think this road might be a bit hazardous?
 

http://lh6.google.com/lifecycle1898/...JPG?imgmax=512
This bike lane sign was hit twice. This road has a 40mph speed limit but traffic commonly travels at 60 to 70.

These things happen. Ride.

You'd be safer if you took the lane.

Does that say "bike route" or bike lane"? If the latter, that's possibly the worst bike lane I've ever seen. Doesn't mean the road is hazardous to cycle on though.

What bike lane?

The one to the left of that solid white line, silly.

I'd hit it....

that said. If cars regularly do 20 over the limit on this road then you're asking the wrong people... I'd find out which municipality is responsible for that road and quietly mention that they could up their speeding ticket revenue.

That isn't a bike lane sign it's a bike route sign. There's a difference.

http://img225.imageshack.us/img225/8661/img8751au8.jpgIn Prescott they uses Bike Route on a Bike lane.

http://img225.imageshack.us/img225/8661/img8751au8.jpg

There are many roads I ride on that are bike routes that don't have bike lanes.

Where in Los Angeles is that?

Sorry about the mistake, it does say bike route. I've requested increased enforcement several times. Over the years it seems that they neglect this road for about 5 years in which time traffic gets used to traveling quite fast then they cover it heavily for about 3 months and write tons of tickets. It's Sepulveda Blvd. North of the Getty center. It's 4 lanes that parallels the 405. Don't know what the accident stats are but there is lots of evidence of cars running out of control. I had my worst motorcycle accident there in 1985, caused by a driver that lost control of his car. I had a funny feeling as I rode home and noticed the sign flattened but still attached then a week later completely separated. Never heard of a cyclist getting killed here.

In the 1970s I used to ride that stretch of Sepulveda at least monthly, usually early on weekend mornings when traffic was light. It really is a great ride, except for the traffic.

The commute to work used to be very light but traffic keeps starting earlier. Maybe when gas gets to be > $5 a gallon more people will find alternative means of transport.
Going down the curvy valley side is lots of fun.

Yep, there's plenty of room near to the centre of that lane isn't there Joe

Plenty, and a passing lane to boot.

I thought the same thing about $3 gas when it cost $1.50.

More likely they'll find ways to live without other things in order to keep buying the exact same amount of gasoline. $6 a gallon wouldn't budge the demand.

Piece of cake. You should visit Atlanta. Sometimes there's not even a white line, let alone green signs with bicycles painted on them. Sheesh.

Bike route signs should only be placed on roads that either have a bike lane, a nice wide shoulder or preferably no fog stripe at all.

Putting them on roads with narrow shoulders like in the OP only causes confusion to already ill informed motorists (and some cyclists too).

See this good write-up on on the confusions created:
http://azbikelaw.org/articles/RayRoad.html

Al

Here, a bike route sign means that motorists should _expect_ to encounter cyclists. Placing these signs only on roads that are "nice" for cyclists would be redundant, as the cyclists already have a way to ride out of the normal traffic lanes...

I was not suggesting that they be placed or not place on 'nice' roads. Only that they should not be be used on roads with narrow un-ridable shoulders. Unless perhaps accompanied by "Share the Road - Cyclist May Use Full Lane" signs.

Perhaps the link I provided above can help clarify my thought.

Anyway in response to the content of your comment. Where I live "Bike Route" Signs are used to show cyclist preferred routes and are most often on back way roads, especially ones that provide connectivity between MUPs - they don't seem to be for motorists.

Al

Sorry, wasn't able to look at the link until now. I agree about the confusion issues, I've a few roads nearby that have bike lanes that disappear into the fog line/gutter pan neverland.... The "...Full Lane" signage would be a welcome addition.

To provide more detail, here they are used for the same purpose as well- but due to the geography of the area (many major in/out of town roads having developed as settler-type trails, way before city planning) often routes are on two-lane shoulderless roads, with no alternate back route to divert onto... so they have the purpose of alerting motorists to probable cyclists.

I've also heard of these "MUP" things before. :) We've got three, I think- next year one will be connected to a pedestrian bridge currently under construction, so it will actually be useful as a way to get somewhere. Otherwise you're just ridin' in the park.

At the current rate of exchange, petrol is $7.56/60/US gal in the UK. Doesn't seem to have reduced demand any.

Ick. Combine park and MUP bridge and this is what you get:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=g***QF-3h8M
Of detail note more related to this thread are two identical signs. The first is just out of frame at 0:00, the second seen at about 0:20. They say "Bike Route" - yep, along a MUP, obviously not intended for motorists.
On the MUP bridge:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aAiWhTvr030
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=s6XWBzYqe1A

No thanks, I stick to the road now.

Al

The bike route sign was hit twice? Two words... inadvertent drift.