National Park Service 

U.S. Department of Interior

National Park Service 

Active Transportation Guidebook

July 2023 (2nd Edition)

A Resource on Supporting Walking and Bicycling for 

National Parks and their Partners
ii

Cover

Cover images are sourced as follows:

• Top, Left Photo: Shenandoah National Park, Virginia (Source: NPS)

• Bottom, Left Photo: Grand Canyon National Park, Arizona (Source: NPS)

• Top, Right Photo: Golden Gate National Recreation Area, California (Source: NPS)

• Bottom, Right Photo: Grand Teton National Park, Wyoming (Source: Matt Wild)

NPS Active Transportation Guidebook
iii

Notice

This document is disseminated under the sponsorship of the National Park Service in the interest of 

information exchange. The U.S. Government assumes no liability for the use of 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 this document.

The contents of this report reflect the views of the authors, who are responsible for the facts and accuracy 

of the data presented herein. The contents do not necessarily reflect the official policy of the National Park 

Service or other federal agencies involved in the development of this report. This report does not constitute a 

standard, specification, or regulation.

NPS Active Transportation Guidebook
iv

Foreword

United States Department of the Interior

National Park Service

1849 C Street, N.W.

Washington, DC 20240

Active transportation, including cycling, walking and other forms of human-powered 

transportation, is an important way that visitors experience the wonder and breadth of our 

nation’s over 84 million acres of parks, cultural and historical spaces. Whether as a form of 

access to parks or recreation at a site, active transportation offers diverse opportunities for 

recreation, greater accessibility, economic growth, improved quality of life, and health and 

wellness benefits, which are all cornerstones to building a strong and vibrant community. 

As popularity of the national park system continues to rise, new and emerging challenges, 

such as increased visitation and congestion, user conflicts, climate impacts, and the 

need for more equitable access and engagement, have left national parks and nearby 

communities eager for tools and strategies to balance visitor safety and experience with 

the preservation and management of natural and cultural resources. 

Active transportation not only offers a unique way for a visitor to experience the outdoors, 

it can also help to alleviate vehicle congestion in parks, promote the protection of park 

resources, encourage environmentally sustainable travel options, promote healthy outdoor 

recreation, provide more equitable access, and encourage new ways to enhance the visitor 

experience. 

To support parks in promoting active transportation to and within their sites, the National 

Park Service, in partnership with the U.S. Department of Transportation, published the 

National Park Service Active Transportation Guidebook: A Resource on Supporting Walking 

and Bicycling for National Parks and their Partners in 2018. This first-of-its-kind tool 

supports National Park Service staff, local governments, community partners, and others 

in promoting, encouraging, and implementing responsible bicycle and pedestrian-friendly 

travel to and within national park sites. This updated edition includes the latest active 

transportation information and guidance from both agencies. 

NPS Active Transportation Guidebook
v

In addition to outlining opportunities for parks to implement bike sharing systems, 

coordinate with local communities to develop multiuse trails and other bicycle and 

pedestrian infrastructure, host car-free events, and conduct bicycle safety trainings, this 

updated guidebook incorporates new and additional considerations for advancing equity 

and inclusion in the parks, electric bicycle use, active transportation safety, and emerging 

mobility technologies to enhance walking and biking. These additions align with the 

National Park Service National Long Range Transportation Plan, as well as strengthen 

the mutually beneficial relationship between the Department of the Interior and U.S. 

Department of Transportation as outlined in the U.S. Department of Transportation/

Department of the Interior Memorandum of Understanding on Transportation Innovation 

in the National Park System. 

As with the first version, this updated guidebook was developed with expert review 

and guidance from partners across a variety of disciplines, programs, agencies, and 

organizations, including involvement by many who share a common desire to create a 

more bicycle- and pedestrian-friendly national park system. 

We hope this updated guidebook continues to inform, inspire, and foster creativity for 

National Park Service staff, communities, and partners as they work together to improve 

bicycle and pedestrian access between national parks, surrounding communities, and 

beyond. 

Mike Caldwell

Associate Director of Park Planning, Facilities and Lands

National Park Service

Lauren Imgrund

Associate Director of Partnerships and Civic Engagement

National Park Service

NPS Active Transportation Guidebook
vi

Foreword

United States Department of Transportation

Federal Highway Administration

1200 New Jersey Avenue

SE Washington, DC 20590

The Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) is pleased to partner with the National Park 

Service (NPS) to present this update of the National Park Service Active Transportation 

Guidebook: A Resource on Supporting Walking and Bicycling for National Parks and 

their Partners. Working with the NPS to develop this Guidebook is another example of 

FHWA Office of Federal Lands Highway’s long-standing commitment to supporting the 

NPS in meeting their context-sensitive transportation goals to: “preserve and protect 

resources, while providing safe and enjoyable access to and within the national parks, using 

sustainable, appropriate, and integrated transportation solutions.”

This Guidebook supports efforts by both the Department of the Interior (DOI) and U.S. 

Department of Transportation (DOT) to build world-class transportation systems that 

provide enhanced access for car-free trips, interpretation, education, and enjoyment 

opportunities to visitors who want to experience public lands, as reflected in the DOT/DOI 

Memorandum of Understanding on Transportation Innovation in the National Park System. 

DOT has a long history of supporting pedestrian and bicycle transportation. Active 

transportation supports the Department’s 2022-2026 Strategic Plan goals to make our 

transportation system safer for all people, reduce inequities and transportation-related 

disparities, and reduce greenhouse gas emissions and pollution, among other priorities. 

Success in improving pedestrian safety and mobility for people of all ages and abilities in 

our national parks depends on partnerships such as this one with the NPS.

The National Park Service Active Transportation Guidebook serves as a resource for 

national park units and their partners to both identify and prioritize bicycle and pedestrian 

transportation needs, in addition to helping gain an understanding of Complete Streets 

design considerations and resource opportunities to implement projects that meet these 

NPS Active Transportation Guidebook
vii

needs. Similarly, the Guidebook shares information and examples of how national parks 

and their communities can develop and provide active transportation programs to further 

promote opportunities for visitors to bike and walk to and within parks. While focused 

on the NPS, the information in this Guidebook will be beneficial to all Federal Land 

Management Agencies looking to support nonmotorized transportation to and within 

federal lands. 

First published in 2018, this resource has now been updated to include the latest active 

transportation information, examples, and guidance. As with the initial version, this updated 

Guidebook was developed by drawing on guidance and expertise from numerous disciplines 

within the NPS and DOT. It serves as an example of both agencies collaborating to develop 

resources that will educate and expand the capabilities of federal staff to develop bicycling 

and walking options to and within some of the most iconic places of natural wonder and 

cultural heritage the nation has to offer.

Timothy G. Hess, P.E.

Associate Administrator for Office of Federal Lands Highway

NPS Active Transportation Guidebook
viii

Acknowledgements

The National Park Service (NPS) developed this Guidebook with support from the U.S. Department 

of Transportation John A. Volpe National Transportation Systems Center (Volpe Center), and the U.S. 

Department of Transportation Federal Highway Administration (FHWA). The following individuals were 

instrumental in this effort:

• Krista Sherwood, National Park Service, Conservation & Outdoor Recreation Programs

• Jessica Baas, U.S. DOT Volpe Center

• Amy Plovnick, U.S. DOT Volpe Center

• Alexandra McNally, U.S. DOT Volpe Center

• David Daddio, U.S. DOT Volpe Center 

• Amalia Holub, U.S. DOT Volpe Center

• Laurie Miskimins, Central Federal Lands Highway Division

The NPS convened a Technical Advisory Committee (TAC) to support the development of the Guidebook. 

TAC members helped to develop content, review drafts, provide ideas and varying perspectives, and subject 

matter expertise. Their contributions and dedication to the effort were critical to the completion of the 

Guidebook. Members included: 

• Tegan Boehmer, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention

• Nola Chavez, National Park Service, Denver Service Center

• Linda Ginenthal, City of Portland, Oregon Active Transportation and Safety Division

• Morgan Lommele, People for Bikes 

• Saara Snow, Adventure Cycling Association

Development of this Guidebook was a collaborative effort, gathering input from multiple agencies, 

organizations, and disciplines. The authors would like to acknowledge the following individuals for their 

contributions of time and subject matter expertise to this Guidebook: 

National Park Service 

• Craig Ackerman, Crater Lake National Park 

• Nick Bartolomeo, Rock Creek Park 

• Randy Biddle, Rocky Mountain National Park 

• Jeremy Buzzell, Park Facility Management Division

• Michael Byrd, Colonial National Historical Park

• Jay Calhoun, Division of Regulations, Jurisdiction, and Special Park Uses

• Jennifer Evans, Crater Lake National Park 

• Ina Hysi, Public Risk Management Program

• John Kelly, Acadia National Park 

• Randy King, Mount Rainier National Park 

• Steve Kloster, Great Smoky Mountain National Park 

• Molly McKinley, Denali National Park 

• Deb Nordeen, Office of Policy

• Jennifer Proctor, Public Risk Management Program

NPS Active Transportation Guidebook
ix

• Alma Ripps, Office of Policy

• Estee Rivera, NPS Centennial Office

• Brian Sikes, Shenandoah National Park

• Elizabeth Stern, NPS Centennial Office

• Tammy Stidham, National Capital Region

• Virginia Sullivan, Adventure Cycling Association

• Alan Turnbull, Rivers, Trails & Conservation Assistance Program

• Eliza Voigt, National Mall and Memorial Parks

• Phil Wilson, Glacier National Park

Federal Highway Administration 

• Scott Allen

• David Cohen

• Christopher B. Douwes

• Dan Goodman

• Gary Jensen

• Todd Johnson 

• Anthony M. Jones

• Dave Kirschner

• Susan Law

• Tamara Redmon

• Gabe Rousseau

• Shari Schaftlein

Additional Stakeholders

• Dee Merriam, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention 

• Marissa Rodriguez-McGill, ofo

• Andy Williamson, International Mountain Bicycling Association

Additional Volpe Center Support 

• Caitlin Connelly

• Rachel Galton

• Emily Navarrete

• Miranda Richard

• Amber Shackelford

• Erica Simmons

• Jaime Young

NPS Active Transportation Guidebook
x

2023 Update

In 2023 the NPS updated the Guidebook with support from the Volpe Center and the FHWA. The following individuals were 

instrumental in this update:

• Krista Sherwood, NPS Conservation & Outdoor Recreation Division

• Wayne Emington, NPS Park Facility Management Division

• Stephanie Tepperberg, NPS Conservation & Outdoor Recreation Division

• Annisha Borah, U.S. DOT Volpe Center

• Alexandra McNally, U.S. DOT Volpe Center

• Amy Plovnick, U.S. DOT Volpe Center

The authors would like to acknowledge the following individuals for their contributions of time and subject matter expertise to 

the 2023 Guidebook update:

National Park Service

• Jeremy Buzzell, Park Facility Management Division

• Erica Cole, Park Facility Management Division

• Don Gutkowski, Park Facility Management Division

• Lindsay Gillham, Natural Resources Stewardship & Science Directorate

• Mark Hartsoe, Park Facility Management Division

• Ina Hysi, Public Risk Management Program

• Adam Kelsey, Law Enforcement, Security, and Emergency Services

• Mike Madej, Intermountain Region, 

• Joe Regula, Park Planning and Special Studies Division

• Victor Rydlisky, Denver Service Center 

• Steve Suder, Park Facility Management Division

Federal Highway Administration

• Christine Black, Office of Federal Lands Highway

• Katie Carlos, Office of Federal Lands Highway

• Becky Crowe, Office of Safety

• Christopher Douwes, Office of Human Environment

• Peter Eun, Resource Center Safety and Design Team

• Elizabeth Hilton, Office of Infrastructure

• Matt Hinshaw, Office of Federal Lands Highway

• Laura Mero, Turner-Fairbank Highway Research Center

• Chimai Ngo, Office of Safety

• Isbel Ramos-Reyes, Office of Federal Lands Highway

• Tamara Redmon, Office of Safety

• Matthew Zeller, Office of Operations 

• Abdul Zineddin, Office of Safety

NPS Active Transportation Guidebook
xi

Centers for Disease Control and Prevention

• David Brown, Physical Activity and Health Branch

• Kristine Day, Physical Activity and Health Branch

Additional U.S. DOT Volpe Center Support

• Renee Blackburn

• Walker Harrison

• Kimberly Higgins

• Jacob Korn

• Rahi Patel 

• Amber Shackelford

• Alex Wilkerson 

NPS Active Transportation Guidebook
xii

REPORT DOCUMENTATION PAGE Form Approved

OMB No. 0704-0188

Public reporting burden for this collection of information is estimated to average 1 hour per response, including the time for reviewing 

instructions, searching existing data sources, gathering and maintaining the data needed, and completing and reviewing the collection of 

information. Send comments regarding this burden estimate or any other aspect of this collection of information, including suggestions 

for reducing this burden, to Washington Headquarters Services, Directorate for Information Operations and Reports, 1215 Jefferson Davis 

Highway, Suite 1204, Arlington, VA 22202-4302, and to the Office of Management and Budget, Paperwork Reduction Project (0704-

0188), Washington, DC 20503.

1. AGENCY USE ONLY (Leave blank) 2. REPORT DATE

July 2023

3. REPORT TYPE AND DATES COVERED

Final Report

4. TITLE AND SUBTITLE

National Park Service Active Transportation Guidebook 

5a. FUNDING NUMBERS

VU16A1/VM593

6. AUTHOR(S)

2023: Annisha Borah, Alexandra McNally, Amy Plovnick (Volpe Center), 

Krista Sherwood, Wayne Emington, Stephanie Tepperberg (National Park Service)

2018: Jessica Baas, David Daddio, Amalia Holub, Alexandra McNally, Amy Plovnick (Volpe 

Center)

Krista Sherwood (National Park Service)

Laurie Miskimins (Central Federal Lands Highway Division)

5b. CONTRACT NUMBER

7. PERFORMING ORGANIZATION NAME(S) AND ADDRESS(ES)

U.S. Department of Transportation

John A. Volpe National Transportation Systems Center

Transportation Planning Division

55 Broadway

Cambridge, MA 02142-1093

8. PERFORMING ORGANIZATION 

REPORT 

DOT-VNTSC-NPS-17-02

9. SPONSORING/MONITORING AGENCY NAME(S) AND ADDRESS(ES)

Krista Sherwood 

National Park Service 

1849 C Street NW

Washington, DC 20005

10. SPONSORING/MONITORING

 AGENCY REPORT NUMBER

999/136171

11. SUPPLEMENTARY NOTES

12a. DISTRIBUTION/AVAILABILITY STATEMENT

Public distribution/availability

12b. DISTRIBUTION CODE

13. ABSTRACT 

The NPS Active Transportation Guidebook is intended to serve as a resource to parks and their partners, and inspire them to pursue 

enhancements to active transportation to and within parks. This Guidebook contains 10 chapters that cover policy, infrastructure 

design, and programs that parks and partners can pursue to improve walking and bicycling opportunities for visitors and surrounding 

communities.

14. SUBJECT TERMS

16. PRICE CODE

15. NUMBER OF PAGES

177

17. SECURITY CLASSIFICATION

 OF REPORT

Unclassified

18. SECURITY CLASSIFICATION

 OF THIS PAGE

Unclassified

19. SECURITY CLASSIFICATION

 OF ABSTRACT

Unclassified

20. LIMITATION OF 

ABSTRACT

Unlimited

NPS Active Transportation Guidebook
xiii

Acronyms

Acronym Full Name

AASHTO American Association of State Highway and 

Transportation Officials

ABA Architectural Barriers Act

ADA Americans with Disabilities Act

ART Anacostia Riverwalk Trail

BAB Bright Angel Bicycles

CDC Centers for Disease Control and Prevention

CDOT Colorado Department of Transportation

CE Categorical Exclusion

CFR Code of Federal Regulations

CSS Context Sensitive Solutions

CUA Commercial Use Authorization

CVTS Collaborative Visitor Transportation Survey

DDOT District of Columbia Department of 

Transportation 

DNR Department of Natural Resources

DOI Department of Interior

DOT Department of Transportation

DSC Denver Service Center

EA Environmental Assessment

e-bike Electric bicycle

EIS Environmental Impact Statement

e-MTB Electric mountain bike

EPA Environmental Protection Agency

e-scooter Electric scooter

Fat bike Fat-tire bicycle

FedRAMP Federal Risk and Authorization Management 

Program

FHWA Federal Highway Administration

FLH Federal Lands Highway

FLMA Federal Land Management Agency

FLTP Federal Lands Transportation Program

FLAP Federal Lands Access Program

FMSS Facility Management Software System

FTA Federal Transit Administration

FWS U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service

GIS Geographic Information Systems

Acronym Full Name

GMP General Management Plan

GPP Green Parks Plan

GTSR Going-to-the-Sun Road

IMARS Incident Management, Analysis, and Reporting 

System 

LRTP Long Range Transportation Plan

MAP-21 Moving Ahead for Progress in the 21st Century 

Act 

MOA Memorandum of Agreement

MOU Memorandum of Understanding

MPO Metropolitan Planning Organization 

MUTCD Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices

NACTO National Association of City Transportation 

Officials

NCHRP National Cooperative Highway Research 

Program

 NEPA National Environmental Policy Act

NHTSA National Highway Traffic Safety Administration 

NLRTP National Long Range Transportation Plan

NPS National Park Service

NRSS National Roadway Safety Strategy

NSC National Safety Council

NTSB National Transportation Safety Board

OPDMD Other power-driven mobility device

PBIC Pedestrian and Bicycle Information Center

RSA Road Safety Audit

RTCA Rivers Trails and Conservation Assistance 

Program

SETP Self Evaluation Transition Plan

STEP Safe Transportation for Every Pedestrian

SUP Special Use Permit

 TIP Transportation Improvement Program

TRB Transportation Research Board

USBR U.S. Bicycle Route System

UPS United Parcel Service

U.S.C. United States Code

U.S. DOT United States Department of Transportation

Volpe Center U.S. DOT Volpe National Transportation Systems 

Center

NPS Active Transportation Guidebook
xiv

Executive Summary

This Guidebook is intended to assist and inspire parks 

and their partners to identify and pursue opportunities 

that enhance active transportation to and within 

national parks. It introduces a variety of policies, 

programs, and types of infrastructure that support 

and promote the use of active transportation within 

and around national parks. The resources referenced 

throughout this Guidebook may help those who want 

to learn more, do more, and implement programs 

and projects that support walking and bicycling. The 

Guidebook highlights many park-related examples 

and best practices in addition to innovative examples 

from other contexts, with the goal of presenting ideas 

for improving bicycling and walking opportunities for 

national parks and their surrounding communities.

The Guidebook covers a number of topics and 

strategies to support walking and biking to and 

within national parks and surrounding communities, 

including:

• Providing context and background information on 

policies and planning activities related to active 

transportation, at both local and national levels.

• Planning and deploying active transportation 

infrastructure, such as pedestrian pathways, 

multiuse trails, bike lanes, signs/wayfinding, 

pavement markings, and bicycle racks.

• Evaluating and improving safety for active 

transportation modes through strategies such as 

infrastructure improvements, safety education, 

enforcement, and emergency response.

• Offering activities and programs that provide 

park visitors the opportunity to bicycle or walk 

while learning about or experiencing the park in 

new ways.

• Holding open streets or “car-free” events that 

enable visitors to enjoy walking and bicycling on 

park roads without automobile traffic.

• Implementing bikeshare or bicycle rental 

systems in coordination with nearby communities 

or other partners.

• Encouraging employees to incorporate active 

transportation into their workplace routines 

through offering employee bicycle fleets, active 

transportation incentives, and employee wellness 

programs.

• Becoming aware of and planning for innovative 

trends and technologies related to bicycling 

and walking, such as bicycle and pedestrian count 

data, mobile applications and crowdsourced data, 

electric bicycles and fat tire bicycles, ridehailing, 

micromobility, and the implications of automated 

vehicles on pedestrian and bicycle safety and 

infrastructure.

These types of efforts to enhance active transportation 

can benefit parks and surrounding communities in 

many ways. Many parks are experiencing an increase 

in visitation combined with aging infrastructure 

and roads that struggle to handle additional cars. 

Active transportation can help parks accommodate 

growing visitation while also offering a unique 

experience for the visitor. It can also help reduce 

vehicle congestion and mitigate some of the negative 

impacts to resources that vehicles cause, such as 

air, light, and noise pollution and wildlife-vehicle 

collisions. Investments in infrastructure and programs 

for walking and bicycling can also provide visitors 

with more options for getting to and around parks, 

improve visitor access, and provide visitors and staff 

opportunities for increased physical activity, improved 

health and wellness, and unique experiences in natural 

settings.

Partnership efforts between parks, surrounding 

communities, and other partners aimed at improving 

active transportation help to facilitate better 

connections for walking and bicycling between and 

within the park and community, as well as form 

lasting working relationships between park staff 

and local governments or other local organizations. 

Active transportation improvements and related 

opportunities can also support local economies in 

gateway communities by attracting visitors and 

supporting local businesses such as bicycle shops, 

sports stores, and restaurants.

NPS Active Transportation Guidebook
xv

Figure ES-1: An Everglades National Park Bike Patrol volunteer on the Shark Valley Scenic Loop in Florida. (Source: NPS)

In addition to describing policies, programs, and infrastructure that parks can implement to promote active 

transportation, the Guidebook also provides practical information on recommended steps to help parks, partners, 

and surrounding communities to begin their active transportation efforts. These steps are:

Consider how active transportation can help support park goals. 

Review the park’s Foundation Document and other planning documents to determine if expanding active 

transportation could help the park meet its mission or address identified transportation challenges. Developing 

an understanding of how active transportation helps to meet park goals can build internal support and justify 

investments in active transportation.

Inventory existing conditions and needs. 

Evaluate the existing infrastructure, programs, or policies within and surrounding the park that support or could be 

improved to enhance active transportation. Working with residents and stakeholders, particularly those who walk 

and bicycle in the park, determine whether there are certain locations that are particularly unsafe for walking and 

bicycling, and whether or not a visitor could enter the park from a nearby community safely on foot or by bicycle. 

In addition to identifying problem spots, look at what is working well, and how that could be expanded. 

NPS Active Transportation Guidebook
xvi

Develop proposals. 

Based on the existing conditions analysis and stakeholder input, develop project ideas for how active transportation 

in and around the park could be improved or enhanced. This may be through developing new infrastructure, but it 

could also be through educational programs or organized tours, changes in policies (such as a lower entrance fee 

for visitors arriving by bicycle rather than by car), initiating a bicycle rental or bikeshare program, or one or more of 

the numerous other strategies highlighted within this Guidebook. 

Consider incorporating active transportation into ongoing 

transportation initiatives. 

Often, active transportation improvements can be incorporated into existing transportation projects at a relatively 

low cost. For example, if a planning study (such as a transportation plan or visitor use management plan) is 

conducted, ensure that walking and bicycling are also considered. If a road is being repaved, consider adding a 

bike lane or crosswalk into the roadway design. Parks can also coordinate with local or regional transportation 

initiatives to build out connected bicycle and pedestrian networks. 

Identify potential partners. 

Partners can play an integral role in successfully pursuing, planning, and implementing active transportation 

projects that benefit parks and the surrounding communities. Potential partners are as wide-ranging and diverse 

as the parks themselves and can bring a variety of skills and resources to a project. Potential partners could include 

gateway communities, regional planning organizations, state and local transportation departments, friends of the 

park groups, national walking and bicycling organizations, public health agencies or healthcare organizations, and 

many others. 

Think creatively about funding sources. 

Funding for active transportation projects and programs can come from a variety of sources, including those 

beyond traditional NPS transportation and operational funding. For example, funding may be leveraged through 

partnerships, formal agreements, and external federal funding sources administered through state and local 

governments or through regional or metropolitan planning organizations.1

 Funding could also come through 

grants from nonprofits or corporations, or through concessions agreements or donations, and other philanthropic 

partnerships.2

 

Monitor and evaluate improvements. 

After implementing active transportation projects and programs, consider how these have changed park and 

surrounding conditions, visitation trends, and the visitor experience. Continually evaluating performance will help 

to identify what is working well, where modifications might be needed, and what strategies could be expanded. 

NPS Active Transportation Guidebook
xvii

Figure ES-2: Valley Forge National Historical Park, Pennsylvania. (Source: U.S. DOT Volpe Center)

End Notes

1 NPS External Transportation Funding Opportunities for National Parks (2018).

https://www.nps.gov/subjects/transportation/funding.htm

2 NPS Director’s Order #21: Donations and Philanthropic Partnerships (2016). 

https://www.nps.gov/policy/DOrders/DO_21.htm

NPS Active Transportation Guidebook
xviii

Table of Contents

Introduction

Introduction IN-1

Guidebook Organization IN-1

What is Active Transportation? IN-3

Benefits of Active Transportation and Support for NPS Goals and Strategic Initiatives IN-3

Building Partnerships Beyond Park Boundaries IN-4

Chapter 1: Legal and Policy Framework

Introduction 1-1

National Park Service Policies Relevant for Active Transportation 1-1

Additional Federal Provisions Relevant in National Parks 1-3

U.S. Department of Transportation Pedestrian and Bicycle Funding and Priorities 1-4

Coordination at the State and Local Levels 1-5

Appendix 1-6

Additional Resources 1-7

Chapter 2: Planning and Elements of Project Development

Introduction 2-1

What is Transportation Planning? 2-1

Transportation Planning within the NPS 2-1

Linking to State and Regional Transportation Planning 2-4

Transportation Funding Opportunities 2-6

Steps in Park Level Planning and Project Scoping 2-6

Additional Resources 2-11

Chapter 3: Infrastructure and Multimodal Connectivity

Introduction 3-1

Infrastructure Policy and Design Guidelines 3-1

Types of Pedestrian Infrastructure 3-2

Types of Bicycle Infrastructure 3-4

Types of Multiuse Infrastructure 3-10

Wayfinding and Signs for Bicyclists and Pedestrians 3-13

Strategies to Enhance Multimodal Connectivity 3-16

Additional Resources 3-17

Chapter 4: Bicyclist and Pedestrian Safety

Introduction 4-1

National Initiatives & Principles Supporting Active Transportation Safety 4-1

Improving Safety with Engineering (Infrastructure) 4-3

Improving Safety with Education and Information 4-11

Improving Safety with Enforcement Strategies and Emergency Response 4-14

Additional Resources 4-16

NPS Active Transportation Guidebook
xix

Chapter 5: Partnerships and Funding

Introduction 5-1

Promoting Active Transportation through Partnerships 5-1

Potential Partners 5-2

Strategies for Building Connections between Parks and Communities 5-6

Funding and Partnerships 5-9

Local and Private Funding 5-10

Formalizing Partnerships through Agreements 5-11

Additional Resources 5-14

Chapter 6: Visitor Activities and Programs

Introduction 6-1

Bicycle and Walking Tours and Classes 6-2

Long-Distance Active Travel 6-5

Policies Promoting Active Travel 6-6

Communication and Visitor Outreach 6-7

Considerations for Implementing Active Transportation Programs 6-10

Additional Resources 6-12

Chapter 7: Open Streets Opportunities in National Parks

Introduction 7-1

Existing NPS Car-Free Opportunities and Programs 7-2

Open Streets Best Practices and Key Considerations for National Parks 7-5

Getting Started Guide for Car-Free Opportunities 7-8

Additional Resources 7-10

Chapter 8: Bicycle Rental and Bikeshare Systems

Introduction 8-1

Overview of Bicycle Rentals 8-2

Overview of Bike Share Systems 8-5

Additional Resources 8-12

Chapter 9: Employee Programs and Park Operational Uses

Introduction 9-1

Benefits of Workplace Active Transportation 9-1

Use of Employee Bicycle Fleets 9-2

Employee Active Transportation Programs and Incentives 9-6

Additional Resources 9-8

Chapter 10: Innovative Technologies and Emerging Trends

Introduction 10-1

The Value of Active Transportation Data 10-1

Collecting Bicycle and Pedestrian Count Data 10-2

Crowdsourced Nonmotorized Travel Data 10-5

Utilizing Mobile Apps for NPS Visitor Experience 10-6

Use and Considerations for Electric Bikes and National Parks 10-7

Use and Considerations for Fat Bikes and National Parks 10-10

Considerations for E-Scooters and Micromobility 10-13

Additional Resources 10-16

NPS Active Transportation Guidebook
Sleeping Bear Dunes National Lakeshore, Michigan (Source: NPS)

Introduction

This chapter introduces the content and organization of the Guidebook. It outlines the 

benefits of active transportation for parks and surrounding communities, and details NPS 

strategic goals and programs that active transportation supports. 
IN-1 Introduction

Introduction

Traveling to or exploring national parks by foot, 

bicycle, or other nonmotorized means provides visitors 

with opportunities to experience natural, cultural, and 

historical places in unique ways. Active transportation 

infrastructure and programs offer a broad range of 

benefits to parks and surrounding communities, and 

help parks and communities better manage vehicle 

congestion, promote resource preservation, and 

accommodate current and increased visitation by 

providing alternatives to driving. Active transportation 

plays a key role in connecting communities with parks 

and providing access for people who do not drive or 

have a car.

With many national parks historically designed 

for motorized vehicle access, new approaches are 

needed to offer alternative ways to access parks and 

to support visitors of all backgrounds and abilities 

in safely walking and bicycling in and around parks. 

These changes can take the form of installing new 

infrastructure, but they can also involve implementing 

programs or educational activities to promote walking 

and bicycling.

This Guidebook was developed through a 

collaboration of bicycle and pedestrian professionals, 

transportation experts, National Park Service (NPS) 

staff, and partners. It is intended as a resource for 

parks, partners, and gateway communities interested 

in encouraging and promoting nonmotorized access, 

particularly walking and bicycling, to and within 

national parks. The goal of this document is to inspire 

NPS staff as well as community, tribal, and local 

government partners to consider potential areas of 

improvement for multimodal access and connectivity. 

The Guidebook also highlights a variety of resources, 

both within the NPS and external to the agency, that 

may be helpful in developing ideas and implementing 

projects and programs.

Opportunities for improving walking and bicycling to 

and within a national park can be diverse and reflect 

the unique environment of the park and surrounding 

community. Information in this Guidebook is 

applicable to a wide range of contexts and settings, 

from small, urban historic sites, to large, remote 

parks with extensive road networks. The importance 

of collaboration with partners in the surrounding 

community is also emphasized throughout the 

Guidebook, as partnerships can help advance the 

development of active transportation infrastructure 

and programs for parks of all sizes.

The Guidebook focuses on several topic areas, 

highlighted below, and incorporates case studies 

and best practices as examples for success and for 

challenges that may arise.

Guidebook Organization

The Guidebook contains visual cues to highlight 

examples, key takeaways, and important points for 

the reader:

This symbol indicates an in-text NPS example.

Blue boxes indicate important facts or 

information relevant to the section’s 

content. 

Green boxes indicate important case 

studies relevant to the section’s content. 

Figure IN-1: A bicyclist in Fort Ord National Monument in California on 

Juan Bautista de Anza Trail. (Source: NPS)
IN-2 NPS Active Transportation Guidebook

The following provides a brief overview of the topic 

areas included within the subsequent chapters that 

make up the NPS Active Transportation Guidebook:

• Chapter 1. Legal and Policy Framework: 

Provides an overview of NPS specific laws, 

regulations, and policies, as well as federal, state, 

and local laws that can support parks and partners 

in pursuing bicycling and walking projects. 

• Chapter 2. Planning and Elements of 

Project Development: Provides an overview 

of transportation planning at the NPS and at 

state and regional agencies; NPS management 

authorities and park goals; and an overview 

of project development and inventorying 

active transportation infrastructure, programs, 

opportunities, and needs. 

• Chapter 3. Infrastructure and Multimodal 

Connectivity: Introduces types of active 

transportation infrastructure (e.g., pedestrian 

pathways, multiuse trails, bike lanes, signs/

wayfinding, pavement markings, bicycle racks, 

etc.) and strategies for improving connectivity 

between modes.

• Chapter 4. Bicyclist and Pedestrian Safety:

Provides resources to help parks and their 

partners evaluate and improve safety for active 

transportation modes. It discusses safety strategies 

centered around the “four E’s” of transportation 

safety: engineering, education, enforcement, and 

emergency response.

• Chapter 5. Partnerships and Funding: Explains 

the benefits of and purposes for partnerships 

and physical connections with surrounding 

communities, partner funding opportunities, and 

case studies of successful active transportation 

partnerships.

• Chapter 6. Visitor Activities and Programs:

Discusses visitor programming related to guided 

tours, special events, bicycle travel policies and 

touring routes, as well as policy considerations.

• Chapter 7. Open Streets Opportunities in 

National Parks: Explores the potential benefits 

of open streets, or “car-free” opportunities in 

national parks and provides best practices based 

on existing case studies. 

• Chapter 8. Bicycle Rental and Bikeshare 

Systems: Discusses types of bikeshare and bicycle 

rental systems, opportunities and constraints, and 

case studies.

• Chapter 9. Employee Programs and Park 

Operational Uses: Explores opportunities to 

support and promote active transportation for 

employees such as incentive programs and bicycle 

fleets used for operations activities.

• Chapter 10. Innovative Technologies and 

Emerging Trends: Discusses other emerging 

topics, such as bicycle and pedestrian counts, 

electric bicycles (e-bikes), fat tire bicycles, and the 

implications of automated vehicles on pedestrian 

and bicycle safety and infrastructure. 

NPS Mission

The National Park Service 

preserves unimpaired the 

natural and cultural resources 

and values of the National Park 

System for the enjoyment, 

education, and inspiration of 

this and future generations. The 

Park Service cooperates with 

partners to extend the benefits 

of natural and cultural resource 

conservation and outdoor 

recreation throughout this 

country and the world.1
IN-3 Introduction

What is Active 

Transportation?

The NPS defines active transportation as any form 

of human-powered transportation that uses physical 

activity to travel from one destination to another.

Pedestrians (including hikers and people with 

mobility aids such as wheelchairs)

Bicyclists (including people using electric bikes)

Although this Guidebook primarily focuses on 

pedestrians (including people using mobility aids such 

as wheelchairs) and bicyclists, active transportation 

can encompass a variety of nonmotorized 

transportation modes, such as hiking, in-line 

skating, roller skating, skateboarding, ice skating, 

snowshoeing, cross-country skiing, dog mushing, 

backpacking, canoeing, or kayaking.

Many bicycling and hiking trips to and within national 

parks have both a transportation and recreational 

purpose and often use the same infrastructure, 

such as multiuse trails or bicycle racks. While this 

Guidebook has a greater focus on transportation, 

many topics support both active transportation and 

recreation. 

Benefits of Active 

Transportation and Support 

for NPS Goals and Strategic 

Initiatives 

Providing active transportation opportunities offers 

a broad range of benefits to parks and surrounding 

communities, while supporting the NPS mission and 

strategic goals. These benefits include: 

• Resource Protection: Helping to avoid and 

mitigate the negative impacts of automobiles 

on air quality and carbon emissions, wildlife, 

and other natural resources within national 

parks.

• Visitor Experience: Enabling visitors to 

experience parks in a more natural setting, 

without the noise or disturbance of vehicles.

• Equitable Access: Providing access 

opportunities for underserved communities, 

such as individuals with disabilities and those 

who do not own a vehicle or who do not 

drive. Ensuring equitable access requires 

recognizing that each person has different 

circumstances and allocating the resources 

needed to achieve equal outcomes.

• Public Health: Providing meaningful and fun 

ways to be physically active, as well as reap the 

physical, mental, social, and spiritual health 

benefits of being outside in a park or natural 

setting.

• Congestion Relief: Helping to relieve vehicle 

congestion and accommodate increasing 

visitation by providing alternatives to driving.

• Economic and Social Benefits: Promoting 

economic growth by attracting visitors who 

will then support local businesses (e.g., bike 

shops, sports stores, restaurants), providing 

jobs and contributing to the quality of life 

for surrounding communities. In some cases, 

active transportation opportunities may also 

increase visitation outside of a park’s typical 

peak season.

In addition to the benefits described above, providing 

opportunities for active transportation to and within 

our national parks can advance many agency and 

Department strategic goals, which generally include: 

• Reducing Congestion:

The Congestion Management Program2

promotes multiple strategies to reduce vehicle 

congestion to and within parks, including the 

provision of motorized and nonmotorized 

alternatives to the private vehicle and the 

incorporation of bicycle and pedestrian 

facilities and infrastructure.
IN-4 NPS Active Transportation Guidebook

• Improving Safety: 

The Transportation Safety Program3

promotes engineering, education, 

enforcement, and emergency services safety 

strategies to reduce the likelihood and severity 

of traffic crashes, including those related to 

active transportation.

• Improving Accessibility: 

The Accessibility Program4

 is committed 

to ensuring that people with disabilities have 

equal opportunity to benefit from facilities, 

programs, services, and activities in the 

National Park System whether they are indoors 

or outdoors. The Accessibility Strategic 

Plan5

 is a five-year strategic plan that discusses 

approaches for ensuring that national parks 

can be enjoyed by individuals with disabilities.

• Confronting Climate Change:

The Climate Change Response Program6

advances efforts to address the effects of 

climate change across the breadth of the 

National Park System.

The Green Parks Plan (GPP)7

 promotes 

sustainable park operations and management, 

the reduction of greenhouse gas emissions, 

and environmental stewardship. The GPP 

“Green our Rides” goal is to reduce 

transportation-related greenhouse gas 

emissions, which account for 40 percent of 

NPS emissions according to the GPP. The 

Climate Friendly Parks Program8

 is a 

partnership between the U.S. Environmental 

Protection Agency (EPA) and the NPS 

that protects parks’ natural and cultural 

resources and ensures their preservation for 

future generations. Reducing fuel use and 

greenhouse gas emissions from park facilities 

and operations is one goal of this program.

• Encouraging Healthy Communities:

The NPS Office of Public Health promotes the 

health and well-being of park visitors through 

Healthy Parks Healthy People US.

9

 This 

program recognizes and promotes the health 

benefits of parks and public lands to build 

upon the contributions that parks play in 

creating healthy communities.

• Advancing Equity, Inclusion, and Access:

The NPS Office of Relevancy, Diversity, 

and Inclusion12 is a champion for an 

organizational culture that is increasingly 

inclusive and participatory, which values the 

diverse ideas, experience and background of 

every individual, and empowers an innovative, 

flexible and resilient NPS to engage the 

opportunities and challenges of the future.

In 2022, the Department of the Interior 

released its first Equity Action Plan.

13 This 

plan lays the foundation to achieve outcomes 

that remove barriers to equal opportunity, 

including equitable access to parks, and deliver 

resources and benefits equitably to all.

• Advancing Transportation Innovation:

The NPS protects park resources and provides 

access to millions of visitors each year by 

planning, implementing, and managing 

innovative transportation systems. The 

Emerging Mobility10 program supports the 

research and implementation of emerging 

transportation trends across the park system, 

including electric vehicles and charging, 

micromobility, and traveler information 

technologies. In 2021, the Department of 

the Interior (DOI) and the U.S. Department 

of Transportation (U.S. DOT) signed a 

memorandum of understanding11 to 

enhance collaboration on transportation 

innovation efforts in the National Park System.

Building Partnerships 

Beyond Park Boundaries

This Guidebook encourages park staff and 

their partners to focus on active transportation 

infrastructure and programs both within and outside 

of park boundaries to create meaningful connections. 

Partnerships between parks and local communities 

and regional planning agencies (i.e., rural and 

metropolitan planning organizations, economic 

development agencies, and local transportation 

departments) can improve physical connections, 

provide joint programming support, develop projects 

of mutual benefit, share maintenance of facilities, and 

leverage funding. The Partnerships and Funding

chapter of this Guidebook provides more information 

and best practices for local partnerships.
IN-5 Introduction

End Notes

1

 NPS Mission Statement (2021). https://www.nps.gov/aboutus/index.htm

2

 NPS Congestion Management Program (2021). https://www.nps.gov/orgs/1548/congestion-managementprogram.htm

3

 NPS Accessibility (2021). https://www.nps.gov/subjects/accessibility/index.htm

4

 NPS Transportation Safety (2018). https://www.nps.gov/subjects/transportation/safety.htm

5

 NPS All In! Accessibility in the National Park Service 2015-2020. https://www.nps.gov/aboutus/upload/All_In_

Accessibility_in_the_NPS_2015-2020_FINAL.pdf

6

 NPS Climate Change Response Program (2021). https://www.nps.gov/orgs/ccrp/index.htm

7

 NPS Green Parks (2021). https://www.nps.gov/greenparksplan/

8

 NPS Climate Friendly Parks Program (2021). https://www.nps.gov/subjects/climatechange/cfpprogram.htm

9

 NPS Healthy Parks Healthy People (2022). https://www.nps.gov/subjects/healthandsafety/health-benefits-of-parks.

htm

10 NPS Emerging Mobility (2022). https://www.nps.gov/subjects/transportation/emerging-mobility.htm

11 Memorandum of Understanding between the Department of the Interior and the Department of Transportation 

Regarding Transportation Innovation in the National Park System (2021). https://www.nps.gov/orgs/1548/

upload/2021-mou-between-doi-and-dot-re-transportation-in-parks.pdf

12 NPS Office of Relevancy, Diversity and Inclusion (2021). https://www.nps.gov/orgs/1244/index.htm

13 Department of the Interior Equity Action Plan (2022). https://www.doi.gov/sites/doi.gov/files/eo13985-02-10-

2022-doi-equity-action-plan-final-with-cover.pdf 
Fort Ord National Monument, California (Source: Bhoj Rai)

Chapter 1: Legal and Policy Framework

This chapter outlines the framework of laws, regulations, and policies that can support 

the NPS and its partners in pursuing active transportation projects. It covers key topics 

such as accessibility and environmental compliance, describes relevant initiatives from the

U.S. Department of Transportation, and discusses how to coordinate with transportation 

partners at the state and local levels.
1-1 Chapter 1: Legal and Policy Framework

Introduction

Familiarity with laws, regulations, policies, guidance, 

and initiatives relevant to active transportation 

provides an important foundation to successfully 

pursue and advance projects and programs that 

support walking and bicycling. This chapter provides 

an overview of NPS- specific regulations and policies, 

as well as other federal, state, and local laws that 

can help support the NPS and its partners in pursuing 

projects that encourage walking and bicycling in 

parks.

Service-wide policies, including the NPS Management 

Policies (2006), and regulations, including the NPS 

Bike Rule and E-Bike Rule, guide decision making 

for how certain active transportation projects can be 

implemented on NPS-managed roads and property. 

Unit-level regulations, many of which are laid out in 

a park’s Superintendent’s Compendium, have specific 

requirements relating to the particular park.

In addition to where the project is implemented, the 

funding source for the project often dictates what 

regulations apply. Federal laws and policies, including 

the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) and 

accessibility guidelines, apply to any project that 

receives federal funding. Since a majority of funding 

for transportation-related projects is acquired through 

federal transportation funding programs, the U.S. 

Department of Transportation (U.S. DOT) often plays a 

major role in ensuring federally mandated policies and 

regulations are followed. Finally, state, regional, and 

local governments may also have laws and policies 

related to walking and bicycling that could affect 

projects in parks and gateway communities.

National Park Service 

Policies Relevant for Active 

Transportation

Today, the NPS manages over 400 park units within 

the National Park System. Site management decisions 

take place primarily at the park level, as each park 

unit is designated for its own unique and significant 

qualities and values representing our natural and 

cultural heritage. However, regional- and national-level 

NPS policies or other federal mandates also guide park 

staff in their decision-making processes. The following 

provides an overview of laws, regulations, and policies 

that are specific to the National Park System; however, 

they may also influence some partnership projects.

NPS Site Managing Authorities: Sites administered 

by the NPS are established either by an act of 

Congress through enabling legislation or by 

presidential proclamation pursuant to the Antiquities 

Act. The enabling legislation or proclamation typically 

identifies the purpose of the designated site, defines 

the boundaries, dictates operating conditions that may 

apply, and specifies certain uses and activities that are 

allowed and uses that are prohibited.

The NPS must manage each site in accordance with 

that site’s enabling legislation or proclamation. The 

enabling legislation or proclamation also provide the 

NPS with certain regulating and authorizing abilities. 

For instance, they might authorize the NPS to allow 

or prohibit certain recreational uses, or they might 

include a directive to manage an area based on certain 

values or priorities that were identified in the enabling 

legislation. There may also be authorities included that 

allow the NPS to enter into agreements in order to 

fulfill the designated purpose, intent, and mandates.

For new trails, the NPS must publish a special 

regulation authorizing bicycle use. For example, in 

2015, the NPS published a special regulation allowing 

the superintendent of Bryce Canyon National Park in 

Utah to designate 6.2 miles of multiuse trail for bicycle 

use in accordance with the NPS Bike Rule.5,6
1-2 NPS Active Transportation Guidebook

NPS Management Policies: Management Policies1

is the highest of three levels of guidance in the NPS 

Directives System. Management Policies, together 

with Director’s Orders and reference manuals or 

handbooks, comprise a comprehensive library of policy 

resources. Management Policies sets the framework 

and provides the foundational policies for managing 

the National Park System. It outlines key policy 

principles, identifies the authorities that generally 

govern park management, and provides guidance 

on various management topics, such as natural and 

cultural resources, interpretation, use of the parks, 

commercial visitor services, and more. Adherence 

to policy is mandatory unless specifically waived 

or modified in writing by the NPS Director (or the 

Secretary of the Interior or the Assistant Secretary). 

Several sections of Management Policies align with the 

goal of promoting active transportation. In particular, 

these policies are:

• Parks, when appropriate and feasible, 

should emphasize and encourage alternative 

transportation systems, including buses, trains, 

ferries, trams, and—preferably—nonmotorized 

modes of access to and moving within parks 

(section 9.2).

• Park roads are intended to enhance the quality 

of a visit while providing for safe and efficient 

travel with minimal or no impacts on natural 

and cultural resources; the primary purpose of 

a park’s road system is generally not to provide 

fast and convenient transportation (section 

9.2.1.1).

• When a park’s road system needs to be updated, 

parks may consider supplementing the road with 

other means of travel (section 9.2.1.1).

• Bicycle travel may be integrated with park 

roads when determined to be safe and feasible 

(section 9.2.2.4).

• Construction or modification of facilities, 

including transportation systems and their 

components, should be done in a manner that 

ensures they are accessible by persons with 

disabilities (section 9.1.2).

• The NPS has a responsibility to protect air quality 

under both the 1916 Organic Act and the Clean 

Air Act. Protecting and improving air quality in 

the parks will help to preserve natural resources 

and systems, preserve cultural resources, and 

sustain visitor enjoyment, human health, and 

scenic vistas (section 4.7.1).

Unit-Specific Superintendent’s Compendium: A 

Superintendent’s Compendium outlines the specific 

regulations applicable in a given park. It may include 

regulations relating to active transportation, such 

as roads and trails on which bicycles are allowed or 

prohibited, or specific instances in which vehicles 

are restricted from a particular road. For example, 

the Superintendent’s Compendium for Great 

Smoky Mountains National Park2

 in Tennessee and 

North Carolina lists routes that are designated for 

nonmotorized bicycle use, including year round bicycle 

use on certain roads that are closed seasonally. In 

addition, the Compendium describes how motorized 

vehicles are restricted from the Cades Cove Loop 

Road on Wednesday and Saturday mornings in the 

summer. The document explains how this restricted 

access is in response to a large number of requests 

from the public to have an opportunity to enjoy the 

area’s wildlife, the historic and cultural resources, and 

natural beauty without the intrusion of motor vehicles.

NPS Bike Rule: The NPS developed the Bike Rule3

in 2012 to set standards for designating bicycle 

routes and managing bicycle use within park units 

throughout the National Park System (36 CFR 4.30).4

 

The rule states that within NPS units, the use of a 

bicycle is prohibited except on park roads, in parking 

areas, and on trails designated for bicycle use. The 

park superintendent may close any park road, parking 

area, or trail to bicycle use pursuant to certain criteria 

and procedures. The Bike Rule emphasizes the 

individual park planning process to decide whether or 

not bicycle use is appropriate on a trail in a national 

park. A superintendent may open an existing hiking 

or equestrian trail to bicycles or may designate a new 

trail for bicycles if the park:

• Completes a park planning document that 

addresses bicycle use on the specific trail;

• Completes either an environmental assessment 

or an environmental impact statement 

evaluating the effects of bicycle use in the park 

and on the specific trail; and

• Completes a written determination stating 

that the addition of bicycle use on the existing 

hiking or horse trail is consistent with the 

protection of the park area’s natural, scenic 

and aesthetic values, safety considerations, 

and management objectives, and will not 

disturb wildlife or park resources.
1-3 Chapter 1: Legal and Policy Framework

For new trails, the NPS must publish a special 

regulation authorizing bicycle use. For example, in 

2015, the NPS published a special regulation allowing 

the superintendent of Bryce Canyon National Park in 

Utah to designate 6.2 miles of multiuse trail for bicycle 

use in accordance with the NPS Bike Rule.5,6

NPS E-Bike Rule: NPS issued its final rule on electric 

bicycles (e-bikes) in December 2020 (36 CFR 4.30(i)).7

The rule states that park superintendents may allow 

e-bikes, or certain classes of e-bikes, on roads, parking 

areas, administrative roads, and trails that are open 

to traditional bicycles. Superintendents have the 

authority to limit or restrict e-bike use after taking into 

consideration public health and safety, natural and 

cultural resource protection, and other management 

activities and objectives. As parks implement this 

regulation, information regarding e-bikes and 

their potential effects will help superintendents 

and park managers make informed management 

decisions about e-bike allowances, enforcement, and 

communications. This will improve transportation and 

recreation access and the visitor experience in the 

National Park System.

Additional Federal 

Provisions Relevant in 

National Parks

Beyond the NPS policies discussed above, there are 

other federal provisions that need to be considered 

when advancing active transportation in national 

parks. The sections below discuss the Wilderness 

Act, accessibility guidelines and requirements, and 

environmental compliance (NEPA). 

Wilderness Act: The Wilderness Act of 19648

 bans 

“mechanical transport” in any designated wilderness 

area (Section 4(c)). Bicycles are considered a form of 

mechanical transport and therefore are not allowed 

in wilderness areas. Many national parks have either 

proposed or congressionally designated wilderness 

areas within park boundaries, where the NPS must 

prohibit bicycles. Parks can consider the impacts of the 

Wilderness Act on bicycling and exclude areas from 

wilderness designations that may later be slated for 

multiuse trails.

For example, in 2008, Sleeping Bear Dunes National 

Lakeshore in Michigan conducted a Wilderness Study9

that evaluated lands within Sleeping Bear Dunes 

National Lakeshore for possible recommendation 

to Congress for inclusion in the national wilderness 

preservation system. While the study identified a 

large area for consideration as a wilderness area, 

it specifically excluded a corridor along the main 

roadway through the lakeshore to allow for the 

eventual construction of a multiuse trail. Since 2008, 

the lakeshore has successfully leveraged funding for 

construction of several portions of the trail. If this 

corridor had not been excluded from the Wilderness 

Study area, the construction of the multiuse trail 

would not have been possible. In 2014, Congress 

designated over 32,000 acres of Sleeping Bear Dunes 

National Lakeshore as wilderness.

Accessibility Guidelines: The NPS is committed 

to providing access to its facilities, services, and 

programs, for all people including those with 

disabilities. NPS Management Policies10 and Director’s 

Order #4211 outline the accessibility guidelines for 

its facilities, which include the Architectural Barriers 

Act of 1968 and the Rehabilitation Act of 1973, 

and section 507 of the Americans with Disabilities 

Act (ADA). In 2010, the Department of Justice 

published revised regulations on implementing ADA 

requirements, allowing “other power-driven mobility 

devices (OPDMD)”12 to be used by individuals with 

mobility disabilities. It is important for park staff 

to be aware of this rule as these powered mobility 

devices often overlap with micromobility devices and 

e-bikes, but those using OPDMD should be considered 

nonmotorized users. In 2013, the U.S. Access Board 

issued a final rule13 for outdoor areas developed by 

the federal government, which became part of the 

Architectural Barriers Act Accessibility Standards.

14

The final rule provides detailed specifications for trails, 

picnic and camping areas, viewing areas, beach access 

routes, and other components of outdoor developed 

areas when either newly built or altered. The rule also 

outlines exceptions for situations where terrain and 

other factors make compliance impracticable. The rule 

applies to federal agencies that develop outdoor areas 

for recreational purposes, including the NPS, U.S. 

Forest Service, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Army 
1-4 NPS Active Transportation Guidebook

Corps of Engineers, Bureau of Land Management, and 

Bureau of Reclamation. More resources on accessibility 

specific to the NPS can be found on the Denver 

Service Center’s (DSC) Accessibility and Universal 

Design Standards webpage.15 

National Environmental Policy Act: The NPS 

is subject to the NEPA,16 passed by Congress in 

1969, which requires federal agencies to assess the 

environmental impact of their proposed actions 

prior to decision making. For the NPS, NEPA is a 

tool for evaluating the environmental impacts of its 

actions, while also involving the public in the decisionmaking process. Director’s Order #12,17 sets forth NPS 

policies and procedures to help NPS managers and 

staff meet NEPA requirements. The accompanying 

NEPA Handbook,18 updated in 2015, outlines the 

pathways of the NEPA process that a park may need 

to complete, depending on the size and scale of a 

project. The Planning and Elements of Project 

Development chapter contains more information 

on NEPA pathways, which include Categorical 

Exclusions (CE), Environmental Assessments (EA), and 

Environmental Impact Statements (EIS).

U.S. Department of 

Transportation Pedestrian 

and Bicycle Funding and 

Priorities

The majority of funding available to the NPS for 

transportation planning and projects comes from the 

U.S. DOT through the Federal Lands Transportation 

Program (FLTP) or in partnership with states, counties, 

or local entities through the Federal Lands Access 

Program (FLAP). Similarly, much of the funding for 

local transportation projects, including projects in 

communities in proximity to national parks, originates 

from federal-aid funding sources.

The U.S. DOT administers federal transportation 

funds according to laws set forth by Congress. The 

statutory provisions affecting bicycling and walking 

are codified in Titles 23 and 49 of the United States 

Code (U.S.C.).19 These codes outline the funding 

mechanisms, planning requirements, and policy 

tools necessary to create more walkable and bicyclefriendly communities. Titles 23 and 49 of the U.S.C. 

and supporting U.S. DOT guidance facilitate the 

implementation of the two codes. These provisions 

enable communities and national parks to invest 

federal funding in projects that improve the safety, 

convenience, and comfort of walking and bicycling 

for everyday travel. Provisions in 23 U.S.C. relating to 

active transportation can be found in the Appendix at 

the end of this chapter.

Active transportation is a priority for the U.S. DOT. 

The 2010 Policy Statement on Bicycle and Pedestrian 

Accommodation Regulations and Recommendations20

states that the U.S. DOT’s policy is to incorporate safe 

and convenient walking and bicycling facilities into 

transportation projects. Bicycle and pedestrian needs 

must be given “due consideration” under federal 

surface transportation law.21 Transportation agencies 

are encouraged to go beyond minimum standards to 

provide safe and convenient facilities for these modes. 

In recent years, the U.S. DOT has taken further 

action to improve pedestrian and bicycle safety 

and infrastructure. In 2016, the Federal Highway 

Administration (FHWA) released the 2016 Strategic 

Agenda for Pedestrian and Bicycle Transportation,

22 a 

framework to guide pedestrian and bicycle planning, 

design, and research efforts in the next five years. 

This agenda establishes a strategic, collaborative 

approach for making walking and bicycling viable 

transportation options for people of all ages and 

abilities in communities throughout the U.S. It 

also provides a framework for issues such as data 

collection and management, pedestrian and bicycle 

network implementation and documentation, 

research, training, initiatives, and national design 

guidance. Additionally, the FHWA released a guide on 

Small Town and Rural Multimodal Networks,

23 which 

is of particular relevance to many parks and gateway 

communities located in rural areas. For more U.S. DOT 

bicycle and pedestrian resources, see the Resources 

section at the end of this chapter.

In accordance with the Americans with Disabilities Act 

(ADA) of 199024 and Section 504 of the Rehabilitation 

Act,

25 ensuring that pedestrians with disabilities can 

safely use the transportation system is also a priority 

for the U.S. DOT. The FHWA’s ADA program26 works 

to ensure that recipients of federal aid and state and 
1-5 Chapter 1: Legal and Policy Framework

local entities that are responsible for roadways and 

pedestrian facilities do not discriminate on the basis 

of disability in any highway transportation program, 

activity, service, or benefit they provide to the general 

public; and to ensure that people with disabilities have 

equitable opportunities to use the public right-of-way 

system. A Department of Justice and Department of 

Transportation Joint Technical Assistance legislative 

interpretation document27 states that whenever 

streets, roadways, or highways are altered, state and 

local governments must provide curb ramps where 

street level pedestrian walkways cross curbs in order to 

ensure the accessibility and usability of the pedestrian 

walkway for persons with disabilities.

Coordination at the State 

and Local Levels

Most states have laws stating that bicyclists have 

the same rights and responsibilities as operators of 

automobiles. The League of American Bicyclists’ State 

Bike Laws website28 is one source for information on 

each state’s laws relating to bicycles. For example, the 

website includes information on safe passing laws 

requiring vehicles to leave a certain distance (e.g., 

three feet) when passing bicycles, laws requiring 

bicyclists to wear helmets, and laws specifying where 

bicyclists can and cannot ride on sidewalks. 

As required in federal transportation legislation 

(23 U.S.C. 217(d)), each state Department of 

Transportation (DOT) is directed to fund a Bicycle and 

Pedestrian position with the purpose of promoting 

bicycle and pedestrian facilities and programs 

throughout the state.29 The coordinator typically 

serves as a liaison within the agency for bicycle 

and pedestrian issues, a vital technical resource, 

and an important point of contact for regional and 

local agencies and user groups seeking to improve 

conditions for bicycling and walking. The FHWA also 

designates a bicycle and pedestrian point of contact 

in each of its 52 Division Offices (one in each state, 

the District of Columbia, and Puerto Rico).30 Parks, 

communities, or partners are encouraged to reach 

out to these individuals to understand state-specific 

law or policy that could impact proposed projects 

or programming. FHWA’s Office of Federal Lands 

Highway (FLH)31 also has staff in each of its three 

Division Offices (Central, Western, and Eastern) who 

can provide information on active transportation policy 

and funding sources in the federal lands context. Each 

of these Division Offices can help to identify technical 

resources and opportunities for planning or project 

collaboration. 

At the state and regional level, state and 

metropolitan transportation planning processes 

involve evaluating and coordinating regional and 

statewide transportation needs in order to identify 

short and long term project and funding priorities. 

Parks and their partners can work with the relevant 

state DOT and regional planning agency such as a 

metropolitan planning organization (MPO)32 or rural 

transportation planning organization to ensure that 

active transportation enhancements in their area are 

considered in this process.

State, regional, and local governments may have 

additional plans and policies relating to active 

transportation. These may include a statewide 

bicycle and pedestrian plan listing planned active 

transportation infrastructure within the area of focus, 

or a Complete Streets policy33 that requires balancing 

the needs of various users regardless of age or ability 

(including children, people with disabilities, and older 

adults) with multimodal transportation needs for 

motorists, transit users, bicyclists, and pedestrians in 

all planned or future implementation projects.

Figure 1-1: Visitors on a multiuse trail at Sleeping Bear Dunes 

National Lakeshore. (Source: NPS)
1-6 NPS Active Transportation Guidebook

Health and Active Transportation34

Data from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) report that 

walking and bicycling have declined compared to previous generations. 

These trends contribute to obesity, diabetes, heart disease, and other 

chronic health conditions. The CDC provides several transportation policy 

recommendations35 that promote active transportation, which can be 

considered for federal lands as well as their surrounding communities. Improving active 

transportation infrastructure is also a key strategy in CDC’s Active People, Healthy Nation 

initiativeSM36 which aims to help 27 million people become more physically active by 2027. 

Multi-sector partnerships including transportation, parks and recreation, public health 

professionals, and other sectors, can improve active transportation facilities through the 

lighting of sidewalks, multiuse trails, and recreational trails; creating safe roadway crossings; 

reducing motor vehicle traffic speed with street design that consider all roadway users; and 

improving pedestrian and bicycling connections to public transportation. In addition, the 

CDC suggests that communities, parks, and others making decisions about transportation 

infrastructure create guidelines for the inclusion of active transportation in planning, 

development, and building of transportation infrastructure. These recommended measures 

can have numerous benefits, including the improvement of respiratory and cardiovascular 

health, reduction of air pollutants, and creation of better planned and designed 

communities. 

Appendix

Provisions of Title 23 of the U.S. Code Relating to Active Transportation

The FHWA provides guidance on the bicycle and pedestrian legislation in Title 23 of the United States Code,37 which 

outlines the funding mechanisms, planning requirements, and policy tools necessary to create more walkable and 

bicycle-friendly communities. Provisions relating to active transportation include:

• State DOTs and MPOs must develop long range transportation plans (LRTP) that consider bicycle and pedestrian 

facilities and safety (23 U.S.C. 217). Federal land management agencies (FLMAs), including the NPS, must 

develop transportation planning procedures consistent with metropolitan and statewide planning processes (23 

U.S.C. 204).

• Each state is required to use a portion of its federal surface transportation funding to fund a bicycle and 

pedestrian coordinator position in its state DOT to promote and facilitate increased walking and bicycling by 

developing pedestrian and bicycle facilities, promoting these facilities, and conducting public education and 

safety programs (23 U.S.C. 217(d)).

• Title 23 also describes situations in which bicycles may not be allowed to use park roads. A provision included 

in the Moving Ahead for Progress in the 21st Century Act (MAP-21) in 2012 and continued in subsequent 

transportation funding legislation requires FMLAs to prohibit bicycles on park roads with a speed limit of 30 

miles per hour or greater when there is an adjacent paved bicycle path within 100 yards of the road unless the 

Secretary of the FLMA determines that the bicycle level of service on that roadway is rated B or higher (23 U.S.C. 

203(d)).38

• Bicycle transportation facilities and pedestrian walkways are eligible for funding under all major federal 

aid programs and the FLTP. The FHWA develops guidance for eligibility for pedestrian and bicycle funding 

opportunities.39
1-7 Chapter 1: Legal and Policy Framework

Additional Resources

CDC Active People, Healthy Nation – Tools for Action: Parks, Recreation, and Green Spaces (2022). 

https://www.cdc.gov/physicalactivity/activepeoplehealthynation/everyone-can-be-involved/parks-recreation-andgreen-spaces.html

FHWA Bike Network Mapping Idea Book (2016). 

https://www.fhwa.dot.gov/environment/bicycle_pedestrian/publications/bikemap_book/

FHWA Metropolitan Pedestrian and Bicycle Planning Handbook (2017). 

https://www.fhwa.dot.gov/planning/processes/pedestrian_bicycle/publications/mpo_handbook/index.cfm

FHWA Pedestrian and Bicycle Safety Guide and Countermeasure Selection System (PedSafe and BikeSafe). 

http://www.pedbikesafe.org/index.cfm

FHWA Statewide Pedestrian and Bicycle Planning Handbook (2014). 

https://www.fhwa.dot.gov/planning/processes/pedestrian_bicycle/publications/pedestrian_bicycle_handbook/

FLH Guide to Promoting Bicycling on Federal Lands (2008). 

http://www.pedbikeinfo.org/cms/downloads/01_promoting_bicycling_entire_document.pdf

League of American Bicyclists Bicycle Friendly America Program. http://www.bikeleague.org/bfa

NPS Transportation Program (2019). https://www.nps.gov/subjects/transportation/index.htm

NPS Denver Service Center Sustainable Trails (2019). https://www.nps.gov/articles/dsc-trails.htm

Western Transportation Institute Good Practices to Encourage Bicycling & Pedestrians on Federal Lands (2011). 

https://westerntransportationinstitute.org/wp-content/uploads/2018/02/TRIPTAC-BikePedPlan_ES.pdf

U.S. DOT Pedestrian and Bicycle Safety (2021). https://www.transportation.gov/pedestrian-bicycle-safety
1-8 NPS Active Transportation Guidebook

End Notes

1

 NPS Management Policies (2006). https://www.nps.gov/policy/MP_2006.pdf

2

 NPS Superintendent’s Compendium for Great Smoky Mountains National Park (2021). 

https://www.nps.gov/grsm/learn/management/superintendent-s-compendium.htm

3

 NPS Bike Use 36 CFR 4.30 Flow Chart (2012).

https://www.nps.gov/orgs/1804/upload/NPS-BikeUse-36CFR4-30-FlowChart_July2017_AF.pdf

4

 NPS Bicycles 36 CFR 4.30.

https://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/CFR-2012-title36-vol1/pdf/CFR-2012-title36-vol1-sec4-30.pdf

5

 NPS Bryce Canyon National Park Multi-Use Path Document List. 

https://parkplanning.nps.gov/documentsList.cfm?parkID=34&projectID=46606

6

 Federal Register, Special Regulations, Areas of the National Park System, Bryce Canyon National Park, Bicycling, 

36 CFR Part 7 (2015). https://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/FR-2015-04-30/pdf/2015-10170.pdf

7

 Federal Register, General Provisions, Electric Bicycles (2020). 

https://www.federalregister.gov/documents/2020/11/02/2020-22129/general-provisions-electric-bicycles

8

 NPS Wilderness Law & Policy (2021). https://www.nps.gov/subjects/wilderness/law-and-policy.htm

9

 NPS Sleeping Bear Dunes National Lakeshore, Wilderness Study (2008). 

https://parkplanning.nps.gov/document.cfm?parkID=165&projectId=14651&documentID=25026

10 NPS Management Policies 1.9.3 Accessibility for Persons with Disabilities (2006) 

https://www.nps.gov/subjects/policy/upload/MP_2006.pdf#page=27

11 NPS Director’s Order #42: Accessibility for Visitors with Disabilities in National Park Service Programs and Services 

(2000). https://www.nps.gov/policy/DOrders/DOrder42.html

12 U.S. Department of Justice Civil Rights Division ADA Requirements Wheelchairs, Mobility Aids, and Other PowerDriven Mobility Devices (2014). https://www.ada.gov/opdmd.pdf

13 U.S. Access Board Guidelines for Outdoor Developed Areas (2013). 

https://www.access-board.gov/aba/guides/chapter-10-outdoor/

14 U.S. Access Board Architectural Barriers Act Accessibility Standards.

https://www.access-board.gov/guidelines-and-standards/buildings-and-sites/about-the-aba-standards/aba-standards

15 NPS Accessibility & Universal Design Standards (2021). 

https://www.nps.gov/dscw/ds-accessibility-universal-design.htm

16 NPS NEPA Policy (2017). https://www.nps.gov/subjects/nepa/policy.htm

17 NPS Director’s Order #12: Conservation Planning, Environmental Impact Analysis and Decision-Making (2011). 

https://www.nps.gov/policy/DOrders/DO_12.pdf

18 NPS NEPA Handbook (2015). https://www.nps.gov/subjects/nepa/upload/NPS_NEPAHandbook_Final_508.pdf

19 FHWA Guidance on Bicycle and Pedestrian Legislation in Title 23 United States Code (U.S.C.) (2017). 

https://www.fhwa.dot.gov/environment/bicycle_pedestrian/legislation/sec217.cfm
1-9 Chapter 1: Legal and Policy Framework

20 U.S. DOT Policy Statement Bicycle and Pedestrian Accommodation Regulations (2010). 

https://www.fhwa.dot.gov/environment/bicycle_pedestrian/guidance/policy_accom.cfm

21 FHWA Bicycle and Pedestrian Program (2022). 

https://www.fhwa.dot.gov/environment/bicycle_pedestrian/guidance/

22 FHWA Strategic Agenda for Pedestrian and Bicycle Transportation (2016). 

https://www.fhwa.dot.gov/environment/bicycle_pedestrian/publications/strategic_agenda/fhwahep16086.pdf

23 FHWA Small Town and Rural Networks (2016). 

https://www.fhwa.dot.gov/environment/bicycle_pedestrian/publications/small_towns/fhwahep17024_lg.pdf

24 Americans with Disability Act (1990). https://www.ada.gov/pubs/adastatute08.pdf

25 U.S. Department of Labor Section 504, Rehabilitation Act of 1973. https://www.dol.gov/agencies/oasam/centersoffices/civil-rights-center/statutes/section-504-rehabilitation-act-of-1973

26 FHWA Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) and Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973 (504) (2021). 

https://www.fhwa.dot.gov/civilrights/programs/ada.cfm

27 Department of Justice/Department of Transportation Joint Technical Assistance on the Title II of the Americans 

with Disabilities Act Requirements to Provide Curb Ramps when Streets, Roads, or Highways are Altered through 

Resurfacing (2013). https://www.ada.gov/doj-fhwa-ta.htm

28 The League of American Bicyclists State Bike Laws. http://bikeleague.org/StateBikeLaws

29 FHWA State Bicycle and Pedestrian Coordinator (2022). 

https://www.fhwa.dot.gov/environment/bicycle_pedestrian/state_contacts.cfm

30 FHWA Division Office Bicycle and Pedestrian Coordinator (2022). 

https://www.fhwa.dot.gov/environment/bicycle_pedestrian/state_fhwa_contacts.cfm

31 FHWA Office of Federal Lands Highway Organizational Contact Information (2021). 

https://highways.dot.gov/federal-lands/about/contacts

32 FHWA Metropolitan Planning Organization (MPO) Database. https://www.planning.dot.gov/mpo/

33 FHWA Complete Streets. https://highways.dot.gov/complete-streets

34 CDC CDC Activity-Friendly Routes to Everyday Destinations (2022). 

https://www.cdc.gov/physicalactivity/activepeoplehealthynation/strategies-to-increase-physical-activity/activityfriendly-routes-to-everyday-destinations.html

35 CDC Transportation Recommendations (2018). https://www.cdc.gov/transportation/

36 CDC Active People, Healthy Nation (2022). 

https://www.cdc.gov/physicalactivity/activepeoplehealthynation/index.html

37 FHWA Bicycle and Pedestrian Planning, Program, and Project Development (2019). 

https://www.fhwa.dot.gov/environment/bicycle_pedestrian/guidance/guidance_2019.cfm

38 Federal Register Title 23 CFR 203. 

https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/USCODE-2001-title23/pdf/USCODE-2001-title23-chap2-sec203.pdf

39 FHWA Pedestrian and Bicycle Funding Opportunities (2021). 

https://www.fhwa.dot.gov/environment/bicycle_pedestrian/funding/funding_opportunities.cfm
Yellowstone National Park, Wyoming (Source: NPS)

Chapter 2: Planning and Elements of 

 Project Development

This chapter describes the basics of transportation planning as it applies within the NPS, as 

well as at the state and regional levels. It also covers related topics that can help parks and 

partners succeed in their active transportation projects, including acquiring transportation 

funding, resources for obtaining planning support, and project development at the park 

and the local levels.
2-1 Chapter 2: Planning and Elements of Project Development

Introduction

The previous chapter covered relevant laws, 

regulations, and policies that may influence or guide 

decision-making in active transportation efforts. This 

chapter builds upon the policy discussion by providing 

information on the basics of transportation planning 

as it applies within the NPS, as well as regionally and 

locally. The transportation system in each national park 

connects parks with their surrounding communities, 

and these often separate but connected systems 

require coordinated planning. By getting involved in 

the surrounding local transportation planning process, 

national park staff can build relationships with other 

transportation stakeholders, align park transportation 

needs and activities with state and regional priorities, 

and ensure important projects are included in 

transportation plans to become eligible for additional 

federal funding.

In addition to planning, project scoping and 

development are critical components to getting 

transportation infrastructure projects built. This 

chapter also provides an overview of project scoping 

at the park and the local levels. Capital projects can 

be developed in a number of ways depending on 

the type of need and project identified, stakeholders 

involved, and funding available. The project 

development process generally includes site-level 

planning and design, which encompasses planning 

studies, preliminary engineering, and environmental 

review. After site-level planning and design, projects 

typically move onto final design and construction.

This chapter gives an overview of project scoping and 

environmental review requirements for the NPS, which 

is meant to serve as a preliminary resource for the 

development of capital projects.

What is Transportation 

Planning?

Transportation planning is a comprehensive process 

for evaluating transportation needs and developing 

recommendations in a collaborative and meaningful 

way. Planning happens at various levels, including the 

federal, state, regional, tribal, and local levels, and 

allows for public involvement in setting long term 

transportation visions and goals to prioritize projects 

for transportation funding. Planning is a critical step 

for envisioning and implementing transportation 

projects. As it relates to active transportation, planning 

can ensure pedestrian and bicycling considerations 

are systematically and integrally considered alongside 

developing future transportation enhancement 

projects.

The planning process typically considers existing 

conditions, system performance, current and future 

multimodal connections, potential opportunities and 

challenges, as well as natural, cultural, historical, 

and environmental resource considerations, societal 

influences, and equity needs. It should engage 

stakeholders, identify future demand, analyze 

alternative solutions, consider all modal options, 

demonstrate how the preferred solution will meet 

goals and needs, and identify an implementation 

strategy. As a result, the most successful projects 

are those that are analyzed comprehensively and 

developed through an integrated and collaborative 

planning process. 

Transportation Planning 

within the NPS

The NPS employs transportation planning support in 

a variety of ways. Some national parks (typically those 

managing an extensive transportation system) include 

transportation planning professionals on staff. The 

NPS can also receive transportation planning support 

through interagency or cooperative agreements, 

project contracting, or through other NPS programs 

like the Rivers, Trails, and Conservation Assistance 

(RTCA)1

 program or the Denver Service Center (DSC),

2

for example. The U.S. Department of Transportation 

(U.S. DOT) Federal Lands Highway (FLH) Division and 

the U.S. DOT Volpe National Transportation Systems 

Center (Volpe Center) also provide transportation 

planning support to the NPS. At the state and regional 

level, state departments of transportation (DOTs) and 

metropolitan planning organizations (MPOs) employ 

planning staff that can assist parks and gateway 

communities. State DOT and MPO staff can often 

assist with understanding the local and regional 

planning processes, schedules for plan updates, and 

provide guidance integrating active transportation 

needs into these efforts.
2-2 NPS Active Transportation Guidebook

Relevant NPS Planning Documents

The NPS conducts transportation planning, with 

resulting planning documents, at both the park 

and program levels. These planning processes are 

completed in order to guide park management 

decisions.

As an important aspect of any multimodal 

transportation network, active transportation goals 

and priorities should always be considered in the 

planning process and incorporated into the resulting 

planning documents. These plans may also require 

periodic updating, providing an opportunity to update 

or add active transportation goals and priorities, as 

needed. When active transportation needs and goals 

are identified and then included in these plans, it can 

lay the foundation for a park manager to prioritize 

and pursue project funding for bicycle and pedestrian 

efforts.

The section below provides an overview of relevant 

NPS transportation-related planning documents, and 

how active transportation may be incorporated

within each. Being familiar with these plans and how 

active transportation contributes to the identified 

goals, objectives, and strategies can help park staff 

and partners make the case for implementing active 

transportation projects and programs. Additional 

information on these and other active transportationrelated NPS planning products can be found in the 

Partnerships and Funding chapter. This chapter 

contains a table with a description and example of 

several additional planning documents, including 

Bicycle and Pedestrian Plans, Five-Year Active 

Transportation Plans, and Accessibility Self Evaluation 

Transition Plans, among others. 

National Long Range Transportation Plan 

(NLRTP): The NPS NLRTP3

 outlines a 20-year vision 

for the NPS transportation system on a national 

level. While active transportation supports many of 

the higher-level goals of the NLRTP, it is specifically 

identified as supporting resource protection and visitor 

experience goals. The NLRTP was completed in 2017 

and is scheduled to be updated every five years.

NPS Region-Specific Plans: The seven NPS regions 

also develop regional Long Range Transportation 

Plans (LRTPs)4

 support the goals of the National 

Plan and provide a planning framework for regional 

support to parks in achieving transportation goals and 

coordinating transportation investments over a 20-

plus year horizon. For example, the Midwest Region’s 

2016 Long Range Transportation Plan5

 emphasizes 

multimodal access and developing best practices 

“to safely turn walking and/or biking into viable 

transportation options.”

Collaborative Visitor Transportation Survey 

(CVTS): CVTS6

 is an effort among the Federal 

Land Management Agencies (FLMAs) to develop a 

common set of tools and measures for collecting 

visitor experience data on federal public lands. This 

effort established a streamlined process for visitor 

data collection with pre-approved survey questions 

by the Office of Management and Budget. The 

NPS can collect data about park visitors, including 

demographic information, and visitor usage patterns 

with the CVTS. CVTS is often used as part of larger 

planning initiatives at a regional level (e.g. long range 

transportation plans) or at a park level (e.g. as part 

of visitor use management plans) and can provide 

data on visitor experiences and preferences relating to 

active transportation and access at NPS sites.

When a survey is to be administered at an NPS site 

only, the park may select questions from the Pool 

of Known Questions,

7

 allowing them to follow an 

internal, streamlined programmatic clearance process 

for data collection. The Pool of Known Questions 

includes a section on transportation, including 

questions about mode, parking, traffic, and other 

transportation services.

Park-Specific Foundation Documents: A 

Foundation Document8

 provides guidance for park 

planning and management decisions, and discusses 

the park’s congressionally-designated purpose, 

significance, fundamental resources and values, 

legal and policy requirements, and key planning and 

related data needs. Although active transportation 

is not specifically addressed in every Foundation 

Document, a park may use this document to identify 

ways in which active transportation could support a 

park’s purpose, values, and transportation or resource 
2-3 Chapter 2: Planning and Elements of Project Development

needs. A Foundation Document may identify existing 

transportation-related challenges, including vehicle 

congestion, air quality impacts, or other identified 

resource, visitor experience, and connectivity issues.

For example, the Foundation Document for Cedar 

Breaks National Monument in Utah identifies 

transportation planning as a key planning need. 

Planning is needed to coordinate with surrounding 

communities on a proposed visitor shuttle and trail 

between the nearby community of Brian Head and 

the monument. The trail would be used by bicyclists 

and pedestrians in the summer and by cross-country 

skiers in the winter. The Foundation Document 

recommends the development of a transportation 

plan in coordination with local partners, which would 

examine the feasibility, impacts, and implementation 

of this trail.

Park-Specific General Management Plans: 

A park’s General Management Plan (GMP)9

 is a 

strategic planning document that outlines the future 

management direction of an NPS site for the next 

15 to 20 years. GMPs vary in their level of detail, 

but typically set the basic philosophy and broad 

guidance for management decisions that affect the 

park’s resources and the visitors’ experience, and lay 

out a vision for desired future conditions at the park. 

GMPs may include information about a park’s existing 

transportation system and planned improvements. 

Other Park Management Plans: Some parks 

have topic-specific transportation plans or trail 

management plans to guide the management of 

transportation or trail-related issues. These plans are 

typically combined with an environmental assessment 

(EA) or environmental impact statement (EIS) 

describing various alternatives for how a proposed 

project might impact a park’s transportation system, 

the environmental impacts of each alternative, 

and the park’s preferred alternative. Transportation 

plans should address all modes of transportation, 

including walking and bicycling. When walking and 

bicycling are included in a transportation or trail plan, 

parks typically discuss how they relate to reducing 

congestion, enhancing safety, or creating additional 

options for visitors.

Figure 2-1: Framework for Park Planning Diagram. (Source: NPS)
2-4 NPS Active Transportation Guidebook

Linking to State and 

Regional Transportation 

Planning

The NPS does not necessarily have jurisdiction and 

authority over all roadways and transportation 

facilities within or connecting to a park. For example, 

a state highway running through a national park 

would be under the jurisdiction of the state. Even 

when a transportation facility is located within park 

boundaries, partners sometimes own or maintain 

the facilities through maintenance agreements, 

right-of-way agreements, and other similar types of 

arrangements (see the Partnerships and Funding

chapter for more information). Outside of park 

boundaries, land ownership and legal or regulatory 

authority can be even more complicated, as 

transportation facilities may be owned and managed 

by a mix of state, local, tribal, or private entities. 

Depending on where a project is proposed or 

implemented and who has regulatory authority over 

it, additional planning, coordination, and consultation 

with state, county, MPO, and other local entities, or 

tribal governments may be needed. Each of these 

entities have planning processes10 with which a 

prospective project (even an NPS owned or managed 

project) may need to comply. 

General Management Plan: Hawaii Volcanoes National Park

The General Management Plan for Hawaii Volcanoes National Park,11 finalized and approved 

in 2016, describes existing transportation access to and within the park, and how future 

access will be managed under the strategies laid out in the plan. The plan addresses future 

transportation access within each of the park’s four identified management zones; the selected 

alternative has several actions pertaining to active transportation, including: 

• Encourage safe bicycle use around Crater Rim Drive by improving or adding signage along 

the road, providing adjacent bicycle trails when feasible, and considering restricting vehicular 

traffic during specific times of day or days of the week to encourage bicycle use.

• Continue to maintain the historic Escape Road as an emergency egress route, but also 

improve the trail surface on the Escape Road to accommodate increased bicycle, equestrian, 

and pedestrian use, and improve connections from the park to the nearby community.

• Explore new or improved trail connections for pedestrians and bicycles from locations in the 

park, such as trails linking Thurston to Pu‘u Pua‘i and Devastation Trail parking lots in order 

to create more pedestrian access to Thurston.

The actions above would complement the 

Earthquake Trail, which is adjacent to Crater 

Rim Drive. The trail is part of the old Crater Rim 

Drive alignment, much of which was destroyed 

in an earthquake. The park kept the safe part 

of the old road open as a trail, which bicyclists 

can use to avoid riding with traffic on the new 

Crater Rim Drive.12 

Figure 2-2: Earthquake Trail is adjacent to Crater Rim Drive in 

Hawaii Volcanoes National Park. (Source: NPS)
2-5 Chapter 2: Planning and Elements of Project Development

Multiuse Trail Plan: Rocky Mountain National Park

The Multiuse Trail Plan for Rocky Mountain National Park in Colorado, finalized in 2014, describes 

options for providing a multiuse trail system along the developed corridor of roads on the east side 

of the park. The purpose of this proposed trail system is to connect with proposed multiuse trail 

systems in the Estes Valley, enhance multimodal connections to existing visitor use areas in the park, 

and provide connections to the seasonal shuttle system within and outside of the park. The plan 

describes three alternatives, including a no-action alternative and two options for a trail system.

Objectives of this trail system include: 

• Explore potential multiuse trail connections to 

other recreational opportunities; 

• Expand recreational opportunities for selfpropelled transportation;

• Provide connections to the park’s shuttle bus 

system;

• Provide for spatial dispersal of visitors;

• Provide for new visitor experiences within the 

park;

• Minimize conflicts among visitors;

• Provide a safe multiuse trail system;

• Promote health and well-being in support 

of national initiatives.

Figure 2-3: Rocky Mountain National Park, Colorado 

(Source: NPS)

Coordination of planning between entities ensures 

that projects and efforts provide for an integrated 

transportation network for a region. Integrating 

proposed transportation projects into partner 

planning documents demonstrates higher levels 

of coordination. These planning documents may 

include: metropolitan transportation plans, long range 

statewide transportation plans, bicycle and pedestrian 

plans, statewide transportation improvement 

programs, or transportation improvement programs. 

For example, between 2014 and 2015, the San 

Antonio Missions National Historical Park in Texas 

worked with the Alamo Area MPO to assess the local 

transportation network connecting with national park 

sites in order to identify opportunities for enhancing 

bicycling and walking access.

The boundary of the park is non-contiguous, 

encompassing four individual Spanish colonial mission 

sites and the related resources located in the middle 

of south San Antonio neighborhoods. The urban park 

has little ownership of transportation facilities with 

many of the existing transportation facilities crossing a 

variety of jurisdictions. In order to address the growing 

transportation concerns of negative impacts caused by 

vehicles and to provide safe, multimodal options for 

park visitors and community members alike, the park 

worked in coordination with the MPO to develop a 

regional Bicycle and Pedestrian Planning Study.

13 This 

study identified opportunities for developing a safe, 

accessible, and comprehensive bicycle and pedestrian 

network that would improve connections between the 

national park and surrounding community.

For more information on the local, regional, and state 

transportation planning process, see the NPS factsheet 

Introduction to the Transportation Planning Process.

14
2-6 NPS Active Transportation Guidebook

Transportation Funding 

Opportunities

As stated in the Legal and Policy Framework

chapter of this Guidebook, the majority of funding 

available to the NPS and its partners for transportation 

planning and project development is provided through 

U.S. DOT funding programs. These programs are 

authorized and funded by Congress through the 

latest federal surface transportation authorization 

Act. These laws establish specific programs with 

intended goals and project eligibility requirements 

for funding priorities. The surface transportation Act 

also authorizes program administration and funding 

formulation to agencies, states, and regions.

For current information on transportation funding, see 

the NPS Federal Lands Transportation Program (FLTP) 

website15 and the NPS Federal Lands Transportation 

Program Implementation Guide.

16 Park staff can 

contact17 the NPS Transportation Program and the NPS 

Federal Lands Transportation Program Coordinators 

for further information, such as current funding 

opportunities and eligibility requirements. The NPS has 

also developed a series of videos18 regarding some of 

the transportation funding opportunities other than 

the FLTP.

Another way to learn about transportation funding 

opportunities available to the NPS and its partners is 

to get involved in the state or regional transportation 

planning process.19 The Partnerships and Funding

chapter contains more information on select funding 

opportunities. 

Prioritizing Transportation Needs

Transportation needs often exceed funding availability. 

As such, state, regional, local governments, and 

national parks must prioritize these needs during 

the planning process to determine which projects 

are funded, and when, for further development 

or implementation. Project prioritization of active 

transportation projects should consider how these 

projects rank against each other and all transportation 

needs. Active transportation projects that have been 

prioritized alongside other transportation needs 

have a better chance of successfully competing for 

funding. Each entity is continually balancing budget 

and management priorities, which will affect the 

feasibility of any proposed active transportation 

project. Understanding that priorities are dynamic 

will help determine the right time to propose a 

project, the level of enthusiasm for a project, who 

the most effective advocates will be, when a project 

will compete best for funding, and most importantly, 

the likelihood of success. Projects that effectively 

address park and surrounding community goals, while 

creating multimodal connections and involving greater 

stakeholder support, have a better chance at receiving 

higher priority in the funding prioritization process, 

either federally or locally.

Steps in Park Level 

Planning and Project 

Scoping

At the park level, staff and park partners can take 

several approaches to improve or expand active 

transportation facilities and programs, depending 

on the scale and scope of the project. Park staff 

may be aware of a need, such as filling in a gap in 

a multiuse trail or improving conditions for bicyclists 

on existing roadways, which also may have been 

identified broadly in the park’s Foundation Document. 

In many cases, the goal may be to improve conditions 

or connections for pedestrians and bicyclists. A 

detailed planning or feasibility study may be required 

for a greater assessment of the project area and 

identification of potential alternatives. Depending 

on the skills and resources available at the park, 

these studies may be conducted in-house, or may 

require engaging a contractor or other technical 

resources within the NPS or U.S. DOT who have 

experience with pedestrian and bicycle planning. 

After a planning or feasibility study is completed and 

specific projects are identified, staff and partners 

continue through the project development process, 

which may include the following steps: preliminary 

engineering; preliminary design and environmental 

compliance with the National Environmental Policy 

Act (NEPA), which includes compliance with applicable 

historic preservation requirements (e.g., the National 

Historic Preservation Act, Section 106); final design 
2-7 Chapter 2: Planning and Elements of Project Development

Planning for Infrastructure and Safety Improvements in 

Presidio, San Francisco 

The Presidio of San Francisco is an area 

of exclusive federal jurisdiction, located 

within the boundaries of Golden Gate 

National Recreation Area on the northern 

tip of San Francisco, California. The Presidio 

Trails and Bikeways Master Plan and 

Environmental Assessment20 focuses on 

the safety of bicyclists and pedestrians in 

relation to the park’s pedestrian and bicycle 

infrastructure network. This analysis and 

plan is an example of an important step 

in creating safer infrastructure in parks; 

it includes an analysis of user groups and 

anticipated user groups, and a proposal 

of project alternatives that create a safer 

active transportation network for visitors. 

Furthermore, safety is considered throughout 

the plan and within each alternative with

specific user groups in mind.

• Identification of active transportation users and infrastructure: As a preliminary 

step, this assessment identifies active transportation infrastructure and users in Presidio. 

Users include pedestrians, bicycle commuters, recreational cyclists, family or touring 

bicyclists, and skaters and skateboarders. The inventory of infrastructure included surface 

type, width, grading, buffers, and access classification. 

• Typical users matched to trail types: The plan matched different types of trails with 

typical users, and classified them as pedestrian trails, multiuse trails, bikeways, and 

accessible trails. The user and trail typologies focus on the safety of the user, taking into 

account characteristics such as average distance traveled, comfort level with traffic, traffic 

speed, and destination. For example, family or touring bicyclists were considered more 

likely to use scenic multiuse trails, while bicycle commuters prefer direct bike routes with 

bike lanes or low- volume roadways.

• Alternatives analysis: The trail and user typology, with an overall emphasis on safety 

and network connectivity, led to an alternatives analysis, which considered infrastructure 

features, design context, and locations where users are riding bicycles or are allowed 

to ride. This analysis produced a plan that proposed a wide range of approaches with 

alternatives, which offered up to 22 miles of improved or new corridors and access for 

people with disabilities.

Figure 2-4: Visitors jog on the multiuse trail in the Presidio of San 

Francisco, Golden Gate National Recreation Area. (Source: NPS)
2-8 NPS Active Transportation Guidebook

and engineering; and construction. Often, to achieve 

success, these active transportation improvement 

projects require a champion, or an NPS staff person, 

park partner, or contractor who maintains the 

momentum of the project and also understands the 

connection between active transportation facilities and 

park resources.

In order to meet federal environmental requirements, 

NPS projects need to adhere to NEPA. The NPS NEPA 

Handbook21 contains information on the NEPA process, 

detailed below (the Legal and Policy Framework

chapter contains an introduction to NEPA). NEPA 

defines a process that public agencies must follow 

to evaluate the environmental impact of proposed 

projects, prior to decision-making. The NPS uses four 

levels of analysis to comply with NEPA, which range 

from Categorical Exclusions to Environmental Impact 

Statements based on potential impact of the project or 

action. 

• Categorical Exclusions (CE) for Which No 

Documentation is Required: Applicable to 

actions that have no potential for significant 

environmental impacts under ordinary 

circumstances that the NEPA review does not 

require formal documentation. Example CE 

projects that do not require formal documentation 

may include educational activities, day-to-day 

resource management and research activities, and 

preparing and issuing publications. 

• Categorical Exclusions for Which 

Documentation is Required: Applicable 

to actions that have been found to have 

no potential for individual or cumulative 

significant environmental impacts under 

ordinary circumstances, but whose potential for 

environmental impacts warrants some level of 

analysis and formal documentation. Example 

CE projects that do require documentation 

may include minor boundary changes, routine 

maintenance of facilities including trails, and 

repair, resurfacing, striping, and installation of 

traffic control devices on existing roads and trails.

• Environmental Assessment (EA): Applicable 

to a variety of situations. An EA is a means for 

documenting compliance with NEPA and assisting 

in the planning and decision-making process when 

a CE is not appropriate but an environmental 

impact statement is not necessary. An EA is meant 

to document at the level of detail necessary to 

demonstrate that the proposal would not result in 

significant environmental impacts.

• Environmental Impact Statement (EIS): 

Applicable to proposals that could result in 

significant adverse environmental impacts. An EIS 

is a detailed written statement required by Section 

102(2)(C) of NEPA.

For active transportation projects, the necessary 

NEPA documentation will vary, and will be project 

specific. For example, the reconfiguring of striping 

on an existing roadway to accommodate a bicycle 

lane during a roadway resurfacing project might be 

considered a CE under NEPA. The resurfacing of a trail 

may also be considered a CE under NEPA, whereas the 

construction of a new trail or other new infrastructure 

projects will likely require an EA, and in rare cases 

an EIS. It is incumbent on the park to ensure that 

the proper NEPA process is undertaken prior to any 

federally funded project. 

The National Historic Preservation Act, Section 10622 

requires federal agencies to consider how their actions 

impact historic properties. The Section 106 process 

typically occurs concurrently with and is incorporated 

into the NEPA process. If an action taken by the 

NPS may impact a historic property on the National 

Register of Historic Places, or a property that meets 

the criteria for the National Register, park staff will 

need to contact the State Historic Preservation Officer 

or Tribal Historic Preservation Office for consultation 

during the process, and may also need to involve the 

public and other relevant stakeholders. Compliance 

with the National Historic Preservation Act is required 

of the NPS, and must be considered as necessary in 

the implementation of active transportation projects. 

Developing an Inventory of Existing 

Conditions and Programs

Understanding existing conditions and programs is 

a key component for a planning or feasibility study. 

The following list provides some examples of the 

types of information or data that parks and partners 

may be interested in collecting to inform future active 

transportation opportunities: 
2-9 Chapter 2: Planning and Elements of Project Development

• Number and location of existing bicycle and 

pedestrian infrastructure, such as bike lanes, 

multiuse trails, trail crossings, crosswalks, bicycle 

racks, and signs; 

• Facility attributes (e.g., condition, width, surface 

type, accessibility, and designated use);

• Areas with congestion or consistent conflicts 

between modes;

• Connectivity of bicycle and pedestrian routes 

or gaps in a network of connected bicycle and 

pedestrian facilities that allow people to get safely 

and conveniently where they need to go;

• Connections with other forms of transportation 

(e.g., transit or shuttle bus systems) and with 

nearby transportation systems (e.g., state 

highways, local roads, and gateway communities);

• Information on bicycle and pedestrian safety (e.g., 

annual number of crashes involving bicyclists 

or pedestrians, locations of crashes, road safety 

audits);

• Availability and location of bicycle rentals and 

bikeshare stations;

• Programming featuring active transportation (e.g., 

guided bike tours or walks);

• Counts of pedestrians and bicyclists;

• Types and ability levels of the bicyclists and 

pedestrians using, or who might use, the facilities; 

and

• Crowdsourced data on bicycle and pedestrian 

routes and travel patterns (see the Innovative 

Technologies and Emerging Trends chapter for 

more information).

Before collecting data on existing conditions, consider 

what data is readily available within the NPS and 

from other data sources. The Federal Highway 

Administration (FHWA) Statewide Pedestrian and 

Bicycle Planning Handbook23 contains a list of 

potential data sources at the national and state level. 

Figure 2-5: Bicyclists riding on Rock Creek Parkway in Washington, D.C.

(Source: Connor Donevan)

U.S. FWS Bicycle and Pedestrian Counting Pilot Project

The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS) is conducting an ongoing effort to test bicycle and 

pedestrian counters at FWS stations across the country. As bicycle and pedestrian access to 

and within wildlife refuges is becoming more popular, data from this project will help track 

growth and inform FWS planning and prioritization of active transportation projects in the 

future. Common counters on the market have been widely tested in urban areas, though 

less in the types of environments in which FWS stations are located (rural areas, gravel roads, 

mainly recreational riders, more exposure to weather elements, etc.). The FWS has tested 

a few brands of counters to identify those that are most accurate and work in different 

conditions. The results of this program may inform NPS units that are considering installing 

counters to track bicycle and pedestrian activity on the types of counters to use in different 

conditions and how to track and manage the data over time. More information on bicycle 

and pedestrian count data can be found in the Innovative Technologies and Emerging Trends

chapter. 
2-10 NPS Active Transportation Guidebook

For example, the National Highway Traffic Safety 

Administration publishes counts of roadway fatalities 

by mode,

24 and the FHWA National Household Travel 

Survey25 collects data on trip purpose and mode. State 

DOTs and MPOs may have information on the location 

and condition of bicycle and pedestrian facilities, and 

local transit agencies may have data on multimodal 

connections.

Within the NPS, data is housed both centrally and 

at the park level. Centralized datasets include 

information such as facility condition data (which 

is housed within the Facility Management Software 

System (FMSS)), roadway Geographic Information 

Systems (GIS) data, and safety data (including crashes 

involving pedestrians and bicycles), which is housed 

within the Incident Management, Analysis and 

Reporting System (IMARS). Other data, including 

information on bicycle and pedestrian facilities, signs, 

and key visitor destinations, is gathered and housed at 

the park level. Some parks also conduct nonmotorized 

counts, although this is less common. The NPS 

Visitor Use Statistics26 website also provides data on 

the number of visitors parks receive each year, and 

available data on traffic counts.

An assessment of existing conditions can help parks 

and partners recognize opportunities for pursuing 

active transportation projects or programs. After 

identifying gaps or deficiencies, parks and partners 

can develop projects and programs to address needs.

NPS National Capital Region Paved Trails Study 

The NPS National Capital Region Paved Trails Study27 sets a vision to guide future planning and 

coordination for trails in the NPS National Capital Region paved trail network. The study identifies 

achievable goals, provides 121 infrastructure and programmatic recommendations, and prioritizes 

opportunities to expand multiuse trails in national parks in the Washington, D.C. area, as funding 

becomes available. To develop the study, the NPS region conducted a comprehensive examination 

of its regional trail network, including identifying bicycle count trends, gaps in the trail network, 

trail safety issues and opportunities, and maintenance requirements. Stakeholder outreach and 

local government trail 

plans and priorities also 

informed the study. The 

NPS prioritized projects 

based on seven criteria, such 

as projects that are in an 

approved or adopted plan 

or study, projects that may 

reduce user conflicts, and 

those located along highvolume trail segments. Since 

its creation, the Paved Trails 

Study has assisted the NPS 

in working with partners to 

secure funding for projects 

in the plan. Figure 2-6: A bicyclist near the Washington Monument in Washington, D.C. 

(Source: M. Gersema)
2-11 Chapter 2: Planning and Elements of Project Development

Additional Resources 

AASHTO Guide for the Planning, Design, and Operation of Pedestrian Facilities, 2nd Edition (2021). 

https://store.transportation.org/item/collectiondetail/224

AASHTO Guide for the Development of Bicycle Facilities, 4th Edition (2012). 

https://store.transportation.org/Item/CollectionDetail?ID=116

Central Federal Lands Highway Division Guide to Promoting Bicycling on Federal Lands (2008). 

http://www.pedbikeinfo.org/cms/downloads/01_promoting_bicycling_entire_document.pdf

FHWA Bike Network Mapping Idea Book (2016). 

https://www.fhwa.dot.gov/environment/bicycle_pedestrian/publications/bikemap_book/

FHWA Metropolitan Pedestrian and Bicycle Planning Handbook (2017). 

https://www.fhwa.dot.gov/planning/processes/pedestrian_bicycle/publications/mpo_handbook/index.cfm

FHWA Small Town and Rural Multimodal Networks (2016). 

https://www.fhwa.dot.gov/environment/bicycle_pedestrian/publications/small_towns/fhwahep17024_lg.pdf

FHWA Statewide Pedestrian and Bicycle Planning Handbook (2014). 

https://www.fhwa.dot.gov/planning/processes/pedestrian_bicycle/publications/pedestrian_bicycle_handbook/

NPS Planning Program. https://parkplanning.nps.gov/planningHome.cfm

U.S. DOT Pedestrian and Bicycle Safety (2021). https://www.transportation.gov/pedestrian-bicycle-safety

Western Transportation Institute Good Practices to Encourage Bicycling & Pedestrians on Federal Lands (2011). 

https://westerntransportationinstitute.org/wp-content/uploads/2018/02/TRIPTAC-BikePedPlan_ES.pdf
2-12 NPS Active Transportation Guidebook

End Notes

1

 NPS Rivers, Trails, and Conservation Assistance Program (RCTA) (2022). https://www.nps.gov/orgs/rtca/index.htm

2

 NPS Denver Service Center (2021). https://www.nps.gov/dsc/

3

 NPS National Long Range Transportation Plan (2017). https://www.nps.gov/orgs/1548/upload/National_Long_

Range_Transportation_Plan_508-Compliant-for-WEB_July_2017.pdf

4

 NPS Regional Long Range Transportation Plans. 

https://www.nps.gov/orgs/1548/long-range-transportation-planning.htm

5

 NPS Midwest Region Long Range Transportation Plan (2016). 

https://www.nps.gov/orgs/1548/upload/Mid_West_Region_2016-Long-Range_Transportation_Plan_508-1.pdf

6

 U.S. DOT Collaborative Visitor Transportation Survey.

http://volpe-public-lands.s3-website-us-east-1.amazonaws.com/flma_lrtp_cvts/cvts.htm

7

 NPS Programmatic Clearance Process (2022). 

https://www.nps.gov/subjects/socialscience/programmaticclearance.htm

8

 NPS Foundation Documents for National Park Units. https://parkplanning.nps.gov/foundationDocuments.cfm

9

 NPS Management Plans. https://parkplanning.nps.gov/ManagementPlans.cfm

10 FHWA Transportation Planning Process Briefing Book (2015). 

https://www.fhwa.dot.gov/planning/publications/briefing_book/fhwahep18015.pdf

11 NPS Hawaii Volcanoes National Park General Management Plan (2016). 

https://parkplanning.nps.gov/projectHome.cfm?projectID=24888

12 NPS Earthquake Trail/Waldron Ledge, Hawaii Volcanoes National Park (2012). 

https://www.nps.gov/media/photo/view.htm?id=12704E05-155D-4519-3EC9546CFF154AFF

13 Alamo Area Metropolitan Planning Organization Regional Bicycle and Pedestrian Study Reports (2016). 

https://www.alamoareampo.org/Studies/docs/Regional_Bicycle_Pedestrian_Planning_Study/rbpps.pdf

14 NPS Introduction to the Transportation Planning Process (2017). 

https://www.nps.gov/subjects/transportation/upload/Intro_Planning_Fact_Sheet_Final.pdf

15 NPS Federal Lands Transportation Program (2020). https://www.nps.gov/orgs/1548/index.htm

16 NPS Federal Lands Transportation Program Implementation Guide (2018). 

https://mylearning.nps.gov/wp-content/uploads/2015/11/NPS_FLTP_IMPLEMENTATION_GUIDE_V2.1-corrected.pdf
2-13 Chapter 2: Planning and Elements of Project Development

17 NPS Federal Lands Transportation Program Contact Us (2020). Contact Us - Federal Lands Transportation 

Program (U.S. National Park Service) (nps.gov)

18 NPS Federal Lands Transportation Program External Transportation Funding (2018). External Transportation 

Funding - Federal Lands Transportation Program (U.S. National Park Service) (nps.gov)

19 NPS Presidio Trails and Bikeways Master Plan and Environmental Assessment (2003). 

https://www.nps.gov/goga/learn/management/upload/PRES%20Trails%20and%20Bikeways.pdf

20 NPS NEPA Handbook (2015). https://www.nps.gov/subjects/nepa/upload/NPS_NEPAHandbook_Final_508.pdf

21 Advisory Council on Historic Preservation An Introduction to Section 106. 

https://www.achp.gov/protecting-historic-properties/section-106-process/introduction-section-106

22 FHWA Pedestrian & Bicycle Safety (2022). https://safety.fhwa.dot.gov/ped_bike/

23 FHWA Statewide Pedestrian and Bicycle Planning Handbook, Appendix B: Key Pedestrian and Bicycle Data 

Sources by Subject Area (2018). https://www.fhwa.dot.gov/planning/processes/pedestrian_bicycle/publications/

pedestrian_bicycle_handbook/ page11.cfm

24 NHTSA Road Safety. https://www.nhtsa.gov/road-safety

25 FHWA National Household Transportation Survey. http://nhts.ornl.gov/

26 NPS Visitor Use Statistics. https://irma.nps.gov/STATS/

27 NPS National Capital Region Paved Trails Study. https://parkplanning.nps.gov/document.cfm?documentID=74623
Cape Cod National Seashore, Massachusetts (Source: NPS)

Chapter 3: Infrastructure and Multimodal

 Connectivity

This chapter introduces different types of active transportation infrastructure – such as 

pedestrian pathways, multiuse trails, bike lanes, signs/wayfinding, pavement markings, 

and bicycle racks – and discusses strategies for improving connectivity between modes. 
3-1 Chapter 3: Infrastructure and Multimodal Connectivity

Introduction

A well-connected multimodal transportation network 

not only provides visitors with more options to 

access and travel between parks and surrounding 

communities, but also expands park access to people 

who may not have been able to visit otherwise. In 

addition, active transportation infrastructure that is 

integrated with other transportation systems, such 

as roadways or transit, gives visitors convenient and 

attractive opportunities to experience a park without 

needing an automobile.

While the context and types of NPS park roads and 

trails vary widely, this chapter provides an overview of 

common physical elements of an active transportation 

system. It describes infrastructure design guidelines 

that apply to active transportation, and introduces 

various types of bicycle, pedestrian, and multiuse 

infrastructure, along with examples of how parks 

and surrounding communities have implemented 

these types of infrastructure. This chapter also 

offers strategies for improving connections between 

modes, such as bicycles and shuttle buses. For more 

information on bicycle and pedestrian safety design 

elements relevant to national parks and gateway 

communities, see the Bicyclist and Pedestrian 

Safety chapter.

Infrastructure Policy and 

Design Guidelines

For the design of bicycle infrastructure, the American 

Association of State Highway and Transportation 

Officials (AASHTO) has a Guide for the Development 

of Bicycle Facilities1

 that provides design values and 

factors to accommodate bicycle travel in most riding 

environments. Specific state or local highway design 

manuals, or specific state bicycle facility design 

manuals, may also provide similar design guidance.

In designing pedestrian infrastructure, transportation 

professionals take guidance from AASHTO’s Guide 

for the Planning, Design, and Operation of Pedestrian 

Facilities, the Federal Highway Administration 

(FHWA) Designing Sidewalks and Trails for Access, 

the U.S. Access Board’s Accessibility Guidelines, 

the Architectural Barriers Act (ABA), and other 

pertinent guidelines and manuals. Similar to bicycle 

infrastructure, some states and local municipalities 

produce their own pedestrian design manuals.

The FHWA Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices 

(MUTCD)2

 defines the standards for signs and striping 

of both bicycle and pedestrian infrastructure and is 

used by road managers nationwide to install and 

maintain traffic control devices on all public streets, 

highways, bikeways, and private roads open to public 

travel. In general, practitioners follow the MUTCD, or 

state-specific MUTCD versions, whenever practicable 

unless there is a reason to deviate from established 

policy. A memorandum of understanding between 

the NPS and the FHWA, updated in 2006, states that 

on campground roadways and other similar lowspeed, low-volume roadways, signs may differ from 

the MUTCD if the NPS submits these signs under the 

experimental rules set forth in the MUTCD and obtains 

FHWA approval prior to their initial use.3 Similarly, 

design manuals are followed by design engineers. For 

cases involving design exceptions, the NPS documents 

and ensures proper justification for these exceptions.

Connected, Multimodal Networks

The FHWA defines a connected network as “interconnected pedestrian and 

bicycle transportation facilities that allow people of all ages and abilities 

to safely and conveniently get where they need to go.” When bicycle and 

pedestrian networks are complete and interconnected, meaning people can 

comfortably travel between national parks and destinations within a local 

community, safety and access are improved, along with the potential to reduce 

congestion through a reduction in the number of vehicles on the roadway. 
3-2 NPS Active Transportation Guidebook

Design Flexibility and Context 

Sensitive Solutions

Good facility design involves balancing safety, mobility, 

and preservation of scenic, aesthetic, historic, cultural, 

and environmental resources. Flexibility in design 

criteria is allowed for under most existing standards 

and guidelines. Applying flexibility requires knowledge 

of these standards, a recognition of the range of 

options available, and understanding how deviating 

from these may impact safety and mobility. For more 

information about taking a flexible approach to 

active transportation infrastructure design, see the 

2013 FHWA Memo on Bicycle and Pedestrian Design 

Flexibility.

5

Context Sensitive Solutions (CSS) is a collaborative, 

interdisciplinary approach that includes the viewpoints 

of all stakeholders in the development of project 

goals. CSS seeks transportation solutions that address 

the needs of all users and facility functions within 

the context of its setting, considering land use, and 

the environmental, cultural, and historical factors. 

The Institute of Transportation Engineers handbook 

Implementing Context Sensitive Design6

 further 

guidance and case studies on CSS. Design flexibility 

and CSS are relevant to the NPS, as they create 

infrastructure that meets the needs of bicyclists and 

pedestrians, but also balance the NPS mission to 

preserve resources and provide for the enjoyment of 

the public. 

Types of Pedestrian 

Infrastructure

Physically and visually separated infrastructure such 

as sidewalks, shoulders, paths, trails, bridges, and 

pedestrian-only lanes can help people safely and 

comfortably walk or use a mobility device (such as a 

wheelchair, scooter, walker, cane, or crutches).7

 The 

characteristics of the roadway, such as traffic volume, 

operating speed, roadway classification, visitor 

experience, and land use should inform decisions 

about the most appropriate type of pedestrian 

infrastructure to install. 

The FHWA Small Town and Rural Multimodal 

Networks Guide8

 provides design information for 

bicycle and pedestrian facilities based on traffic 

volumes, operating speeds, and land use. For example, 

in areas where people walk directly adjacent to highspeed, high-volume traffic, a physically separated 

facility such as a sidewalk with a buffer or a sidepath 

might be appropriate. For roads with lower traffic 

volumes and speeds, a visually separated facility such 

a as a wide shoulder or pedestrian lane might be more 

appropriate.9

When expanding pedestrian facilities in and around 

national parks, consider how to fill the gaps in the 

existing pedestrian network and increase pedestrian 

access to parks and destinations within parks. 

Figure 3-1: A bicyclist on a multiuse trail at the Grand Canyon National Park in Arizona. (Source: NPS)
3-3 Chapter 3: Infrastructure and Multimodal Connectivity

Demand for pedestrian facilities is primarily based 

on the adjacent land use and the types of visitor 

experience intended for an area of the park. Where 

pedestrian facilities are not currently provided, the 

need for pedestrian facilities can be demonstrated 

by identifying where pedestrians might be coming 

from, understanding the types of visitor experiences 

the park intends to create, and determining the 

distance to gateway communities and other nearby 

attractions. Connecting people to the experiences 

they seek requires providing a connected pedestrian 

network with separation between modes appropriate 

for traffic volume and operating speed. Where visitor 

experiences generate higher pedestrian demand, the 

importance of a dedicated, continuous network for 

pedestrians increases. 

Consider locating physically separated pedestrian 

facilities around NPS visitor centers and in areas linking 

to pedestrian trails, multiuse trails, transit stops, and 

park entrances. Any pedestrian facility should be wide 

enough to accommodate and enable people of all 

ages and abilities to safely use them, ideally in groups. 

The Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) accessibility 

standards require a minimum sidewalk width of 

five feet, but many communities choose to make 

sidewalks wider in order to allow for more people to 

pass through and to allow space for amenities.

Figure 3-2: A multiuse trail in Glacier National Park, Montana. 

(Source: U.S. DOT Volpe Center)

Figure 3-3: Pedestrian lanes provide an exclusive space for pedestrians to walk 

outside of the travel area. (Source: FHWA Small Town and Rural Multimodal 

Networks)

Pedestrian Connections in Sitka, Alaska

Sitka Sea Walk is a pedestrian corridor project 

that connects downtown Sitka, Alaska at 

Totem Square to the Sitka National Historical 

Park. With only one crosswalk along Harbor 

Drive in the project area, pedestrians making 

uncontrolled roadway crossings has been a 

long-standing safety challenge. By providing 

both physical and grade separation between 

traffic and pedestrians, the project allows 

for a safer and more efficient transportation 

corridor. The Sitka Sea Walk consists of 

pedestrian oriented facilities with a minimum 

eight-foot-wide concrete walking surface and 

guardrails. The first phase of the project was 

completed in 2014. 

Figure 3-4: Virtual rendering of Sitka Sea Walk in Alaska. 

(Source: City and Borough of Sitka)
3-4 NPS Active Transportation Guidebook

Types of Bicycle 

Infrastructure

The selection of bicycle facility types should be 

informed by the characteristics of the road and the 

experience level of the bicyclists who will be using 

the facilities. On remote or rural roads with less traffic 

and lower speeds, a bicycle warning sign (such as 

“Bicycles May Use Full Lane” or “Bicycles on Road”) 

or marking on the road may be sufficient to notify 

drivers and bicyclists that bicyclists are permitted 

and are encouraged to use the road. On roads with 

higher speeds and higher traffic volumes, separated 

bike lanes or off-street trails may be more appropriate 

for ensuring that bicyclists can safely use the route. 

When deciding what types of bicycle facilities to 

provide, consider the number and characteristics of 

the bicyclists who will be using the facilities, as well 

as the characteristics of the vehicle traffic (e.g., speed, 

volume, etc.) and characteristics of the landscape 

and topology. For example, casual bicyclists or those 

riding with children might be hesitant to ride on roads 

that do not provide separation from vehicle traffic or 

that have challenging grades, while those engaging 

in long-distance bicycle touring might be more 

comfortable bicycling in those settings.

When deciding where to incorporate new active 

transportation infrastructure, it is important to 

evaluate how the proposed infrastructure fits into 

the existing or planned bicycle network within the 

park and surrounding community. Expanding bicycle 

infrastructure can be especially beneficial in places 

where it fills gaps in an existing bicycle network, such 

as by connecting two separate multiuse trails, or 

adding a bike lane on a bridge that carries high-speed 

traffic.10,11 Parks and their partners may also wish to 

prioritize installing new bicycle infrastructure in areas 

where safety is a concern, such as at intersections 

or along roadways that have seen a high number of 

crashes or documented safety deficiencies.

For more information about evaluating existing 

conditions and prioritizing new projects, see the 

Planning and Elements of Project Development

and Bicyclist and Pedestrian Safety chapters.

Figure 3-5: A sign notifies drivers to be alert for bicyclists ahead.

(Source: U.S. DOT Volpe Center)

Roadway resurfacing projects may present 

opportunities to install bicycle and pedestrian 

infrastructure.12 This can help create new active 

transportation facilities in an efficient, cost-effective 

way while road work is already being done. For 

example, if a roadway has wide shoulders or travel 

lanes, there may be an opportunity to reconfigure 

the pavement markings to create bike lanes, provided 

that safety standards are maintained for all roadway 

users. In addition, if the existing roadway width is 

maintained, the environmental review process for 

adding bicycle or pedestrian infrastructure as part 

of a resurfacing project will likely be minimal. For 

upcoming resurfacing projects on NPS roadways, 

park staff can coordinate with their NPS Federal 

Lands Transportation Program (FLTP) Coordinator and 

the Federal Lands Highway (FLH) staff overseeing 

project design on integrating bicycle and pedestrian 

infrastructure where possible. This coordination 
3-5 Chapter 3: Infrastructure and Multimodal Connectivity

should happen early on in the process so that bicycle 

and pedestrian facilities can be incorporated into the 

project scope, design, and budget.

Pavement material can affect the ease of bicycling. 

For example, many transportation agencies apply chip 

seal to existing pavement to protect the surface from 

wearing, lower maintenance costs, and extend the 

lifespan of rural, low-volume roads. However, chip 

seal can be difficult and unpleasant for bicyclists to 

ride on. Microsurfacing is a bicycle-friendly alternative 

to chip seal.13 When deciding whether to apply chip 

seal or asphalt, or to use a microsurfacing treatment, 

parks can consider the number of bicyclists who 

use the road, and whether there is a possibility to 

provide dedicated bicycle infrastructure (e.g., a bike 

lane, multiuse trail, or sidepath) without chip seal. 

Other trail surface types that can be considered 

include natural soil, gravel, asphalt, concrete, etc. 

Each trail surface type has tradeoffs associated with 

costs, durability, user groups, and visual impacts.14

Surface materials can greatly impact accessibility, so 

the chosen surface should consider both the needs of 

bicyclists and those using mobility devices, consistent 

with ABA requirements for a firm and stable surface. 

Figure 3-6: Bicyclists riding in Grand Canyon National Park, Arizona. (Source: NPS)
3-6 NPS Active Transportation Guidebook

Common types of bicycle facilities are listed in order from least to most separation from traffic in the following 

section. Bicycle facilities that are more separated from traffic tend to be safer for both bicyclists and drivers, 

because more separated facilities minimize the potential for a vehicle-bicycle crash.15,16 

Shared Lane Marking 

(Sharrow)

Figure 3-7: Sharrow in Austin, Texas. (Source: 

National Association of City Transportation Officials)

Definition: A roadway shared 

by vehicles and bicycles with 

pavement markings providing 

wayfinding guidance to bicyclists 

and alerting drivers that bicyclists 

are likely to be operating in mixed 

traffic.

Context: Sharrows are used 

on roadways that are a part of 

a bicycle route or network, but 

where the roadway width cannot 

accommodate both a vehicle 

lane and bike lane. Sharrows are 

typically displayed in a series along 

the roadway and are designed for 

roads with speed limits of 35 mph 

or less; they are most commonly 

found in more urban settings. 

On-street Bike Lane

Figure 3-8: On-street bicycle lane near San Antonio 

Missions National Historical Park in Texas. 

(Source: NPS)

Definition: An on-road bicycle 

facility designated by striping, 

signing, and pavement markings. 

A bike lane may have a painted 

buffer that increases lateral 

separation between bicyclists and 

motor vehicles.

Context: On-street bike lanes are 

often used on roadways where 

there is adequate pavement width 

to accommodate lanes for both 

vehicles and bicycles. Bike lanes 

can be considered for roads with 

high traffic volumes or high truck 

traffic, and when funding for 

more protective infrastructure is 

unavailable. 

Bicycle Boulevard

Figure 3-9: A pavement marking denoting a bicycle 

boulevard in Berkeley, California. (Source: National 

Association of City Transportation Officials)

Definition: A shared roadway 

bicycle facility, designed to offer 

priority for bicyclists operating 

within a roadway by using signs, 

pavement markings, and speed 

measures to discourage through 

trips by motor vehicles.

Context: Bicycle boulevards 

provide a bicycle-priority route 

designed to offer convenient, lowstress access to destinations and 

through neighborhoods. Access 

management, traffic calming, 

and crossing treatments are often 

included to improve the bicycle 

experience. They are typically 

used on local streets with existing 

low speeds and low traffic 

volumes.
3-7 Chapter 3: Infrastructure and Multimodal Connectivity

Separated Bike Lane

Figure 3-10: A two-way separated bike lane which 

is part of the Connect Historic Boston project. 

(Source: U.S. DOT Volpe Center)

Definition: An exclusive facility 

for bicyclists that is located 

within or directly adjacent to the 

roadway and that is physically 

separated from motor vehicle 

traffic with a vertical element 

(e.g., curbs, posts, plantings, 

etc.). Also known as a cycle track 

or protected bike lane. 

Context: Separated bike lanes 

are often used on roadways with 

space to accommodate bicycles 

and vehicles separately. They 

are especially valuable along 

roadways with high speed limits, 

high traffic volumes, or high truck 

traffic. They provide a physical 

barrier between the vehicle lane 

and the bike lane for enhanced 

comfort and safety.

Sidepath

Figure 3-11: A sidepath in Sleeping Bear Dunes 

National Lakeshore in Michigan. (Source: NPS) 

Definition: A bidirectional 

multiuse trail located immediately 

adjacent and parallel to a 

roadway.

Context: Sidepaths provide full 

separation from traffic, but are 

located adjacent to the roadway. 

They require a wide roadside 

environment to provide for 

separation and pathway area 

outside of the adjacent roadway.

Multiuse Trail

Figure 3-12: A multiuse trail in Grand Teton 

National Park, Wyoming, has averaged more than 

19,000 trips each year since it opened in May 

2009. (Source: NPS)

Definition: A travel area 

separated from motorized traffic 

and intended for shared use by 

a variety of groups, including 

 pedestrians and bicyclists.

Context: Multiuse trails (also 

referred to as multiuse paths 

or shared use paths) are often 

located within or near the rightsof-way of roadways, limited 

access highways, railroads, or 

utility paths. They can also be 

found within publicly accessible 

lands such as parks and open 

space areas, as well as along 

waterways. Typically, these trails 

have a width of 10 to 14 feet and 

can have a variety of materials, 

such as soil, gravel, asphalt, 

concrete, etc. Because these paths

limit interaction with motorized 

vehicles, they improve the safety 

and comfort of their 

users.17,18
3-8 NPS Active Transportation Guidebook

North Moab Recreation Areas Alternative Transportation Project

The North Moab Recreation Areas Alternative 

Transportation Project is an integrated 

transit and nonmotorized pathway system 

connecting the town of Moab, Utah to 

Arches National Park, the Colorado Riverway 

Recreation Area, and other Bureau of Land 

Management, state, and NPS recreation sites. 

The $11.8 million alternative transportation 

system includes two transit hubs with parking 

spaces and drop-off areas for buses, 12 

miles of multiuse trails, and 14 miles of wide 

shoulders that can be used by bicyclists. The 

project also includes a bicycle and pedestrian 

bridge across the Colorado River that parallels 

a State Highway 191 bridge that lacks shoulders and was previously a major point of conflict 

between bicycles and vehicles.19,20

Figure 3-13: Colorado River bicycle and pedestrian bridge near Moab, Utah. 

(Source: National Trails Training Partnership) 
3-9 Chapter 3: Infrastructure and Multimodal Connectivity

Bicycle Parking Design

Providing secure bicycle parking and storage facilities 

can help encourage visitors to bicycle to and within 

national parks. When deciding what types of bicycle 

racks to use and where to locate them, consider 

for what purpose and for how long people will be 

parking their bicycles. For short term parking, such 

as at a visitor center or concessions facility, bicycle 

parking should be convenient, visible, and easy to 

use. For example, inverted “U”-style bicycle racks 

are popular because they support the bicycle frame 

rather than simply the wheel. They are appropriate for 

many types of bicycles and can be installed in different 

numbers and configurations depending on the need.

For long term bicycle parking, such as at a trailhead 

or campground, users require additional security and 

weather protection. Examples of long-term bicycle 

parking include bicycle lockers and sheltered, secure 

enclosures. The Essentials of Bike Parking21 guide by 

the Association of Pedestrian and Bicycle Professionals 

is one resource which provides details on different 

types of bicycle parking—including styles of bicycle 

racks to avoid—and other factors to consider prior to 

installing bicycle parking.

It is important to consider the location of bike parking 

so as not to block accessible routes with either the 

parking itself or the potential for wheels to obstruct 

the accessible route.

Figure 3-14: “U”-style bicycle racks. (Source: Association of Pedestrian and 

Bicycle Professionals)

Figure 3-15: Types of long-term bicycle storage including bike lockers 

and enclosed shelters. (Source: Association of Pedestrian and Bicycle 

Professionals)
3-10 NPS Active Transportation Guidebook

Types of Multiuse 

Infrastructure

Multiuse trails can accommodate a variety of 

nonmotorized users, including bicyclists and 

pedestrians, including people using other powerdriven mobility devices (OPDMD). In order to promote 

safety and reduce conflict between users, the U.S. 

Access Board accessibility guidelines recommend 

that multiuse trails be wide enough to allow for 

users to safely pass each other; typical multiuse trail 

width standards are between 10 and 14 feet.22 If 

high numbers of both pedestrians and bicyclists are 

expected to use a path, parks may want to consider 

creating separate zones for bicycles and other users 

who will be traveling more slowly (e.g., through 

parallel paths, lane markings, pavement variation, or 

landscaping). Signs, such as a “give warning when 

passing” sign, or trail etiquette brochures can also 

educate users to be aware of others on the path and 

encourage them to pass safely. See the Bicyclist and 

Pedestrian Safety chapter for more information on 

safety education.

Some parks are experiencing overcrowding and 

conflicts between users on existing multiuse trails 

that are narrower than what is recommended by the 

current accessibility guidelines. Many NPS multiuse 

trails are relatively narrow compared to modern 

trail standards. For example, the Mount Vernon 

Trail managed by the George Washington Memorial 

Parkway in northern Virginia is six to eight feet wide, 

while modern standards recommend that trails be a 

minimum of 10 feet wide with separation for bicyclists 

and pedestrians, particularly on trails that are heavily 

used as is the Mount Vernon Trail.

If space is available and impact on resources is 

minimal, a narrow trail could be widened in order to 

accommodate more users; however, this is typically 

a costly and time-consuming strategy, emphasizing 

the importance of appropriately sizing a multiuse trail 

in the initial planning and design. If trail widening is 

not an immediate solution, other options can help 

alleviate these trail conflict and crowding issues. First, 

trail etiquette signs, messaging, or training can help 

users safely interact with each other. Or, if available, 

alternate routes could be identified; for example, 

an on-road route with minimal traffic may be an 

attractive alternative to a multiuse trail for bicyclists 

who want to go at higher speeds.

Maintaining multiuse trails in good condition helps 

to create a safe place to walk and ride, and it makes 

the paths more inviting. Where appropriate, and 

when the hours of the trail extend beyond dawn to 

dusk, trails can include lighting in order to extend 

the transportation use of the path for longer periods. 

Routine maintenance activities, such as sweeping, 

mowing, clearing snow, pavement repair, and trash 

removal, can help keep multiuse trails in a safe 

condition. 

Figure 3-16: A multiuse trail at Chesapeake and 

Ohio Canal National Historical Park in Washington, 

D.C. includes a gravel path and a parallel paved 

path to provide options for pedestrians, bicyclists, 

runners, and others using the trail. 

(Source: National Trails Training Partnership)20
3-11 Chapter 3: Infrastructure and Multimodal Connectivity

Oregon State Parks Bicycle Amenities

Oregon State Parks have made 

improvements to several state managed 

hiker-biker campsites in recent years. 

Three campgrounds have gear and food 

storage lockers, solar-powered phone 

charging stations, bicycle repair stations 

with basic tools and a floor pump, and 

group shelters. Oregon State Parks have 

also installed “U”-style bicycle racks at 

campgrounds and day use areas.

Figure 3-17: A hiker-biker campsite at Cape Blanco State Park in Oregon 

includes lockers for food and gear storage and a bicycle pump and repair 

station. (Source: Oregon State Parks)

Accessibility Considerations for Bicycle 

and Pedestrian Infrastructure

Developing bicycle and pedestrian infrastructure in a way that meets relevant 

accessibility guidelines and regulations allows people of various abilities to benefit 

from the infrastructure. Accessibility guidelines consider the usability of trails and 

visitor areas for those who have mobility challenges. These considerations could 

include trail widths, access ramps, trail slopes, trail surface types, access to rest 

areas, and level landings. U.S. Access Board guidelines apply to federal agencies 

that develop outdoor areas for recreational purposes, and include standards 

for accessible trails, trail facilities, and other types of pedestrian paths, such 

as Outdoor Recreation Access Routes (see the Legal and Policy Framework

chapter for more information).23 These standards do not apply to multiuse trails 

or infrastructure that is primarily for bicycles. For recommendations and best 

practices on accessible bicycle and multiuse paths, refer to the AASHTO Guide 

for the Development of Bicycle Facilities24 and the Rails to Trails Conservancy 

Accessibility resources web page.
3-12 NPS Active Transportation Guidebook

Urban Active Transportation Infrastructure

Some active transportation infrastructure types are more tailored to addressing the mobility 

challenges faced by bicyclists and pedestrians in urban areas, where there are typically higher 

traffic volumes, a greater density of intersections and traffic lights, and in some cases, higher 

numbers of pedestrians and bicyclists. On urban sidewalks, elements such as shade trees, 

benches, lighting, planters, and green infrastructure such as a rain garden can help to create a 

sidewalk that is a safe, enjoyable place for pedestrians to pass through and to linger.26

Two common strategies to enhance a bicyclist’s comfort at an intersection include intersection 

crossing markings and bicycle boxes. Intersection crossing markings guide bicyclists on a safe 

and direct path through intersections. A bicycle box is a designated area at the head of a 

traffic lane at a signalized intersection that provides bicyclists with a safe and visible area to 

queue ahead of motor vehicles during a red light. Agencies must receive interim approval 

from the FHWA to use bicycle boxes.27

Traffic signals can also be designed to prioritize bicyclists and pedestrians. A leading 

pedestrian phase gives pedestrians a walk signal several seconds before vehicles get a green 

light, allowing pedestrians to enter the intersection first and make themselves visible to 

turning vehicles. The pedestrian scramble is an exclusive phase for pedestrians at a traffic 

signal where vehicle traffic is stopped in all directions, giving priority to pedestrians to cross 

in any direction, including diagonally. Bicycle signals are traffic control devices that indicate 

bicycle signal phases and enable specific bicycle travel routes. Bicycle signals are often used 

at complex intersections, in locations with high traffic or bicycle volumes, along contraflow 

lanes, or where there is a need to prioritize bicycle movements.

While the majority of NPS sites would not need to use these urban infrastructure types, parks 

located in or near urban areas could consider working with gateway communities and local 

transportation agencies on implementing these types of infrastructure on partner owned 

facilities approaching the park.

Figure 3-18: (left) Intersection crossing marking in Denver, Colorado. (Source: Ashley Haire, Toole Design Group); (right) Bicycle Box in 

Portland, Oregon. (Source: NACTO Urban Bikeway Design Guide)
3-13 Chapter 3: Infrastructure and Multimodal Connectivity

Wayfinding and Signs for 

Bicyclists and Pedestrians

Wayfinding and signs are key components of bicycle 

and pedestrian facilities that let users know where 

they are and what to expect, aid them in navigating 

to key destinations, and help ensure safety. The 

NPS Sign Program28 at Harpers Ferry Center, which 

provides media services for NPS, maintains the NPS 

national sign standards and provides assistance 

to parks with designing and implementing signs. 

The NPS Sign Program categorizes signs into three 

different types for guidance: motorist guidance signs, 

visual information signs, and identity signs. Signs for 

bicyclists and pedestrians generally fall into the visual 

information signs category, while signs on roadways 

related to bicyclists or pedestrians are included in 

the guidance for motorist signs. The Harpers Ferry 

Center guidelines comply with the FHWA Manual on 

Uniform Traffic Control Devices29 for signs located 

on roadways. Chapter 9 of the MUTCD provides 

examples of bicycle wayfinding signs, as does the 

National Association of City Transportation Officials 

(NACTO) Urban Bikeway Design Guide.

30 See the 

Bicyclist and Pedestrian Safety chapter for more 

information on signs for motorists and bicyclists 

traveling together in mixed traffic. Contact the 

Harpers Ferry Center for more information regarding 

NPS Recreation and Prohibition Symbols.

Wayfinding, which falls into the Harpers Ferry Center 

visual information signs category, can show bicyclists 

and pedestrians that they are on or near a designated 

trail, bikeway, or walking route, and also provide 

guidance about distances to specific destinations, 

Figure 3-19: Wayfinding near Indiana Dunes National Lakeshore in Indiana. (Source: U.S. DOT Volpe Center)
3-14 NPS Active Transportation Guidebook

such as attractions, campgrounds, visitor centers, 

or nearby communities. Signs can also mark routes 

that are accessible to wheelchair users or others 

with disabilities to make it easy for users to find and 

follow them. Wayfinding signs, as well as paper 

maps, map kiosks, GPS-enabled smart phone apps, 

or other electronic mapping tools help users identify 

the safest or most direct pedestrian and bicycle routes 

to destinations or park attractions. These can also 

help familiarize users with the active transportation 

network. Mile markers help to orient people bicycling 

and walking as to how far they have traveled or 

need to go, and they are also useful for pinpointing 

locations of maintenance issues or the user’s location 

in the event of an emergency. Wayfinding signs 

can also indicate to bicyclists that they are on part 

of an official bicycle route, such as the U.S. Bicycle 

Route System (USBRS). For more information about 

bicycle touring routes, see the Visitor Activities and 

Programs chapter.

Other types of signs can help communicate laws and 

expectations to bicyclists and pedestrians, especially 

when they are sharing the same facility. Signs can also 

tell them what to do or expect as a trail intersects a 

roadway. The following section contains examples of 

bicycle and pedestrian signs. For information about 

the safety benefits of these types of signs, see the 

Bicyclist and Pedestrian Safety chapter.

When creating new signs or improving existing signs, 

it is important to work with partners, particularly state 

DOTs, to ensure compliance with sign standards and 

pursue coordination with surrounding sign networks 

and designs. Parks may need to get approval from 

their state DOT for signs on the roadway, and DOTs 

may have state-specific guidance on interpreting the 

MUTCD. 

Consider strategies to promote equity and inclusion 

for wayfinding signage and materials, including 

ensuring digital products are accessible to people 

with disabilities, providing text in multiple languages, 

providing interpretive devices, and considering all 

cognitive abilities. Signs in parks need to be sensitive 

to the context of the surrounding area, taking into 

consideration factors such as safety, visitor experience, 

and visibility of natural and cultural resources. For 

instance, the design and placement of signs in urban 

parks may differ significantly from those implemented 

in more rural, nature focused parks. In addition, signs 

should be simple and concise to reduce visual clutter. 

Signs are often added to a location when there is a 

problem or issue to solve, but more signs may not be 

the only or best solution. Table 3-1 contains examples 

of bicycle and pedestrian signs. For information about 

the safety benefits of these types of signs, see the 

Bicyclist and Pedestrian Safety chapter.

Figure 3-20: The National Mall and Memorial Parks partnered with the 

Washington D.C. Department of Transportation to install bicycle route 

signs throughout the park to connect bicycle routes between the park 

and city. In addition to pointing out the direction of the route, the signs 

also show the distance to the destination. (Source: NPS).
3-15 Chapter 3: Infrastructure and Multimodal Connectivity

Table 3-1: Description of Signs

Sign Definition Context

Signed Bicycle Route A roadway designated 

as a preferred route for 

bicycles, indicated by 

signs along the road. 

Signed bicycle routes are used on 

roads selected as appropriate for 

bicycle travel. The signs alert drivers 

to the presence of bicyclists on the 

road, and show bicyclists that they 

are on a preferred bicycle route.

Trail Courtesy Signs This type of sign is used 

to convey etiquette for 

all users on a multiuse 

trail or path.

Encouraging users to share a 

multiuse trail is important whether 

the trail is in an urban area or 

the backcountry. Signs conveying 

etiquette can help reduce conflicts 

between different user groups. 

NOTE: This information is typically placed on 

informational kiosk trailhead signs and is not an 

MUTCD compliant sign.

Bikes ‘Yield to Pedestrians’ Signs This sign is used 

where bicyclists and 

pedestrians cross 

or share a facility. 

It conveys that a 

bicyclist must yield 

to pedestrians when 

operating on the facility 

together.

This type of sign can help bicyclists 

and pedestrians safely operate or 

navigate the same facility by reducing 

conflicts between the two modes.

Trail Crossing Signs 

for Bicyclists

Signs where a trail 

crosses a roadway 

that warns cyclists 

and pedestrians about 

upcoming conditions. 

Signs on trails can alert trail users 

that a crossing is coming up and 

provide instructions on how to safely 

navigate it.

Electric Bicycle (e-bike) Signage This sign is used by the 

NPS to convey whether or 

not e-bikes are allowed 

on certain trails.

E-bike signage is used to indicate the 

types of users that are permitted on 

certain trails to ensure that e-bikers 

travel in locations where they are 

permitted and for hikers to be aware of 

the presence of e-bikes.

Figure 3-21: Bicycle route sign. (Source: MUTCD)

Figure 3-22: Trail courtesy sign. 

(Source: Harpers Ferry Center)

Figure 3-23: Bikes ‘Yield to Pedestrians’ sign. 

(Source: MUTCD)

Figure 3-24: Trail crossing signs for bicyclists. 

(Source: MUTCD)

Figure 3-25: E-bike signage. 

(Source: NPS)
3-16 NPS Active Transportation Guidebook

Strategies to Enhance 

Multimodal Connectivity

To allow greater mobility, visitors using active 

transportation need to be able to connect to other 

modes of transportation, such as shuttle buses, trains, 

local transit, bikeshare systems, and ferries within and 

connecting to parks. Connecting a variety of modes in 

a transportation network helps to facilitate multimodal 

connectivity; for example, bike lanes or multiuse trails 

could connect with a train station or with public 

transit facilities (i.e., bus stops). The 

Partnerships and Funding chapter of this 

Guidebook provides more information on creating 

partnerships between parks and nearby communities. 

For more information on making bicycle and 

pedestrian connections to transit, see the Federal 

Transit Administration (FTA) Manual on Pedestrian and 

Bicycle Connections to Transit.

31 

Other transportation modes can also support bicycle 

use. For example, shuttle buses operating in and 

around national parks can include bicycle racks or 

trailers so that bicyclists can transport their bicycles 

between locations within a park or from a nearby 

community. Additionally, bicycle racks on support 

vehicles allows staff and others to provide assistance 

to bicyclists in a distress situation (e.g., a flat tire or 

minor injury). Bicycle rental facilities may also consider 

providing vehicle bicycle racks to enable visitors 

to more easily transport bicycles. Sufficient bicycle 

parking, storage, and transport options can allow park 

visitors to switch between modes and more easily 

explore parks and surrounding communities. 

Amtrak, the only national passenger rail system in the 

U.S., operates through or near several national parks, 

and provides a car-free opportunity for people to visit 

parks. Amtrak’s Bicycle Task Force works towards the 

goal of implementing bicycle carry-on service on all 

of Amtrak’s routes. Carry-on service, which allows 

the passenger to carry their bike on and off the train 

themselves at any station, is the most flexible type 

of bicycle service and has been implemented on a 

number of routes. Amtrak has also implemented trainside checked bike service, which allows passengers 

to check their standard-sized bicycle at stations 

with baggage service instead of boxing the bike for 

transport. This service has been implemented on all of 

Amtrak’s long-distance routes. These improvements 

make it easier for people to visit national parks along 

or near Amtrak routes by rail and without a car. Parks, 

communities, and partners can consider providing 

accommodations for these visitors, such as lockers for 

temporary storage of personal items.

In addition to Amtrak, some local or intercity trains 

have cars outfitted with bicycle racks. For example, the 

MARC train service in Maryland tested bike cars on 

several trains to Harpers Ferry, West Virginia, allowing 

bicyclists to access Harpers Ferry National Historical 

Park and the Chesapeake and Ohio Canal National 

Historical Park by train.32

Shuttle Service for Bicyclists 

at Glacier National Park

Glacier National Park allows bicycles to use 

Going-to-the-Sun Road in the spring season 

while the road is being plowed and is not yet 

open to cars (see the Open Streets chapter 

for more information about this opportunity). 

In 2016, the NPS and the Glacier National Park 

Conservancy launched a new shuttle bus service 

for bicycle riders on Going-to-the-Sun Road. The 

shuttle buses operate in May and June, until the 

road opens to vehicles for the season, and are 

equipped with bicycle trailers that can carry up to 

16 bikes, including a limited number of tandem 

and recumbent bikes. The project is intended to 

prevent possible resource damage associated with 

vehicle congestion at Avalanche Creek, a popular 

area for bicyclists and hikers to drive to and 

gather when the Going-to-the-Sun Road is closed 

to vehicles during the spring. With the shuttle 

service, visitors 

can now take 

the shuttle 

bus with their 

bicycles to 

this location, 

rather than 

driving. 

Figure 3-26: A bicycle trailer at Glacier National 

Park in Montana. (Source: Saara Snow)
3-17 Chapter 3: Infrastructure and Multimodal Connectivity

Additional Resources 

Association of Pedestrian and Bicycle Professionals (APBP) Essentials of Bike Parking (2015). 

https://www.apbp.org/assets/docs/EssentialsofBikeParking_FINA.pdf

FHWA Incorporating On-Road Bicycle Networks into Resurfacing Projects (2016). 

https://www.fhwa.dot.gov/environment/bicycle_pedestrian/publications/resurfacing/resurfacing_workbook.pdf

FHWA Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices. Part 9: Traffic Control for Bicycle Facilities (2020) . 

https://mutcd.fhwa.dot.gov/htm/2009/part9/part9_toc.htm

FTA Manual on Pedestrian and Bicycle Connections to Transit (2019). 

https://www.transit.dot.gov/research-innovation/manual-pedestrian-and-bicycle-connections-transit

NACTO Urban Street Design Guide. http://nacto.org/publication/urban-street-design-guide/

NPS Accessibility & Universal Design Standards (2021). 

https://www.nps.gov/dscw/ds-accessibility-universal-design.htm

NPS Director’s Order #42: Accessibility for Visitors with Disabilities in National Park Service Programs and Services 

(2000). https://www.nps.gov/policy/DOrders/DOrder42.html

People for Bikes Green Lane Project. https://www.peopleforbikes.org/local-innovation/green-lane-project

Portland, Oregon Pedestrian Design Guide. https://www.portlandoregon.gov/transportation/article/84048

Rails to Trails Conservancy Accessibility. 

https://www.railstotrails.org/build-trails/trail-building-toolbox/design/accessibility/

U.S. Access Board Architectural Barriers Act (ABA) Standards (2015). 

https://www.access-board.gov/files/aba/ABAstandards.pdf

U.S. Access Board Final Guidelines for Outdoor Developed Areas (2013). https://www.access-board.gov/guidelinesand-standards/recreation-facilities/outdoor-developed-areas/final-guidelines-for-outdoor-developed-areas
3-18 NPS Active Transportation Guidebook

End Notes

1

 AASHTO Guide for the Development of Bicycle Facilities (2012). 

https://nacto.org/wp-content/uploads/2015/04/AASHTO_Bicycle-Facilities-Guide_2012-toc.pdf

2

 FHWA Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices (2022). https://mutcd.fhwa.dot.gov/

3

 Memorandum of Understanding Between FHWA and National Park Service Regarding Traffic Control Devices on 

Roads in National Parks (2006). https://mutcd.fhwa.dot.gov/resources/policy/moutcd/

4

 FHWA Pedestrian and Bicycle Transportation (2016). https://www.fhwa.dot.gov/policy/2015cpr/chap11.cfm

5

 FHWA Memorandum on Bicycle and Pedestrian Facility Design Flexibility (2013). 

https://www.fhwa.dot.gov/environment/bicycle_pedestrian/guidance/design_flexibility.cfm

6

 Institute of Transportation Engineers Implementing Context Sensitive Solutions Design Handbook (2017). 

http://ecommerce.ite.org/IMIS/ItemDetail?iProductCode=IR-145-E

7

 ADA Requirements Wheelchairs, Mobility Aids, and Other Power-Driven Mobility Devices (2014).

https://www.ada.gov/opdmd.htm

8

 FHWA Small Town and Rural Multimodal Networks (2016). 

https://www.fhwa.dot.gov/environment/bicycle_pedestrian/publications/small_towns/

9

 FHWA Strategic Agenda for Pedestrian and Bicycle Transportation (2016). 

http://www.fhwa.dot.gov/environment/bicycle_pedestrian/publications/strategic_agenda/fhwahep16086.pdf

10 FHWA Case Studies in Delivering Safe, Comfortable, and Connected Bicycle Networks (2015). 

http://www.fhwa.dot.gov/environment/bicycle_pedestrian/publications/network_report/network_report.pdf

11 FHWA Incorporating On-Road Bicycle Networks into Resurfacing Projects (2016). 

https://www.fhwa.dot.gov/environment/bicycle_pedestrian/publications/resurfacing/resurfacing_workbook.pdf

12 FHWA Evaluation of Pavement Safety Performance (2015). 

https://www.fhwa.dot.gov/publications/research/safety/14065/004.cfm

13 FWS Wichita Mountains Wildlife Refuge Comprehensive Alternative Transportation Plan (2014). 

https://rosap.ntl.bts.gov/view/dot/12109

14 FHWA Separated Bike Lane Planning and Design Guide (2015). http://www.fhwa.dot.gov/environment/bicycle_ 

pedestrian/publications/separated_bikelane_pdg/separatedbikelane_pdg.pdf

15 UNC Highway Safety Research Center Costs for Pedestrian and Bicyclist Infrastructure Improvements Report 

(2013). http://www.pedbikeinfo.org/cms/downloads/Countermeasure%20Costs_Report_Nov2013.pdf

16 Architectural and Transportation Barriers Compliance Board Shared Use Paths Accessibility Guidelines (2013). 

http://nacto.org/docs/usdg/shared_use_path_accessibility_guidelines_federal_register.pdf

17 Central Federal Lands Highway Division Guide to Promoting Bicycles on Federal Lands (2008). 

http://www.pedbikeinfo.org/cms/downloads/01_promoting_bicycling_entire_document.pdf

18 FHWA Rails-with-Trails Best Practices and Lessons Learned (2021). 

https://www.fhwa.dot.gov/environment/recreational_trails/publications/rwt2021/
3-19 Chapter 3: Infrastructure and Multimodal Connectivity

19 FHWA Small Town and Rural Multimodal Networks (2016). 

https://www.fhwa.dot.gov/environment/bicycle_pedestrian/publications/small_towns/

20 Public Lands Transportation Scholar Final Report North Moab Recreation Area Connections (2013). 

https://westerntransportationinstitute.org/wp-content/uploads/2018/01/PLTS_Roefaro_Final_Report.pdf

21 Association of Pedestrian and Bicycle Professionals. Essentials of Bike Parking (2015). 

https://www.apbp.org/assets/docs/EssentialsofBikeParking_FINA.pdf

22 Architectural and Transportation Barriers Compliance Board Shared Use Path Accessibility Guidelines (2011). 

http://nacto.org/docs/usdg/shared_use_path_accessibility_guidelines_federal_register.pdf

23 U.S. Access Board. A Summary of Accessibility Standards for Federal Outdoor Developed Areas (2014). 

https://www.access-board.gov/aba/guides/chapter-10-outdoor/#introduction

24 AASHTO Guide for the Development of Bicycle Facilities, 4th Edition (2012). 

https://store.transportation.org/Item/CollectionDetail?ID=116

25 Rails to Trails Conservancy Accessibility. 

https://www.railstotrails.org/build-trails/trail-building-toolbox/design/accessibility/

26 NACTO Urban Street Design Guide. http://nacto.org/publication/urban-street-design-guide/

27 FHWA Interim Approval for Optional Use of an Intersection Bicycle Box (2016). 

https://mutcd.fhwa.dot.gov/resources/interim_approval/ia18/index.htm

28 NPS Sign Program at Harpers Ferry Center. https://www.nps.gov/subjects/hfc/index.htm

29 FHWA Memorandum of Understanding Between FHWA and National Park Service Regarding Traffic Control 

Devices on Roads in National Parks (2006). https://mutcd.fhwa.dot.gov/resources/policy/moutcd/

30 NACTO Urban Bikeway Design Guide. http://nacto.org/publication/urban-bikeway-design-guide/

31 FTA Manual on Pedestrian and Bicycle Connections to Transit (2017).

https://www.transit.dot.gov/sites/fta.dot.gov/files/docs/research-innovation/64496/ftareportno0111.pdf

32 Maryland Transit Administration MARC Bike Cars October 27 and 30 (2017). 

https://www.mta.maryland.gov/articles/203
Grand Teton National Park, Wyoming (Source: NPS)

Chapter 4: Bicyclist and Pedestrian Safety

This chapter provides resources to help parks and their partners evaluate and improve safety 

for active transportation modes. It discusses safety strategies centered around the “four E’s” 

of transportation safety: engineering, education, enforcement, and emergency response.
4-1 Chapter 4: Bicyclist and Pedestrian Safety

Introduction

As demand for walking and bicycling in national 

parks continues to increase, parks and partners can 

provide visitors with safe opportunities for active 

transportation and recreation while minimizing 

conflicts between transportation modes. To assist 

parks and partners in improving active transportation 

safety, this chapter includes an overview of NPS policy 

related to transportation safety, information on key 

national bicycle and pedestrian safety initiatives, and 

resources and specific examples centered around 

the “four E’s” of transportation safety: engineering 

(infrastructure), education, enforcement, and 

emergency response.

Several sections of NPS Management Policies1

relate to providing safe active transportation and 

outdoor recreation opportunities integrated into the 

transportation system of parks and the surrounding 

community (see the Legal and Policy Framework

chapter for a more detailed description of NPS 

Management Policies related to active transportation). 

The NPS Management Policies (Section 9.2.1.1) 

state that park road designs are subject to NPS Park 

Road Standards2

 and can be adapted to each park’s 

unique character and resource limitations. The Park 

Road Standards describe how consideration must be 

given to providing safe travel ways in locations where 

bicycling is encouraged, including providing separate 

bikeways where practical. They also discuss sight 

distance considerations where roads intersect with 

pedestrian, equestrian, and bicycle facilities.

Active transportation plans, projects, and safety 

interventions vary to fit the specific needs and context 

of a park and surrounding community. Collaboration 

between planners, engineers, law enforcement 

personnel, emergency responders, community 

partners, communications professionals, and natural 

and cultural resource experts is paramount to ensuring 

that safety strategies are best suited for the park and 

community context.

Engaging community members and area stakeholders 

can help to ensure the safety strategies identified 

and implemented will more accurately reflect 

the transportation needs and preferences of the 

surrounding community. Intentional engagement with 

traditionally underserved communities, low-income 

populations, accessibility organizations, and Native 

American and Indigenous communities to address any 

underlying safety disparities is essential.

National Initiatives & 

Principles Supporting 

Active Transportation 

Safety

National initiatives help to promote principles and 

standards for advancing bicycle and pedestrian 

transportation safety. The following are key national 

safety initiatives to reference when considering and 

pursuing bicycle and pedestrian safety efforts in parks 

and surrounding communities. 

The Safe System Approach

The Safe System Approach3 is a comprehensive 

approach to roadway safety that focuses on both 

human mistakes and human vulnerability and designs 

a system with many redundancies in place to protect 

everyone. 

Founded on the principle that no one should be killed 

or injured when using the transportation system, the 

Safe System Approach is a major component of the 

U.S. Department of Transportation (U.S. DOT) National 

Roadway Safety Strategy (NRSS),

4

 and is championed 

by the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA),5

 the 

National Transportation Safety Board (NTSB),6

 and the 

National Safety Council (NSC).7

 It is also promoted by 

national and international safety initiatives such as the 

Vision Zero Network,

8

 the Road to Zero Coalition,

9

 and 

the Towards Zero Foundation.

10

Figure 4-1: Safe System Approach. (Source: FHWA)
4-2 NPS Active Transportation Guidebook

The Safe System Approach works by building and 

reinforcing multiple layers of protection to both 

prevent crashes from happening and minimize the 

harm caused to those involved when crashes do 

occur. The principles and elements of the Safe System 

Approach can guide program, policy, and project 

level discussions to reduce conflicts between bicycles, 

pedestrians, and vehicles, minimizing the risk of 

injuries and fatalities in active transportation and 

outdoor recreation opportunities. 

The FHWA Primer On Safe System Approach For 

Pedestrians And Bicyclists11 provides information 

on how each of the elements of the Safe System 

Approach address bicycle and pedestrian safety. Since 

pedestrians and bicyclists make up a growing share 

of U.S. traffic fatalities compared with those traveling 

inside of vehicles, by focusing on eliminating deaths 

and injuries the Safe System Approach inherently 

places a priority on pedestrians and bicyclists.

Complete Streets

A Complete Street12 is a street that is safe and feels 

safe for all users, including pedestrians, bicyclists, 

public transportation users, children, older individuals, 

individuals with disabilities, motorists, and freight 

vehicles. Parks and partners can apply Complete 

Streets concepts in planning and design of park and 

community transportation systems to support active 

transportation and outdoor recreation opportunities. 

Figure 4-2: RSAs on Federal and Tribal Lands often require unique 

partnerships to assess safety. (Source: Road Safety Audit Toolkit for Federal 

Land Management Agencies and Tribal Governments)

FHWA describes Complete Streets as an 

implementation strategy of the Safe System Approach 

and notes that creating a safe, connected, and 

equitable Complete Streets network is an iterative 

strategy that involves:

• Understanding the community and network 

context;

• Identifying safety, connectivity, and equity 

concerns; 

• Implementing improvements over time; and

• Evaluating impacts by monitoring and 

measuring success.

 Road Safety Audit (RSA)

By considering how and where people walk and ride bikes, parks can identify potential 

points of conflict between different transportation modes. An RSA is an examination of an 

intersection or stretch of roadway, undertaken to identify opportunities for improvements 

in safety for all road users. In some cases, an RSA can analyze, evaluate, and recommend 

safety strategies for transportation. In addition, RSAs can help parks and their partners 

understand all roadway users’ actions on the road (both intentional and unintentional). Parks 

and Partners can use the FHWA RSA Toolkit for FLMAs and Tribal Governments13 to develop 

engineering, education, enforcement, and emergency response strategies to improve roadway 

safety. RSAs can also provide an early opportunity to engage with natural/cultural resource 

experts. The FHWA Pedestrian and Bicyclist Road Safety Audit Guide and Prompt List14 also 

supports agencies interested in conducting pedestrian- and bicycle-focused RSAs and includes 

information on safety risks for both modes.
4-3 Chapter 4: Bicyclist and Pedestrian Safety

Improving Safety 

with Engineering 

(Infrastructure) 

This section summarizes key engineering strategies 

that parks and partners can implement to provide 

safe and equitable active transportation and 

outdoor recreation opportunities integrated into the 

transportation system of parks and the surrounding 

community. A variety of infrastructure, including 

paved shoulders, on-street bike lanes, separated bike 

lanes, sidewalks, side paths, and multiuse trails, can 

be used to improve bicycle and pedestrian comfort 

and safety. Other measures such as signs, pavement 

markings, reduced speed limits, and high-visibility 

crosswalks may provide cues to drivers that bicyclists 

and pedestrians are likely to be using the road.

The FHWA Bicycle Safety Guide and Countermeasure 

Selection System and Pedestrian Safety Guide and 

Countermeasure Selection System (BIKESAFE15 and 

PEDSAFE16) provide information on how to improve 

safety for pedestrians and bicyclists through an online 

selection tool with a list of possible engineering, 

education, or enforcement treatments to improve 

bicyclist and pedestrian safety and/or mobility based 

on user input about a specific location. The associated 

websites have information on countermeasures for 

specific situations, including intersection treatments, 

shared roadway facilities, multiuse trails, and 

markings, signs, and signals.

Bicycle and pedestrian data, including crash data 

and bicycle and pedestrian counts, can be used to 

identify safety issues and inform safety solutions in the 

categories of engineering, education, enforcement, 

and emergency response. For more information 

about data collection and count technology, see the 

Innovative Technologies and Emerging Trends

chapter.

Figure 4-3: Effect of speeds on pedestrian fatalities. (Source: FHWA)

NPS Visitor Information System Signs

Shared Trails

Province Lands Bicycle Trail

Safety Information

Observe 10 MPH 

speed limit on 

the bike trail.

Numerous accidents have occurred on this trail as 

a result of excessive speed, failure to pay attention, 

and lack of adult supervision. 

Regulations

CAUTION

1'-6"

Figure 4-4: Sample NPS visitor information system sign for shared rail. (Source: NPS)

Safe Speeds

Implementing strategies to ensure safe speeds for 

all users on roads and trails can promote safety for 

people walking and biking in and around parks. Small 

changes in speed17 can have a significant impact on 

fatal and serious injury crashes, especially for people 

who walk or bike. For instance, a pedestrian has a 

90 percent likelihood of surviving if hit by a vehicle 
4-4 NPS Active Transportation Guidebook

traveling at 23 mph, while only a 10 percent chance 

of surviving an impact at 58 mph.18 

FHWA encourages Federal agencies to set appropriate 

speed limits for all users.19 Lower speeds reduce crash 

impact forces, provide additional time for people 

driving to stop, and make it easier to see people 

walking and biking by improving peripheral vision. 

This FHWA video on pedestrians at crosswalks20

explains the relationship between vehicle speeds, 

visibility of crossing pedestrians, and a driver’s ability 

to come to a stop at crosswalks.

In the NPS, park road speed limits are established by 

statute in accordance with the Park Road Standards 

and 36 CFR 4.21,

21 with allowances made for 

deviation when warranted by environmental concerns 

(natural and cultural resources) and safety. Engineering 

speed studies can identify where posted speed limits 

that differ from those allowed by statute may or may 

not be reasonable. 

36 CFR 4.21 - Speed limits sets park area speed limits 

as follows: 

• 15 miles per hour: within all school zones, 

campgrounds, picnic areas, parking areas, 

utility areas, business or residential areas, other 

places of public assemblage, and at emergency 

scenes.

• 25 miles per hour: upon sections of park road 

under repair or construction.

• 45 miles per hour: upon all other park roads.

The regulations also note that the superintendent 

may designate a different speed limit upon any park 

road when these speed limits are determined to 

be unreasonable, unsafe, or inconsistent with the 

purposes for which the park area was established. 

To minimize conflicts with vehicles where people 

walk and bike along roads, or where recreation and 

transportation trails cross roads, parks and partners 

can implement strategies22 to lower traffic speeds. 

This can include setting speed limits unlikely to result 

Figure 4-5: Example of high visibility crosswalk markings and ADA compliant detectable warning surfaces in a park setting. (Source: NPS)
4-5 Chapter 4: Bicyclist and Pedestrian Safety

in crash impact forces beyond what the human body 

can tolerate, as well as education, enforcement, and 

roadway design and infrastructure changes to deter 

excessive speeding. Care can also be taken in the 

design of and setting of speed limits on multiuse 

paths to ensure safety among all path users traveling 

at different speeds. 

Safe Bicycle and Pedestrian 

Crossings 

Parks and partners can reduce conflicts at 

intersections, near key destinations, and where 

recreation and transportation trails cross roads by 

designing visible and logical crossing locations that 

lead to:

• Reliable yielding behavior from people driving;

• Predictable crossing behavor from bicyclists 

and pedestrians; and 

• Speeds unlikely to result in fatal or injury 

crashes at crossing locations.

Crosswalks can be marked near obvious pedestrian 

and bicycle origins and destinations that require 

people to cross the road, including where trails cross 

roads. There is no minimum number of pedestrians 

per hour required to mark a crosswalk. How people 

of different ages and abilities cross the road can also 

help parks and partners determine whether to mark 

a crosswalk. To ensure the safety of people with 

disabilities, parks and partners should follow ADA and 

ABA Standards when designing and implementing 

crosswalks.

The FHWA Crosswalk Marking Field Visibility Study23

shows that high visibility style crosswalk markings, 

also known as continental crosswalk markings, are 

more easily seen by approaching drivers. Continental 

markings can be detected at about twice the distance 

upstream as transverse markings (markings that only 

outline the edge of the crosswalk) during daytime 

conditions. This increase in distance reflects 8 seconds 

of increased awareness of the crossing for a 30 mph 

operating speed.

In some cases, such as on roads with high speeds or 

high traffic volumes, simply marking a crosswalk will 

not be sufficient to reduce conflicts, and additional 

strategies24 to improve the visibility and conspicuity 

of crosswalks will be necessary. To determine which 

additional strategies are appropriate based on traffic 

volumes, operating speeds, and the number of 

lanes, parks and partners can refer to the FHWA Safe 

Transportation for Every Pedestrian (STEP) Studio,

25

which is a compilation of design guidance, research, 

and best practice to identify appropriate engineering 

strategies. The FHWA STEP Guide for Improving 

Visibility at Trail Crossings26 discusses ways to make 

trail crossings more visible to drivers and describes 

safety issues and strategies for different types of trail 

crossings. Table 4-1 provides examples of engineering 

safety strategies for crosswalks, including visibility 

enhancements, raised crosswalks, and flashing 

beacons. Additional engineering safety strategies and 

resources can be found on the FHWA Proven Safety 

Countermeasures27 website. 

Parks and partners can base decisions about whether 

and where to mark a crosswalk while considering the 

context and features of the road and surrounding 

area, including natural and cultural resources, roadway 

speed, sight distance and visibility, multimodal 

transportation sites, and nearby points of interest and 

destinations. To determine the most appropriate safety 

approach, parks and partners can seek professional 

advice and recommendations from planners, 

engineers, law enforcement personnel, emergency 

responders, community partners, communications 

professionals, and natural and cultural resource 

experts. The ABA standards apply to any area in a park 

that is officially designated as a crosswalk.

Figure 4-6: Improved visibility at a marked crossing location in a rural park 

setting. (Source: NPS)
4-6 NPS Active Transportation Guidebook

Table 4-1: Selected Crosswalk Engineering Safety Strategies

Sign Type Definition Context

Crosswalk Visibility 

Enhancements

Lighting, signage, 

pavement 

markings, and 

other design 

strategies that 

increase visibility 

of pedestrians and 

bicyclists in and 

around crosswalks.

High-visibility crosswalk markings help make 

crosswalks and pedestrians more visible and 

can help pedestrians decide where to cross. 

These markings may include advance STOP 

or YIELD signs and pavement markings, curb 

extensions, improved lighting, and in-street 

STOP or YIELD signs. See FHWA Crosswalk 

Visibility Enhancements,

28 and Manual on 

Uniform Traffic Control Devices (MUTCD) 

guidance on the use of R1-6 Series Signs at 

crosswalk locations29 for further considerations.

Raised Crosswalk Raised crosswalks 

force motorists to 

reduce their speed 

at pedestrian 

crossings.

Raised crosswalks are typically flush with the 

street curb and are marked with the same 

signage and pavement markings required at 

other marked crosswalks. See FHWA Raised 

Crosswalks30 for design specifications and 

other considerations for use. 

Rectangular Rapid 

Flashing Beacon (RRFB)

RRFBs are 

pedestrian-actuated 

conspicuity 

enhancements used 

in combination with 

pedestrian, school, 

and trail crossing 

warning signs to 

improve motorist 

yielding behavior 

at uncontrolled, 

marked crosswalks.

RRFBs include two rectangular-shaped yellow 

indications, each with an LED-array-based light 

source, that flash with high frequency when 

activated. RRFBs are most appropriate for roads 

with relatively lower speeds, relatively high traffic 

volumes, or roads multiple lanes in one direction. 

For roadways with posted speeds above 40 mph 

or roads with wide crossing distances, consider 

a Pedestrian Hybrid Beacon31 instead. See FHWA 

Rectangular Rapid Flashing Beacon32 for more 

information.

Figure 4-8: Raised crosswalk. (Source: 

FHWA)

Figure 4-7: ‘Yield to Peds’ and ‘Stop for 

Peds’ in-street sign. (Source: MUTCD)

Figure 4-9: Rectangular Rapid Flashing 

Beacon. (Source: Carol Kachadoorian)
4-7 Chapter 4: Bicyclist and Pedestrian Safety

Safety Along Roads and Trails

Dedicated bicycle and pedestrian infrastructure— 

such as multiuse trails, bike lanes, sidewalks, and 

pedestrian trails—promote safety by increasing 

physical separation between vehicles and bicycles or 

pedestrians, and sometimes by making bicyclists and 

pedestrians more visible. The Infrastructure and 

Multimodal Connectivity chapter provides details 

on the types, amount of separation, and context for 

bicycle and pedestrian infrastructure. 

Along Roads

Depending on the park and roadway context, bicycle 

accommodations along roads can vary from separated 

bikeways that provide physical separation between 

vehicles and bicycles, to shoulder areas that can be 

used for bicycling, to shared travel lanes. Pedestrian 

infrastructure along roadways can include sidewalks 

and paved shoulders. The FHWA Small Town and 

Rural Multimodal Networks Guide33 provides design 

information for mixed traffic, visually separated, and 

physically separated bicycle and pedestrian facilities 

based on traffic volumes, operating speeds, and 

adjacent land use.

The FHWA Bikeway Selection Guide34 provides design 

guidance to ensure bikeways are connected, safe, and 

comfortable, and that they meet the needs of people 

of all ages and abilities. The guide recommends 

bikeway types based on roadway context, traffic 

volume and posted speed. It also describes how 

different types of cyclists will be more comfortable on 

different types of facilities. For example, the majority 

of people fall into the “interested but concerned” 

category, and may not bike at all if they do not 

perceive the bicycle facilities as safe and low stress. 

One potential strategy to improve bicycle and 

pedestrian safety is reconfiguring roadways to 

reallocate space on the road for bicyclists and 

pedestrians. This is often referred to as a road diet. In 

13

BIKEWAY SELECTION GUIDE | 3. BIKEWAY SELECTION PLANNING

Somewhat Confident Bicyclist

Somewhat	Confident	Bicyclists,	also	known	as	Enthused	and	

Confident	Bicyclists,	are	the	next-smallest	group.	They	are	

comfortable on most types of bicycle facilities. They have a lower 

tolerance	for	traffic	stress	than	the	Highly	Confident	Bicyclist	

and generally prefer low-volume residential streets and striped 

or separated bike lanes on major streets, but they are willing 

to	tolerate	higher	levels	of	traffic	stress	for	short	distances	to	

complete trips to destinations or to avoid out-of-direction travel.

Interested but Concerned Bicyclist

Interested	but	Concerned	Bicyclists	are	the	largest	group	

identified	by	the	research	and	have	the	lowest	tolerance	for	

traffic	stress.	Those	who	fit	into	this	group	tend	to	avoid	

bicycling except where they have access to networks of 

separated bikeways or very low-volume streets with safe 

roadway crossings. To maximize the potential for bicycling as 

a viable transportation option, it is important to design bicycle 

facilities	to	meet	the	needs	of	the	Interested	but	Concerned	

Bicyclist category. This is generally the recommended design 

user	profile	as	the	resulting	bikeway	network	will	serve	bicyclists	

of	all	ages	and	abilities,	which	includes	Highly	Confident	and	

Somewhat	Confident	Bicyclists.

Target Design User

The	target	design	user	influences	the	safety,	comfort,	

connectivity,	and	cohesion	of	the	bicycle	network.	Communities	

establish a target design user by selecting a target comfort 

level	for	the	bicycle	network.	Comfort	and	stress	are	inversely	

correlated.	Exposure	to	high	motor	vehicle	traffic	speeds	and	

volumes is the primary contributor of stress. High-comfort/lowstress networks serve the most people while low-comfort/highstress networks serve the least.

While the target design user and target comfort level should 

be selected based on the vision, this critical decision is often 

overlooked. In such cases, the network typically defaults to 

serving	Highly	Confident	and	Somewhat	Confident	users	in	a	

Basic	Bikeway	Network	(as	described	on	page 14).	Communities	

seeking to serve all ages and abilities will need to establish lowstress bicycle networks.

Figure	6:	Bicyclist	Design	User	Profiles

Note:	the	percentages	above	reflect	only	

adults who have stated an interest in bicycling.

Figure 4-10: Bicyclist Design User Profiles (Source: FHWA Bikeway Design Guide)
4-8 NPS Active Transportation Guidebook

a park setting, this is most likely to be done through 

narrowing a two-lane roadway with shoulders 

to create space for bicyclists where the roadway 

shoulders are located. Road diets35 improve overall 

safety and comfort for bicyclists and pedestrians, and 

often enhance the efficiency of vehicle operation.

Reducing lane width may encourage drivers to travel 

at lower speeds, resulting in traffic speeds that 

are closer to the posted speed limit and creating a 

safer and more comfortable roadway for all users. 

Before reconfiguring a roadway, parks and partners 

could work with transportation experts to evaluate 

traffic speeds, volumes, and the types of vehicles 

using the road, and determine whether a road diet 

is an appropriate solution for the roadway and park 

context.

Some national parks may face challenges 

incorporating bicycle and pedestrian infrastructure 

along existing roads. In some cases, the roads are 

too narrow to include dedicated space for these 

modes, and narrowing lanes could be less safe for 

bicyclists. It might not be possible for a park to widen 

a roadway due to footprint constraints in the natural 

environment or due to the historical context. In 

addition, many park roads do not have shoulders to 

reconfigure for bicycle and pedestrian use. In these 

cases, alternate and context appropriate solutions 

such as signs, vehicle speed reduction, changes in 

operational policies such as car-free opportunities 

at certain times of day, and other interventions can 

create a safe place for bicyclists and pedestrians. For 

more information about car-free opportunities, see the 

Open Streets chapter.

For example, Mount Rainier National Park in 

Washington faces historic constraints for a number of 

roads in the park that were designated as part of the 

Mount Rainier National Historic Landmark District. The 

park was established in 1899, and most of the road 

system was constructed between 1911 and 1940. 

These roads are narrow and winding with little to no 

shoulder and cannot be reconstructed because of 

their historic status and purpose. While these roads 

cannot be widened, other roads in the park have been 

damaged by flooding or other natural events; these 

damaged roads have been closed to motor vehicles, 

but remain open for nonmotorized users, offering a 

car-free environment for visitors to explore.

By considering the local context of the park in 

relation to the surrounding environment, community, 

and existing transportation systems, parks and 

partner agencies can identify areas to incorporate 

safe opportunities to walk and bicycle. The FHWA 

Road Diet Informational Guide36 and associated 

resources include safety, operational, and quality 

of life considerations from research and practice to 

help parks determine if road diets are a good fit for a 

certain corridor.

Figure 4-11: Before and After Road Diets. (Source: FHWA)
4-9 Chapter 4: Bicyclist and Pedestrian Safety

Figure 4-12: Bicyclists on the Carbon River Trail, a former road in Mt. 

Rainier National Park that was closed to motor vehicles due to damage 

from flooding. (Source: NPS) 

Along Trails

A number of resources can help parks and partners 

implement safety strategies on multiuse trails 

where people walk and bike for transportation and 

recreation. Meeting established trail design guidelines 

appropriate for the users and context of a trail can 

reduce the likelihood of user conflicts and injuries.

The FHWA Recreational Trails Program37 maintains 

a website of Manuals and Guides for Trail Design, 

Construction, Maintenance, and Operation, and for 

Signs.

38 The following additional resources may be 

helpful for parks and partners designing, maintaining, 

and managing trails:

• NPS Trail Management Handbook (1983)39

• Rails to Trails Conservancy: Trail-Building 

Toolbox40

• Forest Service Trail Fundamentals and Trail 

Management Objectives41

• Forest Service Standard Trail Plans and 

Specifications42

• MN Department of Natural Resources: 

Trail Planning, Design, and Development 

Guidelines43

• California State Parks Trails Handbook44

• ABA Accessibility Standards: Trails45

The FHWA synthesis of the literature and state of the 

practice for Conflicts on Multiple Use Trails46 provides 

information about the causes of trail conflict and 

offers possible solutions.

47 It reviews management 

options such as trail design, information and 

education, user involvement, and regulations and 

enforcement. Parks and partners could implement 

some of the suggested strategies to minimize conflicts 

on multi-use trails. For example, the report suggests 

providing adequate and varied trail opportunities to 

reduce congestion, reducing the number of contacts 

between trail users, particularly in congested areas 

and at trailheads, and using educational materials to 

promote trail etiquette. 

Another resource for minimizing conflict on trails 

is the Trail Use Conflict Study,

48 commissioned by 

the California Department of Parks and Recreation. 

The study reviewed how trail use conflict is 

addressed by other agencies with responsibility over 

recreational trail development and management 

and identified recommendations for low-conflict 

multiuse trail design. For example, the study provides 

recommendations related to tread width and passing 

space, sight distance, turn radius, and surface texture. 

The study also lists recommended management, 

outreach, and public information strategies for 

successfully managing trail conflicts. As an example, 

the study recommends providing user-specific printed 

materials and web postings, and public relations 

campaigns to educate users about trail use rules and 

appropriate behavior. 

Wayfinding and Signing

Wayfinding and signs provide valuable information to 

active transportation and roadway users. Wayfinding 

uses maps and signs to improve visitor understanding 

and experience of a place. Digital wayfinding kiosks 

or bicycle and pedestrian maps can also be used for 

wayfinding; these resources can be easily updated 

with new, relevant information as it becomes 
4-10 NPS Active Transportation Guidebook

Table 4-2: Selected Bicycle and Pedestrian Signage

Sign Type Definition Context

Bicycle Signs Signs along the 

road that notify 

road users that 

bicyclists might 

occupy the travel 

lane.

Combinations of bicycle signs can be used 

at locations where roadway travel lanes are 

too narrow for bicyclists and motor vehicles 

to operate side-by-side or other locations 

where there is a higher risk for collision. The 

sign can call attention to all roadway users, 

communicate safe behaviors to avoid conflicts 

and increase visibility.

NOTE: Bicycle signs are sometimes installed with other signs 

to give direction to roadway users. Some states, such as 

Oregon and Delaware, have phased out ‘Share the Road’ signs 

because the phrase was determined to be too ambiguous in 

meaning. It is being replaced with ‘Bicycle May Use Full Lane’ 

signs.

Pedestrian Crossing Signs on the 

road or trail 

alerting drivers or 

bicyclists that a 

pedestrian crossing 

is coming up and 

that pedestrians 

are likely to be 

crossing.

Signs on roads or trails can alert trail users 

that a crossing is coming up and provide 

instructions on its safe navigation. For 

example, some crossings have signs asking 

bicyclists to dismount before they cross a road, 

ensuring they slow down and make themselves 

visible to cars.

Figure 4-13 Bicycle regulatory and 

warning signs. (Source: MUTCD)

Figure 4-14: Pedestrian crossing sign 

with arrow. (Source: MUTCD)

available. With effective wayfinding systems, active 

transportation users can navigate NPS units in a more 

comfortable and predictable way, which will improve 

safety for all roadway users. 

Signs communicate bicycle and pedestrian safety laws 

and regulations to all roadway users. Often, signs 

alert drivers to the potential presence of bicycles or 

pedestrians, while advising drivers to proceed with 

caution. The use of signs requires drawing upon traffic 

safety engineering expertise as well as the appearance 

of the road as a whole and its relationship to the 

natural and cultural resources of the environment 

through which it passes. 

To avoid intrusion upon natural and cultural resources 

and interference with the visitor experience, it is 

important to be consistent with how signs are 

used and limit the number of signs to only what is 

necessary. Table 4-2 highlights bicycle and pedestrian 

warning signs. Wayfinding and other signs are further 

explored in the Infrastructure and Multimodal 

Connectivity chapter.

Dynamic Warning Beacons for Bicycles

Dynamic warning signals are bicyclist-activated lights 

paired with warning signs to increase driver awareness 

of bicyclists on the roadway. This supplemental 

measure can be added to already installed signs or coinstalled with signs and pavement markings. Consider 

the following:

• Context: Dynamic warning signals are often 

used on roadways with narrow lanes or areas 

where vehicles encroach on bicycle space, 

potentially exposing bicyclists to collisions 
4-11 Chapter 4: Bicyclist and Pedestrian Safety

with drivers; these locations can include rural 

roadways and narrow bridges, or tunnels. 

These signals are considered when there are 

no other safe routes for bicycle travel.

• Safety Implications: Dynamic warning signals 

alert motorists with flashing lights to the 

real-time presence of bicyclists on roadways. 

Drivers will be alerted that they will need to 

share the roadway with bicyclists.

• Potential Impact on National Park 

Resources and Landscapes: These signals 

can be installed with solar panels to reduce 

roadside hardware and power connection 

needs. These warning signals produce light 

at a fixed point, so parks and locations with 

expansive vistas and night sky programs 

should carefully consider their use.

Learn more about pedestrians and bicyclists crossing 

traffic in the Infrastructure and Multimodal 

Connectivity chapter. 

Figure 4-15: Bicyclist-activated dynamic warning beacons indicate to vehicles that bicyclists are present on the road. (Source: Google Streetview)

Improving Safety with 

Education and Information

The development and implementation of successful 

safety campaigns and the effective dissemination 

of visitor safety information can support safe 

environments for pedestrians and bicyclists. 

Components of safety education may include building 

staff support, creating a safety culture, building law 

enforcement support, partnering, and sharing safety 

information and materials.

Building Staff Support

The involvement of NPS staff and partners in the 

development and deployment of a safety campaign 

is important, as this involvement can lead to a more 

effective safety program for visitors. Internal staff 

members or volunteers who are opposed to bicycling 
4-12 NPS Active Transportation Guidebook

on park roads may inhibit public outreach success; 

therefore, it is important to understand the reasons 

behind opposition, as well as to communicate the 

benefits of bicycling and walking. An organized 

all-staff workshop or bike ride are both useful 

and enjoyable activities to encourage support and 

understanding for bicycling and walking in the park.

Creating a Culture of Safety

In addition to fostering staff support, educational 

tools can be used to target a variety of age levels 

and settings in order to promote awareness of active 

transportation safety issues. Parks and partners 

can use educational techniques from the National 

Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) 

Countermeasures That Work Guidebook,

49 which 

outlines several educational techniques as part of 

school programs. These techniques may apply, for 

instance, to school groups visiting parks. Park staff 

or safety ambassadors, who are often volunteers 

that patrol trails and roadways on bicycles to provide 

assistance to visitors, can distribute safety pamphlets 

or conduct safety discussions with youth safety 

clubs, Safe Routes to School programs, or at active 

transportation events.

Park staff are integral in creating a culture of safety 

and can encourage all staff to participate in safe 

practices and risk management processes in the NPS 

Operational Leadership program.

50 Adults can learn 

about bicycle and pedestrian safety through safety 

ambassadors, who can provide information along 

the multiuse trail or roadway. Safety ambassadors 

can provide this information at active transportation 

events, or through formal safety training programs. 

They can also work in coordination with law 

enforcement officers to reinforce safe behaviors. 

Understanding the risks of bicycling and walking 

will reinforce the need for safety on transportation 

facilities, which are often highlighted in RSAs.

Building Law Enforcement Support

Law enforcement officials are responsible for enforcing 

traffic regulations related to bicycle and pedestrian 

safety (see the “Improving Safety Enforcement 

Strategies and Emergency Response” section below). 

Law enforcement can be NPS law enforcement or 

local/state law enforcement where there is concurrent 

jurisdiction. Involving law enforcement in planning 

infrastructure, RSAs, or educational campaigns can 

help inform safety and enforcement efforts. For 

instance, law enforcement personnel may know 

where crashes or other conflicts tend to occur and can 

help parks and local partners target safety campaigns 

to these areas.

Partnering

Partnering with a local, state, tribal, or national 

active transportation advocacy group is one way 

to leverage their expertise and connections in 

gateway communities and beyond. Bicycling and 

walking advocacy groups can provide resources and 

information on safety, guidance on bicycling and 

walking best practices, and connections to the cycling 

community, media, tourism, local government, and 

other important outreach contacts.

In addition, parks could require concessionaires that 

lead bicycle groups or rent bicycles to visitors to 

provide safety training to their customers.

Sharing Safety Education 

Information and Messaging

Safety information can be distributed through printed 

materials, websites, in-person communication, 

social media, safety signage or messaging posted 

at information kiosks, and by video presentations 

with closed captioning or audio casts provided in 

information centers to educate and encourage 

safe driving, walking, and bicycling behavior 

Communications can include different messages 

for different roadway users. For example, parks 

and partners could communicate to drivers any 

requirements to yield to bicyclists and pedestrians, 

while informing bicyclists of proper hand signals and 

areas for safe bicycling. Often, safety campaigns are 

more effective if they are targeted to a particular 

audience or a specific issue.

Understanding visitor behaviors can allow park staff 

and partners to identify critical audiences and develop 

targeted messaging.

Messaging could include information on:

• Relevant rules and regulations for the park 

and local jurisdiction (e.g., organized group 

size restrictions and permitting requirements, 
4-13 Chapter 4: Bicyclist and Pedestrian Safety

local helmet laws, sharing the road, and 

safe passing distance requirements between 

bicycles and vehicles);

• Where to walk and bike, and where walking 

and biking may NOT be allowed;

• When to walk and bike to avoid high volumes 

of vehicle traffic;

• Proper bicycle safety equipment (e.g., 

recommendations for wearing helmets, highly 

visible clothing, and bicycle lighting);

• Where to find route maps and park 

information;

• Promotion of active transportation-related 

events; and 

• Camping information for accommodating 

bicycles.

It is important to make education and public 

messaging products accessible, including ensuring 

digital products are available to people with 

disabilities, making materials available in multiple 

languages, and providing non-digital options for 

people without access to smartphones or reliable 

internet.

Digital mapping can offer valuable trip planning 

information to improve the safety and experience of 

visitors, park staff, and partners. Digital mapping uses 

online mapping tools to communicate park-specific 

and real-time information for all users.

NPS park websites,

51 the NPS App,52 and other 

third-party websites sometimes offer interactive 

digital maps that improve trip planning through 

sharing information of transit schedules, bicycle and 

pedestrian routes, and live data related to congestion, 

weather, etc.

For example, the San Antonio Missions Trip Planner53

offers interactive digital maps online for active 

transportation trails with specific details on the 

trail type and places of interest for pedestrians 

and bicyclists. Active transportation users can 

research their trip to San Antonio Missions National 

Historical Park in advance to find the safest and most 

comfortable route.

Speed Management Education: NHTSA has 

developed a Speed Campaign Toolkit54 for public 

information and education outreach that has been 

tested and validated in programs across the United 

States with example marketing materials that can be 

used when developing a speed management strategy.

Education Best Practice: Blue Ridge Parkway and Shenandoah 

National Park 

Blue Ridge Parkway and Skyline Drive in Shenandoah National Park in Virginia partnered with 

Adventure Cycling Association to develop a bicycle safety campaign work plan.59 The campaign 

will focus on educational strategies to improve safety for bicyclists and all road users on both 

facilities. 

The main educational strategies include the 

creation and dissemination of printed and 

online materials that inform bicyclists and 

drivers about sharing the road practices and 

bicyclist visibility.60 Shenandoah National Park is 

partnering with the Shenandoah Valley Bicycle 

Coalition to promote these safety practices in 

gateway communities. 

Data collection is another central part of this 

bicycle safety campaign. Both parks would 

like to find ways to implement bicycle count 

technology which will be analyzed to better 

understand bicycle visitation over time. For more 

information about data collection and count 

technology, see the Innovative Technologies and Emerging Trends chapter.

Figure 4-16: Skyline Drive in Shenandoah National Park, often used by 

bicyclists. (Source: NPS)
4-14 NPS Active Transportation Guidebook

• Speeding Slow You Down55 is a campaign built 

for law enforcement to raise awareness in the 

community on the laws regarding speeding.

• Stop Speeding Before It Stops You56 is a 

general public awareness campaign about 

raising awareness of the dangers and 

consequences of speeding.

Parks can coordinate Annual Transportation Safety 

Campaigns with the NPS Public Risk Management 

Program,

57 as well as with local jurisdictions and 

other partners. NPS employees can view additional 

resources on speed management on the Public Risk 

Management Program Internal SharePoint site.

58

Improving Safety with 

Enforcement Strategies and 

Emergency Response 

To create safer environments for bicyclists and 

pedestrians, law enforcement and emergency services 

plans consider the specific needs and vulnerabilities of 

these users.61 

Transportation safety efforts, including law 

enforcement, should also acknowledge and address 

current and historic inequities, including the 

disproportionate impact that traffic enforcement 

has on people of color. In 2021, the Department of 

Interior established a Law Enforcement Task Force62 

to implement the highest standards for protecting 

the public and providing necessary policy guidance, 

resources, and training to agency personnel, with a 

focus on equity and evidence-based decision-making.

Equitable law enforcement efforts must focus on 

creating safe environments for all road and trail 

users and be paired with education, outreach, and 

communication efforts. Policy can be used to promote 

bicycle and pedestrian safety within parks and their 

surrounding areas and to ensure that all road and trail 

users are practicing safe behaviors.

Law enforcement may be the responsibility of the 

local jurisdiction, NPS rangers, or in partnership with 

municipal or state police.

For drivers, law enforcement could support road user 

safety by focusing on speed management, crosswalk 

and stop sign compliance, bicycle passing distance, 

congestion in parking lots, and cell phone use while 

driving, especially in high pedestrian and bicycle 

activity areas.

For pedestrians and bicyclists, law enforcement could 

support safe walking along roads and help mitigate 

resource-damaging activities like bicycling off trail. 

For more information, see the Natchez Trace Parkway 

Bicycle Planning Study63 example at right.

Emergency response plans can encourage the 

implementation of design elements that would 

accommodate emergency response vehicles 

along bicycle and pedestrian routes. Such design 

accommodations might include the provision of 

adequate roadway, sidewalk, or multiuse trail width; 

the installation of signs; or methods to control entry 

to trails.63 Parks or partners may consider arranging 

a service that travels to bicyclists to provide repair 

services or bicycle supplies, particularly when parks 

are long distances from bicycle shops. Providing 

this service with partners or vendors could increase 

comfort and confidence for visitors who may fear 

bicycle breakdowns.

Speed Management Enforcement: High Visibility 

Enforcement64 is a traffic safety approach designed 

to create deterrence and change unlawful traffic 

behaviors, combining highly visible and proactive law 

enforcement targeting a specific traffic safety issue 

such as speeding.

There is an established linkage between speed 

education efforts and speed enforcement initiatives.

Working together, these strategies amplify the impact 

of each element’s contribution to traffic safety.

Parks can coordinate High Visibility Enforcement with 

the NPS Traffic Safety Coalition, a coalition of NPS law 

enforcement rangers working together toward the 

mission of providing for safer park roadways through 

engineering, enforcement, education, and emergency 

medical services. The coalition provides resources 

and technical assistance on traffic safety issues. NPS 

employees can view additional resources on the Traffic 

Safety Coalition Internal SharePoint Site.

65
4-15 Chapter 4: Bicyclist and Pedestrian Safety

Education and Enforcement Best Practice: Natchez Trace Parkway

Natchez Trace Parkway, which runs from Nashville, Tennessee 

to Natchez, Mississippi, has made significant efforts to build 

awareness of bicycle safety practices and enhance safety 

enforcement.66 The Natchez Trace Parkway is a premier 

cycle touring destination. The park partnered with the 

Natchez Trace Parkway Association and Adventure Cycling 

Association to implement a bicycle safety campaign in 2014, 

in response to bicyclist fatalities caused by vehicle speeding 

and distracted driving. The goals of the campaign were to:

• Rebrand the parkway as a national park instead of a 

commuter route; 

• Create understanding and cultural acceptance 

that the parkway is a multiuse road, to be safely 

and respectfully shared by all road users;

• Educate and encourage safe driving and cycling 

behavior; and 

• Measure cyclists’ use of the parkway. 

After receiving feedback from public meetings in 

gateway communities along the parkway, the park 

focused on four areas to improve safety for bicyclists: 

education/outreach, visibility/enforcement, signs, 

and data collection. The Natchez Trace Parkway 

Association raised money to help fund these efforts, 

including a bicycle light giveaway program to promote 

visibility; public service announcement “sharethe-road” messages on local radio and television 

stations; installing safe passing signs; installing bicycle counters; and working with the U.S. 

Department of Transportation Volpe Center to study the effectiveness of these strategies.67 The 

park’s involvement included participation by staff from many different departments, including 

interpretation, law enforcement, maintenance, and resource management, providing the internal 

support needed for the success of the campaign. Additionally, partnering with outside groups 

allowed the park to draw from additional expertise, resources, and connections.

Figure 4-17: Visitors riding bicycles on the Natchez 

Figure 4-18: NPS employees installing bicycle signage at Natchez 

Trace Parkway. (Source: NPS)
4-16 NPS Active Transportation Guidebook

Additional Resources 

FHWA Bicycle and Pedestrian Program Designing Sidewalks and Trails for Access (2017). 

https://www.fhwa.dot.gov/environment/bicycle_pedestrian/publications/sidewalk2/sidewalks208.cfm

FHWA Bikeway Selection Guide (2019). https://safety.fhwa.dot.gov/ped_bike/tools_solve/docs/fhwasa18077.pdf

FHWA: Engineering Speed Management Countermeasures: A Desktop Reference of Potential Effectiveness in 

Reducing Crashes (2014). https://safety.fhwa.dot.gov/speedmgt/ref_mats/eng_count/2014/eng_ctm_crsh_14.pdf

FHWA Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices for Streets and Highways (MUTCD) (2022). 

https://mutcd.fhwa.dot.gov/

FHWA Primer On Safe System Approach For Pedestrians And Bicyclists (2021). https://safety.fhwa.dot.gov/ped_

bike/tools_solve/docs/fhwasa21065.pdf 

FHWA Road Safety Audits (RSA) (2022). https://safety.fhwa.dot.gov/rsa/

FHWA Safe Transportation for Every Pedestrian (STEP) Studio. 

https://safety.fhwa.dot.gov/ped_bike/step/resources/docs/step_studio.pdf

FHWA Safety Benefits of Walkways, Sidewalks, and Paved Shoulders (2013). 

https://safety.fhwa.dot.gov/ped_bike/tools_solve/walkways_trifold/

FHWA Small Town and Rural Multimodal Networks Guide (2016). 

https://www.fhwa.dot.gov/environment/bicycle_pedestrian/publications/small_towns/page00.cfm

NHTSA Countermeasures That Work: A Highway Safety Countermeasure Guide for State Highway Safety Offices, 

10th Edition (2020). https://www.nhtsa.gov/book/countermeasures/countermeasures-work

NHTSA High Visibility Enforcement (HVE) Toolkit. https://www.nhtsa.gov/enforcement-justice-services/high-visibilityenforcement-hve-toolkit

NHTSA Speed Campaign Toolkit. https://icsw.nhtsa.gov/newtsm/tk-speeding/

NPS Transportation Safety Program SharePoint Site at Natchez Trace Parkway. https://doimspp.sharepoint.com/sites/

nps-pfmd/SitePages/-Engineering--Transportation-Safety-Countermeasures.aspx

NPS UniGuide SharePoint Site. https://doimspp.sharepoint.com/sites/nps-sign-program/SitePages/home.aspx

Safe Routes Partnership and Walk Bike KC “Taking on Traffic Laws: A How-To Guide for Decriminalizing Mobility” 

(2022). https://saferoutespartnership.org/sites/default/files/decriminalization_guide.pdf
4-17 Chapter 4: Bicyclist and Pedestrian Safety

End Notes

1

 NPS Management Policies (2006). https://www.nps.gov/policy/MP_2006.pdf

2

 NPS Park Road Standards (1984). https://www.nps.gov/orgs/1548/upload/1984_Park_Roads_Standards_508-

Compliant-2.pdf

3

 USDOT Safe System Approach (2022). https://www.transportation.gov/NRSS/SafeSystem

4

 U.S. Department of Transportation National Roadway Safety Strategy. https://www.transportation.gov/NRSS

5

 FHWA The Safe System Approach. https://safety.fhwa.dot.gov/zerodeaths/docs/FHWA_SafeSystem_Brochure_

V9_508_200717.pdf

6

 National Transportation Safety Board The Safe System Approach (2021). https://www.ntsb.gov/news/events/ 

Pages/2021-safe-systems-rt.aspx#:~:text=The%20principles%20underpinning%20the%20Safe,shared%20 

responsibility%3B%20and%20all%20parts

7

 National Safety Council Road to Zero: Taking a Safe System Approach (2020). https://www.nsc.org/safety-firstblog/road-to-zero-taking-a-safe-system-approach

8

 Vision Zero Network Shifting to a Safe System (2021). https://visionzeronetwork.org/shifting-to-a-safe-system-foreveryday-transportation/

9

 NSC Road to Zero: A Plan to Eliminate Roadway Deaths. https://www.nsc.org/road/resources/road-to-zero/roadto-zero-home

10 Toward Zero Deaths Foundation The Safe System. http://www.towardszerofoundation.org/the-safe-system/

11 FHWA Primer on Safe System Approach for Pedestrians and Bicyclists (2021). https://safety.fhwa.dot.gov/ped_

bike/tools_solve/docs/fhwasa21065.pdf

12 FHWA Complete Streets Strategy. https://highways.dot.gov/complete-streets/complete-streets-fhwa

13 FHWA RSA Toolkit for FLMAs and Tribal Governments (2010). https://safety.fhwa.dot.gov/rsa/resources/toolkitflh/

14 FHWA Pedestrian and Bicyclists Road Safety Audit (RSA) Guide and Prompt List (2020). https://safety.fhwa.dot.

gov/ped_bike/tools_solve/docs/fhwasa20042.pdf

15 FHWA Bicycle Safety Guide and Countermeasure Selection System. http://www.pedbikesafe.org/bikesafe/

countermeasures.cfm

16 FHWA Pedestrian Safety Guide and Countermeasure Selection System. http://www.pedbikesafe.org/PEDSAFE/ 

17 AAA Foundation Impact Speed and a Pedestrian’s Risk of Severe Injury or Death (2011). https://aaafoundation.

org/impact-speed-pedestrians-risk-severe-injury-death/

18 Ibid.

19 FHWA Appropriate Speed Limits for All Road Users (2021). https://safety.fhwa.dot.gov/provencountermeasures/

appropriate-speed-limits.cfm

20 FHWA Pedestrians at Crosswalks: What’s Speed Got To Do With It? Video (2021). https://www.youtube.com/

watch?v=Ws8wOmq4uaE

21 US Code of Federal Regulations 36 CFR 4.21 https://www.ecfr.gov/current/title-36/chapter-I/part-4/section-4.21
4-18 NPS Active Transportation Guidebook

22 FHWA Safer Speeds. https://www.transportation.gov/NRSS/SaferSpeeds

23 FHWA Crosswalk Marking Field Visibility Study (2010). https://www.fhwa.dot.gov/publications/research/safety/

pedbike/10067/

24 FHWA Safety Effects of Marked Versus Unmarked Crosswalks at Uncontrolled Locations (2005). https://www.

fhwa.dot.gov/publications/research/safety/04100/04100.pdf

25 FHWA STEP Studio. https://safety.fhwa.dot.gov/ped_bike/step/resources/docs/step_studio.pdf

26 FHWA STEP: Improving Visibility at Trail Crossings (2021). https://safety.fhwa.dot.gov/ped_bike/step/resources/

docs/step_improving_visibilty_at_trail_crossings.pdf

27 FHWA Proven Safety Countermeasures (2022). https://safety.fhwa.dot.gov/provencountermeasures/

28 FHWA Crosswalk Visibility Enhancements (2018). https://safety.fhwa.dot.gov/ped_bike/step/docs/TechSheet_

VizEnhancemt_508compliant.pdf

29 FHWA Interpretation Letter 3(09)-61(I) – Channelizing Devices at Mid-Block Pedestrian Crossings in 

Conjunction with In-Street Pedestrian Crossing (R1-6 Series) Signs (2020). https://mutcd.fhwa.dot.gov/resources/

interpretations/3_09_61.htm

30 FHWA Traffic Calming ePrimer Module 3, Raised Crosswalk (2017). https://safety.fhwa.dot.gov/speedmgt/

ePrimer_modules/module3pt2.cfm#mod314

31 FHWA Pedestrian Hybrid Beacon (PHB) (2018). https://safety.fhwa.dot.gov/ped_bike/step/resources/docs/

fhwasa18064.pdf

32 FHWA Rectangular Rapid-Flashing Beacon (RRFB) (2018). https://safety.fhwa.dot.gov/ped_bike/step/docs/

techSheet_RRFB_2018.pdf

33 FHWA Small Town and Rural Multimodal Networks (2016). https://www.fhwa.dot.gov/environment/bicycle_

pedestrian/publications/small_towns/fhwahep17024_lg.pdf

34 FHWA Bikeway Selection Guide (2019). https://safety.fhwa.dot.gov/ped_bike/tools_solve/docs/fhwasa18077.pdf

35 FHWA Traffic Calming ePrimer Module 3, Road Diet (2017). https://highways.dot.gov/safety/speed-management/

traffic-calming-eprimer/module-3-part-3#3.20

36 FHWA Road Diet Informational Guide (2014). https://safety.fhwa.dot.gov/road_diets/guidance/info_guide/

37 FHWA Recreational Trails Program. https://www.fhwa.dot.gov/Environment/recreational_trails/

38 FHWA Manuals and Guides for Trail Design, Construction, Maintenance, and Operation, and for Signs. https://

www.fhwa.dot.gov/environment/recreational_trails/guidance/manuals.cfm

39 NPS Trail Management Handbook (1983). http://npshistory.com/publications/trails-management-1983.pdf

40 Rails to Trails Conservancy: Trail-Building Toolbox. https://www.railstotrails.org/build-trails/trail-building-toolbox/

41 Forest Service Trail Fundamentals and Trail Management Objectives. https://www.fs.usda.gov/managing-land/

trails/trail-management-tools/trail-fundamentals

42 Forest Service Standard Trail Plans and Specifications. https://www.fs.usda.gov/managing-land/trails/trailmanagement-tools/trailplans
4-19 Chapter 4: Bicyclist and Pedestrian Safety

43 MN Department of Natural Resources: Trail Planning, Design, and Development Guidelines. https://www.dnr.

state.mn.us/publications/trails_waterways/tgmanual/index.html

44 California State Parks Trails Handbook (2019). https://www.parks.ca.gov/?page_id=29174

45 ABA Accessibility Standards: Trails. https://www.access-board.gov/aba/#aba-1017

46 FHWA Conflicts on Multiple Use Trails (1994). https://www.fhwa.dot.gov/environment/recreational_trails/

publications/conflicts_on_multiple_use_trails/

47 FHWA Conflicts on Multiple Use Trails, Ways to Avoid or Minimize Conflicts on Multiple-Use Trails (1994). https://

www.fhwa.dot.gov/environment/recreational_trails/publications/conflicts_on_multiple_use_trails/

48 California Department of Parks and Recreation Trail Use Conflict Study (2012). https://www.parks.ca.gov/

pages/980/files/app_c_trailuseconflictstudy_chginuse_draft.pdf

49 NHTSA Countermeasures that Work: A Highway Safety Countermeasure Guide for State Highway Safety Offices 

(2021). https://www.nhtsa.gov/sites/nhtsa.gov/files/2021-09/15100_Countermeasures10th_080621_v5_tag.pdf

50 NPS Natural Resource Stewardship Training Career Academy Operational Leadership. https://www.nps.gov/

training/nrs/academy/G_both_graphic/operational_leadership.html

51 NPS Find a Park. https://www.nps.gov/findapark/index.htm

52 NPS The NPS App. https://www.nps.gov/subjects/digital/nps-apps.htm

53 NPS San Antonio Missions Trip Planner. https://www.nps.gov/saan/planyourvisit/directions.htm

54 NHTSA Speed Campaign Toolkit. https://icsw.nhtsa.gov/newtsm/tk-speeding/

55 NHTSA Speeding Slows You Down Enforcement Campaign. https://www.trafficsafetymarketing.gov/getmaterials/speed-prevention/speeding-wrecks-lives/speeding-slows-you-down-enforcement

56 NHTSA Stop Speeding Before It Stops You Social Norming Campaign. https://www.trafficsafetymarketing.gov/

get-materials/speed-prevention/speeding-wrecks-lives/speeding-catches-you-social-norming

57 NPS Public Risk Management Program (2020). https://www.nps.gov/orgs/1336/index.htm

58 NPS Public Risk Management Program Internal SharePoint. https://doimspp.sharepoint.com/sites/nps-preventvisitor-injury/SitePages/home.aspx

59 Adventure Cycling Association. Bicycle Safety Accessibility Campaign Workplan (2016). Internal document, no 

link is publicly available.

60 Ibid.

61 Florida Department of Transportation Pedestrian and Bicycle Strategic Safety Plan (PBSSP) and Coalition (2021). 

https://www.fdot.gov/Safety/programs/pedestrian-and-bicycle-safety#:~:text=Updated%20in%20October%20

62 US Department of Interior Law Enforcement Task Force. https://www.doi.gov/oles/doi-law-enforcement-taskforce#:~:text=The%20Task%20Force%2C%20led%20by,Office%20of%20Law%20Enforcement%20and

63 NPS Natchez Trace Bicycle Planning Study (2016). https://rosap.ntl.bts.gov/view/dot/12330

64 FHWA Bollards, Gates, and Other Barriers (2018). https://www.fhwa.dot.gov/environment/recreational_trails/

guidance/bollards_access.cfm
4-20 NPS Active Transportation Guidebook

65 NHTSA High Visibility Enforcement (HVE) Toolkit. https://www.nhtsa.gov/enforcement-justice-services/highvisibility-enforcement-hve-toolkit

66 NPS Traffic Safety Coalition Internal SharePoint. https://doimspp.sharepoint.com/sites/nps-leses/SitePages/TrafficSafety-Coalition.aspx

67 NPS Natchez Trace Bicycle Planning Study (2016). https://rosap.ntl.bts.gov/view/dot/12330

68 Ibid.
Grand Canyon National Park, Arizona (Source: NPS)

Chapter 5: Partnerships and Funding

This chapter describes the important role partnerships play in building connections between 

communities and national parks and helping them achieve common goals. It discusses 

recent successes parks have had working with partners, including leveraging resources, 

technical expertise, and funding.
5-1 Chapter 5: Partnerships and Funding

Introduction

Parks and partners can coordinate to create 

multimodal transportation opportunities, both within 

park boundaries, and beyond park boundaries to 

connect with surrounding transportation networks. 

These connected networks better accommodate 

a variety of visitor modal preferences and abilities, 

and provide better access between parks and 

communities. Coordination often also requires 

engaging in state, metropolitan, and local planning 

processes. This involvement could open the door for 

exploring potential partnerships and may provide 

opportunities to access and leverage external funding. 

Partnerships can help national parks and their 

surrounding communities achieve common goals, 

while also providing considerable benefits, including 

leveraging resources, staff support, and funding.

This chapter provides an overview of the important 

role that partnerships play in building connections 

between communities and national parks. 

Furthermore, it explores the role of partnerships in 

securing funding and provides relevant case studies 

of recent successes. As many partnerships are 

defined through formal agreements, the chapter also 

discusses the use of agreements as tools through 

which to define roles and responsibilities in managing 

infrastructure, projects, and programs.

Promoting Active 

Transportation through 

Partnerships 

Local partners, such as national park friends groups, 

city and state governments, and walking and bicycling 

advocacy groups, can help promote and improve 

opportunities for active transportation to and within 

parks. Partnerships can benefit active transportation 

projects located within or beyond park boundaries, 

championed by NPS staff or a partner. Partnerships 

can have many different purposes:

• Promoting awareness and excitement about 

active transportation in national parks;

• Finding support and champions among a wide 

range of stakeholders;

• Pursuing and securing funding;

• Utilizing non-funding resources, such as labor 

and technical expertise, to complete projects;

• Collaborating on planning products, programs, 

and projects;

• Improving bicycling and pedestrian infrastructure 

in gateway communities;

• Receiving diverse and useful input; and

• Encouraging continuous engagement and 

participation by the community in planning 

transportation facilities.

Park visitors often bring economic benefits to local 

gateway communities, which can be a motivating 

factor for parks and communities to pursue 

partnerships. Improving pedestrian and bicycling 

networks can accommodate more visitors and extend 

stays in gateway communities. Active transportation 

facilities within and around parks help improve quality 

of life and attractiveness for residents, who often 

value places to walk and bicycle safely within and near 

their surrounding communities. Additional economic 

benefits include higher public tax revenues, increased 

jobs related to recreational visits, new businesses 

related to trails, and direct spending attributed 

to trail users.1

 A low-cost way to improve active 

transportation connections to a park is to work with 

gateway communities to ensure routine resurfacing 

and maintenance of access roads to the parks 

includes improvements to pedestrian and bicycling 

infrastructure, where appropriate.

NPS staff and partners can maintain project 

momentum and support through regular 

communication with project stakeholders. The 

NPS can share information with park visitors and 

stakeholders by holding workshops for surrounding 

community stakeholders to discuss active 

transportation efforts, and by distributing newsletters 

and project updates to maintain engagement. Local 

user groups, advocacy groups, or friends groups 

can also communicate active transportation efforts 

and accomplishments through their organizations’ 

networks. For example, bicycle organizations can 

disseminate park information and trail maps to local 

bicycle shops, the bicycling community, elected 

officials, and agency contacts (tourism, transportation, 

etc.).2,3
5-2 NPS Active Transportation Guidebook

Potential Partners

Partners have various interests, roles, and 

responsibilities, which are relevant to different 

components of active transportation plans and 

projects. Finding internal NPS supporters and external 

partners is key to building enthusiastic support 

for walking and bicycling. Often, initiatives are 

strengthened by having a “champion,” or a person 

who is willing to lead or spearhead a project, event 

or push a cause forward, and use their knowledge, 

expertise, and connections to maintain momentum. 

Champions are often NPS staff or passionate local 

residents within the community. This role is usually 

based on a person’s interests, experience, commitment 

to seeing a project implemented, and desire to 

enhance access to resources.

Table 5-1 below identifies external partners, including 

both public and private entities that may value and 

benefit from shared active transportation projects 

within and near NPS parks. 

Table 5-1: Description of External Partners

Partner Description Example

State and local 

governments

State and local governments include community, 

municipal, county, state, and tribal governments. These 

different levels of governments and agencies can assist 

in gathering input from a wide range of stakeholders. 

Often the state Department of Transportation (DOT) or 

the city DOT have ongoing transportation construction 

and maintenance programs, and may own transportation 

facilities that offer the necessary rights-of-way to connect 

communities and parks. Therefore, engaging these 

agencies can be critical to making these connections. 

City of Grandview in 

Missouri partnered with 

the NPS Harry S. Truman 

National Historic Site to 

complete a multiuse trail.4

Metropolitan 

Planning 

Organization 

(MPO)

MPOs are federally funded transportation policy-making 

organizations for any urbanized area with a population 

greater than 50,000 and include representatives from 

local government and transportation authorities. MPOs 

develop a long range transportation plan (LRTP) and a 

transportation improvement program (TIP), along with 

other planning documents. LRTPs and TIPs are discussed in 

more detail in the Planning and Project Development

chapter. The FHWA Metropolitan Pedestrian and Bicycle 

Planning Handbook5

 documents practical information and 

examples for planning bicycle and pedestrian facilities.4

 

Northwest Indiana Regional 

Planning Association is 

coordinating an effort to 

build a trail, the Marquette 

Greenway, which connects 

several towns and cities 

in northwest Indiana and 

extends through the Indiana 

Dunes National Park.5

User groups 

and friends 

groups

User groups represent an organization of people who 

utilize the park in a similar way. Friends groups can provide 

an outlet for citizens’ passion about a park’s mission. These 

groups often fundraise for parks, assist with park events 

and other tasks, and can provide parks with important 

input from park users and interested individuals.

International Mountain 

Bicycling Association,

7

a user group, promotes 

friendly and safe policies for 

mountain bicyclists within 

national parks and other 

federal lands. 
5-3 Chapter 5: Partnerships and Funding

Table 5-1: Description of External Partners

Partner Description Example

Organizations 

representing 

people with 

disabilities 

Parks may consider establishing partnerships with 

groups that represent people with disabilities, which can 

include federally funded programs, such as Centers for 

Independent Living and Independent Living Services,

8

 or 

nonprofit organizations. These groups often advocate 

for disabled persons and can provide parks with crucial 

information about accessibility and how to include the 

disabled.9

 The NPS National Accessibility Branch10 can help 

guide parks on accessibility design standards inside and 

outside of park boundaries. Parks and partners can reach 

the NPS National Accessibility Branch through their email, 

accessibility@nps.gov. The U.S. Access Board is a federal 

agency that promotes equality for people with disabilities 

through guidance in accessible design for the built 

environment, including active transportation facilities.11 

Easter Seals12 is a nonprofit 

organization that has 

worked to promote NPS 

efforts in accessibility to the 

disabled, such as the Access 

Pass, which allows those 

with disabilities to access 

entry to most federal lands 

for free.13

Advocacy 

groups

Advocacy groups are typically mission-driven nonprofit 

organizations, and there are many whose mission aligns 

with that of the NPS. Advocacy groups may even be 

established primarily to assist or benefit a specific park 

area, a series of park areas, a program, or the entire 

National Park System.

People for Bikes14

often advocates for the 

development of bicycle 

facilities and promotion 

within national parks. 

American Trails15 advocates 

for the development of 

diverse, high quality trails 

and greenways. 

Organizations 

representing 

underserved 

communities 

There are many nonprofit groups or community 

organizations that represent minority groups or 

underserved communities. These groups can partner with 

parks to encourage and empower culturally and racially 

diverse community members to engage with wilderness 

and parks. Often, these groups hope to inspire the 

community to become long term environmental stewards 

with strong connections to the natural world in both the 

wilderness and their communities.

WildLink16 has partnered 

with Yosemite National Park 

to encourage California high 

school students from diverse 

backgrounds to experience 

wilderness and public lands.
5-4 NPS Active Transportation Guidebook

Table 5-1: Description of External Partners

Partner Description Example

National 

partners

National partners include federal governmental 

agencies. The FHWA and the Department of Interior 

(DOI) can provide resources and documents to guide 

parks in transportation planning. These national 

partners can also impact local governments through 

rulemaking and funding distribution, and often offer 

guidance to local government.

The FHWA17 offers NPS staff 

high level guidance in federal 

regulation and legislation that 

is relevant to the NPS and 

partners.

Federal Land 

Management 

Agencies 

(FLMAs)

FLMAs are agencies within the federal government that 

manage public lands. The NPS is a FLMA, along with the 

U.S. Bureau of Land Management, U.S. Army Corps of 

Engineers, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, U.S. Bureau 

of Reclamation, and U.S. Forest Service. The NPS and 

partners can collaborate with other FLMAs on programs 

and policy development, and also on projects where 

the agencies have units in close proximity to each other. 

In addition, partnering with other FLMAs can be an 

avenue for sharing best practices and lessons learned on 

active transportation projects.

The NPS and partnering 

FLMAs collaborated in the 

development of data collection 

for the Collaborative Visitor 

Transportation Survey (CVTS).

18

This partnership established a 

streamlined process for preapproved transportation survey 

questions by the Office of 

Management and Budget.

Private 

companies, 

business 

associations, 

and tourism 

associations

Private companies, business associations, tourism 

associations, and other organizations in the surrounding 

communities can be partners. These groups may have 

an interest in promoting active transportation for their 

employees or clientele. Additionally, these groups may 

want to explore branding the company or organization 

as active transportation friendly.

L.L. Bean, an outdoor retailer, 

contributed funding for a 

transit system that serves 

Acadia National Park and the 

surrounding community.19 The 

system’s buses include bicycle 

racks, facilitating multimodal 

connectivity in the park.

State and 

Local Health 

Departments

Many state and local Health Departments are focusing 

on connecting pedestrian, bicycling, and public 

transportation systems to parks and recreational 

opportunities and can be important partners in 

promoting the importance of health in relation to active 

transportation and assisting with communication and 

evaluation efforts. 

Oregon Health Authority, 

with funding from Centers 

for Disease Control and 

Prevention, partnered with 

the Safe Routes Partnership to 

develop Connecting People to 

Parks: A Toolkit to Increase Safe 

and Equitable Access to Local 

Parks and Green Spaces.

20
5-5 Chapter 5: Partnerships and Funding

The NPS draws on many resources to build support for walking and bicycling in national parks, and to implement 

projects. Table 5-2 includes resources that provide technical assistance in transportation planning, engineering, and 

construction to NPS units.

Table 5-2: Technical Assistance Support Groups

Resources Description

NPS Federal Lands 

Transportation 

Program 

Coordinators21

Each NPS region has a FLTP Coordinator, who oversees the programming and funding 

for transportation projects in the region, including bicycle and pedestrian facilities. These 

coordinators, in partnership with Federal Lands Highway, are jointly responsible for 

administering transportation funds. Federal Lands Transportation Program Coordinators and 

regional transportation staff are valuable resources for park staff, because they can connect 

parks to technical resources and advise on funding opportunities.

NPS Rivers, Trails, 

and Conservation 

Assistance Program 

(RTCA)22

The RTCA program provides technical support to communities and parks for trails, greenways, 

and other projects. RTCA, a national network of NPS employees who are conservation and 

recreation planning professionals, collaborates with community groups, nonprofit organizations, 

tribes, and state and local governments to design trails and parks, conserve and improve access 

to rivers, protect special places, and create recreation opportunities. The program’s staff provide 

technical assistance to community groups and government agencies that work to protect and 

enhance parks; it helps achieve on-the-ground success on projects initiated by the community. 

The NPS provides this resource to parks and partners with no cost through an application 

process.

NPS Denver 

Service Center23

The DSC is a contracting service division within the NPS that provides start- to-finish project 

management and delivery for NPS staff and partners. More specifically, this center can provide 

expertise and support in contracting, small business support, design and construction, planning, 

information management, GIS, and many other technical services.

FHWA Office of 

Federal Lands 

Highway (FLH)24

The Office of FLH provides transportation planning, engineering, and construction assistance 

for transportation assets that service the needs of federal and tribal lands. FLH is a part of the 

FHWA that is divided into three divisions, Eastern, Central, and Western. FLH also administers 

Federal Lands Transportation Planning funding and Federal Lands Access Program funding to 

NPS and ensures these programs are administered according to regulation. More broadly, the 

FHWA provides valuable resources for parks and their partners through technical guidance 

documents for active transportation.

The U.S. DOT 

Volpe National 

Transportation 

Systems Center

(Volpe Center)25

The Volpe Center is a fee-for-service agency within the U.S. DOT that supports FLMAs, including 

NPS parks, all seven NPS regions, and the Washington Support Office, in addition to state and 

local agencies and other parts of the U.S. DOT. The Volpe Center works to resolve complex 

transportation challenges at both the program and project levels. More specifically, the Volpe 

Center’s Public Lands Team26 assists FLMAs with bicycle and pedestrian planning and policy; 

road safety audits; program and policy development; environmental compliance and modeling; 

multimodal systems planning; long term planning; partnerships and outreach; and stakeholder 

involvement.
5-6 NPS Active Transportation Guidebook

Strategies for Building 

Connections between 

Parks and Communities

Building on the relationships formed through 

partnerships, physical connections can be created 

between parks and communities, which often begin 

with transportation planning and project development 

efforts. 

Planning & Project Development

Often, building physical connections between parks 

and a community requires a preliminary analysis of 

needs, goals, and alternatives analyses, in order to 

produce recommendations or preferred outcomes for 

active transportation facilities. Planning documents 

can be guided by policies, laws, and initiatives, as 

outlined in the Planning and Project Development 

chapter. The Infrastructure and Multimodal 

Connectivity chapter can be used to explore different 

bicycle and pedestrian transportation facilities, and 

the Bicyclist and Pedestrian Safety chapter can be 

Local Partnership to Improve Connectivity with the Mantua Greenway

IIn West Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, NPS RTCA, Philadelphia Local Initiatives Support Corporation, 

the William Penn Foundation, the Philadelphia City Planning Commission, Commerce 

Department, and Mantua residents formed a partnership to create the Mantua Greenway. This 

effort began as a local initiative in the Mantua neighborhood of Philadelphia, and eventually 

residents established the Mantua 

Greenway Resident Advisory 

Committee. This advisory committee 

and the partners are planning to fill 

a gap in Philadelphia’s growing bike 

trail network and simultaneously 

beautify the neighborhood’s 

northern border along Amtrak’s 

rail tracks. This project will 

renovate a community greenway 

along a portion of Mantua 

Avenue and Parrish Street with 

the addition of trees, permeable 

pavement, and other stormwater 

management infrastructure; 

murals and art installations; and 

a tribute to Mantua history and 

community leaders.27 The first phase 

of construction of the Mantua 

Greenway began in 2020.28

This project will improve the connectivity of the bicycle network in Philadelphia, where there are 

seven trails recognized as National Recreation Trails that help to link four national parks: Edgar 

Allen Poe National Historic Site, Thaddeus Kosciuszko National Memorial, Gloria Dei Church 

National Historic Site, and Independence National Historical Park. NPS RTCA staff helped organize 

community members and stakeholders to conduct a feasibility study, working with the resident 

advisory committee to coordinate outreach events, and developing a long-term maintenance plan.

Figure 5-1: RTCA and community groups have worked together to organize, plan, and 

renovate the Mantua Greenway, pictured above, which will work to connect residents to 

several different National Recreation Trails and national parks in the city of Philadelphia, 

Pennsylvania. (Source: NPS)
5-7 Chapter 5: Partnerships and Funding

used to explore different approaches to creating safe 

active transportation facilities. NPS planning products 

are often developed by park staff or by consultants 

with direction from the park staff. These documents 

organize and prioritize park efforts for improving 

connections of active transportation networks, and 

communicate the park’s preferred projects to decision 

makers. They can be used to build support for funding 

specific projects. Park and surrounding community 

stakeholders can provide input for external planning 

documents through attending public meetings and 

communicating directly with state DOT and MPO staff.

Parks and their partners can advance projects by 

completing planning documents and preliminary 

engineering even before funding is available. “Shovelready” projects, or proposed projects that are at the 

stage where construction could begin if funding were 

provided, are often in a better position to compete 

for capital grant or program funding, particularly for 

priority or stimulus-type funding.

Table 5-3 below includes examples of several types of 

NPS transportation planning documents that can help 

park staff in the project development process.29 The 

list below is not exhaustive, and park staff can contact 

their regional NPS FLTP Coordinator for additional 

information on which study best suits the needs of the 

park.

Table 5-3: Sample of NPS Planning Document Types

Planning 

Document Description Example

Bicycle and 

Pedestrian Plans

Bicycle and pedestrian plans provide research, analyses, 

and recommendations to promote the safe travel of 

pedestrians, bicyclists, and motorists. Comprehensive 

bicycle and pedestrian plans involve various levels of 

government, institutions, businesses, and the public. In 

the past, it has not been common for NPS to create a 

bicycle and pedestrian plan, but NPS does partner with 

nearby communities to help improve connectivity to 

and within the park. 

Outer Cape Bicycle and 

Pedestrian Master Plan Final 

Report30

Five-Year Active 

Transportation 

Plan

A five-year plan for alternative transportation projects 

can be created to coordinate efforts among partners 

and stakeholders, and prioritize projects in a specified 

timeframe. These plans may outline high priority 

transportation projects involving park resources 

and identify lead sponsors for each project where 

applicable. Often, these plans discuss fiscal constraints, 

identify funding sources and estimate overall project 

costs.

The case study of the 

Mississippi National River 

and Recreation Area below 

explores the development of 

their five-year plan.
5-8 NPS Active Transportation Guidebook

Table 5-3: Sample of NPS Planning Document Types

Planning 

Document

Description Example

Accessibility 

Self Evaluation 

Transition Plan 

(SETP)

The Accessibility SETP is a strategy document that 

contains findings from a self-evaluation process and 

specific actions to be taken to improve accessibility at 

a park. The goals of the plan are to document existing 

park barriers to accessibility for people with disabilities; 

recommend an effective approach for upgrading 

facilities, services, activities, and programs; and instill a 

culture around creating universal access.

Through the SETP, Grand 

Teton National Park identified 

barriers to accessibility that 

exist for key park experiences 

and determined timeframes 

to remove them.31

Trail 

Management/ 

Stewardship Plan

Trail management/stewardship plans aim to identify 

management objectives and strategies to guide the 

development, protection, management, maintenance, 

and use of the trail system within the park over a 15-

year period to meet new challenges and opportunities. 

These plans are consistent with the park’s purpose and 

related/applicable laws and policies.

Yosemite National Park Half 

Dome Trail Stewardship Plan32

discusses trail management, 

conservation, and visitor 

experience.

Visitor Use 

Management 

Plan

A visitor use management plan develops a vision for 

providing for and managing visitor use by aligning 

visitor opportunities and experiences with the park’s 

purpose and providing direction for protecting 

fundamental resources and values. 

Delaware Water Gap 

National Recreation Area 

Visitor Use Management 

Plan/Environmental Impact 

Statement.33

Feasibility Study A feasibility study can identify potential active 

transportation improvements and may provide an 

environmental screening of projects in the NPS 

unit or gateway community. This type of study 

typicallyinventories existing conditions and features 

alternatives with possible improvements to existing 

facilities; at times, these studies may present the 

potential for new infrastructure and programs. The 

alternatives provided by a feasibility study may present 

a preferred alternative or may simply narrow options 

to eliminate alternatives that do not fit the project’s 

criteria.

Partnership between the 

NPS and the Cape Cod 

Commission produced a 

Bicycle Feasibility Study.34
5-9 Chapter 5: Partnerships and Funding

Mississippi National River and Recreation Area Five-Year Plan

The Mississippi National 

River and Recreation Area is 

located in the MinneapolisSt. Paul metropolitan 

area, running along 72 

miles of the Mississippi 

River with multiple access 

points, parks, and trails. 

NPS staff organize a 

quarterly meeting 

with approximately 20 

transportation stakeholder 

representatives from city, 

county, and other agencies 

to discuss priorities 

for the park and other 

governmental entities 

in advancing alternative 

transportation access to 

and within the park. A key product developed through this partnership is the Five-Year Alternative 

Transportation System Implementation Plan for fiscal years 2016-2020 (Five-Year Plan).35 This plan 

outlines high priority transportation projects involving park resources and identifies lead sponsors 

for each project (e.g., NPS, city, county, nonprofit). Although the plan is not fiscally constrained, it 

identifies the amount of funding that each partner has committed to complete each project. The 

Five-Year Plan enables the park and its partners to show that there is broad support for the projects 

identified in the plan, and helps each partner make a strong case when requesting funding internal 

to his/her organization or applying for external funding opportunities for identified projects.

Figure 5-2: Stone Arch Bridge and Mill Ruins Park in Mississippi National River and Recreation Area. 

(Source: NPS)

Funding and Partnerships

Partnerships often present opportunities for leveraging 

funding and other resources. In some cases, a 

partnership is needed, because an individual entity 

or agency would not be an eligible applicant for 

grant funding alone. In other cases, a partnership 

may create a better and more dynamic effort using 

shared resources. For example, the Federal Lands 

Access Program (FLAP) funds transportation facilities 

located on, adjacent to, or providing access to federal 

lands, for which title or maintenance responsibility 

is vested in state, county, town, township, tribal, 

municipal, or local government on and connecting 

to federal lands. Only non-federal and tribal partners 

are eligible to apply for FLAP. This program requires 

the relevant FLMA or other eligible entity to endorse 

the application that must be submitted by the local 

government, state government, or tribal entity 

that owns or maintains the transportation facility. 

Established partnerships between local entities and 

parks often make more competitive applications to 

receive funding. For more information on the FLAP 

program, visit the U.S. DOT FHWA, Office of Federal 

Lands Highway FLAP program website.

36

Usually, the initial steps of developing a funding 

application involve collaborating and communicating 

with potential partners. New funding opportunities 

sometimes catalyze new partnerships with 

stakeholders who see value in the potential 

project. Previously established partnerships are also 

valuable, because partners already have a shared 

understanding of respective needs and interests. 
5-10 NPS Active Transportation Guidebook

Projects with preliminary planning and engineering 

already completed are often more competitive for 

grant funding; they demonstrate already dedicated 

resources to the project, and that construction 

can begin within a shorter time frame. Projects 

with preliminary planning and engineering already 

completed are often more competitive for grant 

funding; they demonstrate already dedicated 

resources to the project, and that construction can 

begin within a shorter time frame.

Federal Funding

Various federal transportation funding sources can 

support active transportation efforts for national parks 

and their surrounding communities. The FLTP provides 

funding to improve transportation infrastructure 

owned and maintained by FLMAs. The FHWA Office 

of Federal Lands Highway administers the program 

under the Highways title of the U.S. Code (Title 23). 

The FLH distributes FLTP funding to the NPS, which 

then distributes the funding to its regional offices. 

The regional offices allocate funding to priority 

transportation projects, a portion of which includes 

active transportation projects.

As mentioned earlier, the FLAP program37 can provide 

funds for active transportation projects to improve 

transportation facilities that provide access to, are 

adjacent to, or are located within federal lands. New 

and rehabilitated facilities must be owned and/or 

maintained by a state or local agency. In recent years, 

NPS partners have received FLAP funding for the 

Bryce Canyon bicycle and pedestrian trail in Utah; the 

Assateague Gateway bicycle and pedestrian trail in 

Maryland; and the Pullen Creek Stream bicycle and 

pedestrian walk in Alaska; among many other active 

transportation facilities. FLTP funding is eligible for 

use to fulfill the local match requirement of FLAP; the 

requirement for a local match can range depending 

on the state, but it is typically 20 percent of the 

project’s total cost.

Other federal funding programs considered the 

most applicable for active transportation projects 

include the Transportation Alternatives Set-Aside,38

Recreational Trails Program,39 and Congestion 

Mitigation and Air Quality Improvement Program.40

These funding programs are accessed through 

states or MPOs, and priorities and deadlines for 

these funding programs vary from state-to- state. 

Parks can contact their NPS FLTP Coordinator to 

discuss project eligibility, program requirements, 

and partnership ideas. To learn more about external 

transportation funding opportunities, please visit the 

Figure 5-3: Bicyclists on a multi-use path in Assateague National Seashore. (Source: NPS)
5-11 Chapter 5: Partnerships and Funding

NPS Transportation web page on Funding & Finance.

41

In addition, the FHWA offers a comprehensive table 

of potential pedestrian and bicycle projects with 

corresponding federal funding programs, as a part 

of the FHWA Bicycle and Pedestrian Program.

42 The 

FHWA Active Transportation Funding and Finance 

Toolkit43 also provides information on potential 

funding sources.

Local and Private Funding

Local funding sources for active transportation projects 

can be line items in budgets from state governments, 

municipalities, other local governments or nonprofit 

organizations, or they can be grants from private or 

public sources, such as walking and bicycling clubs, 

advocacy groups, health and well-being enterprises 

and programs, and environmental organizations. 

• State agencies can provide funding from the 

departments of transportation and natural 

resources, or other state agencies with an 

interest in active transportation or outdoor 

recreation.

• Municipalities, cities, townships, and other 

local government agencies fund bicycle and 

pedestrian facilities from their capital budgets; 

these local governments should also plan to 

maintain these facilities and include additional 

needs related to bicycle and pedestrian 

infrastructure in their maintenance budgets.44

• Private interest groups, such as user groups, 

advocacy groups, or friends groups, may 

offer funding or fundraise for projects that 

coincide with their needs and the park’s project 

prioritization. 

In general, local funding sources vary by state; 

parks can develop a better understanding of these 

funding opportunities by contacting the regional 

NPS FLTP Coordinator.45 Often, local fund sources are 

required as a match for federal funding to serve as 

an indication of the local community’s commitment 

to the project and to further leverage the federal 

funding. 

Formalizing Partnerships 

through Agreements

NPS parks and their partners often use formal 

agreements to define roles and responsibilities when 

working together on mutually beneficial projects, 

programs, or services. Agreements document the roles 

and responsibilities for each entity and outline the 

terms and conditions for what each entity will provide 

and receive. This section includes a brief introduction 

to the types of agreements parks may wish to pursue 

related to active transportation.

Parks and their partners may wish to enter into 

formal agreements for a variety of reasons, including 

defining responsibility for certain programs, to transfer 

funding, to allow for a specific use on NPS property, 

or to transfer management responsibilities of NPS 

property to another entity. The typical elements of a 

formal agreement often include the following: 

• Partners and parties involved;

• Background of the effort;

• Purpose and need;

• Authority under which NPS is allowed to enter 

into the agreement;

• Timeframe of the effort and period of 

performance for the agreement;

• Roles and responsibilities of each entity;

• Funding responsibility and budget (if applicable); 

and

• Other requirements (e.g., federal statutes, 

reporting requirements, points of contacts, 

terms of termination, etc.).

While agreement types can vary widely, they most 

commonly take the following forms when related to 

active transportation: 

Friends Group Agreement: These agreements are 

used with nonprofit organizations that are established 

primarily to assist or benefit a specific park. They 

provide the legal and policy framework for the work 

to be done by a park friends group and are described 
5-12 NPS Active Transportation Guidebook

in an annual work plan. For example, a friends group 

may operate a trail ambassadors program in which 

volunteers greet and establish contact with visitors.

Special Use Permit: Special use permits allow 

for short- term activities (not to exceed five years) 

that provide a benefit to an individual, group, or 

organization rather than the public at large. For 

example, NPS might issue a special use permit that 

allows a nonprofit group to conduct a group ride or 

operate regular bicycle tours of the park. Commercial 

outfitters conducting similar activities would need to 

secure a Commercial Use Authorization from park 

staff.

Interagency Agreement: Written between two or 

more federal agencies, interagency agreements are 

used to transfer funds and exchange services between 

federal agencies or DOI bureaus. For example, NPS 

might enter into an agreement with another federal 

agency to receive technical services for a trail design 

or share maintenance with another federal land 

management agency.

Memorandum of Understanding: These general 

agreements describe responsibilities and relationships 

with federal and non-federal partners, including state 

and local governments, nonprofit organizations, 

corporations, and individuals. There is no exchange 

of funding through MOUs and they are generally 

reviewed every five years. For example, a park may 

enter into an MOU with a local partner to share 

operations and maintenance of a trail within park 

boundaries.

Memorandum of Agreement (MOA): MOAs 

could involve the same parties as Memorandum 

of Understanding (MOUs), but they authorize and 

document the receipt of funds, goods, or services 

by the NPS from another party. These general 

agreements are also typically renewed every five years. 

For example, a local partner may agree to provide 

engineering expertise for a proposed project.

Cooperative Agreement: These agreements are a 

mechanism by which to move funding between NPS 

and partners, including state or local governments, to 

implement a project or program. For example, the NPS 

may use a cooperative agreement to transfer funding 

to a local partner in order to meet match requirements 

associated with a FLAP grant project.

Easement: In some cases, partners may only be able 

to make investments in infrastructure if they have a 

long term ownership interest in the proposed asset. 

With certain authorities, parks may be able to issue 

easements or legally convey partial ownership in a 

piece of property or right-of-way, either temporarily 

or permanently, without fully divesting of land. An 

easement is a realty mechanism that can be used 

for a partner to construct, own, and maintain a 

transportation facility such as a trail. 

Some examples of active transportation programs 

and projects that are supported by formal agreements 

include: 

• Acadia National Park manages trail maintenance 

with Friends of Acadia, under a Friends Group 

Agreement;

• Capital Bikeshare and the National Mall and 

Memorial Parks use a special use permit to allow 

for bike share stations to be positioned on NPS 

park property in Washington, D.C.; and

• Fort McHenry National Monument uses an 

easement to allow the Department of Defense 

better access to its nearby property.

The NPS has also signed national-level MOUs with 

national bicycle advocacy organizations, including 

the International Mountain Bicycling Association and 

Adventure Cycling Association, for providing expertise 

and support on collaborative bicycling efforts. 

Individual parks may utilize these agreements for 

obtaining bicycling support and guidance by reaching 

out to staff in the NPS Conservation and Outdoor 

Recreation Division.

The regional NPS FLTP Coordinators, contracting and 

financial assistance office, and regional partnership 

leads can provide park staff with resources and 

technical support in pursuing agreement opportunities 

with partners. Director’s Order #2046 provides more 

information on NPS policies and procedures for 

administering agreements.
5-13 Chapter 5: Partnerships and Funding

District Department of Transportation MOU for the Anacostia Riverwalk

The NPS entered into an MOU with the District of Columbia Department of Transportation (DDOT) 

in 2013 for the maintenance and operation of the portion of the Anacostia Riverwalk Trail (ART) 

on NPS property. The NPS’s National Capital Parks-East and DDOT created this MOU as an element 

of a larger project, called the Anacostia Waterfront Initiative, which was a collaborative effort 

of several federal agencies and a quasi-governmental organization. While the original initiative 

launched the construction of the trail with a federal transportation grant, this 2013 agreement 

focuses on the maintenance and operation of the trail without the transfer of funding. Each 

party is responsible for securing funding required to perform responsibilities outlined under the 

MOU. Typically, MOUs are permitted to last around five years, but this agreement lasts for 25 

years because it establishes long term responsibilities of each entity. DDOT will maintain the 

ART’s lighting, bridge structures, boardwalks, and pavement, and the NPS will provide sanitation, 

landscaping, trail signs, and visitor furnishings, such as benches, picnic tables, trash receptacles, 

etc. The MOU also outlines joint duties between DDOT and the NPS, which include general site 

inspections and bridge inspections over specified time periods. Additionally, the MOU identifies 

specific terms of the agreement, such as key points of contact from both parties, terms for dispute 

resolution, and allowances for modification or termination of the agreement.

Figure 5-4: A child runs on the Anacostia Riverwalk in Washington, D.C. (Source: NPS)
5-14 NPS Active Transportation Guidebook

Additional Resources 

Advocacy Advance How Communities are Paying to Maintain Trails, Bike Lanes, and Sidewalks (2014). 

https://www.recpro.org/assets/Library/Trails/how_communities_pay_bike_infra_maintenance.pdf

Cape Cod Commission Outer Cape Bicycle and Pedestrian Master Plan Final Report (2017). 

https://www.capecodcommission.org/resource-library/file/?url=/dept/commission/team/Website_Resources/

initiatives/OuterCapeBikePedPlan/OCBPMPFinalReport9-2016UpdateFeb2017.pdf

FHWA Active Transportation Funding and Finance Toolkit (2022). 

https://www.fhwa.dot.gov/environment/bicycle_pedestrian/resources/atfft/index.cfm

FHWA Pedestrian and Bicycle Funding Opportunities (2021). 

https://www.fhwa.dot.gov/environment/bicycle_pedestrian/funding/funding_opportunities.cfm

FHWA STIP State of the Practice Review: Development and Use of Statewide Transportation Improvement 

Programs (2017). https://www.fhwa.dot.gov/planning/processes/statewide/practices/stip/page00.cfm

NPS Office of Public Health (OPH). https://www.nps.gov/public_health/hp/hphp
5-15 Chapter 5: Partnerships and Funding

End Notes

1 American Trails. Economic Benefits of Trails Webpage (1999). 

https://www.americantrails.org/resources/economic-benefits-of-trails

2

 NPS Collaboration and Conservation: Lessons Learned from National Park Service Partnership Areas in the 

Western United States (2004). https://www.nps.gov/orgs/1412/upload/Collaboration-and-Conservation-WesternUS-508.pdf

3

 NPS Collaboration Handbook. 

https://www.nps.gov/subjects/urban/upload/Collaboration-Handbook_IGG-and-NPS.pdf

4

 Federal Lands Access Program, Missouri. https://highways.dot.gov/federal-lands/programs-access/mo

5

 FHWA Metropolitan Pedestrian and Bicycle Planning Handbook (2017). 

https://www.fhwa.dot.gov/planning/processes/pedestrian_bicycle/publications/mpo_handbook/index.cfm

6

 Northwest Indiana Regional Planning Association Marquette Greenway Poster Plan (2009). https://nirpc.org/2040-

plan/mobility/greenways-blueways/planning-initiatives/marquette-greenway-poster-plan/

7

 International Mountain Bicycling Association. https://www.imba.com/

8

 Administration for Community Living Centers for Independent Living (2022).

https://www.acl.gov/programs/aging-and-disability-networks/centers-independent-living

9

 NPS Partnerships (2020). https://www.nps.gov/subjects/partnerships/index.htm

10 NPS Accessibility (2020). https://www.nps.gov/aboutus/accessibility.htm

11 United States Access Board. https://www.access-board.gov/

12 Easter Seals Nonprofit Organization Website. http://www.easterseals.com/who-we-are/history/

13 USGS Access Pass. https://store.usgs.gov/access-pass

14 People for Bikes. http://www.peopleforbikes.org/

15 American Trails. https://www.americantrails.org/

16 WildLink. http://wildlinkprogram.org/about/about-us

17 U.S. DOT Federal Highway Administration. https://www.fhwa.dot.gov/

18 Collaborative Visitor Transportation Survey (CVTS) Information Collection (2022).

http://volpe-public-lands.s3-website-us-east-1.amazonaws.com/flma_lrtp_cvts/cvts_info_collections.htm1.

amazonaws.com/flma_lrtp_cvts/cvts_info_collections.htm

19 Friends of Acadia. https://friendsofacadia.org/what-we-do/sustainable-visitation/the-island-explorer/

20 Connecting People to Parks: A Toolkit to Increase Safe and Equitable Access to Local Parks and Green Spaces 

(2021). https://saferoutespartnership.org/resources/toolkit/connecting-people-parks

21 NPS Federal Lands Transportation Program Contact Us (2020). https://www.nps.gov/orgs/1548/contactus.htm
5-16 NPS Active Transportation Guidebook

22 NPS Rivers, Trails, and Conservation Assistance Program (RTCA) (2022). https://www.nps.gov/orgs/rtca/index.htm

23 NPS Denver Service Center (2021). https://www.nps.gov/orgs/1804/index.htm

24 FHWA Office of Federal Lands. https://highways.dot.gov/federal-lands

25 U.S. DOT Volpe Center. https://www.volpe.dot.gov/

26 U.S. DOT Volpe Center Public Lands Team. https://www.volpe.dot.gov/our-work/transportation-policy-andplanning/transportation-planning/public-lands-team

27 Plan Philly Greenway in the Works for Mantua’s Northern Border (2014). 

http://planphilly.com/eyesonthestreet/2014/04/16/greenway-in-the-works-for-mantua-s-northern-border

28 Mantua Greenway Philadelphia Timeline. https://www.mantuagreenway.org/timeline/

29 NPS Catalog of Products & Services (2016). https://www.nps.gov/orgs/1804/upload/CatalogofProducts_

MAY2016_smallfile.pdf

30 Cape Cod Commission Outer Cape Bicycle and Pedestrian Master Plan Final Report (2017). 

https://www.capecodcommission.org/resource-library/file/?url=/dept/commission/team/Website_Resources/

initiatives/OuterCapeBikePedPlan/OCBPMPFinalReport9-2016UpdateFeb2017.pdf

31 National Park Service Planning, Accessibility Self Evaluation Transition Plan (SETP). 

https://parkplanning.nps.gov/projectHome.cfm?projectId=82268

32 NPS Yosemite National Park Half Dome Trail Stewardship Plan (2012). 

https://parkplanning.nps.gov/documentsList.cfm?parkID=347&projectID=29443

33 NPS Visitor Use Management Plan for DEWA and MDSR. 

https://parkplanning.nps.gov/projectHome.cfm?projectID=55912

34 NPS Study Integrated Bicycle Plan for Cape Cod Bicycle Feasibility Study in Partnership 

with the Cape Cod Commission (2010). https://capecodcommission.org/resource-library/

file?url=%2Fdept%2Fcommission%2Fteam%2FWebsite_Resources%2Ftransportation%2F2010_CCNS_Bike_

Feasibility.pdf

35 Mississippi National River and Recreation Area Alternative Transportation Systems Implementation. https://www.

volpe.dot.gov/transportation-planning/public-lands/mississippi-national-river-and-recreation-area-alternative

36 FHWA Federal Lands Access Program (FLAP) (2021). https://flh.fhwa.dot.gov/programs/flap/

37 Ibid.

38 FHWA Transportation Alternatives (2020). https://www.fhwa.dot.gov/environment/transportation_alternatives/

39 FHWA Recreational Trails Program (2022). https://www.fhwa.dot.gov/environment/recreational_trails/

40 FHWA Congestion Mitigation and Air Quality (CMAQ) Improvement Program (2021). 

https://www.fhwa.dot.gov/environment/air_quality/cmaq/
5-17 Chapter 5: Partnerships and Funding

41 NPS Funding & Finance. https://www.nps.gov/subjects/transportation/funding.htm

42 FHWA Bicycle and Pedestrian Funding Opportunities (2021). 

https://www.fhwa.dot.gov/environment/bicycle_pedestrian/funding/funding_opportunities.cfm

43 FHWA Active Transportation Funding and Finance Toolkit (2022). 

https://www.fhwa.dot.gov/environment/bicycle_pedestrian/resources/atfft/index.cfm

44 Advocacy Advance How Communities are Paying to Maintain Trails, Bike Lanes, and Sidewalks (2014). 

https://www.recpro.org/assets/Library/Trails/how_communities_pay_bike_infra_maintenance.pdf

45 NPS Federal Lands Transportation Program Coordinator Contact Us. 

https://www.nps.gov/orgs/1548/contactus.htm

46 NPS Director’s Order #20. https://www.nps.gov/policy/DOrders/DOrder20.html
San Antonio Missions National Historical Park, Texas (Source: NPS)

Chapter 6: Visitor Activities and Programs

This chapter discusses how parks and partners can get more visitors walking and bicycling 

through programming such as guided tours, special events, bicycle travel policies, and 

touring routes.
6-1 Chapter 6: Visitor Activities and Programs

Introduction

Offering activities and programs that provide park 

visitors the opportunity to bicycle or walk can 

encourage them to learn about or experience the park 

in new ways. Many park visitors have benefitted from 

programs and activities, such as a ranger-led walking 

or biking tour, a partner-led event, or a bicycle touring 

route that goes through a national park, as just a 

few examples. These activities and programs can be 

organized by park staff, concessionaires, volunteers, 

or friends groups, and also provide an opportunity 

for parks to partner with nearby communities, 

nonprofits, or other entities with an interest in 

encouraging walking and bicycling to and within 

national parks. It is also an opportunity to highlight 

significant or relevant historic and cultural events and 

activities that recognize the area’s diversity, culture, 

traditions, ceremonies, and heritage. As with any 

effort, providing the public with advance notice and 

detailed information about these active transportation 

programs and activities online and in printed materials 

is an important aspect of a successful program.

Through the provision of fun, safe, and accessible 

active transportation visitor programs and activities, 

parks and their partners can get more visitors walking 

and bicycling. In addition to walking and bicycling 

during these activities, visitors may choose to walk or 

bicycle to the activities as well, either from another 

location within the park, a nearby community, or even 

longer distances. Guided or structured opportunities 

can help encourage visitors who may be new to 

walking and bicycling in national parks to do so, while 

also being an attraction for visitors who regularly walk 

and bike.

Active transportation programs can be designed 

to accommodate participants of varying ages and 

abilities, including children and families, older adults, 

people with disabilities, and people new to bicycling. 

Offering tours or group rides of various distances and 

difficulties, as well as promoting them in different 

ways, can help ensure that parks equitably reach 

and engage a broad group of visitors. Programs can 

also be targeted to reach groups that may be less 

likely to regularly visit the park, such as low-income 

or minority residents from a nearby community (for 

example, by providing transportation or partnering 

with community groups on marketing).

Figure 6-1: A Ranger leads a bicycle tour at Governors Island National Monument in New York City, New York. (Source: NPS)
6-2 NPS Active Transportation Guidebook

The following sections provide information on several 

types of visitor programs and activities: bicycle and 

walking tours and classes, special events, bicycle 

touring routes, and policies promoting bicycle 

and pedestrian travel. The chapter also includes 

information on how websites, maps, and other 

tools can help communicate information about 

these programs to park visitors, and discusses key 

considerations for parks and partners interested in 

implementing or expanding active transportation 

programs and activities.

Bicycle and Walking 

Tours and Classes

A number of parks offer regular or occasional bicycle 

or walking tours led by park rangers or volunteers, 

which provide visitors an opportunity to learn about 

and see the park’s natural or cultural resources while 

engaging in physical activity. For example, Everglades 

National Park in Florida offers a number of free guided 

bicycle tours in different areas of the park. Visitors are 

encouraged to bring their own bicycles or rent them 

from a park concessionaire.1

 In an urban context, 

Boston National Historical Park has occasional free 

walking tours led by a NPS ranger on portions of the 

Freedom Trail, a delineated route along city streets 

connecting historic sites in Boston, Massachusetts.2

Through obtaining a special use permit (SUP) issued 

by the park, a nonprofit organization or other entity 

could also lead bicycle and walking tours in parks. 

Tours could also be operated by an approved park 

concessionaire, in which case these activities must be 

mutually agreed upon by the park and concessionaire 

in the concession contract.

External companies and organizations, both for-profit 

and nonprofit, may also organize commercial tours 

for walking and biking activities in national parks. 

The walking and biking tours offered by these groups 

vary in size and style and require a commercial use 

authorization (CUA) issued by the park. In general, 

CUAs and SUPs define the terms and conditions for 

what is allowed to take place in the park and allow 

the park to plan accordingly for resource protection, 

safety, and other factors. For these same reasons, the 

authorization or permit may define limitations for the 

approved group size. Operators and activity organizers 

should reach out to park staff well in advance of 

the proposed activity to obtain the appropriate 

permit and ensure compliance to park management 

restrictions and regulations. In some instances, group 

size limitations and other defined restrictions may limit 

the operator’s ability to conduct a tour, particularly 

in consideration of the operator’s profitability. In 

these cases, although flexibility in park restrictions 

and regulations is typically not possible, the activity 

might be allowed if the operator can adjust how 

it is conducted. Tour operators, activity organizers, 

and park staff can work together when issuing a 

commercial use authorization or special use permit to 

ensure that a balance is met.

In addition to bicycle tours, some parks host other 

bicycle-focused programs, such as bicycle safety or 

learn to ride classes. For example, George Washington 

Memorial Parkway offers “Learn to Ride” classes on 

most Saturdays between April and September.3

 While 

this program is geared towards children over age five, 

adults are encouraged to participate as well.

Figure 6-2: Volunteer-led bike tour at Everglades National Park in Florida. 

(Source: NPS)
6-3 Chapter 6: Visitor Activities and Programs

National Park Foundation 

Active Trails Program

The National Park Foundation4 offers 

an Active Trails grant program that 

provides funding to parks and partners 

for a wide range of activities to promote 

healthy lifestyles along trails to and 

within national parks. Some of these 

programs focus on the public health 

benefits of walking or bicycling. For 

example, Martin Van Buren National 

Historic Site in New York used an Active 

Trails grant to host youth recreational 

programs to promote the use of national 

parks as places to be healthy and enjoy 

the outdoors. A local environmental 

educator led programs that focused 

on fun and exercise, but also included 

reflection activities and questions to help 

youth connect their experience on trails 

and in the outdoors with their physical, 

mental, and emotional health.5

Special Events and 

Activities that Promote 

Walking and Bicycling 

Special events, which can be held annually or semiregularly, are another way to promote bicycling and 

walking in national parks and provide visitors a unique 

opportunity to explore parks without a car. These 

events may be organized by parks, partners, or outside 

organizations such as nonprofits or athletic clubs.

Many events are also held during National Bike 

Month, which is organized by the League of American 

Bicyclists each May. For example, in May 2017 

Saratoga National Historical Park in New York planned 

a day long Bike Summit to coincide with National Bike 

Month. During the Bike Summit, the park unveiled 

new repair stations, held bicycle skills trainings, 

offered tune-ups and safety checks, and held a fivemile ranger-guided bicycle tour.6

Car-free opportunities are a type of visitor program 

or event that allows visitors to experience park roads 

without automobile traffic.The Open Streets chapter 

provides additional information about types of carfree events and how to organize car-free activities in 

national parks.

Some parks have hosted events to highlight the health 

benefits of being outdoors and being active. Many of 

these events align with broader NPS initiatives, such as 

Healthy Parks, Healthy People.

7

 For example, in 2012 

Cuyahoga Valley National Park in Ohio partnered with 

the Cleveland Clinic to launch a “Walk with a Doc 

and a Ranger” pilot program. The program involved 

several three-to-five mile casual walks in the park led 

by a doctor and a park ranger. Attendees were able to 

learn more about health issues, improve fitness, and 

enjoy the national park.8

Figure 6-3: A park ranger leads a bicycle tour at Saratoga National 

Historical Park, New York. (Source: NPS)

Figure 6-4: Richard Kratche, M.D. and Park Ranger Brady Bourquin lead a hike in 

Cuyahoga Valley National Park, Ohio. (Source: NPS/Courtesy of Cleveland Clinic)
6-4 NPS Active Transportation Guidebook

National Park Rx Day

Park Rx (i.e., park prescription) is an 

initiative designed in collaboration with 

healthcare providers and community 

partners to promote parks, trails, and 

open space for the purpose of improving 

individual and community health.9 On April 

24, 2016, the NPS participated in National 

Park Rx Day10, an event to promote the 

growing movement of health practitioners 

prescribing parks and nature to patients 

to improve human health. National parks 

and their partners around the country 

organized events for National Park Rx 

Day, including events related to walking, 

bicycling, and physical activity in parks. Figure 6-5: A physician leads a group of children on a walk as part of 

the Park Rx program in Washington, D.C. (Source: NPS)

Where appropriate, parks may also host active 

transportation-related events organized by outside 

groups, such as nonprofit organizations or bicycle 

clubs. This is often achieved through special use 

permits, which are required for certain special events 

that are not organized or sponsored by the NPS.11

Those interested in holding a special event in a 

national park should reach out to the park to discuss 

the proposed event and learn more about the permits 

that it would require. Although these types of events 

often primarily benefit the organizing entity, the event 

may also engage a new audience of park visitors and 

provide a unique opportunity for visitors to experience 

their park by bike or by foot. Examples of these types 

of temporary, short term events include walkathons, 

fun runs, and charity bicycle rides. 

For instance, Bike Your Park Day12 is an annual event 

started by the Adventure Cycling Association to 

encourage people to ride a bicycle to or in a national 

park or other public lands. In the event’s first year, 

held on National Public Lands Day (September 24, 

2016), over 11,000 people participated in 1,400 

organized rides in parks and public lands in all 

50 states, including many rides in national parks. 

Rides are organized by event participants, including 

individuals, groups, parks, or partners. The event is 

held annually on the last Saturday in September, and 

national parks can participate by organizing rides for 

the public or encouraging visitors to register a ride. 

Events organized by outside groups often require 

close coordination with the park, to ensure that 

the event minimizes impacts to park resources and 

visitors. Organizers of these rides should check in 

advance with the park (or other public land manager) 

to determine relevant policies that may require 

permits for activities, particularly for those involving 

large groups. This also allows the park to prepare 

accordingly for the upcoming activity (i.e., emergency 

planning, increased staffing, public notification, 

etc.). If a permit is necessary, activity allowances and 

restrictions will be outlined in the special use permit.

Many running and bicycle clubs use parks on a regular 

basis for club training rides and runs. These activities 

do not typically require the significant coordination 

and planning that a race or other large-scale event 

does, but still involve groups of people walking and 

bicycling within parks. For example, Greenbelt Park

in Maryland has hosted practice bicycle races on its 

perimeter roadway for over 30 years. The races are 

scheduled on Wednesday evenings during the summer 

and are organized by the Route 1 Velo bicycle club. 

While these informal events likely do not require a 

special use permit, for NPS staff planning and visitor 

management purposes, it is best to notify the park in 

advance of these proposed activities.
6-5 Chapter 6: Visitor Activities and Programs

Long-Distance 

Active Travel

The term “active travel” refers to long-distance 

traveling by bicycle or foot, usually over the course of 

multiple days (or even weeks or months). The sections 

below discuss two forms of active long-distance 

travel: bicycle touring routes and long-distance hiking 

trails. Policies and programs that can encourage and 

accommodate active long-distance travelers along 

their journey include establishing and providing 

information about bicycle touring routes and longdistance hiking trails, and offering lower entrance fees 

or a more flexible campground reservation policy for 

those arriving by bicycle or foot. 

Figure 6-6: Cyclists ride in a practice race in Greenbelt Park, Maryland. 

(Source: NPS)

Bicycle Touring Routes

Designated bicycle touring routes and long-distance 

trails can help people traveling by bicycle plan their 

trips by identifying safe or recommended routes 

for bicycle travel. Many designated bicycle routes 

and trails pass through national parks and can help 

encourage bicycle tourism in parks and surrounding 

communities.

The U.S. Bicycle Route System is a network of officially 

numbered and signed bicycle routes connecting across 

the country. These routes are developed, designated, 

and signed by the state department of transportation, 

often in collaboration with local or state bicycle or trail 

advocacy groups and volunteers. Route designation 

requires agreement from all road owner jurisdictions 

(municipalities, counties, national parks, etc.) along 

the route, and the route numbering is approved by the

American Association of State Highway Transportation 

Officials (AASHTO). As of 2021, nearly 18,000 miles of 

U.S. Bicycle Routes have been designated in 31 states 

and Washington D.C., and approximately 4,000 miles 

include signs.13

Figure 6-7: U.S. Bicycle Route 10 volunteer coordinator John Pope meets 

with a North Cascades Park Ranger in the inaugural ride of U.S. Bike Route 

10 in Washington State. (Source: Michelle Pope)

Several U.S. Bicycle Routes (USBRs) pass through 

national parks, including: 

• North Cascades National Park, Washington 

(USBR 10)

• Sleeping Bear Dunes National Lakeshore, 

Michigan (USBR 35)

• Indiana Dunes National Park, Indiana (USBR 37)

• Mississippi National River and Recreation Area, 

Minnesota (USBR 45)

• Chesapeake & Ohio Canal National Historical 

Park, Maryland and West Virginia (USBR 50) 

• Mammoth Cave National Park, Kentucky 

(USBR 76) 

Adventure Cycling Association is the lead organization 

that coordinates USBRS development and promotion 

nationally. Routes are selected based on a National 

Corridor Plan showing 50-mile wide corridors where 

routes could feasibly be developed and officially 

designated. Park staff can partner with their state 

Department of Transportation, nearby communities, 

and other stakeholders to develop and designate 

routes through national parks. This process involves 
6-6 NPS Active Transportation Guidebook

formalizing a letter of agreement allowing the route 

to be designated through the park. Providing bicycle 

route information on websites and other printed 

materials helps to inform visitors of routes to access 

parks by bicycle. 

The USBR numbered system encompasses existing 

bicycle routes and trails that pass through national 

parks including the Mississippi River Trail, East 

Coast Greenway, the Katy Trail in Missouri, and the 

Chesapeake and Ohio Canal towpath in Washington 

D.C., Maryland, and West Virginia. Although not fully 

connected yet, the East Coast Greenway14 is a longdistance route with the goal of connecting cities of 

the Eastern Seaboard on traffic-free greenways from 

Maine to Florida. The USBR also encompasses most 

of the paved routes in the 47,000-mile Adventure 

Cycling Route Network.

15

Long-Distance Hiking and 

Walking Trails

Similar to bicycle touring, long-distance hiking involves 

traveling by foot over the course of several days, 

weeks, or months. Examples of long-distance hiking 

trails include the Appalachian National Scenic Trail, a 

2,180 mile long public footpath that stretches from 

Maine to Georgia, and the Pacific Crest Trail, which 

stretches 2,650 miles from Mexico to Canada through 

California, Oregon, and Washington. While some 

hikers (known as “thru hikers”) choose to travel the 

length of these trails in a single season, many others 

hike only a portion at a time. Some of the multiuse 

paths mentioned in the “Bicycle Touring” section 

above, such as Chesapeake and Ohio Canal Towpath, 

are also popular with long-distance hikers.

Long-distance hiking trails may provide connections 

between different national parks and between parks 

and surrounding communities, facilitating car-free 

access to national parks. For example, the Appalachian 

National Scenic Trail connects Shenandoah National 

Park in Virginia to Great Smoky Mountains National 

Park on the Tennessee-North Carolina border, and 

creates an option for active transportation between 

the parks for long-distance hikers. 

The National Park Service plays a role in managing 

approximately 30 National Scenic and Historic Trails,16

some of which are long-distance hiking trails. The 

Appalachian National Scenic Trail is managed by the 

National Park Service, U.S. Forest Service, Appalachian 

Trail Conservancy, and other state agencies. The Pacific 

Crest Trail is administered by the U.S. Forest Service 

in conjunction with the National Park Service, Bureau 

of Land Management, California State Parks, and the 

Pacific Crest Trail Association. The trail passes through 

or close to several national parks, including Sequoia & 

Kings Canyon, Yosemite, Lassen Volcano, Crater Lake, 

and North Cascades National Parks.

Figure 6-8: A bicyclist on the Chesapeake & Ohio canal towpath, which 

at 184.5 miles is one of the longest bicycle trails in the continental U.S. 

(Source: Laurel Hamilton)

Policies Promoting 

Active Travel 

Individual park policies and procedures can support 

and encourage visitors to travel by bicycle and foot 

by making it cheaper and easier for them to arrive to 

the park without a car. Some parks charge a lower 

(or no) entrance fee for visitors arriving by bicycle or 

by foot than for those arriving by car. For example, 

Assateague Island National Seashore, located off 

the coasts of Virginia and Maryland, charges a $25 

entrance fee for vehicles, and no fee for visitors 

arriving by bicycle or foot.
6-7 Chapter 6: Visitor Activities and Programs

In addition, visitors traveling long-distance by 

bicycle and foot may find it difficult to make or 

keep campground reservations due to unforeseen 

circumstances like weather, injury, or necessary 

bicycle repairs. To address these challenges, some 

campgrounds have designated “hiker-biker”campsites 

that are first come, first serve and do not require 

a reservation. Recognizing that bicycle tourists are 

unlikely to stay in the same location for more than 

one night, some parks have exempted bicyclists from 

minimum length of stay requirements for campground 

reservations.

A handful of state parks, including those in Indiana, 

Massachusetts, Michigan, Minnesota, Nevada, 

Virginia, and Wisconsin, have implemented “noturn-away” policies that guarantee space for 

active transportation travelers in the event of a full 

campground. Informing the public about these 

policies18 is essential to ensuring that hikers and 

touring bicyclists are able to take advantage of them 

when planning their trips.

Campgrounds can also provide amenities for campers 

arriving by foot or bicycle, including bicycle parking, 

bicycle maintenance tools or repair stations, lockers 

for valuables, electrical outlets for charging cell 

phones, and wildlife-proof storage for food.

Natchez Trace Parkway Bicycle-Only Campgrounds

Natchez Trace Parkway, which runs from 

Nashville, Tennessee to Natchez, Mississippi, 

has five bicycle-only campgrounds that 

provide basic camping for visitors who 

are biking the Natchez Trace Parkway. By 

using the parkway campgrounds, bicycleonly campgrounds, and communities near 

the Parkway, visitors can plan their trips 

to ride between 30 and 60 miles each 

day. The Natchez Trace Parkway website 

provides information about the bicycleonly campgrounds, including their locations 

along the Parkway, bicycle directions to 

the campgrounds, a list of campground 

amenities, and pictures.17

Figure 6-9: Bicyclists on the Natchez Trace Parkway. 

(Source: U.S. DOT Volpe Center)

Communication and Visitor 

Outreach

Providing information about walking and bicycling to 

the public on park websites, social media, park maps, 

bulletin boards, and other promotional materials is 

another way to facilitate active transportation in and 

around parks. This type of information can prepare 

visitors for what to expect when walking or bicycling 

within a park, give them ideas about how to travel to 

or within a park by bicycle, and allow them to learn 

about active transportation programs and activities 

happening in and around a park.

As a federal agency, the NPS is required by law to 

ensure that it effectively communicates with persons 

with disabilities. It must ensure that communications 

are available in multiple formats, and websites and 

other electronic media conform to Section 508 

Standards for Electronic and Information Technology 

established by the U.S. Access Board.19 
6-8 NPS Active Transportation Guidebook

Some effective ways that park staff can share 

information about active transportation with their 

visitors include:

• Providing information on getting to and traveling 

through the park by bicycle or foot in the “Plan Your 

Visit” section of the park website.

• Listing bicycle and walking safety tips, such as 

information about terrain, where to refill water 

bottles or access bicycle repairs, or how to safely 

share the road with vehicles, on the park’s website or 

in a brochure. 

• Distributing a map showing multiuse paths, bike 

lanes, and roads that are well-suited for bicycling, as 

well as other park landmarks and amenities.

• Posting on social media about upcoming bicycle or 

walking events, such as a tour led by a park ranger or 

a special event hosted by a friends group.

• Using social media to inform visitors about conditions 

at the park, such as road closures and weather, which 

could help them plan their bicycle or walking trip. 

• Providing information on the park website about 

policies to encourage travel by foot and bicycle, such 

as lower entrance fees for those arriving by foot or 

bicycle, or campsites reserved for hikers and bicyclists.

For example, Yosemite National Park publishes a 

bicycle map, available online and in print (Figure 

6-10). This enables bicyclists to better plan their 

routes by understanding which roads are shared 

with other vehicles and which are meant primarily 

for nonmotorized modes. It also helps bicyclists 

estimate distances between amenities and attractions. 

Parks can encourage use of active transportation by 

providing information that may help the trip be more 

predictable and comfortable for the visitor.

Providing Essential Traveler Information to NPS Visitors

The NPS Long Range Transportation Plan20 recommends that, when applicable, the 

following information be available to visitors on the “Directions & Transportation” section of 

the park’s website: 

• The description of the transportation experience within the park, including typical 

congestion at certain sites.

• Information on how to access the park via motorized and nonmotorized methods of 

transport.

• Alternative modes of transport available within the park (e.g., bicycle rentals).

• Parking availability for all modes of transport (e.g., parking lots, RV spaces, bicycle racks).

• Travel distances and times between key points within the park.

• Accessibility information for those with disabilities.

Providing detailed and clear information can help encourage active transportation by 

making visitors aware of all transportation options, possibilities for multimodal trips, and 

constraints and amenities related to each mode (e.g., limited parking or the presence of 

bike lanes). 
6-9 Chapter 6: Visitor Activities and Programs

Figure 6-10: Map showing bike paths in Yosemite National Park in California. (Source: NPS)

Online Information about Bicycling: Denali National Park & Preserve

Denali National Park & Preserve in 

Alaska has extensive information 

on its website about bicycling 

in the park so that visitors who 

choose to bicycle know what 

to expect. The website includes 

information on suggested 

itineraries for bicycle day trips, 

bicycle camping, riding the park 

shuttle bus with a bicycle, and 

spring cycling before the park 

road is open to cars. The website 

also includes safety tips related to 

repairs, staying hydrated, wildlife, 

weather, and rules of the road.21

Figure 6-11: Bicyclists on the park road in Denali National Park, Alaska. (Source: NPS)
6-10 NPS Active Transportation Guidebook

Considerations for 

Implementing Active 

Transportation Programs 

Active transportation programs and activities in 

national parks may be organized by the parks 

themselves, or by friends groups, nonprofits, 

concessionaires or other private companies, bicycle or 

running clubs, or other groups or individuals. 

There are a variety of elements to consider when 

implementing bicycle and pedestrian programs and 

activities in and around parks:

• Audience: Consider tailoring active transportation 

programs to different audiences, such as people 

of different ages, physical and fitness abilities, and 

levels of comfort on a bicycle. For example, holding 

two bicycle tours on the same day—a 10 mile ride 

on roads for experienced bicyclists and a three 

mile ride on a multiuse path for those who want a 

shorter ride or are traveling with children—could 

provide options for a broad range of participants. 

• Impact on park visitors, staff, and resources: 

The size and type of the visitor program will 

affect the impact it has on park staff, visitors not 

participating in the program, and natural and 

cultural resources. Encouraging visitors to walk 

and bicycle rather than drive can help reduce the 

negative impacts of vehicle travel on natural and 

cultural resources. However, an organized event 

might require additional staff to support the event 

and road closures that could impact other park 

visitors. As a result, parks may decide to limit the 

frequency of these types of events (e.g., once a 

year), or develop strategies to minimize impacts. 

• Planning: Entities interested in pursuing an 

organized event involving a national park should 

reach out to that park to discuss their proposed 

event and follow any necessary permitting 

processes. Even if a permit is not required, those 

leading large groups (such as an organized bicycle 

ride of 10 or more participants) should also notify 

the park ahead of time in order to ensure necessary 

preparations. 

• Supporting policies: Policies can encourage 

visitors to travel by foot or bicycle and to take part 

in active transportation programs and activities. 

Policies that support active transportation include a 

lower entrance fee for active transportation users, a 

no-turn-away policy for hikers and bicycle campers, 

and a delineated bicycle route within the park.

• Infrastructure: Visitors are unlikely to participate 

in active transportation activities and programs 

if they do not feel safe doing so. Providing safe 

infrastructure for walking and bicycling allows 

visitors to use these modes and participate in active 

transportation programs. For more information 

about active transportation infrastructure, see the 

Infrastructure and Multimodal Connectivity

chapter.

• Information and outreach: Providing information 

about active transportation programs online and 

in printed materials can inform visitors about 

these programs and what to expect when walking 

and bicycling to and within a park. Working with 

partners, friends groups, and nearby communities 

to get the word out can help ensure the 

information reaches a broad audience of potential 

visitors. 

• Education and safety: Active transportation 

programs can be an opportunity to educate visitors 

about safe riding and walking. For example, 

some parks specify in their permits for companies 

that lead group rides that these companies 

must conduct safety training with each group of 

bicyclists before they ride in the park. For more 

information, see the Bicyclist and Pedestrian 

Safety chapter.
6-11 Chapter 6: Visitor Activities and Programs

Figure 6-12: A bicyclist at Chamizal National Memorial in Texas. (Source: NPS)
6-12 NPS Active Transportation Guidebook

Additional Resources 

Adventury Cycling Association National Corridor Plan. 

https://www.adventurecycling.org/routes-and-maps/us-bicycle-route-system/national-corridor-plan/

Adventure Cycling Association Parks Partnerships & Resources. 

https://www.adventurecycling.org/bicycle-tourism/national-advocacy-projects/parks-partnerships-resources/ 
6-13 Chapter 6: Visitor Activities and Programs

End Notes

1 Everglades National Park. Biking. https://www.nps.gov/ever/planyourvisit/biking.htm

2 NPS Boston National Historical Park Thing to do. https://www.nps.gov/bost/planyourvisit/things2do.htm

3

 NPS George Washington Memorial Parkway Learn to Ride (2020). 

https://www.nps.gov/gwmp/planyourvisit/learntoride.htm

4

 National Park Foundation Active Trails. https://www.nationalparks.org/our-work/programs/active-trails

5

 National Park Foundation Youth Engagement & Education. 

https://www.nationalparks.org/our-work/youth-engagement-education

6

 NPS Saratoga National Historical Park Bicycling Information (2014). 

https://www.nps.gov/sara/planyourvisit/bicyclinginformation.htm

7

 National Park Service Office of Public Health. https://www.nps.gov/orgs/1735/index.htm

8

 NPS A Call to Action Action 13: Stop Talking and Listen. A Toolkit for Engaging Communities and Fostering 

Relationships (2013). https://www.nps.gov/subjects/policy/upload/Task-9-Engaging-Communities-Toolkit.pdf

9

 NPS Healthy Parks Healthy People. https://www.nps.gov/planyourvisit/healthy-events.htm

10 The National Park Rx Initiative. http://www.parkrx.org/

11 NPS Management Policies (2006) Section 86. Special Park Uses. 

https://www.nps.gov/orgs/1548/upload/ManagementPolicies2006.pdf

12 Adventure Cycling Association Bike Your Park Day. 

https://www.adventurecycling.org/resources/bike-your-park-day/

13 Adventure Cycling Association U.S. Bicycle Route System. 

https://www.adventurecycling.org/routes-and-maps/us-bicycle-route-system/

14 East Coast Greenway. http://www.greenway.org/

15 Adventure Cycling Association Interactive Network Map.

https://www.adventurecycling.org/routes-and-maps/adventure-cycling-route-network/interactive-network-map/

16 NPS America’s National Trails System. https://www.nps.gov/subjects/nationaltrailssystem/index.htm

17 NPS Bicycle-Only Campgrounds (2021). https://www.nps.gov/natr/planyourvisit/bicycle-only-campgrounds.htm

18 Adventure Cycling Association Guide to Bicycle Camping. 

https://www.adventurecycling.org/sites/default/assets/File/Travel_Initiatives/National%20Advocacy%20Projects/

BicycleCampingGuide_WEB.pdf

19 U.S. Access Board Information and Communication Technology (2018). https://www.access-board.gov/ict.html

20 NPS Transportation Planning. https://www.nps.gov/subjects/transportation/planning.htm

21 NPS Denali National Park & Preserve Cycling. https://www.nps.gov/dena/planyourvisit/cycling.htm
Glacier National Park, Montana (Source: Saara Snow)

Chapter 7: Open Streets Opportunities 

 in National Parks

This chapter explores the potential benefits of open streets, or “car-free” opportunities in 

national parks. It describes recent successes parks have had with open streets events of 

varying scale, frequency, and level of partnership involvement, and discusses best practices 

for car-free events.
7-1 Chapter 7: Open Streets Opportunities in National Parks

Introduction 

Open streets or “car-free” opportunities and events 

enable visitors to enjoy walking and bicycling on park 

roads without automobile traffic (open streets and 

car-free are used interchangeably in this chapter). Carfree opportunities have occurred in some cities and 

in local, state, and national parks around the country 

for over 50 years, and there are currently a number 

of National Park Service sites that provide such 

experiences for visitors. These events vary in scale, 

frequency, and level of partnership involvement. 

Open streets are excellent ways for visitors to 

experience parks without automobile traffic, 

while also engaging in active transportation and 

recreation; some parks have noted that their carfree experiences have attracted first time visitors. 

Car-free opportunities can provide many health, 

environmental, safety, economic, and visitor 

experience benefits for parks, their partners, and 

nearby communities by: 

• Promoting active living and encouraging modes of 

travel other than private motor vehicles;

• Assisting parks with addressing congestion and air 

quality issues;

• Providing opportunities for visitors to engage more 

meaningfully with the surrounding landscape and 

experience the park in a new way;

• Encouraging more visitors to use active 

transportation to travel in the park beyond the carfree event;

• Encouraging partnership efforts and building 

relationships with gateway communities;

• Increasing the value that communities place on 

having a national park in their backyard; and

• Providing new experiences while creating more 

equitable, diverse, equitable, inclusive, and accessible 

outdoor recreation opportunities.

The following sections discuss open streets 

opportunities that currently take place in national 

parks, as well as best practices and key considerations 

for NPS car-free opportunities. The chapter concludes 

with a brief resource guide for parks and partners 

interested in pursuing car-free programs. 

In developing this chapter, staff from multiple national 

parks that have or are successfully hosting car-free 

opportunities were interviewed in order to learn more 

about the details and how-tos of these events. 

Figure 7-1: Bicyclists during a car-free morning at Acadia National Park in 

Maine. (Source: NPS)

The Open Streets Project

Urban open street events typically 

feature various types of health-focused, 

active lifestyle activities such as walking, 

bicycling, yoga, and dance. These events 

can have different names (Ciclovía, 

Sunday Streets, etc.) and usually take 

place in city centers. The Open Streets 

Project,

1

 a collaboration between two 

organizations, Street Plans Collaborative 

and 8 80 Cities, shares information 

about open street events with the goal 

of increasing the number, size, and 

frequency of initiatives taking place 

across North America. The Open Streets 

Project published the Open Streets 

Toolkit,

2

 which tracks open street events 

in the U.S. and Canada, and outlines the 

range of public health, environmental, 

economic, community, and social benefits 

that open street events provide.
7-2 NPS Active Transportation Guidebook

Existing NPS Car-Free Opportunities and Programs 

Several national park units currently offer visitors an opportunity to experience park roads in a car-free 

environment. Table 7-1 below categorizes NPS car-free events into three typologies, and includes a description, 

considerations, and examples of parks that currently hold each type of car-free opportunity. 

Table 7-1: NPS car-free typology

Type Description Level of Effort/

Considerations

Example 

Parks

Seasonal 

opportunities

Seasonal access for visitors 

during the shoulder season 

in the spring/fall when select 

roads are not open to vehicles 

due to snow (visitors are still 

able to access other areas 

of the park using motorized 

vehicles). Exact timeframe 

varies year to year depending 

on weather and snowfall. 

Seasonal opportunities can 

bring tourism to gateway 

communities and encourage 

park visitation during 

shoulder seasons, which are 

typically in the spring and fall.

Requires minimal to 

moderate effort from park 

staff as plowing would 

take place anyway, but 

there are maintenance 

and safety considerations 

while visitors are using park 

roads. Notifications are 

often posted on the park 

website, and there may be 

other communications to let 

users know that the road is 

available for use. Typically, no 

programming or amenities 

are provided.

Catoctin Mountain, 

Denali, Glacier, 

Grand Teton, 

Lassen Volcanic, 

Mount Rainier, 

Rocky Mountain, 

Yellowstone

Routine (weekly/

monthly) 

opportunities

Temporary use restrictions 

on a park road (or a portion 

of a road) to allow for only 

nonmotorized uses on a 

scheduled, recurring basis. 

Allows visitors to regularly 

experience vehicle-free days 

at the park.

Requires a moderate level 

of effort to get the event 

established, though this can 

decrease once the event is

routine. Event information is 

often available on the park 

website. Typically, little to no 

additional programming or 

amenities are provided. 

Great Smoky 

Mountains, Rock 

Creek Park

Special 

opportunities 

or events 

Temporary use restrictions 

on a park road (or a portion 

of a road) to allow for only 

nonmotorized uses once or 

twice a year, typically during 

the summer or fall. 

Level of effort and coordination 

varies widely. Parks might 

simply restrict vehicle use 

on a designated road on 

specific dates and provide 

notification on the park 

website, or a destination 

event might be created with 

partner coordination to provide 

programming and amenities. 

Acadia, Crater Lake, 

Colonial Parkway, 

Fort Dupont Park, 

Shenandoah
7-3 Chapter 7: Open Streets Opportunities in National Parks

Examples of Seasonal 

Car-Free Opportunities 

Denali National Park, Alaska: In late March, the 

park typically starts plowing the Denali Park Road. 

Once snow-free, visitors are allowed to use portions 

of the road that remain closed to vehicular traffic 

until the summer season begins in May. Popular uses 

of Denali Park Road include cycling, hiking, skiing, 

and dog-mushing. This seasonal opportunity has 

increased in popularity over the past five years and 

offers visitors another way to experience the park 

during spring months.3 As this opportunity becomes 

more widely known, local communities benefit 

from increased out-of-town visitation and economic 

growth during the shoulder season.

Figure 7-3: A bicyclist riding the Denali Park Road before it opens to vehicles. 

(Source: NPS)

Glacier National Park, Montana: Starting in about 

mid-April, bicyclists can use the plowed portions of the 

Going-to-the-Sun-Road (GTSR) until the road is reopened 

to vehicles in late June.4

 Bicyclists have unrestricted 

access to the plowed portions of the road on weekends 

and can cycle the road after the plow crews have 

stopped for the day on weekdays. In 2016, the park 

launched a new shuttle service for visitors on the GTSR 

that operates during the spring months beginning in May 

to the end of June, when the road reopens to vehicles.5 

For bicyclists, this shuttle is also equipped with a bicycle 

trailer to transport up to 16 bikes; this allows bicyclists of 

all ages to access GTSR (see image below).

Figure 7-4: Bicyclists on the GTSR during the spring shoulder season. 

(Source: Saara Snow)

Starting in 2016, Glacier National Park also established 

strong volunteer presence during the spring shoulder 

season. Park staff anticipated more participation in the 

spring shoulder season due to the shuttle and began a 

formalized volunteer bike patrol program. Volunteers 

support the event by providing a park presence on the 

road, managing parking, and riding the GTSR to ensure 

visitors are safe.

Figure 7-2: The bicycle trailer and visitor shuttle at Glacier National Park.

(Source: Saara Snow)
7-4 NPS Active Transportation Guidebook

Examples of Routine 

Car-Free Opportunities

Great Smoky Mountains National Park, 

Tennessee: Each year between May and September, 

Great Smoky Mountains National Park provides carfree opportunities6

 along Cades Cove Loop Road. In 

2020 and 2021, the park offered car-free days every 

Wednesday. These car- free days along the 11-mile 

road have become popular with visitors and local 

residents alike as an opportunity to view cultural 

landscapes and wildlife by foot or bicycle without 

disturbance from vehicles. In 2020, an average of 

1,800 pedestrians and cyclists participated each 

Wednesday. Although the events are routine, it takes 

considerable effort from staff and volunteers to 

manage parking and monitor bicyclist safety on the 

Loop Road. 

Rock Creek Park, Washington D.C.: Since 1981, 

the NPS has closed 4.3 miles of Beach Drive to motor 

vehicles from 7:00 a.m. on Saturday to 7:00 p.m. 

on Sunday, every weekend throughout the year. 

The purpose of this schedule is to provide a regular 

opportunity for visitors to engage in active recreation 

in a car-free environment. The weekend closure 

of Beach Drive to vehicles has become a routine 

operation for staff, requiring minimal effort, and gives 

D.C. residents and visitors an opportunity to escape 

the sounds and stress of the city streets.7

In April 2020, in response to the COVID-19 pandemic, 

the NPS temporarily increased socially-distanced 

recreational opportunities for pedestrians and bicyclists 

on the northern section of Beach Drive and adjoining 

park roads by limiting drivers’ access during weekdays. 

In 2021, NPS began a public engagement process to 

inform the future management of this section of the 

road.

Figure 7-5: Bicyclists on Beach Drive during the regular vehicle-free weekends. 

(Source: NPS)

Examples of Special Car-Free 

Opportunities and Events

Acadia National Park, Maine: Over the past 10-15 

years, the Park Loop Road has been maintained in 

great condition through regularly scheduled repaving. 

The upkeep of the road has led to increased interest 

from road cyclists, but the road is narrow and lacks 

shoulders, and there are often conflicts between 

bicyclists and vehicles sharing the road. In 2015 

and 2016,8

 the park piloted two car-free Saturday 

mornings, one in May and one in September. For 

the event, motorized vehicles were not allowed 

along portions of the Park Loop Road on Mt. Desert 

Island from 7:00 a.m. to 12:00 p.m. and the visitor 

entrance fee was waived. In 2015, there were over 

600 participants (runners, bicyclists, skaters, etc.) 

at the May event, and over 900 participants at the 

September event. 

These opportunities were held only in the morning 

to ensure that visitors not participating in the event 

could still visit the park as planned in the afternoon. 

The park also worked with the gateway community of 

Bar Harbor to recommend that visitors spend time in 

the downtown as an alternate activity in the morning. 

In addition, the Island Explorer shuttle bus system 

providing access to the park continued to operate 

during the event in 2016, which provided visitors 

another way to access points of interest along the 

road during the car-free mornings.

As of 2017, Acadia National Park does not plan to 

continue its car-free morning pilot but is continuing 

to look into ways to offer car-free opportunities to 

visitors.

Figure 7-6: A family enjoying a car-free morning at Acadia National Park. 

(Source: NPS)
7-5 Chapter 7: Open Streets Opportunities in National Parks

Crater Lake National Park, Oregon: Crater Lake 

National Park has hosted “Ride the Rim” car-free 

days in the park for two consecutive weekends each 

year since 2013.9

 The annual event typically occurs 

on the last two Saturdays in September on East Rim 

Drive. Hikers and bicyclists have access to 25 miles 

of vehicle-free roadway around Crater Lake to enjoy 

picturesque views. The opportunity is implemented 

as a temporary vehicle-use restriction on the 25 

mile section of the Rim Road, and is organized in 

partnership with Discover Klamath Falls, a tourism 

association in the nearby community of Klamath Falls. 

In addition to providing advance notice and event 

information on the park’s website, Discover Klamath 

Falls manages a separate “Ride the Rim” website 

that provides additional information about the event 

and available amenities, as well as free participant 

registration (participants must still pay the park 

entrance fee).10 A shuttle service is provided along the 

nine mile section of the Rim Road that remains open 

to vehicles. Visitors, park staff, and the community see 

the event as a big success, providing a highly-rated 

visitor experience and giving the local tourism industry 

a boost during what is otherwise a low-visitation time 

of the year.

Open Streets Best Practices 

and Key Considerations for 

National Parks

The section below contains best practices and key 

considerations for ensuring the success of open 

streets programs in parks. The insights below have 

been gathered from parks experienced with hosting 

car-free events or activities and are followed by a 

brief “getting started guide” intended for parks 

and partners with interest in pursuing similar 

opportunities. 

Gather support 

Coordination with surrounding communities can 

ensure that parks have the required support to 

successfully organize and provide an open streets 

opportunity. Support may come from local tourism 

groups, friends groups, local cities, or elected officials. 

For Crater Lake’s “Ride the Rim” days, the park 

worked closely with their congressional delegation, 

as well as gateway communities and a tourism 

association, to ensure support for the car-free days. 

Figure 7-7: A participant at Shenandoah National Park’s vehicle-free day on Skyline Drive in Virginia. (Source: NPS)
7-6 NPS Active Transportation Guidebook

Link with park policies and existing plans 

Consider incorporating use restrictions for carfree days into the park’s Foundation Document or 

Superintendent’s Compendium. This will allow the 

park to develop the management justification and 

structure to support the opportunities. Additionally, an 

open streets opportunity may align with park goals or 

values in the Foundation Document. For example, park 

staff noted that Shenandoah National Park’s vehiclefree day on Skyline Drive aligns with the Foundation 

values of promoting clean air, scenic beauty, and 

natural soundscapes. 

Obtain required permits

For events organized by external organizations, the 

partner must apply for a special use permit in order to 

establish requirements and park approval for the event 

or activity. See the Visitor Activities and Programs

chapter for more information. 

Consider existing agreements 

Work with concessionaires to ensure that a carfree event does not violate any existing concession 

agreements. For example, at Crater Lake, a contract 

with a shuttle bus operator guarantees access to 

the road for paid tours during the peak season. By 

scheduling the event after the concession period ends 

each year, the park avoided violating that agreement.

Consider safety 

Visitor safety is always a consideration for parks, and 

car-free events are no exception. For car-free events 

specifically, consider emergency management plans, 

maintenance of the road where the event is being 

held, and ensuring there is clear information available 

on the characteristics of the route, and whether 

amenities (such as first aid tents, water, restrooms, 

etc.) will be provided. For example, the maintenance 

crew at Great Smoky Mountains uses blowers on the 

Cades Cove Loop Road to clear debris once a week, 

helping to keep the road safer for cyclists.

Consider potential participants

Consider the level of experience of bicyclists and other 

roadway users, and communicate information about 

the course, level of difficulty, and amenities that will 

be available along the route. 

For example, the Park Loop Road at Acadia 

National Park can accommodate a greater variety of 

participants than the shoulder season road closure 

opportunity at Mount Rainier National Park, as 

the road in Mount Rainier is a steep incline up a 

mountain. Where possible, try to provide a wide range 

of opportunities to accommodate varying abilities of 

visitors and participants.

Outreach to provide information about the carfree opportunities 

Many parks use multiple communication tools 

including the park website, social media, press 

releases, and partner (e.g., friends groups, volunteers, 

local bicycle shops) and gateway community outreach 

to get the word out about the car-free opportunities. 

Mount Rainier National Park in Washington noted that 

staff use Twitter daily to update visitors on whether 

Sunrise Road is open to nonmotorized use, as the 

availability and length of the road that is open for 

recreation changes throughout the shoulder season.

Consider a pre-registration process 

Some parks work with friends groups or partner 

organizations to run a pre-registration for events. The 

registration can be useful to anticipate the number 

of participants for an event. This is especially helpful 

if there is limited parking, since an event cap can be 

set in the registration. If working with a partner to 

use online registration, ensure the communications, 

messaging, and key information points are clear for 

the registration page. It may be useful to develop 

a frequently asked questions page as well, in 

anticipation of the types of questions the park may 

get about the event.

Use signs to provide critical information

It is important to provide information to visitors 

and the public well in advance of the car-free 

opportunities, but it is also critical to provide 

information as they are arriving to the park. For 

example, Acadia National Park uses variable 

messaging signs placed on the roads leading to the 

park to alert visitors of temporary vehicle restrictions 

on Park Loop Road. Mount Rainier National Park uses 

a sign at the bottom of Sunrise Road to let visitors 

know the status of the road for recreation during the 

shoulder season.
7-7 Chapter 7: Open Streets Opportunities in National Parks

Utilize volunteers to support car-free 

opportunities 

Volunteers can fulfill a variety of support functions 

at open street events, such as helping manage 

parking (Great Smoky Mountains National Park, 

Glacier National Park), greeting visitors, and providing 

information about the car-free opportunity (Acadia 

National Park). Great Smoky Mountains National Park 

and Glacier National Park both have volunteer bike 

patrols that ride the road during the car-free event, 

helping to ensure that participants are safe, and also 

to assist if there are any incidents.

Think strategically about when to offer car-free 

opportunities

While car-free opportunities provide a unique way 

to enjoy the park without vehicles, consider how to 

accommodate visitor access for those not participating 

in the event. For instance, in Acadia National Park, 

staff achieved this balance with the timing of their 

car-free mornings. The park restricted vehicles on 

Park Loop Road from midnight to noon on the day 

of the event so that visitors with cars could use the 

road in the afternoon. While the event is taking place, 

other features within the park were still accessible by 

vehicle. 

Figure 7-8: Bicyclists at Shenandoah National Park’s vehicle-free day in Virginia. (Source: NPS)
7-8 NPS Active Transportation Guidebook

Getting Started Guide for 

Car-Free Opportunities 

This section provides preliminary direction for NPS staff 

and partners who might be interested in holding a carfree event. The steps below have been adapted from 

The Open Streets Guide11 by the Open Streets Project,

but do not reflect additional NPS-specific processes.

When planning a car-free event or activity, the 

following are suggested steps and timelines. These are 

general recommendations that may vary depending 

on the park, the context, and the activity. It is best to 

begin the planning early in order to coordinate with 

necessary partners or entities, so as to address any 

unforeseen issues that may arise. 

Develop an event proposal (6-12 months before 

the event) 

An event proposal will help to formalize ideas for an 

event and serve as a foundation for further planning. 

This proposal may include information, such as:

• Purpose or objectives for the event;

• Timeline, including when the event will be held, 

key milestones and meeting dates for planning the 

event; 

• Budget estimate; and

• Proposed route for the event.

Identify partners and key roles (throughout 

event planning process)

Identify potential partner entities or organizations 

(e.g., bicyclists groups, advocacy groups, health care 

partners, friends of the park groups, etc.) that may 

be interested in supporting or having a key role in the 

event. In addition, work with these partners to identify 

roles and responsibilities for the event. For example, 

partners may be able to help with marketing and 

outreach, providing donations, providing volunteer 

support, and more.

Develop a logistical plan (3-6 months before the 

event)

After an event proposal has been accepted and the 

partners identified, further event planning is required 

to determine details for how the event will take place. 

A logistical plan will help to ensure greater success 

and may include:

• A marketing/branding and outreach strategy for 

the event;

• Details about the designated route;

• A traffic control plan for any detours or 

modifications to normal traffic flow;

• Emergency services and safety considerations;

• A staffing plan for the event;

• Details about any supporting activities or amenities 

(such as portable toilets, first aid stations, etc.); and

• A detailed “day-of” plan for the event, including 

timelines for when the road will be closed and 

reopened to vehicles, and other key day-of items.

Identify and pursue necessary permits and other 

required documents (4-6 months before the 

event) 

Depending on the proposed event and related 

activities, a permit or other related documents (e.g., 

insurance policy, etc.) may be required. Reach out to 

the park well in advance to discuss the proposal and 

obtain necessary approvals. 

Evaluate the event (during and/or after the 

event)

Evaluating an event, either during or after the 

conclusion of the event, informs event organizers of 

its success or where improvements to event logistics 

may be necessary. When events are repeated over 

time, tracking elements such as the number of visitors 

participating in the event also helps to develop an 

understanding of event success and trends.
7-9 Chapter 7: Open Streets Opportunities in National Parks

The following are ways to evaluate car-free events in 

national parks: • Track participant numbers: Track participant 

numbers through online event pre-registration, or 

through counting participants the day of the event. 

Beyond the event, participant data can also be 

useful to demonstrate support for investments in 

active transportation.

• Track resources and cost: Tracking staff time 

and monetary costs of conducting the car-free 

opportunity can help event organizers and/or park 

staff justify the efficiency of the event and inform 

the ability to host future car-free events. It may also 

inform where improvements could be made for 

future events.

• Surveys: Visitor surveys are a great way to get 

feedback on car-free programs. If park staff do 

not have the resources to administer the survey 

themselves, they can consider drawing upon 

friends groups or other partners for help. In Acadia 

National Park, volunteers staffing the entrance of 

the park during the first car-free morning handed 

out links to an online survey for visitors to take. 

The park received mostly positive feedback and 

continued with the car-free mornings in 2016. 

• Debrief with staff: Consider holding a debrief 

meeting with staff, volunteers, and others involved 

in the car-free event to discuss what went well, 

and what improvements can be made. Glacier 

National Park created an interdisciplinary working 

group for their car-free opportunities. The group 

included staff representing different fields of 

expertise within the park, including the public 

information officer, law enforcement, interpretative 

rangers, transportation staff, and wildlife biologists. 

Varying perspectives strengthen the planning and 

implementation of an event.
7-10 NPS Active Transportation Guidebook

Additional Resources

Open Streets Project Open Streets Guide (2012). 

https://nacto.org/docs/usdg/smaller_open_streets_guide_final_print_alliance_biking_walking.pdf

Open Streets Project Open Streets Project Toolkit. http://openstreetsproject.org/open-streets-toolkit/

8 80 Cities Open Streets Trends and Opportunities.

https://www.880cities.org/images/880tools/openstreets-policy-brief-english.pdf
7-11 Chapter 7: Open Streets Opportunities in National Parks

End Notes

1

 Open Streets Project. http://openstreetsproject.org/

2

 Open Streets Project Toolkit. http://openstreetsproject.org/open-streets-toolkit/

3

 NPS Denali National Park & Preserve Cycling (2021). https://www.nps.gov/dena/planyourvisit/cycling.htm

4

 NPS Glacier National Park Bicycling (2021). https://www.nps.gov/glac/planyourvisit/bicycling.htm

5

 NPS Glacier National Park 2016 New Shuttle for Bicyclists Launches Today Press Release (2016). 

https://www.nps.gov/glac/learn/news/media-16-21.htm

6

 NPS Great Smoky Mountains National Park Bicycling (2020). https://www.nps.gov/grsm/planyourvisit/biking.htm

7

 Rock Creek Park District of Columbia Calendar. https://www.nps.gov/rocr/planyourvisit/calendar.htm

8

 NPS Acadia National Park Bicycling (2021). https://www.nps.gov/acad/planyourvisit/bicycling.htm

9

 NPS Crater Lake National Park Calendar. https://www.nps.gov/crla/planyourvisit/calendar.htm

10 Ride the Rim Crater Lake, Oregon (2022). https://ridetherimoregon.com/

11 Open Streets Project Open Streets Guide (2012). 

https://nacto.org/docs/usdg/smaller_open_streets_guide_final_print_alliance_biking_walking.pdf
Washington D.C. (Source: Kelly Siegel)

Chapter 8: Bicycle Rental and 

 Bikeshare Systems

This chapter discusses types of bicycle sharing and rental systems, differences between the 

two, and opportunities and constraints. It provides case studies of parks that have worked 

with partners to implement bicycle sharing or rental systems.
8-1 Chapter 8: Bicycle Rental and Bike Sharing Systems

Introduction

Bicycle rental and bikeshare systems expand the 

opportunities for visitors to access and explore 

national parks by bicycle. They can provide a way 

for visitors to access national parks from nearby 

communities or travel within parks without needing a 

personal vehicle. These systems can also give people 

who are traveling without a bicycle (e.g., visitors from 

out of state) the option of using one in the park. 

The following chapter discusses characteristics of 

both bicycle rental and bikeshare systems, examples 

of parks that have pursued each option, and 

considerations for their implementation.

Bicycle Rental Programs offer bicycles for 

recreational, longer-term use (such as several hours 

or days). Bicycles are rented and returned from a 

single, staffed location. Bicycle rental programs often 

offer several types of bicycles, including those that 

accommodate children and people with disabilities. 

Many national parks have concession-operated bicycle 

rental businesses located in the park. Bicycle rental 

businesses located in nearby communities can also 

create opportunities for park visitors to bicycle to and 

within a park.

Bike Sharing Systems provide users with the option 

to borrow a bicycle from either a defined station 

location (docked or kiosk-based system), from varying 

locations within a defined service area (dockless 

system), or a combination of both (hybrid system). 

The bicycles are typically used for point-to-point 

trips.1

 Bikeshare systems can be considered a form 

of public transportation and are primarily located in 

urban areas or in a defined area such as a campus 

setting. Bikeshare systems typically offer memberships 

(e.g., daily, monthly, or yearly) and use technologies 

such as smart cards, fobs, or smartphone apps for 

users to automatically unlock bicycles. Many systems 

have implemented reduced fare programs and cash 

payment options to promote equity and serve a wider 

array of users. Formalized bikeshare systems in the 

United States have expanded rapidly since 2010 when 

the first large-scale docked systems launched in the 

District of Columbia, Denver, and Minneapolis.

Table 8-1 shows some of the major distinctions 

between bicycle rental and bikeshare programs. As 

bicycle rental and bikeshare serve different purposes, 

a park could choose to allow for operation of both 

types of systems within the park.

Table 8-1: Differences between bicycle rental and sharing concepts

Bicycle Rental Bicycle Sharing

Longer term (hourly, daily, weekly) recreational use is 

typical

Shorter term use (30-60 minute increments) primarily 

for transportation purposes

Single location that is staffed for bicycle pickup and 

drop off

Dispersed network of unattended stations for bicycle 

pick up and drop off, enabling one way use of 

bicycles

Targets bicycle use for recreation Primarily targets bicycle use for public transportation, 

but can also be used recreationally

Traditional for-profit business model For profit or subsidized by various sponsors, similar to 

other forms of public transportation

Traditional bicycles do not incorporate tracking 

capabilities

GPS technology is used to track bicycle location and 

use
8-2 NPS Active Transportation Guidebook

Table 8-1: Differences between bicycle rental and sharing concepts (continued)

Bicycle Rental Bicycle Sharing

May accommodate families by providing children’s 

bicycles or trailers; also may accommodate people 

with disabilities or varying preferences with specialty 

bicycles (tricycles, hand cycles, electric bicycles 

(e-bikes), etc.)

Usually designed for adults (Europe and Canada 

typically allow riders 14 years and older, while U.S. 

typically allows 16 years and older); some systems 

include bicycles that accommodate people with 

disabilities or varying preferences (tricycles, hand 

cycles, e-bikes, etc.)

Lower capital costs (approximately $300 per bicycle) Higher capital costs (approximately $1,000 per 

bicycle and $20,000-$50,000 per kiosk)

Variable annual operating costs Annual operating cost between $1,000 and $2,000 

per bicycle

(Sources: Exploring Bicycle Options for Federal Lands2 and Wichita Mountains Wildlife Refuge Comprehensive Alternative Transportation Plan3)

Bicycle rental and bikeshare systems work best when 

they are located in and near safe places to ride. Bicycle 

and pedestrian infrastructure that provides safe routes 

and connections between the park, community 

destinations, and bicycle rental or bikeshare locations 

is critical for encouraging bike use. If there is no 

bicycle infrastructure in and around a park, consider 

pursuing improvements prior to, or in conjunction 

with, installing a bicycle rental or bikeshare 

program. For more information about bicycle and 

pedestrian infrastructure, see the Infrastructure and 

Multimodal Connectivity chapter.

Overview of Bicycle Rentals 

Many national parks have bicycle rentals available 

either within or near the park. Bicycle rental 

businesses can be created at a small scale, and capital 

costs for bicycle rental businesses are also relatively 

low, making it a feasible option for parks that are 

interested in expanding recreational bicycle use.

Most bicycle rental systems in national parks are 

operated by private concessionaires. A private bicycle 

rental company may operate under a commercial use 

authorization (CUA) permit, in which the company 

pays the park a fee to operate inside the park. In some 

parks, bicycle rental services are operated through 

a larger concessions contract, such as a lodging 

contract. Bicycle rental programs can also be operated 

by the NPS, in which case the park would purchase 

the bicycles and rent them directly to park visitors.

When there is not a bicycle rental business or program 

within the park, parks often provide information to 

visitors about how to find bicycle rental businesses 

in nearby communities, such as by linking to the 

local chamber of commerce on the park website. 

This option can be especially beneficial if parking or 

congestion within the park is an issue, as visitors will 

have the opportunity to arrive by bicycles that they 

rent from nearby towns, rather than driving into the 

park. 

Bicycle Rental Considerations 

for National Parks

To determine whether initiating a bicycle rental 

program would be a good fit, consider the park and 

its surrounding communities’ landscape for bicycle 

use, the park context, visitation information, park 

operation goals, and bicycle-related policies. Bicycle 

rental programs might work best in or near parks that 

have high numbers of visitors and existing bicycle 

infrastructure or safe places to ride. Bicycle rentals can 

also help parks address policy or operational goals, 

such as reducing congestion and private vehicle trips, 

or providing recreational opportunities for visitors. 
8-3 Chapter 8: Bicycle Rental and Bike Sharing Systems

When pursuing or initiating a bicycle rental program in 

or near a park, consider the following factors: 

• Operating model: Consider whether a bicycle 

rental program should be operated by the NPS 

or through a concession agreement or other 

partnership arrangement. If pursuing bicycle 

rentals through a concessions or cooperative 

agreement, decide whether to establish a new 

agreement to provide bicycle rental service, or 

whether bicycle rentals could be offered under 

a larger, existing concessions contract, such as 

a lodging contract. 

• Capital and operating costs: Capital 

costs for bicycle rental businesses will vary 

depending on the number and types of 

bicycles and other equipment offered. 

Operating costs will vary depending on the 

number of staff, number of locations, and 

what other services are offered. With NPSoperated bicycle rentals, the park will be 

responsible for the up-front costs of buying 

the bicycles as well as the staff time and 

costs for operating the system, while with 

a program operated through a concessions 

agreement the concessioner will pay these 

costs.

• Types of bicycles offered: Bicycle rental 

operators can provide a variety of different 

types of bicycles, including road bicycles, 

electric bicycles, for people who want to 

travel longer distances or need assistance 

maintaining a reasonable speed, bicycles for 

children or with child trailers/carriers, and 

adaptive bicycles such as handcycles, tricycles, 

or recumbent bikes to accommodate people 

with disabilities. Consider encouraging 

operators to offer bicycles for a range 

of potential users based on visitor use 

management data and to coordinate with park 

staff to only offer bicycles that are permitted in 

the park, such as certain classes of e-bikes. 

• Community partnerships: Partnerships can 

be a key to implementing bicycle rentals in or 

near a national park. For example, a bicycle 

rental operator could have two locations – one 

in a park and one in a nearby community – to 

allow for one-way trips. Alternatively, if a park 

does not have a bicycle rental business within 

the park, it can provide information about 

where to find rental providers or partner with 

bicycle rental operators in nearby communities 

as a way to encourage visitors to bicycle to 

the park. See the Partnerships and Funding

chapter for more information. 

Figure 8-1: Bicyclists enjoy the multiuse pathways at the Grand Canyon National Park in Arizona. (Source: NPS)
8-4 NPS Active Transportation Guidebook

• Pricing: Bicycle rentals are typically more 

expensive for users than bikeshare per ride, 

but the rental pricing structure encourages 

longer trips and single or multiple day 

rentals. If funding is available or provided by 

community partners, consider implementing 

a bicycle library model that offers bicycles 

for free or at a very low cost. Bicycle rental 

and bikeshare providers could also consider 

implementing discounted fee structures for 

low-income populations.

• Visitor information: When renting bicycles 

to park visitors, consider providing information 

about bicycle and e-bike policies, realtime availability, safety considerations, and 

information about bicycle paths or other 

places to ride. This information could be 

provided by the park directly; alternatively, 

it could be a requirement of a bicycle rental 

concessions contract to provide this type 

of information to people renting bicycles. 

The Public Lands E-Bikes Communication 

Guidebook4

 (internal NPS resource) along 

with three supplemental communications 

products provides tips on communicating with 

the public about e-bike opportunities and 

regulations.

• Accessibility: Visitor service entities that 

operate within a park are required to provide 

equal opportunity for people with disabilities 

to benefit from the provided experiences. 

When the park is considering visitor service 

entities (including bicycle rental and bikeshare 

operators), it is important to determine 

Figure 8-2: The bicycle rental company in Grand Canyon National Park 

provides riders with recommended bicycle routes in the park. 

(Source: Bright Angel Bicycles)

Figure 8-3: Example map showing where visitors may bicycle on multiuse 

paths and along roadways in Grand Canyon National Park, Arizona. 

(Source: NPS)

whether the provider offers an accessible 

opportunity (e.g., modified devices or adaptive 

equipment) and the experience and training of 

staff for serving those with disabilities.

Bicycle Rental Examples

Grand Canyon National Park: In-park bicycle 

rental business 

Grand Canyon National Park has a multimodal 

transportation system with 13 miles of multiuse trails 

along the South Rim of the canyon with a shuttle bus 

stop every one-half to one mile. This gives visitors and 

residents the opportunity to walk, bicycle, and ride a 

shuttle bus along any portion of the trails and tailor 

activities to their comfort levels and physical abilities. 

All park shuttle buses are wheelchair accessible and 

equipped with a front-end bicycle rack.

At Grand Canyon National Park, bicycle rentals are 

provided by Bright Angel Bicycles (BAB), a private 

bicycle rental company located in the park.

To accommodate riders of various ages and abilities, 

BAB offers various sizes of bicycles, as well as trailers, 

adult tricycles, and tandems; it also offers bicycle tours 

at two locations, Hermit Road and Yaki Point. BAB 

also provides information about several recommended 

bicycle routes within the park, ranging in distance 

from three and a half to 21 miles, and information 

about how to connect to the park’s shuttle bus system 

to bicycle one way and take the shuttle back.
8-5 Chapter 8: Bicycle Rental and Bike Sharing Systems

Yellowstone National Park: In-park bicycle rentals 

through lodging contract

In Yellowstone National Park, bicycle rentals are 

offered by Xanterra Parks and Resorts, the primary 

authorized concessioner in the park that also provides 

lodging, camping, and recreational activities. Bicycle 

rentals are offered from the Old Faithful Snow Lodge. 

Adult and child bicycles, as well as bicycle trailers, are 

available. Xanterra provides suggestions of popular 

bicycle routes to follow, ranging in distance from 

three to 21 miles, on paved multiuse paths, gravel 

roads closed to automobile traffic, and roads with 

automobile traffic. One popular route is a two-mile 

round-trip paved path that passes by three geysers.5

Figure 8-4: Bicyclists ride on the Fountain Freight Road trail next to 

Midway Geyser Basin in Yellowstone National Park, Wyoming. 

(Source: NPS)

Acadia National Park: Bicycle rentals nearby the 

park

Acadia National Park does not have bicycle rentals 

within the park, but several businesses in Bar Harbor, 

Maine and other nearby communities offer rentals. 

Visitors can ride from these businesses to the park or 

use the Island Explorer shuttle bus service (all buses 

are equipped with bicycle racks). Once in the park, 

visitors can ride on the park’s carriage roads, which 

have a hard-packed gravel surface and are closed 

to vehicle traffic, the Schoodic bike paths, which 

include 8.3 miles of packed gravel trails, or on the 

Park Loop Road, a heavily traveled automobile route 

that provides a 21-mile scenic loop around the park. 

In 2019 Acadia modified its policy to allow e-bikes 

on the carriage roads, Schoodic bike paths, and other 

places where traditional bikes are permitted. Acadia 

chose to lower the speed limit for all trail users to 20 

miles per hour to promote safety for all users. After 

determining the e-bike policy, park staff worked 

with rental operators in the gateway communities to 

encourage operators to purchase compliant fleets and 

provide visitors with accurate information. 

Figure 8-5: A rental fleet outside a bicycle shop in Bar Harbor, Maine, near 

Acadia National Park. (Source: U.S. DOT Volpe Center)

Overview of Bike Share 

Systems

Bikeshare systems are typically located in large 

urban areas with existing bicycle infrastructure, 

although some smaller cities, as well as college and 

large corporate campuses, have also implemented 

bikeshare. Bikeshare systems might work well in 

national parks that are located in densely populated 

urban areas, especially cities that have existing 

bikeshare systems. They might also work well in and 

near parks with high visitation, extensive bicycling 

infrastructure, connections to transit, and many 

destinations and attractions within several miles. 

Bike share systems can take several forms, including: 

• A “kiosk-based” system: bikes are secured 

to and rented from an automated docking 

station;

• A “dockless” system: locking and renting 

technology is located on the bike itself and 

riders can pick up and drop off bicycles at 

almost any location; and 
8-6 NPS Active Transportation Guidebook

• A hybrid system: riders can access bikes at a 

docking station or can find and unlock freefloating bikes using a mobile app.

For fully docked systems, the stations may be installed 

semi-permanently at a location (fixed systems), or they 

may be portable stations that can be moved when 

necessary (such as for special events or for the winter).

With docked systems, bicycles must be regularly 

redistributed to allow customers space to return 

bicycles when the set number of docks at a station 

fills up or to provide bicycles when a station becomes 

empty. The stations, which can be battery, solar, 

or electric-powered, are typically connected to a 

centralized programming system that informs system 

managers when the bicycles need to be redistributed. 

Some bikeshare systems incorporate a smart lock 

technology that places the unlocking and rental 

technology on the bicycles themselves. Bicycles are 

typically rented using a smartphone and may or may 

not use stations or kiosks for docking the bicycles. 

For example, a bikeshare system in Evansville, Indiana 

offers 70 bicycles across seven stations. Bicycles are 

unlocked using a smartphone app and come with 

a U-lock so that users can lock their bicycle at an 

interim destination before returning it to a station. 

The program is sponsored by several local companies 

and health organizations and the Evansville Area Trails 

Coalition, a nonprofit citizens group promoting area 

trail use. Proceeds from the program’s user fees go 

directly to the trails coalition.6

 

Figure 8-6: Visitors and park staff using the bike share at San Antonio Missions National Historical Park in Texas. (Source: NPS)
8-7 Chapter 8: Bicycle Rental and Bike Sharing Systems

Dockless bikeshare systems exist in several cities and 

locations across the U.S. Systems without designated 

stations have lower capital costs, since each bikeshare 

docking station typically costs $20,000 to $50,000. 

Despite the fact that bicycles are not rented from 

stations, dockless systems also require bicycles to be 

regularly distributed to ensure that they are available 

throughout the service area. In some jurisdictions, 

issues have emerged due to bicycles being parked 

along the sidewalk and in the right-of-way impeding 

access for pedestrians and individuals with disabilities. 

Dockless systems also suffer from greater rates of 

vandalism and bicycle theft than docked systems, 

which can lead to additional costs for operators. 

Hybrid bikeshare systems aim to balance the reliability 

and control of docked systems with the flexibility and 

lower costs of dockless systems. Bicycles can typically 

be locked at a station for free or at any bike rack 

in the service area for a small fee. Hybrid bikeshare 

systems include GPS tracking technology on the 

bicycle similar to docked and dockless systems.

Some hybrid and dockless bikeshare operators work 

with jurisdictions to create street corrals, which are 

designated parking areas for shared bicycles and other 

active transportation devices such as electric scooters. 

Corrals decrease sidewalk clutter and provide flexibility 

with the number of bicycles that can be parked in a 

given area (as compared to a docking station, which 

only allows for a set number). For more information 

about those types of systems, see the Innovative 

Technologies and Emerging Trends chapter.

A number of companies offer bikeshare equipment 

and technologies. There are also a number of entities 

that provide bikeshare services, from providing the 

stations and the bicycles, to managing the system. 

Municipal governments typically have involvement in 

the management of bikeshare systems within their 

cities, but a variety of business and operating models 

exist.

In most cases, bikeshare systems are financed by a 

combination of user and member fees, grants, and 

sponsorships or advertising. Bikeshare docks and 

equipment, though not the purchase of bicycles, may 

be eligible for certain Federal Transit Administration 

(FTA) funding.7

 A bikeshare system may be publicly 

owned and privately operated, with the local 

government or municipality owning the bikeshare 

capital infrastructure, but contracting with a private 

company or partnering with a nonprofit to operate 

the system. Another common model is for a nonprofit 

to own and operate the bikeshare system or lease it 

directly from a bikeshare manufacturing company. The 

nonprofit could operate the system directly or contract 

with a private company to provide for operation 

needs. The nonprofit model is popular because it 

puts the financial liability on the nonprofit rather 

than the government and provides more flexibility for 

fundraising or applying for grants. Finally, a bikeshare 

system could be both owned and operated by the 

private sector with minimal government involvement.8

If there is an existing bikeshare system in a community 

near a national park, understanding more about how 

this system operates can help parks and partners 

determine the relevant stakeholders and begin the 

discussion on connecting bikeshare between the park 

and the community.

Integrating Municipal Bike Share 

Systems into Urban National Parks 

Many U.S. cities and urban areas have integrated 

bikeshare systems into the local or regional 

transportation network in recent years. National 

parks interested in providing bikeshare as an option 

for visitors could reach out to the nearby community 

or bikeshare operator, if one exists, to discuss 

opportunities for expanding or implementing a system 

to connect with key park destinations.

Several national parks have had success partnering 

with municipalities to provide bikeshare stations on 

and adjacent to park property, including the National 

Mall and Memorial Parks in the District of Columbia; 

Mississippi National River and Recreation rea in 

Minneapolis-St. Paul, Minnesota; and San Antonio 

Missions National Historical Park in Texas. All three 

parks are located in urban settings, making bikeshare 

a desirable option for accessing and experiencing park 

sites. In all three cases, park staff worked with the city 

governments and bikeshare operators to plan stations 

in and around the park sites and routes.8

 The NPSoperated Yosemite Bikeshare at Yosemite National 

Park provides a non-urban example of how bikeshare 

and bicycle rental systems can coexist at a park to 

serve transportation and recreation needs.
8-8 NPS Active Transportation Guidebook

Collaboration between parks and partners is critical 

in order to successfully connect a bike share system 

to and within a park. Initial topics to discuss for a 

collaborative bike share effort typically include: 

• Planning the siting of stations in and around 

the park to facilitate easy access to and 

between destinations;

• Evaluating the bikeshare system in the context 

of the larger transportation system network; 

• Developing signs that both identify the 

bikeshare station and provide directions to 

nearby national park sites;

• Promoting the bikeshare system through 

various outreach networks, including digital 

platforms (e.g., bikeshare websites and apps);

• Developing bicycle infrastructure that makes 

traveling between bikeshare stations and 

destinations safe and comfortable for users;

• Promote coordination with the bikeshare 

program to ensure e-bike related restrictions at 

the NPS unit are considered;

• Sharing and analyzing data collected through 

bikeshare usage; and

• Funding the bikeshare system by working 

with partners to apply for grants or identify 

sponsors to fund bicycles, stations, or system 

operations.

Regional planning and transportation divisions are 

available for assistance in planning bikeshare stations 

or for assistance in exploring funding opportunities.

Bike Sharing Considerations for 

National Parks

When parks and partners are interested in 

implementing or connecting bikeshare systems to 

and within a national park, the primary factors to 

consider depend largely on the park setting, the type 

of bikeshare system that exists or is most appropriate 

for the area (i.e., docked, dockless, or hybrid), and 

who the intended user is (i.e., visitors, staff and 

volunteers, etc.). For example, remote parks that wish 

to implement their own bikeshare system primarily 

for use within park boundaries would need to identify 

how to operate and maintain the system as well as 

available funding to pay for the system. In addition, 

if the intended user of the system is park staff and 

volunteers, then an ad-hoc system may be the most 

feasible option. With ad-hoc systems, bicycles are 

purchased and distributed around a defined area 

without any stations or tracking technology. Users 

can pick up a bicycle for free, ride it, and drop it off 

elsewhere in the area. See the Employee Programs 

and Park Operational Uses chapter for more 

information on this type of system being used at 

Glacier National Park in Montana. The majority of 

bikeshare systems that are currently in use across the 

U.S. are docked. For parks and partners interested in 

pursuing a connection with an existing system or in 

implementing a docked bikeshare system with the 

local municipality and other partners, the following 

are additional considerations: 

• Land ownership: Bikeshare operators follow 

different procedures for station placement 

depending on who owns the land on which a 

bikeshare station will be located. For bikeshare 

stations located on NPS managed properties, 

a formal memorandum of understanding 

between the NPS and the bikeshare operator 

may be required.

• NPS mission: Bikeshare stations should align 

and not conflict with a park’s mission as laid 

out in its Foundation Document or General 

Management Plan. For example, bikeshare 

stations and signs should not detract from 

historic preservation objectives or disrupt 

scenic viewsheds and should be located near 

visitor use locations.

• Advertising limitations: Many bikeshare 

systems are partially funded through 

advertising on stations. However, commercial 

advertising is not allowed on NPS sites. 

Instead of featuring advertisements, stations 

on NPS land can display informational or 

educational materials, such as safety messages 

or information about nearby attractions. 

The bicycles, however, do not have the 

same advertisement limitations, as they are 

considered moving vehicles.

• Concessions issues: Parks often have 

concessions agreements with bicycle rental 

businesses. To install bikeshare stations in 
8-9 Chapter 8: Bicycle Rental and Bike Sharing Systems

these parks, the NPS will need to demonstrate, 

as detailed earlier in this chapter, that 

bikeshare provides a different service from 

bicycle rental and that the bikeshare operation 

does not infringe upon the concessions 

agreement. Table 8-1 provides information 

about the differences between these two types 

of systems and can help make the case that 

each provide distinct services. For example, 

bikeshare is used primarily for transportation, 

while bicycle rentals are typically used for 

recreation. For this reason, installing bikeshare 

stations in national parks can help close gaps 

in municipal bikeshare networks and provide 

additional options for bicycle travel within 

parks and in the surrounding communities – 

without detracting from existing bicycle rental 

businesses.

• Digital platforms: Bikeshare operators 

frequently provide a mobile application for 

users to locate available bikes and rent them. 

Mobile apps and websites are digital platforms 

that can augment signage and in-person 

communication, as well as provide real-time 

information.

• Liability: Most large public bikeshare systems 

in the U.S. are operated by third parties 

(private company or nonprofit organization) 

rather than a government agency. Bikeshare 

operators address legal liability by requiring 

members to sign a user agreement and by 

carrying appropriate insurance. Therefore, 

bikeshare systems operated by third parties 

should not create any additional liability issues 

for national parks.

• E-bikes: Many bikeshare systems include 

e-bikes, but their operation in parks must align 

with the NPS e-bike regulations and a park 

manager’s decision about where e-bikes are 

allowed. Charging stations should coincide 

with high visitor use locations.

Bike Sharing Examples 

Nice Ride Minnesota and Mississippi National 

River and Recreation Area

The Nice Ride Minnesota bike share system 

launched in 2010 with 700 bicycles and 65 stations 

in Minneapolis-St. Paul, Minnesota. The system 

expanded rapidly, and as of 2017 had over 1,800 

Figure 8-7: Many Nice Ride stations are located in and around Mississippi National River and Recreation Area, allowing visitors to access and enjoy the park by 

bicycle. (Source: NPS)
8-10 NPS Active Transportation Guidebook

bicycles and 200 stations. In 2011, the NPS completed 

a plan to create a robust multimodal network that 

includes bicycle facilities, canoe and kayak rental 

facilities, and connections to public bus and light rail 

systems throughout the Mississippi National River and 

Recreation Area. Based in part on this plan, the NPS 

and Nice Ride Minnesota are partnering to improve 

access to the river’s cultural, historic, and natural 

resources to enable visitors and residents to arrive and 

travel along the river without the use of a car. 

In addition to bike share stations along the river, in 

2016 the park launched a paddle share program that 

allows visitors to rent kayaks from several stations 

along the river. The paddle share stations are aligned 

with Nice Ride bike share stations, allowing visitors the 

option to paddle one way and bicycle the other. 

Capital Bikeshare and National Mall and 

Memorial Parks 

The District of Columbia’s bike share system, Capital 

Bikeshare, launched in 2010 and as of 2017 had 

expanded to 3,700 bicycles and 440 stations in the 

region, including Maryland and Virginia. In 2012, five 

stations were installed on the National Mall. Since 

then, four additional stations have been installed on 

and around the National Mall, and visitors can use 

bike share to access and travel between monuments. 

Implementing Capital Bikeshare on NPS managed 

land is authorized through a memorandum of 

understanding (MOU) between the District of 

Columbia Department of Transportation and NPS; 

these management approaches are discussed in more 

detail in the Partnerships and Funding chapter. 

Since the MOU is with the National Capital Region 

rather than a specific park, the agreement allows any 

park in the region to work with Capital Bikeshare to 

install stations and sets up a process for obtaining 

special use permits in order to do so. However, as of 

2017, the National Mall is the only park in the region 

that has bike share stations installed on NPS managed 

property.

Figure 8-8: Bicyclists using the Capital Bikeshare in front of the Lincoln Memorial. (Source: NPS)

B-Cycle and San Antonio Missions National 

Historical Park

In 2012, the B-Cycle bikeshare system in San Antonio, 

Texas was expanded to connect to San Antonio 

Missions National Historical Park. The park consists of 

four 18th century Spanish colonial missions that are 

located along an eight mile stretch of the San Antonio 

River. Most park visitors arrive by personal vehicle, and 

the NPS was interested in providing an alternative that 

would help reduce vehicle and parking congestion as 

well as greenhouse gas emissions. Working together, 

the park, the city of San Antonio, and a nonprofit San 

Antonio bikeshare organization implemented a linear 
8-11 Chapter 8: Bicycle Rental and Bike Sharing Systems

expansion of the bikeshare system along a newly 

built recreation trail from downtown to the park. 

With funding from an FTA grant, 12 new bikeshare 

stations were installed, providing access to all four NPS 

missions. As of 2020, the B-Cycle system provided 

nearly 90,000 trips per year. 

For each of these three docked bikeshare examples, 

the stations that connect visitors to national park sites 

and routes are among the most highly used in each 

system. 

Figure 8-9: The B-Cycle system in San Antonio extends from 

downtown to connect to multiple sites within the San Antonio Missions 

National Historical Park. (Source: NPS)

Yosemite Bikeshare and Yosemite National Park

Yosemite Bikeshare is a free, seasonal bikeshare 

system in the Yosemite Valley. The bikeshare system 

is designed to be used for short trips around the 

Yosemite Valley and includes 50 bicycles that are 

typically available between June and October. Each 

bicycle comes with a helmet and individuals are able 

to retrieve a bicycle from one of two stations located 

at the Yosemite Village Parking Area and Yosemite 

Village mall. 

Visitors are able to locate and unlock the bikes using 

the Yosemite Bikeshare mobile application. Individuals 

use a cell phone to scan a QR code between the 

handlebars that unlocks the bicycle’s rear wheel. The 

bicycles may be used for up to two hours at a time 

before being returned to the same station where they 

were retrieved. 

The system is jointly operated by the National Park 

Service and the Yosemite Conservancy, a nonprofit 

partner. For visitors interested in full-day bicycle 

rentals, Yosemite works with a concessioner that 

provides full-day rentals for conventional and adaptive 

bicycles. During summer 2020, the system provided 

1,600 trips.

Figure 8-10: The Yosemite Bikeshare system allows riders to take 

2-hour trips around the Yosemite Valley. (Source: NPS)
8-12 NPS Active Transportation Guidebook

Additional Resources 

National Association of City Transportation Officials (NACTO) Shared Micromobility in the U.S. 2018. 

https://nacto.org/shared-micromobility-2018/

North American Bikeshare and Scooter Association 2nd Annual Shared Micromobility State of the Industry 

Report (2020). https://www.dropbox.com/s/f417a5xasdxm4fv/FINAL%20-%202020%20State%20of%20

the%20Industry%20Report.pdf?dl=0&__hsfp=1273170026&__hssc=251652889.1.1629983278987&__

hstc=251652889.9591add3fd17bf7568a895da19903197.1629983278986.1629983278986.1629983278986.1

Portland State University Transportation Research and Education Center National Scan of Bike Share Equity 

Programs (2020). https://trec.pdx.edu/research/project/1278/National_Scan_of_Bike_Share_Equity_Programs

Toole Design Group and the Pedestrian and Bicycle Information Center Bike Sharing in the United States: State 

of the Practice and Guide to Implementation (2012). https://www.bikesharing.ch/fileadmin/minisites/redaktion/

bikesharing/Dokumente/Bikesharing_in_the_United_States.pdf
8-13 Chapter 8: Bicycle Rental and Bike Sharing Systems

End Notes

1

 FHWA Frequently asked Questions and Answers concerning Bike Sharing Relative to the United States 

Department of Transportation (2012). 

https://www.fhwa.dot.gov/environment/bicycle_pedestrian/funding/faq_bikeshare.cfm

2

 FHWA Federal Lands Highway Division Exploring Bicycle Options For Federal Lands: Bike Sharing, Rentals And 

Employee Fleets (2012). http://www.pedbikeinfo.org/cms/downloads/ExploringBicycleOptionsForFederalLands.pdf

3

 FWS Wichita Mountains Wildlife Refuge: Comprehensive Alternative Transportation Plan (2014). 

https://rosap.ntl.bts.gov/view/dot/12109

4

 NPS Public Lands E-Bikes Communications Guidebook (2022). https://doimspp.sharepoint.com/sites/nps-outdoorrecreation/SitePages/Electric-Bicycles.aspx#public-lands-e-bike-communications (NPS Internal Link)

5

 NPS Yellowstone National Park Bicycling. https://www.nps.gov/yell/planyourvisit/bicycling.htm

6

 Evansville Courier & Press City-wide Bike Sharing Program Announced (2016). http://www.courierpress.com/story/

news/local/2016/10/03/citywide-bike-sharing-program-announced/91462008/

7

 FTA Frequently Asked Questions and Answers concerning Bike Sharing Relative to the United States Department 

of Transportation (2015). https://www.transit.dot.gov/sites/fta.dot.gov/files/docs/ Informal_Q_and_As_Final_

updated_w_new_contacts_9_30_15.pdf

8

 Pioneer Valley Planning Commission. Regional Bikeshare in the Pioneer Valley Feasibility Study (2014). 

http://www.amherstma.gov/DocumentCenter/View/32094

9

 Sherwood, K. and Murphy, J. Expanding a Municipal Bikeshare System into an Urban National Park Through 

Community Partnerships: City of San Antonio, Texas, and San Antonio Missions National Historical Park (2014). 

https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/abs/10.3141/2453-07

10 Electrek The US is doubling e-bike imports this year to half a million, and even that isn’t enough (2020). https://

electrek.co/2020/10/28/the-us-is-doubling-e-bike-imports-this-year-to-half-a-million-and-even-that-isnt-enough/

11 Salmeron-Manzano, E. and Manzano-Aguglioari, F. The Electric Bicycle: Worldwide Research Trends (2018). 

https://www.mdpi.com/1996-1073/11/7/1894
White Sands National Monument, New Mexico (Source: NPS)

Chapter 9: Employee Programs and 

 Park Operational Uses

This chapter explores how parks can encourage employees to incorporate active 

transportation into their workplace routines through offering employee bicycle fleets, active 

transportation incentives, and employee wellness programs. It describes the benefits of such 

programs to both employees and parks.
9-1 Chapter 9: Employee Programs and Park Operational Uses

Introduction

The National Park Service can encourage and provide 

opportunities to incorporate active transportation 

into employee workplace routines. Workplace active 

transportation can benefit employees and park 

resources by reducing greenhouse gas emissions 

and transportation costs for the park and individual 

employees, increasing employee productivity, and 

improving employee health, well-being, and overall 

job satisfaction. To help parks and employees realize 

these benefits and create a more active and healthy 

workplace culture, a park can include bicycles in the 

employee vehicle fleet, provide active transportation 

incentive programs for employees commuting 

between home and work as well as traveling between 

worksites while on duty, or offer employee wellness 

programs tailored to the interest of park staff and the 

park environment.

In addition to equipment and programs, safe 

bicycle and pedestrian infrastructure can allow and 

encourage employees to use bicycles or walk when 

commuting and while at work. Bicycle and pedestrian 

infrastructure in and around parks also benefits 

park visitors and can improve the visitor experience. 

For more information on active transportation 

infrastructure, see the Infrastructure and 

Multimodal Connectivity chapter.

The following sections provide more information on:

• the benefits of workplace active 

transportation;

• the use of employee bicycle fleets for 

operation, transportation, and recreation 

purposes; and

• programs and incentives that may help 

motivate employees to walk or bicycle more.

Benefits of Workplace 

Active Transportation

Promoting workplace active transportation through 

employer or partner provided equipment, programs, 

and incentives can provide various benefits to NPS 

employees, volunteers, and visitors and can help 

achieve operational and agency goals. These benefits 

include:

• Improved employee health and wellbeing: Numerous studies show that bicycling 

has positive benefits for physical health, 

weight loss, and mental health.1

 In addition, 

active commuting has been linked to better 

productivity because of lower absenteeism 

due to illness, benefitting employers as well as 

employees.2,3,4

• Improved employee satisfaction: Bicycling 

can be an enjoyable way to travel, and having 

an opportunity to ride a bicycle to and from 

work or during the workday might improve 

employee job satisfaction. For example, one 

study found that 67 percent of people who 

bike or walk to work enjoy their commute, 

compared to 58 percent of those who 

commute by car.5

• Reduced transportation costs, roadway 

congestion, and greenhouse gas 

emissions: Utilizing bicycles for operational 

activities and employee or volunteer 

transportation between work sites may save 

parks money on fuel and vehicle maintenance 

costs, reduce roadway congestion by removing 

employee vehicles from the roadway, and 

allow them to reduce transportation- and 

operations-related greenhouse gas emissions. 

• Increased employee understanding of 

visitor active transportation: Providing 

bicycles for employee use can help NPS staff 

develop a firsthand understanding of the 

benefits of active transportation and become 

advocates for expanding active transportation 

programming and infrastructure within and 

around the park. Employee bicycle fleets 

can also increase the visibility of active 

transportation for park visitors, and show 

visitors that riding a bicycle in the park can be 

safe, easy, and enjoyable.
9-2 NPS Active Transportation Guidebook

Use of Employee 

Bicycle Fleets 

Employee bicycle fleets are collections of bicycles that 

are provided by an organization and offered to staff 

and volunteers for their use. Employee bicycle fleets 

can provide additional transportation options for 

employees to travel to and from work and between 

work sites, and for operational activities such as 

patrolling or hauling materials. Employee fleets can 

operate like a bike sharing system, with employees 

borrowing bicycles for short trips within a defined 

area. Employers may also loan bicycles out for a longer 

time period, such as a several weeks or months. 

Employee bicycle fleets may be owned or operated by 

parks themselves, or by partner organizations such as 

friends of the park groups or other nonprofits. 

In national parks, employee bicycle fleets have been 

successful for the following uses: 

• Operational: Job-related tasks, such as 

leading visitor programs, conducting law 

enforcement patrols, or hauling materials;

• Transportation: Traveling to and from work 

sites and commuting to and from work; and

• Recreation: Exercise or leisure outside of work 

hours.

The sections below describe each of these three 

categories in more detail, and provide examples of 

how parks can use bicycle fleets in these ways. 

Operational Uses

Businesses and organizations around the country are 

discovering that bicycles can be used to accomplish 

job-related activities that have primarily been 

accomplished using a motor vehicle. For example, 

United Parcel Service (UPS) uses an electronicallyassisted cargo bicycle for deliveries in Portland, 

Oregon. The city of Cambridge, Massachusetts, 

employs a company called Metro Pedal Power to use 

cargo bicycles to pick up recycling from public bins.

Within national parks, employee bicycle fleets can be 

used for operational activities such as: 

• Patrolling campgrounds, multiuse trails, 

beaches, or other park areas;

• Hauling materials, such as office supplies, 

firewood, recycling, or garbage; 

• Leading visitor tours or activities; and

• Conducting maintenance activities. 

Figure 9-1: Employees and visitors to Grand Canyon National Park in Arizona. (Source: NPS)
9-3 Chapter 9: Employee Programs and Park Operational Uses

Using bicycles rather than vehicles for operational 

activities can reduce park fuel expenses and carbon 

emissions, as well as create visibility around active 

transportation in the park. Using bicycles to patrol 

areas of the park can provide employees, law 

enforcement, and volunteers with greater coverage 

in areas where vehicle access is limited but bicycle 

access is permitted. Patrolling by bicycle, for example, 

can give park employees access to multiuse trails and 

remote campsites that they would not be able to 

easily patrol in a vehicle.

When bicycles are used for operational activities, 

parks may need more specialized types of bicycles and 

equipment in the fleet. For example, a trailer could 

be added to equip a bicycle to haul materials, electric 

bicycles (e-bikes) can enable employees to carry heavy 

loads or cover hilly terrain, and bicycles with fat tires 

can allow employees to use bicycles to patrol on dirt, 

sand, or over snow.

Transportation Uses

Employee bicycle fleets are often used for traveling 

between sites within a defined geographic area. For 

example, the Denver Federal Center in Colorado, a 

623-acre campus of 28 federal agency offices, has 

a free kiosk-based bike share program for tenants 

that includes 50 bicycles and six stations strategically 

placed throughout the campus. The bike share system 

is geared towards encouraging short trips between 

buildings, as well as providing increased access to 

surrounding public transportation.

Some national parks have adopted this model and 

provide bicycles for employees to use for travel 

between sites within the park. Bicycles used for this 

purpose can replace vehicle trips that employees 

would have otherwise taken. In this way, bicycles can 

reduce fuel expenses and carbon emissions, as well as 

provide an opportunity for physical activity during the 

work day.

Figure 9-2: Bicycles that are part of the Glacier National Park employee “Red Bike” fleet in Montana. (Source: NPS)
9-4 NPS Active Transportation Guidebook

Glacier National Park Red Bike Program

The Glacier National Park Red Bike Program provides 27 bicycles for employees to use 

within park boundaries. The bicycles, which come equipped with helmets and rear saddle 

baskets, are located at office buildings, visitor centers, campgrounds, and ranger stations. 

Park employees can check out a master key to access the bicycles for an entire season, 

which runs from May 1 to October 15. In an average year, 35 to 40 employees utilize the 

bicycles. People with this master key can borrow a bicycle at any time, and must return 

the bicycle to the same location within 72 hours of check-out. Most bicycle use is between 

offices in the park, although at two locations employees can use the bicycles to get from 

their living quarters to their office. The bicycles were purchased with a grant from the 

Glacier National Park Fund, and are maintained by staff, volunteers, and local bicycle shops.

Figure 9-3: Glacier National Park superintendent Jeff Mow rides an employee “Red Bike” near the park headquarters. (Source: NPS)

Employee bicycle fleets can also be used for 

commuting purposes. Some national parks have 

provided bicycle fleets to employees and volunteers 

who live in or nearby the park to use for commuting. 

These bicycles may be offered to employees or 

volunteers as a long term loan (e.g., for an entire 

season), or be checked out for daily use as is a typical 

bicycle rental. This type of system is especially useful 

for parks that have many seasonal employees or 

volunteers who live in or near the park and might not 

have other forms of transportation available to them.

Recreation Uses

Employee bicycle fleets can be used for exercise and 

recreational trips outside of work hours, such as after 

work or during a lunch break. Many workplaces have 

gyms that employees can use; an employee bicycle 

fleet for recreation is similar in concept.

It is important to note that bicycles that are 

government property require special authorization to 

be used for non-work purposes or personal use, such 

as recreation. Therefore, parks pursuing bicycle fleets 

to use for recreation or commuting purposes typically 

work with a partner, such as a nonprofit organization 

or employee association, to purchase the bicycles and 

manage the employee fleet program. 
9-5 Chapter 9: Employee Programs and Park Operational Uses

For example, the NPS Midwest Regional Office in 

Omaha, Nebraska offers 10 bicycles that employees 

can use for recreation. The program was initiated 

by the Midwest Region Activities Association, an 

employee group that plans recreational and social 

activities. The group used $5,000 in grants topurchase 

the bicycles and accessories. NPS employees and 

their guests and families can borrow the bicycles to 

ride outside of work hours, such as after work or 

during their lunch break. The nearby Lewis and Clark 

National Historic Trail and Missouri Riverfront Trail are 

popular places for employees to ride.

Employee Bicycle Fleet 

Considerations 

To determine whether an employee bicycle fleet 

would be a good fit to implement within a park, the 

following are a few aspects to consider: 

• Is the landscape and geography conducive to 

comfortably riding a bicycle? 

• Is the distance between worksites and homes 

a reasonable distance to travel by bicycle?

• Is there infrastructure in place to ride a bicycle 

safely? 

Bicycle fleets may work best when employees tend 

to travel between several locations within a relatively 

small geographic area, and when there are safe places 

to ride within and around the park, such as multiuse 

trails, bike lanes, or roads without high-speed traffic. 

They are also attractive for parks that have a large 

number of seasonal employees who may be living 

in park-provided housing and do not have personal 

vehicles. Pursuing a bicycle fleet for operational uses 

can work well when employees use park vehicles to 

travel short distances or at low speeds, and if a park 

faces high maintenance and fuel expenses for these 

vehicles.

When the determination has been made that an 

employee bicycle fleet program would be a good 

fit for a park, consider the following elements for 

planning and implementing the program: 

• Funding: Several employee bicycle fleet 

programs at national parks have been funded 

through grants from friends of the park 

groups or other public lands support groups, 

such as the National Park Foundation. Other 

parks have used their own budgets to fund 

employee fleets. Capital costs for an employee 

bicycle fleet program typically average $300 to 

$600 per bicycle, including accessories. Cargo 

bicycles, e-bikes, or other specialty bicycles are 

more expensive. 

• Bicycle ownership: Bicycles that are 

government property require special 

authorization to be used for non-work 

purposes or personal use. To address this issue 

and allow employees to use employee fleet 

bicycles for personal use, such as on a lunch 

break or commuting, some parks have had 

another organization, such as a nonprofit, 

purchase and manage the bicycles.

• Equipment: The types of bicycles chosen 

for the fleet should accommodate the local 

climate and terrain, and the fleet’s intended 

use. For example, hilly parks may need bicycles 

with more gears, and parks in rainy climates 

may want to add fenders to the bicycles.

Bicycles that will be used for operational uses 

such as hauling materials may need to be 

fitted with a trailer. When purchasing bicycles 

for the fleet, consider purchasing accessories 

as well, such as helmets, locks, and baskets. 

• Maintenance and operations: In the 

planning stage of implementing an employee 

bicycle fleet, consider how the bicycles will be 

maintained, including who will do the work 

and how it will be paid for. Also determine 

how the system will be managed, such as 

procedures for signing up and checking out 

the bicycles. Maintenance costs for employee 

bicycle fleets vary widely depending on the 

type and quality of the bicycle, level of use, 

and exposure to weather. Some parks rely on 

external volunteers for bicycle maintenance or 

incorporate the operations and maintenance 

of the employee fleet into existing job duties. 
9-6 NPS Active Transportation Guidebook

• Partnerships: Partnerships with park friends 

groups, nonprofits, nearby bicycle shops, 

or others can provide a variety of benefits 

to implementing, maintaining, or operating 

an employee bicycle fleet program. These 

groups can be involved in a variety of ways, 

from purchasing or donating the bicycles, 

to volunteering to maintain the bicycles, 

to training employees in bicycle skills and 

maintenance. In some cases, partners own the 

bicycles and operate the bicycle fleet program. 

• Potential benefits: Measuring and evaluating 

the potential benefits of employee bicycle 

fleets, such as fuel and cost savings and 

increased employee satisfaction, can help 

make the case for implementing an employee 

bicycle fleet. Some parks have quantified 

benefits of employee fleets by attaching an 

odometer to the bicycles and calculating fuel 

and emissions reductions resulting from their 

use.

• Employee support: Employees who are 

accustomed to using cars for short workrelated trips or other work duties might find it 

difficult to shift to bicycling for these purposes. 

Education and training about an employee 

bicycle fleet can help staff change their habits 

and behaviors and begin to integrate bicycling 

into their day-to-day work. An initiative 

such as a “bike buddies” program that pairs 

experienced riders with new ones could 

also help employees get comfortable with 

bicycling.

• Internal champion: Having a champion 

within the park to oversee the bicycle fleet, 

such as an individual employee or an employee 

group, can also be helpful for initiating 

and maintaining the program. This person 

or group could be responsible for tracking 

which employees are using the program or 

when the bicycles need to be maintained, and 

encouraging employees to use the system. 

However, to ensure the longevity of the bicycle 

fleet beyond one individual’s tenure at the 

park, it is important that the knowledge about 

and responsibility for an employee bicycle fleet 

is spread out across multiple people. 

• Safety and liability: Many employee bicycle 

fleets require riders to sign a user agreement 

agreeing to the rules of the program and 

assuming all risks of using the bicycles. To 

enhance safety, employee fleet managers 

can provide employees with bicycle safety 

information or training or provide helmets.

Bicycle fleet programs can also require riders 

to wear a helmet when using the bicycle fleet, 

if there is not an existing state or local helmet 

law that applies to adult bicycle riders.

Employee Active 

Transportation Programs 

and Incentives 

Employer-sponsored programs can encourage 

employees to use active transportation and 

make it easy and fun for them to walk and 

bike more. Employee programs include offering 

bicycle commuting reimbursement or bike sharing 

memberships, providing workplace amenities that 

support active transportation, and holding special 

events and educational and wellness activities focused 

around active transportation.

Bicycle Commuting Reimbursement

Many employers offer commuting incentives for their 

employees, such as free or discounted transit passes. 

Instituting or expanding these incentive programs 

to include bicycling can be a tool for encouraging 

employees to use active transportation while 

commuting. Programs that offer to subsidize bicycle 

expenses make commuting by alternate means, other 

than by way of a personal vehicle, more appealing. 
9-7 Chapter 9: Employee Programs and Park Operational Uses

For example, the Department of Interior’s Bicycle 

Subsidy Benefit Program6

 allows employees to be 

reimbursed for up to $20 a month for qualified 

bicycle commuting costs for the months in which the 

employee commuted by bicycle at least 50 percent 

of the time. Bicycle commuting costs can include the 

purchase of a bicycle, bicycle lock, helmet, bicycle 

accessories such as reflective lights or racks, and 

bicycle repairs and maintenance. This bicycle benefit 

is offered as an alternative to other transportation 

benefits, such as a transit pass or parking benefits. 

Bike Sharing Memberships 

Offering free or discounted memberships to existing 

bike sharing systems can encourage employees to 

commute by bicycle or to use bicycles for short trips 

during the workday (for example, to travel to a 

meeting at a different location). For instance, in 

Washington, D.C., several federal agencies provide or 

have temporarily tested offering free Capital Bikeshare 

memberships to their staff.

Workplace Active Transportation 

Amenities 

Employers can encourage staff to walk or bicycle to 

work by providing workplace amenities that support 

these activities, such as covered or sheltered bicycle 

parking, showers and changing areas, and a bicycle 

repair area with tools and supplies. Many communities 

acknowledge local businesses that provide these types 

of amenities through recognition programs, such as 

through window decals or listing on a website. These 

types of programs can help businesses promote their 

bike-friendly amenities, and encourage visitors to 

frequent business or organizations that make active 

transportation a priority. One certification program at 

the national level is the League of American Bicyclists’ 

Bicycle Friendly Business initiative,

7

 which provides 

information about actions and policies that businesses 

and organizations can take to encourage employees 

to ride to work, and awards businesses that have 

taken these actions. The National Mall and Memorial 

Parks in Washington, D.C. was named a Bicycle 

Friendly Business in 2009, becoming the first park in 

the National Park Service to receive this designation. 

Workplace Educational and 

Wellness Programs 

Workplace educational and wellness programs 

can provide employees with resources and 

encouragement to use active transportation, as well 

as build camaraderie among staff who use active 

transportation. These programs can include organized 

social bicycle rides or walks, informal employee groups 

that meet to share resources about bicycle commuting 

(such as recommended routes or bicycle repair 

skills), or speakers or other educational programs 

about the health benefits of active transportation. 

Some workplaces have friendly competitions where 

employees log miles walked or biked, and teams or 

departments compete against each other to log the 

most miles. 

Many employers also promote Bike to Work Week or 

Bike to Work Day, which are typically held annually 

in May.8

 They can do this through promoting the 

event in advance, providing breakfast for those who 

bicycle to work, or offering prizes for those who 

ride. For example, at the NPS Denver Service Center, 

Bike to Work Day events are organized by employee 

volunteers, and the employee association pays for 

snacks and prizes for those who participate.
9-8 NPS Active Transportation Guidebook

Additional Resources 

FHWA Federal Lands Highway Division Exploring Bicycle Options for Federal Lands: Bike Sharing, Rentals and 

Employee Fleets (2012). http://www.pedbikeinfo.org/cms/downloads/ExploringBicycleOptionsForFederalLands.pdf

Implementing a Successful Bicycle and Active Commuting Program in the Washington, DC Metropolitan Area 

(2010). https://www.fedcenter.gov/_kd/Items/actions.cfm?action=Show&item_id=15046

People for Bikes Health Statistics. https://www.peopleforbikes.org/statistics/bicycling-and-lungs

U.S. DOE Green Rides Toolkit for National Parks. https://cleancities.energy.gov/technical-assistance/green-rides/
9-9 Chapter 9: Employee Programs and Park Operational Uses

End Notes

1

 People for Bikes Health Statistics. https://www.peopleforbikes.org/statistics/bicycling-and-lungs

2

 Hendriksen IJM, et al, The Association between Commuter Cycling and Sickness Absence, Preventive Medicine 

(2010) 51:132-135. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ypmed.2010.05.007

3

 Deenihan, G. and Caulfield, B., Estimating the Health Economic Benefits of Cycling, Journal of Transport and 

Health (2014) 1:141-149. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jth.2014.02.001

4

 Amlani, N., and Munir, F., Does Physical Activity Have an Impact on Sickness Absence? A Review, Sports Medicine 

(2014) 44:887-907. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40279-014-0171-0

5

 Morris, E. & Guerra, E. Mood And Mode: Does How We Travel Affect How We Feel? Transportation (2015) 42: 

25-43. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11116-014-9521-x

6

 DOI Bicycle Subsidy Benefit Program. https://www.doi.gov/ofas/bicycle-subsidy-benefit-program

7

 League of American Bicyclists Become a Bicycle Friendly Business. http://bikeleague.org/business

8

 League of American Bicyclists Bike Month Dates and Events. 

https://bikeleague.org/content/bike-month-dates-events-0
Glacier National Park, Montana (Source: NPS)

Chapter 10: Innovative Technologies and

 Emerging Trends

This chapter discusses newer topics related to walking and bicycling that are becoming 

relevant to national parks and gateway communities. These emerging topics include bicycle 

and pedestrian count data; mobile applications and crowdsourced data; electric bicycles 

and fat tire bicycles; and the implications of automated vehicles on pedestrian and bicycle 

safety and infrastructure.
10-1 Chapter 10: Innovative Technologies and Emerging Trends

Introduction

Innovation and technology are rapidly changing, 

influencing shifts in active transportation trends. 

These advancements are leading to improved access 

to information and data and transforming modes of 

travel, while at the same time having implications 

to existing policies and management practices.

This chapter provides an overview of emerging 

transportation trends and innovative technologies 

related to bicycling and walking relevant to national 

parks and gateway communities. The topics 

highlighted include advancements in bicycle and 

pedestrian count technology; the increasing availability 

of mobile applications (apps) and crowdsourced data; 

the growing use of electric bicycles (e-bikes), fat tire 

bicycles, electric scooters and ridehailing; and how the 

emergence of automated vehicles may impact safety 

for active transportation.

Figure 10-1: An example of a trail counter hidden within a sign post at 

Sleeping Bear Dunes National Lakeshore in Michigan; sign was turned 

upside down to expose the counter for the photograph. (Source: NPS)

The Value of Active 

Transportation Data 

Data enables managers to make decisions that better 

reflect the needs of visitors, help to reduce impacts 

to resources, and support bicycle and pedestrian 

planning, policies, and investments. This includes 

information on demographics, bicycling and walking 

volumes, motor vehicle traffic volumes, and usage 

patterns. Several national parks currently collect count 

data to help monitor the impact of trail use on natural 

resources, but few parks collect data on bicycle and 

pedestrian counts on park roads and multiuse trails. 

As more visitors wish to experience parks through 

active modes, improved bicycle and pedestrian data 

becomes increasingly important and can be used for a 

number of purposes, including to:

• Gain a better understanding of the routes, 

volumes, and visitation patterns (e.g., daily, 

weekly, and seasonally) of pedestrian and 

bicycle travel, including modal preferences of 

visitors;

• Better understand visitor demographics and 

preferences that may assist with tailored 

strategies for promoting bicycling and walking 

in and around national parks;

• Help understand broader safety concerns and 

exposure rates (as opposed to having solely 

the total number of crashes or incidents);

• Prioritize projects, programs, and funding, as 

well as providing data for grant applications;

• Quantify the various benefits (e.g., health, 

environmental, etc.) of walking and bicycling 

and communicate those benefits to the public;

• Track the impacts of a new infrastructure 

investment (e.g., dedicated bike path or lane); 

and

• Incorporate into the park’s visitor count 

methodology (in coordination with the NPS 

Visitor Use Statistics office).
10-2 NPS Active Transportation Guidebook

The NPS consistently collects visitation counts for 

people arriving by vehicle and at visitor centers, but 

there is no system-wide guidance for the collection 

of bicycle or pedestrian data. The methodology for 

incorporating these numbers into the park’s monthly 

visitation counts is typically determined on a park-bypark basis. As parks and their partners start to identify 

a need to collect more data on walking and bicycling 

in their parks and nearby communities, they may 

consider implementing their own counting programs 

(see below) or gathering relevant data from other 

sources such as local municipalities, states, partners, 

or crowdsourced data. Advancements in technology 

have continued to improve active transportation 

data systems and their methodologies, which makes 

counting easier and more efficient.

Collecting Bicycle and 

Pedestrian Count Data

A growing number of entities, such as parks and 

recreation departments, counties, cities, metropolitan 

planning organizations (MPOs), and advocacy 

groups, have implemented bicycle and pedestrian 

count programs in order to support their active 

transportation initiatives. Park staff and their partners 

can begin collecting counts incrementally based on 

available resources, investing more in their count 

program as appropriate. The initial goal of a new 

bicycle and pedestrian count program is generally to 

establish baseline counts, which can then be updated 

annually or as resources are available.

The below steps offer a typical progression when 

beginning to consider collecting bicycle and 

pedestrian count data, though some steps may occur 

concurrently:1,2,3

• Define the purpose for data collection:

Entities can consider the following questions: 

“Why is the data going to be collected?” 

and “How will it be used?” These questions 

will help parks and communities to decide if 

bicycle and pedestrian counts are needed and 

how to frame the program’s purpose in order 

to collect the best and most useful data. 

• Identify count locations: Count locations are 

typically selected in areas where bicyclists and 

pedestrians are known to travel, which could 

be within or adjacent to the park. Counts can 

occur at entry or access points, which may be 

well defined in urban areas but less so in rural 

areas. The facility type (multiuse trail, on-road 

bike lane, sidewalk, etc.) will help inform the 

type of count technology that should be used. 

See Table 10-1 below for examples of count 

technology types. 

• Identify count timeframe: Short term 

counts are typically done over a period of one 

to several days for a few hours each day and 

at several select locations, while longer term 

counts can be collected continuously using 

automated counters over months or years 

at a few locations. When planning the count 

time frame, consider the visitation patterns 

at national parks, which often have seasonal 

variations. The Federal Highway Administration 

(FHWA) Traffic Monitoring Guide4

 and Travel 

Monitoring Analysis System recommends 

certain months, days, and times to collect 

counts, in an effort to standardize counts 

collected across the country. Many places 

often collect count data in September with 

optional count days in May, July, or January, 

with the count days including at least one day 

mid-week (Tuesday, Wednesday, or Thursday) 

and a Saturday. Park staff may wish to 

consider the guidance from the Transportation 

Research Board (TRB) National Cooperative 

Highway Research Program (NCHRP)5,6 as 

a starting point, and tailor count programs 

based on known patterns and fluctuations in 

visitation at the park.7

• Identify available resources needed to 

collect the data: Collecting bicycle and 

pedestrian count data requires resources, 

which could include staff or volunteer time 

and funding to purchase counters. The 

necessary resources are dependent upon the 

counting process selected, the type of counters 

chosen, count locations, and timeframe. Parks 

can consider partnering with agencies that 

may already be collecting data, such as MPOs 

or state Departments of Transportation (DOTs). 
10-3 Chapter 10: Innovative Technologies and Emerging Trends

• Consider automated counters versus 

manual counts: Manual counts require 

staff or volunteers to collect the count data 

by tallying bicycles or pedestrians as they 

pass the count locations. Manual counts 

often require a lower upfront investment but 

require significant staff or volunteer time. 

With limited resources, count programs can 

be initiated by conducting manual counts at 

a limited number of key locations, such as 

those known to be highly used by bicyclists 

and pedestrians. When collecting manual 

counts, parks can also consider recording 

additional data such as weather (temperature 

highs and lows, precipitation), month, 

season, and demographics (gender, age, etc.). 

Automated counts require the purchase of 

technology, which continues to improve and 

become more affordable (the cost of counters 

generally range between $750 and $4,000 

each)8

 Automated counters can collect data 

continuously and for longer periods of time; 

they may provide more accurate data than 

manual counts, enable data extrapolation to 

estimate counts during different time periods, 

and give an understanding of factors such 

as time of day, season, or weather. Many 

automated counters record weather, date, and 

temperature along with the count volumes. 

Should the count data be used to determine the park’s 

visitation numbers, the methodology, counter location, 

etc. will need to be determined in coordination with 

the NPS Visitor Statistics office.

Regional planning and transportation divisions may 

be able to help parks acquire counters or help with 

developing projects for more robust counting. 

For parks considering using automated counters, 

there are a number of options to consider. Table 10-1 

below provides a description of some common types 

of counter technologies that are most applicable 

to a park setting as well as related considerations. 

Numerous additional resources are available online to 

help park staff determine how to implement a count 

program to best fit their needs (see the Resources 

section at the end of this chapter).

Figure 10-2: Installation of a pedestrian counter at Sleeping Bear Dunes National Lakeshore in Michigan. (Source: NPS)
10-4 NPS Active Transportation Guidebook

Table 10-1: Common bicycle and pedestrian count technologies

Count

Technology8,9

Description What 

Does It 

Count?

Timeframe Example 

Manufacturers*

Considerations 

for Parks

Manual 

Observers

Volunteers or staff are 

stationed at the count 

location in shifts to tally 

observed bicyclists or 

pedestrians passing by. 

Bicyclists 

and 

pedestrians 

separately

Temporary/

short term 

counts

N/A If funding is limited for 

count programs, manual 

counts can be a good way 

to start data collection 

for a count program. 

Short term manual counts 

may be less accurate for 

extrapolating data to 

longer time frames.

Infrared 

sensors 

(active or 

passive)

These counters are typically 

in weatherproof boxes, 

have a long battery life, and 

are portable. The counters 

detect changes in energy 

(temperature/heat) when 

people pass by them. They 

can be used for any surface 

type, and must be mounted 

on signposts, fences, etc. 

Bicyclists 

and 

pedestrians 

combined

Short term or 

permanent 

counts

EcoCounter: Pyro; 

TRAFx Infrared 

Counter; TrailMaster 

TM 1550

These counters are 

portable and easy to set 

up. They work well on 

trails but are difficult to 

use for on-road bike lanes.

Pneumatic 

tubes

Tube counters operate with 

an air switch that detects 

bursts of air from passing 

bicycles. They are relatively 

portable and low cost, 

and can be used on firm 

surfaces.

Bicyclists 

only

Short term 

counts

EcoCounter: Tube Pneumatic tube counters 

are commonly used for 

counting bicyclists. One 

should consider heavy 

vehicle use and falling 

rocks or debris on the 

road or trail, which can 

damage the pneumatic 

tubes.

Inductive 

loops

Inductive loops measure 

the electromagnetic force 

of bicycle wheels. They 

must be installed on paved 

surfaces and may require 

saw cuts in the pavement 

to be installed. Short term 

inductive loops that adhere 

to the ground and require 

no engineering to install are 

also available. 

Bicyclists 

only

Short term or 

permanent 

counts

Diamond Traffic: 

TT-41/Pegasus; 

EcoCounter EasyZELT

Inductive loops may be 

a good alternative to 

pneumatic tubes if there 

is a risk of damage to the 

tubes from falling rocks or 

debris.

Automated 

video analysis

Automated video analysis is 

an emerging technology that 

uses algorithms, computer 

vision techniques, and 

visual pattern recognition. It 

requires minimal labor, and 

the cameras are portable for 

use at multiple locations. 

Due to technological 

memory limitations, this 

technique is best suited for 

short duration counts.

Pedestrians 

and 

potentially 

bicyclists

Short term 

counts

N/A Automated video analysis 

has been mainly used for 

pedestrian counts but 

use for bicycle counts is 

becoming more common. 

In pedestrian counts, error 

has ranged from 5-13 

percent.9

* These lists contain examples of manufacturers, but do not contain all bicycle and pedestrian count manufacturers for the different categories of count technologies. 

Before purchasing, ensure that any equipment that uses cloud-based storage is certified under the Federal Risk and Authorization Management Program (FedRAMP).
10-5 Chapter 10: Innovative Technologies and Emerging Trends

Crowdsourced 

Nonmotorized Travel Data

New opportunities to understand bicycle and 

pedestrian travel patterns have emerged through 

crowdsourced data. Crowdsourced data involves 

contributions from internet and mobile app users 

that are obtained and used by organizations, after 

the data has been aggregated and anonymized for 

privacy purposes. Crowdsourced data related to active 

transportation includes:

• Data from fitness mobile apps or social media 

sites;

• Shared mobility data, including information 

from bikeshare and scooter share apps; and

• Location-based services, or mobile device data 

that can identify trip characteristics and mode.

The data can be collected actively, with users adding 

data about where they travel, or passively, with an 

application running in the background and collecting 

bicycle speed or route data. Companies that collect 

crowdsourced data may sell the data to potential 

users or be willing to enter into partnerships to share 

the data. This data can provide agencies with a better 

understanding of how people use networks of roads, 

bike paths, sidewalks, and intersections. Parks and 

partners can use this data to identify roadways or 

trails with heavy bicycle and pedestrian use, and help 

focus their efforts to target improvements of specific 

facilities. As with any data, be aware of biases and 

small record counts that may exist when utilizing 

crowdsourced data.

For example, the Colorado Department of 

Transportation (CDOT) purchased crowdsourced data 

from a company called Strava Inc. in 2018, which 

developed proprietary mobile technology to collect 

crowdsourced bicycle and pedestrian trip data logged 

by its community of users. CDOT compared Strava’s 

crowdsourced data to data collected by automated 

counters across Colorado. CDOT found that the 

crowdsourced data correlated highly with automated 

counter data. Planners at CDOT used the data to 

classify high-traffic bicycle routes throughout the state 

and to prioritize bicycle infrastructure improvement 

accordingly.10 Beginning in 2020, Strava made its data 

available for free to organizations that plan, own, or 

maintain active transportation infrastructure through 

the Strava Metro tool. 

As crowdsourced data platforms have increased in 

popularity, the reliability of the data they provide 

has also increased. However, data may be more 

representative of actual nonmotorized travel in some 

situations than in others. For example, users of mobile 

apps that track bicycling may be more competitive and 

ride faster and longer distances than the average NPS 

visitor. It is important to use multiple types of data to 

inform decision-making rather than relying solely on 

crowdsourced data. A study by the Centers for Disease 

Control and Prevention found that Strava data reliably 

ranked census tracts based on active transportation 

commuting share and that the reliability of the 

crowdsourced data increased as population density 

increased.11

In other cases, private companies will develop a basic 

mobile app and maintain app servers that collect 

crowdsourced data; agencies or organizations can 

buy access to the app’s database that stores the raw 

data, which typically has a lower upfront cost than 

buying the aggregated data outright. An agency using 

such data usually contributes additional resources to 

promote the use of the app, which is critical in order 

to create enough data points to arrive at accurate 

conclusions about active transportation. 

Separately, the development of data standards has 

supported the exchange of shared mobility data 

between mobility providers and jurisdictions. The 

General Bikeshare Feed Specification12 is an opendata source that offers real-time data feeds on the 

use of bikeshare and shared electric scooters. The 

Mobility Data Specification is a comparable platform 

that provides a standard for two-way data exchange 

between mobility operators and cities. These platforms 

are used by public entities nationwide and provide 

a shared data vocabulary to allow cities to easily 

communicate with operators. 
10-6 NPS Active Transportation Guidebook

NPS Use of Crowdsourced Data and 

Other Data Sources

For parks and partners that wish to look into using 

crowdsourced data, consider the following: 

• Reach out to regional planning or 

transportation divisions for assistance: In 

some cases, parks may be able to tap into data 

collection already taking place. 

• Establish partnerships to purchase 

datasets: Collaborate with partners to 

purchase data that may be too expensive for 

one partner to pay for on their own. This may 

facilitate collaboration on program or project 

implementation.

• Encourage the use of apps that produce 

free data: Communities and park partners 

can promote free apps that actively record the 

bicycle and pedestrian trips of visitors.

• Explore the use of open data standards: 

Parks may coordinate with cities and other 

partners to supplement existing data sources 

and better understand how shared mobility is 

used to access parks.

Utilizing Mobile Apps for 

NPS Visitor Experience

The NPS developed a free mobile app to improve 

visitor experience and to support visitors planning trips 

to parks. The NPS App13 is available to download on 

iOS and Android devices and serves as a clearinghouse 

on visitor information for all NPS sites. Private 

companies have developed mobile apps to facilitate 

pedestrian and bicycle route planning, which can be 

used alongside the NPS app for information on active 

transportation within parks.

The NPS app was created to help visitors make 

the most of their visit and combines information 

from park rangers with a suite of useful features. 

These features include interactive maps, amenities, 

accessibility information, things to do, and relevant 

alerts and events. These tools are designed to improve 

the visitor experience and to work in conjunction with 

other interpretive and educational resources available 

within parks. Information on active transportation 

opportunities, including bicycling, boating, and biking, 

is pre-loaded into the app to allow visitors to easily 

plan their trip.14 Parks may work with the Digital 

Strategy team in the NPS Office of Communications 

for assistance with the NPS app.

Figure 10-3: Screenshot of the homepage 

on the NPS app. (Source: NPS)

Figure 10-4: Points of interest displayed 

around the Boston National Historical Park 

Freedom Trail in the NPS app. (Source: NPS)

Figure 10-5: Map of points along the Freedom 

Trail shown in the NPS app. (Source: NPS)
10-7 Chapter 10: Innovative Technologies and Emerging Trends

Use and Considerations for 

Electric Bikes and National 

Parks 

The NPS defines an electric bicycle (e-bike) as “a twoor three-wheeled cycle with fully operable pedals 

and an electric motor of not more than 750 watts 

that provides propulsion assistance.”15 For in-depth 

information on e-bike regulations see the Legal and 

Policy Framework chapter. E-bikes are often hard to 

distinguish from traditional bicycles as the motor and 

battery is small and quiet. E-bikes are not considered 

motor bikes and the bicycles do not produce any fuel 

emissions. E-bikes also include electric mountain bikes 

(e-MTBs), which are growing in popularity.

E-bikes expand bicycling opportunities to more 

people, especially older adults and individuals with 

disabilities, who may not otherwise be able to ride a 

bicycle. They can be particularly beneficial on hilly or 

strenuous terrain. E-bikes are growing in popularity 

in the U.S., with sales of e-bikes increasing by 145 

percent between 2019 and 2020.16

Many state and local public land management 

agencies have decided to open trails to e-bike use. 

For example, several state parks, county open space 

organizations, and municipalities treat e-bikes 

identically to regular non-electric bicycles, or have 

designated specific areas that are open to e-bikes.17

The next section provides considerations to park 

managers for use of e-bikes as well as next steps for 

parks and partners to prepare for and better align 

with this growing trend.

Figure 10-6: Visitors riding e-bikes in Montana. (Source: Bureau of Land 

Management)

Overview of E-Bikes

An electric bicycle, or e-bike, is a bicycle with a small electric motor and battery to assist with 

the operation of the bicycle and decrease the physical exertion demands on the rider. There are 

two main types of e-bikes: pedal-assisted and throttle-assisted. With pedal-assisted bicycles, 

riders must pedal to engage the motor, whereas with throttle-assisted bicycles, riders can use a 

throttle mounted to the handlebar to engage the motor. In both cases, riders can still use the 

bike using only human power. NPS regulations outline three classes of e-bikes based on the type 

of electric assistance and the top assisted speed:

Class Type of Electric Assistance Top Assisted Speed

Class 1 E-bike Pedal 20 mph

Class 2 E-bike Throttle 20 mph

Class 3 E-bike Pedal 28 mph

Another type of e-bike is an electric mountain bicycle (e-MTB), which is more commonly used on 

unpaved backcountry trails. e-MTBs can be class 1, 2, or 3 e-bikes, but are typically pedal-assist. When 

used on NPS-managed lands, e-MTBs are subject to the same requirements that apply to other e-bikes 

under the NPS e-bike regulations. See the Legal and Policy Framework chapter for more information.

Per NPS regulations, park superintendents may allow e-bikes, or certain classes of e-bikes, on roads, 

parking areas, administrative roads, and trails that are open to traditional bicycles. Superintendents 

have the authority to limit or restrict e-bike use after taking into consideration public health and safety, 

natural and cultural resource protection, and other management activities and objectives.
10-8 NPS Active Transportation Guidebook

Considerations for E-bike Use

E-bikes can be used for a variety of purposes and 

provide a range of benefits. For instance, e-bikes: 

• Expand the option of bicycling to more 

people: E-bikes provide a new option for 

people who want to bicycle but might not 

otherwise because of physical fitness, age, 

disability, or convenience, especially at high 

altitude, and for those whose work commutes 

are farther than a typical bicycle commute 

(one to three miles). Additionally, e-bikes can 

allow visitors to traverse hilly conditions more 

easily than with traditional bicycles.

• Increase access to locations through 

bicycling: E-bikes make bicycle travel easier, 

because they allow bicyclists to travel farther 

using less energy. E-bikes can also increase 

access to destinations at a farther distance, 

allowing those who do not own a car to 

access parks from further away.

• Offer health and wellness benefits: 

Riding an e-bike has similar positive results 

for a rider’s overall health and wellness 

compared to a traditional bicycle.18 In 

addition, e-bikes provide mobility to those 

with physical limitations that may otherwise 

prevent or discourage them from bicycling for 

transportation or recreation. 

• Can be used for utility purposes: E-bikes 

can carry up to 400 pounds of cargo and can 

be equipped with built-in hauling features, 

specialty baskets, versatile racks, carrying bags, 

and other accessories. Park staff and visitors 

who need to transport heavier items, goods, 

or equipment can benefit from e-bikes as a 

cost-effective alternative to cars and trucks 

when used for transport and deliveries.

• Mitigate negative environmental impacts: 

When used as an alternative to gasoline- or 

diesel-powered modes, e-bikes can reduce 

greenhouse gas emissions and fossil fuel 

consumption, improve air quality, and support 

active modes of transportation for park staff 

and visitors. Similar to traditional bicycles, 

e-bikes can decrease traffic congestion, reduce 

the demand for parking spaces, and increase 

the number and visibility of bicyclists on the 

road. Adoption of e-bikes as a replacement 

for motor vehicles can help parks meet NPS 

sustainability goals. 

• Can be used for administrative use and 

emergency response: Parks may look to use 

e-bikes instead of motor vehicles in certain 

situations. E-bikes may meet the need of law 

enforcement personnel as well as park rangers 

completing administrative duties. In addition, 

parks may deploy e-bikes in search-and-rescue 

situations to reach areas that are inaccessible 

by a motor vehicle. 

• Provide an additional source of revenue 

for bike tour operators: Realizing a growing 

trend and accommodating for varying 

terrains, bike tour operators are beginning to 

incorporate e-bikes into their fleet to increase 

interest, meet the diverse needs of visitors, and 

boost revenue.

In general, if state, local, or Federal regulations permit, 

certain classes of e-bikes may be used on most trails 

funded with Federal Highway Administration funds 

(except on nonmotorized trails funded under the 

Recreational Trails Program19). For other off-highway 

vehicle use on otherwise nonmotorized trails, consult 

with the state whether any action is required under 

the FHWA Framework for Considering Motorized Use 

on Nonmotorized Trails and Pedestrian Walkways.

20

Note that people with disabilities might use e-bikes 

as other power-driven mobility devices (OPDMD), 

which are considered a nonmotorized use that may 

be allowed in areas where e-bikes are not generally 

allowed.21

For trails funded through the Recreational Trails 

Program, e-bikes are a motorized use, and cannot be 

permitted on trails designated only for nonmotorized 

use. Parks could benefit from working with the state 

agency responsible22 for the program to determine 

which trails may allow e-bikes or other off-road 

motorized use.
10-9 Chapter 10: Innovative Technologies and Emerging Trends

Potential Next Steps for Park 

Managers and Partners 

• Review the NPS e-bike regulation (36 CFR 1.4 

and 4.30(i)).

23

• Encourage outdoor stewardship principles 

(e.g. “Leave No Trace” and“Recreate 

Responsibly”)24 and trail etiquette guidelines 

for all trail users in order to make outdoor 

recreation opportunities inviting to everyone 

and for all abilities. The Public Lands E-bike 

Communications Guidebook25 (internal NPS 

resource) is a tool for helping NPS staff and 

federal public land managers communicate 

more effectively to visitors and partners about 

e-bike use, rules, and etiquette on public 

lands. 

• Communicate the process by which visitors 

may seek accommodation for e-bikes as 

OPDMDs under the Americans with Disability 

Act. E-bikes do not automatically qualify 

as OPDMDs; however, for areas where 

e-bikes are generally disallowed, public land 

managers may assess whether e-bikes can be 

accommodated as an OPDMD in accordance 

with Department of Justice guidance,

26 upon 

request. In deciding whether e-bikes can 

be accommodated as OPDMDs, public land 

managers may develop and publicize rules 

for people with disabilities using e-bikes as 

OPDMDs .

• Refer to the state’s and surrounding 

jurisdictional (i.e., including county, local, and/

or surrounding federal land management 

agencies) laws and regulations to understand 

policies on e-bike usage in areas adjacent 

to the park and coordinate with relevant 

partners.27

• On a trail-by-trail basis, park managers may 

assess routes to determine suitability for 

e-bike and e-MTB use by defining trail use 

and trail type and considering surrounding 

resource characteristics. Park staff should 

consider whether, where, and under what 

conditions e-bikes should be allowed on trails 

or administrative roads. This decision should 

be based on the resource conditions of the 

park, the particular characteristics of the 

trail or administrative road, conflicting visitor 

uses, safety concerns, and any other relevant 

considerations. Per NPS regulations, park 

superintendents may allow e-bikes, or certain 

classes of e-bikes, on roads, parking areas, 

administrative roads, and trails that are open 

to traditional bicycles. Superintendents have 

the authority to limit or restrict e-bike use after 

taking into consideration public health and 

safety, natural and cultural resource protection, 

and other management activities and 

objectives. If superintendents open locations to 

e-bikes, they must notify the public pursuant 

to 36 CFR 1.7.

28

E-Bike Pilot on Natural Surface Trail in Durango, CO

The town of Durango, CO is known nationally for its abundance of mountain biking trails. The city attracts 

thousands of outdoor enthusiasts of all levels and user types each year who come to explore these worldclass trails. In 2020, the city began allowing e-bikes on certain natural surface trails in order to assess trail 

user perceptions through surveys to gauge feedback and to monitor any potential modal conflicts. City staff 

placed signage along the designated trails and conducted educational campaigns to inform trail users of trail 

etiquette guidelines. The city will conduct analyses on its survey response data and use the results to inform 

future e-bike management on city trails. 
10-10 NPS Active Transportation Guidebook

eMTB Pilot for Law Enforcement Rangers in Grand Canyon National Park

In the remote Tuweep area of Grand Canyon National Park, law enforcement rangers piloted a three month 

effort, through a partnership with PeopleForBikes and the Grand Canyon Association, to incorporate an 

e-MTB into the NPS equipment fleet. Rangers in this area are required to patrol roadways and other remote 

areas by foot, bicycle, or motorized vehicle, where accessible.

This pilot effort quickly demonstrated to rangers 

the benefit of electric bike utilization in their daily 

work toward visitor and resource protection and 

emergency services. The e-MTBs allowed rangers 

to access areas more swiftly, quietly, and safely. 

The rechargeable battery provided for a 60-80 

mile travel range, which was sufficient to cover 

most of the normal needs within the less remote 

NPS areas. Rangers charged the e-MTB batteries at 

the available ranger stations, powered by solar.

This successful demonstration effort creates a 

compelling example for other NPS sites to consider 

utilizing electric bikes within the vehicle and 

equipment fleet and highlights an example of 

using e-bikes to replace trips that would otherwise 

have been made with a motorized vehicle.

Figure 10-7: Bicyclists in Grand Canyon National Park, Arizona. 

(Source: NPS)

Use and Considerations 

for Fat Bikes and National 

Parks 

Fat tire bicycles (fat bikes) are defined as humanpowered bicycles that fall under the umbrella of 

mountain bicycles, equipped with extra wide tires 

(3.5+ inches wide) operated with less than 10 pounds 

per square inch (psi) of pressure in each tire. Fat bikes 

may be e-bikes or traditional bicycles. Fat bikes are 

a form of active transportation that allows bicycling 

on soft or unstable terrain; they are typically used 

on sand or snow but can be used in all seasons on 

a wide variety of surfaces. While fat bike use is 

becoming more popular as a way to expand winter 

recreation, fat bike use may also introduce new 

resource and user conflicts with other trail users, such 

as snowmobiles and cross-country skiers on groomed 

winter-use trails.

Fat Bike Regulation

Fat bikes are regulated at the federal and state levels 

under the same conventions as traditional bicycles. Fat 

bikes tend to be used on trails and beaches; therefore, 

regulations specific to fat bikes fall within the 

jurisdiction of the park and its management. Trails can 

be considered for fat biking on a trail-by-trail basis. 

The NPS Sustainable Trails webpage29 can provide 

guidance in creating different types of trails.

The two examples below highlight state and local park 

systems with established fat bike regulations:

• Cuyuna Country State Recreation Area is 

part of a pilot program led by the Minnesota 

Department of Natural Resources (DNR) 

to create a transportation network that 

accommodates fat bikes, particularly in 

the winter. The pilot aims to minimize user 

conflicts with other winter transportation 
10-11 Chapter 10: Innovative Technologies and Emerging Trends

Figure 10-8:Fat bike use in the winter on a trail in the boreal forest in Alaska. (Source: U.S. DOT Volpe Center)

modes through trail design and management. 

Cuyuna has over 20 miles of trails groomed 

for fat biking and provides users with maps, 

virtual tours, and trail status updates.30

In addition, Minnesota’s DNR has extensive 

guidance for land managers on trail 

maintenance for fat biking and other winter 

activities.31

• Noquemanon trail system in Michigan 

has more than 60 miles of fat bike accessible 

trails, 30 miles of which are multiuse and 

30 miles of which are dedicated to fat bikes 

alone. This system is managed by a fat bike 

nonprofit organization that donates time and 

money to help offset trail management costs. 

This system includes education to riders using 

snowmobile trails with rules to promote safety 

on the trails, such as prohibiting headphone 

use, encouraging users to wear brightly 

colored clothing, requiring flashing bike lights, 

and prohibiting bike riding on the groomed 

trails when temperatures are near or above 

freezing as the bike tires may leave ruts.32

Considerations for Fat Bike Use

Fat bikes provide the opportunity to extend bicycling 

into colder months, and also expand the range of 

places where bicycling is possible. While there are 

many positive aspects to fat tire biking, parks may 

want to consider their impacts on trail management. 

Considerations for parks include:

• Improved feeling of stability: For those 

who do not have the balance or self-assurance 

to ride a traditional bicycle, fat bikes offer a 

more stable bicycle experience, which can be 

appealing on park trails as well as roadways.

• Use on variable terrain: Fat bikes can be 

used on terrain that traditional bicycles cannot 

traverse, such as packed snow and sand. For 

example, fat bikes can allow visitors to bike 

along shore lines and winter-use trails in 

snow.

• Winter season recreation in variable 

weather conditions: Fat bikes may enable 

travel throughout winter, which could spread 

out seasonal visitation.
10-12 NPS Active Transportation Guidebook

• Trail management: Parks or other entities 

tasked with managing trails and trail-use 

may experience increased costs for allowing 

fat tire biking. For example, opening trails 

to fat biking in winter may mean that parks 

incur costs for grooming and other trail 

maintenance expenses in seasons that did not 

previously require this upkeep.

• Environmental impact: Particular trail 

environments may be susceptible to 

soil displacement and erosion; this may 

necessitate specific fat bike trail designation to 

accommodate sustainable use that minimizes 

ground disturbance and impacts to wildlife 

habitat.

• Trail conflict: As with all multiuse trails, 

certain management practices, use restrictions, 

and educational initiatives may need to be 

implemented in order to avoid the potential 

for trail crowding, safety issues, and conflicts 

between different users of trails.

Next Steps for Park Managers and 

Partners

• Ensure that any introduction of fat tire biking 

follows the guidance of the NPS Bike Rule 

(36 CFR 4.30)

33 —see the Legal and Policy 

Framework chapter for more information;

• Determine fat bike access to nonmotorized 

trails on a trail-by-trail basis or by defining 

trail characteristics that are appropriate or 

inappropriate for fat bikes;

• Consider the designation of certain areas of a 

park open for fat bikes or specific trail types 

open for fat bikes in various seasons, using 

maps, signs, or tree markings; and

• Provide education for staff and visitors on 

appropriate fat bike use through pamphlets, 

the park’s website, workshops, and by 

partnering with local bicycle and advocacy 

groups.

Fat Bike Guidance in Routt National Forest

Hahns Peak at the Bears Ears District in Routt National Forest,* Colorado includes 500,000 

acres of forest with terrain ranging from sagebrush flatland to forested mountains. The 

International Mountain Biking Association has published Winter Fat Biking,34 outlining 

specific trail conditions that are ideal for fat bikes. The Fat Bike Guidelines document 

discusses the best practices for fat biking on mixed-use winter trails, including etiquette 

for sharing the trails with people cross country skiing, snowmobiling, and snowshoeing, 

and trail grooming practices. The document also discusses best practices for fat biking 

on snowmobile trails, where fat bike users may be more vulnerable in sharing trails with 

motorized vehicles. The Guidelines emphasize the value in respecting other trail users, as 

well as the need for fat bike users to make themselves visible. The document also highlights 

“Special Areas” that should be avoided by fat bike users, such as those closed to protect 

wildlife, areas of heavy snowmobile and snowcat use, and the local ski resort during peak 

hours of trail use.

*Note: National forests and national parks have different mandates from the federal 

government about how to manage these federal lands. However, this example provides 

useful information to consider in making allowances for fat bikes, where appropriate in or 

near a national park.
10-13 Chapter 10: Innovative Technologies and Emerging Trends

Figure 10-9: Visitors at Denali National Park in Alaska using fat bikes. (Source: NPS)

Considerations 

for E-Scooters and 

Micromobility

Fleets of shared electric scooters (e-scooters) began 

appearing in U.S. cities in 2017. Since then, dockless 

e-scooter sharing systems have grown to serve over 

92 cities serving as a popular transportation mode for 

tourism and recreation.35 Shared e-scooter systems 

are often deployed in dense environments where their 

usage is intended for short trips including “first and 

last-mile” connections to transit. Similarly to dockless 

bicycles, shared fleets are most commonly parked 

in the public right-of-way and are unlocked using a 

smartphone application. 

E-scooters are predominantly found in urban settings 

providing for convenient use as a transportation 

device. For parks located in urban areas, e-scooters 

may be used by visitors to reach an NPS site. Parks 

in these areas may need to coordinate with the local 

jurisdiction in order to more effectively manage these 

devices, including managing or enforcing where they 

may be used and where they should be parked. Parks 

may reach out to regional planning or transportation 

divisions for additional assistance. NPS staff may 

collaborate to create corrals where e-scooters can 

be parked to keep sidewalks and trails clear. In 

addition, e-scooter operators may establish geofences, 

which restrict the use of devices in certain locations. 

Geofences can prevent users from parking devices 

outside of defined areas, may use fee structures that 

incentivize riders to return their e-scooters to corrals, 

and can impose speed limits. NPS staff can learn more 

about e-scooter safety and use considerations at the 

NPS Emerging Mobility Page.

36 Many cities, including 

Portland, OR and Chicago, IL have also completed 

e-scooter pilot studies.37,38
10-14 NPS Active Transportation Guidebook

Considerations for 

Ridehailing 

Ridehailing services (also known as transportation 

network companies) are on-demand, curb-to-curb car 

services that users access through smartphone apps. 

Users set a destination and pick-up point and are 

given an estimated time of arrival to their destination. 

Payment is typically collected through the ridehailing 

app. 

Ridehailing is most commonly used for short to 

medium distance trips and may replace other modes 

such as taxis, transit, or personal car trips. Ridehailing 

presents a number of opportunities such as reducing 

strains on parking by limiting the number of personal 

vehicles in the park. Ridehailing can also be used in 

conjunction with methods of active transportation 

such as permitting users to complete a one-way hike 

or bicycle trip and hailing a vehicle to return to their 

point of origin. Listed below are several considerations 

for parks to keep in mind before encouraging the use 

of ridehailing. 

• Ensure there is cellular connectivity or 

Wi-Fi: Users must have a cellular or Wi-Fi 

connection in order to request a vehicle. It is 

critical to ensure that areas from which visitors 

may intend to leave the park have a cellular or 

wi-fi connection before encouraging users to 

use ridehailing. 

• Consider how to collect fees (if 

applicable): Visitors arriving by ridehailing to 

fee areas must pay the entrance fee before 

being dropped off in a park. Where ridehailing 

is prevalent, parks may consider creating a 

pick-up and drop-off area where vehicles can 

easily drop off and retrieve passengers in order 

to simplify fee collection.

Automated Vehicles and

Active Transportation 

Currently, the automobile industry is on the verge of 

a technological transformation with the development 

of automated vehicle technologies. This includes 

systems that continuously control the steering, 

acceleration, and braking without direct driver input 

and which do not require the driver to monitor the 

operation of the vehicle while the system is activated 

and operating within its operational design domain.

For safe implementation of automated vehicles in 

national parks, this technology must accommodate 

bicyclists, pedestrians, and other road users on rural 

roadways.

The Pedestrian and Bicycle Information Center (PBIC), 

operated by University of North Carolina Highway 

Safety Research Center, published a document that 

presents considerations for bicycles and pedestrians 

in relation to vehicles with automated features, called 

Discussion Guide for Automated and Connected 

Vehicles, Pedestrians, and Bicyclists.

39 This document 

presents special issues that need to be considered to 

ensure that automated vehicles interact safely with 

nonmotorized users. Many of these issues deal with 

detection, and how automated systems will recognize, 

react, and communicate with pedestrians and 

bicyclists. More details on these challenges include:

• Detection and prediction of bicycle and 

pedestrian movements by vehicles;

• Social customs and communication between 

bicyclists/pedestrians and vehicles;

• Vehicle movement and roadway design related 

to bicycle and pedestrian interaction with 

vehicles, such as passing, parking, and loading/

unloading of vehicle passengers;

• Potential risks due to different levels of 

automation and driver hand-off; 

• Unpredictability of changing technology and 

data needs; and

• Designing systems to work in alignment with 

bicycle/pedestrian networks.
10-15 Chapter 10: Innovative Technologies and Emerging Trends

The U.S. Department of Transportation (U.S. DOT) 

is focused on regulating the safety of automated 

vehicles in roadway environments that have many 

dynamic variables, including pedestrians and bicyclists. 

The U.S. DOT recently released updated guidance on 

automated vehicle technology, Ensuring American 

Leadership in Automated Vehicles Technologies: 

Automated Vehicles 4.0, which contains guidance 

measures and best practices for industry, government, 

safety advocates, and the public.40

NPS staff can check the National Highway Traffic 

Safety Administration (NHTSA) Automated Vehicles 

for Safety webpage for more information.41 While 

these technologies are still in the development and 

testing phases, park staff can remain informed in 

order to be aware of implications for parks and visitors 

going forward, and the potential impacts to active 

transportation.

The NPS launched electric automated shuttle pilots42

at Wright Brothers National Memorial and Yellowstone 

National Park in spring 2021. These automated shuttle 

pilots – the first-ever automated shuttle pilots at a 

recreational public lands site in the country – allowed 

the NPS to understand the capabilities of the currently 

available technology and evaluate its suitability for 

public lands applications, including understanding 

how low-speed automated shuttles interact with other 

road users.

Figure 10-10: Electric, automated vehicles used in the automated shuttle pilot at Yellowstone National Park (Source: NPS)
10-16 NPS Active Transportation Guidebook

Additional Resources 

Boulder County CO Parks & Open Space E-bike Pilot Study Results and Policy Recommendations (2019). 

https://assets.bouldercounty.org/wp-content/uploads/2019/11/e-bikes-recommendation-bocc-11-13-2019.pdf

FHWA Transportation Planning Capacity Peer Program, North Central Texas Council of Governments Peer 

Exchange on Bicycle and Pedestrian Count Programs (2013). https://www.nctcog.org/nctcg/media/Transportation/

DocsMaps/Plan/Bike/TPCB_Peer_Exchange_Report_Arl052013.pdf

NPS Emerging Mobility. https://www.nps.gov/subjects/transportation/emerging-mobility.htm

NPS Federal Register General Provisions; Electric Bicycles. https://www.federalregister.gov/d/2020-22129

NPS Denver Service Center Sustainable Trails. https://www.nps.gov/articles/dsc-trails.htm

PBIC Discussion Guide for Automated and Connected Vehicles, Pedestrians, and Bicyclists. 

https://www.pedbikeinfo.org/resources/resources_details.cfm?id=5082

Portland State University Design and Implementation of Pedestrian and Bicycle-Specific Data Collection Methods in 

Oregon (2014). https://pdxscholar.library.pdx.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1358&context=cengin_fac
10-17 Chapter 10: Innovative Technologies and Emerging Trends

End Notes

1

 TRB National Cooperative Highway Research Program (NCHRP) Report 797: Guidebook on Pedestrian and Bicycle 

Volume Data (2016). www.trb.org/Main/Blurbs/171973.aspx

2

 FHWA Traffic Monitoring Guide, Chapter 4: Traffic Monitoring for Non-motorized Traffic (2014). 

https://www.fhwa.dot.gov/policyinformation/tmguide/tmg_2013/traffic-monitoring-for-non-motorized.cfm

3

 FHWA Coding Nonmotorized Station Location Information in the 2016 Traffic Monitoring Guide Format (2016). 

https://www.fhwa.dot.gov/environment/bicycle_pedestrian/publications/tmg_coding/fhwahep17011.pdf

4

 FHWA Travel Monitoring and Traffic Volume (2019). https://www.fhwa.dot.gov/policyinformation/tmguide/

5

 TRB NCHRP Guidebook on Pedestrian and Bicycle Volume Data Collection (2016). 

https://www.trb.org/Main/Blurbs/171973.aspx

6

 TRB NCHRP Methods and Technologies for Pedestrian and Bicycle Volume Data Collection: Phase 2 (2017). 

http://www.trb.org/Main/Blurbs/175860.aspx 

7

 National Bicycle and Pedestrian Documentation Project: Instructions. 

http://bikepeddocumentation.org/application/files/3314/6671/8088/NBPD_Instructions_2010.pdf

8

 FHWA Bicycle and Pedestrian Count Technology Deployment Pilot Program (2016). 

https://www.fhwa.dot.gov/environment/bicycle_pedestrian/countpilot/summary_report/fhwahep17012.pdf 

9

 FHWA Exploring Pedestrian Counting Procedures (2016). 

https://www.fhwa.dot.gov/policyinformation/travel_monitoring/pubs/hpl16026/

10 Sunde, E. Colorado Analyzes Key Bike Corridors Using Metro to Prioritize Investments in Infrastructure (2019). 

https://medium.com/strava-metro/colorado-analyzes-key-bike-corridors-using-metro-to-prioritize-investments-ininfrastructure-1a5d74b8fa5 

11 Whitfield, G., Ussery, E., Riordan, B., and Wendel, A. Association Between User-Generated Commuting Data and 

Population – Representative Active Commuting Surveillance Data – Four Cities, 2014-2015 (2016). 

http://dx.doi.org/10.15585/mmwr.mm6536a4

12 North American Bikeshare & Scootshare Association (NABSA) Shared Mobility Data. 

https://nabsa.net/resources/data/

13 NPS The NPS App (2021). https://www.nps.gov/subjects/digital/nps-apps.htm

14 Ibid.

15 NPS Policy Memorandum 19-01 (2020). 

https://www.federalregister.gov/documents/2020/11/02/2020-22129/general-provisions-electric-bicycles#p-15

16 Glusac, E., Farther, Faster and No Sweat: Bike-Sharing and the E-Bike Boom (2021). 

https://www.nytimes.com/2021/03/02/travel/ebikes-bike-sharing-us.html

17 People for Bikes Electric Bike Laws – State by State. https://www.peopleforbikes.org/electric-bikes/state-laws
10-18 NPS Active Transportation Guidebook

18 Fishman, E., Cherry, C. E-bikes in the Mainstream: Reviewing a Decade of Research (2015). https://www.

researchgate.net/publication/280572410_E-bikes_in_the_Mainstream_Reviewing_a_Decade_of_Research

19 FHWA Recreational Trails Program (2022). https://www.fhwa.dot.gov/environment/recreational_trails/

20 FHWA Framework for Considering Motorized Use on Nonmotorized Trails and Pedestrian Walkways. 

https://www.fhwa.dot.gov/environment/bicycle_pedestrian/guidance/framework.cfm

21 U.S. Department of Justice Civil Rights Division Wheelchairs, Mobility Aids, and Other Power-Driven Mobility 

Devices (2014). https://www.ada.gov/opdmd.pdf

22 FHWA Recreational Trails Program State Administrators (2022). 

https://www.fhwa.dot.gov/environment/recreational_trails/rtpstate.cfm

23 NPS 36 cfr 1.4 and 4.30(i) General Provisions, Electric Bicycles (2020). 

https://www.federalregister.gov/documents/2020/11/02/2020-22129/general-provisions-electric-bicycles

24 #RecreateResponsibly. https://www.recreateresponsibly.org/

25 NPS Public Lands E-Bikes Communications Guidebook (2022). https://doimspp.sharepoint.com/sites/nps-outdoorrecreation/SitePages/Electric-Bicycles.aspx#public-lands-e-bike-communications (Internal NPS SharePoint)

26 DOJ ADA Wheelchairs, Mobility Aids, and Other Power-Driven Mobility Devices. 

https://www.ada.gov/opdmd.htm

27 National Conference of State Legislatures. State Electric Bicycle Laws: A Legislative Primer (2021). 

https://www.ncsl.org/research/transportation/state-electric-bicycle-laws-a-legislative-primer.aspx

28 36 CFR 1.7 Public notice. https://www.ecfr.gov/current/title-36/chapter-I/part-1/section-1.7

29 NPS Denver Service Center: Resources on Sustainable Trails. https://www.nps.gov/articles/dsc-trails.htm

30 Minnesota DNR Fat Bike Riding in Minnesota. https://www.dnr.state.mn.us/fatbike/index.html

31 Minnesota DNR Minnesota State Parks and Trail Planning. 

http://www.dnr.state.mn.us/input/mgmtplans/parks_trails/index.html

32 Noquemanon Trail Network. https://noquetrails.org/

33 NPS Bike Rule 36 CFR 4.30. https://www.ecfr.gov/current/title-36/chapter-I/part-4/section-4.30

34 International Mountain Bicycling Association Winter Fat Biking: Guidelines and Best Practices for Access, Safety, 

and Sharing the Trail. https://www.imba.com/node/1865 

35 U.S. DOT Bureau of Transportation Statistics (BTS) Bikeshare and E-Scooter Systems in the U.S (2021). 

https://data.bts.gov/stories/s/Bikeshare-and-e-scooters-in-the-U-S-/fwcs-jprj/

36 NPS Emerging Mobility. https://www.nps.gov/subjects/transportation/emerging-mobility.htm

37 Portland Bureau of Transportation. E-Scooter Findings Report (2018). 
10-19 Chapter 10: Innovative Technologies and Emerging Trends

https://www.portlandoregon.gov/transportation/article/709719

38 Chicago Department of Transportation Scooter Sharing in Chicago. 

https://www.chicago.gov/city/en/depts/cdot/supp_info/escooter-share-pilot-project.html

39 PBIC Discussion Guide for Automated and Connected Vehicles, Pedestrians, and Bicyclists. 

https://www.pedbikeinfo.org/resources/resources_details.cfm?id=5082

40 National Science and Technology Council & U.S. DOT Ensuring American Leadership in Automated Vehicle 

Technologies: Automated Vehicles 4.0 (2020). 

https://www.transportation.gov/sites/dot.gov/files/2020-02/EnsuringAmericanLeadershipAVTech4.pdf

41 NHTSA Automated Vehicles for Safety. https://www.nhtsa.gov/technology-innovation/automated-vehicles-safety

42 NPS Emerging Mobility (2022). https://www.nps.gov/subjects/transportation/emerging-mobility.htm