http://safety.fhwa.dot.gov

FHWA Safety Program

State Best Practice Policy for

Shoulders and Walkways

Introduction

Safety is the number one priority for the U.S. Department of Transportation (USDOT) and it’s the agency’s 

policy to provide safe and effective pedestrian accommodation wherever possible. The Federal Highway 

Administration (FHWA) encourages the use of specific proven pedestrian safety countermeasures that 

can help achieve local, State and National safety goals. One of those countermeasures is the inclusion 

of walkways and paved shoulders. This flyer highlights three agencies: New York State Department 

of Transportation (NYSDOT), Pennsylvania Department of Transportation (PennDOT) and the Oregon 

Department of Transportation (ODOT) that have implemented policies and plans that promote the 

inclusion of paved shoulders and walkways. 

All State and local agencies are encouraged to consider providing and maintaining paved shoulders or 

walkways along both sides of streets and highways in urban areas, particularly near school zones and 

transit locations, and where there is frequent pedestrian activity.1

A walkway is defined as a continuous way designated for pedestrians and separated from motor vehicle 

traffic by a space or barrier. A shoulder provides a gravel or paved highway area for pedestrians to walk 

next to the roadway, particularly in rural areas where sidewalks and pathways are not feasible.

State DOT Example

NYSDOT

In New York, pedestrians are permitted to use the shoulders of most State highways, with the exception of 

interstates, parkways, and other similar controlled-access highways where they are specifically prohibited. 

As a result, the New York State Department of Transportation’s (NYSDOT) Highway Design Manual includes 

considerations that designers need to make shoulders pedestrian friendly when shoulders will be used 

as pedestrian facilities. The policy and its implementing design standards are intended to address the 

requirements of the Title 23 CFR 652.5 which requires pedestrians to be given full consideration on all 

Federal Aid projects. Below is an excerpt from the pedestrian facilities design chapter that defines when 

shoulders should be included: 

When accommodation of pedestrian travel is warranted, then 

pedestrian facilities should be provided. The preferred facility for 

pedestrian travel along a road is a sidewalk. 

Shoulders are not substitutes for a well-designed pedestrian facility. 

However, there may occasionally be a need to design shoulders as 

walkways where roadside space is constrained... When shoulders 

will be used as pedestrian facilities, the designer should decide 

whether it is practicable for pedestrians to walk facing traffic or 

if provisions should be made for them to walk in either direction 

along one side of the road. The decision should be based on safety, 

e.g., the ability to cross the road safely, and other considerations.2

Photo Credit: Sprinkle Consulting
State DOT Example

PennDOT

The Pennsylvania Department of Transportation 

(PennDOT) has adopted design standards 

specifically to make shoulders accessible. Along 

some roadways, sidewalks are not feasible and 

pedestrian use is expected to be only occasional. 

While some transportation agencies install paved 

shoulders along these roadways, PennDOT goes 

the extra mile for pedestrians. To better provide 

for pedestrians who may need to walk on these 

shoulders, PennDOT constructs the shoulders to be 

compliant with the (draft) Public Rights-of-Way Accessibility Guidelines.3 Cross slopes are kept to 

a 2% maximum and detectable warning strips are installed at crosswalks.

State DOT Example

ODOT

In 1971, the State of Oregon legislature passed the “Bike Bill”4 ushering in a new era of nonmotorized facility construction. The Bill’s goal was to create safer bicycling facilities across the 

state but the Bill also requires the construction of sidewalks or walkways when a road is built or 

rebuilt. The following is an excerpt from the Oregon State Bicycle and Pedestrian plan on the 

different types of walkways:

Rural Walkways

In sparsely populated areas, the shoulders of rural roads usually accommodate pedestrians. There are, however, 

roadways outside urban areas where the urban character creates a need for sidewalks...Where sidewalks are not 

provided, shoulders should be wide enough to accommodate both pedestrians and bicyclists.

Urban Walkways

The appropriate facilities for pedestrians are sidewalks. A sidewalk provides positive separation from traffic, an allweather surface and access for the disabled. They are readily identifiable by both pedestrians and motorists.

Arterials and Major Collectors

Sidewalks must be provided on both sides of all arterial and collector streets, unless there are physical limitations 

and land use characteristics that render a sidewalk unsuitable on one side. 

Minor Collectors and Local Streets

Sidewalks on both sides of the street are the appropriate facility. There is a point below which sidewalks on both sides 

of a local street may not be critical: e.g. on short dead-end streets with few potential residences and with no access 

to other facilities.5

Photo Credit: Michael Ronkin
Shoulder and Walkway Best Practice Policy 

Overcoming Implementation Challenges

The implementation of these policies has encountered some resistance for reasons ranging 

from budget concerns to maintenance in the field. Each state has addressed these concerns 

in order to facilitate their inclusion in roadway projects. 

In New York, there were two primary concerns: 

availability of required right-of-way and crossslope. Resistance to implementing the policy 

came from the regional designers who are 

responsible for designing the shoulders. In 

some cases, where there is very limited right-ofway and significant slopes to swales adjacent 

to the roadway, it could be impractical to add 

pavement. When such a determination is made, 

the New York policy states the reasons should be 

fully documented in the Project Scoping Report/

Design Report. There were also drainage concerns as the cross slope for a paved shoulder is 

typically six percent but when the shoulders are installed for pedestrian use, the allowed cross 

slope is two percent. There was concern that the minimal cross slope could impede water 

flow across the shoulder allowing sediment to accumulate resulting in the loss of a usable 

shoulder. Evaluation of paved shoulders over time has mitigated these operational concerns.

In Oregon, the resistance is primarily budgetary. When a roadway is being resurfaced, only the 

travel lanes may be repaved. Resurfacing or pavement preservation projects are tracked using 

dollars/mile. Adding or resurfacing shoulders decreases the miles of resurfacing that can be 

implemented within the available budget. Likewise, the policy of maintenance paving offers no 

incentive to add shoulders. If lane miles paved is one of an agency’s performance measures, 

and adding shoulders does not increase miles paved, the agency is essentially penalized for 

paving shoulders. While these budgetary concerns are valid, they can be overcome by the 

wide range of benefits that paved shoulders and walkways can provide – such as reducing 

pedestrian crashes and reducing shoulder maintenance requirements.

Photo Credit: Michael Ronkin
Endnotes

1 U.S. Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Guidance Memorandum on Consideration and Implementation of Proven Safety 

Countermeasures (Washington, DC: July 2008). http://safety.fhwa.dot.gov/policy/memo071008/

2 New York State Department of Transportation, “Ch 18.6.2 Use of Shoulders as Pedestrian Facilities,” in Highway Design Manual, (Albany, NY: 2006) p. 

18-20. https://www.nysdot.gov/divisions/engineering/design/dqab/hdm/hdm-repository/chapt_18.pdf 

3 U.S. Access Board, “Public Rights-of-Way” web page. http://www.access-board.gov/prowac/ 

4 State of Oregon, “The Bike Bill,” Oregon Revised Statute (2009), sec 366.514. https://www.oregonlaws.org/ors/366.514

5 Oregon Department of Transportation, “I.2.B.2.d Urban Walkways,” in 1995 Oregon Bicycle and Pedestrian Plan (Salem, OR: 1995), p.53.

http://www.oregon.gov/ODOT/HWY/BIKEPED/docs/bp_plan_2.pdf 

6 U.S. Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Pedestrian and Bicycle Crashes of the Early 1990’s, FHWA-RD-95-163 

(Washington, DC: 1995.)

7 U.S. Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, An Analysis of Factors Contributing to “Walking Along Roadway” Crashes: 

Research Study and Guidelines for Sidewalks and Walkways, FHWA-RD-01-101 (Washington D.C., 2001).

8 Florida Department of Transportation, Update of Florida Crash Reduction Factors and Countermeasures to Improve the Development of District Safety 

Improvement Projects (Tallahassee, FL, 2005). http://www.dot.state.fl.us/research-center/Completed_Proj/Summary_SF/FDOT_BD015_04_rpt.pdf.

9 Dowling, Reinke, et al., NCHRP Report 616, Multimodal Level of Service Analysis for Urban Streets, Transportation Research Board of the National 

Academies, Project 3-70 (Washington D.C., 2008). 

For more information and resources on pedestrian

and bicycle safety, please visit:

http://safety.fhwa.dot.gov/ped_bike/

FHWA-SA-11-018

Benefits of Shoulders and Walkways

FHWA encourages the inclusion of walkways and shoulders to create safer pedestrian environments. 

Pedestrians killed while “walking along the roadway” account for almost eight percent of all 

pedestrians killed in traffic crashes.6 Many of these tragedies are preventable. Providing walkways 

separated from the travel lanes could help to prevent up to 88 percent of these “walking along 

roadway crashes.”7 Widening paved shoulders also provide numerous safety benefits for motorists as 

well as benefits for pedestrians including:

•	Reducing numerous crash types8

» Head on crashes (15%-75% reported reduction)

» Sideswipe crashes (15%-41%)

» Fixed object crashes (29%-49%)

» Pedestrian “walking along roadway”crashes (71%)

•	 Improving roadway drainage

•	 Increasing effective turning radii at intersections

•	Reducing shoulder maintenance requirements

•	 Providing emergency stopping space for broken down vehicles

•	 Providing space for maintenance operations and snow storage

•	 Providing an increased level of comfort for bicyclists9