I am voicing support for VDOT to completely adopt the bicycling policies and facilities in the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA)’s new Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices (MUTCD). Specifically, I would like to voice support for  Section 9E.07 Separated Bicycle Lanes. The city of Roanoke and others across Virginia are only scraping the surface of what can be done with safe bicycle infrastructure. Separated bike lanes will be an integral part of having healthier, safer, and better quality-of-life communities across the Commonwealth.

I support VDOT adopting the bicycling policies and facilities as outlined in the new manual, particularly Section 9E.07 on Separated Bicycle Lanes. Adoption of dedicated, protected space for those riding bikes is certain to promote a healthier Virginia: the extra safety will help mitigate car-related biking accidents, encourage more people to use bikes to exercise in their day-to-day, and reduce car congestion on the road (as more people will have biking as an option). 

I support VDOT completely adopt the bicycling policies and facilities in the FHWA’s new  MUTCD. Specifically, I would like to voice support for  Section 9E.07 Separated Bicycle Lanes. Looking at large urban areas around the world who are quickly trying to pivot to cycling as transport and the advent of ebikes changes how americans can and want to move around our urban areas.  We need to be able to do this safely and when we can it can transform out communities and make people happier healthier safer and better off economically. 

I would like to express my support for VDOT to completely adopt the bicycling policies and facilities in the updated MUTCD. Separate, protected bike infrastructure is the gold standard for safer and more accessible cycling. The new guidance around protected bike lanes is an essential step forward for safer, healthier, and more connected communities across the commonwealth.

Adopt the MUTCD with the needed protection for cycling and alternative transportation protections in place. The disparity in vehicle speed and size from any light passenger vehicle and upwards in comparison to a cyclist on human powered or even e-assist platform is far too great to leave in place the current open structure. 

What happened with fixing potholes, cleaning up the mess like cigarettes butts, broken glass, trash on roadsides, interstates, medians, and sidewalks? There is more trash,  dead branches from trees collecting on medians? 
Bike lanes are okay, but the places where there are created is illogical and dangerous. No wonder there are unnecessary accidents. Where is the proper safety for the drivers and bike riders? 
Wasting hardworking taxpayer dollars is shameful. 

I urge the adoption by the Commonwealth of Virginia of the new MUTCD, and the implementation of features that will improve safety for vulnerable road users, including

• Protected bicycle lanes (separated by physical barriers);

• Dedicated bicycle signal faces and bicycle-specific traffic signal timing.

• Painted bike facilities and bike boxes (advanced stop lines for bicyclists at intersections);

• Contraflow bicycle lanes (enabling two-way bicycling on one-way streets);

• Mid-block crossings and pedestrian hybrid beacons with bicycle accommodations; and

• Contextual guidance on speed limit setting with a de-emphasis of the 85th percentile in non-freeway or rural highway settings.

I am  writing on behalf of the Alexandria Bicycle and Pedestrian Advisory Committee (BPAC) which is the lead volunteer organization advocating for improved safety for pedestrians and people on bikes in the CIty of Alexandria.

We have voted to support the improved bike facilities and signals, and the new guidance on setting speed limits,  that are included in the new MUTCD and to urge their inclusion in any Commonwealth of Virginia specific MUTCD.  

We would also like to be included in any list of stakeholders for the process of discussing the new MUTCD. 

Where it can be done, I support protected bike lanes. However, with some cost in mind, I would additionally support making safe bicycling connections through neighborhoods that permit bicycle travel off two-lane, heavily traveled roads. I would also support connections over creeks, etc., that allow one to get to established bike routes or lanes from some of the more detached neighborhood areas.

As an ardent bicyclist and a member of PedalsafeROA, my comment is to ask VDOT to adopt the bicycling policies and facilities in FHWA’s new Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices (MUTCD). I also support protected bike lanes.

Thank you!

The state MUTCD supplement should reflect the state and local laws as well as best practices already in use. 

Section 9B.11 Bicycles Use Ped Signal Sign (R9-5) option statement should be included in the State MUTCD supplement as it is already used by VDOT on projects such as the Virginia Center Blvd cycletrack in Vienna, VA. Installing those signs under the pedestrian signal head on the far side and near side of the intersection should be added as an option statement.

Section 9B.15 Bicycle Passing Clearance Sign (R4-19) option statement should be included in the State MUTCD supplement as the Code of Virginia § 46.2-839 requires 3 feet to pass and in some cases, requires drivers to change lanes to pass. A “change lanes to pass” supplemental sign should be added Section 9B.14 to reflect Code of Virginia § 46.2-839. 

Section 9E.03 Extensions of Bicycle Lanes through Intersections support statement should be upgraded to a standard statement. The option statement allowing green paint should be increased to guidance.

Section 9E.07 Separated Bicycle Lanes support statement should be included in the State MUTCD supplement and be increased to a standard statement. Separated bicycle lanes have existed on Virginia streets for more than a decade including on state-controlled streets.

Section 9E.08 Counter-Flow Bicycle Lanes support statement should be included in the State MUTCD supplement and be increased to a standard statement. The guidance statement, Counter-flow bicycle lanes should not be used between a general-purpose lane and an on-street parallel parking lane for motor vehicles, should be omitted as it is not evidence-based and many jurisdictions have contraflow lanes adjacent to parking lanes. Contraflow bike lanes are listed as an acceptable treatment on VDOT’s website.

Section 9E.11 Two-Stage Bicycle Turn Boxes support statement should be included in the State MUTCD supplement and be increased to a guidance statement. 

Section 9E.12 Bicycle Box option statement should be included in the State MUTCD supplement and be increased to a guidance statement. 

Section 9E.14 Bicycle Route Pavement Markings option statement should be included in the State MUTCD supplement and be increased to a guidance statement and should be allowed to be used in place of wayfinding signs rather than merely supplement them.

Section 3H.06 Green-Colored Pavement for Bicycle Facilities support statement should be included in the State MUTCD supplement as VDOT uses it on their own bicycle facilities and local jurisdictions have used green paint for more than a decade. In addition, research shows that green paint in conflict zones increases safety for people bicycling. 

Section 3J.07 Sidewalk Extensions Designated by Pavement Markings support statement should be included in the State MUTCD supplement and be increased to a guidance statement. 

Section 2B.20 In-Street and Overhead Pedestrian and Trail Crossing Signs (R1-6 and R1-9 Series) option statement should be included in the State MUTCD supplement and be increased to a guidance statement. Code of Virginia § 46.2-924 requires roadway users to stop to pedestrians and bicyclists in the crosswalk (see Code of Virginia § 46.2-904) so R1-5, R1-5d, R1-6, R1-6d, R1-9, R1-9d should be omitted from State MUTCD supplement. 

Section 4L.01 Application of Rectangular Rapid Flashing Beacons option statement should be included in the State MUTCD supplement and be increased to a guidance statement. RRBFs are an effective traffic control device with a significant body of evidence supporting their use. 

Section 4H.01 Use of Bicycle Signal Faces option statement should be included in the State MUTCD supplement and be increased to a guidance statement. 

Section 2B.59 Traffic Signal Signs and Plaques (R10-5 through R10-30)’s R10-15 yield to pedestrians when turning should be omitted from the State MUTCD supplement as Code of Virginia § 46.2-904 requires roadway users to stop, not yield. 

Section 2B.60 No Turn on Red Signs (R10-11 Series, R10-17a, and R10-30) should specify in the State MUTCD supplement that installing a supplemental sign, “when pedestrians are present” should never be used as it is not in the MUTCD and FHWA has discouraged their use for almost 20 years https://mutcd.fhwa.dot.gov/resources/interpretations/2_635.htm. Existing “when pedestrians are present” signs under no turn on red signs should be removed in an expeditious manner.

Section 9B.01 should clarify that trail stop signs should only be used in jurisdictions that require bicyclists to stop at them per Code of Virginia § 46.2-924. E.

completely adopt the new bicycling standards, guidance and options in the 11th Edition of the FHWA’s MUTCD, published in December 2023.

The state should fully adopt the new MUTCD and the state supplement should reflect the state and local laws as well as best practices already in use. See detailed feedback below.  Additionally Sustainable Mobility for Arlington County would like to be included in any future VDOT stakeholder or public engagement processes involving the MUTCD.

Section 9B.11 Bicycles Use Ped Signal Sign (R9-5) option statement should be included in the State MUTCD supplement as it is already used by VDOT on projects such as the Virginia Center Blvd cycletrack in Vienna, VA. Installing those signs under the pedestrian signal head on the far side and near side of the intersection should be added as an option statement.

Section 9B.15 Bicycle Passing Clearance Sign (R4-19) option statement should be included in the State MUTCD supplement as the Code of Virginia § 46.2-839 requires 3 feet to pass and in some cases, requires drivers to change lanes to pass. A “change lanes to pass” supplemental sign should be added Section 9B.14 to reflect Code of Virginia § 46.2-839.

Section 9E.03 Extensions of Bicycle Lanes through Intersections support statement should be upgraded to a standard statement. The option statement allowing green paint should be increased to guidance.

Section 9E.07 Separated Bicycle Lanes support statement should be included in the State MUTCD supplement and be increased to a standard statement. Separated bicycle lanes have existed on Virginia streets for more than a decade including on state-controlled streets.

Section 9E.08 Counter-Flow Bicycle Lanes support statement should be included in the State MUTCD supplement and be increased to a standard statement. The guidance statement, Counter-flow bicycle lanes should not be used between a general-purpose lane and an on-street parallel parking lane for motor vehicles, should be omitted as it is not evidence-based and many jurisdictions, including Arlington, have contraflow lanes adjacent to parking lanes. Contraflow bike lanes are listed as an acceptable treatment on VDOT’s website.

Section 9E.11 Two-Stage Bicycle Turn Boxes support statement should be included in the State MUTCD supplement and be increased to a guidance statement.

Section 9E.14 Bicycle Route Pavement Markings option statement should be included in the State MUTCD supplement and be increased to a guidance statement and should be allowed to be used in place of wayfinding signs rather than merely supplement them.

Section 3H.06 Green-Colored Pavement for Bicycle Facilities support statement should be included in the State MUTCD supplement as VDOT uses it on their own bicycle facilities and local jurisdictions have used green paint for more than a decade. In addition, research shows that green paint in conflict zones increases safety for people bicycling.

Section 3J.07 Sidewalk Extensions Designated by Pavement Markings support statement should be included in the State MUTCD supplement and be increased to a guidance statement.

Section 2B.20 In-Street and Overhead Pedestrian and Trail Crossing Signs (R1-6 and R1-9 Series) option statement should be included in the State MUTCD supplement and be increased to a guidance statement. Code of Virginia § 46.2-924 requires roadway users to stop to pedestrians and bicyclists in the crosswalk (see Code of Virginia § 46.2-904) so R1-5, R1-5d, R1-6, R1-6d, R1-9, R1-9d should be omitted from State MUTCD supplement.

Section 4L.01 Application of Rectangular Rapid Flashing Beacons option statement should be included in the State MUTCD supplement and be increased to a guidance statement. RRFBs are an effective traffic control device with a significant body of evidence supporting their use that have been deployed effectively throughout Arlington.

Section 4H.01 Use of Bicycle Signal Faces option statement should be included in the State MUTCD supplement and be increased to a guidance statement.

Section 2B.59 Traffic Signal Signs and Plaques (R10-5 through R10-30)’s R10-15 yield to pedestrians when turning should be omitted from the State MUTCD supplement as Code of Virginia § 46.2-904 requires roadway users to stop, not yield.

Section 2B.60 No Turn on Red Signs (R10-11 Series, R10-17a, and R10-30) should specify in the State MUTCD supplement that installing a supplemental sign, “when pedestrians are present” should never be used as it is not in the MUTCD and FHWA has discouraged their use for almost 20 years https://mutcd.fhwa.dot.gov/resources/interpretations/2_635.htm. Existing “when pedestrians are present” signs under no turn on red signs should be removed in an expeditious manner.

Section 9B.01 should clarify that trail stop signs should only be used in jurisdictions that require bicyclists to stop at them per Code of Virginia § 46.2-924. E.

Protected bike lanes as mentioned in section 9E.07 would be a great improvement to our standards to give citizens safe alternatives for transport.  Streets are not only for vehicles and they are also infrastructure paid for by all tax paying citizens.  All citizens should be able to safely travel on our streets without being runover by an inattentive driver.  Safer designs lead to safer communities.

I don't agree with everything in the federal MUTCD and you can find comments that I made in my role at the League of American Bicyclists during its adoption here: https://bikeleague.org/take-action/policy-advocacy/on-the-issues/mutcd/

However, the federal MUTCD includes substantial improvements from the prior edition and I encourage Virginia to adopt it as-is. Specific changes that I believe are most important to adopt include provisions for new bicycle facilities not present in prior editions, such as separated bike lanes in Section 9E.07. Changes to speed limit signage and setting in Section 2B.21 are also very important to adopt, specifically the requirement to consider roadway context and the consideration of pedestrian and bicycle facilities and activity when conducting an engineering study. Those changes would be strengthen by stronger guidance to not rely on the 85th percentile approach and to always consider the safety of people biking and walking.

Adopt MUTCD 2023 as is, but specifically Part 9: Traffic Control for Bicycle Facilities, and more specifically Section 9E.06: Buffer-Separated Bike Lanes, and Section 9E.07: Separated Bike Lanes.

I write in support of the adoption of the federal MUTCD standard. My small business is one of many in urban village centers that benefits tremendously from its proximity to protected bike facilities. Unfortunately, such safe and healthful thoroughfares (Greenways, bike paths, rail trails, etc) are limited in scope and often are not accessible to all potential users. Businesses that form the backbone of our communities -- locally owned retail, food & bev, services -- would thrive all the more with improved standards that enable the creation of a safe *transportation network* for people on bike, on foot, and on other alternative modes of transportation. 

It is especially important to adopt the changes relevant to bicycle and pedestrian safety.  These changes fit in perfectly with our new administration's Make America Healthy Again agenda.  Making roads and streets safer for bicyclists and pedestrian will encourage those healthy activities.  It will provide an affordable alternative  that will allow more people to get to work.  Getting more people into the workforce is another priority of our new administration, and the MUTCD can help by making making it safer for people who don't have or can't afford cars to get to employment.  Finally, the bicycle and pedestrian design alternatives will allow our transportation system to be more efficient economically.  More people walking or cycling will reduce the demand for wider and newer highways, thus meeting the conservative goals of lowering the cost of government and increasing freedom of choice.   

I support and recommend adopting Adopt MUTCD 2023 As Is, especially section 9 and protected bike lanes.

As a cyclist, a member of PedalSafe Roa, and someone who pays taxes and cares about other people that are also cyclists and pedestrians, I think it is very important to adopt this.

Mr. Robert Cochrane, 

I am writing on behalf of the Virginia Bicycling Federation (VBF) to strongly support adoption in Virginia of the Standards, Options and Guidance for bicycle facilities and traffic control devices in the 2023 Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices (MUTCD). We urge the Virginia Department of Transportation (VDOT) to expansively incorporate ALL bicycling-related elements of the MUTCD Guide into applicable policy and design guidance. Thanks so much for your note of February 20, 2025 indicating that VBF will be included in VDOT’s external stakeholder engagement plans. 

The revised FHWA MUTCD introduces and codifies numerous design elements that meaningfully enhance bicyclist safety, including the following: 

• Protected bicycle lanes (separated by physical barriers);

• Dedicated bicycle signal faces and bicycle-specific traffic signal timing;

• Painted bike facilities and bike boxes (advanced stop lines for bicyclists at intersections);

• Contraflow bicycle lanes (enabling two-way bicycling on one-way streets);

• Mid-block crossings and pedestrian hybrid beacons with bicycle accommodations; and

• Guidance on speed limit setting with a de-emphasis of the 85th percentile..

Adopting these provisions will align Virginia with federal standards, improve safety for vulnerable road users, and help ensure continued eligibility for federal funding opportunities.  

We offer our operational expertise and appreciate being included in VDOT’s stakeholder engagement. We would also like to assist with efforts such as identifying case studies of successful implementations and updating applicable Code of Virginia sections, if required.

Thank you for your commitment to safe and sustainable transportation. We look forward to continued engagement in this process. Please feel free to contact us at brantley.tyndall@gmail.com and JimDurham48@outlook.com. 

Sincerely,  

Jim Durham, Advocacy Committee Chair, Virginia Bicycling Federation