Charvak's thoughts mainly echo my own. In Europe and even Canada, bike lanes are usually completely separate from the road and parked cars, with a divider in the way, like in the following pictures:<br><a href="http://www.fixpert.com/images/2007/08/italy-separate-bike-lane.jpg">http://www.fixpert.com/images/2007/08/italy-separate-bike-lane.jpg</a> (Italy)<br>
<a href="http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2657/3857774264_b63c5b50cf.jpg">http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2657/3857774264_b63c5b50cf.jpg</a> (Montreal)<br><br>While this does reinforce the notion that bikes belong "off the road," it absolutely provides a safe space for people to bike without having to worry about double parkers or opening doors.<br>
<br>But in this country, they are too often just lines drawn in the street between a line of parked cars and the "car lane." Often these are drawn without widening the street at all, so there is the same amount of actual space as before, but while bikes previously had access to the whole lane, with the bike lane drawn in, drivers think they belong in that little space on the side of the road. So, I would argue that bike lanes such as in the picture on the flyer are significantly detrimental to safety of cyclists. <br>
<br>Bike lanes in the US seem more of a knee-jerk concession towards cyclists than something actually planned and implemented to increase riders' safety. <br><br><div class="gmail_quote">On Fri, Aug 28, 2009 at 3:10 PM, Charvak Karpe <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:charvak@alum.mit.edu">charvak@alum.mit.edu</a>></span> wrote:<br>
<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; padding-left: 1ex;">Angela, if you're going 30 mph with freight in tow, you should be in<br>
the car lane, not the bike lane, right?<br>
<br>
Rob pointed out that different people view bike lanes differently, as<br>
optional or mandatory.<br>
<br>
I was riding along Mass Ave near Harvard Square yesterday. There was<br>
an SUV stopped in the bike lane with flashers on. I raced ahead to<br>
the two Cambridge bike cops and here's what we said:<br>
<br>
me: "Hey, there's a car stopped back there in the bike lane."<br>
CP: "And...?"<br>
me: "Do you care?"<br>
CP: "No."<br>
me: "So it's legal to stop a car in the bike lane?"<br>
CP: "She might be picking somebody up."<br>
me: "Look, she's still waiting there."<br>
CP: "She might be picking someone up, did you ever think of that?"<br>
<br>
After that exchange, I thought that we need more clarity about the<br>
proper use of bike lanes. I've seen bicyclists wait behind stopped<br>
cars in the bike lane because they don't think they're allowed to go<br>
around. I've seen people get dropped off from the car lane with the<br>
door opening into the bike lane and thought, "That's dangerous, they<br>
should pull all the way to the right." And when I see cars stopped in<br>
the bike lane, I think that's inappropriate too. The double standard<br>
is not reasonable, which is why we need clear rules. Cars should know<br>
that they should either:<br>
<br>
"Never obstruct the bike lane."<br>
"Always check for bikes to the right before pulling into the bike lane<br>
as far right as possible to unload passengers."<br>
<br>
I see people obeying either rule, and it leads to dangerous confusion,<br>
so I just try to always pass on the left. The Bike Bill makes that<br>
non-standard behaviour by explicitly legalising bicycles passing on<br>
the right. It's like they set up the rules and paint bike lanes in<br>
ways to make cycling as dangerous as possible.<br>
<br>
What do people think?<br>
<br>
</blockquote></div><br>