Dark Bollards, Dangerous Bollards

A bollard, for those who don't know the term, is one of those posts used to keep motor vehicles off of trails, sidewalks, and other non-motorized facilities. Many trail systems use them, but many use them badly, sometimes with tragic results. When a bicyclist moving at reasonable speeds runs into a bollard, common outcomes include serious injury, destruction of the bicycle frame, or even death.

If we were discussing a roadway, no competent traffic engineer would consider placing unmarked telephone poles between the lanes with no additional clearance or warnings. The results would be too obvious. Yet some of these same traffic engineers will suggest placing bollards in the middle of bicycle trails with essentially no warning for the bicyclists.

This is not usually done with the intent of maiming bicyclists, even though that is the natural outcome. Instead, the people designing these bollards simply have not thought of them as obstructions in a roadway. Worse, sometimes the bollards are positively hidden, by designs intended to blend into a park-like setting, such as bollards made of unpainted wood, or of metal painted soothing dark blues or greens.

It's easy for the lone cyclist to be dismissed as a whining malcontent, especially if the official in charge is predisposed to see cyclists that way. To avoid this, it helps to present the issue on the right terms, as a well-documented traffic safety concern.

First, let's look at two nationally-known design standards. While these do not have the force of law, they are authoritative references that are often incorporated into legal design standards.

AASHTO Guide for the Development of Bicycle Facilities

The American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials puts out many useful design references, including this one on bicycle facilities. Discussing access-control bollards, AASHTO says:

Shared use paths may need some form of physical barrier at highway intersections to prevent unauthorized motor vehicles from using the facilities. [....] Posts or bollards should be set back beyond the clear zone on the crossing highway or be of a breakaway design. The post should be permanently reflectorized for nighttime visibility and painted a bright color for improved daytime visibility. Striping an envelope around the post is recommended as shown in Figure 26. When more than one post is used, an odd number of posts at 1.5-m (5-foot) spacing is desirable. Wider spacing can allow entry to motor vehicles, while narrower spacing might prevent entry by adult tricycles, wheelchair users, and bicycles with trailers.

Figure 26, not reporoduced here, shows the bollard enclosed in 4-inch-wide yellow stripes, forming a diamond 2 feet wide by 3 feet long.
Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices

The Federal Highway Administration's Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices provides standardized signs, signals, and markings for all sorts of traffic situations, and this is no exception.

MUTCD Fig. 9C-2 illustrates the same pavement marking recommended in the AASHTO Guide, and Section 9C.03 specifies markings for "obstructions in the center of the path, including vertical elements intended to physically prevent unauthorized motor vehicles from entering the path." The MUTCD standard requires that: Obstructions in the traveled way of a shared-use path shall be marked with retroreflectorized material or appropriate object markers.

As used here, "object markers" are the familiar reflective signs used for roadside obstructions, such as yellow reflectorized diamonds or yellow-and-black diagonal lines.

Draft language from the Federal Highway Administration goes even further, but has not yet been formally adopted:

Some trail managers install bollards, gates, or other barriers to restrict unauthorized use. Trail managers should question whether bollards, gates, fences, or other barriers are needed at all. For the purpose of the bullets below, “bollard” includes bollards, gates, fences, or any other barrier constructed or installed next to, within, or across a trail presumably to restrict unauthorized access.

Even "properly" installed bollards constitute a serious and potentially fatal safety hazard to unwary trail users. In addition, no bollard layout that admits bicycles, tricycles, and bicycle trailers can exclude single-track motor vehicles such as motorcycles and mopeds. For these reasons, bollards should never be a default treatment, and should not be used unless there is a documented history of intrusion by unauthorized cars, trucks, or other unauthorized vehicles.

A landscaped median may be an appropriate method to reduce the likelihood that somebody might think the shared use path is a public street or driveway. See "What kind of barrier will keep cars off a bike path?" by John Williams and Kathleen McLaughlin, originally published in Bicycle Forum (Issue 30, August 1992), now NCBW Forum. See Article.

Bollards are often ineffective: a determined person is likely to go around or go through. This may result in additional maintenance costs for the trail, either to repair or replace the bollards, or to repair trail or landscaping damage where vehicles go around the bollards.

Bollards are often a hazard to trail users, who can crash into them, possibly resulting in serious injury or death. Poorly installed bollards can lead to head-on collisions. Bollards are involved in "second user" crashes, where the first user hides the bollard until it is too late to avoid it, even if the first user has adequate sight distance. These crashes can produce serious or incapacitating injuries. This can happen to pedestrians as well as bicyclists or other higher speed users.

Unjustified bollards can create liability exposure. Trail managers should consider whether or not they increase their liability if they install bollards, gates, fences, or other barriers.

Bollards, gates, fences, or other barriers can slow access for emergency response.

If installed, bollard, gates, fences, or other barriers:

Must not restrict access for people with disabilities (ABA, Rehabilitation Act, and ADA: cited above).

Must be easily visible, especially in low light conditions. Section 9C.03 of the Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices (MUTCD) requires retroreflectorization of any obstruction in the traveled way of a shared-use path. This includes posts along the edge of a path (within a path's "shoulder"). In addition, MUTCD Figure 9C-2 defines a diamond-shaped marking that should be used around bollards or other obstructions within a path.

Should have sufficient sight distance to allow users to adjust speed. This is especially important on paths that have traffic calming features such as curves or landscaping near the bollards. Insufficient sight distance increases the likelihood that bollards will be dangerous hazards.

Should permit passage, without dismounting, for adult tricycles, bicycles towing trailers, and tandem bicycles. All users legally permitted to use the facility should be accommodated; failure to do so increases the likelihood that the bollards will be dangerous hazards.

In short, it's clear that multiple national agencies and organizations responsible for design standards and engineering have recognized bollards as a potential threat to public safety and a potential source of liability to public agencies that install them. But that doesn't necessarily mean your local jurisdiction is familiar with those findings, or has adopted standards that address them.

So What Standards Apply in My Case?

AASHTO and FHWA standards are respected nationally, but your local authority may have its own design standards. You may need to ask what design standards apply to a particular project and do more research. For example, in Washington State, the WSDOT Design Manual Chapter 1020 - Bicycle Facilities addresses these issues for state-funded projects, saying

Install bollards at entrances to shared-use paths to prevent motor vehicles from entering. When locating such installations, ensure that barriers are well marked and visible to bicyclists, day or night. Do not use bollards to divert or slow path traffic. (For bollard designs, see the Standard Plans, and for pavement markings at bollards, see the MUTCD.)

This tells you that the MUTCD pavement markings apply, but you also need to find the Standard Plans to see what standards the bollards themselves must meet. In this case, WSDOT's Standard Plans call for a bollard made of 3-inch nominal steel pipe, 2'6" tall, with the top capped for safety, and four stripes of 1/2" retroreflective tape spread over 4 inches, starting 2 inches from the top of the bollard.

Presenting Your Case

Once you have this level of specific, local detail, it's much harder to dismiss you as a whining malcontent. Instead, you're a concerned citizen pointing out a design oversight that could expose the city to bad publicity or even liability.

Try to present your request calmly and rationally, even though you're dealing with a situation that could have killed you or your children. The bad design was almost certainly not installed with the intent of injuring anyone, and it doesn't do anyone any good to make the officials involved defensive.

Many parks and recreation officials honestly believe that bollards are generally innocuous, or even a safety feature for trail users. These officials are usually not cyclists, nor are they traffic engineers, and they may have little idea of the risks they're imposing on the public. Simply telling them their facility could kill someone does little good if it comes across as the opinion of one local lunatic. If, on the other hand, the Federal Highway Administration says their facility risks causing "incapacitating injuries" and creates liability exposure, these officials may reconsider their preconceptions in favor of bollards.

If you cannot get local officials to take your concerns seriously, other avenues include presenting the same information to local media, asking why your tax dollars are being spent on such hazardous facilities. If the facilities are funded by state or federal grants, you might also have some luck presenting your concerns to the agencies providing those grants, in case those agencies require compliance with higher standards.

If all else fails, be sure to keep copies of your letters to local officials so that any trail user injured by the facility can prove the jurisdiction had ample notice of its negligence. Sometimes it takes a multi-million dollar settlement before authorities take seriously the unintended consequences of their design errors.

This page written by Josh Putnam. Please feel free to email questions, comments, corrections, suggestions, etc.

Josh Putnam's Home Page | Josh's Bike Page. | Josh's Framebuilding Page. | Josh's Photo Page.