On Thu, Feb 16, 2017 at 10:11 AM, Spencer Gardner <spencergard...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Good catch on the MUTCD language. I'm not opposed to tagging with a bike > lane and a parking lane, but then what should be used as the assumed width > of the bike lane? This has direct relevance for my application, where I > need to know how wide a bike lane is. Would you suggest an assumed width > for parking and then subtract from the total to arrive at the operable > space for people on bicycles? > Check the local standard and get a sample. Current federal guidelines put parking at 8 feet (and is fairly typical), bicycle lanes must be 4 feet minimum, 5 feet if there's parking adjacent, measured from the edge of the gutter pan, or if there is none, the curb face or the edge of the roadway (being either the physical edge or the painted edge, whichever is closer to the centerline) to the inside of the lane marking. Oregon-specific, 6 feet any time an adjacent lane allows motor vehicles or is oncoming. In practice, it's rare to see a lane less than 6 feet wide anymore regardless of application because a cargo bike, most adult tricycles and many bikes pulling trailers are a tight squeeze in a six foot lane. It's starting to get common to see 7 foot lanes in Oregon, often with a 1 foot buffer on the left and a two foot buffer between the right edge of the lane and the edgeline itself, for a 10 foot single-file bike lane.
_______________________________________________ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
