Originally Posted by sggoodri
I disagree entirely. The vast majority of car-bike collisions occur at junctions, and bike lanes don't reduce these, and in fact likely make them worse. Similarly, falls from poor pavement conditions and doorings are not helped by bike lane stripes, and may be made worse.
The vast majority of
all traffic accidents, I suspect, happen at junctions. Bike lanes can help by notifying cars of where cyclists are likely to be and guiding cyclists correctly across and intersection. Falls from debris is a matter of cyclist skill, like not going round a curve too quickly in a car. Doorings are a matter of engineering. If you have door zone bike lanes, you should do something about that. It is a problem easily solved.
As I see it, bike lane striping takes my safety out of my hands and puts it in the hands of the drivers turning or crossing in front of me. Bike lane stripes might reduce certain types of overtaking-type collisions. But these collision types are so rare (and are mostly found on high-speed rural roads and fast arterials with few junctions) that this potential benefit needs to be kept in perspective. I'm far more concerned about right-hook, left-cross and drive-out hazards when I ride with my son to the ice cream store downtown than I am about overtaking collisions, which is why I take the lane through intersections on the way. I take as much control of the situation as I can by riding more visibly and assertively at these locations; by contrast, a striped bike lane puts me in a position of less visibility, maneuvering room, and control over the situation, and thus puts me at the mercy of drivers' competence at actions they perform less reliably than slowing behind me when they cannot pass me at junctions.
A bike lane need not be used at minor intersections. A cyclist can move out of it, or the bike lane can be engineered in such a way to minimize conflicts. A properly designed bike lane will not have right turn vulnerabilities at major intersections, and will possibly lend more protection against a left cross or hook, as there is more time to react from cars coming from the left.
Lastly, my environment is mostly rural highways and high speed arterials with relatively few interesections. Overtaking cars are very much of my concern. I can control how I present myself, if you will, to cars in front of me. Overtaking cars are a wildcard. Just being out of their direct travel path is extremely helpful to me. As for WOLs as an alternative, I've outlined elsewhere why I don't think they are sustainable in the long run.
I've researched the police reports of car-bike collisions in Cary and the rest of Wake County including Raleigh. There is a lot of bike traffic on the roads I ride with my son, and no reports of overtaking-type car-bike collisions, just a lot of intersection-type collisions. There's no way a bike lane stripe is going to reduce my risk of collision on these roads, and I think a great disservice is done to cyclists when striping proponents claim that these roads are unreasonably dangerous without striping or that striping needs to be shoe-horned in any way that can be managed.
Misleading the public about what makes cycling safe, i.e. over-selling segregation striping and stencils, particularly on low-speed and city streets with lots of junctions, is no way to improve cycling safety.
Misleading and overselling anything are dangerous tactics everywhere. Here, on this forum, I think vehicular cycling and anti-bike lane sentiment has been misleading and oversold as the panacea of cycling. In a different forum, I'd be on the other side, as I make good use of vehicular cycling techniques when I bicycle.
the answer is neither one or the other
there is a paradox to every paradigm.