On roadways that regularly experience unusually high peak hour volumes, more separation can be beneficial, particularly when the peak hour also coincides with peak volumes of bicyclists.

Additional buffer width between a separated bike lane or shared use sidepath to the travel lane;
Providing markings and signs denoting the crossing;
Providing raised crossings; or
At signalized locations, phase separating the conflict.

For separated bikeways, a determination must be made as to whether the bikeway will be provided as a one-way facility on each side of the road, a two-way facility on one side of the road, or as two-way facilities on both sides of the road. As discussed above, the contra-flow bicyclist may be unexpected by motorists requiring additional design mitigations. This decision requires engineering judgment based on the bikeway’s role in the broader bike network, connectivity, safety impacts, the locations of destinations within the corridor, physical constraints within the ROW, and an assessment of intersection operations and frequency of driveways and intersections.

The presence of high concentrations of children and older adults should be considered during project planning. These groups may only feel comfortable bicycling on physically separated facilities, even where motor vehicle speeds and volumes are relatively low. Typically, these populations are less confident in their bicycling abilities and, in the case of children, may be less visible to motorists and lack both roadway experience as well as reduced traffic awareness skills. They can also create more conflicts with pedestrians when they are expected to share the same space.

It is essential to consider the proposed transportation project in context of the local bicycle network. Wide, high-volume, or high-speed roadways can create substantial barriers to connectivity. Parallel alternative routes may not exist or may require bicyclists to ride several miles out of the way, adding substantial distance and travel time. Intersections between State and local roadways may feature a high number of conflict points, constrained ROW, or high-speed differential. Separated facilities can help close gaps in a low-stress network. Considerations include providing separate bicycle facilities under freeway underpasses, improving visibility of bicyclists, providing on-street connections between two major shared use paths, or routes connected to schools, major employers, parks, or other recreational opportunities.

Biking offers a valuable “first-mile” and “last-mile” connection to transit systems, effectively expanding the transit-shed around a station or stop. It is important to ensure accessibility of transit boarding areas, pedestrian crossings, and parking spaces, while also integrating the bicycle network into transit systems. Traffic laws and agency policy often address transit vehicles and bicycles in the right most lane or right side of the roadway. Some agencies have designated shared “transit lanes” for bicycle riding, but frequent bus stops or roadway design may create delays or less safe conditions for bicyclists sharing a lane with heavy transit traffic. If the preferred bikeway for a roadway is a bike lane or separated bike lane, the placement of the bike lane with respect to where pedestrians may wait or travel when boarding or alighting transit vehicles should be considered, as should the extent to which transit operations impact bicyclists’ level of comfort and safety. As noted in , options for minimizing conflicts with transit include installing signs, pavement markings, and/or floating bus stops to provide for shared space, placing a separated bike lane on the left side of a one-way street (out of the way of transit stops along the right side), or choosing to install a separated bike lane on a nearby parallel corridor away from transit.