Published: January 20, 2023

This chapter provides guidance for shared use paths used by bicyclists and pedestrians, including those with disabilities, for transportation and recreation purposes. Shared use paths are physically separated from motor vehicle traffic by an open space or barrier.

5.1 General

Shared use paths are one of the preferred bikeway types for the Interested but Concerned Bicyclist design user profile (see Section 3.2.1) due to their separation from motor vehicle traffic.

Shared use paths should be thought of as a system of off-road transportation routes for pedestrians, bicyclists, and other non-motorized users that extends and complements the on-road bicycle network. Shared use paths are most commonly designed for two-way travel, and the guidance herein assumes a two-way facility is planned unless otherwise stated. The presence of a shared use path should not be used as a reason to preclude on-road bikeways where appropriate. A shared use path can supplement a network of separated bike lanes, on-road bike lanes, shared roadways, bicycle boulevards, and paved shoulders.

Shared use path design is similar to roadway design, following many of the same core design precepts but on a different scale and with typically lower design speeds.

5.1.1 Accessibility Requirements for Shared Use Paths

Shared use paths are used by pedestrians and must meet the accessibility requirements of the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA). Paths in the public right-of-way that follow the roadway and function as sidewalks, commonly referred to as sidepaths, should be designed in accordance with the proposed Public Rights of Way Accessibility Guidelines (PROWAG). Shared use paths built in independent right-of-way should meet the draft accessibility guidelines in the Advance Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (ANPRM) on Accessibility Guidelines for Shared Use Paths.

Additional information on accessibility requirements for pedestrian facilities is described in Chapter 4.

The guidance in this section supplements the general elements of design discussed in Chapter 3 and provides additional details for designers working on shared use paths.

5.2 Shared Use Path Users

A wide range of users rely on shared use paths for a variety of trip purposes. Therefore, paths should be designed to accommodate a broad array of expected users and purposes. Some shared use paths are relatively short and connect single destinations such as a neighborhood to a school, park, retail center, or transit station. Some paths are longer and connect multiple destinations along a shared use path system. Some shared use paths are used primarily for recreational purposes while others are used primarily for transportation purposes such as commuting. The primary differentiator in the design and maintenance of shared use paths for transportation purposes is the recognition that path users are dependent on path safety, accessibility, comfort, and convenience at all hours of the day and during all seasons of the year.

Path users may include but are not limited to:

• Pedestrians (including walkers, runners, people using wheelchairs, both non-motorized and motorized), people with baby strollers, people walking dogs, and others.
• Adult upright bicyclists, adult tricyclists, recumbent bicyclists, bicyclists pulling trailers, tandem bicyclists, and child bicyclists;
• Inline skaters, roller skaters, skateboarders, kick scooter users, and users of other micromobility devices.

5.2.1 Design User

As discussed in Section 3.2, shared use path design criteria should primarily be based on a person’s physical and operating characteristics as a pedestrian or bicyclist (see Section 3.2.1), therefore different design users will be required to establish key design control values. For shared use paths these will generally be:

• Geometric Design Controls – path width should be based on the volume of pedestrians and bicyclists expected to use the path; however, design speed, acceleration and deceleration rates, and horizontal and vertical curvature, and clearances should be based on an adult bicyclist as they are typically the largest and fastest of all path users.
• Sight Distance - should be based on a recumbent or hand bicyclists as they typically have the lowest eye height of all path users.
• Intersection Crossing Performance Criteria - such as crossing time and acceleration should be based on pedestrians and child bicyclists as they are typically the slowest of all path users.
• Queue Storage - such as the width of crossing islands or other areas where bicyclist queuing length must be accounted for should be based on a bicyclist with a trailer as they are typically the longest path user.

5.3 General Design Considerations

5.3.1 Width and Clearances

Width

The appropriate paved width for a shared use path is dependent on the context, volume, and mix of users. When determining an appropriate shared use path width, it is also important to consider the natural behavior of people operating on paths. People traveling want the ability to have conversations with companions, thus they will walk and bicycle side-by-side regardless of the width provided (see Figure 5-1). Path widths less than 11 ft. in width do not provide space for people to travel side-by-side and be passed by other users approaching from the opposite direction without increasing the potential for conflicts. An additional consideration for determining an appropriate path width is ensuring the inherent speed differential between wheeled users and people walking, and the volume of shared use path users, does not result in uncomfortable or unsafe conditions.

Figure 5-1: People Walking and Bicycling Naturally Prefer to Socialize by Operating Side-by-Side

Failure to account for normal human social behavior and the mix of operating speeds will result in user conflicts on shared use paths that operate at moderate to high volume thresholds. In some cases, the presence of frequent conflicts can result in some people avoiding the facility altogether. To mitigate safety and discomfort issues between wheeled users and people walking, it may be appropriate to consider paths wider than minimum widths.

Table 5-1: Shared Use Path Widths for Anticipated Peak Hour Volumes

Table 5-1¹ shows minimum shared use path widths to achieve a Shared Use Path Level of Service (SUP LOS) of “C”. Shared use path user volumes can be collected on an existing path, estimated using a similar path, or projected using land use and other demand characteristics present along the path. If the designer cannot collect or estimate the modal split values, a typical mode split of 60 percent bicyclists, 30 percent pedestrians, and 10 percent other wheeled users may be considered. Using a minimum SUP LOS of “C” helps to ensure the path has the minimum width necessary to meet current demand with a modest ability to carry some additional future capacity. At SUP LOS “D,” the path will be at its functional capacity limit during peak periods which will result in significant service degradation for users due to crowding.

Table 5-1 should be used to inform the selection of a shared use path width to serve the desired volume, user mix and operational conditions for the path. Regionally significant paths serving a wide range of users, with faster bicyclists using the facility for transportation and recreation, may benefit from the ability to operate on wider width shared use paths.

As path widths begin to exceed 15 ft. in width, it may be desirable to separate pedestrians from bicyclists to minimize speed differential between pedestrians and wheeled users in lieu of providing a wider shared use path.

The FHWA Shared Use Path Level of Service Calculator can help designers understand potential volume thresholds where passing movements between bicyclists and pedestrians will limit the effectiveness of a shared use path. To improve the comfort and safety of bicyclists and pedestrians, and to improve the efficiency of the shared use path for bicycle travel, separation of bicyclists and pedestrians should be considered when:

• Level of Service is projected to be at or below level “C”
• Pedestrians can reasonably be anticipated to be 30 percent or more of the volume
• Higher volumes of children, seniors, or individuals with disabilities are likely to be present
• Where faster bicycle speed is desired to serve regionally significant bicycle travel

Where it is determined to separate bicyclists and other higher-speed wheeled users from pedestrians (including people walking or using wheelchairs or other assistive devices) there are three strategies which can be considered (see Figure 5-2):

1. A wide path can be provided which separates users using pavement markings
2. A wide path can be provided which separates users with a traversable surface delineation
3. Separate bikeways and walkways can be used which are physical separated from each other

Figure 5-2: Potential Options for Separation of Shared Use Paths

Horizontal and Vertical Clearances

A graded shoulder width of at least 5 ft. with a maximum cross slope of 6:1 should be provided on each side of a shared use path. Shy distances from obstructions such as bushes, large rocks, bridge piers, abutments, and poles should be provided per Section 3.6.2. See Figure 5-3 for a typical cross- section of a shared use path.

Where paths are adjacent to parallel bodies of water or downward slopes of 3:1 or steeper, a wider separation should be considered. A 5 ft. separation from the edge of path pavement to the top of the slope is desirable. Depending on the height of the embankment and condition at the bottom, a physical barrier, such as dense shrubbery, railing or fencing may be appropriate. Where a recovery area (distance between the edge of the path pavement and the top of the slope) is less than 5 ft., physical barriers are recommended in the following situations (see Figure 5-3):

• Slope 3:1 or greater, with a drop of 6 ft. or greater;
• Slope 3:1 or greater, adjacent to a parallel body of water or other substantial object;
• Slope 2:1 or greater, with a drop of 4 ft. or greater;
• Slope 1:1 or greater, with a drop of 1 ft. or greater.

The barrier should begin prior to, and extend beyond, the area of need similar to the implementation of guardrail with shy spaces per Section 3.6.2. The ends of the barrier should be flared away from the path edge, particularly if constrained dimensions are used.

It is not desirable to place the pathway in a narrow corridor between two fences for long distances, as this creates personal security issues, prevents users who need help from being seen, prevents path users from leaving the path in an emergency, and impedes emergency response.

Additional information on horizontal and vertical shy space is provided in Section 3.6.2.

In addition to shy spaces for path user comfort and operations, additional horizontal clearances may be needed to accommodate bicyclist sight lines and stopping sight distances in areas of horizontal alignments. Figure 5-4 and Table 5-2 illustrate and identify the minimum lateral clearances need to provide sight lines through horizontal alignments. On narrower paths, bicyclists tend to ride near the middle of the path. Lateral clearances on horizontal curves should be calculated based on the sum of the stopping sight distances for path users travelling in opposite directions around the curve.

Figure 5-3: Typical Shared Use Path Cross-Sections (left), Steep Slope Edge Treatment (right)

Figure 5-4: Horizontal Sightline Offset for Adjacent Path Objects

Table 5-2: Minimum Lateral Clearance for Horizontal Curves

5.3.2 Sidepaths

Sidepaths are a type of shared use path that are located parallel to a roadway and may be considered in addition to on-road bikeways. The primary distinction between sidepaths and shared use paths on independent alignments is their intersection context. Side path intersections occur within the functional area of a roadway-roadway intersection (see Section 6.5.2). For shared use paths on independent alignments, shared use path crossings may occur at mid-block roadway locations (see Section 5.6.3) or at roadway-roadway intersections. The geometric and operational design of side path intersections closely follows the best practices for separated bike lanes (see Chapter 6). However, when designing sidepaths, the designer should use this chapter for all other elements of design including path width and other supportive design elements, as separated bike lanes are not designed to accommodate pedestrians.

While it is generally preferable to select path alignments in independent rights-of-way, there are situations where existing roads provide the only corridors available and may be considered where one or more of the following conditions exist:

• The adjacent roadway has relatively high-volume and high-speed motor vehicle traffic that might discourage many bicyclists from riding on the roadway, potentially increasing sidewalk riding, and there are no practical alternatives for either improving the roadway or accommodating bicyclists on nearby parallel streets.
• The side path is used for a short distance to provide continuity between sections of path in independent rights-of-way, or to connect local streets that are used as bicycle routes.
• The side path can be terminated at each end onto streets that accommodate bicyclists, onto another path, or in a location that is otherwise bicycle compatible.

A wide separation should be provided between a sidepath and the adjacent roadway where possible. The minimum recommended distance between a path and the roadway curb or edge of travelled way (where there is no curb) is 5 ft., though this can be reduced to 2 ft. in constrained areas. Where a paved shoulder is present, the separation distance begins at the outside edge of shoulder.

5.3.3 Design Speed

As discussed in Section 3.3, a design speed is used to determine various geometric features of a shared use path. In most situations, shared use paths should be designed for a speed that is comfortable and appropriate for the design user profile in a given context. There is no single design speed recommended for all shared use paths, and design speeds may change along portions of shared use paths as they travel through different contexts. This is especially the case for longer paths that transition between suburban/rural settings and urban settings where contextual conditions and demand expectations are different. Table 5-3 provides recommended shared use path design speeds based on context.

Table 5-3: Shared Use Path Design Speed by Context

While some bicyclists - as well as emerging technologies such as electric assist bicycles and motorized micromobility devices - can travel faster than the noted design speeds, designing to accommodate the fastest possible speed is often not appropriate in many contexts. However, designers should understand that due to the linear nature of shared use paths, some users may travel faster than the desired operational speeds.

The design speed should not change frequently or have extreme variations. Transitions between speed zones should be included and may include signage (see Section 5.7.1) or other strategies for reducing bicyclist speeds (see Section 5.6.2) to inform bicyclists that slower speeds are required and alert them to potential conflicts. Any change in design speed should be identified in the project documents explaining the reason for changing the design speed and specific elements that were considered as part of the decision making process.

5.3.4 Horizontal Alignment

The minimum radius of horizontal curvature for bicyclists can be calculated using two different methods. One method uses “lean angle”, and the other method uses superelevation and coefficient of friction. In general, the lean angle method should be used in design. Table 5-4 shows minimum radii of curvature for a paved path using a 20-degree lean angle. See the AASHTO Guide for the Development of Bicycle Facilities for information on calculating the minimum radius based on superelevation and coefficient of friction.

Tapers can also be used to change path horizontal direction. Tapers should generally occur gradually, with a minimum length discussed in Section 3.6.3. When using tapers to change direction, designers should consider adding a radius to the beginning and end of the taper to mimic a bicyclist’s natural path.

In retrofit or constrained conditions where the appropriate horizontal curve radius cannot be achieved due to physical or right-of-way constraints, and especially where the shared use path is a 90-degree or larger corner, designers should consider widening the path at the curve as shown in Figure 5-5 to provide more space to maneuver through the curve.

Table 5-4: Minimum Radii for Horizontal Curve on Paved Shared Use Path at a 20-degree Lean Angle

US Customary
Design Speed (mph)	Minimum Radius (ft)
12	27
14	36
16	47
18	60
20	74
25	115
30	166

Figure 5-5: Figure 55: Shared Use Path Horizontal Alignment in Constrained Areas

5.3.5 Cross Slope

For the reasons mentioned in Section 3.7.3, a 1.56 percent cross slope is recommended for the design of shared use paths to help ensure the 2 percent maximum accessible cross slope is constructable. A cross slope of 1.56 percent also provides enough slope to convey surface drainage in most situations. A cross-section that provides a center crown with no more than 1.56 percent slope in each direction may also be used, but may be more difficult to construct particularly on narrower shared use paths.

Because this guide recommends a relatively flat cross slope, and because horizontal curvature can be based on a 20-degree lean angle, superelevation for horizontal curvature is not needed. Since superelevation is not needed for horizontal curvature, cross slopes can follow the direction of the existing terrain. This practice enables the designer to better accommodate surface drainage and lessen construction impacts.

In situations where a path is intended for bicycle use only and does not need to meet accessibility guidelines, (e.g., pedestrians are accommodated on a separate sidewalk or path), cross slopes between 2 and 8 percent may be used. If cross slopes steeper than 2 percent are needed, they should be sloped to the inside of horizontal curves regardless of drainage conditions. In these situations, the path should follow design guidance found in Section 6.3.7 Separated Bicycle Lanes. In any situation, ADA paths and paths with lower cross slopes are generally more comfortable for bicyclists of all types.

Cross slopes should be transitioned to connect to existing slopes, or to adjust to a reversal of predominant terrain slope or drainage, or to a horizontal curve in some situations. Cross slope transitions should be gradual and comfortable for the path user. A minimum transition length of 5 ft. for each 1 percent change in cross slope should be used.

5.3.6 Vertical Alignment

The maximum grade of a shared use path contained within the roadway right-of-way shall not exceed the general grade established for the adjacent roadway. Consistent with the U.S. Access Board’s Supplemental Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (SNPRM) on Shared Use Paths, where the shared use path is not contained within the roadway right-of-way, the grade should be kept to a minimum and the maximum grade of the shared use path should not exceed 5 percent.

If the path is at or approaching 5 percent for a significant length (1000 ft. or more), this sustained grade would be quite noticeable for a bicyclists or wheelchair user and maximum slopes of 3 to 4 percent should be considered. Alternately, or in addition to a lower sustained grade, pull-outs could be provided at strategic locations for users to get out of the travel path to pause or rest.

Where physical constrains (existing terrain or infrastructure, notable natural features, etc.) or regulatory constraints (endangers species, the environment, etc.) prevent full compliance with the 5 percent maximum grades, additional mitigations should be considered. Options to mitigate excessive grades on shared use paths include the following:

• Use higher design speeds for horizontal and vertical alignments, stopping sight distance, and other geometric features.
• When steep grades occur over a long distance, consider an additional 4 to 6 ft. of width to permit slower bicyclists to dismount and walk uphill, and to provide more maneuvering space for faster downhill bicyclists.
• Install the Hill Warning (W7-5) sign for bicyclists and advisory speed plaque in conditions where the steep grade is unexpected and not visible.
• Exceed minimum shy distances, add recovery areas and/or protective barriers (see Section 3.6.2).
• If other designs are not practicable, for shared use paths use a series of switchbacks to traverse the grade. If this is done, an extra 4 to 6 ft. of path width should be considered to provide maneuvering space and allow faster climbing bicyclists to pass slower bicyclists. Where switchbacks must make abrupt 180-degree turns, additional space should be provided in these turning areas to allow bicyclists to swing wide to navigate the turns.
• Provide resting intervals with flatter grades to permit users to stop periodically and rest.
• Consider the provision of accessible pedestrian handrails located outside of the bicyclist operating space but within accessible reach of the firm stable path surface.

See Section 5.3.8 for vertical crest curve guidance based on sight distances.

5.3.7 Drainage

Minimum pavement longitudinal grades of 0.5 percent and cross slopes of 1 percent usually provides adequate drainage conveyance. Providing a cross slope in one direction instead of crowning is preferred and usually simplifies drainage and path construction. An even surface is essential to prevent water ponding and ice formation. On unpaved paths, particular attention should be paid to drainage to avoid erosion and ponding.

Depending on site conditions, shared use paths with cross slopes in the direction of the existing terrain will typically provide sheet flow of surface runoff and avoid the need for channelizing flow in ditches, cross culverts, and closed pipe systems. Low points on the bikeway should be kept at a minimum or adequate drainage should be provided to keep stormwater from ponding within the operating space of bicyclists.

Where a shared use path is constructed on the side of a slope that has considerable runoff or other conditions that result in relatively high runoff, a ditch should be placed on the uphill side to intercept the slope’s drainage. Ditches adjacent to the shared use path should be designed with bicycle safety in mind, per the guidance in Sections 5.3.1. Where needed, catch basins and manholes should be located outside of the shared use path and shy spaces (see Section 3.6.2).

To prevent erosion in the area adjacent to the shared use path, consideration should be given to preserving a hardy, natural ground cover. Shy distances and shoulder/buffer widths should be maintained adjacent to steep slopes or other potential hazards. In addition, shared use path design should meet applicable stormwater management regulations.

Additional guidance for drainage can be found in Chapter 3 and in the L&D Manual Volume 2.

5.3.8 Stopping Sight Distance

To provide path users with opportunities to see and react to unexpected conditions, shared use paths should be designed with adequate stopping sight distances.

For a crest vertical curve, the height of eye is assumed to be 3.83 ft. for a recumbent bicyclist and the object height is assumed to be 0 inches to recognize that impediments to bicycle travel exists at pavement level. Table 5-5 can be used to select the minimum length of vertical curve needed to provide minimum stopping sight distances at various speeds on crest vertical curves.

See Section 5.3.1 for sight distances related to horizontal clearances, Section 3.5.1 for additional discussion of stopping sight distance, and Section 3.5.2 for intersection sight distance cases.

Table 5-5: Minimum Length of Crest Vertical Curve (ft) Based on Stopping Sight Distance

Stopping Sight Distance
%	40	60	80	100	120	140	160	180	200	220	240	260	280	300
2									17	57	97	137	177	217
3						25	65	105	145	185	226	265	307	352
4				8.5	48.5	88.5	128.5	169	209	253	301	353	409	470
5			7	47	87	128	167	211	261	316	376	441	512	587
6			32	72	113	154	201	254	313	379	451	530	614	705
7		11	51	91	132	179	234	296	366	442	526	618	716	822
8		24	64	104	150	205	267	338	418	505	602	706	819	940
9		35	75	117	169	230	301	381	470	569	677	794	921	1057
10	3	43	84	131	188	256	334	423	522	632	752	883	1023	1175
11	10	50	92	144	207	281	368	465	574	695	827	971	1126	1292
12	16	56	100	157	226	307	401	508	627	758	902	1059	1228	1410
13	21	61	109	170	244	333	434	550	679	821	978	1147	1331	1527
14	25	66	117	183	263	358	468	592	731	885	1053	1236	1433	1645
15	29	70	125	196	282	384	501	634	783	948	1128	1324	1535	1762
16	32	75	134	209	301	409	535	677	836	1011	1203	1412	1638	1880
17	35	80	142	222	320	435	568	719	888	1074	1278	1500	1740	1997
18	38	85	150	235	338	461	602	761	940	1137	1354	1589	1842	2115
19	40	89	159	248	357	486	635	804	992	1201	1429	1677	1945	2232
20	42	94	167	261	376	512	668	846	1044	1264	1504	1765	2047	2350

5.3.9 Surface Structure

Shared use paths should be stable, firm and slip resistant and be accessible to and usable by individuals with disabilities. All-weather concrete and asphalt pavement surfaces are preferred over surfaces of crushed aggregate, sand, clay, or stabilized earth. On shared use paths, loads should be substantially less than on roadways. However, to prevent pavement damage, which can contribute to bicycle crashes, shared use paths should be designed to sustain wheel loads of occasional emergency, patrol, maintenance, and other motor vehicles that are permitted to use or cross the path.

It is important to maintain a smooth riding surface on shared use paths. Vertical alignment shall be generally planar within the shared use path including curb ramp runs, turning spaces, and gutter areas. See Chapter 4 for additional information on accessibility requirements for facilities with pedestrian activity and Chapter 12 for maintenance considerations.

5.4 Bridges and Underpasses for Paths

The clear width of a shared use path on a bridge or in an underpass should account for the necessary operating space and shy spaces. The paved width of the path (barrier-to-barrier or wall- to-wall width) should allow 2 ft. of shy space on each side of the shared use path. Under constrained conditions the shy space may be reduced to 1 ft. (see Section 3.6.2).

Railings, barriers, and fencing are common components of bridges and bridge approaches. On bridges, these elements can serve a variety of purposes, as crashworthy barriers for vehicles, as pedestrian railings, as “anti-throw” screens, to provide a vertical element adjacent to a drop-off, and as an aesthetic component of the bridge. Protective railings, fences, or barriers on either side of a shared use path on a stand-alone structure should be a minimum of 42 inches high. There are some locations where a 48 inches high railing should be considered in order to prevent bicyclists from falling over the railing during a crash. This includes bridges or bridge approaches where high- speed, steep angle impacts between a bicyclist and a railing may occur, such as at a curve at the foot of a long descending grade where the curve radius is less than appropriate for the design speed or anticipated speed. If a fence is provided, higher railings may not be needed.

Openings between horizontal or vertical members on railings should be small enough that a 6 inch sphere cannot pass through them in the lower 27 inches. For the portion of railing that is higher than 27 inches, openings may be spaced such that an 8 inch sphere cannot pass through them. This is done to prevent children from falling through the openings. Where a bicyclist’s handlebar may come into contact with a railing or other barrier, a smooth wide rubrail may be installed at a height of 36 inches to 44 inches to reduce the likelihood that bicyclist’s handlebar will be caught by the railing (see Figure 5-6). The design of railings and rubrail should be coordinated with the bridge engineer and architect (if relevant) to address the functional design, pedestrian accessibility, and desired aesthetics.

The structural design of shared use path bridges should be designed in accordance with the ODOT Bridge Design Manual and the AASHTO LRFD Bridge Design Specifications for Design of Pedestrian Bridges.

Figure 5-6: Example Bridge Railing with Bicycle Rubrail

5.5 Path Amenities

Shared use path entrances serve as gateways and typically offer a variety of amenities to accommodate shared use path users transitioning from the road to the path system. The following are amenities that may be considered as reasonable parts of a bikeway project:

• Informational kiosks, signs and bulletin boards – These can include helpful information such as the name of the shared use path, operating hours, “you are here” maps, contact information to report problems, emergency response information such as contact information, and shared use path rules and regulations. These should meet accessibility requirements for position, height and legibility of signs.
• Bicycle parking – Bicycle parking is less important at entrances of paved shared use paths in urban areas because most people accessing the shared use path are using their bicycles. Bicycle parking is more important at rest areas with bathrooms and at locations that connect to parks, playgrounds, retail areas, restaurants and other similar locations where shared use path users are likely to need to leave their bicycles for a period of time. Bicycle racks are also important at spur hiking trails that may be accessed by people arriving by bicycle. See Chapter 6 for further details regarding bicycle parking.
• Vehicular parking – Most shared use path entrances do not provide off-street parking for motor vehicles, particularly where parking is located nearby, or where many users live near the shared use path and are likely to either walk or bike to the entrance. For major regional shared use paths that attract people travelling longer distances, off-street parking can be beneficial. The number of parking spaces should ideally be based on demand and include appropriate accessible spaces. However, vehicular parking is often constrained by the amount of property available. One method of determining parking demand is described in the Institute of Transportation Engineers publication, Parking Generation.
• Benches – Shared use path entrances often act as meeting places and benches allow visitors to rest while waiting for other path users. Path users may also wish to rest after a walk or bicycle ride. Benches should be accessible and should generally be placed to maximize the view of people passing by, or near a significant natural feature. It is generally not preferable to place a bench so that a person sitting on it has their back to the shared use path.
• Trash receptacles – For shared use paths that are regularly maintained by an agency or organization that picks up trash and handles graffiti and vandalism, trash receptacles can be provided at shared use path entrances and at regular intervals along the path.
• Water fountains and picnic tables – Water fountains are a welcome amenity for some users, and can also be designed to provide water for pets. Picnic tables are another welcome amenity for some users. In both cases, they should be accessible and should be placed away from the flow of shared use path traffic.
• Lighting – Lighting should be provided at conflict points such as intersection or mid-block crossings, transit stops, and other areas based on land use context and expected user volumes. Lighting may also be needed along the lengths of shared use paths to improve safety and security for paths that are open during evening hours.

Waysides are locations adjacent to a shared use path that provide a place for path users to rest, meet other path users, enjoy a view, or to orient themselves. They serve both practical and aesthetic purposes and can greatly enhance the user experience. Waysides come in many shapes and sizes from a bench along a shared use path, to pocket parks with restrooms, maps, and other amenities described above. Consider including cane-detectable signage that includes braille information to alert people with vision disabilities to the presence of the wayside. Include a description of the wayside amenities to assist the person in navigating and understanding the layout of the wayside.

5.6 Shared Use Path Intersection Design

Where shared use paths intersect roadways, the crossing design should minimize path users’ exposure to traffic and minimize the speed differential at the points where travel movements intersect. Another goal is to provide clear messages regarding right of way to all users moving through an intersection in conjunction with design features that result in higher compliance where users are expected to yield.

Shared use path intersection can be at a mid-block location or a side path at an existing intersection of two roadways. The latter scenario follows design principles for separated bike lanes and are discussed in Chapter 6.

Any shared use path intersection design should consider the variable speed between the vehicles and path users, the available intersection sight distance and the traffic volumes. There are three primary design objectives:

• Alert the motorists and path users to the crossing,
• Communicate who has the obligation to yield to whom,
• Enable the motorists and/ or path users to fulfill their obligations.

Designers should have a firm understanding of mutual yielding behavior as discussed in Section 3.4 to achieve the above intersection design objectives. Additionally, attention should be given to ensuring that people with limited or no vision are given sufficient cues at intersections to prevent them from unintentionally moving into the street or a bike-only facility.

Illumination of the path/roadway intersection should be provided, especially on unlit paths. Curb ramps with detectable warnings must be provided at intersections, and the width of the curb ramp and detectable warnings should extend the full width of the shared use path.

5.6.1 Restricting Motor Vehicles

Unauthorized use of shared use paths by motor vehicles occurs occasionally. In general, this is a greater issue on shared use paths that extend through independent rights-of-way that are not visible from adjacent roads and properties.

The routine use of bollards and other similar barriers (e.g., z-gates, fences) placed within the shared use path to restrict motor vehicle traffic is not recommended:

• Barriers such as bollards, fences, or other similar devices create permanent obstacles to path users, and bollards on shared use paths may be struck by bicyclists and other path users and can cause serious injury.
• Approaching bicyclists may shield even a conspicuous bollard from a following bicyclist’s view until a point where the trailing bicyclist does not have sufficient time to react.
• Physical barriers are often ineffective at the job they were intended for — keeping out motorized traffic. People who are determined to enter the shared use path illegally will often find a way around the physical barrier, damaging shared use path structures and adjacent vegetation.
• Barrier features can also slow access for emergency responders.

Figure 5-7: Bollard Approach Markings

Bollards should not be used unless there is a documented history of regularly unauthorized intrusion by motor vehicles, and other options have been unsuccessful in addressing the issue. A three-step approach may be used to prevent unauthorized motor vehicle entry to shared use paths:

1. Post signs identifying the entry as a shared use path and regulatory signs prohibiting motor vehicle entry. For example, the NO MOTOR VEHICLES (R5-3) sign may be placed at locations where roads and shared use paths cross, and at other path entry locations. Per the OMUTCD, this sign can be used to reinforce the rules of the roadway.
2. Design the shared use path point of entry such that its appearance clearly indicates it is not a vehicle access, and its physical design makes intentional access by unauthorized users difficult without presenting hazards to intended shared use path users. Figure 5-8 shows the preferred method of restricting entry of motor vehicles using a conspicuous center island that splits the entry way into two sections separated by concrete or low landscaping and features the following design elements:
   • The path approach to the split should be delineated with solid line pavement markings to guide the path user around the split.
   • Each section should be half the nominal shared use path width; for example, a 10 ft. shared use path should be split into two 5 ft. sections.

Figure 5-8: Path Curb Ramp and Apron

• Each half should be no more than 6 ft. wide to emphasize the nonmotorized use and discourage entry by motorized vehicles.
• Curbing used around the perimeter of the island should be beveled or mountable to reduce the risk of pedal strikes by bicyclists. A painted median island or a landscaped area flush to the path are alternative options to split the path access, but do not have the same effectiveness of restricting motor vehicles.
• The center island and selected vegetation should be designed to allow emergency and maintenance vehicles to enter the shared use path, if needed, by straddling the island and passing over the landscaping. Alternatively, it may be more appropriate to designate emergency and maintenance vehicle access via separate access drives adjacent to path access points, which can be secured by gates or fencing.

Assess whether signing and shared use path entry designs prevent or reduce unauthorized traffic. If motor vehicle incursion is isolated to a specific location, consider targeted surveillance and enforcement. Consider the reasons why the motor vehicle incursion is happening at that location and determine whether other changes to the path farther from the point of entry might discourage further motor vehicle intrusion. If unauthorized use persists, assess whether the problems posed by unauthorized vehicle entry exceed the risks and access issues posed by barriers. Where the need for bollards or other vertical barriers in the shared use path can be justified despite their risks and access issues, Table 5-6 summarizes design features that should be considered to make them as compatible with the needs of bicyclists and other path users as possible.

Table 5-6: Bollard Design Features and Considerations

5.6.2 Path Approaches to Intersections

Reducing Speeds

To reduce shared use path users’ approach speeds, chicanes (i.e., horizontal curvature) can be incorporated at approaches to intersections where users must stop or yield, or where sight distance is limited. End chicanes at least 30 ft. from bollards or intersecting sidewalks or roadways to allow the user to dedicate their attention to navigating the curves in the shared use path first, followed by the approaching intersection (rather than both at the same time). A solid center line stripe is recommended at chicanes to reduce the instances of bicyclists “cutting the corners” of the curves. Chicanes should not be designed with radii less than 15 ft. and should not accommodate a straight ‘fastest path’ if a bicyclist used the entirety of the path to navigate the turns.

However, in many instances there will not be sufficient right-of-way to provide a chicane approaching an intersection. These locations will rely entirely on pavement markings (Section 5.7.2), signing (Section 5.7.1), and appropriate sight lines (see Section 3.5) to communicate the presence of the path intersection.

The use of z-gates, bollards, or other physical obstructions within the shared use path to slow bicyclists or to force bicyclists to dismount is not appropriate approaching intersections (see Section 5.6.1).

Curb Ramps and Aprons

The opening of a shared use path at a roadway intersection should be at least the same width as the shared use path itself. If a splitter island is used, the combined shared use path widths on either side of the island should equal or exceed the width of the shared use path itself (see Figure 5-8 for a graphic representation and for details see Standard Construction Drawing BP-7.1). The splitter island may be paint-only or curbed, though paint-only treatments may be less visible leading to motorist access (see Section 5.6.1).

A curb ramp or blended transition should be the full width of the shared use path, not including any side flares of the curb ramp, if used. The approach should provide a smooth and accessible transition between the shared use path and the roadway. The ramp should be designed to be accessible to and usable by individuals with disabilities. Detectable warning surfaces should be placed across the full width of the ramp at the edge of the roadway, even when there are separate bicycle and pedestrian ways within the shared use path.

Unpaved shared use paths or trails that intersect with paved shared use paths should be provided with paved aprons extending a minimum of 20 ft. from the path edge.

Widening

For locations where queuing at an intersection results in crowding at the roadway edge, consideration can be given to widening the shared use path approach. This can increase the crossing capacity and help reduce conflicts at shared use path entrances. Crosswalks should be widened to match the width of the shared use path.

5.6.3 Design of Mid-Block Crossings

Figure 5-9 through Figure 5-13 illustrate various examples of mid-block control treatments. These figures show typical pavement marking and sign crossing treatments. The diagrams are illustrative and are not intended to show all signs and markings that may be necessary or advisable, or all types of design treatments that are possible at these locations. Each figure assumes the appropriate minimum sight distances are provided for the roadway and the shared use path. See Sections 4.4.3, 4.4.4, and 6.4.1 for additional intersection countermeasures considerations including treatments to address motorist yielding.

It is preferable for mid-block crossings to intersect the roadway at a 90° angle to minimize the crossing distance and to maximize the intersection sight distance. Sight triangles and intersection sight distance are discussed in more detail in Sections 3.5.

Figure 5-9: Shared Use Path Stops or Yields

Figure 5-10: Shared Use Path Stops or Yields near Railroad Crossing

Figure 5-11: Road Stops

Figure 5-12: Multi-lane Road Uncontrolled with Advance Yield Line

Figure 5-13: Multi-lane Road with Signals

5.7 Signing and Marking

5.7.1 Signs and Traffic Control

Primary guidance for traffic control signs can be found in chapters 2B and 9B of the OMUTCD; the information presented in this section is supplemental to that guidance and is specific to shared use paths.

For advance warning sign placements on shared use paths, the sign should be placed to allow adequate perception-response time. A minimum of 2.5 seconds of perception reaction time is recommended for all path users. The location of the sign should be based on the stopping sight distance needed by the fastest expected path user; however, the sign should not be located closer than 50 ft. from the location warranting the advance warning.

Shared Use Path Crossing Assembly

Roadway users may be warned of a shared use path crossing by using a Combined Bicycle/ Pedestrian Warning (W11-15) sign. On a roadway approach to a shared use path crossing, placement of an intersection or advance traffic control warning sign should be at the distance recommended for the approach speed in Table 2C-4 of the OMUTCD.

The assembly consists of a W11-15 accompanied by a Downward Arrow (W16-7P) plaque mounted below the warning sign.  The Advance Shared Use Path Name (W16-8P) plaque may be mounted on the sign assembly (below the W11-15 sign) to notify approaching roadway users of the name of the shared use path being crossed.

At shared use path crossings that experience frequent conflicts between motorists and path users, or on multi-lane roadways where a sign on the right-hand side of the roadway may not be visible to all travel lanes, an additional shared use path crossing warning sign assembly should be installed on the left-hand side of the road, or on the crossing island, if present.

The W11-15 may be placed on the roadway in advance of a shared use path crossing. Again, this warning sign should not be used in advance of locations where the roadway is stop-, yield-, or signal-controlled. Advance warning sign assemblies may be supplemented with an AHEAD (W16- 9P) plaque located below the TRAIL X-ING W11-15P plaque.

Traffic Control Regulatory Signs

YIELD and STOP signs are used to assign priority at controlled but unsignalized shared use path– roadway intersections. The choice of traffic control (if any) should be made with reference to the priority assignment guidance provided in Section 6.4, but YIELD signs are preferred over STOP signs where sight distances accommodate yield operation. The design and use of the signs are described in sections 2B and 9B of the OMUTCD.

When these signs are co-located with others on or near the same post, placement should not obstruct the shape of the STOP or YIELD signs.

Intersection and Advance Traffic Control Warning Signs

Advance traffic control warning signs announce the presence of a traffic control of the indicated type (YIELD, STOP, or signal) where the control itself is not visible for a sufficient distance on an approach for users to respond to the device. An intersection warning sign may be used in advance of an intersection to indicate the presence of the intersection and the possibility of turning or entering traffic.

On a shared use path approach to a roadway intersection, placement of an advance warning sign should be at a distance at least as great as the stopping sight distance of the fastest expected path user in advance of the location to which the sign applies. The advance placement distance should not be less than 50 ft.

An intersection or advance traffic control warning sign may carry a Advanced Street/Shared Use Path Name (W16-8P) plaque to identify the intersecting road or path, as appropriate for the approach.

Guide Signs

The purpose of guide and wayfinding signs on shared use paths is to inform users of intersecting routes, direct them to important destinations, and generally to give information that will help them proceed along their way in a simple and direct manner. Road Name (D3-1) and Shared Use Path Name (W16-8P) plaque should be placed at all shared use path–roadway crossings and considered at other path access points. This helps path users track their locations and can enhance personal security of users. They should also be used at junctions where one major shared use path crosses another. At mid- block crossings, the D3-1 sign may be installed on the same post with a regulatory sign.

Guide signs to indicate directions, destinations, distances, route numbers, and names of crossing streets should be used in the same manner as described in section 2D.50 of the OMUTCD.

Warning Signs

The MUTCD provides guidance for the application of warning signs on shared use paths. In general, the use of warning signs should be limited to locations where sight distance to the condition is limited or the condition is otherwise unexpected. Where pavement markings are not included around fixed objects or other physical features which could represent a crash hazard, the application of reflective materials on the object (e.g., bollard) or Type 3 Object Marker plaques in front of the obstruction should be considered where night time operation is allowed on the path.

5.7.2 Pavement Markings

Pavement markings can provide important guidance and information for path and roadway users. Pavement markings should be retroreflective.

Center Lines

A yellow center line stripe may be used to separate opposite directions of travel where passing is inadvisable. The use of a center line stripe can be applied to the entire length of a facility, or only at specific locations. On shared use paths, the use of a center line stripe may be particularly beneficial in the following circumstances:

• For shared use paths with high user volumes (continuous stripe)
• On curves with restricted sight distance, or design speeds less than 14 mph (localized stripe)
• On unlit shared use paths where night-time riding is permitted (continuous stripe)
• Approaching intersections (localized stripe)
• Approaching obstructions within the center of the shared use path, such as bollards (localized stripe)

The use of the center line stripe may not be desired in parks or natural settings. However, on shared use paths where a center line is not provided along the entire length of the path, appropriate locations for a solid center line stripe should still be considered where described above.

A solid yellow center line stripe may be used on the approach to intersections to discourage passing on the approach and departure of an intersection. If used, the center line should be striped solid the length of the stopping sight distance from the edge of the sidewalk (or roadway, if no sidewalk is present). A consistent approach to intersection striping can help to increase awareness of intersections.

Stop and Yield Lines

Use and design of stop and yield lines is described in sections 3B and 9C of the OMUTCD. For shared use paths, stop or yield lines should be placed across the half-width of the path corresponding to the stop or yield-controlled approach. If used, the stop or yield line should be placed a minimum of 2 ft. behind the nearest sidewalk or edge of roadway if a sidewalk is not present.

Obstruction Markings

Obstructions should not be located within the clear width of a shared use path because they present a crash hazard to bicyclists and other shared use path users. Where an obstruction on the traveled portion cannot be avoided (for example, in situations where bollards are used, see Section 5.6.1, or where a shared use path splits abuts a natural feature), channelizing lines of appropriate color (yellow for center line, otherwise white) should be used to guide bicyclists around it with sufficient advance warning of the presence of the obstruction by signs if the obstruction is not otherwise visible.

For obstructions located on the edge of the shared use path, an obstruction marking should be used as shown in Figure 5-14. The edge line or center line obstruction markings may be supplemented with buffer markings or colored pavement to further emphasize the hazard. At locations where a center line is present, the center line should shift as well to maintain relatively equal lane widths on either side of the path center line.

The markings should be located per the guidance for shy distance from obstructions in Section 3.6.2.

Figure 5-14: Obstruction Marking at Edge of Shared Use Path

Edge Lines

White edge line markings should be considered for use on shared use paths under the following situations:

• Where night-time use is permitted or routinely occurs
• Approaches to intersections to alert path users of changing conditions
• To separate pedestrians from bicyclists where the shared use path design includes a separate area for pedestrian travel
• When the shared use path width is changing significantly over a relatively short distance
• Approaches to marked constraints on the outside edge of the shared use path, such as entrances to tunnels or when passing bridge abutments
• To establish a shy distance from an obstruction that may otherwise not be noticeable, such as a short stretch of curbing or the foot of an adjacent retaining wall

Refer to Section 3.3.2 for more information on separation of shared use path traffic.

Marked Crosswalks

Marked crosswalks are recommended for all crossings of shared use paths at roadways; they are required at mid-block locations to create a legal crossing. At congested crossings, the shared use path can be widened on the approach (see Section 5.3.1) to provide a separate bicycle crossing (see Section 6.5.1) and pedestrian crosswalks to reduce conflicts and allow faster moving bicyclists to bypass pedestrians increasing the person crossing-capacity of the crossing.

Advance Word or Symbol Markings

Advance pavement markings may be used on shared use path approaches at crossings where the crossing is unexpected or where there is a history of crashes, conflicts, or complaints. If a supplemental word marking (such as HWY XING) is used, its leading edge should be located at or near the point where the approaching user passes the intersection warning sign or advance traffic control warning sign that the marking supplements. Additional markings may be placed closer to the crossing if needed but should be at least 50 ft. from the crossing. Advance pavement markings may be placed across the entire width of the path or within the approach lane. Pavement markings should not replace the appropriate signs. Pavement markings may be words or symbols as described in Part 3 of the OMUTCD.

Narrow Path Conditions

At locations where paths with higher volumes of users must narrow below the recommended widths described in Section 5.3.1 consideration should be given to warning of the narrowed path condition. Fixed objects or natural features adjacent to the path that present potential hazards to path users should be properly marked following the Obstruction Markings guidance. Advance warning signs should be considered where sight distance is restricted to the object or feature including the use of the PATH NARROWS (W5-4a) sign. Appropriate channelization tapers should also be included to effect any changes in shared use path width ahead of the location. When narrower shared use path widths occur at discrete locations, consider including a marked center line to help organize opposing directions of travel.

Chapter 5 Endnotes

1. FHWA Shared-Use Path Level Of Service Calculator – A User’s Guide