Archive for the 'Rumble Strips' Category

It’s been more than six months since the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) updated its guidance for rumble stripes. While the original draft didn’t even mention bicyclists, the new guidance was helpful for addressing our needs. The League and Adventure Cycling are currently preparing an update to our rumble strip policy report, including a matrix of state policies and how they compare to the FHWA guidance. In the meantime, one Ohio advocate is making progress with the state Department of Transportation.

For bicyclists in Ohio, riding along the scenic Scioto River truly is a pleasure. Getting across the river is a bit more of a challenge, as there are only a few bridges in this area north of Columbus. Tricia Kovacs, with the Ohio Bicycle Federation, has been riding in this area for years and was dismayed when the State Route 42 bridge had rumble stripes installed. Luckily, some emails and a meeting later, she is hopeful that state engineers are starting to understand her and other cyclists’ concerns.

Credit: Ohio Bicycle Federation

Why is the bridge important for bicyclists?

Tricia Kovacs: I lead the Woodstock Bicycle Tour, hosted by Columbus Outdoor Pursuits, and we’ve been using this bridge and road for a long time. This is the only way for bicyclists to cross the river unless you’re looking to go pretty far out of your way. Even then the next available road is a state route, so you could end up in the same situation with rumble stripes on a bridge. Besides every road being open for bicyclists, a lot of us like to ride in this area because it’s really beautiful.

What was the message you took to the ODOT traffic engineering administrator?

We had been corresponding via email up until this week, when we had our first in-person meeting. He told me that ODOT has been reaching out to motorcyclists on other road issues, and wanted to ensure they are working with bicyclists as well.

We came prepared to discuss the differences between the FHWA guidance and Ohio’s current policy. This included a lot of photos we’ve taken in Ohio of rumble stripes on roads with narrow shoulders, which really seemed to make an impression. We also discussed different types of bicycles (e.g. tandem, trike) and how the current rumble stripe gaps may not be long enough for these users. Lastly, we expressed our disappointment that every state road meeting their criteria of shoulder width and speed limit is going to be rumble striped when they are repaved.

What was his response?

I think we’ll find some positive ground on the exclusion of bridges from rumble striping in Ohio. He did commit to looking further at requiring a four-foot shoulder (instead of the current two feet). Given the positive conversation, I’m hopeful on that issue. We also got a commitment that he’ll share road resurfacing plans with us in the future so we’re not playing “catch up” and can provide input before a project begins. This will be a great opportunity for OBF to create more relationships at the state DOT on this and other issues.

What are some lessons you learned that are helpful for other advocates?

Our group still has a position of “no rumble stripes”, but we’re starting to learn when and how to work with ODOT to ensure the best possible accommodation for bicyclists (e.g. wider shoulders, gaps in the stripes, narrower and shallower stripes). ODOT also needs to ensure its policy is complying with the new FHWA guidance, which is there for a reason, and as a tool for advocates.

The devil is in the details. Bicycling advocates need to get involved in the application of a state’s rumble stripe policy. We first started working on the issue in 2010, when we lobbied to be sure that the TOSRV bike route (in its 51st year), the cross state bike routes and the Adventure Cycling routes were not rumble striped. Since then, we have had to continuously contact our MPOs, district engineers, and others to represent the needs of bicyclists (especially in rural areas). It’s also a good idea to let the upper management know when their district engineers are receptive to cyclists’ needs and to thank them for their efforts.

Matt Wempe
League State and Local Advocacy Coordinator

Mr. Wempe joined the League in September 2011. For the three years prior, he worked as a transportation planner and Safe Routes to School Coordinator in Fort Collins, Colo. He holds a BA in Economics from the University of Illinois at Chicago and a Masters of Urban and Regional Planning from the University of Illinois Urbana-Champaign.

It may seem like I’m blogging about Georgia a lot lately, and it’s for good reason. The Atlanta Bicycle Coalition is one of two Advocacy Advance model grant recipients. ABC’s grant is focused on doubling federal spending on bicycle and pedestrian projects and programs, as well as tripling the mode share to 3 percent. While in town for an Action 2020 workshop, I had the pleasure of meeting Neil Walker, a cycling instructor who wears many hats.

It’s hard to get involved in bicycle education in Atlanta without running into Neil. As a League Cycling Instructor and educator, Neil has made a mission of working with low-income and minority kids and adults in the metro region. “I grew up in a lower income area and was pretty much confined to a few square blocks,” notes Walker. “Once I got a bike, suddenly I was able to go all over the place. That bike got me my first jobs delivering groceries and newspapers.”

Credit: Neil Walker

Today Neil is working with a number of organizations and neighborhoods:

• Metro Atlanta Cycling Club: Through their One Love event, the club has raised more than $100,000 in the past five years for the Dream Team, East Atlanta Kids Club, and Bicycle Little League. The club is primarily focused on involving African Americans in cycling
• Dream Team Bike Ride Across Georgia (BRAG): The program starts with teaching Traffic Skills 101 to middle and high school students. The main goal is to get kids on bikes. For the 2012 ride, 20 kids are signed up to participate, with the course set to travel through the mountains of northern Georgia.
• East Atlanta Neighborhoods: Neil’s work is focused mainly on health and nutrition. Among other things, he has led local rides to the farmers market (55 participants on the last trip) to highlight local, healthy food options. Atlanta City Councilmember Aaron Watson (himself a huge bike proponent) liked the program so much he formally adopted it as his Living Smart Initiative.

At the national level, Neil has been working with the National Brotherhood of Cyclists to expand their educational offerings. The goal is to go from the current four LCIs nationally to at least five in each of the 35 local clubs.

Credit: Neil Walker

There are definitely hurdles for working in low-income and minority neighborhoods. A lack of local bicycle shops and infrastructure makes it hard to establish the necessary culture. Working with the Atlanta Police Athletic League, Neil and others have been bringing bike shops to the neighborhoods. “We showed up at a public housing development with no warning and ended up fixing 22 bikes,” Neil says. “Kids just kept coming up to us.” Neil also works with his old employer REI to do neighborhood bike repair days.

A huge myth is that only poor people ride bicycles. “It really creates a bicycling stigma in the minds of low income people,” says Walker. “Adults are difficult. They may be self conscious on a bike or just not know where to start.” School bicycle clubs are one way to address the issue, as kids are usually eager to ride and share that freedom with their family. Adults also start to come on board once they expand their definition of a cyclist beyond the lycra. “With cut-backs in local bus service, showing someone how to ride to the closest MARTA [Atlanta’s light rail system] station can be huge,” Walker says.

There’s also the challenge that some people just don’t think of bicycling as an option. The Dream Team has expanded throughout Georgia, mainly due to people asking about it as BRAG passes through town. This type of event can be the spark that gets folks thinking “maybe I should be riding a bike.”

If you’d like to learn more about these programs, email Neil at neil@atlantabike.org.

Elsewhere in cycling advocacy…

• Nebraska Governor Dave Heineman has signed the state’s three foot safe passing legislation into law. Sponsored by state Sen. Tom Hansen, the law provides a safe passing distance for bicyclists, pedestrians, and electric personal assistance mobility devices. Nebraska becomes the 24th state to adopt a safe passing law. Who’s going to get us to the halfway point?
• Virginia is for bicycle touring, and it’s getting easier thanks to the Virginia Bicycle Federation. VBF worked with Joe Elton, Virginia’s State Parks Director to create designated areas for cyclists to camp even when campgrounds are full. Ride-in touring cyclists will always have a place to stay.
• The Florida legislature recently passed a series of bicycling bills. The bills cover topics from additional exemptions to the state’s mandatory bike lane law (which could stand to be repealed) to allowing cyclists cited for riding without lights at night to avoid fines by installing lights on their bicycles.

Do you have news from your advocacy organization?  Let me know: matt@bikeleague.org

Matt Wempe
League State and Local Advocacy Coordinator

Mr. Wempe joined the League in September 2011. For the three years prior, he worked as a transportation planner and Safe Routes to School Coordinator in Fort Collins, Colo. He holds a BA in Economics from the University of Illinois at Chicago and a Masters of Urban and Regional Planning from the University of Illinois Urbana-Champaign.

UPDATE:  Due to anticipated high turnout, the SCCRTC Bicycle Committee is looking for an alternative meeting location.  Please contact the RTC at info@sccrtc.org for the meeting location.

Nothing can quite compare to rumble strips when it comes to ruining a beautiful bicycle ride.  Adventure Cycling and the League have previously written about rumble strips and the difficulties they pose to cyclists.  We were very happy to see the Federal Highway Administration revise their May 2011 guidance that would have promoted rumble strip installation on many rural roads and even some urban roads across America.

Touring Cyclists on Highway 1

So, it was a bit of a shock when we heard from Adventure Cycling and League members that the California Department of Transportation (CalTrans) is planning to install rumble strips on a portion of the Highway 1 between Davenport and Santa Cruz.  Highway 1 – also known as the Pacific Coast Highway – is part of one of the most active bicycle touring routes in the country and a major draw for international tourism.

To its credit, CalTrans has one of the best rumble strip policies when it comes to accommodating bicyclists.  So we did some research and found out the following:

• This 11-mile section has been identified as a high collision area, including at least one bicycle fatality.  Rumble strips are the proposed safety improvement to address run-off-the-road and head-on crash incidents.
• CalTrans policy only allows rumble strips where there will be more than five feet of shoulder clearance for cyclists.  CalTrans data indicate that the shoulder width in this area is approximately eight feet, though this has been disputed by local cyclists and regional transportation planners.
• This is a “candidate project” that will not go to construction for another 18-24 months and includes both center-line and shoulder rumbles.  CalTrans has committed to working with local cyclists, and presumably following their policy, as project planning progresses.
• The Santa Cruz County Regional Transportation Commission has received over 70 contacts on this issue.  The SCCRTC is working with CalTrans to ensure accurate shoulder width data and has requested the collision data justifying the need for rumble strips.  The SCCRTC Bicycle Committee will be discussing the project at their April 9 meeting.

While we recognize the safety benefits for motorists under certain conditions, we are concerned about their use on Highway 1.  The League and Adventure Cycling will be submitting letters to CalTrans respectfully requesting that:

• CalTrans not install rumble strips on Highway 1 at this time.
• CalTrans work to provide a five-foot wide road shoulder on Highway 1 clear of sand and other debris while still accommodating parked vehicles and ocean access for residents and visitors.
• CalTrans continue to work with cyclists to ensure that Highway 1 remains one of the country’s premier bicycling routes.

We encourage local cyclists to speak out on this issue (reference the three points above as a start).  Here are some ways you can make sure CalTrans hears your voice:

Contact CalTrans District 5

Jim Shivers
District 5 Public Information Officer
Phone: 805.549.3237
Email: Jim.Shivers@dot.ca.gov

Richard Krumholz
District 5 Director
Email: Rich.Krumholz@dot.ca.gov

Attend the SCCRTC Bicycle Committee Meeting

Monday, April 9 at 6:30pm
Regional Transportation Commission Conference Room
1523 Pacific Ave., Santa Cruz (above Chef Works)

As we learn more, look for updates to this blog.

Matt Wempe
League State and Local Advocacy Coordinator

Mr. Wempe joined the League in September 2011. For the three years prior, he worked as a transportation planner and Safe Routes to School Coordinator in Fort Collins, Colo. He holds a BA in Economics from the University of Illinois at Chicago and a Masters of Urban and Regional Planning from the University of Illinois Urbana-Champaign.

Three of America’s largest cycling organizations — Adventure Cycling Association, Alliance for Biking & Walking, and the League of American Bicyclists – wish to thank the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) for the significant improvements the agency made last week in an important technical advisory (TA) regarding the application of rumble strips on U.S. roadways.

The FHWA issued a revised TA on rumble strips in May 2011, the first such revision in ten years. The TA is important because it provides official national guidance on the use of rumbles and influences state and local agency action in their use of rumbles on roadways of all types. FHWA had indicated that this new advisory would substantially improve the TA’s guidance on the application of rumble strips and how they affected bicyclists. As we previously noted the May 2011 TA went backwards from the 2001 TA in its lack of inclusion of cyclists’ safety issues.

The newly revised TA, released on November 16, 2011, is a substantial improvement. It includes a new section about the accommodation of all roadway users (Section 9), with a special emphasis on the needs of cyclists, and lays out “a number of measures that should be considered to accommodate bicyclists,” including wide shoulders, bicycle gaps (intervals without rumble strips that allow cyclists to safety cross back or forth), and customized rumble treatments to allow more space for cyclists. The new TA also includes a significantly improved section on public outreach and involvement.

There are still sections of the new TA that raise concerns for cyclists, including Section 7b, which identifies the optimal “length” (or width) of rumble strips as 16 inches, a dimension which can make it more likely that these strips will cut into useable road shoulder space for cyclists.

It will be important for local citizens and organizations to pay close attention to the proposed addition of rumble strips on existing roadways and when roads are being built, reconstructed or repaved.

In addition to FHWA’s new advisory, further background and guidance can be found in the League’s Bicycling and Rumble Strips report and information on state-by-state use of of rumbles prepared by Adventure Cycling Association. Adventure Cycling has also developed a Flickr page where people can share photos of well-designed and poorly-designed rumble strips.

For more on this, please see the joint press release.

Matt Wempe
League State and Local Advocacy Coordinator

Mr. Wempe joined the League in September 2011. For the three years prior, he worked as a transportation planner and Safe Routes to School Coordinator in Fort Collins, Colo. He holds a BA in Economics from the University of Illinois at Chicago and a Masters of Urban and Regional Planning from the University of Illinois Urbana-Champaign.

For sometime we’ve been concerned about the proliferation of rumble strips on shoulders that either don’t need them or that do not have at least 4 feet of remaining shoulder space for safe cycling. Last year we wrote a report on rumble strips for advocates. We’ve been partnering with the Adventure Cycling Association and the Alliance for Biking & Walking to work with state DOTs and the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) to curb excessive rumble strip use.

We were extremely perturbed by FHWA guidance quietly released in May, which set out “much broader” recommendations than in the past. The new FHWA guidance on the installation of both shoulder and centerline rumble strips is significantly worse for bicyclists than the 2001 guidance. The League, the Alliance, and Adventure Cycling submitted specific points that the bicycling community wants added to the guidance.

Cyclist Will Selser rides in the travel lane on US Highway 89 in Montana in order to avoid rumble strips on the shoulder. Photo by Bill Schneider.

Today, Adventure Cycling Executive Director Jim Sayer wrote this update on the partnership’s efforts:

[We] have held lengthy meetings with FHWA’s director of safety and technology, Michael Griffith, plus many of his staff and also officials at the U.S. Department of Transportation.

At our most recent meeting, we were pleasantly surprised by what we heard. Rather than stonewall us, Mr. Griffith and his staff walked though our litany of concerns, in detail, and acknowledged that they could do better. They shared with us many specific and extensive changes to the TA that they are now considering and hope to move on in the next couple of months. In particular, they are working to improve the language as it relates to the needs of bicyclists and other non-automotive road users, and also the guidance on effective public participation before rumbles are applied. Also, as a good faith measure, FHWA has suspended webinars that it was going to conduct on the new TA until the language is redone.

Read Jim’s whole post.

We agree with Jim’s advice for in the meantime: be on the look out for bad rumble stripping practices and let your transportation agency know that modified guidance is on the way.

Darren Flusche
League Policy Director

Flusche joined the League in April 2009 and has a B.A. in history from Syracuse University and a Masters of Public Administration with a concentration in public policy analysis from New York University.

Fresh off a successful Re-imagining Broad Street event in Memphis, advocates in Tennessee  get a new Bicycle & Pedestrian policy at TDOT (helmet tip, Bike Walk TN). The updated policy:

• now applies to local governments managing transportation projects with federal funding as well as TDOT staff and contractors
• requires use of AASHTO and TDOT bicycle and pedestrian facility design standards
• requires that accommodations for cyclists and pedestrians must be integrated into all federally or state funded transportation projects
• requires that federally funded bridge replacement or rehabilitation projects include bicycle and pedestrian accommodations

See the full policy here.

Tennessee DOT has also been at the forefront in creating a model bicycle-tolerable rumble strip policy.  As one of the state’s to be included in FHWA’s run off the road crash reduction planning efforts, we’ve received positive feedback that  city, MPO and state transportation planners were steadfast to ensure that their model plan and design standards were integrated into FHWA’s efforts in their state, and ensuring that cyclist-safety is integrated into these crash reduction strategies.

These examples show that Tennessee is moving in the right direction in changing the culture of transportation agencies that will have a lasting direct effect on cycling in the state.

Bike Walk Tennessee advocates have worked hard for the progress made in their state.

Jeff Peel
State and Local Advocacy Coordinator

Peel joined the League in March 2008 as a Program Specialist for the Bicycle Friendly Communities program. Peel has a BA in American Studies from the University of Southern Mississippi.

Thanks to all who responded to our action alert on rumble strips- you have helped get the attention of state transportation agencies across the country. We’ve had some great results:

• Pennsylvania DOT is now working with our colleagues at Pennsylvania Walks and Bikes on a strategy and timeline to remediate improperly installed rumbles along the state’s highways.
• Ohio DOT is now reaching out to advocates in the state for input on a new edgeline rumble stripe guidance and the issue has even picked up some relatively pro-bike press.
• Maryland and Oregon are reaching out to us and state advocates for input on updates to their policies.
• Arkansas Dept. of Highways Chief Engineer stated at a conference that  they would be clarifying current guidance and developing improved policy- citing response from cyclists as the motivation.

And the list could go on. Yet despite these improvements and new opportunities to have our voices heard, we must keep the pressure up and be vigilant that even where there are good policies in place, that they are followed correctly. Not everyone has won their battle on rumble strips yet. For example, Kansas cycling advocates continue to push for improvements and have created their own action alert here. Also, fresh off some big campaign victories the League of Michigan Bicyclists are making rumble strips one of their priorities.

We’d also be remiss not to mention states like Arizona, Maine, Tennessee, Wisconsin and others who were doing the right thing already, and have led the way on improved designs, creating model practices for us to share with other state. You can read about them in our Advocacy Advance report Bicycles and Rumble Strips- Problems for Cyclists .

Our work also continues at the federal level. The League, Alliance, Adventure Cycling and USA Cycling have collectively been working to improve FHWA guidance and leadership on the issue. FHWA has sent emails to state field staff reminding them of their guidance on accommodating cyclists when planning for rumble strips. We are also pushing for an improved technical advisory regarding rumbles. We’ll keep you updated on our progress.

Jeff Peel
State and Local Advocacy Coordinator

Peel joined the League in March 2008 as a Program Specialist for the Bicycle Friendly Communities program. Peel has a BA in American Studies from the University of Southern Mississippi.

Cyclists and motorists share a desire for safer roadways. Most of us are motorists as well as cyclists and we have probably all benefited from the wake-up call provided by rumble strips on the Interstate or major state highways. However, as cyclists we also know that there is no such thing as a bicyclist-friendly rumble strip, and over the years a lot of good roads for riding have been lost to rumble strips. [Click here to go directly to send the alert.]

Almost a decade ago the cycling community worked long and hard with the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) and State Departments of Transportation (DOT) to develop more tolerable rumble strip designs (for example, with gaps in the rumbles so that cyclists can cross them if needed) and to agree to policies that ensured popular cycling routes and roads with shoulders less than four feet in width would not be rumbled without good cause – i.e. a documented history of run-off-the-road crashes.

Today we are faced with a renewed push by the FHWA and state DOTs to rumble strip state highways as a matter of course and without regard to their own policies on where it is appropriate. We are seeing rumble strips being proposed and implemented in more and more urban settings, rather than just rural highways. In an attempt to prevent “roadway departures” by motor vehicles, rumble strips are seen as a very effective countermeasure: they do wake people up. Unfortunately, not every road is the nail to the rumble strips hammer. To be effective, there has to be recovery room; crash history and there have to be no unintended consequences. We need transportation agencies to take closer look into their toolbox.

For example, has roadway safety been improved if cyclists are all but forced to ride in the travel lane of a high-speed rural roadway because the shoulder has been rendered useless by rumble strips? This gets to the heart of the US Secretary of Transportation’s recent policy statement that declares “Because of the benefits they provide, transportation agencies should give the same priority to walking and bicycling as is given to other transportation modes.” This is where the rubber meets the road and we see if Federal and state agencies are going to heed LaHood’s words that, “this is the end of favoring motorized transportation at the expense of non-motorized.”

We have researched and issued a report on best practices. We have tried to work with FHWA on this issue. In an unprecedented partnership, the League of American Bicyclists, Adventure Cycling Association, Alliance for Biking and Walking, and USA Cycling have jointly asked them to re-issue their existing rumble strip guidance to states. We’ve met with officials in FHWA’s Office of Safety to ask for their help in applying their own guidance at the state level. And yet we learned recently that 17 states are leading a “Roadway Departure Prevention” program where the indiscriminate and wholesale application of rumble strips is being encouraged. Other states are sure to follow and the hard-won policy protecting cycling routes has been thrown out of the window.

This is a real threat and it is time to act! We need your immediate support and action to try to put a stop to it, today. We are not asking to end the use of rumble strips – they are a legitimate and effective safety treatment. We ARE asking for an end to the indiscriminate and inappropriate application of rumble strips that ignores FHWA and AASHTO’s own guidance on when and where they should be used. Send a message to your State DOT TODAY and ensure you don’t wake up tomorrow and discover your favorite ride has been ruined.

Photo by Dennis Coello

Another example:

Photo from Savannahnow.com

Darren Flusche
League Policy Director

Flusche joined the League in April 2009 and has a B.A. in history from Syracuse University and a Masters of Public Administration with a concentration in public policy analysis from New York University.

The Recumbent Blog got its hands on the installation instructions for continuous milled rumble strips in Alberta, Canada. It’s worth looking at in the context of our discussion of rumble strips to examine what’s good about the approach and what could be improved.

Alberta, Canada's rumble strip installation instructions

In our report on rumble strips, we highlight four common problems with rumble strips that should be addressed in bicycle-tolerable installation: 1. strips that are too wide, 2. grooves that are too deep, 3. strips not placed near the fog line, and 4. strips that are continuous.

Let’s take the width first. Some of the most bicycle-tolerable designs call for 5 inch wide rumble strips, but strips are sometimes 16 or 18 inches wide and even occasionally take up the entire shoulder (see the photo in our previous post). In that context, the one foot wide strip here could be a lot worse.

Second, relatively speaking, 8 mm is a very favorable rumble strip depth for cyclists.

The third issue is placement. Strips should be placed within a foot of the fog line, and the Alberta installation calls for this, which is great. So far the guidance is three for three. The trick with placement is that sometimes implementation doesn’t follow the plan. Sometimes the agency doesn’t even know that the contractors are mis-installing the strips until bicyclists bring it to their attention, so advocates should monitor rumble strip installation to make sure the strips are installed correctly.

In the photo below from the Recumbent Blog, you can see the strip sitting snuggly against the white fog line. The best part of the example below, though, is the six foot remaining ridable shoulder to the right of the strip. Guidance from the US Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) says that strips should not be installed unless there is at least four feet remaining (five if there is a guardrail). Six feet makes this a comfortable ride — and gives drivers plenty of time to correct their trajectory before their fully off the road.

A rumble strip close to the fog line with a six foot shoulder in Alberta, Canada (Photo from The Recumbent Blog)

The fourth potential issue is the only one that I’d suggest they re-visit. These strips are continuous. They do not include any gaps to allow cyclists to cross into the travel lane to avoid debris or rough pavement.

I’d like to thank the Recumbent Blog for bringing up this real life example that gets close to following bicycle-tolerable practices. What we tell state and local advocates is that rumble strips are not going anywhere. FHWA and state DOTs see them as an effective and inexpensive safety tool. The trick for bicycling advocates is to urge agencies not to install rumble strips indiscriminately (i.e. only when conditions call for it and there are sufficient shoulders,) and to follow bicycle-tolerable practices when they do install them.

Darren Flusche
League Policy Director

Flusche joined the League in April 2009 and has a B.A. in history from Syracuse University and a Masters of Public Administration with a concentration in public policy analysis from New York University.

The Advocacy Advance Team has produced a report on rumble strip policies and we are working with a number of states to ensure road agencies are enacting bicycle-tolerable rumble strip policies and adhering to them. However, we haven’t excerpted the report on the blog yet. So let’s start the week off with that.

You can read the whole report here (PDF). The League, the Alliance for Bicycling and Walking, and Adventure Cycling, held a conference call for advocates, see the notes from the call here (PDF). We also surveyed our club members to see how rumble strips are affecting them and what actions they’ve taken so far, here’s  a summary of the results (PDF).

Route 45, Southern Illinois (Photo provided by Ginny Sullivan of the Adventure Cycling Association)

BICYCLING AND RUMBLE STRIPS

Problems for Cyclists

What are rumble strips?: Rumble strips are raised or grooved patterns in a road’s shoulder designed to alert drivers with noise and vibrations that they are drifting off the roadway. They can be an effective safety measure to prevent run‐off‐the‐road (ROR) crashes, especially on limited‐access highways and rural two‐lane highways with long straight sections. (Rumble strips placed on the centerline can help prevent head‐on crashes.)

How do rumble strips impact cyclists?: Rumble strips are virtually impossible to ride a bicycle on or over– they are at best uncomfortable, even for a very short distance, and at worst can cause a cyclist to lose control of their bike and fall. They can damage a bicycle wheel, can cause a flat tire, and/or shake lose parts off a bicycle. Consequently, cyclists will avoid riding over themii – and when rumble strips leave no room on a shoulder, the cyclist will have no other option than to ride in the travel lane. While rumble strips do not deter car, truck or bus travel, they have a severe impact on bicycling travel, and have ruined popular cycling routes.

The negative impact of rumble strips on the ride‐ability of a roadway has prompted American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials (AASHTO) and the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) to provide guidance to follow when considering rumble strips on roadways used by cyclists. They recommend that rumble strips should not be used indiscriminately on roadways that are not limited‐access. Rumble strips should be used where there is a history of run‐off‐the‐road crashes; especially where there is sufficient recovery room for a motorist to react to the alert provided by the rumble strip; and when the impact cyclists can be minimized. This means that at least four feet of unobstructed roadway shoulder remains after the rumble strips have been installed.

States should train and monitor contractors to ensure best practices are followed. Advocates should work with their state DOTs, Municipal Planning Organizations (MPOs), and county road commissions to verify that unnecessary rumble strips are not installed and that preferred bicycling routes, especially, are kept free of rumble strips. It is important to get it right the first time. Improperly installed rumble strips are expensive to repair – often costing many times more than the original installation – and usually cannot be repaired without leaving behind an uneven surface or a shoulder prone to early failure.

Specific Elements to Address

1. Too wide – many rumble strips are excessively wide, removing limited space on the shoulder for bicyclists to travel.

2. Too deep – most rumble strips are ground‐in to depths that are excessive and dramatically more dangerous for cyclists.

3. Continuous – rumble strips without gaps in the strip do not allow a safe way for cyclists to cross, merge or turn without hitting rumble strips.

4. Placement – the lateral placement in a shoulder can make a shoulder that was once verycomfortable to a bicyclist unusable.

Rumble strips along GA 193 south-southwest of Chattanooga, Tennessee – near intersection with Battlefield Parkway (GA 2). Photo by Dennis Coello

(more…)

Darren Flusche
League Policy Director

Flusche joined the League in April 2009 and has a B.A. in history from Syracuse University and a Masters of Public Administration with a concentration in public policy analysis from New York University.

With funds from the American Reinvestment and  Recovery Act and Tiger Grants, rumble strips may be coming to a road near you. The League of American Bicyclists is working with Adventure Cycling and the Alliance for Bicycling and Walking to make sure states follow FHWA guidance to minimize the impact of rumbling strips on cyclists. Adventure Cycling’s Jim Sayer wrote an excellent account of the groups’ meeting with two officials Federal Highways. (It includes this listing of rumble strip practices by state.) Here’s an excerpt from the post:

We emphasized that we were not opposed to rumble strips when properly applied but that the evidence was demonstrating that states and counties were forgetting about the importance of cyclists’ safe use of secondary roads — and the clearguidance provided by many states and the FHWA on how to apply rumbles in a way that respects the needs of all users. The indiscriminate use of rumbles also contradicts the recent directive of U.S. Transportation Secretary Ray LaHood that bicycling and walking should be considered as “equal modes” of transportation to motorized vehicles.

Joe and David were cordial, had clearly done their research, and had given a lot of thought to the subject. They promised to follow up with Administrator Mendez and with us, and thought they could provide some form of information to agencies about the proper use and application of rumbles. They also let us know that they are doing an in-depth update of their technical guidance on rumbles, due out later this summer, and asked for our input.

Read the whole post.

Adventure Cycling’s Ginny Sullivan was kind enough to pass on a very good example of the impact rumble strips can have on bicycling routes. A bicyclist was stuck by a truck in Bryan County, GA. A commenter wrote: “I actually saw the accident occur. The bicyclist was at fault. The cyclist was trying to avoid the divots/ripples on the shoulder/bike lane of the road and in doing so continuously went ONTO THE ROADWAY. This cause the driver of the truck to hit the cyclist.” The quote and this photograph, I believe, speak for themselves.

Photo from Savannahnow.com

Darren Flusche
League Policy Director

Flusche joined the League in April 2009 and has a B.A. in history from Syracuse University and a Masters of Public Administration with a concentration in public policy analysis from New York University.

To raise awareness about the dangers of driving while distracted, the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) has posted their distracted driving policy statement and frequently asked questions on their website.

The statement starts with this, “The primary responsibility of the driver is to operate a motor vehicle safely. The task of driving requires full attention and focus. Drivers should resist engaging in any activity that takes their eyes and attention off the road for more than a couple of seconds. In some circumstances even a second or two can make all the difference in a driver being able to avoid a crash.” The Frequently asked questions then offer a good summary of distracted driving’s risks and research.

On the whole it’s a good primer on distracted driving and worth reading, but I have one bone to pick. After a strong opening about how safe driving is a driver’s primary responsibility, the FAQs suggests that states take do something that diverts attention away from driver responsibility and can create a lot of problems for cyclists: installing rumble strips.

Here’s the offending passage:

States can take some steps immediately to reduce the risks of distracted driving. One example is installing rumble strips along roads to get the attention of drivers before they leave the roadway and/or deviate from their lane.

Rumble strips occupy the best part of the shoulder to bike on and can force cyclists onto the debris-ridden outer edge of the shoulder or into high speed travel lanes. The stimulus law has created greater urgency for cyclists to speak out against the proliferation of rumble stripping because the America Reinvestment and Recovery Act (ARRA) has provided funds that states can use to install rumble strips. (Google “ARRA rumble strips” for examples.) Plans for the strips stretch beyond interstates and limited access highways to slower otherwise bike-friendly roads and threaten thousands of miles of good bicycling routes.

Notwithstanding the insertion of rumble strips into the discussion, NHTSA has put together a strong statement on distracted driving. Again, it’s worth a read. And while you’re on the topic, you can check out our report, Distracted Driving: a Bicycling Advocate’s Resource.

Darren Flusche
League Policy Director

Flusche joined the League in April 2009 and has a B.A. in history from Syracuse University and a Masters of Public Administration with a concentration in public policy analysis from New York University.