Bike lane or loading bay??

[Sandra6]

Anyone else have to use a bike lane that is also a loading bay??
Surely that was an oversight on somebody's behalf?!
When I ride into the town centre I use a fairly busy road, couple of junctions with lights, and a stop start cycle path -which then disappears under a number of cars and vans"loading". I tend to just hop onto the pavement and off the bike as I only need to go round the corner, but I wondered if this was common elsewhere.

 

[Ian Cooper]

This sort of thing is why I never use bike lanes, or bike paths, or bike tracks, or any piece of asphalt or concrete with the word 'bike' attached to it. Because they are designed, implemented and overseen by complete incompetents who have most likely never ridden a bike in their lives.

BTW, no one 'has' to use a bike lane. They are optional.

 

[Miquel In De Rain]

In a way Ian is right if the setup of the deathtrap at the North side of Blackfriars Bridge is anything to go by.

 

[HovR]

I have some very nice shared use paths near me, which are completely separate from the road - However the cycle paths on the road do tend to be littered with parked or loading cars.

On the other hand, when I go to America I tend to see some very well planned facilities - Roads which have a parking lane by the pavement, then a cycle lane about 3/4 the size of a cars lane (motorized vehicles are not allowed to enter this lane) and next to that the roadway for motorized vehicles.

 

[Sandra6]

In this instance the bike lane is the edge of the road where I would cycle if it wasn't there - so I guess it could be a loading bay anyway. It just seems more irritating because it is painted green with a little white bike on. If I didn't cycle in it I would be in the middle of the road and getting grief from cars!

 

[gaz]

CS7 is like that on the weekends and outside of rush hour.

 

[Powely]

On the other hand, when I go to America I tend to see some very well planned facilities

Australia, well Perth (not seen the east coast)is the same. Why can't we get it right here?

 

[marinyork]

In this instance the bike lane is the edge of the road where I would cycle if it wasn't there - so I guess it could be a loading bay anyway. It just seems more irritating because it is painted green with a little white bike on. If I didn't cycle in it I would be in the middle of the road and getting grief from cars!

Streeview pic?

 

[TwickenhamCyclist]

Australia, well Perth (not seen the east coast)is the same. Why can't we get it right here?

Space and land values?

 

[TwickenhamCyclist]

 

[Powely]

Space and land values?

That's true! Doh

 

[summerdays]

The outbound cycle lane in Stokes Croft is almost always covered in cars, so much so that I do a double take on the few occasions it isn't. The worst bit about it is that it is actually double yellow lines so shouldn't be parked up anyway! But you can frequently get a row of 5 or more cars parked there.

 

[Boris Bajic]

This sort of thing is why I never use bike lanes, or bike paths, or bike tracks, or any piece of asphalt or concrete with the word 'bike' attached to it. Because they are designed, implemented and overseen by complete incompetents who have most likely never ridden a bike in their lives.

BTW, no one 'has' to use a bike lane. They are optional.

I agree that one doesn't have to use these things and I prefer not to use them myself, but I'm not sure it's right to be so sweeping in one's condemnation of them all and all those who designed them.

I've found some excellent ones in Northern Continental Europe.

I don't use them in the UK because I am of a generation who rode on the road. I like the road. I like being a part of the traffic.

 

[Ian Cooper]

...when I go to America I tend to see some very well planned facilities - Roads which have a parking lane by the pavement, then a cycle lane about 3/4 the size of a cars lane (motorized vehicles are not allowed to enter this lane) and next to that the roadway for motorized vehicles.

I assume you mean a door zone bike lane, like this one:

That's the bike lane that killed Tufts University graduate student Dana Laird in 2002. It is a lovely width - 4-6 whole feet. Just wide enough to fit a fully open car door, which is the last thing Dana saw before she was run over by a bus. Door zone bike lanes are death traps. People who design them need to be stopped. Dana would still be alive today if she had been riding in the traffic lane.

I live in Silver Spring, Maryland: home to what was described by Slate.com as "The Stupidest Bike Lane in America" ( http://link.brightcove.com/services/player/bcpid271557392?bctid=1504447505 ) - and under Maryland law, cyclists were required to use it.They actually re-striped it a couple of years ago. Now it's much better:

You might notice that when it turns that 'dog-leg' corner (which I defy any cyclist to take at anything over 6mph), it becomes a door zone bike lane. So they changed it from a bike lane that was so stupid that no one would ever use it, to a door zone bike lane that could actually get someone killed.

Generally speaking, bike lanes here are better than most English ones, in that they are more likely to be the regulation width. Other than that, there's not much difference. I prefer the road - at least if that's stupid, 90+% of the population complains about it, so it's likely to get fixed faster.

 

[HovR]

Whilst I am aware not all bike lanes in the US will fit to the high standard I have seen, as per your example, the ones I have seen were more than wide enough to accommodate an opening door unless the cyclist was foolish enough to ride on the right hand side line, effectively placing himself in the parking lane.

IIRC, there was also a bit of a "dead zone" which wasn't cycle lane or parking space, leaving room for opening doors.

I tried to find it in streetview, but I can't for the life of me remember where it was.