Rept. 116-152, pertaining to H.R. 7616, the Transportation, Housing and Urban Development, and Related Agencies
Appropriations Act, 2021.
21 DOT, FHWA, “Highway Statistics 2022 Table HM-18,” accessed February 2024, https://www.fhwa.dot.gov/
policyinformation/statistics/2022/hm18.cfm.
22 DOT, National Roadway Safety Strategy, version 1.1, January 2022, https://www.transportation.gov/sites/dot.gov/
files/2022-02/USDOT-National-Roadway-Safety-Strategy.pdf.
23 DOT, FHWA, “Waiver of Non-Federal Match for State Planning and Research (SPR) and Metropolitan Planning
(PL) Funds in Support of Complete Streets Planning Activities (BIL § 11206),” memorandum, January 5, 2023,
https://www.fhwa.dot.gov/planning/spr-pl_match_waiver_memo.pdf.
24 Letter from Nuria Fernandez, Director of the Federal Transit Administration’s (FTA’s) Office of Planning, to FTA
Colleagues, March 10, 2023.
Congressional Research Service
7
link to page 11 link to page 11 link to page 11 link to page 11 Complete Streets: A Primer
Appendix. A
Table A-1. Complete Streets-Related Bills, 109th-118th Congresses
House Bill
Senate Bill
Congressa
Short Titleb
—
S. 794
109
Safe and Complete Streets Act
of 2005c
H.R. 5951
S. 2686
110
Safe and Complete Streets Act
of 2008 / Complete Streets Act
of 2008
H.R. 1443
S. 584
111
Complete Streets Act of 2009
H.R. 1780
S. 1056
112
Safe and Complete Streets Act
of 2011
H.R. 2468
S. 2004
113
Safe Streets Act of 2013 / Safe
Streets Act of 2014
H.R. 2071
—
114
Safe Streets Act of 2015
H.R. 3663
S. 2077
116
Complete Streets Act of 2019
H.R. 1289
S. 425
117
Complete Streets Act of 2021
H.R. 3562
—
117
Vision Zero Act of 2021d
H.R. 7082
S. 3670
118
Complete Streets Act of 2024
Source: CRS based on Congress.gov, February 21, 2024.
Notes: CRS accessed Congress.gov to identify bills as of February 21, 2024. The phrase “complete streets” was
searched across the years 1973-2024 to identify bills. None were identified prior to the 109th Congress. From
the 109th to 118th Congresses, 17 bills were identified through a search for “complete streets” in the title or
summary of a bill. Legislation that is not freestanding, such as amendments, would not be captured by this search.
House and Senate companion bills identified as related in Congress.gov are listed together.
The table does not reflect the provisions that established the complete streets program as contained in Section
11206 of the Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act (P.L. 117-58).
a. There were no bills identified for the 115th Congress.
b. The “Short Title” column reflects the short title of the bill as introduced.
c. Provisions from S. 794 were included in the Safe, Accountable, Flexible, Efficient Transportation Equity Act
of 2005 (SAFETEA; P.L. 109-59).
d. Provisions of this bill were included in a related bill, H.R. 3684, enacted as the Infrastructure Investment and
Jobs Act (P.L. 117-58).
Congressional Research Service
8
Complete Streets: A Primer
Author Information
Jennifer J. Marshall
Analyst in Transportation Policy
Disclaimer
This document was prepared by the Congressional Research Service (CRS). CRS serves as nonpartisan
shared staff to congressional committees and Members of Congress. It operates solely at the behest of and
under the direction of Congress. Information in a CRS Report should not be relied upon for purposes other
than public understanding of information that has been provided by CRS to Members of Congress in
connection with CRS’s institutional role. CRS Reports, as a work of the United States Government, are not
subject to copyright protection in the United States. Any CRS Report may be reproduced and distributed in
its entirety without permission from CRS. However, as a CRS Report may include copyrighted images or
material from a third party, you may need to obtain the permission of the copyright holder if you wish to
copy or otherwise use copyrighted material.
Congressional Research Service
R47947 · VERSION 1 · NEW
9
March 7, 2024
Complete streets is a multimodal approach to roadway design and safety that considers all users
of transportation infrastructure. A street is considered complete if it facilitates the safe movement
Jennifer J. Marshall
of users of all ages, abilities, and transportation modes. Additionally, transportation agencies and
Analyst in Transportation
researchers consider complete streets an approach that can assist communities in reaching safety,
Policy
accessibility, equity, connectivity, mobility, and environmental goals.
Complete streets encompasses physical changes to roadways (e.g., dedicated bicycle and bus
lanes) and sidewalks to specifically accommodate transit, pedestrians, and bicyclists alongside
personal motor vehicles. Complete streets also emphasizes other changes, such as adding lighting, planters, trees, and
benches, to improve the user experience of a street. The specific elements included in a complete streets design are context
sensitive and vary from place to place, but the principles can be applied in urban, suburban, and rural settings.
Section 11206 of the Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act (IIJA; P.L. 117-58) required states and metropolitan planning
organizations to fund the development of complete streets policies and complete streets prioritization plans through the
Metropolitan Planning Program (23 U.S.C. §104(d)) and State Planning and Research Program (23 U.S.C. §505). The IIJA
authorized related discretionary grant programs including Safe Streets and Roads for All (SS4A) and the Reconnecting
Communities Pilot Program.
The IIJA is the first law to establish requirements for complete streets standards and policies. There have been other efforts
from the executive and legislative branches. For example, since 2017, the Department of Transportation has identified
complete streets as a tool to improve roadway safety in the Safety for All Users Report, the Moving to a Complete Streets
Design Model report, and the National Roadway Safety Strategy. Between the 109th and 118th Congresses, at least 17 bills
related to complete streets have been introduced, including House and Senate companion bills.
Congressional Research Service
link to page 4 link to page 4 link to page 6 link to page 8 link to page 8 link to page 9 link to page 9 link to page 9 link to page 10 link to page 10 link to page 10 link to page 5 link to page 5 link to page 7 link to page 11 link to page 11 link to page 12 Complete Streets: A Primer
Contents
Introduction ..................................................................................................................................... 1
What Is a Complete Street? ............................................................................................................. 1
Goals and Considerations of Complete Streets ......................................................................... 3
Current Complete Streets Law and Funding ................................................................................... 5
Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act ..................................................................................... 5
Other Funding Sources .............................................................................................................. 6
Selected Recent Executive Actions ................................................................................................. 6
Safety for All Users Report ....................................................................................................... 6
Moving to a Complete Streets Design Model Report ............................................................... 7
National Roadway Safety Strategy ........................................................................................... 7
Complete Streets Formula Grant Match Waivers ...................................................................... 7
Figures
Figure 1. Example of a Complete Street in an Urban Setting ......................................................... 2
Figure 2. Example of a Complete Street Cross Section in a Rural Setting ..................................... 2
Tables
Table 1. Selected Opportunities and Challenges of the Complete Streets Approach ...................... 4
Table A-1. Complete Streets-Related Bills, 109th-118th Congresses ................................................ 8
Appendixes
Appendix. A ..................................................................................................................................... 8
Contacts
Author Information .......................................................................................................................... 9
Congressional Research Service
link to page 5 link to page 5 Complete Streets: A Primer
Introduction
Complete streets is a multimodal and multiuser approach to transportation planning and
implementation of public road infrastructure.1 The Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act (IIJA;
P.L. 117-58), enacted in November 2021, defined complete streets standards or policies as
measures that “ensure the safe and adequate accommodation of all users of the transportation
system, including pedestrians, bicyclists, public transportation users, children, older individuals,
individuals with disabilities, motorists, and freight vehicles.”2 The IIJA is the first federal
legislation to define the term complete streets standards and policies.
This report provides an overview of the concept of complete streets. The report first explains the
elements of complete streets in urban and rural settings, then outlines the goals and considerations
of complete streets policy. It also discusses the history of executive actions related to complete
streets and contains an Appendix identifying complete streets-related bills introduced from the
109th to the 118th Congresses.
What Is a Complete Street?
A complete streets approach encompasses various physical design elements, including travel
lanes for motor vehicles and for users other than cars and trucks. Such elements may include,
among other things, dedicated bicycle and bus lanes, sidewalks, mid-block pedestrian crossings,
traffic calming treatments, and street trees.3 Complete streets designs are based on context-
specific budget, location, and community goals. Figure 1 and Figure 2 provide visual examples
of complete streets in urban and rural settings.4
1 “Complete Streets” is capitalized in P.L. 117-58 in reference to “Complete Streets standards and policies,” “Complete
Streets prioritization plans,” and “Complete Streets projects.” CRS has determined that “complete streets” will be
uncapitalized throughout this report due to the broad use of the phrase “complete streets” within transportation policy;
Barbara McCann, Completing Our Streets: The Transition to Safe and Inclusive Transportation Networks (Washington,
DC: Island Press, 2013). Hereinafter cited as McCann, Completing Our Streets.
2 P.L. 117-58, Division A, Subtitle B, §11206.
3 According to the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) and the Institute of Transportation Engineers, to increase
the safety of roadways through traffic calming, vehicle speeds and vehicle volumes on a single street or within a street
network are reduced. U.S. Department of Transportation (DOT), FHWA, Traffic Calming ePrimer, 2018,
https://highways.dot.gov/safety/speed-management/traffic-calming-eprimer.
4 National Association of City Transportation Officials, “Streets,” in Urban Street Design Guide (Washington, DC:
Island Press/Center for Resource Economics, 2013); DOT, FHWA, Complete Streets Transformations: Six Scenarios to
Transform Arterials Using a Complete Streets Implementation Strategy, February 25, 2022.
Congressional Research Service
1
link to page 5 link to page 5
Complete Streets: A Primer
Figure 1. Example of a Complete Street in an Urban Setting
Source: National Association for City Transportation Officials, “Streets: Streets Design Principles,” in Urban
Street Design Guide (New York City, NY: Island Press, 2013), p. 6.
Figure 1 illustrates possible elements of a complete street in an urban setting, including dedicated
bus and bicycle lanes, on-street parking, pedestrian- and vehicle-oriented street lighting, shade
trees, benches, and curb ramps, among other features. This example shows how low-cost
interventions, such as pavement striping, can delineate boundaries of physical design elements
(e.g., where hatched marking separates the on-street parking from the bike lane). Pavement
striping could be used to analyze effectiveness prior to a more permanent and expensive
installation, such as flex posts or cement planter barriers.
Figure 2. Example of a Complete Street Cross Section in a Rural Setting
Source: U.S. Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Complete Streets Transformations:
Six Scenarios to Transform Arterials Using a Complete Streets Implementation Strategy, February 25, 2022, p. 15,
https://highways.dot.gov/sites/fhwa.dot.gov/files/2022-02/2022_CS_Transformations_Doc_508.pdf.
Figure 2 illustrates a complete street design that might be appropriate in a small town and rural
context. This street design includes lanes for cars, on-street parking on each side, sidewalks wide
enough for people using mobility devices, and shade trees. For some communities, the challenge
in implementing complete streets is identifying ways to incorporate space for pedestrians that
Congressional Research Service
2
Complete Streets: A Primer
separates them from vehicles.5 In this case, the design of this street could be considered complete
due to the presence of safe, accessible sidewalks for pedestrians of all abilities.
Goals and Considerations of Complete Streets
The core goal of complete streets is to improve the safety of all roadway users, especially
bicyclists and pedestrians.6 The Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) has identified other
goals of complete streets, including accessibility, equity, and connectivity. Researchers have
identified improving mobility and mitigating environmental impacts as additional goals.7
Explanations of how complete streets could achieve these goals are provided below.
• Safety: Change roadway design to impact user behavior. For example,
reconfiguring roadways with traffic calming techniques can reduce both
motorists’ speeds and roadway crossing distance for pedestrians and bicyclists.
These changes can lead to decreased crash risk and severity.8
• Accessibility: Remove barriers of access to transportation. For example, adding
curb ramps and ensuring sidewalk infrastructure does not have obstructions (e.g.,
fire hydrants) could remove barriers of access for assistive-mobility users.9
• Equity: Provide transportation options across race, gender, age, ability, or class.
For example, adding sidewalks may be an equitable solution for a community
that has a high number of zero-car households and a high number of
pedestrians.10
• Connectivity: Improve routes to destinations. For example, installing sidewalks
that connect frequented locations in a neighborhood can provide protected routes
for pedestrians to travel to multiple local businesses.11
5 Separating motorists from non-motorists decreases the number of points of conflict, which decreases the probability
of crash-related injuries and fatalities. Sheila Sarkar, “Evaluation of Different Types of Pedestrian-Vehicle
Separations,” Transportation Research Record, vol. 1502 (1995), pp. 83-95.
6 DOT, FHWA, Moving to a Complete Streets Design Model: A Report to Congress on Opportunities and Challenges,
March 2022, https://highways.dot.gov/sites/fhwa.dot.gov/files/2022-03/
Complete%20Streets%20Report%20to%20Congress.pdf (hereinafter cited as DOT, FHWA, Moving to a Complete
Streets Design Model).
7 Nancy Hui et al., “Measuring the Completeness of Complete Streets,” Transport Reviews, vol. 38, no. 1 (March
2017), pp. 73-95; Samuel W. Jordan and Stephanie Ivey, “Complete Streets: Promises and Proof,” American Society of
Civil Engineers, vol. 147, no. 2 (2021).
8 DOT, FHWA, Complete Streets Construction Cost Case Study: Resurfacing and Reconstruction of MN 28, MN 29,
and MN 104 in Glenwood, MN, FHWA-HRT-23-056, HRDI-20/05-23(WEB)E, 2023, https://highways.dot.gov/sites/
fhwa.dot.gov/files/FHWA-HRT-23-056.pdf; DOT, National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, Literature Review
on Vehicle Travel Speeds and Pedestrian Injuries, DOT HS 809 021, October 1999, https://one.nhtsa.gov/people/
injury/research/pub/hs809012.html.
9 DOT, FHWA, Complete Streets Construction Cost Case Study: 300 West Street Reconstruction Project, Salt Lake
City, UT, FHWA-HRT-23-060, HRDI-20/05-23(WEB)E, 2023, https://highways.dot.gov/sites/fhwa.dot.gov/files/
FHWA-HRT-23-060.pdf.
10 Executive Order 13985, “Advancing Racial Equity and Support for Underserved Communities Through the Federal
Government,” 86 Federal Register 7009, January 25, 2021.
11 DOT, FHWA, FHWA Guidebook for Measuring Multimodal Network Connectivity, FHWA-HEP-18-032,
Washington, DC, February 2018, https://www.fhwa.dot.gov/environment/bicycle_pedestrian/publications/
multimodal_connectivity/fhwahep18032.pdf.
Congressional Research Service
3
link to page 7 link to page 7 Complete Streets: A Primer
• Mobility: Ensure users of all modes are able to move around easily. For example,
installing traffic signals can create safer opportunities for pedestrians to cross
vehicular traffic.12
• Environment: Incorporate environmentally conscious elements in roadway
designs. For example, installing street trees along a road can absorb rainfall.13
There are opportunities and challenges associated with each of these goals. Table 1 identifies
examples of these opportunities and challenges.
Table 1. Selected Opportunities and Challenges of the Complete Streets Approach
Goal
Opportunity
Challenge
Safety
Decrease the number of traffic-related serious Reducing the number of on-street parking
injuries and deaths by installing traffic calming
spaces available or reducing motorists’ speeds
treatments to support decreasing motorists’
via traffic calming interventions may be
speeds
disliked by communities
Deter crime by increasing lighting and
Installing lighting and surveillance may add to
surveillance for pedestrians, bicyclists, and
construction and maintenance costs
parked cars
Accessibility
Create infrastructure that can be used by
Establishing limited right-of-way can lead to
people using all modes and any mobility or
reducing space for some users to
assistive device
accommodate othersa
Equity
Improve access to schools, jobs, and services
Accommodating multiple modes can increase
by creating more safe transportation options
construction and maintenance costs
for users of all modes and abilities
Connectivity
Remove physical barriers for pedestrians such
Completing networks for pedestrians can
as high-speed roadways without crossing
increase vehicle delay time to allow for safe
opportunities
crossing
Mobility
Decrease travel time for people traveling by
Accommodating additional modes could
transit, bicycle, or foot with dedicated right-
increase personal vehicle travel time along the
of-way and adjusted signal timing
corridor
Environment
Decrease stormwater runoff by increasing
Adding vegetation could create more street
vegetation along streets
maintenance responsibility and costs
Sources: CRS based on U.S. Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Traffic Calming
ePrimer, 2018, https://highways.dot.gov/safety/speed-management/traffic-calming-eprimer; Nancy Hui et al.,
“Measuring the Completeness of Complete Streets,” Transport Reviews, vol. 38, no. 1 (March 2017), pp. 73-95;
and Samuel W. Jordan and Stephanie Ivey, “Complete Streets: Promises and Proof,” American Society of Civil
Engineers, vol. 147, no. 2 (2021).
Note:
a. As used here, the term right-of-way refers to the public space located between private property boundaries.
The ability for governments to widen streets or add sidewalks is dependent on the quantity of rights-of-way
owned or able to be acquired.
12 DOT, FHWA, Complete Streets Construction Cost Case Study: Resurfacing of South Lawrence Boulevard (State
Road 21), Keystone Heights, FL, FHWA-HRT-23-057 / HRDI-20/05-23(WEB)E, Washington, DC, 2023,
https://highways.dot.gov/sites/fhwa.dot.gov/files/FHWA-HRT-23-057.pdf.
13 U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Green Streets Handbook, EPA 841-B-18-001, Washington, DC, March
2021, pp. 1-6, https://www.epa.gov/sites/default/files/2021-04/documents/
green_streets_design_manual_feb_2021_web_res_small_508.pdf.
Congressional Research Service
4
Complete Streets: A Primer
Current Complete Streets Law and Funding
Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act
Section 11206 of the IIJA required states and metropolitan planning organizations (MPOs) to
adopt complete streets policies and develop complete streets prioritization plans. The IIJA set
aside an estimated $93 million from the highway formula grant programs for these purposes.14
Section 11206 of the IIJA addressed complete streets in five subsections:
• (a) Definition of Complete Streets Standards or Policies
• (b) Funding Requirement
• (c) Activities Described (This section describes planning activities eligible for
funds in subsection (b).)
• (d) Federal Share
• (e) State Flexibility (This section provides states with flexibility to opt out of
subsection (b).)
Section 11206(b) contains a complete streets funding set-aside. It requires both states and MPOs
to spend no less than the 2.5% of funding apportioned to states through 23 U.S.C. §505, State
Planning and Research, and no less than the 2.5% of funding granted to MPOs under 23 U.S.C.
§104(d), Metropolitan Planning, to carry out activities as described in Section 11206(c) until the
Department of Transportation (DOT) has certified that the requirements have been met. When the
policy requirements are met, states and MPOs are no longer required to spend funds on complete
streets. In the IIJA, funding for complete streets derives from federal funds directed toward both
states and MPOs.15
Funds granted to MPOs under 23 U.S.C. §104(d) are administered by states on behalf of DOT
through contract authority.16 Under 23 U.S.C. §104(d)(2), states create a formula for distributing
the funds; the formula requires approval by DOT. States may need to change their formulas in
accordance with the set-aside requirement of IIJA Section 11206.
14 DOT, FHWA, “Bipartisan Infrastructure Law Fact Sheets: Metropolitan Planning Program,” February 8, 2022,
https://www.fhwa.dot.gov/bipartisan-infrastructure-law/metro_planning.cfm; DOT, FHWA, “Bipartisan Infrastructure
Law Fact Sheets: Surface Transportation Block Program,” October 26, 2022, https://www.fhwa.dot.gov/bipartisan-
infrastructure-law/stbg.cfm. Not less than 2.5% of the funding allocated to states according to 23 U.S.C. §505 and to
metropolitan planning organizations under 23 U.S.C. §104(d) is to be used to carry out activities as described in
subsection (c), Section 11206 of P.L. 117-58. The complete streets funding set aside from the Metropolitan Planning
Program (23 U.S.C. §104(d)) is approximately $57 million of the $2.28 billion that will be made available between
FY2022 and FY2026. The State Planning and Research Program (23 U.S.C. §104(d)) is 2% of funding of the Surface
Transportation Block Grant Program, and approximately $72 billion will be made available through the Surface
Transportation Block Grant Program between FY2022 and FY2026. Of the $72 billion, approximately $1.44 billion
will be made available for states through the State Planning and Research Program. Of the $1.44 billion, the funding set
aside for complete streets planning activities is $36 million. The total available through Section 11206(b) of P.L. 117-
58 is approximately $93 million, which includes $57 million for metropolitan planning organizations and $36 million
for states.
15 Under the Complete Streets Acts of 2019 and 2021 (H.R. 3663/S. 2077 and H.R. 1289/S. 425, respectively), which
were not enacted, the proposed complete streets program would have been completely funded and managed by states.
16 Contract authority allows states to obligate funding when the surface transportation reauthorization act is enacted.
Contract authority differs from the appropriated budget authority process in surface transportation funding, which
requires two legislative actions to begin implementation—an authorization and an appropriation. For more information
on contract authority, see DOT, FHWA, Funding Federal-Aid Highways, FHWA-PL-17-011, March 2017,
https://www.fhwa.dot.gov/policy/olsp/fundingfederalaid/FFAH_2017.pdf.
Congressional Research Service
5
Complete Streets: A Primer
Among other options, Congress may consider seeking analysis of the benefits and challenges for
states of changing their formulas and the impact, if any, on achievement of the complete streets
requirement. For instance, Congress could direct DOT, the Government Accountability Office, or
another entity to study the impact of IIJA Section 11206 on state formula structures and
administration processes for funding distributed under 23 U.S.C. §104(d). More generally, the
implementation of requirements in the IIJA might help inform congressional deliberations on the
type and extent of additional actions and programs, if any, that might be beneficial and the
advisability of amendment or repeal of current programs or requirements. To that end, Congress
may request updates from DOT on the progress of complete streets adoption nationwide.
Other Funding Sources
In addition to IIJA Section 11206, which designates funding specifically for complete streets
policies and planning, other new programs in the IIJA may support complete streets goals. Such
programs include two discretionary grant programs: Safe Streets and Roads for All (SS4A) and
Reconnecting Communities Pilot Program.17 From FY2022 through FY2026, SS4A is to make
available $5 billion, and the Reconnecting Communities program is to make available $1 billion.
Complete streets projects and activities also are eligible under many of the eight Federal-Aid
Highway Programs, including the Surface Transportation Block Program; Highway Safety
Improvement Program; Congestion Mitigation and Air Quality Improvement Program; Carbon
Reduction Program; and Promoting Resilient Operations for Transformative, Efficient, and Cost-
Saving Transportation Formula Program. Funds under these programs have some transferability
between programs, which allows for the customization of funding to accomplish safety goals
associated with complete streets. FHWA has prepared guidance on the formula and discretionary
federal funding sources that can be used to support complete streets projects.18
Selected Recent Executive Actions
Since 2017, several actions by DOT have supported state and local agencies’ development of
complete streets policies and plans.
Safety for All Users Report
In December 2017, DOT published the Safety for All Users Report, pursuant to requirements of
Section 1442 of the Fixing America’s Surface Transportation Act (FAST Act; P.L. 114-94) and
based on Senate committee guidance in S.Rept. 114-243.19 In the Safety for All Users Report,
DOT described policies and programs that promote safety for all users, including complete streets
17 The Safe Streets and Roads for All program is at P.L. 117-58, Division A, §24112. The Reconnecting Communities
Pilot Program is at P.L. 117-58, Division A, §11509.
18 DOT, FHWA, “Funding Safety for All,” FHWA-SA-23-011, September 2023, https://highways.dot.gov/sites/
fhwa.dot.gov/files/2023-10/complete_streets_poster_funding_safety_for_all_09132023.pdf.
19 DOT, Safety for All Users Report: A Report Developed by the U.S. Department of Transportation Under Section
1442 of the Fixing America’s Surface Transportation (FAST) Act, December 2017, p. 2,
https://www.transportation.gov/sites/dot.gov/files/docs/mission/safety/303201/safety-all-users-report.pdf. Section
1442(b) states that “[n]ot later than 2 years after the date of enactment of this Act, the Secretary shall make available to
the public a report cataloging examples of State law or State transportation policy that provide for the safe and adequate
accommodation of all users of the surface transportation network, in all phases of project planning, development, and
operation.” (FAST; P.L. 114-94); S.Rept. 114-243 pertained to S. 2844, the Transportation, Housing and Urban
Development, and Related Agencies Appropriations Act, 2017.
Congressional Research Service
6
Complete Streets: A Primer
policies as a recommended tool. DOT declared in the report that complete streets would become
part of subsequent policy initiatives.
Moving to a Complete Streets Design Model Report
In March 2022, FHWA issued a report to Congress entitled Moving to a Complete Streets Design
Model. The agency cited this report as a response to House committee guidance in H.Rept. 116-
152, for DOT to adopt a complete streets design model for non-access-controlled roadways.20
Such roadways comprise nearly 80% of the National Highway System’s mileage.21 The FHWA
report indicated that DOT could provide guidance on the statutory requirement to consider all
modes of transportation found throughout federal standards for infrastructure planning and
design. The FHWA report suggested that proactive guidance and technical support from DOT
could help state leadership and practitioners, MPOs, and local agencies adopt complete streets
principles.
National Roadway Safety Strategy
In January 2022, DOT released a National Roadway Safety Strategy outlining its approach to
eliminating roadway deaths.22 As part of the strategy, DOT adopted the Safe Systems Approach to
roadway design. The approach has five objectives: safer people, safer roads, safer vehicles, safer
speeds, and post-crash care. A comprehensive Complete Streets Initiative is described as one of
six key actions to achieve the safer roads objective. For the Complete Streets Initiative, DOT
committed to providing technical assistance to communities, incorporating complete streets
criteria in federal grant opportunities, incorporating lighting in roadway upgrades, and involving
transit providers in complete streets implementation.
Complete Streets Formula Grant Match Waivers
On January 5, 2023, FHWA published a memorandum approving a waiver of the nonfederal
match requirement of the funding described in Section 11206(d) of P.L. 117-58.23 Thus, states and
MPOs would not have to contribute local dollars to meet the complete streets funding
requirement described in Section 11206(d) of P.L. 117-58. The Federal Transit Administration
took action on March 10, 2023, to approve a waiver of the nonfederal match for the Metropolitan
Planning Program and State Planning and Research Program funding authorized at 49 U.S.C.
§5305 for complete streets planning activities for each fiscal year under Section 11206(d) of P.L.
117-58.24 The nonfederal match waiver is available until the state or MPO meets requirements of
Section 11206(d) of P.L. 117-58.
20 The agency’s report is DOT, FHWA, Moving to a Complete Streets Design Model. The House committee report is
H.Rept. 116-152, pertaining to H.R. 7616, the Transportation, Housing and Urban Development, and Related Agencies
Appropriations Act, 2021.
21 DOT, FHWA, “Highway Statistics 2022 Table HM-18,” accessed February 2024, https://www.fhwa.dot.gov/
policyinformation/statistics/2022/hm18.cfm.
22 DOT, National Roadway Safety Strategy, version 1.1, January 2022, https://www.transportation.gov/sites/dot.gov/
files/2022-02/USDOT-National-Roadway-Safety-Strategy.pdf.
23 DOT, FHWA, “Waiver of Non-Federal Match for State Planning and Research (SPR) and Metropolitan Planning
(PL) Funds in Support of Complete Streets Planning Activities (BIL § 11206),” memorandum, January 5, 2023,
https://www.fhwa.dot.gov/planning/spr-pl_match_waiver_memo.pdf.
24 Letter from Nuria Fernandez, Director of the Federal Transit Administration’s (FTA’s) Office of Planning, to FTA
Colleagues, March 10, 2023.
Congressional Research Service
7
link to page 11 link to page 11 link to page 11 link to page 11 Complete Streets: A Primer
Appendix. A
Table A-1. Complete Streets-Related Bills, 109th-118th Congresses
House Bill
Senate Bill
Congressa
Short Titleb
—
S. 794
109
Safe and Complete Streets Act
of 2005c
H.R. 5951
S. 2686
110
Safe and Complete Streets Act
of 2008 / Complete Streets Act
of 2008
H.R. 1443
S. 584
111
Complete Streets Act of 2009
H.R. 1780
S. 1056
112
Safe and Complete Streets Act
of 2011
H.R. 2468
S. 2004
113
Safe Streets Act of 2013 / Safe
Streets Act of 2014
H.R. 2071
—
114
Safe Streets Act of 2015
H.R. 3663
S. 2077
116
Complete Streets Act of 2019
H.R. 1289
S. 425
117
Complete Streets Act of 2021
H.R. 3562
—
117
Vision Zero Act of 2021d
H.R. 7082
S. 3670
118
Complete Streets Act of 2024
Source: CRS based on Congress.gov, February 21, 2024.
Notes: CRS accessed Congress.gov to identify bills as of February 21, 2024. The phrase “complete streets” was
searched across the years 1973-2024 to identify bills. None were identified prior to the 109th Congress. From
the 109th to 118th Congresses, 17 bills were identified through a search for “complete streets” in the title or
summary of a bill. Legislation that is not freestanding, such as amendments, would not be captured by this search.
House and Senate companion bills identified as related in Congress.gov are listed together.
The table does not reflect the provisions that established the complete streets program as contained in Section
11206 of the Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act (P.L. 117-58).
a. There were no bills identified for the 115th Congress.
b. The “Short Title” column reflects the short title of the bill as introduced.
c. Provisions from S. 794 were included in the Safe, Accountable, Flexible, Efficient Transportation Equity Act
of 2005 (SAFETEA; P.L. 109-59).
d. Provisions of this bill were included in a related bill, H.R. 3684, enacted as the Infrastructure Investment and
Jobs Act (P.L. 117-58).
Congressional Research Service
8
Complete Streets: A Primer
Author Information
Jennifer J. Marshall
Analyst in Transportation Policy
Disclaimer
This document was prepared by the Congressional Research Service (CRS). CRS serves as nonpartisan
shared staff to congressional committees and Members of Congress. It operates solely at the behest of and
under the direction of Congress. Information in a CRS Report should not be relied upon for purposes other
than public understanding of information that has been provided by CRS to Members of Congress in
connection with CRS’s institutional role. CRS Reports, as a work of the United States Government, are not
subject to copyright protection in the United States. Any CRS Report may be reproduced and distributed in
its entirety without permission from CRS. However, as a CRS Report may include copyrighted images or
material from a third party, you may need to obtain the permission of the copyright holder if you wish to
copy or otherwise use copyrighted material.
Congressional Research Service
R47947 · VERSION 1 · NEW
9