BIKE: Do bike lanes really improve bike safety?

[Roger Baker]

On Jan 3, 2005, at 11:22 AM, Thorne wrote:

> I'm in favor of motor-assisted bikes for those who want to use them.  
> But the
> idea of segregating bike or motorized bikes from the rest of traffic 
> for
> safety reasons is a false hope.  Cyclists are safer mixed in with 
> traffic
> following traffic laws than they are on the segregated facilities.  
> Getting
> bike-centric isn't a matter of facilities so much as a matter of 
> getting out
> and riding.  Surely, the roadways should be designed with bicycle 
> traffic in
> mind, but I'll remind you that every lane you see is a bike lane.
>

[From my point of view, this link and the documentation from the 
Cambridge Mass. website seems to document the safety advantages of bike 
lanes pretty conclusively. I expect there will always be non-believers. 
-- Roger]


http://www.cambridgema.gov/~CDD/et/bike/bike_safety.html

Safety Benefits of Bike Lanes

Bike lanes help define road space, decrease the stress level of 
bicyclists riding in traffic, encourage bicyclists to ride in the 
correct direction  of travel, and signal motorists that cyclists have a 
right to the road. Bike lanes help to better organize the flow of 
traffic and reduce the chance  that motorists will stray into cyclists’ 
path of travel.1, 2 Bicyclists  have stated their preference for marked 
on-street bicycle lanes in numerous surveys.3 In addition, several 
real-time studies (where cyclists of varying abilities and backgrounds 
ride and assess actual routes  and street conditions) have found that 
cyclists are more comfortable and assess a street as having a better 
level of service for them where there  are marked bike lanes present.4

In summary, bike lanes do the following:
	• 	support and encourage bicycling as a means of transportation;
	• 	help define road space;
	• 	promote a more orderly flow of traffic;
	• 	encourage bicyclists to ride in the correct direction, with the 
flow of traffic;
	• 	give bicyclists a clear place to be so they are not tempted to ride 
on the sidewalk;
	• 	remind motorists to look for cyclists when turning or opening car 
doors;
	• 	signal motorists that cyclists have a right to the road;
	• 	reduce the chance that motorists will stray into cyclists’ path of 
travel;
	• 	make it less likely that passing motorists swerve toward opposing 
traffic;
	• 	decrease the stress level of bicyclists riding in traffic.

Well-designed facilities encourage proper behavior and decrease the 
likelihood of crashes. Numerous studies have shown that bicycle lanes 
improve safety and promote proper riding behavior.5
	• 	In 1996, over 2000 League of American Bicyclist members were 
surveyed about the crashes (accidents) they were involved in over the  
course of the previous year. From the information, a relative danger 
index was calculated which shows that streets with bike lanes  were the 
safest places to ride, having a significantly lower crash rate then 
either major or minor streets without any bicycle facilities;  
moreover, they are safer than trails and sidewalks as well.6
	• 	The addition of bicycle lanes in Davis, California reduced crashes 
by 31 percent.7
	• 	Bicycle lanes on a major avenue in Eugene, Oregon resulted in an 
increase in bicycle use and a substantial reduction in the bicycle  
crash rate. The crash rate per 100,000 bike miles fell by almost half 
and the motor vehicle crash rate also fell significantly.8
	• 	When the city of Corvallis, OR installed 13 miles of bicycle lanes 
in one year, the number of bicycle crashes fell from 40 in the year  
prior to the installation to just 16 in the year afterwards, and of the 
5 crashes that occurred on streets with bike lanes, all involved  
bicyclists riding at night with no lights.9
	• 	In Chicago, Illinois, crash severity was reduced in one study of 
marking bike lanes in a narrow cross section where 5 foot bike lanes  
were marked next to 7 foot parking lanes.10
	• 	In Denmark, bicycle lanes reduced the number of bicycle crashes by 
35 percent.11 Some of the bike lanes  reached risk reductions of 70 to 
80 percent.12
	• 	A comparison of crash rates of all types in major cities has shown 
that cities with higher bicycle use have lower traffic crash rates  of 
all types than cities with lower bicycle use.13
	• 	In a national study comparing streets with bike lanes and those 
without, several important observations were made:14
	• 	Wrong-way riding was significantly lower on the streets with bike 
lanes.
	• 	In approaching intersections, 15% of cyclists on streets without 
bike lanes rode on the sidewalks, vs. 3% on the streets with bike  
lanes.
	• 	On streets with bike lanes, 81% of cyclists obeyed stop signs, vs. 
55% on streets without.
	• 	In Cambridge, sidewalk bicycling was cut in half after the 
installation of bicycle lanes on Mass. Ave. in Central Square.15
	• 	Corvallis and Eugene, Oregon, cities with good bikeway networks, 
have the highest number of riders and rider behavior is the best:  
wrong-way riding is minimal, fewer ride on the sidewalk than in other 
Oregon cities.
	• 	In looking at comparable streets with and without bicycle lanes in 
Davis and Santa Barbara, California, the number of cyclists riding  on 
the wrong side of the street was one third as much on streets with 
bicycle lanes.

Return to Top

Footnotes
	1.  	David L. Harkey and J. Richard Stewart, “Evaluation of Shared-Use 
Facilities for Bicycles and Motor Vehicles  in Florida,” Florida 
Department of Transportation, March 1996.
	2.  	Cyclists are still permitted to travel in the regular vehicle 
travel lanes even when a bike lane is present.  Cyclists should signal 
and make sure they have the attention of the people behind them before 
moving into the vehicle travel  lane from a bike lane. Motorists should 
be aware that cyclists may merge into their lanes in front of them, 
e.g., to avoid  an obstacle or to make a left turn.
	3.  	Monique Stimson, “Analysis of Commuter Bicyclist Route Choice 
Using Stated Preference Study,” TRB,  2003.; FHWA, Development of the 
Bicycle Compatibility Index, December 1998.
	4.  	Bruce Landis et al., “Real-Time Human Perceptions: Toward a 
Bicycle Level of Service,” Transportation  Research Record 1578; FHWA, 
Development of the Bicycle Compatibility Index, December 1998.
	5.  	Federal Highway Administration, Safety Effectiveness of Highway 
Design Features, Volume VI, Pedestrians  and Bicyclists, 
FHWA-RD-91-049, 1991.
	6.  	William E. Moritz, Ph.D., “Adult Bicyclists In The United States  
Characteristics And Riding  Experience In 1996,” TRB Preprint Paper, 
1998.
	7.  	Federal Highway Administration, Bicycle Safety-Related Research 
Synthesis, 1995.
	8.  	Ibid.
	9.  	Ibid.
	10.  	Pedestrian and Bicycle Information Center, Bike Lane Design 
Guide, 2002.
	11.  	Danish Road Directorate, Safety of Cyclists in Urban Areas, 1994.
	12.  	Jan Grubb Laursen, Nordic Experience with the Safety of 
Bicycling, 1993.
	13.  	Peter Newman, Lecture presented at the Conservation Law 
Foundation, Boston, MA, January 9, 1997.
	14.  	Federal Highway Administration, Bicycle Lanes versus Wide Curb 
Lanes: Operational and Safety Findings,  May 1998.
	15.  	City of Cambridge data, unpublished.

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: text/enriched
Size: 7456 bytes
Desc: not available
Url : http://lists.bicycleaustin.info/private.cgi/forum-bicycleaustin.info/attachments/20050103/f8eea679/attachment.bin