Achieving Multimodal Networks: Applying Design Flexibility and Reducing Conflicts

Porter, C.; Fink, Charles H.; Toole, Jennifer; Schultheiss, Bill; Danila, M; Mongelli, E · 2016 · ROSA P / Federal Highway Administration (U.S.)

archive: archived pipeline: cataloged verified

Get this paper ↗ (full text — opens at the source; we link to it, we don't host it)

Summary

This report, published by the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) in 2016, addresses the challenge of retrofitting existing transportation systems to accommodate multimodal networks. The primary motivation is to make walking and bicycling safe, comfortable, and viable transportation choices for people of all ages and abilities, thereby improving community health, equity, and quality of life. The document specifically targets practitioners who face barriers such as constrained rights-of-way, liability concerns, and rigid interpretations of design standards. It aims to demonstrate how current national guidelines offer significant flexibility and how designers can reduce conflicts between vulnerable users (pedestrians and bicyclists) and motor vehicles. The resource was developed through a comprehensive literature review, stakeholder outreach, and guidance from a Technical Work Group comprising practitioners from various U.S. jurisdictions. The report is structured around 24 specific design topics organized into two themes. Part 1 focuses on "Applying Design Flexibility," covering topics such as lane width selection, intersection geometry, traffic calming, road diets, and bridge design. Part 2 focuses on "Reducing Conflicts," addressing issues like network connectivity, school access, transit station integration, freight interactions, and shared streets. Each topic includes case studies from diverse locations (e.g., Portland, OR; San Francisco, CA; Washington, DC) and references to national guidelines like the AASHTO Green Book, MUTCD, and NACTO guides. The methodology emphasizes the use of engineering judgment, thorough documentation, and experimentation to justify deviations from conservative design values. Key findings include the assertion that strict adherence to conservative design criteria often results in wider, faster streets that increase crash rates rather than improve safety. The report identifies that national standards explicitly permit flexibility and encourage context-sensitive design. It outlines three pillars for managing liability and risk: applying engineering judgment based on site-specific conditions, documenting design decisions to build a case for flexibility, and utilizing formal experimentation processes for new treatments. Specific strategies highlighted include using narrower lane widths to calm traffic, implementing separated bike lanes, designing compact intersections, and employing proven safety countermeasures like road diets and crossing islands. The report also provides strategies for managing conflicts at transit stations, freight loading zones, and midblock path intersections. The significance of this report lies in its role as a practical resource for overcoming perceived barriers to multimodal design. It clarifies that designers are not negligent for deviating from standard guidance if they follow a documented process using engineering judgment. By providing specific, evidence-based strategies and case studies, the report empowers planners and designers to create connected networks that prioritize safety and accessibility. It supports the broader goal of integrating pedestrian and bicycle infrastructure into existing urban, suburban, and rural environments, ultimately fostering more equitable and livable communities.

Key finding

The report provides a comprehensive framework of 24 design topics that enable planners and designers to apply flexibility in national guidelines and implement specific strategies to reduce conflicts between pedestrians, bicyclists, and motor vehicles.

Methodology

review

Provenance

The full processing record for this entry. Every stage of this paper's journey through the pipeline is logged — what ran, with which tool and model, how many attempts it took, and when it last completed. Discovered via bulk_ingest_rosap on 2026-05-23 (6 acquisition events logged).

Summary generated by qwen3.6-27b-prismaquant on 2026-06-10; verification: verified.

Topics

Ranked by relevance to this paper. Hover a topic for its definition.

• cyclist safety
• intersection design
• perceptual countermeasures
• vru facing ehmi