I like bikelanes.
 

They keep the cars out of my way.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XCqhFtcdPbk

All but one of them ;)

Why didn't you use the BL under the bridge?

Al

Then you'd probably love these bike paths in Finland.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vgUkNxUE0wc

I used the bike lanes in Manhattan all summer. Also used the West Side bike path. I also used traffic lanes. A bike lane is just a lane- supposedly exclusively for bikes but often blocked by everything from pedestrians to parked vehicles to construction. In which case just move over and take the traffic lane. If there weren't a bike lane I'd be changing from one lane to another in with the other traffic anyway.

As for me I prefer the streets with the bike lanes but it doesn't mean my tires are glued to the area defined by the bike lane.

Here's an example of how I combine bike lanes but abandon them when they don't suit me.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bcIAluwR9ws

I like bike lanes too. Even better I like fully separated bikeways far away from the noise and fumes of traffic, where I can actually hear my iPod and don't have to worry if it's dangerous to use it.

ZOMG!!! CALL THE COPS!!!

Bit of a goofy design there, innit.

Looks alright. I generally prefer the road, with or without bikelanes. Separate paths can be a bit hit and miss. Hard to judge a system by one small snippet of video. That, of course, is also true of that clip I posted. Bikelanes around Brisbane, in general, are pretty poor. This is one of the few good ones.

Nice clip.

Yeah, I treat bikelanes pretty much exactly like I treat any lane, and happily leave it if it necessary.

The main reason I posted the clip was as a counterpoint to the claims that bikelanes marginalise cyclists - the point being that sometimes that 'marginalisation' can work to our advantage. The idea that bikelanes somehow make all who use them into clueless newbies that put themselves unecessarily into risky situations is laughable to me. Nor are they always used due to some mythical 'inferiority complex'. Sometimes, they're a good thing.

Of course, some bikelanes are better than others. Personally, I think it's a bit pointless putting them on city streets where a cyclist can readily match the ambient speed of traffic, but whatever, I certainly don't feel obliged to use them in every situation they're used.

I just turn mine up.

I kinda enjoy riding in traffic. The heavier the traffic, the safer it is to cycle I reckon. YMMV

I couldn't agree more. Nice to see some rational, clear, open minded, non-fear based thinking. A rare thing in this particular forum.

Depends on the speed of that traffic.

Can't argue with that.

I also like roadways, and love to use the quieter ones, especially when the dogs are barking at me from behind a fence. :p

Now that Ive lived and commuted in the wild west ....West Palm....which
has by far the most elaborate network of bike lanes Ive ever seen, I cannot
imagine what people would have against lanes !?!?!
I couldnt imagine riding this type of area without them :eek: !!
I approve of anything that will segregate me from the insanity going on 24" to my left !

Don't confuse a bike lane with a roadway having extra width to allow for cyclists to pass stopped traffic. A bike lane itself adds no width to the roadway although often, extra width is striped off with a bike lane.

What an absurd straw man. No one has ever argued that, explicitly or implicitly.

And no one has ever denied that in certain situations, particularly in congested traffic, bike lanes can serve as a facility for cyclists to pass the stopped traffic.

The argument against bike lanes is not that bike lanes have no advantages, but that the disadvantages (to cyclists) outweigh the advantages.

and THAT argument is lousy and fraught with fallacies.

I like bike lanes. bike infrastructure has amazing benefits to bicycling in communities. Some cities around the world boast of 30-40% trips by bicycle, thru the implementation of bicycling infrastructure.

Cities in the USA that build bike lanes and bike infrastructure can boast of 15, 17, 20 percent trips by bikes, and reductions in accidents among bicyclists.

I LIKE bike lanes. I LIKE the benefits bicycling infracture brings to a community.

Even blowhard, diehard bike lane haters like john forester and helemt head can ride vehicularily in bike lanes.

^^^^ I use them as just another option.
How can having MORE choices to ride a section
of road possibly be bad ? The Autobahn is a
good example of efficiancy due to every type
of vehicle having a place.

I think it is more than infrastructure that makes a difference... it is also local attitude. But indeed facilities can sure make it nicer and that can reduce the reluctance by anyone to take to the road on a bike.

The infrastructure in Finland (near the arctic circle even) indeed contributes to some well over 30% of all trips being made by bike.

I like bike lanes and bike paths, because no matter how careful I am on the road, no matter how much I follow or don't follow Forrester's, no matter how alert I am... not a day goes by that I don't get quite a few idiots who don't seem to have a feel for how wide their damned metal box is. There are way too many people who drive like they got their license in a box of Cracker Jacks.

On the other hand, there are plenty of idiot cyclists on bicycle lanes too. They can be especially dangerous if they are two-way lanes or paths.

Im reading over some threads here (A-S) and whenever somebody posts
a " I got hurt because of a bikelane" type thread, it's always the bikelanes
fault :rolleyes:

Allow me a little hyperbole, but - I think it's about even. I don't care if they put 'em in, and I'll use them if they're any good, but I don't care if they don't. If they do insist on putting them in, I'd prefer well implemented ones than poor. I reckon energy spent actively advocating against bikelane implementations would be better spent advocating better designed bikelanes, but I'm not prepared to spend any of that energy myself, so I just get by with what there is.

What would you consider a safe bike lane design at intersections, other than no bike lane at intersections.
If there is not enough room to keep bike lanes out of the door zone, would you suggest not having the bike lane.
If there are frequent driveways, would you suggest not having the bike lane.

If so, then is advacating against bike lanes in these situations not also advocating for cyclist safety.

driveways? you mean, residential driveways? not a chance, cbhi.

commercial, maybe. however, cars yield to traffic- including bikes in bike lanes- before entering superior roadways, is the law.

That may be the law, but the motorist are often unable to see cyclist in the bike lane, especially when there is on street parking.

yep, time to work on improving public right of way space to consider all road users, and improve the bicycling infrastructure implemented in this country.

How long is a piece of string? Intersections are a many varied thing. One application can't possibly apply to all of them.

Don't care. I'll ride far enough into the lane to be safe either way.

Don't care. I'll ride far enough into the lane to be safe either way.

Possibly, but only if you buy into the idea that bikelanes make people lose all traffic sense.

I don't think all bikelanes are necessary, particularly in the CBD, and god knows I've seen some woeful implementations (eg. 'bikelanes' less than 50m long), but even the worst ones haven't negatively affected my ride, so why bother complain?

It's one thing to advocate the removal (or non-implementation) of unsafe or unecessary bikelanes, (and presumably to advocate for safe and useful ones) and quite another to advocate against all bikelanes. They aren't all bad.

My, what a thoughtful and logical conclusion.

Might want to get rid of the traffic lane and sidewalk too.