timmyhiggy

How do people feel about cycle lane design?

In the UK, as far as I know it is illegal to cycle on the pavements, in that you cause a danger to pedestrians. Therefore I think that cycle lanes placed on pavements with a painted line dividing the foot/wheel sections are a ludicrous idea, because pedestrians NEVER stick to their side and never will do.
I also think that just painted cycle lanes are useless on roads. It puts you alongside the traffic and means you fall victim to cars which turn across you without looking in their mirrors or signalling or sometimes just moving over to make more room for a large vehicle coming the other way, knocking you off unless you manage to leap up the kerb successfully and quickly enough. I think that all roads are better off without the painted lane at all, you so the cars are in front and behind, or with an intermittent row of kerbstones/ballards to make the lane more of a feature. How do others feel?

CB HI

I and many here agree with you. Some want bike lanes just to make new cyclist FEEL safer. They believe that even if the bike lanes increase cycling dangers, that FEELING safer will get more people on bicycles and will somehow make cycling safer. Cycle commuting since 1982, I have not seen any "safety in numbers" effect.

CB HI

Getting ready for the poorly done, so called studies.

timmyhiggy

Maybe they are better for "beginner" cyclists, in that if you are a nervous beginner, you will probably be going slowly and won't be so bothered about unnecessary stopping on pavement cycle roads and will be able to stop the moment a car sweeps across your front wheel almost instantly, whereas a faster cyclist will just opt to ride on the road rather than carve up peds and when someone turns (in the uk) left you can't stop in time and essentially have to corner tighter than the car whilst moving faster than it. I've had to do this twice in the 6 months I have been living in my current city but fear the day that I can't turn tight enough and end up draped over the side of the car.

genec

Do the lines down the center of the road add any real safety... or do they make motorists feel safer?

Funny how that works, eh?

Digital_Cowboy

IF we have to have bike lanes "shoved down our throats" the way that I would like to see them designed is using the following guide/formula:

measure 3' from the rightmost edge of the road if there is no shoulder, if there is a shoulder than measure 3' from the leftmost edge of the shoulder and strip it as a "no man's land." Than measure 3' from the leftmost edge of that "no man's land" and mark it as a bike lane. Than measure 3' from the leftmost edge of the bike lane and strip it as another "no man's land" to form the 3' passing buffer. Than leave 8' for the average sized motor vehicle.

Of course, I know full well that that will never happen, but it is how I would prefer to see a bike lane designed.

CB HI

But your the one that wants to slow things down for safety. I have driven on many mountain roads that were safer before they painted the centerline. After the centerline got painted, speeds on those roads increased and so did the head on collisions. And motorist did feel safer, the reason they drove faster.

genec

Sure, slow everything down... go full Monderman everywhere. I doubt it will happen.

More often I see roads designed like freeways. So what is the solution? Take a lane and bike vehicular? Riiiiiiiggghhhttt!