In June of 2024, the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) released their guidance on Separated Bike Lanes on Higher Speed Roadways: A Toolkit and Guide. The guide can be helpful for advocates and transportation planners in understanding how to promote and plan for the appropriate types of bicycle facilities on higher speed roadways.  In this article, the Coalition of Arizona Bicyclists has summarized that guide.

For the purpose of the guide, the FHWA has defined

Bicycle lanes as

• Part of the roadway intended exclusively for people on bicycles
• Having a horizontal buffer separating people on bicycles from motor vehicle traffic
• That uses a vertical element in the buffer space (p7)

Higher speed roadways as

• Roadways where the posted speed limit is 35 mph or greater (p7)

The guide is separated into 7 sections, which are summarized below.

Section 1: Introduction presents the toolkit guide’s purpose.

Section 2: Background describes the toolkit guide’s scope and background.

Section 3: Overview of State of Practice and Current Challenges summarizes existing research and challenges of implementing separated bike lanes on higher speed roads.

Section 4: Planning Separated Bike Lanes outlines key considerations for practitioners in the planning phase.

Section 5: Designing Separated Bike Lanes provides best practices on the form of separation, directional and width characteristics, and driveway and intersection designs.

Section 6: Maintaining Separated Bike Lanes identifies maintenance considerations including managing stormwater and assets, street-sweeping requirements, and seasonal maintenance procedures.

Section 7: Moving Forward summarizes key takeaways from the toolkit guide.

Section 1: The Introduction includes the definitions for bicycle lanes and higher speed roadways as shown above.

It should be noted that the text of the guide states “intended exclusively for bicyclists” but in a graphic it shows “Intended exclusively for bicyclists and scooters”.

The guide states that roadways with speeds greater than 50 mph are not part of the focus of the guidance as roadways where traffic is moving more than 50 mph “are most likely on limited-access roadways”. As anyone who travels on the Arizona roadways knows, the average motor vehicle speed on a road with a 45-mph speed limit is over 50-mph.

Section 2: In the Background, the FHWA acknowledges that there has been a significant increase in crashes and deaths on our roadways and that

a growing body of evidence in the United States and internationally demonstrates that separated bike lanes can reduce crashes involving people bicycling. (p9)

The guide is not designed to provide details of roadway design but can be used as a guidance on “how to plan, design, and maintain buffers and vertical separations for those lanes.”

Section 3: This section starts with an overview of current research drawing the following conclusions.

• higher speeds are a risk factor associated with bicyclist crashes and injuries
• separated bicycle lanes have an overall improved safety performance
• separated bike lanes influence driver behavior, decreasing speed and instances of motor vehicle encroachment
• both people bicycling and people driving feel more comfortable with separated bicycle lanes (p11)

This section also has detail and cited references on specific studies related to

• Risk Factors for Bicyclists on Higher Speed Roads
• Safety Performance of Separated Bike Lanes
• Effects of Separated Bike Lane Design Elements on Driver Behaviors
• User Perceptions of Safety and Comfort
• Existing Design Guidance and Policies
• Current Challenges

A key takeaway from Section 3 is that

separated bike lanes are preferred by both bicyclists and drivers to most other bicycle facilities along higher traffic streets (p15)

Section 4: This section provides an overview of the planning process, starting with project justification. This includes looking at needs for improved safety for people on bicycles, looking at expanding or creating better connections in an existing network, leveraging existing projects, and identifying people or groups that will be impacted and support the changes.

There is information about identifying funding options. There are links to a large number of Federal funding opportunities, and discussion of local and private funding opportunities.

Section 4 also includes information about policies that support the use of separated bicycle lanes on higher speed roadways, including Vision Zero, the Safe Systems Approach and the use of roadway design guides.

One of the most effective strategies to improve bicyclists’ safety and the safety of all road users is to reduce vehicle speeds. (p32)

Section 5: This section covers some of the basic design elements for separated bike lanes on higher speed roadways. It includes pictures of different forms of vertical lane separation along with the pros and cons of the different types of separation. The forms of separation shown are:

• Delineator Posts
• Parking Stops
• Parked Cars
• Barriers
• Raised Median/Curb

A table in this section shows the pros and cons of each form of vertical separation.

Section 5 has information on the use of vertical separation and design guidance for intersections and driveways. This includes cost, perceived safety, durability, maintenance, stormwater management, crash concerns, aesthetics, construction needs, strategies to lower roadway speed, access management, one-way versus two-way separated bike lanes, visibility at crossings, mixing zones, deceleration lanes, and signalized intersections.

Links to other guidance’s specific to separated bike lanes at intersections and driveways are listed in this section.

There are case studies in this section, showing the use of different types of bicycle lane separation in different cities around the country.

Best Practices for Vertical Bicycle Lane Separation (p32)

• Horizontal and vertical separation (vertical barriers) are essential on higher speed roads.
• Horizontal separation can be as important as vertical separation. Bicyclists feel more comfortable when further offset from vehicles.
• Separation types can be used in combination to realize the full benefits of several treatments at a lower overall cost.
• One of the most effective strategies to improve bicyclists’ safety is to reduce vehicle speeds.

Section 6: This section covers the importance of properly maintaining separated bicycle lanes on higher speed roadways. As it may be difficult for a person on a bicycle to move out of a separated bicycle lane, these lanes need to be kept free of obstructions. This includes street sweeping, and stormwater management. Other maintenance includes the repair of vertical separators and road restriping. The key recommendation here is incorporate street sweeping and repair and replacement of vertical separators into a regular maintenance schedule so that separated bicycle lanes don’t fall into disrepair and discourage people on bicycles from using them.

Section 6 includes several case studies showing how different cities have approached the maintenance of separated bicycle lanes.

Best Practices for Separated Bicycle Lane Maintenance

• Plan and budget for how a separated bicycle lane will be maintained.
• Consider the width of the facility and evaluate sweeping and plowing capabilities.
• Establish partnerships with stakeholders and develop clear maintenance plans.
• Coordinate with public agencies on asset management, regular maintenance needs, and construction closures.
• Consider stormwater management needs in design process.

Section 7: In the Moving Forword section, the FHWA recommends that you ask the following questions

• What form of separation is needed on a higher speed road?
• How can separated bike lanes on higher speed roads be maintained through driveways and intersections?
• How can agencies sustain safe separated bicycle lane operations on higher speed roads?

In closing the FHWA advises

When planning a bike facility on a higher speed road, there must be separation provided between bicyclists and vehicles. Shared lanes or other bike facilities without separation should not be deployed on higher speed roads.

You can download the complete guidance at https://rosap.ntl.bts.gov/view/dot/75901