Current Infrastructure v. Advisory Bike Lanes

Our current road systems are under strict scrutiny as biking is becoming a more prevalent activity in the U.S., particularly in many cities. There are numerous articles and videos that criticize and critique our current manner of transportation, one alternative to current poorly designed road system is the idea of advisory lanes.

According to the city of Alexandria, VA, an advisory lane is a type of infrastructure that functions to “create a space on the roadway for cyclists while visually narrowing streets to slow drivers.” The road is still considered to be two-ways, even though the driving lane is considerably narrower. In order to safely pass oncoming traffic on this narrow road, drivers are allowed to merge into bike lane once yielding to cyclists. So in addition to drivers being more aware of cyclists, cyclists must also be aware and drive as though a car does not seem them.

This concept is used all over Europe, most notably in the Netherlands, and even sparingly across the United States, predominantly in areas with higher bike traffic than car traffic. This process puts equal responsibility on drivers and cyclists to be aware of their surroundings and truly share a road.

Although advisory lanes have been shown to be effective, many lanes across the United States remain at 12 feet in width. According to an article called “Why 12-Foot Traffic Lanes Are Disastrous for Safety and Must Be Replaced Now,” narrowing lanes by two-inches would actually create safer driving lanes. Similar to how advisory lanes function, a 10-foot-wide lane would slow down the flow of traffic. Even in the “traffic engineer’s bible,” known as the Green Book, they state that 10-foot-wide lanes are effective and even have some “advantages.”

Additionally, according to the article, studies have proved that narrower lanes reduce and change the number of accidents reported on the roads. Other reports indicate that 10-foot-wide roads do not cause any more accidents than 12-foot-wide lanes. As I’ve stated a few times now, the more narrow the road, the slower you must go. Thus, you reduce the number of tickets and accidents that result from speeding.

One of the most important aspects of narrower roads is that they do not reduce the flow of traffic, they only reduce the speed of traffic. According to research,

“The measured saturation flow rates are similar for lane widths between 10 feet and 12 feet. … Thus, so long as all other geometric and traffic signalization conditions remain constant, there is no measurable decrease in urban street capacity when through lane widths are narrowed from 12 feet to 10 feet.”

Particularly in a city landscape, there is no need for such excess of street space. As Janette Sadik-Khan has mentioned in her novel “Street Fights,” the 12-foot space of one lane is actually wasted bike lane or sidewalk space. She goes into depth explaining the numbers, “A 2015 Toyota Camry is only about six feet wide, and the vast majority of trucks and commercial vehicles are less than eight and a half feet across” (p. 50). Mathematically, there is no reason for these overly wide street lanes other than the fact they can provide “breathing room” for drivers to reduce the possibilities of them hitting anything (p. 51).

By continuously framing our streets only in favor of cars, we are rewarding bad behavior from drivers and punishing those who wish to use alternative transportation. Narrower lanes would actually benefit all parties involved – pedestrians, drivers, and cyclists – as all would have a safer environment to transport through.

So why then are our roads built so wide still? More appropriately, why are city streets built so wide when driving should remain slow? Let’s pretend that changed.

Imagine This:

New York City wants to radically alter their streets in order to be more pedestrian and cyclist friendly. But traffic engineers want your advice. Do you recommend advisory lanes? Or just decreasing street length?

Personally, I would not advise advisory bike lanes in NYC, strictly because the places in which advisory bike lanes are successful have fewer cars and more cyclists. Additionally, I don’t think many New Yorkers would be able to adapt to such a different way of driving. NYC is also filled with several different ethnicities, all who have driving experience from somewhere else. I feel as though adding an advisory bike lane would only increase the number of injuries and deaths of cyclists rather than create a safer environment.

Instead, I would highly recommend creating narrower streets. It’s important to emphasize slow driving in the city, and it is even more crucial to advocate for individuals to walk or cycle around the city. As cities are typically known for their crowded areas and pollution, encouraging alternative means of transportation by constructing better road ways could help revise the attitude most have toward cities. Cities are not meant to be car friendly, instead, they are meant for people to get out and explore the city by foot (or bike). Creating narrower roads would allow for more sidewalks and bike paths, thus creating a more environmentally conscious way of living in the city and a safer environment for all those involved.