Advocacy & Safety - What’s the deal with one-way bike paths?

OK, a bike lane on the road, with the cars, should of course be one-way. But otherwise – cyclists move slow enough to be spared one-way signs on bike paths. It’s a thing from the automobile world that shouldn’t bother us! It’s as if road signs would increase the status of the bike path, make it more road-like or something. When there is actually only a few basics to know – keep right and use lighting.

I think of this every time I cross the long bridge Västerbron. The bike paths, running on either side of the road, are really wide – but one-way. This annoys me, it’s so stupid to cross the road, bike on the right side of the bridge, then cross the road again to continue. So I don’t, and sometimes (very seldom) other cyclists yell at me. Hobby-cops! The real cops don’t bother, so why do we need these signs?!?!
http://www.karlsplanet.com/pics/liposmalltrans.gif

For what it's worth, I still think bike paths generally are a waste of time anyway. I don't bother with them. The only place I can think of where they might be of any use is on that bridge just south of the Sorrento shops. Even there, you'd still have to dodge the fisherman on the bridge and the metal "pedestrians only" barriers (strange thing for a bike path).

Guess I'll just continue to use the road.

I usually use the road too, especially at this time of year, when the bike paths are covered by gravel from the winter. But just like you say, these long bridges... with highway-like car lanes! I’ve never biked in the car section of those, although it’s tempting, since it’s hard to enjoy the descent from the top of the bridge when biking on a washboard...

Sorry, I am one of those obnoxious guys who yells at wrong-way cyclists, who can present a serious danger. I can understand the desire to avoid multiple street crossings, but whenever you do ride counterflow, I hope you yield to those going the proper direction. The situation is particularly acute on a narrow bike lane, separated from high-speed motor traffic by only a stripe in the pavement.

Here in Geneva we have both cycle lanes and paths. The lanes are like normal road lanes but very slightly elevated (like a pavement, footpath, sidewalk) and the paths are usually protected with a rail or barrier. I stick to these as the motoring fraternity here are crazy. The only disadvantage is the pollution. After an hours ride you tend to get slightly black...

Leave the roads to the maniacks.

My problem with bike paths over here is that they are generally so narrow that they should be one way, with another path on the opposite side of the road. Instead they're two way often crossing over to the 'wrong' side of the road halfway along.

Richard

Originally posted by Harry
Here in Geneva we have both cycle lanes and paths. The lanes are like normal road lanes but very slightly elevated (like a pavement, footpath, sidewalk)

How elevated is "slightly". One of my many objections to bike paths is the idea of the "elevated" area which can become dangerous if going over it on an angle (say you needed to swerve to avoid something).

Originally posted by Chris L


How elevated is "slightly". One of my many objections to bike paths is the idea of the "elevated" area which can become dangerous if going over it on an angle (say you needed to swerve to avoid something).

Height os a kerbstone but slightly tapered to avoid your objection.

There'a a new 120 francs fine for parking on the cycle lane. All we need is a few flics (cops, fuzz) to enforce this great idea.

Originally posted by John E
Sorry, I am one of those obnoxious guys who yells at wrong-way cyclists, who can present a serious danger. I can understand the desire to avoid multiple street crossings, but whenever you do ride counterflow, I hope you yield to those going the proper direction. The situation is particularly acute on a narrow bike lane, separated from high-speed motor traffic by only a stripe in the pavement.
John, just like I point out in my first post, I would never ride counterflow on lanes (or narrow paths). My objection is to those bike paths that are so wide that they could easily be two-way, but that are one-way only because of traffic-aesthetic reasons.

But yes, it is dangerous riding counterflow even on wide bike paths, because people don’t expect meeting other cyclists. But since cyclists often are without a driver’s license and just follow their common sense, you’re bound to meet a lot of them even on one-way paths.

One bike path in Stockholm was one-way for like 200 meters. No one cared about it, so now there are signs that it’s two-way. Much better!

A lot of cyclists, even experienced drivers, when using bike paths disregard the local conventions for driving on the left or right.
Its really annoying to have to negotiate with every cyclist you meet as to which way you are going. Even when I use a small hand signal, they often take that as an instruction, not a signal, and move where I point !
Ive had near collisions becasue the people behind me cycle on the wrong side, blocking that path for oncomming cyclists.

It all comes down to treating bicycles and bike paths as toys. We are vehicle and should behave as such.
I can handle a cyclist comming the "wrong" way along a wide path, as long as they stick to their side of the path.