Recommended Bicycle Lane Widths for Various Roadway Characteristics (2014) / Chapter Skim
Currently Skimming:
Pages 12-49
The Chapter Skim interface presents what we've algorithmically identified as the most significant single chunk of text within every page in the chapter.
Select key terms on the right to highlight them within pages of the chapter.
From page 12... ...
12 Observational Field Studies This section describes the observational field studies conducted to evaluate the allocation of roadway width on both bicyclists' and motorists' lateral positioning, taking into consideration various roadway characteristics. The general methodology of the observational field study involved installing temporary lane line markings to delineate bicycle lanes at midblock locations.
|
From page 13... ...
13 30 to 35 mph are common on many streets in urban and suburban areas. So although potential data collection sites were not found covering a range of speed limits, the sites that were identified had speed limits common to many streets in urban and suburban areas and were typical of locations where bicycle lanes are installed or are considered for installation.
|
From page 14... ...
14 Figure 1. Study sites and scenarios with on-street parking.
|
From page 15... ...
15 Table 6 summarizes the 17 study scenarios evaluated -- 11 scenarios with on-street parking and 6 scenarios without onstreet parking. Table 6 shows the widths of the travel lanes, bicycle lanes, and parking lanes (if applicable)
|
From page 16... ...
16 1 4-ft bicycle lane; 1-ft buffer area. 2 3.5-ft bicycle lane; 1.5-ft buffer area.
|
From page 17... ...
17 3.3 Data Collection Methodology For each study scenario, a video camera was positioned to record cyclist and motorist lateral position along the midblock portion of the study section. Figure 4 through Figure 8 show the perspectives from the camera for the Massachusetts Avenue, Clark Street, Division Street, Prospect Street (northbound)
|
From page 18... ...
18 and lane widths (i.e., parking lane, bicycle lane, buffer space, and adjacent travel lane, as applicable)
|
From page 19... ...
19 ings)
|
From page 20... ...
20 (e.g., vehicles parked in the travel lane, bicyclist riding in the far left of the travel lane) ; in total, fewer than 2% of cyclist, passing vehicle, and parked vehicle records were excluded.
|
From page 21... ...
21 Table 6. Figure 9 through Figure 13 show the position of parked vehicles, cyclists, and passing vehicles within their respective lanes.
|
From page 22... ...
22 Figure 9. Measurements taken on Massachusetts Avenue in Cambridge (assumed 7-ft width for passing vehicle)
|
From page 23... ...
23 Figure 10. Measurements taken on Clark Street in Chicago (assumed 7-ft width for passing vehicle)
|
From page 24... ...
24 Figure 11. Measurements taken on Division Street in Chicago (assumed 7-ft width for passing vehicle)
|
From page 25... ...
25 Figure 12. Measurements taken on Prospect Street (northbound)
|
From page 26... ...
26 Figure 13. Measurements taken on Prospect Street (southbound)
|
From page 27... ...
27 In each plot, the data are sorted by the cyclist's lateral position, with the minimum distance from the curb lowest on the y-axis and the maximum highest on the y-axis. This effectively creates a cumulative distribution of the cyclist's position relative to the curb in each graph.
|
From page 28... ...
28 Figure 14. Measurements taken on Massachusetts Avenue in Cambridge (assumed 5.67-ft width for passing vehicle)
|
From page 29... ...
29 Figure 15. Measurements taken on Clark Street in Chicago (assumed 5.67-ft width for passing vehicle)
|
From page 30... ...
30 Figure 16. Measurements taken on Division Street in Chicago (assumed 5.67-ft width for passing vehicle)
|
From page 31... ...
31 Figure 17. Measurements taken on Prospect Street (northbound)
|
From page 32... ...
32 Figure 18. Measurements taken on Prospect Street (southbound)
|
From page 33... ...
33 Street (City) Parking Lane Width (ft)
|
From page 34... ...
Street (City) Bike Lane Width (ft)
|
From page 35... ...
35 Pa rk in g La ne Bi ke L an e Pa rk in g La ne Bu ffe r Pa rk in g La ne Bu ffe r Bu ffe r Bi ke L an e Bu ffe r Bi ke L an e Bi ke L an e Tr av el L an e Bi ke L an e Tr av el L an e Bi ke L an e Tr av el L an e Figure 20. Distribution of distance of cyclists from curb on Massachusetts Avenue.
|
From page 36... ...
36 Pa rk in g La ne Bi ke L an e Bi ke L an e Tr av el L an e Bi ke L an e Tr av el L an e Bi ke L an e Tr av el L an e Pa rk in g La ne Bi ke L an e Pa rk in g La ne Bi ke L an e Pa rk in g La ne Bu ffe r Bu ffe r Bi ke L an e Bi ke L an e Bu ffe r Bu ffe r Tr av el L an e Figure 22. Distribution of distance of cyclists from curb on Division Street.
|
From page 37... ...
37 Ve r ca l C ur b Ve r ca l C ur b Ve r ca l C ur b Bi ke L an e Tr av el L an e Bi ke L an e Tr av el L an e Figure 24. Distribution of distance of cyclists from curb on Prospect Street (southbound)
|
From page 38... ...
38 Bi ke L an e Tr av el L an e Bi ke L an e Tr av el L an e Bi ke L an e Tr av el L an e Figure 25. Distribution of passing vehicle distance from curb on Massachusetts Avenue.
|
From page 39... ...
39 Bi ke L an e Tr av el L an e Bi ke L an e Tr av el L an e Bi ke L an e Tr av el L an e Bi ke L an e Tr av el L an e Figure 26. Distribution of passing vehicle distance from curb on Clark Street.
|
From page 40... ...
40 Bi ke L an e Tr av el L an e Bi ke L an e Tr av el L an e Figure 28. Distribution of passing vehicle distance from curb on Prospect Street (northbound)
|
From page 41... ...
41 A couple of points are worth noting with regard to the position of passing vehicles within the travel lane and relative to the bicycle lane: 1. At sites with travel lanes ranging in width from 10 to 14 ft that were adjacent to bicycle lanes, very few passing vehicles encroached into the bicycle lane, even from the narrowest travel lane of 10 ft.
|
From page 42... ...
42 • Position of the left lane line of the bike lane (i.e., the longitudinal lane line that separates the travel lane and the bike lane)
|
From page 43... ...
43 width for use in the analysis is a conservative (i.e., stringent) choice for analysis purposes.
|
From page 44... ...
44 Percentage of Cyclists Riding Within the Effective Bike Lane. Using the three selected percentiles (i.e., 85th, 90th, and 95th)
|
From page 45... ...
Scenario Street (City) Width (ft)
|
From page 46... ...
46 had no statistically significant effect (p-value of 0.50) on the position of parked vehicles.
|
From page 47... ...
47 the boundaries of the designated 8-ft parking lane, and no vehicles parked outside the boundaries of the designated 9-ft parking lane. Effect of Roadway Characteristics on the Calculated Central Positioning of Cyclists.
|
From page 48... ...
48 average, within the effective bike lane (since the estimate is positive) at 0.65 ft from either its left or right edge.
|
From page 49... ...
49 parked vehicles within the door zone by an average of 0.62 ft, regardless of the width of the bicycle lane. – The presence of a buffer effectively moved bicyclists away from parked vehicles by an average of 0.42 ft, ranging from 0.04 to 0.81 ft.
|
Key Terms
This material may be derived from roughly machine-read images, and so is provided only to facilitate research.
More
information on Chapter Skim is available.