Credit: Samuel Piper
Simple interventions for yield-controlled intersections and midblock crossings can assign priority to a bikeway.
Apply Yield Control to Cross Traffic
Minor intersections, where two streets of relatively low-volume and low-speed traffic intersection, likely do not require all-way stop control. To assign priority to the street with the bikeway, install yield signs on the approaches of the cross-street.
Convert from Stop to Yield
Change minor intersections along a bikeway from stop control to yield control. Carefully evaluate speeds, clear zones, and volumes on all intersection approaches and consider past crash history at the intersection.
Consider supplementing this change with other traffic-calming or volume management tools, such as raised intersections, speed humps, sidewalk extensions, or curb extensions.
Gateway Treatments
Gateway treatments use a combination of in-street signs, markings, and vertical elements to create a prominent crossing point for people walking and biking. This configuration increases yielding and achieves notable reductions in motor vehicle speeds at the crossing point.1 Gateways can be used midblock or at intersections.
Where the bikeway crosses an intersection, place an IN-STREET PEDESTRIAN CROSSING (MUTCD R1-6 or R1-6a) sign on the centerline and on each of the bike lane lines or other locations near each curb.
At uncontrolled pedestrian and bike crossings, the IN-STREET TRAIL CROSSING (MUTCD R1-6d or R1-6e) sign is placed on the centerline and each side of the street in a buffer or furnishing zone.
For multilane streets, add flexible delineators on each lane line.
Rectangular Rapid Flashing Beacons (RRFB)
Rectangular Rapid Flashing Beacons (RRFBs) are amber flashing lights with an easily-recognizable ‘stutter flash’ pattern. RRFBs can improve driver yielding behavior. They are most effective where they are distinct features in the street and not repeated frequently to cross the same street.
RRFBs are appropriate on streets with operating speeds under 35 mph (60 km/h), only one through lane per direction, and low-to-moderate motor vehicle traffic volumes. The combined effect of these three factors influences the overall effectiveness of the RRFB. RRFBs have also been implemented successfully across four-lane streets with median refuge islands and operating speeds closer to 25 mph.
At crossings with very high bike or pedestrian volumes, RRFBs might be activated so frequently as to reduce their effectiveness. Consider lane reductions or other tools to improve crossing safety. On corridors with low intersection density or where a crossing is significantly distant from a traffic signal, consider applying a hybrid beacon or a half signal operating on a short cycle.
Compliance and familiarity with RRFBs, as well as the legal requirement to yield or stop at a crosswalk, differs by region, state, and province.
Design Guidance
RRFBs are typically pole-mounted on both sides of the roadway immediately before the crosswalk. Where a median is available, provide supplemental RRFBs within the median for improved visibility. Overhead RRFB installations are not required but have advantages if there is limited right-of-way or a high level of curbside activity that might block visibility. Pole-mounted RRFBs are placed close to the roadway, putting them at higher risk of being struck by drivers. If overhead mast arm mounting is being considered, costs may become similar to those of half signals.
Avoid placing RRFBs on streets with a high density of signals. If coordinated signals are within sight of an RRFB, use louvered green signal faces to reduce the incentive to exceed the speed limit or not yield to people in the crosswalk or crossbike.
A TRAIL CROSSING (MUTCD W11-15) sign and diagonal arrow plaque must be placed on the same pole (or mastarm) as the RRFB where people biking and walking are crossing. Consider yield lines and a YIELD HERE TO TRAIL CROSSING (MUTCD R1-5d) sign installed 40 ft (12 m) ahead of the crosswalk or crossbike on multilane streets.
Use crossbike markings to highlight the presence of people on bikes crossing the street. Crossbikes should be provided adjacent to each crosswalk.
Detection
Passive detection improves the experience of people on bikes at RRFBs, increases use of RRFBs, and may increase driver compliance by decreasing the likelihood of encountering an RRFB flashing for an empty crosswalk. Passive detection should be installed near the intersection to detect people on bikes as they arrive at the intersection.2 Maintain the stop condition for people on bikes and configure the detection to activate the RRFB upon arrival at the stop.
Push button actuation often requires a specific push button for people on bikes to activate the beacon. Buttons should face the bikeway, as should supplemental signs, and should not require a person on a bike to dismount to reach the button. Push buttons for exclusive use by people riding bikes or other shared micromobility devices should not use an Accessible Pedestrian Signal (APS) or locator tone. Any push button used by pedestrians must have a vibrotactile APS button.
Power supply to the RRFB may be provided by solar panels or hard-wired, depending on climate. As with mast arms, the provision of power supply greatly increases the cost of an RRFB, reducing its advantages compared with signals and hybrid beacons.
Misaligned Intersections
Special attention is needed where discontinuities in the street grid require bikeway users to turn briefly onto another street before resuming their original direction. These locations usually resemble two T intersections, and require specific treatments to maintain comfort and wayfinding.3
Provide bikeway connections along the major street for the length of the offset, even if the street does not otherwise feature a bikeway. Include queuing areas where people riding bikes can wait safely for gaps in cross traffic.
Side-running directional bike lanes may be buffered, protected, or raised. Jug handles, turn boxes, and raised waiting areas help improve the crossing position and visibility of people on bikes, and clarify their intent to approaching motorists. Install crossbikes in each direction.
Consider yield controls, RRFBs, an offset hybrid beacon, or a half signal.
Curbside two-way bikeways channel bikeway users in either direction to one crossing location,4 sometimes with RRFBs or half signals. Design these bikeways as protected, buffered, or raised bikeways regardless of the approach or departure bike facility type. In constrained conditions with relatively low volumes of bikeway users and people walking, consider a shared-use path treatment. Install a bidirectional crossbike.
Consider yield controls, RRFBs, an offset hybrid beacon, or a half signal.
Center running bikeways may be in-street or within a raised median. People on bikes cross one direction of traffic at a time. To accommodate the center-running bikeway, restrict motor vehicle movements on side streets to right-in/right-out.
Consider yield controls, RRFBs, an offset hybrid beacon, or a half signal.
- Roadway Safety Institute. Evaluation of R1-6 Gateway Treatment Alternatives for Pedestrian Crossings: Follow Up Report. Publication Number CTS 17-05. Center for Transportation Studies at University of Minnesota, 2017. https://cts-d8resmod-prd.oit.umn.edu/pdf/cts-17-05.pdf. ↩︎
- Alta Planning + Design. Bicycle Detection. Alta, 2021. https://altago.com/wp-content/uploads/Alta-Bike-Detection-White-Paper-July-2021-1.pdf. ↩︎
- “Due to local street discontinuity, many Neighborhood Byways include offset intersections, or junctions where a Neighborhood Byway aligns asymmetrically across an intersecting roadway. These connections require specific treatments to maintain the level of comfort and to provide awareness of how to follow the route.”
City of Salt Lake City. Neighborhood Byway Facility Guidelines. 2024. https://www.slc.gov/transportation/wp-content/uploads/sites/11/2024/06/SLC-Byways-Design-Guidelines-v3.pdf. ↩︎ - “The preferred design treatment is to provide a bi-directional bicycle pathway on one side of the road to facilitate the connection.”
British Columbia Ministry of Transportation and Infrastructure. Active Transportation Design Guide. Province of British Columbia, 2019: page D21. https://www2.gov.bc.ca/assets/gov/driving-and-transportation/funding-engagement-permits/grants-funding/cycling-infrastructure-funding/active-transportation-guide/2019-06-14_bcatdg_compiled_digital.pdf. ↩︎