Protected Bike Lane / Cycle Track
ELM-PBL-37 Protected Bike Lane / Cycle Track
Related Media
The items below come from outside the Commonway System, external videos, podcasts, and articles related to this page's topic, not part of the guidebook itself.
Are Streets Too Complicated Now?
Asks whether today's proliferation of lines, signals, and lane types on streets is overcomplication or a needed response to modern demands, a question that runs directly through CS's Element-scale catalog and the density-tiered Corridor retrofit paths this video is tagged to.
Dutch-style intersection design: bike-friendly
Shows the protected-intersection design vocabulary, continuous cycle tracks, corner refuge islands, separated signal phasing, that underpins CS's Protected Intersection pattern and the Corridor retrofit paths built around it.
Why this pattern exists
Physical separation removes the reliance on driver behavior and paint compliance that lower-tier bike facilities depend on, making cycling comfortable and accessible to a much broader range of riders, including children and less-confident adults, the core goal of an all-ages-and-abilities bike network.1 This pattern exists to document the design considerations specific to physical separation.
Key considerations
- Intersection and driveway conflict points require particular design attention, since physical separation that continues uninterrupted mid-block can create visibility conflicts at any break in that separation
- Should be the aspirational default treatment on higher-speed or higher-volume corridors where cycling is intended to be a viable, comfortable option for a broad range of riders
- Maintenance access (snow removal, sweeping) needs to be planned for within a physically separated facility, since standard vehicle-lane equipment may not fit
- Minimum rideable width is 6.5–7 ft (2–2.1 m) for a one-way facility, with 8–12.5 ft (2.5–3.8 m) preferred where volume supports side-by-side riding or passing.2 Buffer width must be at least 3 ft (0.9 m) where adjacent to on-street parking, to clear the door-swing zone, or 2–3 ft (0.6–0.9 m) on streets without parking at 30 mph or below.2
Related patterns
Buffered Bike Lane (ELM-BBL-35), Conventional Bike Lane (ELM-CBL-34) (lower-separation alternatives); Bicycle Signal (ELM-BCS-16) (a common companion treatment at intersections)
Getting there: Retrofit path options
This Element is the direct product of all three protected bike lane retrofits: via lane-width reallocation (RFT-CDR-07), via lane removal (RFT-CDR-08), and via parking reduction (RFT-CDR-09).
References
- Evidence-based Lusk, A.C. et al. (2011), "Risk of injury for bicycling on cycle tracks versus in the street," Injury Prevention 17(2). Montreal study: 28% lower injury rate on cycle tracks compared to comparable streets.
- Precedent-based NACTO, Urban Bikeway Design Guide, 3rd Ed., "Protected Bike Lanes." Design specifications.