Use of Freeway Shoulders for Travel — Guide for Planning, Evaluating, and Designing Part-Time Shoulder Use as a Traffic Management Strategy

Printable Version [PDF, 5.9 MB]
You may need the Adobe® Reader® to view the PDFs on this page.
Contact Information: Operations Feedback at OperationsFeedback@dot.gov

Publication #: FHWA-HOP-15-023

February 2016

Notice

This document is disseminated under the sponsorship of the U.S. Department of Transportation in the interest of information exchange. The U.S. Government assumes no liability for the use of the information contained in this document.

The U.S. Government does not endorse products or manufacturers. Trademarks or manufacturers' names appear in this report only because they are considered essential to the objective of the document.

Quality Assurance Statement

The Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) provides high-quality information to serve Government, industry, and the public in a manner that promotes public understanding. Standards and policies are used to ensure and maximize the quality, objectivity, utility, and integrity of its information. FHWA periodically reviews quality issues and adjusts its programs and processes to ensure continuous quality improvement.

Foreword

The Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) Office of Operations in cooperation with the Office of Infrastructure is pleased to present this publication titled “Use of Freeway Shoulders for Travel - Guide for Planning, Evaluating, and Designing Part-Time Shoulder Use as a Traffic Management Strategy” (Shoulder Use Guide). As defined in this Guide, part-time shoulder use converts paved roadside shoulders to an area used for travel during portions of the day as a congestion relief strategy. It is sometimes known as temporary shoulder use or hard shoulder running, and is typically implemented on freeways. When evaluated as part of a Performance-Based Practical Design (https://www.fhwa.dot.gov/design/pbpd/) alternative, part-time shoulder use can be a cost-effective solution to improving operations and safety by providing additional capacity when it is needed most, while preserving the use of a shoulder as a refuge area during the majority of the day. In some cases, shoulder use applications can serve as an interim solution to highway capacity constraints while agencies further study and / or acquire the necessary resources for adding general purpose travel lanes. Part-time shoulder use is a common practice in some European countries and has been gaining interest in the U.S. There are currently over 30 shoulder use installations in operation across the country covering 14 states. While there is much variety in these applications, the most frequent approach to date is the use of freeway shoulders by transit vehicles during peak period times of the day. Despite the growing interest, there is a lack of guidance and standards to help practitioners through the process of evaluating potential shoulder use implementations. Based on interviews with agencies that have deployed shoulder use treatments, interviews with Federal Highway Administration subject matter experts, and research on relevant safety and operations effects and analytical techniques, this Guide synthesizes information and best practices. While questions remain in some areas of the Guide and more experience with shoulder use and additional research is needed to provide more specific direction to practitioners, this Guide outlines a process and covers a range of issues including planning, design, implementation, and day-to-day operation that will help agencies advance shoulder use concepts in their states in a more consistent manner. The FHWA Office of Operations is supporting this Guide through workshops and related technical assistance. If you have any comments on this material, seek further assistance, or wish to discuss opportunities for hosting a workshop, please contact Jim Hunt jim.hunt@dot.gov or Greg Jones GregM.Jones@dot.gov from the Office of Operations or Robert Mooney Robert.Mooney@dot.gov from the Office of Infrastructure.
Robert Arnold Director Office of Transportation Management Office of Operations, FHWA		Tom Everett Director Office of Program Administration Office of infrastructure, FHWA

Technical Documentation Page

1. Report No. Publication #: FHWA-HOP-15-023	2. Government Accession No.	3. Recipient's Catalog No.
4. Title and Subtitle Use of Freeway Shoulders for Travel — Guide for Planning, Evaluating, and Designing Part-Time Shoulder Use as a Traffic Management Strategy		5. Report Date February 2016
		6. Performing Organization Code
7. Author(s) Jenior, P., Dowling, R., Nevers, B. (Kittelson & Associates, Inc.); Neudorff, L. (CH2M)		8. Performing Organization Report No. 18112
9. Performing Organization Name and Address Kittelson & Associates, Inc. 300 M Street SE, Suite 810 Washington, DC 20001		10. Work Unit No. (TRAIS)
		11. Contract or Grant No. DTFH61-12-D-00049/5001
12. Sponsoring Agency Name and Address United States Department of Transportation Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) Office of Operations 1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE Washington, DC 20590		13. Type of Report and Period Covered Technical Report Informational Report Sept 2014 to Feb 2016
		14. Sponsoring Agency Code FHWA
15. Supplementary Notes Jim Hunt (jim.hunt@dot.gov) served as the Government Task Manager
16. Abstract Part-time shoulder use is the conversion of shoulders to travel lanes during some hours of day as a congestion relief strategy. This strategy is also known as temporary shoulder use or hard shoulder running, and is typically implemented on freeways. Part-time shoulder use is a transportation system management and operations (TSM&O) strategy that uses shoulders to provide additional capacity when it is most needed, and preserves shoulders as refuge areas during the majority of the day. This guide covers planning, design, implementation, and day-to-day operation of shoulder use. It covers a wide variety of design and operational concepts for shoulder use, and describes how a performance based practical design (PBPD) process guides the planning of facilities with shoulder use.
17. Key Words Shoulder Use, Hard Shoulder Running, Shoulder Lanes, Active Traffic Management, Performance-Based Practical Design		18. Distribution Statement No restrictions.
19. Security Classification (of this report) Unclassified	20. Security Classification (of this page) Unclassified	21. No of Pages 170	22. Price

Form DOT F 1700.7 (8-72)
Reproduction of completed page authorized.

---

Table of Contents

[ SI Conversion Factors ]

Introduction
	Purpose, Scope, and Target Audience
	Organization of Guide
Chapter 1. What is Part-time Shoulder Use?
	Shoulders and Shoulder Usage
	Different Part-time Shoulder Use Concepts
	Part-time Shoulder Use Guidance
	Examples of Part-time Shoulder Uses
Chapter 2. Planning, Screening, Decision Making, and Preliminary Engineering
	Part-time Shoulder Use Consideration in The Planning Process
	Planning for Operations
	Environmental Decisionmaking Process
	Preliminary Engineering
	Performance Based Practical Design (PBPD)
	PBPD and Objectives-Driven Decision-making
	Determining Performance Objectives and Constraints
	TSM&O Strategies That Can Support Part-time Shoulder Use
Chapter 3. Mobility Analysis
	Shoulder Capacity
	System Analysis
	Operations Analysis
	Reliability Analysis
	Before/After Studies
Chapter 4. Safety Analysis
	Assessing Part-time Shoulder Use Safety
	Observational Safety Studies
	Crash Prediction
	Conclusions
Chapter 5. Environmental Analysis
	Air Quality Analysis
	Greenhouse Gas Emissions Analysis
	Noise Analysis
Chapter 6. Costs and Benefits Analysis
	Life-Cycle Costs
	Monetizing Benefits
	Conducting a Benefit/Cost Analysis
	Selecting the Optimum Project(s)
Chapter 7. Design Considerations
	Geometric Design
	Pavement Design
	Drainage Design
	Traffic Control Device Design
	ITS Design
Chapter 8. Implementation Process
	Design Exception Process
	Legal Issues
	MUTCD Experimental Approval Process
	Stakeholder Engagement
	Public Involvement
Chapter 9. Day-to-Day Operation
	Maintenance
	Incident Management
	Law Enforcement
	Opening and Closing Part-time Shoulder Use Facilities
Appendix A. Case Studies of Successful Applications in the United States
	Minneapolis-St. Paul, Minnesota — Bus on Shoulder
	Fairfax County, Virginia
	Alpharetta, Georgia
	San Diego, California
	Middlesex County, New Jersey
	Seattle, Washington
	Miami, Florida
	Minneapolis, Minnesota — Dynamic Shoulder Lane
	Idaho Springs, Colorado
	Boston, Massachusetts
Appendix B. Signing and Pavement Marking Examples
	Bus on Shoulder
	Static Part-time Shoulder Use
References

List of Figures

• Figure 1. Map. Part-time shoulder use locations in US, 2015.
• Figure 2. Photo. Bus-on-shoulder operations in Minneapolis-St. Paul.
• Figure 3. Photo. Bus-on-shoulder operations on the left-shoulder in Chicago.
• Figure 4. Photo. Static Bus-on-shoulder message sign on US 9 arterial in Old Bridge, New Jersey.
• Figure 5. Photo. Previous Static Part-time shoulder use on I-66 in Northern Virginia.
• Figure 6. Photo. Static part-time shoulder use on New Jersey Turnpike Newark Bay Extension with variable speed limit and changeable message sign.
• Figure 7. Photo. Part-time shoulder use in Germany.
• Figure 8. Photo. High-occupancy-toll part-time shoulder use in Minneapolis-St. Paul.
• Figure 9. Illustration. National Environmental Policy Act Processing Options (Classes of Actions).
• Figure 10. Illustration. Part-time shoulder use screening decision tree.
• Figure 11. Equation. Average Travel Time Rate.
• Figure 12. Equation. Recurring Delay Rate.
• Figure 13. Equation. Incident Delay Rate.
• Figure 14. Equation. 95th-Percentile Travel Time Index.
• Figure 15. Equation. Percent of Trips that Occur at Speeds Less than 45 mph.
• Figure 16. Graph. Predicted crash frequency associated with increasing number of freeway lanes and narrowing the right shoulder.
• Figure 17. Graph. Predicted crash frequency on eight- and ten-lane freeways relative to Annual Average Daily Traffic, no change in shoulder width.
• Figure 18. Graph. Predicted crash frequency relative to Annual Average Daily Traffic and Number of Freeway Lanes, no change in shoulder width.
• Figure 19. Graph. Predicted crash frequency on eight-lane freeways with 14- and 4-foot right shoulder width relative to Annual Average Daily Traffic.
• Figure 20. Graph. Predicted crash frequency with and without narrow lanes and narrow shoulders on 4-lane freeways.
• Figure 21. Graph. Predicted crash frequency with and without narrow lanes and narrow shoulders on 6-lane freeways.
• Figure 22. Graph. Predicted crash frequency with and without narrow lanes and narrow shoulders on 8-lane freeways.
• Figure 23. Graph. Predicted percent change in crash frequency when adding part-time shoulder use by narrowing all lanes.
• Figure 24. Illustration. Typical part-time shoulder use add.
• Figure 25. Illustration. Typical part-time shoulder use drop.
• Figure 26: Illustration. Part-time shoulder use approaching major fork.
• Figure 27. Illustration. Path of parallel-style on-ramp traffic with part-time shoulder use.
• Figure 28. Illustration. Path of parallel-style off-ramp traffic with part-time shoulder use.
• Figure 29. Illustration. Parallel-style ramp with large convergence angle. Shoulder lane shaded.
• Figure 30. Illustration. Parallel-style ramp with small convergence angle. Shoulder lane shaded.
• Figure 31. Illustration. Conflict between ramp and shoulder traffic with taper-style ramp. Shoulder lane shaded.
• Figure 32. Illustration. Conversion of taper-style ramp to parallel-style ramp to remove conflict between ramp and shoulder traffic. Shoulder lane shaded.
• Figure 33. Illustration. Creation of inside merge with parallel-style two-lane on-ramp. Shoulder lane shaded.
• Figure 34. Illustration. Conflict between ramp and shoulder traffic with two-lane taper-style ramp with inside merge. Shoulder lane shaded.
• Figure 35. Photo. Emergency Turnout, UK.
• Figure 36. Photo. Emergency Turnout, Georgia.
• Figure 37. Photo. MnDOT, regulatory sign for Bus-on-shoulder operation.
• Figure 38. Photo and Illustration. Example of full gantry ATM deployment in Washington State (no part-time shoulder use).
• Figure 39. Example Dynamic Part-time Shoulder Use Public Information Material.
• Figure 40. Bus-on-shoulder sign placement, Minnesota.
• Figure 41. Photo. FDOT regulatory sign for Bus-on-shoulder operation.
• Figure 42. Photo. MnDOT on-ramp Bus-on-shoulder warning sign, right side of photo.
• Figure 43. Photo. Maryland SHA sign to manage right-turn lane conflict.
• Figure 44. Photo. Caltrans word pavement markings for BOS operation.
• Figure 45. Photo. NJDOT word pavement markings for BOS operation.
• Figure 46. Photo. SR 522 arterial Bus-on-shoulder pavement markings, Washington state.
• Figure 47. Photo Illustration. US 9 arterial Bus-on-shoulder pavement markings, New Jersey.138.
• Figure 48. Photo. Sign at start of part-time shoulder use segment, GA 400.
• Figure 49. Photo. Warning sign along part-time shoulder use segment, GA 400.
• Figure 50. Photo. Regulatory sign on on-ramp, GA 400.
• Figure 51. Photo. Regulatory sign, I-H-1 mainline.
• Figure 52. Photo. Regulatory sign, I-H-1 on-ramp.
• Figure 53. Photo. Regulatory sign, I-H-1 off-ramp.
• Figure 54. Photo. Updated regulatory sign, I-95 breakdown lanes.
• Figure 55. Illustration. Dynamic part-time shoulder use sign detail, I-95 breakdown lanes.
• Figure 56. Photo. Dynamic sign signifying the shoulder is closed to traffic, I-95 breakdown lanes.
• Figure 57. Photo. Dynamic sign signifying the shoulder is open for use, I-95 breakdown lanes.
• Figure 58. Photo. Regulatory sign, SR 29 mainline.
• Figure 59. Photo. Mast Arm Dynamic Lane Control Sign, New Jersey Turnpike Newark Bay Extension.
• Figure 60. Photo. Dynamic Lane Control Sign on Gantry, New Jersey Turnpike Newark Bay Extension.
• Figure 61. Photo. Combination of static and dynamic signage, I-66 mainline.
• Figure 62. Photo. Notice informing motorists of the lack of right shoulder during shoulder running operations, I-66 mainline.
• Figure 63. Photo. Static signage denoting permitted use of shoulder to exit during non- operational hours of shoulder use, I-66 mainline.
• Figure 64. Photo. Overhead regulatory sign, US 2.
• Figure 65. Photo. Turnout sign sequence, I-66.
• Figure 66. Photo. Edge lines and “shldr lane” work markings on a part-time shoulder use section of I-H-1.
• Figure 67. Photo. Edge line markings at the start of part-time shoulder use segment, US 2.
• Figure 68. Illustration. On- and off-ramp striping plans, I-93.
• Figure 69. Photo. On-ramp striping, I-93.
• Figure 70. Photo. Off-ramp striping, I-93.
• Figure 71. Photo. Off-ramp striping, I-66.

List of Tables

• Table 1. Feasibility checklist of design and operation concepts for part-time shoulder use.
• Table 2. Advantages and disadvantages of left and right part-time shoulder use.
• Table 3. Example performance objectives for Performance Based Practical Design analysis.
• Table 4. Transportation System Management & Operations strategies that can support part-time shoulder use.
• Table 5. Simulated part-time shoulder capacity.(18).
• Table 6. Freeway part-time shoulder use scenarios and crash prediction inputs.
• Table 7. Air Quality tools and data needs.
• Table 8. Potential capital cost components.
• Table 9. Potential operations and maintenance cost components.
• Table 10. Benefit estimation parameters.
• Table 11. Controlling criteria, minimum AASHTO values, and relationship to part-time shoulder use.
• Table 12. Signing of static part-time shoulder use in US.
• Table 13. Part-Time Shoulder Use Facilities in US.
• Table 14. Non-Technical Success Factors of the I-35W Priced Dynamic Shoulder Lane.