According to the chairman of a panel that advises the City of Minneapolis on bike matters, we now have “the most thorough analysis we’ve seen of crashes” involving bicycles and motor vehicles. Apparently the study confirms that collisions are “most likely to happen during the afternoon rush hour” and in close proximity of an intersection.
The study also suggests that bike lanes do not make a difference. In fact, “[s]ome of the top crash sites have bike lanes while others don’t . . . .” Of course, that doesn’t stop the Star Tribune from presumably cherry picking specific findings at specific locations to suggest “[t]he analysis also found that streets with bike lanes, such as downtown Hennepin or University Avenue SE., tend to have lower crash rates than streets like Lowry Avenue or 28th Street with only partial or no such markings.”
Is there an agenda here? This would seem to be a fair question considering the conflicting “facts” cited in the article. What might that agenda be . . .? Perhaps the President of the Minneapolis Bicycle Coalition provides the answer with his suggestion that “the findings lend support for [his] coalition's goal of protected bikes lanes, those separated from traffic lanes by curbs, parked cars or posts and cables.”
Cross-posted and comments welcome at Davis & Emmer's NewsTalk Blog.