{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.013071895424836602, 'fraction_numerical': 0.01027077497665733, 'mean_word_length': 5.496969696969697, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
Design Guidance for Bicycle Lane Widths

The objective of this research was to develop recommendations for bicycle lane width for various roadway and traffic characteristics. An observational field study involved installing temporary lane line markings to delineate bicycle lanes of varying width at midblock locations and then observing the lateral positioning of bicyclists and motorists within the roadway cross section. The final database from the field study included data for 4,965 bicyclists, 3,163 passing vehicles, and 994 parked vehicles. The primary findings of the study showed that a buffered bike lane provided distinct advantages over simply widening a bike lane and that as traffic volumes and truck percentages increased, bicyclists moved away from vehicles in the travel lane and positioned themselves closer to parked vehicles or the curb. General design guidance is provided along with recommended parking lane, buffer, bike lane, and travel lane widths most applicable to urban and suburban two-lane undivided roadways with constrained roadway width.