Liberty Ave’s Shared Lane Markings are an example of Pittsburgh’s use of innovative bicycle facilities

Recognizing the limitations of federal standards, bicycle traffic planners and traffic engineers from some of the country’s largest cities, including San Francisco, Portland, Minneapolis, Seattle, Boston, Chicago, and New York, are forming a coalition to push for bikeway innovation.  BikePortland reports that the coalition, which officially launches tomorrow, is called “Cities for Cycling,” and is comprised of US cities that have taken an active role in creating bicycle-friendly environments and want more freedom and flexibility to innovate.

Bikeways, defined as any type of marking, signage, or built facility that incorporates bicycle traffic, are regulated by two companion documents: The Manual of Uniform Traffic Control Devices (MUTCD), and the American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials’ (AASHTO) Guide to the Development of Bicycle Facilities.  These two manuals act as a bible of sorts for traffic planners and engineers, basically saying what can and can’t be done, while making sure that a ‘stop sign’ looks the same whether you’re in Washington or Wasilla.  Straying from these documents can put cities and traffic engineers in the spotlight, and held liable, should anything happen due to the change.  For the most part, the MUTCD/AASHTO standards act as the end of a conversation, unless a city is willing to prioritize innovation.

But what happens if you think these documents aren’t good enough or don’t reflect current trends? Traffic engineers in cities around the world are continually innovating and trying out new facilities to help deal with the fact that bicycles, cars, buses, and pedestrians all need to use the same thruways.  Some work, some not so well, but the idea is that they are continually trying to develop better and safer facilities for bicycles.  The standards for automobile traffic have been developing and evolving since Henry Bliss, the first US automobile fatality, emerged from his New York City Streetcar in 1899.  In the US, bicycle facilities standards have been designed to retrofit along streets already designed for automobiles.  The time that’s been dedicated to bicycle innovation is relatively short and recent.  Since the MUTCD/AASHTO documents are painfully slow to change or to incorporate innovative designs, they are not able to keep up with the desire of many cities to create a bicycle-friendly built environment.  As a case in point, the most recent edition of the MUTCD was published in 2003.

One such bicycle facility, that is neither in the MUTCD or AASHTO, but has garnered national attention is the Bicycle Boulevard, now in regular use in Berkeley, CA.  A bicycle boulevard is a shared roadway which has been optimized for bicycle traffic. In contrast with other shared roadways, bicycle boulevards discourage cut-through motor vehicle traffic, but typically allow local motor vehicle traffic. They are designed to give priority to cyclists as through-going traffic.

In order to do something different from the MUTCD/AASHTO, cities must apply for a “Request to Experiment,” subjecting the project to Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) oversight.  Obtaining the experimental status, requires the city to explain to the FHWA what they plan to do, and how they plan to monitor it.  Most cities won’t bother to go through with the rigamarole because they don’t want to spend the time or money on the project or they fear the liability and potential backlash of something new or different.

Back in 2007, thanks to BikePGH’s gentle nudging and prodding, the City of Pittsburgh applied for our first “Request to Experiment” when the shared lane markings, or “sharrows,” were installed on Liberty Ave in Bloomfield.  Pittsburgh was one of the first east coast cities to use sharrows, and has been followed by numerous other cities since.  You may remember filling out surveys about how you felt when using the sharrows, either as a driver or cyclist.  These surveys were forwarded to the FHWA to help them determine whether these markings are useful in creating safer streets, with the idea that they will be in the MUTCD someday.  Although the MUTCD board has yet to officially incorporate these markings, word is that they will be in the next edition.

Looking at best practices, and actually having the ability to incorporate them, is integral in creating an environment that is welcoming to bicycle traffic.  Knowing that these city planners and engineers that comprise “Cities for Cycling” are converging, with the goal of helping other cities that don’t have the means or will to innovate, is encouraging.

Cities for Cycling has been adopted as an official project of the National Association of City Transportation Officials.  On December 8th, NACTO and the Metropolitan Policy Program at Brookings will host an event and panel discussion in Washington D.C. to officially launch the project.

Are YOU a member of BikePGH?

If not, JOIN TODAY! We need you to add your voice! Bike Pittsburgh works to protect cyclist’s rights and promote the vision of making Pittsburgh a safer and more enjoyable place to live and to ride.  For more info, check out: www.bike-pgh.org/membership

Gift Memberships also available.  Click here for details.