11 ms·

As a commuting cyclist I usually prefer to ride in the street than in a bike lane. Protected cycle lanes are great only so long as nobody turns to the right dir

• fhbdukfrh 7y ago
  I agree. The biggest cause of issues between cars and bikes has got to be speed differential, so if I'm on the appropriate bike i always ride in traffic. The bike lanes always get the worst sections of road (the curb) with cracks, drains and debris, Plus cars right hooking you, a car door biting you or a jaywalker on their cellphone are not infrequent risks. That said there is a big biking population who should not be riding in traffic so without separated bike lanes can't get to parts of my city
  • SketchySeaBeast 7y ago
    > biggest cause of issues between cars and bikes has got to be speed differential, so if I'm on the appropriate bike i always ride in traffic >That said there is a big biking population who should not be riding in traffic so without separated bike lanes can't get to parts of my city I was going to say - I've yet to see a biker keep up with commuter traffic, which would make the speed differential a problem.
    • deleted 7y ago
      [deleted]
    • tomjakubowski 7y ago
      At rush hour it can be easy to beat commuters in cars on your bike.
      • SketchySeaBeast 7y ago
        But that's due to the average velocity being low, not the maximum velocity. Also, bikes have the advantage of weaving past traffic in those circumstances.
        • kiliantics 7y ago
          In most cities, average velocity is always low. Where I live, I can beat driving time on my bike for any distance that takes less than an hour. (I can always beat public transit over these distances and further too.) It's basically pointless to drive if you could bike instead and yet so many do it anyway.
  • chapium 7y ago
    Speed is usually not an issue on city roads. Turns and blind spots are bad. Some people try to pass just so they can get to the next red light quicker. Usually if its congested enough that its not safe for a car to pass a cyclist the cyclist is usually able to go faster than traffic. Cars lose a lot of time decelerating and accelerating for frequent stops. Its even an annoyance to the biker because on car is hit about wanting to pass and then the biker keeps waiting at intersections for cars to get up to speed.
• wefarrell 7y ago
  In NYC I think they're counterproductive to safety. Cars use them for temporary parking and pedestrians use them as a sidewalk. When I visit Europe and Japan they seem to be far more effective. I think it comes down to etiquette and that goes both ways - non cyclists need to respect bike lanes and cyclists need to obey traffic laws. Admittedly I don't obey traffic laws when cycling, but I would if they were enforced.
  • deleted 7y ago
    [deleted]
  • deanclatworthy 7y ago
    As a European I couldn't believe people cycled in the lanes I saw in NYC last year. I was there only a few days, but saw numerous close calls with drivers turning into the lanes. It's nuts. If you took away the parking inbetween the cycle lane and the road, you'd probably take away 50% of accidents also.
  • amalcon 7y ago
    What factor do you believe explains the 78% drop in deaths and serious injuries per bicycle trip in NYC from 2000-2017? https://www1.nyc.gov/html/dot/downloads/pdf/nyc-cycling-risk.pdf https://www1.nyc.gov/html/dot/downloads/pdf/nyc-cycling-risk... I'm legitimately curious. I'm not a New Yorker, so it's very plausible that there are factors involved that I'm not aware of. E.g. if the additional 130 million trips in 2017 are all in Central Park, that could explain it.
    • dsfyu404ed 7y ago
      There's some study that's popular to post around here (maybe someone has the link, I don't have it) but the gist of it is that in the past few years they identified the dangerous intersections and changed them up to make them less dangerous.
    • wefarrell 7y ago
      I've only been biking here the last 6 years so it's hard to speculate, but I would guess that the number of people biking have forced cars to adjust. It's pretty rare for me to feel like I'm at risk of being hit by a car and anytime they don't notice me it's because I'm in their blind spot, which I now know to be aware of. Pedestrians are another story. They will cross streets and watch out for cars but not cyclists. I almost killed a small child when her mother directed her into the bike lane (without looking) in order to get around some obstacle on the side walk. Pedestrians do not pay attention and are frequently on their phones.
• amalcon 7y ago
  The stats are quite clear that protected bicycle lanes improve bicyclist safety. The article literally cites such a study.
  • fhbdukfrh 7y ago
    The study supports safety for cyclists but i missed any reference to the safety for drivers that the article purports it found
    • jtms 7y ago
      Is collision with a cyclist really a safety risk for an automobile driver? A minor ding for a car is a fatality for a cyclist
      • hannasanarion 7y ago
        As measured in a reduction of damage from accidents, yeah. If cars travel at lower speed, they're less likely to crash and when they do, it won't be as expensive to fix.
      • vonmoltke 7y ago
        Hitting a cyclist hard enough to kill them is not a "minor ding", except in unusual circumstances.
    • dougmany 7y ago
      There is a link to another article that states: >“Bike facilities end up slowing cars down, even when a driver hits another driver, it’s less likely to be a fatality because it’s happening at a slower speed,” Marshall said. https://usa.streetsblog.org/2019/05/29/protect-yourself-separated-bike-lanes-means-safer-streets-study-says/ https://usa.streetsblog.org/2019/05/29/protect-yourself-sepa...
  • jtms 7y ago
    Maybe overall this is true, but in NYC there are very few lanes I’d consider truly protected - the rest are minefields and generally less safe
• ummonk 7y ago
  Dutch style intersections seem to be really good at making cyclists and pedestrians in protected lanes visible to turners.
• jtms 7y ago
  I agree - I also find it safer in NYC to just ride with traffic. I have had several collisions with pedestrians who decided they would just step out right in front of me into my “lane” and nearly door’d on a couple of other occasions
  • nogridbag 7y ago
    That makes me feel even worse now. The other day I stopped behind a cyclist at a red light on a major avenue in NYC. He was in the left lane and the bike lane is simply one more lane over. When the light turned green he took forever to get going and even after 20 seconds he was still going dangerously slow so I honked him and felt like a jerk. I did not understand why he simply didn't use the bike lane. The cross streets are a different story. The bike lanes there are basically non-existent and I have no problem sharing the road with cyclists there.
    • btrettel 7y ago
      > When the light turned green he took forever to get going and even after 20 seconds he was still going dangerously slow so I honked him and felt like a jerk. I did not understand why he simply didn't use the bike lane. Cyclist here. My experience suggests that when a cyclist takes the lane, they're doing so because they decided it was the best option for them. I wish more drivers would give them the benefit of the doubt. There are many reasons not to use the bike lane: debris, drivers turning into the bike lane without looking, pedestrians walking into the bike lane without looking, cars illegally blocking the bike lane, needing to make a left turn (it's typically illegal to make a left turn from the far right), a cyclist keeping up with traffic, etc.
      • nogridbag 7y ago
        I concur the cyclist must have chosen that lane for a reason which is why I felt in the wrong but none of the reasons listed seem applicable in this case. Also, are pedestrians walking into bike lanes a valid reason not to use bike lanes? For every pedestrian blindly walking into bike lanes staring at their phone I see an equal number of cyclists going at high speeds through pedestrian crossings (9 times out of 10 when they don't have the right of way). As a pedestrian I've almost been hit by cyclists four times (twice in Queens and twice in Manhattan). The one case in Queens was really bad as it was one of those powered food delivery bicycles and I was pushing a baby in a stroller.
• 6cd6beb 7y ago
  >When there are cars parked in between the cycle lane and the car lane it's much easier for the driver to miss the cyclist, and few people check the cycle lane before turning right. I was definitely guilty of this until I started cycling. Happened to me. I t-boned the car, flipped up and over it, landed on outstretched arms and damn near broke them. She drove off. Still haven't fully recovered after a few years. Honestly you just have to be fast enough to keep up with cars or take roads where cars are sparse. I find that drivers get more aggressive and careless the more of them there are on the road. Anecdotally if you drive a car in a rural road, if you happen to see another car on your trip you're getting a smile and a wave. This does not happen in downtown Austin.
• jdreyfuss 7y ago
  In SF at least, Ubers and Lyfts often treat unprotected bike lanes as drop-off and pick-up zones as well, which adds another dangerous wrinkle for bikers
• btrettel 7y ago
  > Protected cycle lanes are great only so long as nobody turns to the right directly in front of you. Yes, many bike lane advocates seem to think bike lanes are some panacea, but the vast majority of them don't address this basic issue. I think this is because strong bike lane advocates tend to be less experienced cyclists if they are cyclists at all. The more experienced cyclists have more nuanced views in my experience. In Austin there are several protected bike lanes that I simply don't use because drivers far too frequently turn across them without looking. I'm confident enough to ride in the normal travel lane there, but I recognize that many cyclists aren't.
  • ska 7y ago
    I have seen several where there is a separate light for right turn (for cars) and straight/right (for bikes). It seems to address this problem, at least. Still not as good as the dutch system, but easier to retrofit I suppose.
• tonymet 7y ago
  Agreed. Bike lanes are where the most unpredictable stuff happens : the door zone, driveways, truck loading, tree-mulchers. Also, bike lanes are actually a sinister public policy that deliberately puts drivers against cyclists and here's why. Cities want to reduce traffic, but don't take the political risk to raise the costs of driving (fuel taxes, geofencing etc). Instead they build useless bike lanes with the deliberate side effect of slowing car traffic. What this does is generate animosity toward cyclists instead of where is should be directed: city hall. I'm a lifelong bike commuter in a city that's increased bike lanes over the years. I think bike lanes are bad for both cyclists and drivers.
  • u801e 7y ago
    > Also, bike lanes are actually a sinister public policy that deliberately puts drivers against cyclists They're actually favored by motorists and facilities advocates since they get cyclists out of the way of cars. The unpredictable stuff you mention is just stuff that cyclists have to deal with for the convenience of motorists. In fact, in New York the law for cyclists proceeding at less than the normal speed of traffic states: https://www.dot.ny.gov/display/programs/bicycle/safety_laws/laws#1234 https://www.dot.ny.gov/display/programs/bicycle/safety_laws/... >> Upon all roadways, any bicycle or in-line skate shall be driven either on a usable bicycle or in-line skate lane or, if a usable bicycle or in-line skate lane has not been provided, near the right-hand curb or edge of the roadway or upon a usable right-hand shoulder in such a manner as to prevent undue interference with the flow of traffic The last clause shows that it's not for safety; it's for the convenience of motorists.
  • gnopgnip 7y ago
    This article is about protected bike lanes. Protected bike lanes do not have issues with truck loading or most of the other problems you mention.