Machka 

We had one instance where we were cycling along the road doing a mid-tour century on loaded road touring bicycles with fairly narrow tires. Beside us was a very gravelly bicycle path which was not conducive to our tires or our load or the speed we wanted to maintain.

A vehicle pulled up beside us and the person leaned out and started shouting at us that there was a path for the likes of us, and pointing wildly to the path. We nodded and smiled. Yeah, whatever. There was a bit more yelling ... and a bit more nodding and smiling on our part ... and the vehicle roared away.

We rolled into the campground at the end of the day and started putting together dinner when a woman came up to us and asked us if we were the cyclists out on the road. We were. Then she told us that it had been her and her husband who had yelled at us about the path by the side of the road. She said that at first they were quite annoyed with us, then they started looking at the path and realised the condition it was in. She asked us if the reason we were not using the path was because of the width of our tires and the load we had on our bicycles ... and the rough condition of the path.

Exactly right! She got it!! And we had a nice chat with her.

contango 

It's always good when things turn out well. Most of the time in the places I described I come out of the junction and stay all the way to the right, and if people want to pass they can go by on the inside. A couple of times I've had people beeping at me, shouting at me to get in the bike lane and buzzing past too close.

It used to be the conventional wisdom over here that it's best to use the road rather than the bike path if your speed is over 15mph. I think now the guideline is 18mph. Personally I tend to consider my speed relative to the prevailing traffic and conditions on both the road and the path, so if I'm going 15-20 in a 20 limit I'll just stay on the road, if I'm going 15-20mph in a 50 limit with wide roads I'll keep over so cars can get past, and if I'm going 15-20mph in a 50 limit with narrow roads I'd look to use the path and slow down rather than become a rolling roadblock. If the path was teeming with pedestrians and children and badly broken up then I'd just accept I was a rolling roadblock for a time and just do the best I could.

Machka 

For me, it depends on the purpose of my ride, and the bicycle I'm riding.

If I'm doing a century or fast(ish) training ride, I'll ride on the road.
If I'm doing a casual cruise, I might choose a bike path ... or maybe not.
If I'm on a road bicycle with narrow(ish) tires, I'll ride on the road.
If I'm on a bicycle with wider tires, I might choose a bike path ... or maybe not.

Roody

Thanks, but actually I was curious about instances when cyclists were told to ride on a bike lane even when there is no bike lane there, as Rowan had mentioned. This is certainly a reason not to build bike lanes, if it has been happening frequently and can be documented.

Roody

Actually, traffic calming and complete streets are very far from being the same thing. Segregated bike lanes are also different, although sometimes they are part of a complete street plan. Basically, complete streets refers to designing the entire right of way to be appropriate for all users. A wide variety of design components are used, depending on local needs and conditions.

Rowan

And that in Australia is what you would call complete streets. But really, they are designed to temper the speed of vehicles through the vicinity.

It's just semantics. It works in certain urban environments, but doesn't work so well if the road is the only main route between on locale and another.

Some of the better examples I have seen again have been in Europe. But low speed limits help achieve a more amenable environment.

Roody

Many cities have in fact seen enormous increases in cycling when infrastructure was introduced or improved, including the city that Ekdog lives in. I wouldn't say this happened "magically" when a few people "lamented". I'm sure that a lot of planning, hard work, funding, and marketing were behind every successful infrastructure upgrade.

Rowan

I doubt it will be documented because many of the conflict situations aren't reported... I mean, to what should a report be made? Bicycle advisory committees attached to municipal council might be an option, if they exist at all. Do they exist in your region, for example.

Roody

Actually, in some cases a complete street plan would not slow down the motor vehicles. As in your example of a main highway between two distant locations. People will naturally want to drive quickly there, so the most appropriate complete street design might be to separate the fast cars from other users. Cyclists might have a separate smoothly paved path so that they can travel quickly also.

I think we (cyclists in any given city or region) limit ourselves unnecessarily if we try a one size fits all solution. On one street, a separate cycle track might be the solution. One block over a bike lane might work best. Somewhere nearby might be suited for VC.

Roody

Yes they do. There are also non-government groups that try to advocate for cyclists. But I have never heard of a case where cyclists were actually told that they can't legally ride on First St. because there's a bike lane over on Second St. I think we all would agree that it's important not to get ourselves thrown off of some roads as a trade off for having nice facilities on other roads.

contango 

I've often thought the best infrastructure lets through traffic get through quickly with minimal obstruction, and makes the local roads as difficult as possible to use at any speed to discourage people using side roads as a "rat-run" to bypass slow traffic on the arterial routes. As long as there are suitable ways to get across the arterial routes (which means more than a bridge every couple of miles) they don't need to represent huge barriers. If arterial routes are for traffic passing through town then the logical solution is a ring road so it doesn't have to go into town at all, in which case you don't get the trunk road effectively cutting the town in half.

I agree. Sometimes I've really appreciated having a bike path to use, like when I was 185km into a 210km ride and hadn't drunk enough so my legs were tiring, and I was going about 15mph on a road with a 50mph limit. It was good to be able to get off the road and not feel any pressure to keep my speed up. In any situation involving turning right across the traffic the bike lane on the far left of the road turns into more of a liability than a help.

ETA: It also varies on the individual cyclist. Some cyclists might feel more comfortable going slowly along the bike lane, stopping at the junction and then using the crossing to cross, then continuing their journey. Other cyclists would prefer to navigate the junction just like any other vehicle.

Roody

I feel ya! There have been many times when I felt tired and weak on the bike. The worst was when I went miles on a 30 mph tailwind, then had to head home into the wind. And on a mountain bike! No drop bars! I really started to wonder if I was ever going to make it. Thank goodness I was on a trail, where I could go slowly and there were benches and drinking fountains.

It strikes me that many people always feel tired and weak on a bike. This could be due to old age or disability. Maybe they're just new to cycling. Or they worked an exhausting double shift and are trying to commute home.

These are the majority of cyclists--old, tired, not so fit, and riding mountain bikes. These are the people we build bike lanes, trails and cycle tracks for--not so much for the tiny minority of cyclists who are fit, experienced, and members of bikeforums.net.

no1mad 

While I agree, I also realize that there are probably* just as many unsuccessful implementations due to poor planning, lack of funding, or worse- "let's throw them a bone so they'll shut up" attitude.

Tulsa has added some bike lanes in and around downtown, but it is a fragmented network. I personally think that they were installed more for the local Chamber of Commerce to be able to answer in the affirmative if prospective employers inquire about them than for the locals to actually use.

*I said probably because it is just my opinion, not based on any hard data.

daihard 

I was riding in the city called Kirkland this morning when I ran into half-arsed bike lanes like that. They are less than 2 feet wide and go over potholes and cracks and other obstacles. Must be the result of the "let's put something together so we can say we have bike lanes" mentality.

Roody

Do you think it's fair to base your opinion of bike facilities on one really ****ty example?

Ekdog

Our lanes are like sidewalks (pavements) and have their own traffic lights. It's no more a problem than crossing the street at a crosswalk (zebra crossing) is for a pedestrian (paedestrian).

Ekdog

That hasn't happened here. In fact, as there are now so many more cyclists than there used to be, drivers have become more used to seeing us and sharing the road with us in those places where there are no bike lanes. Even though the number of cylists has skyrocketed, the number of cycling fatalities has dropped.

Ekdog

Yes, I'm absolutely convinced that the introduction of good infrastructure will convince a lot of people to give up their cars. I've seen it happen here and elsewhere. Mass transit is also key. If you give people options, many will choose not to drive.

no1mad 

I used Tulsa as an example because I've been within a less than 20 mile radius of its downtown all of my life, save for trips out of the area and less than 2 years when I was living in Guthrie (north of OKC and the original State Capitol). That being said...
...my assertion that not all bike infrastructure is equal would appear to have some merit.

Rollfast

If you have really narrow rims and are wider than 24 inches this could be a problem. OTOH, over here there's parking on the right side of that lane in many places. It's not too hard.

Rowan

Indeed. A lot of the infrastructure that is implemented comes from long involvement by many people, if my experience is any indication. The thing is, the lack of success in the early stages tends to burn out the advocates. And too often, the people who are installed as bicycle (and pedestrian) officers in government receive crap from all sides that want to tear apart the officers on the one hand for doing too little, and on the other hand for doing way too much for non-paying road users. (This was documented in a national cycling report for the New Zealand government around a decade ago. And I have had the same experience).

Quite often, there are compromises that often satisfy no-one. And sometimes the implementation of features such as bike lanes absolutely go against the natural flow and actually put cyclists in danger and liable at law (vis a vis the bike lane down Campbell St in Hobart, Tasmania, that is on the wrong side of a one-way street -- I was against this right from the start, but when I left the organisation concerned, it was implemented).

Or designated bike routes with adjustments to road infrastructure to accommodate them.

Agreed on your last point.

Often here, there are permanent barricades or dead-ends created on some streets to prevent the "rat-run". However, there are crossings and openings that allow cyclists to make their way through as "preferential" users. This sort of thing, however, does require considerable care in how the junctions and paths are arranged to maintain safety. Then there is the legal option, which is being investigated here, of having a bike lane continue on the main road through a T-junction so the rider doesn't have to stop at a traffic light; it can happen only on one side of the through road, but it's still effective. However, again, too often road designers make a simple solution difficult by diverting the lane off behind a barrier (to ensure the cyclist's safety), but the diversion actually becomes an impediment.

Which leads me to another grip -- the wandering bike path. The thing is, transport cyclists want a fast and direct route to their destinations, and that means straight lines. Too often, designers believe cycling is a leisurely pastime, and install paths that reflect this. Paths that wander around trees and along river banks. But for many transportational cyclists, and especially commuters, the road is in fact a better place to ride because it is more direct (and usually better surfaced).

Yes, this has happened. There is a plethora of photographs on the internet of disastrous bicycle infrastructure in Britain, for example.

no1mad 

I looked up Seville using wikipedia. While cycling has been on the rise for some time, you also have rail, bus, and even tram service, not to mention already had bike lanes and a subsidized bike for hire scheme. But you're also in a more compact and densely populated area- like 1/4 the land mass of Tulsa and 6x the population per square mile*...

*Seville - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Tulsa, Oklahoma - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Rowan

If that is that is the case, that riders are more accepted on roads not serviced by bike lanes, then that's great. Are the lanes without bike lanes wide enough for cars and bikes to share?

Roody

Clearly there has been a lot of crappy infrastructure installed over the years. I do detect improvements recently. The engineering standards are higher and I think there is more thoughtful design rather than a one size fits all approach. There is a learning curve, like with everything new.

Ekdog

Yes, as I mentioned before, I agree with you about mass transit being important. I'm all for it, especially when multimodal options are possible. I use a local train-bike combination to commute to my job, which is in a town that is thirteen kilometers away. I could easily commute even longer distances if I had to.

I'm not sure what you mean when you say we "already had bike lanes and a subsidized bike for hire scheme." Before 2005, when the lanes were built, we only had a few disconnected lanes that were hardly used at all. The bike for hire scheme was inaugurated shortly afterwards. Cycling skyrocketed.