Green Lane Project Spreads the Word About NACTO’s Bikeway Design Guide

For the next two years, the Green Lane Project will lend expertise and support to Austin, Chicago, Memphis, Portland, San Francisco and Washington, D.C. as those cities implement the type of infrastructure that has proven successful at leading people to take up biking for transportation. The project bills itself as a “storytelling campaign” for the cities to share their experiences.

NACTO and the Green Lane Project are trying to make protected bike facilities a standard engineering treatment. Photo: ##http://www.utilitycycling.org/wp-content/uploads/Screen-shot-2012-02-08-at-3.49.55-PM.jpg##Utility Cycling##

“We want to build that library of great examples from the United States… rather than having to point people to Europe,” said Green Lane Project director Martha Roskowski.

The Green Lane Project — which officially kicks off Thursday with an event in Chicago — will also make an impact beyond those six cities. By broadly disseminating the Urban Bikeway Design Guide, a pioneering document released last year by the National Association of City Transportation Officials, the project will reach a critical audience in places that may not have the level of political support for bike infrastructure found in the six cities receiving direct assistance.

Last March the Boulder-based organization Bikes Belong, which oversees the Green Lane Project, co-sponsored the publication of the NACTO guide, the country’s first attempt at a uniform set of traffic-engineering standards for effective bike infrastructure such as protected bike lanes, bike boxes, bike signals and a host of treatments that are just now gaining currency in American cities.

Bikes Belong is also providing funding for the guide’s second module, due out next month, which focuses on bike boulevards.

A guiding force behind these efforts is the vision for more protected bike lanes in the U.S.

“If you look at the good Dutch or Danish systems, on the bigger streets, you provide protection and separation,” said Randy Neufeld, director of the SRAM Cycling Fund. (SRAM, the other sponsor of the NACTO guide, is the major funding source for the Green Lane Project.)

The challenge now is to foster the adoption of NACTO’s designs, so the guide can hold its own next to old-guard engineering standards like the FHWA’s Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices and the American Association of State Highway Transportation Officials’ design guidelines.

In its first year, the NACTO guide made a lot of headway. More than 40 U.S. cities have signed on to endorse the guide, and Transportation Secretary Ray LaHood voiced his support last October.

On-the-ground use of the guide has varied, but a handful of cities — Austin, Atlanta, Portland, Salt Lake City and Syracuse — have formally approved the guide as their official resource for bike planning.

Austin adopted the guide through a city council ordinance last August. The city’s bike program manager, Annick Beaudet, said the NACTO guide — and now the Green Lane Project — validated concepts engineers had explored in a 2009 bicycle master plan.

But Austin, like the five other Green Lane cities, already has political and community support for more innovative bike infrastructure. The project deliberately sought cities “that have already digested the NACTO guide [and] are now moving deeper into the implementation details,” said Roskowski.

Going forward, the goal is to reach out to cities that are at an earlier stage in developing their cycling programs, so that one day “the city engineer in Omaha who wants to design a cycle track doesn’t have to call New York City to get their plans,” said David Vega-Barachowitz, NACTO’s sustainable initiatives program manager.

Progress at the city level will be critical for the next stage of mainstreaming these practices – embedding effective designs for bike infrastructure in state transportation departments. “The states want to make sure we have a vetted, legal position of what [the NACTO guide] is – so they’re not in murky territory,” said Vega-Barachowitz.

“There are a lot of engineers and project designers who are still really intimidated by these designs,” Roskowski said. “They’re so new – and so they’re not backed by years and years of safety data.”

The MUTCD, last updated in 2009, currently classifies bike boxes and most types of bike signals as “experimental.” Green pavement markings for bike routes recently won interim approval.

AASHTO’s latest Guide for Development of Bicycle Facilities was published in 1999 [PDF], years before American cities began implementing designs like protected bike lanes. An overhauled guide is slated to come out next month, more than doubling the content and adding guidance on treatments like shared-use paths and bike signals. But the update still lags behind the NACTO guide in its “lack of positive guidance for protected bike lanes,” according to Vega-Barachowitz.

Bill Schultheiss, a traffic engineer who serves on the national committee that writes MUTCD updates, said that professionals involved in the MUTCD and AASHTO guidelines are also frustrated at the slow pace of change. There’s a misconception, he said, “of stodgy people who don’t want updates.”

Still, he said there are good reasons for planners to take their time with these newer street treatments. “A lot of advocates, a lot of people in charge of biking for public agencies, are not engineers,” he said, and can be “desensitized to the responsibilities and liability associated with an engineering license.”

Funding for research and evaluation is often a barrier. “People who make the decisions of what gets funded are predominantly from motorist-oriented agencies,” less geared toward cycling, Schultheiss said.

As the NACTO guide grows more popular, it could catalyze more dramatic changes to the MUTCD and AASHTO guides — or it could cement its own authority, becoming a trusted resource alongside the older standards.

“It feels like the NACTO guide is still seen in some sectors as the stepchild to MUTCD and AASHTO,” said Roskowski. “We’re interested in knitting that family closer together.”

Neufeld pointed out that there’s room for “professional, contextual” flexibility in these matters. “It’s not like an IRS tax code where there’s a right way and a wrong way to do it,” he said.

The Green Lane Project should help forge a path for the next generation of American bike infrastructure. “It’s most important that there’s a commitment to innovation,” said Neufeld. “I think that all of these cities involved have a lot to learn about the process and how to negotiate the political and public acceptance.”

  • Ben Kintisch

    We are just approaching the tip of the iceberg when it comes to better bicycle infrastructure in the U.S. I’m so looking forward to the day when protected bike lanes, bike boxes, bicycle signals and the like are so commonplace that we no longer hear that lame refrain, “We can’t do that. We’re not Europe.” No, we’re not Europe, we’re the United States, and our citizens (whether on bike, foot, or in cars) also deserve safe passageway on our roads!

  • This is a great sign of progress. Hopefully all cities take the appropriate measures soon.

  • USbike

    This is indeed a very positive sign and I very much look forward to the development of this on-going initiative.  I can understand Mr. Schultheiss’ concern about many community activists and people in charge of biking for public agencies not being engineers.  However, I see this as a good thing, because the status quo that have been developed by the professionals have obviously not resulted in a people-friendly environment the last 6 decades or more.  It took a lot of grassroots and community action to end detrimental highway projects that would have sliced communities and cities in half.  And if people weren’t asking for high quality bike amenities, I doubt we would ever get any from the civil engineers and urban planners who aren’t already concerned about creating a more bike and pedestrian-friendly environment.  You don’t need to be an engineer to know that a particular street is dangerous to cross or that the roads aren’t accommodating to a particular mode of traffic.  

    That being said, I hope to see a lot more cooperation between activists and the planners.  It helps tremendously for everyone to be on board and on the same page.  It will be great to have some standardized guidelines that can more-easily be implemented across various states and cities, but we need to make sure those guidelines are at a sufficient standard.  

  • fj

    This is good news. 

    Automobiles have been able to monopolize public streets by threatening other modes that do not have the excessive weight, size, power, cost, and backing of the fossil fuel industry.

    The fact that cars, trucks, and buses are allowed to kill and maim many pedestrians and cyclists on daily basis is absolutely criminal.

  • Jakewegmann

    Fantastic work, Bikes Belong! They are stepping into the breach. May the Dane-ificiation and Dutch-ification of American biking infrastructure begin.

    I take strong exception to this statement from Bill Schultheiss (traffic engineer serving on the committee that writes MUTCD updates): “there are good reasons for planners to take their time with these newer street treatments.”I’m sorry, I don’t accept that statement. These new (for us, in backwards America) treatments have been in routine use in Europe not for years, but for decades. Is our engineering profession so provincial that the wheel (or the lane, as it were) must be recreated just because it’s new to the United States? Isn’t asphalt still asphalt and aren’t cars still cars in Europe?”Taking time” with these treatments will result in dozens — hundreds? — of extra needless cyclist deaths per year of delay in installing cycle tracks. Maybe most importantly, thousands of new cyclists will be too intimidated to get that bike out of storage and start using it to get around. The growth of biking in the US, which we desperately need to happen, for all kinds of reasons, will be further delayed by a number of years. Here’s another way of looking at it — our existing (inadequate) facilities for bikes, or in most cases our complete lack of them, put thousands of bike riders in danger on a daily basis. Why are we “taking our time” to fix this sorry state of affairs?!

  • BC

    Bill Schultheiss, a professional on the MUTCD update committee, denies that the professionals doing MUTCD and AASHTO guidelines are “stodgy people who don’t
    want updates.”  He then defends the slow pace of updates and says the advocates and biking professionals just don’t understand because they are not engineers, demonstrating that there’s at least one stodgy and reluctant professional on the MUTCD update committee.
     

ALSO ON STREETSBLOG

Green Lane Project Picks Six New Cities to Make Big Progress on Bikeways

|
More than 100 cities applied for the second round of the Green Lane Project, the program that helps cities build better bike infrastructure, including protected lanes. People for Bikes, which runs the program, announced its selections for round two today: Atlanta, Boston, Denver, Indianapolis, Pittsburgh, and Seattle. “The selected cities have ambitious goals and a vision for […]

Four Ways Protected Bike Lanes Benefit Businesses

|
The question isn’t whether your city can afford high-quality bike infrastructure anymore, say our friends at the Green Lane Project. It’s whether your city can afford not to. The Green Lane Project has been working with the Alliance for Biking and Walking on a study examining the different ways protected bike lanes help local businesses. […]

Bikes Belong Selects Six Cities to Fast Track Protected Bike Lanes

|
The Bikes Belong Foundation has chosen six cities to fast track physically protected bikeway designs that make cycling safer and more accessible to a wide range of people. Austin, Chicago, Memphis, Portland, San Francisco and Washington D.C. will receive a leg up from Bikes Belong’s new “Green Lane Project.” The two-year, intensive technical assistance program […]