Different Types of Bike Lanes

[hotbike]

In my opinion, most roads are wide enough that it doesn't seem sensible to demand a bike lane.
When and where bicycle lanes should be built depends on a variety of factors.
I have four different ideas, for different types of bicycle lanes:

1) Slow Lane for Bikes-When the Speed Limit is over 30 MPH-Goes the whole length of the road.

2) Hill Climbing Lane for Bikes- Like #1, but ends at the top of the hill.

3) Acceleration Lane for Bicycles- To give the bike a chance to get up to speed, when entering road from a side-street, then merges with traffic. Acceleration lane only needs to be 200 to 500 feet long. (I got this idea from the Expressway).

4) Express Lane for Bicycles-When traffic is at a standstill, Bicycles can fly past the gridlock. Ideal bike lane for urban areas, the Express lane is a fast lane for bikes when the car and truck traffic is slow.

I posted this because the traffic conditions are so different from one location to the next. "Bicycle Lane" could mean one of several different things. I have not included bike-only bikeways, or MUP's, or any bike lane that is separated from traffic. These are all painted lines on the road, not separate pavement.

I think #4 , express lane for urban biking, is the most important, and stands in sharp contrast against the other types of bike lanes.

Does anyone have an idea to add, for another, different type of bike lane? Please post a reply.

Again, I am not a strong supporter of bike lanes in general, most of them come out terrible. More consideration needs to be given to local traffic patterns, and the specific purpose of the bike lane , as stated above.

Do you get my drift?

[Sportsman9]

Well I'm personally a fan of bike lanes, because some bikers (myself included) go significantly slower than motor traffic and our lanes should be separated as much as possible. I think continuous lanes are best because drivers come to recognize that on X Street there is, in fact, a bike lane and they need to be on the lookout.

Lanes that only go a short distance would I think be tricky for motorists to recognize.

I recently had the pleasure of riding a lane on far East 20th Street in Manhattan -- the lane has a good 2 feet or so separating the lane edge from the parked car doors, so if you ride in the middle of the bike lane you are outside the door zone.

One more improvement to lanes is painting the whole lane a solid color such as blue or green.

[genec]

In my opinion, most roads are wide enough that it doesn't seem sensible to demand a bike lane.
When and where bicycle lanes should be built depends on a variety of factors.
I have four different ideas, for different types of bicycle lanes:

1) Slow Lane for Bikes-When the Speed Limit is over 30 MPH-Goes the whole length of the road.

2) Hill Climbing Lane for Bikes- Like #1, but ends at the top of the hill.

3) Acceleration Lane for Bicycles- To give the bike a chance to get up to speed, when entering road from a side-street, then merges with traffic. Acceleration lane only needs to be 200 to 500 feet long. (I got this idea from the Expressway).

4) Express Lane for Bicycles-When traffic is at a standstill, Bicycles can fly past the gridlock. Ideal bike lane for urban areas, the Express lane is a fast lane for bikes when the car and truck traffic is slow.

I posted this because the traffic conditions are so different from one location to the next. "Bicycle Lane" could mean one of several different things. I have not included bike-only bikeways, or MUP's, or any bike lane that is separated from traffic. These are all painted lines on the road, not separate pavement.

I think #4 , express lane for urban biking, is the most important, and stands in sharp contrast against the other types of bike lanes.

Does anyone have an idea to add, for another, different type of bike lane? Please post a reply.

Again, I am not a strong supporter of bike lanes in general, most of them come out terrible. More consideration needs to be given to local traffic patterns, and the specific purpose of the bike lane , as stated above.

Do you get my drift?

Got your drift, and frankly these sound like pretty fair ideas... might even get the road crew AND Traffic Engineers thinking about what a bike lane really is and how they are used, and how to best implement them.

[Extort]

I am not sure about #3, just because the difference in speed between a stopped (and turning) cyclist and one speeding by at ~25MPH is not enough of a significant difference to force traffic engineers to plan around.

In urban areas I think that every street should have a wide outer lane (cars plus bikes or bikes with parallel parking) because many people will get the idea that cycling is faster than sitting in traffic. These lanes should be outside of the right hand turn lanes and have a clear amount of space between parked cars and traffic lanes. California determined that a bike lane should be 8 feet wide, and I think that is a good enough number...