Correspondence with FHWA on Experimentation
In late 2021, the FHWA announced they would deny all future requests to experiment (RTEs) with ELRs. Their stated reason for this decision was that they had enough ongoing experiments to satisfy their data collection needs (see https://mutcd.fhwa.dot.gov/knowledge/faqs/faq_part9.htm#otq4).
On April 19, 2022, a group of industry-leading organizations (NACTO, ITE, APBP, LAB) and practitioners sent a letter to the FHWA explaining why this reasoning and action was mistaken and offered alternative actions to consider. For more information on this issue and the reasons the industry felt the FHWA should reconsider, read the letter at this link.
A summary of the objections in the letter are:
At the Summer, 2022 meeting of the National Committee on Uniform Traffic Control Devices, an FHWA representative spoke to the Bicycle Technical Committee. He told the committee that the reason for denying future RTE applications was because the FHWA wasn't getting enough data from agencies with already-approved RTEs (this differs from the reason stated on their website). This makes it appear that, because some agencies weren't complying with the conditions of their RTE agreements, the FHWA had decided to deny all other agencies the ability to make their streets safer. I am unsure of the logic behind this decision.
Letter Update: On February 28, 2023, the FHWA responded to the industry's 2022 letter. That letter did not respond to any of the problems described in the original letter and did not respond to any of the suggestions for alternative action. It did not comment on the fact that many of its current experiments use designs that are NOT recommended by guidance from countries with decades more experience with ELRs.
In late 2021, the FHWA announced they would deny all future requests to experiment (RTEs) with ELRs. Their stated reason for this decision was that they had enough ongoing experiments to satisfy their data collection needs (see https://mutcd.fhwa.dot.gov/knowledge/faqs/faq_part9.htm#otq4).
On April 19, 2022, a group of industry-leading organizations (NACTO, ITE, APBP, LAB) and practitioners sent a letter to the FHWA explaining why this reasoning and action was mistaken and offered alternative actions to consider. For more information on this issue and the reasons the industry felt the FHWA should reconsider, read the letter at this link.
A summary of the objections in the letter are:
- This action discourages use of a treatment that benefits all vulnerable road users and has been shown to reduce motor vehicle crashes.
- This action exacerbates an already-widespread practice of agencies installing ELRs without FHWA involvement, reducing our evidence base.
- This action finalizes a database of ELRs that are less safe due to designs that run counter to decades of experience in other countries.
- This action pays little attention to rural ELRs and no attention to those at the upper end of the performance envelope.
- This action does nothing to evaluate the primary use of ELRs as pedestrian facilities, a use that is already occurring.
- This action runs counter to published guidance that describes ELRs as being available with FHWA approval.
At the Summer, 2022 meeting of the National Committee on Uniform Traffic Control Devices, an FHWA representative spoke to the Bicycle Technical Committee. He told the committee that the reason for denying future RTE applications was because the FHWA wasn't getting enough data from agencies with already-approved RTEs (this differs from the reason stated on their website). This makes it appear that, because some agencies weren't complying with the conditions of their RTE agreements, the FHWA had decided to deny all other agencies the ability to make their streets safer. I am unsure of the logic behind this decision.
Letter Update: On February 28, 2023, the FHWA responded to the industry's 2022 letter. That letter did not respond to any of the problems described in the original letter and did not respond to any of the suggestions for alternative action. It did not comment on the fact that many of its current experiments use designs that are NOT recommended by guidance from countries with decades more experience with ELRs.
Photo courtesy of Scott Robinson at City of Bloomington, IN.