There’s Safety in (Bike-Specific) Infrastructure

Today on the Streetsblog Network, Bike Portland looks at a new review of the scientific literature
on the relation between bicycle infrastructure and injuries to
cyclists, conducted by researchers at the University of British
Columbia. While the study points to the need for more data, it finds
that dedicated bicycle infrastructure is associated with a lower risk
of injury for people on bikes.

Elly Blue writes:

3942850339_f3db2076a2_m.jpgMulti-use paths like the
Hawthorne Bridge have the
highest injury potential. Photo: Jonathan Maus

There’s a constant chorus — sometimes soft, sometimes overpoweringly
loud — in every conversation about bike infrastructure in America. Its
refrain: You’re safer without any bike lanes, separated lanes, cycle
tracks, bike boulevards, off-road paths. Just take the lane, follow the
rules, wear your helmet, and you’ll be fine.

A group of scholars at the University of British Columbia have found otherwise. They conducted a literature review,
looking at all available studies linking bicycle safety with
infrastructure. Their conclusions will be counterintuitive for some.

“Results to date suggest that sidewalks and multi-use
trails pose the highest risk, major roads are more hazardous than minor
roads, and the presence of bicycle facilities (e.g. on-road bike
routes, on-road marked bike lanes, and off-road bike paths) was
associated with the lowest risk.”

“One of the major advantages of infrastructure-based improvements,
compared to personal protective devices such as helmets, is that safe
infrastructure provides population-wide protection for all cyclists,”
study co-author Meghan Winters said in a press release.

The study’s abstract draws these conclusions:

Evidence is beginning to accumulate that purpose-built
bicycle-specific facilities reduce crashes and injuries among cyclists,
providing the basis for initial transportation engineering guidelines
for cyclist safety. Street lighting, paved surfaces, and low-angled
grades are additional factors that appear to improve cyclist safety.
Future research examining a greater variety of infrastructure would
allow development of more detailed guidelines.

I’m sure that many of our network members will want to dig deeper into this one. 

More from around the network: a rant against bike chic from Biker Chicks of West Chester. Extraordinary Observations makes the connection between free burritos and traffic congestion. And the Bicycle Coalition of Greater Philadelphia reports on biking the transit strike in that city.

  • Speaking of bike infrastructure…

    I was at the Metro community meeting last night in West Hollywood for the Westside Subway Extension, where five proposed stops were discussed (Hollywood/Highland, SantaMonica/LaBrea, SantaMonica/Fairfax, SantaMonica/SanVicente and BeverlyCenter). Each proposed station had a table where someone led a discussion about where to locate the station boxes, what type of box, what portals would be best for the station, how they relate to the community, etc..

    At the SantaMonica/SanVicente table (and the station looks like will be between SanVicente and LaCienega on Santa Monica so they can make that turn down to the Beverly Center), more that one person stated that the station should have bicycle parking (not automobile parking). The transportation consultant asked, “How much parking?” He said he was serious. Should we have 15 spaces, 20 spaces, 100 spaces? No one had an exact figure.

    So if you’d like bike parking at these stations, now is the time to make yourself heard. How much bike parking would be appropriate for a subway station?



More Evidence That Helmet Laws Don’t Work

If you want to increase cycling safety in your city, drop the helmet law and focus on getting more people– particularly women — on bikes, with street designs that offer separation from vehicle traffic. That’s the finding of a new study by researchers at the University of British Columbia [PDF] evaluating safety outcomes for cyclists across Canadian […]