I'd rather just not have a bike lane
11-02-18, 11:37 AM
#1
vespertine member
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jul 2013
Location: Land of Angora, Turkey
Posts: 2,476
Bikes: Yes
Mentioned: 22 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 687 Post(s)
Liked 220 Times
in
163 Posts
I'd rather just not have a bike lane
One of the main east-west streets in my town (La Crosse, WI) opened yesterday, after being closed for four months. Part of the ~5 block resurfacing project was supposed to include improved bicycle and pedestrian facilities.
Coming out of the traffic circle (that was added last summer), I turned into the new bike lane. There was a nice arrow showing me where to go - helpful in the dark. I suddenly realized that just beyond the arrow, at the end of the first block of new pavement, there was a CURB and I was about to hit it head on.
What happened? It appears that, following recommendations from State of Wisconsin best practices to improve pedestrian safety, the street was engineered to include curb extensions or bump-outs at each intersection. Here's one picture from that document to demonstrate:
In the bottom half of the picture above, there is a lane of traffic with a bike lane to the right, and then curb bump-outs that are entirely to the right of the bike lane at each intersection.
On my street, there was not enough space for this design. Instead, there is one lane of traffic in each direction, and the right side of the traffic lane aligns with the curb extension. Both traffic lanes are quite narrow, without enough room for an automobile and a bicycle to safely operate side by side.
Without enough room to place a bicycle lane that continues straight (as represented in the bottom right of the picture above), the bike lane is instead placed in between the curb extensions (in the position of the parked car in the bottom right of the picture above). Since there are curb extensions at each intersection for four blocks, the bike lane effectively ends at each intersection, with painted instructions to either continue riding straight up over the curb or into the gutter.
Effectively, this means that using the bike lane requires one to weave in and out of traffic at each intersection. IMO, this is not a particularly safe practice. I'm particularly concerned because this town has a large number of college students who are new to riding for transportation, and this design is essentially teaching them to weave in and out of the traffic lane.
Ultimately, I'd rather just not have a bike lane.
Coming out of the traffic circle (that was added last summer), I turned into the new bike lane. There was a nice arrow showing me where to go - helpful in the dark. I suddenly realized that just beyond the arrow, at the end of the first block of new pavement, there was a CURB and I was about to hit it head on.
What happened? It appears that, following recommendations from State of Wisconsin best practices to improve pedestrian safety, the street was engineered to include curb extensions or bump-outs at each intersection. Here's one picture from that document to demonstrate:
In the bottom half of the picture above, there is a lane of traffic with a bike lane to the right, and then curb bump-outs that are entirely to the right of the bike lane at each intersection.
On my street, there was not enough space for this design. Instead, there is one lane of traffic in each direction, and the right side of the traffic lane aligns with the curb extension. Both traffic lanes are quite narrow, without enough room for an automobile and a bicycle to safely operate side by side.
Without enough room to place a bicycle lane that continues straight (as represented in the bottom right of the picture above), the bike lane is instead placed in between the curb extensions (in the position of the parked car in the bottom right of the picture above). Since there are curb extensions at each intersection for four blocks, the bike lane effectively ends at each intersection, with painted instructions to either continue riding straight up over the curb or into the gutter.
Effectively, this means that using the bike lane requires one to weave in and out of traffic at each intersection. IMO, this is not a particularly safe practice. I'm particularly concerned because this town has a large number of college students who are new to riding for transportation, and this design is essentially teaching them to weave in and out of the traffic lane.
Ultimately, I'd rather just not have a bike lane.
11-02-18, 12:05 PM
#2
Junior Member
Join Date: Nov 2018
Posts: 5
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times
in
0 Posts
Ultimately, I think that overall bike lanes are great but I think this intersection design is poor. You could ask the owner of the project (whether it is a city or your department of transportation) that they should install bike access ramps in the curb portions that kick in or out that way you have somewhere to go if a big vehicle is blocking the bike lane. Just a thought.
11-02-18, 12:12 PM
#3
Senior Member
I am seeing this same design in Orange County, CA. Can't imagine what they were thinking.
11-02-18, 02:33 PM
#4
Tragically Ignorant
Join Date: Jun 2018
Location: New England
Posts: 15,613
Bikes: Serotta Atlanta; 1994 Specialized Allez Pro; Giant OCR A1; SOMA Double Cross Disc; 2022 Allez Elite mit der SRAM
Mentioned: 62 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 8186 Post(s)
Liked 9,098 Times
in
5,054 Posts
I'd never use that lane--I'm going to keep a straight lane of travel. Your thread topic has it exactly right. Can you see the curb at night? Sounds like a real accident waiting to happen.
11-02-18, 08:27 PM
#5
genec
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: West Coast
Posts: 27,079
Bikes: custom built, sannino, beachbike, giant trance x2
Mentioned: 86 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 13658 Post(s)
Liked 4,532 Times
in
3,158 Posts
11-02-18, 08:37 PM
#6
Senior Member
Join Date: Oct 2013
Location: D'uh... I am a Cutter
Posts: 6,139
Bikes: '17 Access Old Turnpike Gravel bike, '14 Trek 1.1, '13 Cannondale CAAD 10, '98 CAD 2, R300
Mentioned: 62 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1571 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 12 Times
in
9 Posts
Many engineers... also work closely with other engineering groups.... and their own legal departments. So the legal safety of prevailing ideas... often rule the decisions/designs. I myself... would rather ride in/with traffic or stick to side streets. The bike lanes don't serve the cycling or driving public well IMHO.
11-02-18, 10:24 PM
#7
Senior Member
Join Date: Nov 2014
Location: Eugene, Oregon, USA
Posts: 27,547
Mentioned: 217 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 18369 Post(s)
Liked 4,507 Times
in
3,350 Posts
I like good well designed bike lanes, but many municipalities seem to just think of them as something to include when convenient, and then start and stop them when not convenient.
Those "bump outs"... appear to be good for pedestrians (get them standing closer to the cars before crossing), but bad for cyclists.
I've never seen them as start/stop terminators for bike lanes, but it is common to have them surrounding parking (which may not have cars, and thus a good cycling place), except when squeezed into traffic.
Or, if one has a parking lane, bike lane, then driving lane, I often ride as far away from the cars as possible... and those "bump outs" get in the way again.
Those "bump outs"... appear to be good for pedestrians (get them standing closer to the cars before crossing), but bad for cyclists.
I've never seen them as start/stop terminators for bike lanes, but it is common to have them surrounding parking (which may not have cars, and thus a good cycling place), except when squeezed into traffic.
Or, if one has a parking lane, bike lane, then driving lane, I often ride as far away from the cars as possible... and those "bump outs" get in the way again.
11-03-18, 01:19 AM
#8
Senior Member
Join Date: May 2014
Location: USA
Posts: 1,820
Bikes: 1996 Trek 970 ZX Single Track 2x11
Mentioned: 8 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 614 Post(s)
Liked 564 Times
in
428 Posts
I agree with you, that if a given lane's occupants are forced to jet into and out of that lane then the design is poor.
In the case of much slower-moving traffic (such as bicycles), that design is downright dangerous to the slow movers.
Growing up, I had to cope with a tight, older busy street that was ~3 lanes per side, zero bike lane, zero extra space in the gutter area of the RH lane for even a slim "ten speed" type bike and petite rider. We all used the sidewalks. Of course, even those cut out from time to time, forcing people to use the RH lane for brief stints until the sidewalk came back again. Wasn't worth the risk, going on that street. Very dangerous, specifically because of what you indicate: forced coping with the lane appearing then disappearing ... which wreaked havoc with the level of surprise inflicted on approaching vehicles.
In the case of much slower-moving traffic (such as bicycles), that design is downright dangerous to the slow movers.
Growing up, I had to cope with a tight, older busy street that was ~3 lanes per side, zero bike lane, zero extra space in the gutter area of the RH lane for even a slim "ten speed" type bike and petite rider. We all used the sidewalks. Of course, even those cut out from time to time, forcing people to use the RH lane for brief stints until the sidewalk came back again. Wasn't worth the risk, going on that street. Very dangerous, specifically because of what you indicate: forced coping with the lane appearing then disappearing ... which wreaked havoc with the level of surprise inflicted on approaching vehicles.
11-03-18, 02:15 AM
#9
☢
Typical poorly designed bike lanes. At least the one I highlighted a while back (it too has faults) used islands that allowed for the bike lane to run continuously between the traffic. This is what happens when planner aren't cyclists or don't ask for input before proceeding with their designs.
11-03-18, 02:34 AM
#10
Cycleway town
I've sppken out against bike lanes before, they just confuse the issue. They create a false sense of security for cyclists, they effectively mean nothing and should be treated as such.
Roads are for travelling.
What next, a horse lane?
Roads are for travelling.
What next, a horse lane?
11-03-18, 07:56 AM
#11
Senior Member
Join Date: Oct 2015
Posts: 15,483
Bikes: 2015 Workswell 066, 2017 Workswell 093, 2014 Dawes Sheila, 1983 Cannondale 500, 1984 Raleigh Olympian, 2007 Cannondale Rize 4, 2017 Fuji Sportif 1 LE
Mentioned: 144 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 7649 Post(s)
Liked 3,469 Times
in
1,832 Posts
Point it out to whichever government did the job, and if you can (maybe contact bike shops ans cycling clubs) ask other cyclists of they see an issue, and if so, make a phone call or write a lttrer.
11-03-18, 06:51 PM
#13
Senior Member
Join Date: May 2008
Posts: 7,384
Mentioned: 49 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 800 Post(s)
Liked 218 Times
in
171 Posts
I'd rather just not have a bike lane
In response not to the specific peculiarity of the OP, but to the title of this thread itself, I have found this discussion the most convincing rebuttal to bike lanes:
One of the main east-west streets in my town (La Crosse, WI) opened yesterday, after being closed for four months. Part of the ~5 block resurfacing project was supposed to include improved bicycle and pedestrian facilities…
Effectively, this means that using the bike lane requires one to weave in and out of traffic at each intersection. IMO, this is not a particularly safe practice.
I'm particularly concerned because this town has a large number of college students who are new to riding for transportation, and this design is essentially teaching them to weave in and out of the traffic lane.
Effectively, this means that using the bike lane requires one to weave in and out of traffic at each intersection. IMO, this is not a particularly safe practice.
I'm particularly concerned because this town has a large number of college students who are new to riding for transportation, and this design is essentially teaching them to weave in and out of the traffic lane.
Many engineers... also work closely with other engineering groups.... and their own legal departments. So the legal safety of prevailing ideas... often rule the decisions/designs.
I myself... would rather ride in/with traffic or stick to side streets. The bike lanes don't serve the cycling or driving public well IMHO.
Ultimately, I'd rather just not have a bike lane.
I myself... would rather ride in/with traffic or stick to side streets. The bike lanes don't serve the cycling or driving public well IMHO.
Ultimately, I'd rather just not have a bike lane.
I like good well designed bike lanes, but many municipalities seem to just think of them as something to include when convenient, and then start and stop them when not convenient.
Man, this is like so many internet arguments.
We need air!
No, you're wrong! We need water!
How about we ride on the roads where that works, develop new infrastructure where we need it, and enforce the laws everywhere?:
We need air!
No, you're wrong! We need water!
How about we ride on the roads where that works, develop new infrastructure where we need it, and enforce the laws everywhere?:
Sounds great. However, we have this little problem that started in California back in '78 with prop. 13. As a result of the four decades long tax revolt it spawned, we're dealing with the ultimate priority issue: there's only so much money in the budget and it's not enough.
Some people, mostly people who are relatively new to cycling, think we should use the few dollars that can go towards improving conditions for cycling by building a few miles of separated infrastructure and place it mostly on urban roads (with the inevitable intersection failures).
Other, more experienced riders, think we would be better served by funding traffic law enforcement and putting in many more miles of proper, six to eight foot bikelanes (not in the door zone) and only putting in separate facilities where there are long stretches of high-speed road without appreciable numbers of intersections.
This difference of opinion wouldn't be such a big deal, but many of these segragationists have been making their public case by convincing everyone that cycling is too dangerous to be done anywhere except on a segregated facility. Not surprisingly, this has an impact in terms of how many people are willing to even try riding a bike since there is no way to get anywhere in the US without riding on a road.
Oddly enough, these people are called and consider themselves "bicycling advocates". If one were to design a fifth-column assault to keep cycling participation down, it would look just like the pro-separation folks
Some people, mostly people who are relatively new to cycling, think we should use the few dollars that can go towards improving conditions for cycling by building a few miles of separated infrastructure and place it mostly on urban roads (with the inevitable intersection failures).
Other, more experienced riders, think we would be better served by funding traffic law enforcement and putting in many more miles of proper, six to eight foot bikelanes (not in the door zone) and only putting in separate facilities where there are long stretches of high-speed road without appreciable numbers of intersections.
This difference of opinion wouldn't be such a big deal, but many of these segragationists have been making their public case by convincing everyone that cycling is too dangerous to be done anywhere except on a segregated facility. Not surprisingly, this has an impact in terms of how many people are willing to even try riding a bike since there is no way to get anywhere in the US without riding on a road.
Oddly enough, these people are called and consider themselves "bicycling advocates". If one were to design a fifth-column assault to keep cycling participation down, it would look just like the pro-separation folks
Last edited by Jim from Boston; 11-03-18 at 07:38 PM.
11-03-18, 07:39 PM
#14
Senior Member
Here’s a particularly egregious example in my home town. The southbound bike lane just goes away, and the thru lane for cars is so narrow they actually painted a sharrow there, just one, and by the time a driver sees the sharrow it is too late. To make it worse that is a steep downhill near a school.
11-03-18, 07:55 PM
#15
Senior Member
Join Date: Oct 2015
Location: San Diego, California
Posts: 4,077
Bikes: Velo Orange Piolet
Mentioned: 28 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2228 Post(s)
Liked 2,011 Times
in
972 Posts
This is very bad design (obviously). It's a massive safety hazard. Find out whom to complain to and complain. Organize - post things on craigslist, nextdoor.com, the regional section of bikeforums, etc. to get other cyclists to complain. Using phrases like "before someone gets killed" isn't all that hyperbolic in this case.
This is a big screw up by someone. Sounds like it could be fixed by just knocking out those bump-outs that are in the bike lanes.
This is a big screw up by someone. Sounds like it could be fixed by just knocking out those bump-outs that are in the bike lanes.
11-03-18, 08:36 PM
#16
Senior Member
Join Date: Oct 2015
Posts: 15,483
Bikes: 2015 Workswell 066, 2017 Workswell 093, 2014 Dawes Sheila, 1983 Cannondale 500, 1984 Raleigh Olympian, 2007 Cannondale Rize 4, 2017 Fuji Sportif 1 LE
Mentioned: 144 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 7649 Post(s)
Liked 3,469 Times
in
1,832 Posts
This is very bad design (obviously). It's a massive safety hazard. Find out whom to complain to and complain. Organize - post things on craigslist, nextdoor.com, the regional section of bikeforums, etc. to get other cyclists to complain. Using phrases like "before someone gets killed" isn't all that hyperbolic in this case.
This is a big screw up by someone. Sounds like it could be fixed by just knocking out those bump-outs that are in the bike lanes.
This is a big screw up by someone. Sounds like it could be fixed by just knocking out those bump-outs that are in the bike lanes.
I have a few less severe but otherwise similar spots on some of my rides ... the first time through, they really get the adrenal glands kicking ..... Crash or get hit is a tough call to make a 18 mph with about 1.8 seconds to choose and move.
11-04-18, 12:01 AM
#17
Senior Member
There has already been a stink raised, but nothing will change until the city is hit with a big wrongful death judgment. Here are some explanations from the city website. I suspect the people who wrote this never even learned to ride bikes when they were kids:
: Why did they install the bulb out curbs at some intersections?
A: Many of the residents on the side streets had expressed concerns about limited sight distance as they attempted to turn onto Saddleback Road. The bulb out curbs provide an opportunity for drivers on the side streets to pull further forward into a protected area to improve sight distance and make it easier and safer to make these turns. In addition, the bulb out curbs serve as part of the traffic calming solution by causing subtle changes in the path of travel for through traffic and narrowing the travel lanes.
Q: Saddleback Ranch Road is used by bicyclists in the area. How will this project affect bicyclists?
A: Saddleback Ranch Road is considered a bike route because it is used by road cyclists and mountain bikers in the area. Although there were never striped bike lanes on Saddleback, there were wider segments of the roadway that allowed for bikes and vehicles to travel side-by-side. With the addition of the traffic calming measures, there are now certain segments of the roadway where bikes and vehicles may have to travel in single file formation. Bikes are considered vehicles by the vehicles code and therefore have the same rights and responsibilities as drivers of vehicles.
Q: Why didn’t the City install striped bike lanes?
A: In order to try to achieve the primary goal of slowing and calming traffic, it is necessary to substantially narrow the travel lanes. Even if there was space to install bike lanes (which are usually about 5-8 feet wide), doing so for any extended period would provide drivers with a sense of excess width and would, at a minimum, significantly reduce the benefits of the overall traffic calming. Where the lanes are confined by the medians and curbs (physical constraints on both sides), the travel lanes are about 13 feet wide. Although these are not ideal conditions for a bike and vehicle to share the lane, a slower moving vehicle can legally and safely pass a bicycle in this space under the right conditions. For instance, if a bike is within 3 feet of the curb this would leave about 10 feet for the car to pass. With the average vehicle being about 6 to 6 ½ feet wide and needing to allow 3 feet between the vehicle and the bike there is at least potentially an opportunity for a vehicle to pass. However, you should always remember that bikes have the same rights as vehicles and therefore bicyclists can use more of the lane, if they consider it necessary.
: Why did they install the bulb out curbs at some intersections?
A: Many of the residents on the side streets had expressed concerns about limited sight distance as they attempted to turn onto Saddleback Road. The bulb out curbs provide an opportunity for drivers on the side streets to pull further forward into a protected area to improve sight distance and make it easier and safer to make these turns. In addition, the bulb out curbs serve as part of the traffic calming solution by causing subtle changes in the path of travel for through traffic and narrowing the travel lanes.
Q: Saddleback Ranch Road is used by bicyclists in the area. How will this project affect bicyclists?
A: Saddleback Ranch Road is considered a bike route because it is used by road cyclists and mountain bikers in the area. Although there were never striped bike lanes on Saddleback, there were wider segments of the roadway that allowed for bikes and vehicles to travel side-by-side. With the addition of the traffic calming measures, there are now certain segments of the roadway where bikes and vehicles may have to travel in single file formation. Bikes are considered vehicles by the vehicles code and therefore have the same rights and responsibilities as drivers of vehicles.
Q: Why didn’t the City install striped bike lanes?
A: In order to try to achieve the primary goal of slowing and calming traffic, it is necessary to substantially narrow the travel lanes. Even if there was space to install bike lanes (which are usually about 5-8 feet wide), doing so for any extended period would provide drivers with a sense of excess width and would, at a minimum, significantly reduce the benefits of the overall traffic calming. Where the lanes are confined by the medians and curbs (physical constraints on both sides), the travel lanes are about 13 feet wide. Although these are not ideal conditions for a bike and vehicle to share the lane, a slower moving vehicle can legally and safely pass a bicycle in this space under the right conditions. For instance, if a bike is within 3 feet of the curb this would leave about 10 feet for the car to pass. With the average vehicle being about 6 to 6 ½ feet wide and needing to allow 3 feet between the vehicle and the bike there is at least potentially an opportunity for a vehicle to pass. However, you should always remember that bikes have the same rights as vehicles and therefore bicyclists can use more of the lane, if they consider it necessary.
11-04-18, 03:59 AM
#18
Senior Member
Join Date: Oct 2015
Posts: 15,483
Bikes: 2015 Workswell 066, 2017 Workswell 093, 2014 Dawes Sheila, 1983 Cannondale 500, 1984 Raleigh Olympian, 2007 Cannondale Rize 4, 2017 Fuji Sportif 1 LE
Mentioned: 144 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 7649 Post(s)
Liked 3,469 Times
in
1,832 Posts
Okay ... so we need someone to take one for the team and get hit right there .... 
11-05-18, 01:09 AM
#19
vespertine member
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jul 2013
Location: Land of Angora, Turkey
Posts: 2,476
Bikes: Yes
Mentioned: 22 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 687 Post(s)
Liked 220 Times
in
163 Posts
Update...
I got a bit more info from a local FB cycling group. Apparently, the residents of the street were pretty gung-ho about not losing street parking (I swear, *everything* in this town revolves around parking.) People (I'm not sure if it was City officials or residents) were also into the curb extensions.
I'll try and determine who was in charge so that I can complain. Nothing will happen now until Spring, so in the meantime, it might be worth enlisting the help of some advocacy groups or folks with more political capital than I possess.
I've been avoiding the road, but decided to venture out tonight to get a few photos of urban planning at its finest.
First, the world's shortest bike lane - less than half a block:
Next, we have the sharrow pointing into the gutter:
And last but not least, instructions on how to get doored!
I got a bit more info from a local FB cycling group. Apparently, the residents of the street were pretty gung-ho about not losing street parking (I swear, *everything* in this town revolves around parking.) People (I'm not sure if it was City officials or residents) were also into the curb extensions.
I'll try and determine who was in charge so that I can complain. Nothing will happen now until Spring, so in the meantime, it might be worth enlisting the help of some advocacy groups or folks with more political capital than I possess.
I've been avoiding the road, but decided to venture out tonight to get a few photos of urban planning at its finest.
First, the world's shortest bike lane - less than half a block:
Next, we have the sharrow pointing into the gutter:
And last but not least, instructions on how to get doored!
11-05-18, 09:28 AM
#20
Senior Member
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: LF, APMAT
Posts: 2,752
Mentioned: 13 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 623 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 397 Times
in
226 Posts
Based on those pictures I would not be riding in that "bike lane". It almost looks like they tried to make everyone happy with the worst compromises possible.
11-05-18, 02:51 PM
#21
☢
What they did is create the pretense of a bike lane. The sharrows should be positioned within the lane of travel (indicating a shared lane) not to the side of the road.
A dedicated bike lane should be painted green or contains the bike logo. In the above case, there is insufficient clearance next to the parked cars to consider that sufficient space for a dedicated bike lane.
A dedicated bike lane should be painted green or contains the bike logo. In the above case, there is insufficient clearance next to the parked cars to consider that sufficient space for a dedicated bike lane.
Last edited by KraneXL; 11-06-18 at 02:08 AM.
11-05-18, 09:47 PM
#22
SE Wis
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Milwaukee, WI
Posts: 10,505
Bikes: '68 Raleigh Sprite, '02 Raleigh C500, '84 Raleigh Gran Prix, '91 Trek 400, 2013 Novara Randonee, 1990 Trek 970
Mentioned: 40 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2743 Post(s)
Liked 3,390 Times
in
2,053 Posts
11-06-18, 02:19 AM
#23
☢
11-06-18, 06:12 AM
#24
SE Wis
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Milwaukee, WI
Posts: 10,505
Bikes: '68 Raleigh Sprite, '02 Raleigh C500, '84 Raleigh Gran Prix, '91 Trek 400, 2013 Novara Randonee, 1990 Trek 970
Mentioned: 40 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2743 Post(s)
Liked 3,390 Times
in
2,053 Posts
11-06-18, 11:52 AM
#25
20+mph Commuter
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Greenville. SC USA
Posts: 7,515
Bikes: Surly LHT, Surly Lowside, a folding bike, and a beater.
Mentioned: 31 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1434 Post(s)
Liked 331 Times
in
219 Posts
Many engineers... also work closely with other engineering groups.... and their own legal departments. So the legal safety of prevailing ideas... often rule the decisions/designs. I myself... would rather ride in/with traffic or stick to side streets. The bike lanes don't serve the cycling or driving public well IMHO.
A little paint has been a real game changer for me. And utility cycling has grown quite a bit over those 10 years. I am assuming that those cyclists would have just been more distracted motorists without the painted lanes.
A place to exist, more cyclists, less cars. I am not complaining. But I agree. The OP has a legit gripe about that stupidity.