there's a lot of talk by the anti-bike stripe crowd in this forum - steve goodridge, larry felton, bruce rosar, etc- that claim there's great benefits by promoting roads that have 'wide lanes that support sharing'.
I find there are a lot of contradictions and flaws in wide lanes. I like extra width for riding (who doesn't?) but there's a lot of flaws on relying on wide lanes for greater bikeability in communities.
wide lanes encourage bicyclists to hug the curb and dart in and out of parked cars.
also, just wide lanes on high speed arterials will keep many cyclists off those roads, looking for alternate routes.
moving from a 'lane sharing' position to a 'lane claiming' position approaching intersections on high speed roads will be difficult or impossible for some bicyclists and impossible at times for all, making right hooks, blind spot crosses and destination conflicts inevitable with wide lanes.
wide lanes at intersections also cause blocking problems for bicyclists in heavy traffic, making bicyclists do a bumper weave to advance, or getting stuck in traffic.
I've been noticing a lot of 'wide lanes' that supposedly 'support sharing' that I have NO interest in sharing with automobile traffic. 14' feet of lane? please. that puts me riding within a foot or two of the curb as cars pass, or holding them up while claiming the lane. something I'm perfectly willing to do.
I got the angry pickup truck honking and yelling yesterday in a wide lane as i was spooling up for a left off the road.
I question the validity of promoting wide lanes that 'support' sharing.....
is "wide lanes that support sharing" 'vc code' for promoting curb hugging, parked car dodging, bumper weave at stoplights, keeping some roads biker adverse, and causing destination conflicts?