What is fhwa experimentation?
Safe use of the American road system is achieved partly through unambiguous direction to drivers and a predictable environment. Standardization of traffic control mechanisms is an important piece of this strategy. In order to try out new ideas or roadway configurations which are not currently part of these standards, one needs a process by which new ideas are tested and their performance evaluated.
For the American transportation network, this process has been codified and is administered by the FHWA. Section 1A.10 of the MUTCD contains the regulations describing the experimentation process. Broadly speaking, the process requires an application to the FHWA describing the setting, the proposed project and a plan for evaluating the project's effectiveness. After approval is granted the project is constructed. After a trial period of at least one year, the project is evaluated and the findings are forwarded to the FHWA. Twice-yearly reports are submitted to the FHWA during the trial period.
For the American transportation network, this process has been codified and is administered by the FHWA. Section 1A.10 of the MUTCD contains the regulations describing the experimentation process. Broadly speaking, the process requires an application to the FHWA describing the setting, the proposed project and a plan for evaluating the project's effectiveness. After approval is granted the project is constructed. After a trial period of at least one year, the project is evaluated and the findings are forwarded to the FHWA. Twice-yearly reports are submitted to the FHWA during the trial period.
what are the pros and cons of the Fhwa experimentation process?
While conducting my survey of North American ELR installations, I found that approximately half had chosen to install ELRs outside of the FHWA experimentation process. The reasons for this varied among jurisdictions but the fact that some chose to not do so indicates a decision-making process occurred wherein some jurisdictions purposely chose to avoid the process. What are the pros and cons of this process that influenced those decisions?
PROS
Two significant advantages to using the FHWA experimentation process are:
First, an agency working within this process will have significant legal protection should an experimental facility result in harm or legal action claiming harm.
Second, the findings of the evaluation required at the end of the process become part of the body of information used by the FHWA when determining whether a new traffic control mechanism should be added to existing standards. This requires an agency to perform extra work in the interest of the greater good.
CONS
Two significant disadvantages to using the FHWA experimentation process are:
First, participation in the process requires more time and money. An application process must be navigated successfully and an evaluation study must be completed at the end of a trial period. Reports must be sent to the FHWA during the trial period.
Second, the possibility exists that approval could be denied or the design modified in an unacceptable or unsafe manner.
RECOMMENDATION
A responsible agency would conduct an evaluation of a new traffic control facility whether it participated in the experimentation process or not. I don't consider this part of the process to be "extra work". Additionally, the application letter should be a fairly simple item to construct. If the project is well-scoped, the application will consist of a cover letter and a collection of information that already exists. The remaining downside is the time taken to navigate the process and produce the interim reports which is unavoidable.
I believe the disadvantages to this process are minimal. They are far outweighed by the contributions to the safety and multimodality of our transportation network.
PROS
Two significant advantages to using the FHWA experimentation process are:
First, an agency working within this process will have significant legal protection should an experimental facility result in harm or legal action claiming harm.
Second, the findings of the evaluation required at the end of the process become part of the body of information used by the FHWA when determining whether a new traffic control mechanism should be added to existing standards. This requires an agency to perform extra work in the interest of the greater good.
CONS
Two significant disadvantages to using the FHWA experimentation process are:
First, participation in the process requires more time and money. An application process must be navigated successfully and an evaluation study must be completed at the end of a trial period. Reports must be sent to the FHWA during the trial period.
Second, the possibility exists that approval could be denied or the design modified in an unacceptable or unsafe manner.
RECOMMENDATION
A responsible agency would conduct an evaluation of a new traffic control facility whether it participated in the experimentation process or not. I don't consider this part of the process to be "extra work". Additionally, the application letter should be a fairly simple item to construct. If the project is well-scoped, the application will consist of a cover letter and a collection of information that already exists. The remaining downside is the time taken to navigate the process and produce the interim reports which is unavoidable.
I believe the disadvantages to this process are minimal. They are far outweighed by the contributions to the safety and multimodality of our transportation network.
What is involved in the fhwa experimentation process?
Regulations on the FHWA experimentation process are described in Section 1A.10 of the MUTCD. Further details can be found at https://mutcd.fhwa.dot.gov/condexper.htm. Information on FHWA experimentation with ELRs (the FHWA calls them "dashed bicycle lanes") can be found at https://www.fhwa.dot.gov/environment/bicycle_pedestrian/guidance/mutcd/dashed_bike_lanes.cfm.
WHAT ABOUT THE DESIGN GUIDELINES THAT ARE RECOMMENDED BY THE FHWA FOR AN ELR?
As of June, 2017, the FHWA has published two sources of design guidance on ELRs. One set of guidelines exists in the dashed bike lane experimentation webpage. Another set is contained in the FHWA Small Town and Rural Multimodal Networks guide. These two sources do not agree on all points, e.g. center travel lane width. One assumes that the more recent and much more complete guidance provided in the Small Town and Rural Multimodal Networks guide supercedes that found on the experimentation webpage.
In my opinion, FHWA guidance on center lane width and use of color steers agencies toward less safe and less comfortable designs. Some of this guidance may be the reason some agencies choose to forgo the experimentation process.
One promising sign is that jurisdictions have received FHWA approval for ELRs that do not follow the guidelines on the FHWA's website. It appears that the FHWA is willing to allow any reasonable experimentation supported by good engineering judgment.
In my opinion, FHWA guidance on center lane width and use of color steers agencies toward less safe and less comfortable designs. Some of this guidance may be the reason some agencies choose to forgo the experimentation process.
One promising sign is that jurisdictions have received FHWA approval for ELRs that do not follow the guidelines on the FHWA's website. It appears that the FHWA is willing to allow any reasonable experimentation supported by good engineering judgment.
Photo courtesy of Scott Robinson at City of Bloomington, IN.