RCMoeur 

This reminds me of some of the discussions we had early in the reboot of the US Bicycle Route System on roadway selection. On a roadway with no cycling-usable shoulders and lanes too narrow to allow same-lane overtaking (e.g. a huge number of roadways in the US), there can be a big difference in riding experience based on traffic volume. A roadway such as the ones depicted in the photos can be fine with low motor traffic volumes, but somewhat less pleasant with higher traffic volumes and greater number of passing situations. Motor travel speed isn't as decisive a factor, as long as the road generally has stopping sight distance appropriate for the actual speeds. It's tough to come up with specific thresholds for what constitutes "suitable", even if agencies want them to make the decision process easier, as it can eliminate "good" routes or include "bad" routes depending on where it's set.

The current USBRS guidance: https://www.adventurecycling.org/sit...orCriteria.pdf

Kerry Irons may have additional insights, as he was and is deeply involved in this program.

Eric F 

Generally speaking, if you follow the same rules of the road as a car (which is required by most state vehicle codes in the US), you're pretty safe. Be predictable in how you move, and be aware of what's going on around you. Riding erratically, and making unexpected moves contrary to the way most car traffic moves, highly increases your change of having an issue.

Eric F 

Why?

phrantic09

The OP looks like pretty much every road I ride

mschwett 

around here (sf bay area) it has more to do with driver awareness and speed differential. our steeper roads are more likely to have a bike lane in the uphill direction, and none downhill, with speed limits in the 25-35 range. there is virtually no speed differential going downhill, so most cyclists just take middle lane.

popular arterial roads with higher speeds are the ones i avoid unless they have bike lanes. many do.

rural/country roads usually have shoulders, but no official bike lanes, and these are where most of the most epic rides occur. i personally minimize time on the roads with higher vehicle speeds and less driver awareness, but as genejockey said, most of these roads are heavily cycled, well known routes, shoulder or no.

urban/neighborhood road. bike lane uphill only. speed limit 20 or 25 depending on the block.


urban arterial with higher speeds, with bike lane. in this case a two way cycle track. not bad despite higher traffic volumes and speeds.


very frequently cycled suburban hilly road, bike lane/shoulder on uphill side only. speed limit 35.



typical windy rural/country/preserve road. shoulders come and go. relatively little traffic and heavily cycled. drivers are very aware of cyclists but typically going fast enough to cause serious injury (30-40), so a radar and flashing light are really important to me here. some of these are a little worse than others and i generally avoid those.


high speed country road. these worry me but i’ll use the well cycled / well signed ones like this. radar is a MUST at these speeds, and any approaching vehicles from behind will have me getting as close to the edge as possible and glancing over my shoulder if their rate of closure is high. vehicles can easily be doing 55-65 here, although i doubt the limit is that high. i only use these if they have wide shoulders as shown.

MyRedTrek

Can you translate? Lol.

SoSmellyAir

Generally, no. Irvine, California has many bike lanes and bike trails (i.e., MUP): City_Bikeway_Map2.pdf (cityofirvine.org)

jaxgtr

Most of the roads on my normal routes now have bike lanes, but a lot of the roads outside of town have a small shoulder, but nothing I would call a bike lane. Some have nothing or a sidewalk edge,

prj71

Unfortunately the guy in the car coming up behind you and texting on his phone is my worry these days.

Eric F 

Valid.

79pmooney

I ride roads with no shoulder all the time. Most without a fog line. str8jakett's and prj71's look very familiar (and no, I've never seen them).

I was riding before bike lanes. The early ones around Boston were famous in bike shop circles for their potholes that brought us a bunch of business. Now, some are a blessing, some are just neutral and some I make it a point of avoiding. Many are at times very good and at others, unrideable. The separated MUP trails I ride sometimes but never as part of the exercise portion of my rides.

SoSmellyAir

While also doing a TikTok challenge.

GhostRider62

Plenty of better alternatives, insufficient line of sight, excessive speed differentials, too narrow creates unnecessary risk per my risk mgt plan

Maelochs

I also started before bike lanes .... and even after 50-odd years of development, bikes lanes often devolve into gutter, and are the pat of the road where the trash cars don't want to hit winds up.

Also, there are several around here which end abruptly in deep its big enough to swallow half a bike, or disappear across an intersection, so if you hold your line you are suddenly about to hit an 8-inch curb (I first found that one at night, back when I was quicker---- better than coffee to spike the heart rate.)

if there is no bike lane the drivers know where I am and will be---barring the sort of roadside debris/ bad pavement which could happen anywhere at any time--so I don't have to suddenly jump into teh traffic lane. On some stretches of road I ride I ignore the bike lane because it will only confuse drivers when I weave in and out.

mackgoo

Yes.

Steve B.

I actually do not think there are any actual dedicated cycling lanes in the county I live in, Nassau on Long island. This county has been notoriously reluctant to add any kinds of cycling infrastructure, outside of a very badly designed 5 mile bike path in a local park. There is zero on street lanes. It's been a Republican controlled county for decades and I'm sorry to say but that's part of the reason (as opposed to NYC which has been controlled by Democrats for decades and where they have added hundreds of miles of on street bise lanes as well as dedicated paths). When they had the option to add cycling infrastructure to re-built roadways that partly used state funding, they opted to ignore the regulations of the funding to including pedestrian and cycling infrastructure. I've figured out over decades of riding here, where it is safe to do so and am OK.

rsbob 

The closest bike lane is 3 miles away and lasts about 150’. All the roads I ride look like this:

I don’t stress about bike lanes or not. A distracted driver can take you out on either, so I just ride and let the chips fall as they may.

Maelochs

Aye ... a stripe of paint will not save me any more than a think metal sign on the roadside or a colored light suspended above an intersection.

bampilot06

What’s a bike lane?

SoSmellyAir

How does a cyclist turn left at an intersection?

beng1

There is almost no riding where I live that has a dedicated bike lane. I think being old helps, for most of my life there were no computers, cell-phones, bike lanes, helmets, seat-belt laws, nor most of the BS humans are born into now. So when that stuff is not there I could care less. Most people die doing things they don't care about, taking a crap, watching the evening news, raking leaves. When you think about it maybe it is the lucky ones who go out in gun or knife fights, high-speed crashes, having great sex or getting run down while on a great bicycle ride.

mschwett 

on the far side of the intersection, at a red. if you want to turn on a green (not legal at this one, which has a protected turn lane - very rare for sf), you join the roadway. works fine. it makes cyclists a bit of a hybrid of pedestrians and cars, sharing turns across the roadway with pedestrians.




some of the newer versions of these have a third signal cycle for pedestrians and bikes only (there's specifically a "bike" light) which is nice. it's a short cycle - maybe 10 seconds - but during that time there's a big red "NO TURNS" to hopefully keep cars from deciding to turn on red, which is typically legal.
my only beef with these is that they greatly reduce the green cycle for bikes going straight through, since when the main light is green the bike light is actually red, to avoid turning conflicts. so i typically take the lane and just ride through on the green.

DangerousDanR

Half of my commute is on neighborhood streets with a 25 MPH speed limit which is completely ignored by almost everyone, but half is on this. Note the wide path on the right hand side. Even a North Dakota driver can't mess this up.


https://goo.gl/maps/3XoRd7rxG6DxKPxG8

Maelochs

So ... North Dakotas sens out a mini-plow to clear that lane at the same time it clears the main roadways?

DangerousDanR

Here in ND about 20% of the state's tax basis is oil extraction tax, the state and local governments do have cash to do things they think are worth doing, and keeping the MUTs open happens to be one of them. So... yes, and no is the answer to your question

That MUT is "owned" by North Dakota State University, and they do plow it regularly. The road in the picture is "owned" by the City of Fargo, so they plow it. Most of the other MUTs in the Fargo area are "owned" by the Fargo Parks and Recreation District, and they keep them nicely packed and great to ride.

Until we have an event like last week where we got 12+ inches of snow overnight, followed by 20-40 MPH winds. Then the MUTs are covered with drifts and the fat bike is the commuter of choice and it makes the commute into a great trail ride.