Motorists leave less room when passing cyclists in a bike lane

tomasrojo

It's certainly been my experience that cycle lanes lead to close passes, and I remember the Warrington Cycle Campaign carrying out a relatively informal study that suggested the same.

Here's the latest.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/green-living-blog/2009/sep/11/bike-lanes

In the presence of a cycle lane, a driver is likely to drive between the cycle lane line and the centre line in a position which is appropriate for the visible highway horizontal geometry ahead of the driver. A cyclist within a cycle lane does not seem to cause a driver to adopt a different position in his or her lane. This has important implications for the width of cycle lanes and implies that their width should never be compromised.

DePurpereWolf

soooo, the cycle lane is too narrow?

tomasrojo

I guess no cycle lanes are better than sub-2m ones. Certainly my experience.

Beasty

tomasrojo wrote: »

I guess no cycle lanes are better than sub-2m ones. Certainly my experience.

Does anyone know if there is a recommended width for cycle lanes? I've not seen too many approaching 2m, and most are, I would guess, nearer 1m than 2m.

tomasrojo

Beasty wrote: »

Does anyone know if there is a recommended width for cycle lanes? I've not seen too many approaching 2m, and most are, I would guess, nearer 1m than 2m.

In the National Cycle Facilities Manual, the text states that the absolute minimum width of a cycle lane is 1.25m, the "preferred width" is given as between 1.5 and 2m. Elsewhere in the text 1.25m is referred to as being a "normally used" minimum width for with-flow cycle tracks.

All fantasy, of course.

The recommended width internationally is 2m. 1.5m is the minimum recommended internationally.

1m is preposterous. It is also pretty much the standard here. I've seen one in Dublin that begins about 20cm wide and then blossoms slowly into an 80cm one.

DirkVoodoo

I have definitely noticed that most of the time I am being given more room when no lane exists, but it may just be coincidence since there are more lanes in heavily trafficked areas.

One thing that bugs me non stop is passing the Esso station on the N11, if I am in the cycle path, motorists who are waiting to get out suddenly inch forward and block the path. It's somewhat similar to the "wandering bus passenger" phenomenon where a guy waiting for a bus will step right out in front of you as you pass, even though the bus has some distance left to come.

blorg

Beasty wrote: »

Does anyone know if there is a recommended width for cycle lanes? I've not seen too many approaching 2m, and most are, I would guess, nearer 1m than 2m.

The "PROVISION OF CYCLE FACILITIES National Manual For Urban Areas" on the Dublin Transportation Office website is inconsistent with 1.25m an "absolute minimum" but elsewhere actually specifies 1.5m as the minimum, with 1.75m the minimum "preferred" width and there only for low traffic situations.

Peak-hour volume   Width of cycle-track (m)
0 - 150            1.75* 
150 - 750          2.50
> 750              3.50

*The minimum width of a cycle track is 1.50m. If this width is used the track should have soft kerb (preferably a compacted grass verge or a low kerb <0.05m on the left-hand side) which can be used by cyclists to take evasive action when passing or overtaking.

http://www.dto.ie/web2006/chapter3.pdf

DePurpereWolf

3.50 meter wide cycle lanes? Most roads aren't even that wide.

cyclopath2001

Beasty wrote: »

Does anyone know if there is a recommended width for cycle lanes? I've not seen too many approaching 2m, and most are, I would guess, nearer 1m than 2m.

Irish law sets a minimum width of 1.5 metres.

But it does not set out if this includes drains and gutters.

No local authority has been prosecuted for breaking the regulations on signage, markings or minimum width.

Beasty

cyclopath2001 wrote: »

Irish law sets a minimum width of 1.5 metres.

But it does not set out if this includes drains and gutters.

No local authority has been prosecuted for breaking the regulations on signage, markings or minimum width.

From the link posted by Blorg above, it appears the minimum for an "on-road" cycle path is 1.25m. The 1.5m is presumably for those separated from the road. I am not sure if these limits are the law, or simply guidelines.

stopped_clock

I wouldn't be surprised if most motorists pass with less space when a cyclist is in a cycle lane.

I wonder though if the number of 'near misses' (ie where the motorist passes really close) is fewer with the cycle lane.

Any thoughts?

tomasrojo

stopped_clock wrote: »

I wouldn't be surprised if most motorists pass with less space when a cyclist is in a cycle lane.

I wonder though if the number of 'near misses' (ie where the motorist passes really close) is fewer with the cycle lane.

Any thoughts?

If the cycle lane is merely a painted-off segment of a standard traffic lane, then extremely close passes are frequently the result. The motorist doesn't seem to move over very much at all when passing because subconsciously they "know" that they can overtake: they are in a separate lane.

But they're not in a separate lane; they're still in a standard traffic lane that is slightly wider than a car, and certainly not wide enough to simultaneously contain a cyclist and a car, let alone to allow 1.5m of passing distance.