1. Bikeway Design for
Complete Streets
Steve Durrant :: Paul Wojciechowski

2. Bikeways Solutions for St. Louis

3. Objectives
• Understand that there is diversity among
bicyclists we are designing for in St. Louis
• There is a distinct preference in the type of
facilities we are providing in the Gateway
Bike Plan.
• There are a basic and expanded pallet of
bikeway types in the Gateway Bike Plan.
• Safety is critical, and good design is
mandatory.
• Funding is available to get it done
• Practice using the bikeway “Top 10”.

4. The Bicycle
Vision – The Gateway
Bike Plan will create the
bicycle component to
the regional
transportation network
that accommodates all
users and promotes
consistent design and
development of bicycle
facilities.

5. The Bicycle
Mission – Increase
the number of people
using bicycles for
transportation, while
reducing the number
of crashes involving
bicycles

6. Top Ten Considerations for Bikeways
1. Is the roadway a collector , arterial or
neighborhood street?
2. Has the bikeway taken into consideration the
primary type of riders using the bikeway?
3. How does the bikeway fit into the roadway
segment?
4. Has the bikeway type considered the volume
of motor vehicles?
5. Has the bikeway type considered speeds of
motor vehicles?

7. Top Ten Considerations for Bikeways
6. How does the bikeway integrate into the
transportation system?
7. Has the bikeway taken into consideration
ongoing maintenance?
8. Has the bikeway type considered
intersections?
9. What destinations are you connecting?
10. Have you considered the right of way and
roadway width ?

8. Who are we designing our system for?
Shared Roadways
Separated
Bike Lanes
Interested but Concerned No Way, No How
60% 33%
60%
Strong and
Enthused and
Fearless
Confident
Photo - Trailnet
Photo – Roger Geller

10. What Choices do we have?

11. Bike Network:
Note: Bike St. Louis
mileage included in the
table does not include
mileage in the regional
network that calls for
changes to facility type.
Assessment in the plan
did not include all BSL
routes.

12. Great Ideas… but how do we make
these ideas in St. Louis?
Think Complete Streets!

13. PRINCIPLES OF DESIGN
1. Allow cyclists to use the road
Provide a smooth riding surface
Make room for cyclists
2. Make road inviting to cyclists
Slow traffic down
Reallocate roadway space
3. Make drivers aware of bicycle presence
Stripe or mark or sign when needed
4. Build paths where appropriate
To supplement the street system

14. What are bicyclists’ obligations?
Ride on the right in the same direction as
other traffic
Obey all traffic signs and signals
Use hand signals to communicate intended
movements
Equip their bicycles with a front lamp and a
rear reflector (light preferred)

15. Is the roadway a collector, arterial
or neighborhood street?

16. Arterial Road with Curb and Gutter

17. Arterial Road without curb and Gutter

18. Collector Roads

19. Neighborhood Street

20. Quiet Streets

21. Quiet Streets Essentials
Bike/Walk Streets
Bicycle Preferred Streets
Bicycle Boulevards

22. Definition
• Operation of a local street modified to act as a
through street for bicyclists and pedestrians
• Traffic controls give priority to through cyclists
and pedestrians
• Through auto traffic is encouraged to use
alternate routes

23. Purpose
• To provide continuous low‐stress access
within a neighborhood.
• To provide a route parallel to desirable high‐
volume travel routes
• To create low‐stress connections to family,
work and recreation destinations
• To provide a network of connected
neighborhoods

24. Why?
Walk or bike to school
1969 42%
2001 16%
Health, options, independence and vitality

25. Why?

26. Why?

27. Features
• Safe pedestrian environment for all ages and
abilities
• Safe and convenient bicycle and pedestrian
crossings minimizing delay at minor streets
• Easy to find and follow
• Calming for motor vehicle traffic
• Streetscape that slows and discourages through
motor vehicle traffic

28. Features
• Parallel to desirable travel routes lacking
dedicated bicycle facilities or that make
pedestrians uncomfortable
• Accommodate pedestrians and cyclists not
comfortable using major roads (even with bike
lanes and sidewalks)
• A “Family‐friendly” alternative for children
and/or less experienced riders

29. Why?

30. When will this work?
… with an interconnected grid
…when a parallel route exists for through auto
traffic

31. • Quiet Streets are also called Bicycle
Boulevards or Neighborhood Greenways
• Streets where bicycling and walking is
prioritized over motor vehicles
• Shared roadways with no specific vehicle or
bike lane markings (e.g., a residential street)
• Streets with lower travel speeds and low or
reduced motor vehicle volumes
• A safe environment to walk along and cross as
a pedestrian

32. Why Bother?
• Precedent
• Finding Our way
• Calming
• Getting Across
• Signals

33. AASHTO
MUTCD
FHWA
FTA
Precedent

34. Precedent

35. NACTO Bike Boulevard Outline
Tailor streets to existing conditions and desired
outcomes;
1. Slow motor vehicle speeds
2. Low or reduced motor vehicle volumes
3. Minimal bicyclist delays at minor intersections
4. Safe and convenient major street crossings
5. An easy‐to‐find and –follow route

36. Finding our way

37. Finding our way

38. Finding our way

39. Finding our way

40. Finding our way

41. Calming

42. Calming

43. Calming +

44. Calming

46. Getting across

47. Getting across

48. Getting across

50. Connections

51. Connections

52. Connections/Calming

53. Transit Connections

54. Finding our way

55. Calming

56. Connections

57. Putting it all together

58. Signals

59. Signals

60. Signals

61. Shared Lane Markings

62. Shared Lane Markings

63. Shared Lane Markings
Shared roadway pavement
markings are markings used to
indicate a shared lane
environment for bicycles and
automobiles. SLMs reinforce
the validity of bicycle traffic
on the road and suggest
proper positioning of cyclists
on the street.
Portland

64. Shared Lane Markings:
Shared Lane Markings: “
What does it do?
– Shows cyclists where to
ride on the street to avoid
doors
– Alerts drivers to cyclists
Where is it appropriate?
– Not enough room for lanes
– Parallel parking
– High occupancy rate

65. Use of Shared Lane Markings
• Adjacent to on‐street parking to position
cyclist outside of door zone
• In wide lanes to position away from curb
• Narrow lanes (yes, they can go in the middle)
• Multi‐lane roads where there is no room for
bike lane
• Climbing lanes (on downgrade) paired with
bike lane
• 35 mph or less speed limit

66. Where not to use SLM’s
• On paved shoulders or in bike lanes
• Where the speed limit exceeds 35 mph
• In door zones

67. Shared Lane Marking

68. Shared Lane Marking

70. Shared Lane Markings

71. Shared Lane Markings

72. Shared Lane Marking

73. Shared Lane Marking

74. Shared Lane Marking

75. Shared Lane Marking
Eager Road,
Brentwood/Richmond
Heights

76. Shared with Route Signing

77. Shared with Route Signing and Marking

78. Bike Lanes Lanes

79. Bike Lanes

80. Advantages of bike lanes
• Create a lane so cyclists can travel at their own
pace ( priority for bikes that allow passing
stopped motor vehicles in travel lanes)
• Guide cyclists in a manner consistent with good
operation (close to traffic, where they’re visible
and drivers can predict their movements)
• Reduce bicycle / pedestrian conflicts (cyclists
no longer ride on sidewalks)
• Striping creates conditions that change
behaviors
• More cyclists on the road leads to increased
driver awareness

81. Advantages of bike lanes

82. Bike Lane Basics
• Markings are required, signs are optional
• Edge lines between bikes and motor
vehicles should be 6”, the right bike lane
line should be 4”
• Keep bike lanes solid and not dotted at
unsignalized driveways and alleys
• Dot lines through bus stops
• In St. Louis we use a helmeted rider and
an arrow

83. Bike Lane Basics
• 5 ft. standard width (4 ft. with no curb and gutter)
• 5 ft. bike lane is sufficient assuming a 1 ft. wide
gutter
• In areas that have 2 ft. wide gutter, a 6 ft. wide
bike lane is preferred, with 5 ft. as a minimum
width in locations with lower speeds
• In extremely constrained, urban low speed
environments where 5 ft. cannot be achieved and
there is no gutter, a 4 ft. wide bike lane is
acceptable (assumes adjacent travel lane has been
narrowed to the minimum acceptable width)

84. Car Doors and Bike Lanes
• Why this is an issue, and where?
• Recommend and reinforcing safer path of
travel
 Use Parking “T’s” extending into bike lane
 Use parking “T’s” in a wide parking lane
 Slightly narrower bike lane symbols on the
left of lane

85. Angled Parking
• Bike lanes not recommended along front-in
angled parking, use Shared Lane Markings
• Bike lanes are OK with back-in angled parking if:
1. Parking bays are sufficiently long
2. Solid line separates parking and bike lane
Yes No

86. Angled parking

87. Curb, Gutter and Inlets
• When measuring for bike lanes, the gutter pan
matters
• 4’ minimum
outside of
gutter

88. An inlet covering most of the travel way
for bicyclists…is a shoulder
1’

89. Replace inlets that are hazards!

90. Bike Safe…but turned wrong

91. Bike safe…
turned the correct direction

92. Bike safe… and channels water

93. The best grate…is no grate

94. Colorized Lanes
Color applied to bicycle facilities
helps alert roadway users to the
presence of bicyclists and clearly
assigns right-of-way to cyclists.
Motorists are expected to yield to
cyclists in these areas.
Portland

95. Colorized Lanes

96. Colorized Lanes

97. Colorized Lanes

98.  Convenience of
Colorized Lanes
riding on the street
with some
psychological
separation
 Novice cyclists are
more likely to ride
in bike lane, not on
sidewalk
 Street appears
narrower -
motorists drive
slower
 Used in many
cities within the US
(Seattle, Olympia,
Portland) and
worldwide

99. Colorized Lanes

100. Colorized Lanes

101. Colorized Lanes

102. Colorized Lanes
Portland

103. Colorized Lanes

104. Colorized Lanes

105. Colorized Lanes

106. Other Ideas: Jug-handle - go right to turn left

107. Jug-handle: go right to turn left

108. Jug-handle: go right to turn left

109. Intersections with
On- or Off-Ramps
Jug-handle: go right to turn left

110. Jug-handle: go right to turn left

111. Bike Boxes
Portland

112. Bike Boxes

113. Bike Boxes

114. Bike Boxes

115. Bike Boxes

116. Bike Boxes
Portland

117. Bike Boxes
Portland

118. Bike Boxes

119. Bike Boxes

120. Bike Boxes
Portland

121. Bike Boxes
Portland

122. Buffered
Bicycle lane with a spatial
buffer to increase the distance
between the bicycle travel lane
and the automobile travel lane
or the parking zone.
Portland

123. Buffered

124. Buffered

125. Buffered
Portland

126. Buffered

127. Buffered

128. Buffered
Portland

129. Buffered
Portland

130. Buffered
Portland

131.  Convenience of
Buffered (Raised)
riding on the
street +
psychological
separation of a
barrier
 Mountable curb
allows cyclists to
leave bike lane for
turning or
overtaking
 Motorists feel
bump when they
stray into curb
 Novice bicyclists
more likely to ride
in bike lane rather
than on sidewalk

132. Buffered (Raised)
Combines the convenience of riding on the street
with the psychological separation of a barrier
Mountable curb
mountable curb

133. Cycle Tracks

134. Cycle Tracks

135. Cycle Track
A bicycle exclusive facility that
provides physical separation from
motorized vehicle traffic within the
right of way.
Portland

136. Cycle Track
A bicycle exclusive facility that
provides physical separation from
motorized vehicle traffic within the
right of way.
Combines the user experience of a
separated path with the on-street
infrastructure of a bike lane.
Portland

137. Cycle Track

139. Cycle Track
Amsterdam, The Netherlands

140. Cycle Track
Copenhagen, Denmark

141. Cycle Track
Cambridge, MA

142. Cycle Track
Cambridge, MA

143. Cycle Track
Cambridge, MA

144. Cycle Track
Cambridge, MA

145. Cycle Track
Cambridge, MA

146. Cycle Track
Vancouver, BC

147. Cycle Track
Vancouver, BC

148. Cycle Track
Munich

149. Cycle Track
Munich

150. Cycle Track
Kelowna, BC (Stantec)

151. Cycle Track
Kelowna, BC (Stantec)

152. Cycle Track

153. Cycle Track

154. Cycle Track

155. Cycle Track
Portland

156. Cycle Track
Portland

157. Cycle Track
Portland

158. Cycle Track
Portland

159. Cycle Track
Portland

160. Intersection Markings

161. Continuity & Transitions

162. Continuity & Transitions

163. Continuity & Transitions

164. Continuity & Transitions

165. Intersections

166. Merge Areas

167. Contra‐Flow Bike Lanes

168. Contra‐Flow Bike Lanes

169. Contra‐Flow
A one-way motorized traffic
street with two-way bicycle
facilities, including an
opposite direction bicycle only
lane.
Portland

170. Contra‐Flow
Double yellow line creates 2-way street

171. Contra‐Flow

172. Contra‐Flow

173. Signals

174. Signals

175. Bike Signals

176. Signals

177. Signals
Oregon & Interstate, Portland
177

178. Hybrid Beacons

179. Signals
HAWK signal

180. Sidepaths

181. Request to Experiment
The Process

182. Request to Experiment
FHWA experimentation procedure:
Requests for experimentation should
originate with the agency responsible for
managing the roadway where experiment will
take place.
That organization forwards the request to the
FHWA.
The FHWA must approve the experiment
before it begins.

183. Request to Experiment
All requests must include:
A statement of the nature of the problem, including data
that justifies the need for a new device or application.
Describe the proposed change, how it was developed,
how it deviates from the current MUTCD.
Illustrations that enhance understanding of the device
or its use.
Explain how the device was developed, if it has been
tried, the adequacy of its performance, and the process
by which the device was chosen.
A statement that the concept of the traffic control device
is not protected by a patent or copyright.

184. Request to Experiment
All requests must include:
The time period and locations of the experiment.
A detailed research or evaluation plan. Before and after
studies, quantitative data enabling a scientifically-sound
evaluation of the performance.
An agreement to restore the site following completion.
Agreement to terminate the experiment if the experiment
causes significant safety hazards.
An agreement to provide progress reports for the
duration of the experiment.

185. Request to Experiment
4‐12 Weeks

186. Request to Experiment
1Year Minimum

187. Request to Experiment
At the conclusion of the experiment:
If the experiment demonstrates an
improvement, it may remain in place
as a request is made to update the
MUTCD.

188. Request to Experiment
Document Everything
Look for precedent
Other modes
Historic
Other places
Evaluate effectiveness
Before
During
After
Control
Refine
Document

189. Request to Experiment
Document Everything
Look for precedent
Other modes
Historic
Other places
Evaluate effectiveness
Before
During
After
Control
Refine
Document
Document

190. Request to Experiment
Document Everything
Look for precedent
Other modes
Historic
Other places
Evaluate effectiveness
Before
During
After
Control
Refine
Document
Document
Document

191. Parking
Oregon & Interstate, Portland

192. Parking

193. Parking