Bicycle Board Members,
If bike lanes are not _>_ 5 feet wide, motorists pass cyclists closer than they would if there were no bike lane at all says a British study.
On 8/25, I sent you a clip from /The Cyclist's Manifesto: The Case For Riding On Two Wheels Instead of Four/ that explained why bike lanes are obsolete and sharrows are the thing.
Recall that when we proposed sharrows to the Traffic Commission we cited the San Francisco study that showed that cyclists practice better lane positioning and motorists give cyclists more room when passing when sharrows are on the road. The following study shows that if bike lanes are not _>_ 5 feet wide, motorists pass cyclists closer than they would if there were no bike lane at all. (My thanks to fellow LCI Frank Krygowski for sending this.)
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/uk/article6828100.ece
"Cycle lanes encourage motorists to drive closer to bikes, says study"
Cycle lanes can make roads more dangerous for cyclists because they encourage motorists to drive closer when overtaking bicycles, a study has found.
Drivers give cyclists a wider berth on roads where there is no lane because they assume that they should share the road and make more allowance for the risk of wobbles.
The study, conducted by Leeds and Bolton universities, challenges the approach taken by many local authorities, which is to promote cycling by painting cycle lanes and cycle symbols on their roads. It suggests that reducing the speed and volume of traffic would be more effective in improving cycle safety than narrow cycle lanes.
Boris Johnson, the Mayor of London, is planning to create 12 “cycle superhighways” by 2012 but his transport authority said yesterday that most of the network would be lanes painted on roads rather than segregated cycle paths.
For the study the researchers mounted a camcorder on the rear rack of a bicycle and rode on three roads that each had sections with and without cycle lanes. On all three roads, drivers gave cyclists less room where there was a cycle lane. The greatest difference was recorded on the A6 near Garstang, Lancashire, where cars passed 18cm (7in) closer when the cyclist was in a cycle lane.
All the cycle lanes were slightly narrower than the minimum width of 1.5m (5ft) recommended by the Department for Transport. The majority of Britain’s cycle lanes do not comply with this guideline.
The study, which is due to be published in the scientific journal Accident Analysis and Prevention, says that on roads without cycle lanes, drivers “consciously perform an overtaking manoeuvre”. On roads with cycle lanes, they treat the space between the centre line and the outside edge of the cycle lane as exclusively their territory and make less adjustment for cyclists.
The study concludes: “Cycle lanes do not appear to provide greater space for cyclists in all conditions.” The Highway Code tells drivers to “give cyclists at least as much room as you would when overtaking a car”.
Chris Peck, policy co-ordinator of the Cyclists’ Touring Club, said: “Cycle lanes have a part to play in improving road conditions for cyclists, but this research has raised concerns that they are not always the best solution and may make cycling more unpleasant.”
He said that too many authorities viewed cycle lanes as a cheap and easy alternative to more effective measures of reducing the vulnerability of cyclists, such as cutting the speed limit to 20mph and redesigning awkward junctions. Mr Peck added that narrow cycle lanes could create tension between drivers and cyclists, with drivers becoming annoyed when cyclists strayed outside them. Some cyclists felt under pressure to remain within the lane until the last moment when turning right, leading to sudden, potentially dangerous manoeuvres.
He said: “Cycle lanes are a good visual reminder to people that cycling is being encouraged but they can cause cyclists to hug the kerb, which may not be the safest place to be.”
Frank /Cyclists fare best when they act and are treated as drivers of vehicles/