Study: Relationship of Lane Width to Safety for Urban and Suburban Arterials

Posted February 10th, 2008 by Antonio Rosell
Posted in
DSC00474.JPG
DSC00474.JPG
The only place where 12 ft lanes make sense?

Study presented at TRB (Transportation Research Board) in 2007 shows:

  • the use of lanes narrower than 3.6 m (12 ft) on urban and suburban arterials does not increase crash frequencies
  • 10 ft lanes on the whole are safer, not less safe, than 11 or 12 ft lanes
  • in many cases even narrower travel lanes (9 ft) may be safer than wider lanes for the motoring public

Members of the Association of Pedestrian and Bicycle Professionals (planners and engineers who specialize in bicycle and pedestrian design) have expressed unanimous support of narrower travel lanes (and using the space that is freed up for providing bicycle lanes).

Given this new research - what are some of its implications for Minnesota State Aid Standards?

Study is attached.

AttachmentSize
TRB2007-Potts_Harwood_Richard-LaneWidth.pdf179.69 KB

Post new comment

The content of this field is kept private and will not be shown publicly.
  • Web page addresses and e-mail addresses turn into links automatically.
  • Allowed HTML tags: <a> <em> <strong> <ul> <ol> <li> <blockquote> <p> <br> <h3> <h4> <img>
  • Lines and paragraphs break automatically.

More information about formatting options

CAPTCHA
This question is for testing whether you are a human visitor and to prevent automated spam submissions.
Copy the characters (respecting upper/lower case) from the image.

Drupal implementation: Community Design Group, LLC | Hosting and support: Advantage Labs, Inc