Originally Posted by
noisebeam
The flaw in this (aside from lack of awareness and varied laws across state lines) is that the bike lane is rarely wide enough for an average width motor vehicle to travel in. Driving partly in lanes goes against normal rules of traffic. Why paint a lane that one should be in for turning when one can fit ones vehicle in it?
Al
I agree with your first reason for opposition (lack of awareness and varied laws) but not the second (partial lanes). With or without the dotted bike lane line there, cars wanting to turn right will slide around the right hand side of cars going straight--they make their own two-lanes-in-one, so it's not an odd or confusing situation. I just wish people were aware and that the same law was in place in every state.
The downside of removing the bike lane is forcing bike to merge into faster traffic. In places where traffic is heavy like my commute, it would be impossible for me to merge and take-the-lane at every right hand turn. So, the only option I would have left is to forego the bike lane entirely. But since I tend to travel at about 20 MPH less than the cars, I'm now a roadblock. (By CA law, I am allowed to do this, if I believe it removes me from a hazardous situation, btw) It seems unreasonable to expect that all motorists must travel at the speed that I
solely decide.
So what do I do? I stay in my bike lane and at the places along my commute where right hooks are common (3 of them), I watch the cars near me very closely and I'm hyper aware that I might need to save my butt at a moment's notice.
So I would argue that its better to increase awareness and try to standardize the regulations rather than remove the bike lanes at the intersections. In the meantime, do whatever it takes to stay safe.