Bicycle Facilities and the Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices

The use of green-colored pavement with the shared-lane marking is noncompliant with the Conditions of the Interim Approval for the Optional Use of green-colored Pavement for Bike Lanes (IA-14). Therefore, this treatment is experimental.

In July 2013, the FHWA discontinued the approval of new experiments using green-colored pavement with the shared-lane marking until the FHWA could analyze more information regarding preliminary feedback on this application. As of August 2014 the FHWA will accept requests to experiment using green-colored pavement with the shared-lane marking as a background conspicuity enhancement only.

Experimenting with green-colored pavement in a continuous, longitudinal manner in conjunction with the shared-lane marking remains discontinued at this time. The FHWA continues to maintain four existing experiments with this application and these experiments are not terminated.

More information on the FHWA's active official experiments for green-colored pavement to communicate a continuous, longitudinal direction in conjunction with shared-lane markings can be found at the Official Rulings Database on the MUTCD Web site. Active official experiments for this application include:

• 9-99 - Salt Lake City, UT
• 9-113 - Long Beach, CA
• 9(09)-29 - Edina, MN
• 9(09)-38 - Oakland, CA

A previously approved fifth experiment has been voluntarily discontinued by the agency.

Experiments to use green-colored pavement as a background conspicuity enhancement for the shared-lane marking will only be accepted for review if they fulfill three elements:

1. The request conforms with Items A through I in Paragraph 11 of Section 1A.10 in the MUTCD.
2. The experiment analyzes a minimum of two metrics to investigate motorist comprehension, understanding, or use.
3. The experiment analyzes a minimum of two metrics to investigate bicycle comprehension, understanding, or use.

The FHWA will accept requests to experiment where an agency desires to deploy shared-lane markings for the first time or desires to upgrade existing shared-lane markings. Regardless, the agency is required to establish a baseline at their discretion in order to conduct the analyses.

Examples of metrics to investigate motorist comprehension, understanding, or use include, but are not limited to:

• Lane utilization factor(s) (if multi-lane, did motor vehicle volume in that lane go up or down after installation)
• Crash rates or frequencies
• Motor vehicle lateral positioning
• Motor vehicle lane changing (if multi-lane)
• Motor vehicle speed (85th percentile, mean speed, etc.)
• Estimated motorist passing distance when overtaking bicyclists

Examples of metrics to investigate bicycle comprehension, understanding, or use include, but are not limited to:

• Before/after bicycle volume on sidewalks
• Before/after wrong-way bicycle volume
• Crash rates and/or severities
• Bicycle lateral positioning relative to the shared-lane marking
• Bicyclist lane positioning relative to parked cars

Agencies can include the analysis of metrics that fulfill one or more of their goals in a bicycle program such as if the device increase bicycle ridership overall, or if the device was successful in relocating bicycle volume off of or to other routes, but these metrics might not constitute fulfillment of II. or III. above.

Attempts to validate small or negligible reductions in bicycle crashes (e.g. 4 bicycle crashes before and 3 bicycle crashes after), or no change(s) in bicycle crashes in the analysis should not be done if large datasets are not available. Alternatively, a bicycle crash analysis can demonstrate that the experimental device does not result or contribute to any adverse or negative safety conditions to any road user.