Why Don’t Cyclists Use Bike Lanes?
Вставка
- Опубліковано 15 вер 2024
- “Cyclists are ***holes, they’ll see a bike lane and ride in the road because they can.” That’s an actual comment we got on this channel, and it’s one of the most puzzling arguments we’ve ever seen against urban cycling and bike infrastructure. It’s just so counterintuitive, like hearing someone claim that drivers are parking their cars in farmers’ fields instead of parking lots. If it’s happening, it’s a little odd, something we should investigate instead of saying “well, I guess there’s no point in bike lanes”. So one day I saw it happening and decided to figure out what was going on.
Keep Urbanity rolling:
Join our Patreon for early releases, credit at the end of each video, and bonus content: / ohtheurbanity
Contact form: docs.google.co...
Subscribe on UA-cam: / @ohtheurbanity
Instagram: / ohurbanity
Twitter: / ohurbanity
For professional inquiries, please fill out the following contact form: docs.google.co...
References:
Next episode: Why are there cars on the bike lane?
While 95% of all road space is already reserved for cars.
Simple answer:
The HOV lane is full
hahaha
You're now risking a 70€ penalty fee in Germany when doing so, even for a short stop.
That actually helped and reduced the problem quite significantly.
@@danielschurmann7558 glad to hear that law is enforced somewhere, rather than just used as a feel good statement by politicians.
@@danielschurmann7558 God bless Germany. In Czech Republic, the cars parked in a bike lane are often just warned. In theory they could have got a fine of up to 2000 CZK, but I never heard of anyone getting the maximum fine (or any fine, for that matter) for parking in the bike lane. Basically, the maximum applicable fee was estabilished somewhen 20y ago, when the average salary was half it is today, and there were a third less cars on the roads, so any fine hurt significantly more than it does today, and there was bigger chance (approx. by a third) that you'll be fined. Today everyone just rather risks getting a fine (which they never will), police is carelessly driving by like nothing happened, and then some drivers have the audacity to complain about cyclist not using the bike lane...
If it was up to me, I would grant an amnesty for everyone charged with the destruction of property if that property was a car parked on a sidewalk or in the bike lane. You know, let the people take the law to their own hands when the police is unable or unwilling to...
I explain to motorists who are annoyed by cyclists on the road that they should campaign for good cycling infrastructure. I don't know any cyclist who would choose to ride on a busy road if they couldn't ride on a well-developed cycle path.
The lack of biking infrastructure is the #1 reason that I don't bike in my small city, even though it's perfectly sized for it. And it turns out that's the #1 concern for cyclists as well, as found in various cycling polls.
Yeah, unfortunately, when I talk to motorists in a store-or somewhere-they always, and I mean always, circle back to the-‘They’re a&^holes.’ I explain how cyclist don’t want to ride in the road with them because if they’re going over 20 mph/12 kph there’s a good chance the cyclist will have a serious injury. They ignore that and go back to their first point, so I stop.
@@SkipGole You should mention how hundreds of motorists are also a holes and constantly break the rules, but the damage they cause is waaaaay more costly and deadly than anything a cyclist could ever inflict.
They have it. Its called the sidewalk, which no one uses to walk on since no one walks. Government is the reason people are afraid to ride on the sidewalk.
The "well-developed" lanes in Toronto have bad drainage and are often flooded, full of parked ebikes and clueless pedestrians or joggers. Id rather do the speed limit and take the road on most of the streets in the core.
perhaps a more relevant question should be: why do I often see cars parked in or driving in the bike lane.
Which bike lane?
@@ralf4640 the ones intended for bikes.
I saw a photo of a police car parked in a bike lane.
There's a term called getting doored. Meaning people hitting cyclists with their car doors when they open it.
@@Alex-od7nl yes, but usually they aren't.
I almost never see this
You're just lying bro
Bikes are still legaly considered vehicles in canada/ontario and have the right to use any road they want (aside from 400 series highways). that being said, insconsistant or poorly maintained bike networks are what land me on the road most of the time.
I agree 100%.
This. In Edmonton, I, a cyclist, am legally considered a "motor vehicle" and am bound to all the rules of the road that they are.
Doesn't stop the people who try to run me over as they turn left because "there's no bike lane here!" Nope my dude, you are in the wrong. My straight trumps your left, every single day of the year. Except I'm the one who gets hurt if you break the rules. Sound fair?
Ugh we need more bike lanes.
Interesting. Out in Arizona, bicycles aren’t considered vehicles, but if you’re riding in the middle of a car lane, you’re entitled to the same rights and responsibilities as motorists. This slight difference allows cyclists the right to use paved shoulders as travel lanes (e.g., on rural highways).
Legally treating a bicycle as a “motor vehicle” doesn’t make any sense to me. Vehicle yes, but it definitely has no motor. In the California vehicle code, a bicycle is considered the same as a vehicle _except_ where the code explicitly refers to motor vehicles.
@@trevinbeattie4888 As a canadian it doesnt makle sense to me either. A bike is closer to a pedestrian enhancer.
I've been a fool for years riding my bicycle in the busy streets. It was only last week I discovered there was a bicycle path built along the local river linking the neighboring town. I've since redirected my path of travel and I spend a fraction of the time on the road and my mental health has already improved. When safer alternatives are provided - we very much prefer them!
Agreed. I changed from a 45mph 4 lane road with a bike gutter to a 40 mph 2 lane road with 1/10 the traffic and no bike lane at all. It's safer and quieter despite no bike lane. I'd love to see one added because there is a nice mixed use trail and some parks parallel to the road. A nice bike lane could safely connect like 1.5 miles worth of neighborhoods along that road to the trail as well as access to the parks and nature space without needing to drive there.
I often leave the bike lane at intersections if it is unprotected and doesn't have its own signal so that drivers don't have the opportunity to hit me when they turn right without looking.
Omg... my city is full of selfish impatient drivers who turn right on red without even bothering to look for anyone crossing.
There is a protected bike lane in my city, and there are signs that say right turn yield to bikes and pedestrians but I realized as a cyclist that I should use that as a warning and not a comfort. It lets me know where cars might be turning across my path.
@@drivers99 right turns on red need to be banned everywhere
That's a big one for me too. I also am frequently out of bike lanes when there is construction or I need to make a left soon. I'll also ride down a street that parallels a bike route no matter how busy that street is if I only have a few blocks to my destination.
@@crowmob-yo6ry everywhere in the city maybe. I live in the middle of nowhere and having to sit at a red light for absolutely no reason isn't helping anyone.
As a relatively new driver who has been walking/ using public transit their whole life, bike lanes and their faults are even more apparent. In Canada there should be at least a meter between the cyclist and the drivers, yet some bike lanes don’t even give the cyclist that much room. How long until city officials realize that a white line of paint won’t save a cyclist from being in an accident.
Never.
They know. They don't care. Paint allows them to claim that X miles of bike lanes have been built. That's all. Proper infrastrure costs money, and they don't want to spend any.
@@Frostbiker Actually, they don't care about the expenses. It's not their money after all. They will only build something if it brings anything in return. $imple as that.
@@Frostbiker And in that respect, painting in these so-called bike lanes is just a way for municipal politicians to virtue signal and pretend that they are greener than anyone else on the planet.
@@hugosantana7253They care insofar as "Mike Russell spent tens of thousands of our tax dollars on bike paths to nowhere. Mike Russell: bad for Pine Creek, bad for America" sounds like the end of their career. Spending money looks bad.
Some bike lanes are less comfortable than the car lanes. Changing grades for every driveway and side street hurts my taint.
gross lol
I recently tried the sidewalk once instead of the 45mph painted bike gutter because I was sick of dipshits in trucks hugging the bike line. I'm glad I wasn't reaching down for a bottle or something because there was a random like 1 foot tall pyramid of concrete across the sidewalk for some kind of drainage. Unexpected changes like that are as fun as a punch in the nuts. And that same bump doesn't exist over in the road.
If you're sitting on your taint, you have the wrong saddle. You should only be on your sit bones. Go get a bike fit.
Yeah, he kinda missed the point that some bike lanes (especially when on the sidewalks) are in so bad condition that you just can't use them when trying to go more than 10kmh
Taint yourself a better seat. A selle italia or fizik seat seem to be the best, and if you have a round hole, ergon split cf seatpost will eat some bumps.
Also swapping to some wider tires will help. Tires also act as shock absorbers. More rubber and lower pressure will give a smoother ride. My roadbike fits 40mm tires, so i went gravel tire. I may switch to an all road tire down the line for some rolling resistance gains. My 28mm tires live in a bin until i decide to race or something.
Elements that force me out of the bike lanes include:
1. Damaged road surface and sunken drain covers.
2. Never cleaned bike lanes with lots of broken glass from the recycling truck.
3. Blocked storm drains that mean the path is a giant puddle/lake long after the rain.
In North America, the right-hand part of a road is the worst built and full of debris/hazards.
ripped off bumpers, ice walls, tire chunks, cardboard boxes and the biggest fucking nail I've ever seen in my entire life are among the funniest objects I have found in a bike lane
Reason 2: broken glass, a lot of debris; those are my main reasons for riding in the street.
Rubbish bins are common too and some rides in NYC primarly Manhattan see construction equipment and delivery vans cop cars trucks bus or many pedestrians on the bike lane
Came here to say basically all of these. Fallen tree limbs, too.
why don't the cars ever ask why they take up soo much space?
Because of the auto industry flinging piles of money at the government for several decades. That's literally why we only have decent infrastructure for motor vehicles, and crap for everything else.
Carbrain is like a mental illness and it's really difficult to administer therapy.
The cars know why they take up so much space. They all either became a SUV to load more into for those weekend vacations. Or they became a more sporty/luxury version of its previous self, requiring a larger wheelbase.
The children of the 60's grew up with VW beetles and mini bus's. They then turned and popularized the suburban, tahoe, and expedition. Even the modern ford explorer is basically expedition in size.
I do it for my own safety. There’s a stretch of road on my daily commute where there’s:
A) no sidewalks
B) no bike lanes
C) no room for cars to park on the road but they do anyways
So as a result I am forced to cycle in the middle of the lane so nobody can attempt to pass me. I made the mistake of hugging the parked cars as close as I could and people just fly by me and I have had countless dangerous close calls. Like wtf am I supposed to do? And people still honk at me when I cycle in the middle of the lane. I just don’t want to die trying to go to class yet somehow I’m the a-hole on the road 😔
That's a somewhat different case than the one this video is about, though - when there is no bike lane, versus a bike lane exists and is not used.
There's a road that had the cycling "lane" getting repainted so it was blocked, as I arrived to the freshly painted section I used the sidewalk, and some old lady told me to get down to the cycling lane, and I think about it all the time and still do not understand if she's blind and can't smell paint or if she's just dumb
Ok that's fair. But it doesn't change that majority of cyclists are entitled, arrogant scumbags. If you disagree your delusional.
@@PauxloE the net result is the same though: car commuters complaining about bikes being in “their” lanes which makes it even harder for us to convince city officials to add onto what little bike infrastructure that does exist.
In the state of california. Those motorists are supposed to cross into oncoming traffic on a 2 lane road to pass a cyclist. In my experience, they ignore the law every time. In their defense, I just found the law this year, and it was passed 8 years ago (2016).
Personally i hope @ 10 years there is public warning about it through the media, then the law being enforced by officers.
Likewise though. If cars are backing up behind you. The rules of the road apply and if there are more than the prerequisite number of cars (I think 6) you are legally required to pull to the shoulder and allow vehicles to pass.
The most common instance of cyclists not using bike lanes that I see is riding on the sidewalk when there is a painted gutter bike lane, which just shows that cyclists don't find gutter lanes to be safe/comfortable
I 100% blame this on the poor city planners and the politicians who support them. The instance you describe irritates cyclists, pedestrians, motorists and home owners (who can no longer park on the street): this is why I tell my local politicians whenever they will listen, "Either do it correctly or don't bother!"
Had my mind blown when I saw somebody point out that painted bike lanes are car infrastructure, not bike infrastructure.
Having a painted bikelane allows them to get a "sustainability" checkbox for extra funding.
@@jamesphillips2285 Almost all bike lanes are car infrastructure.
We have a wide separated bike lane. It's a straight road between my village and the town. It's been there for 7 years now. So many older people ride the bike on the road, simply because that is what they have always done. They keep saying they don't need the bike lane, why was it even built? It was so expensive and unnecessary according to them. Thay say cyclists should just ride on the road. I never see younger folk doing that.
My city, despite being an almost half a million European city, has only really few bike lanes, two of them are painted gutters on a pedestrian street and other one on a major busy street, where it turns into a combined bus + bike lane.
One thing that needs to be emphasized with this topic is that in the vast majority of places in North America, the percentage of car drivers who behave badly is FAR higher than the percentage of cyclists who behave badly, and the car drivers are far, far more dangerous.
And the drivers who complain about cyclists can see this, but they have trained themselves to NEVER blame car infrastructure or car drivers as a group for these problems. A driver doing their daily commute can see 10 different cars driving dangerously and they'll simply think "that guy is a bad driver" 10 different times. But if they see two cyclists riding on the road, they'll immediatley think "all cyclists are assholes and we need to remove all cycling infrastructure to make driving easier".
I'm lucky that I live near work and my commute is a short walk, but every single time I have to drive a car at rush hour (which has extended so far that it's now from 2-6 PM every weekday), I see a truly scary number of people driving dangerously. Yet my coworkers who drive to work from the suburbs will often complain about cyclists as a group, but never about drivers as a group (if they get frustrated they'll complain about one specific driver or about "traffic"). The disparity in complaints about cyclists versus drivers is so irrational and emotionally driven that it's come to resemble a form of bigotry.
100 percent this.
Drivers violating the rules are fined by the police. When we start pulling over cyclist, then maybe people will say “a few bad apples and they are caught by the traffic police”. Until then people will say cyclists get a free pass for violating the rules of the road.
You are lucky. Where I live rush hour starts at 5 am and goes to midnight.
This is why you have to try to assume that people do most things because of some reasonable reason. Curiosity and sympathy are powerful tools
Being forced to bike on roads during winter due to being a student with no car and public transit being so bad even worse in bad weather winter it just make dread winter every year
What a great line! "Curiosity and sympathy are powerful tools" Im gonna start using this.
This kind of thinking would solve so many problems.
In no order my reasons are:
1) Left turns when the lane is on the right side.
2) Right turns when the lane is on the left side.
3) Potholes, manhole covers, and debris in the curb lane.
4) Discontinuities in the cycling network.
5) Construction.
6) To get to an intersection with lights.
Around 50% of the bike lanes in my area couldn't be used for the following reasons primarily:
-broken glass everywhere
-parked cars
-more broken glass
On garbage day everyone puts there bins in the bike lanes. This is really dangerous and requires cyclists to swerve in and out of traffic. I also hate when road work crews put the road work ahead signs in the bike lane for the same reason. Super dangerous!
“I also hate when road work crews put the road work ahead signs in the bike lane…”
When I encounter closed bike lanes, I (usually) take a car lane and ride right in the middle so that no one can even attempt to pass me.
Yep, we are all inconvenienced.
Another reason is, sometimes there's no bike lane at all. Often, really. Yet some drivers think there's one, either assuming "there must be one" or mistaking a sidewalk (forbidden to cycle on in many countries including mine) or any flattish surface for a bike lane.
Yet another one is bike lanes that have to yield at each and every intersection and/or have many borders/bumps/bad surface while the road is flat, well-maintained and has priority. It's fine with an all-terran bike when you're having a leisure ride, not with an utilitary bike when getting from A to B, nor with a sport bike either.
Wish i could up vote this comment more.
My town wants to make a separated bike lane to replace the painted gutters. It's contentious for many reasons. But noone has pointed out that it will mean cyclists no longer having the same right of way as cars at every intersection, they will now have to stop as they are not in the roadway.
There is a state road near me where the DOT said they would build a bike path on the right shoulder. It was too narrow to begin with. Then they narrowed it by putting in rumble strips in an effort to keep cars on the road. Ever try to ride on rumble strips with narrow road bike tires? I have to ride left of the fog line because the "bike lane" left over is about 8" wide and is full of pebbles and glass. Many times the car drivers get upset, but they may have never ridden a bike in their lives.
In my city, the bike lanes have no signage and the network is extremely patchy; so it's very easy to get lost or find yourself stranded on a sidewalk or dumped onto a road. To any bruised car-drivers out there, trust me, I'd much rather be in a bike lane than on the road!
I've debated on taking some spray paint and marking out trail names at junctions. The first time I started exploring our trail network I took a right turn and just kept going. Eventually stopped and checked my phone. Realized I had taken a completely separate trail and to continue on the one I meant to would require a sharp 90 degree turn over a random bridge. No signs. No markings. I've seen too many random mixed use trails that dead end into a drainage pond. Or one where I'm going home that there's like 200 feet before it ends in huge rocks and the river but about 400 feet past that dead end is where the trail actually continues and slopes down under a bridge. There's no signage that warns you you're about to crash and drown in a river if you take that right turn.
We desperately need more connectivity in the bike network. It's so difficult to find underpasses to avoid crossing over huge roads.
Here in Quebec cycle path are used by everybody: roller blade, longboard, scooter, lady with troller, mobility scooter, people walking their dog, children playing, trying to use the bike lane at more than 15km/h is limit dangerous for both parties
There seems to be a widespread attude of cyclist hatred. It's not rational, it's emotional.
I personally know someone who shows a vitriolic hatred of cyclists, despite cycling for years when he was young.
Tell him that HE is the one polluting the city!!! ;-)
@@Lifelikesky He may live in the city, but his job is outide the city. I don't see him cycling there.
Sounds like the POS owner of the Yasmin restaurant in San Francisco. That guy is scum. Please contact the restaurant and call them out on their sick hatred of bike lanes.
Not Just Bikes talked about punishment passes. Where drivers gaze cyclists or blow car smoke in their faces. Why is this assault allowed?
Watch Shifter on a cop talking about bike theft. He said many cops don't care about bike theft.
Some cops steal and sell bikes in the lost and found.
I've seen a photo of a police car parked in the bike lane.
Some people hit cyclists with their car doors. It's called getting doored.
Some drivers said they hated cyclists cause cyclists slow them down or take up space.
Drivers also said they didn't want to have to worry about hitting cyclists.
Then give cyclists their own paths away from cars.
Then some drivers complain about taxes.
Btw, you can watch Not Just Bikes and CityNerd on how car and suburb centric design and how owning a car is far more taxes and individually more expensive.
The reason for that vitriolic attitude is because cyclists lack common sense and act like they own the road. Your probably one of them with this statement. Your so oblivious.
Crucial point to add: The asphalt is always shittier in the bike lane alongside the road. It's less maintained and bumpier.
Quit complaining probably gives you a better workout.
That is a major point of contention for me. The equipment to pave a narrow path is simply not capable of finishing asphalt to the same level of flatness as larger road pavers, and with a bicycle's short wheelbase, and the nature of bicycle tires, every little deviation is magnified.
@@1966johnnywayne This is one of the reasons I don't like the way that separated bike lanes are constructed. I think cities, especially in a country with freeze-thaw cycles like Canada, should build them by first paving them as part of the entire street and then cutting out for the median and using prefabricated median segments (kind of like but not actually New Jersey barriers). Given they'd be prefabricated, it should also reduce the cost of setting up extra formwork and in-situ concrete pouring.
@@davidjames4915 👍
@@markwilson5967 Real immature of you.
People saying cyclists are a**holes are just people who just should ride themselves to understand how much they were a**holes in the first place.
That would be a great addition to the driver's exam or ed. Like hopping on a stationary bike and getting close pass by a truck or bus. It's already been done in some places.
As a new cyclist, i agree. Cycling has changed how I drive near someone in a bike lane and how much attention I give them.
I used to *never* use the streetside segregated bicycle path on my daily commute along an arterial street in a UK city, and I'll tell you exactly why: If I cycled in the road and was going straight, I (like car drivers) had priority over anyone coming through on the side streets, so only needed to (potentially) stop at major, signalled junctions. But if I used the bike path, I had to yield and potentially stop at *every single intersection*.
In my area there are some "bike lanes" that are so narrow that the stenciled bike symbol doesn't fit in the lane. Of course the lane is also unprotected, so in this case, I take the lane, rather than risk getting clipped my someone's mirror or worse.
If there isn't much traffic, I will also stay out of the bike lane to avoid the manholes, potholes, and debris.
There is supposed to be a recognized or engineered minimum width of bicycle lanes. It printed in planner's books.
Yeah, I have to deal with those narrow bicycle lanes that the painted symbol will not fit in. And bicycle lanes narrower than a bicycle's handlebar.
Can add a couple more problems like: bicycle lanes or paved shoulders suddenly ending without warning; and, kids bicycling against the flow of traffic in those less than idea facilities.
For me, the most common reasons I drive on the road are cars blocking the path.
But we have one stretch in town where a cyclist has to yield to cars coming out of side streets and businesses on the side of the road every 30m or so. Plus at every crossing he has to descend to road level and ride back up a very poorly made cycle path. On the street you are riding on smooth surface and it's a main road to boot. Nothing to think about here, especially when cars can safely get around me on the tram tracks.
Bike lanes here prioritize cars over bikes. You get to an intersection and the bike lane goes next to the crosswalk, but you are required to give way to cars, while pedestrians don't. I don't see the point of using them, since if I ride in the road I will have the same priority as any other vehicle. I'll only use them if it is convenient or to avoid sections blocked by cars causing traffic.
Just today I had someone yell at me from the rail trail to ride on the dedicated trail instead of the road as I went by. But the rail trail doesn't go where I was going, it's a recreation route that goes into the woods, there's just a short section that runs parallel to some road. Didn't make sense to switch over for 200 yards, particularly as my focus was on navigating the intersections around me and on looking for potholes in our shitty roads here in MA.
Perfect timing! Today I had some obnoxious driver in an SUV angrily yell at me for briefly cycling in the street to bypass a crowded section of a parallel bike path.
Also, bike lanes rarely actually get you to your destination.... They are like highways. You will still need to ride in roads or sidewalks, to get to your final destination / to the bike lane
The city where I live recently installed some "Safe Routes to School" routes meant for children to get to and from school. Someone posted a Saturday morning picture of a recreational sport cyclist riding in the street and so many people lost their mind and used this as proof that the project was a waste of money.
Same cyclist uses the school route and runs over a small child. CYCLISTS ARE MURDERING OUR CHILDREN AND INVADING THEIR SPACE. Cyclists just can't win. Carbrain is a mental illness.
My city doesn’t have many bike lanes, and the ones they do have are just painted on and used by cars as extra driving lanes or passing lanes. They’re a total death trap and nobody trusts it for themselves and they definitely don’t trust it for their kids. Heck, half my city doesn’t even have sidewalks, pedestrians are just expected to walk on the road.
Same in my city. When the bike lanes are just painted gutters I tend to ride in the middle of the lane so cars can’t just fly past me, then I yield to the bike lane to allow them to pass, then move back. I’d prefer to have an actually separated bike lane, and I often ride on the sidewalk instead, but that has it’s own downsides (more debris and obstacles, as well as way bumpier with lots of sudden drops to go up an down, leading to a much higher risk of getting a flat tire).
Now throw in kids bicycling in the opposite direction.
Don't city planners get to have this kind of "fun" too ?
There's no law (in the UK) that says if there's a bike lane I have to ride in it so if I feel it's safer or better in anyway for me to ride in the shared road I will. The road which incidentally my taxes help pay for. In London there are lots of reasons for not using bike lanes which include proximity to pedestrians who frequently step into the lane while checking their TikTok, erratic e-scooter riders, slow moving rickshaw riders blocking the whole lane, potholes, uncleared debris, and tourists weaving about on Boris bikes.
~90% the same in central Stockholm, the main difference being snow removal not always prioritised for ~6months
(and in the suburbs, #1 reason=pedestrians rightfully taking up most of the width of the narrow shared paths)
[edit: another reason, albeit uncommon -> at least one place in downtown Sthlm has an extremely popular bike path with ppl often queuing there for traffic light to turn green for several minutes + relatively unused traffic lane in parallel = a minority prefer to share the lane with cars for a few meters than to risk having to wait for several traffic light cycles]
@@pcongre I used to cycle around in Stockholm a couple decades ago, and back then there were fewer bike paths. But even in the middle of the city I still felt relatively safe, since drivers were as a whole respectful. It did help that I was one of the sport cyclists, so I kept pace with the cars for a large part of it. That's also my reason for sometimes cycling on the streets instead of on bike paths. It was just faster. Especially late evenings/nights, when you have the streets for yourself quite a lot. Only problem is that the traffic lights aren't set to trigger for bikes.
The (southern) suburbs I never had any trouble with. Great path network, and many streets don't have too much traffic. Bigger streets may be an issue, but there are usually at least bike lanes on them.
I also lived in Västerås for a few years. Much faster and better snow clearing (probably because the city is surrounded by farmland, which means lots of people with tractors who want to make some extra cash clearing snow, and they're all used to waking up early in the morning), and it's very easy to get around by bike.
I pay taxes but I don’t walk on the road because I cannot keep up with the speed of the traffic.
This argument is not any different than “I paid taxes, I will ride my bike on the subway tracks”
@@chefnyc Actually I bet you do walk in the road when there isn't a sidewalk or when you need to cross to the other side or for any number of other practical reasons. It's perfectly legitimate to do that and the law allows you to do it. Cars don't own the road and bicycles are allowed to use the shared highway unless as in the UK it's a motorway and the law prohibits it. There are many laws against trespassing on railway tracks so no of course you can't do that. My comment regarding taxes is alluding to the common argument that cyclists shouldn't be using the road because they don't pay road tax which is entirely fallacious and displays an ignorance of the fact that every taxpayer funds the roads through general taxation, and therefore the idea that non-car drivers should excluded on those grounds is unsupportable.
I remember a few times not using a bike lane for some of these reasons and at first I was worried about being judged but then I just thought, "Nah, I'm sure people are smart enough to realize something that basic"
🙃
This video presents a good, general lesson: if someone's doing something you don't understand, there's usually a reason for it. Sometimes not a reason that stands to further scrutiny (IF it's scrutinized, which it often isn't by either the person doing the thing OR the person befuddled by the other), sometimes one that's counter-intuitive, sometimes for a reason that is ultimately arbitrary, but people are GENERALLY rational in the motivation for their choices and actions. Not always, but often enough that we owe each other the benefit of the doubt in figuring out what we're all doing.
Tim Harford's _The Logic of Life_ was a nice application of this.
just shows how little people get out of their cars
Wait, what do little people have to do with this??
(Sorry, the dad joke brain rot got me.)
What JOKE !
Aren't little people infrastructure planners ?
One really obvious yet often missed one
"Why aren't they using the bike lanes" is often said in tandem with "that we spent tax money on".
The bike lane doesn't even need to be in the room. It can be somewhere else completely different. The driver will be absolutely baffled that the cyclist doesn't magically transport themselves from the end of a bike lane to their destination.
It's remarkable sometimes how out of the way drivers insist cyclists should go to get to a bike lane. Apparently one north-south and one east-west bike route should be enough, and cyclists should walk in the sidewalk to get to them 🙄.
it's like saying that cars should always be on highways that we all have paid so much money for, so why are they driving down the streets for!?
Recently, our city has de-rated traffic signals for cyclists. It's led me to engage w a few people online obsessed with bikes following "the rules." HERE"s THE THING: shove it!! Bikes aren't heavy machinery, and you don't cede any rights to use one in public! On grass, on roads, paths, or anywhere public.
Sure, some places have ordinances, and police may be able to ticket you, but they're in the wrong. This just hasn't been properly thought over in our car-brained society, where half the people didn't even pay attention in driver's ed. You sign your license as an agreement forfeiting rights for the privilege to drive on public roads.
Children can drive on farms or on private property. Anyone can walk on the sidewalk. You never sign away any rights to use a bike counter to the direction of car traffic.
There's a reasonable expectation you can hold for yourself, to do what's right or sensible, but don't think you're entitled to expect that of cyclists.
I struggle a lot with drivers giving me trouble for not riding in the bike lane when I'm riding. They don't seem to know lanes have a max speed limit and bikes can go over 30kph no problem if the rider is fit. I think how fast bikes can go in general is pretty poorly understood by the general population.
. . . and if they're on an ebike, even somebody who is not fit can easily go over 30kph.
Drivers don't understand the concept because their solution to a speed limit is to ignore it.
@@keithmcmanus2406 speed suggestion*
There's one path in Ste-Catherine/St-Constant QC that I avoid because I can pretty easily do 10 over the speed limit, and because I've had a bunch of near misses and one actual hit on it. Doesn't stop people from harassing me for "slowing them down", but I'd rather be harassed and avoided than blindly crashed into...
As a cyclist I avoid cycling paths/lanes when they are dangerous and use them when they are safe. Safety first!
As a cyclist biking for transportation around my neighborhood and city, I would like to know why all these drivers aren't on the separated car paths we've spent millions on.
In Montreal, construction is 9 / 10 the reason why you don't use the bike lane.
for me, dooring is the reason probably like 5/10
Theres a section of road I regularly ride with a really nice protected bike lane that goes completely unused by most. The start is blocked by construction, but when it does open up there is no provision to allow cyclists to turn left at the following intersection, which is where I need to go. At first I would use the bike lane then leave through one of the gaps in the parked cars to make the left turn. But I stopped that once I almost got hit by a car trying to swere into the spot. Sometimes its just easier to use the road for a shot period of time
This is a good point. In my city, we have these narrow red painted bicycle lanes on the bigger streets/roads. But the planners apparently assumed that cyclists never need to make left turns… but surprise, we do!
Whenever I need to make a left turn, I have just two options: Become a pedestrian and get on the sidewalk where in my country I am not allowed to ride my bike, then cross both intersecting streets, or pretend I am a car and just get into the left turning lane.
Why are so many streets in Montreal called "Rue Barrée" 😂
I remember one encounter I had on a busier connector road that parallels the highway. It's 45mph, one lane each direction, and sometimes a center turn lane. No sidewalks except for short ones along apartment complexes. I frequently use sidestreets to pull over and let cars pass (try to avoid more than 4 behind). I need to use this road as no other neighborhoods connect over a set of railroad tracks it crosses.
One day, a car matches speed with me while passing, throws a drink out the window, and yells, "Get off the F* road, n*!" (I'm white, btw)
I think some drivers just don't understand that cyclists also want to avoid cars, and will choose the best route they can. If there was a (safe) bike lane or bike path built along the road, I'd absolutely use it. But without one, drivers are going to be slowed down slightly.
Also, many drivers don't seem to understand the math. Being behind a cyclist, even for a whole mile, costs them less than 1 minute of drive time.
Two common reasons i’ve used the road instead of the bike lane:
1) not enough buffer from parked cars and only way to keep a safe distance from potential dooring is to ride on the road
2) the bike path is an extension of the sidewalk and goes up and down at each driveway and intersection without a smooth transfer
Drivers are stupid. In my town they're making safer bike infrastructure, away from the traffic. They are complaining that this is just waste of money. At the same time they complain about us being on the road. It's pure stupidity. If you want to use current infrastructure, for safe ride, you need good full suspension mtb. Definitely roadies can't ride there, basicaly the main groups that drivers direct hatred at.
you got me at "drivers are stupid". Didn't need to read the rest.
@@summerclub55 Yea, shows your level of inteligence. Congrats on making yourself look like a fool.
@@summerclub55 Yea, shows your level of inteligence.
One frequent case I have noticed of cyclists not using the bike lanes in Montreal is on Bd René-Lévesque E after the Rue Cartier intersection. The reason there is because at that intersection; the Bike lane switches to the other side of the road and requires cyclists to cross the road at that intersection. The signing in the area is inadequate too and many people who've never cycled down that street don't know this.
Crossing the road is also going to be a minimum of a 2 minute delay; if the signal timings are anything like the ones in Edmonton.
...well crap. I've lived in the neighbourhood for 4 years and I didn't even realize it continued east of Cartier. There's also the construction fencing/signs by that path at Beaudry that keep getting blown over.
I definitely used the road next to a multi use path this week. The path is great, but has a 15mph speed limit. When I have an ebike that goes 28mph and I'm late for work, the 30mph limit road right next to it looks really attractive.
This is an interesting topic I hardly ever hear or see discussed over in The Netherlands. I guess the reason is not only our infrastructure is better but also the sheer numbers. I recall many occasions where a flock of fietsers simply push away cars by outnumbering them if there was some srnsible readon to do so. This is related to the cycling culture. Over here virtually every moyotidt is a fietser him/herself, creating a lot of leeway for fietsers.
In several comments people have written that it is perfectly legal NOT to use bike lanes and use the road itself. Not so in The Netherlands. If there is a designated fietspad, you have no business being out on the road. Safety is obviously a two-way process! Irresponsible fietsers do not help us in the struggle to obtain safer infrastructure.
I long for the days when we will have a cycling infrastructure as developed as in the Netherlands! Still so far away
@@summerclub55 My advice to anyone whoagrees would be to make constructive contributions and take concrete steps towards this lofty goal. It won't happen by itself. (Even!) in The Netherlands there is a constant struggle to get things done and there is always tons of room for improvement. Complacency is not a good idea.
Car drivers are assholes. They see a perfectly good surface parking lot, and park on the sidewalk.
One thing that makes me hesitant about bike lanes that you didn't mention is parked cars. People don't look when they open their door and can open it into you. I feel like that's a flaw in the design of the infrastructure though.
The one thing that annoys me about some cyclists is being recklace and invisible at night time. Stop wearing all black clothes, bike a bit more carefully and buy a light and a bell. I swear bikers sneak up on me like ninjas when I'm out walking at night, just make yourselves more visible please. The light on you bike isn't just there for you to see, it's so people can see you at night easier.
agreed on the visibility. I night commute more than half the year(sun dont come up before I have to start) I have front and rear lights on my helmet, solid and flashing lights front and rear on the bike and even added spoke lights so I'm more visable from the side. I still overtake shadows almost ever morning that I only spot by the fact that they are backlit by a light halfway down the block. Its worse when the moron is going wrongway down the bike lane.
The point about opening car doors is really important. My father had a dooring accident like that on his bike when I was still a kid. There are bicycle lanes in my city that run right next to parked cars and are only as wide as the car doors would swing open. I always ride my bike right on the painted line on this one particular road and drivers get mad at me and pass me really closely, but it’s still safer than riding right next to parked cars.
I bike to work and have a jack uniform so I throw a construction Hi-Vis vest on to bike. Plus light. My stance on helmets that they are optional if you stay below 30km/h and don't ride off-road. Otherwise I'd definitely want one.
I saw the same yesterday day. Bike lane was blocked with no detour available. This would be ever happen for cars. “Sorry, road closed. No alternative.”
My biggest complaint is discontinuous bike lanes. Lane for 2 blocks, dump into traff. Five blocks later, a one block bike lane. Then sharrows or nothing again.
What? Did someone steal the "share the road signs"?
hahaha
Wish they could have stolen the planners instead !!!
What was left out of the video is that no where in Canada is a cyclist obligated to use cycling infrastructure.
I believe that is up to an officer's discretion. If you are "Impeding" traffic flow where a bike path exists (1 M. from the curb), then the officer can write you a ticket if he feels your actions aren't justified.
@@1966johnnywayne Incorrect; an officer's discretion should never come into play.
We have speed limits (maximums) on our road; not speed mimimums.
Gentle reminder that cops don't interpret the law; they enforce laws already on the books.
@@1966johnnywayne Bicycles ARE the flow of traffic.
@@brooksrownd2275 Oooh!...that's deep. But actually the posted limit kicks Philosocycles a##.
Allow me to explain the internet to you, my good people. The OW (Original Whiner) had to slow down his car for a street cyclist ONCE, therefore: "ALL cyclists are a-holes who like to block traffic."
A bicycle IS a vehicle. That's not to question. And roads - rather drive ways as the part of a road - are designed that a below average driver can easily drive on it without causing an accident. That's where all vehicles belong. If the car drivers cant behave and endanger people then they shouldn't be allowed on public roads! Then there would be plenty of space and a clear design to follow on the remaining roads which could be called bike lanes then.
In the UK our main blockers are parked cars, poorly maintained cycle lanes (like the snow example) or badly joined-up routes. Crazy how many people get so incensed about people using the roads.
The main reason I avoid riding in the bike lane is when it's just one of those street gutters right next to parked cars in the dooring zone. I value my life too much to risk it by not looking in my mirror before getting out of my car. I think more cyclists should just ride in the middle of the road instead of endangering themselves.
In the countryside around Berlin, there often are two-directional bike paths (or rather combined bike/pedestrian paths) beside the road, but often not going through inside the villages. So after the village, you need to pay attention to find the beginning, and if it happens to be on the other side of the road, you can easily miss it.
Actually, in my experience cyclists will ride on the sidewalks instead of bike lanes, because the lanes are nothing but a stripe of paint and incredibly uncomfortable and dangerous.
I think painted "bike lanes" are the worst. Not only are they too narrow in most cases, but "car brains" don't expect someone will move out of the lane to avoid a road hazard, increasing the danger level for cyclists.
i do not use bike lanes because they really are " the narrow side of the road" and some lawyer/politician changed the name to "bike lanes".
They are full of detritus and bad patched-up asphalt jobs- if the patched-up asphalt jobs translated to a car tire ratio- cars would not drive on those bad patched-up jobs! The drivers would say: It is not safe for my car to negotiate those asphalt cracks that are wider than the width of my tires and deeper than the height of my tires".
Cars park in the "side of the road/bike lanes" . Dangerous obstacle.
The only way to avoid those perpetual obstacles in the "side of the road/bike lane" is to bike in car traffic. If i were to fall because of the slippery plastic tape ( yeah they have speed bumps in the "side of the road/bike lane" my 7mph is too fast) or other obstacles, wet leaves or broken glass for instance, the "side of the road/bike lane" is not wide enough to protect me from being run over by cars.
Also, I do not trust a driver to mow me down. As a bike commuter, I bike on the sidewalk, much slower, and i have no issue dismounting when I meet a pedestrian on the sidewalk. There are so few pedestrians anyway. I bike on sidewalks to get to bike paths.
And now the narrow bike lanes are used by both 7mph bikes and 25 mph motorbikes. they might be powered by electricity but they still are motorbikes. So would we expect a 20 mph car driver to drive in the same lane as a 50 mph car driver? The difference in speeds makes it dangerous. Well same for human-powered/motor-powered bikes. They do not belong in the same space.
Please stop using the term " bike lane" when referring to the side of the roads. You are being complicit to murders. Unless it is a bike path where motor vehicles are banned, it is not safe for bicycle. I now bike a lot less because the cars are more numerous, bigger, built stronger, and have faster acceleration and take more room on the roads.
or the "bike" lane doesn't go where you want to
I love how you guys are always patient, thorough, and gracious- thoughtfully responding to critiques you see online. At first, this approach might seem ineffective against someone making a bad-faith argument or unwilling to listen, but in the long run I think this is the most powerful way to persuade people towards your point of view. Keep up the good work!
I'll usually use bike lanes if they are available. That said I might not bother to use them if they are short and patchy and I'd have to switch back on the road every 200 meters or so or if they are shared with pedestrians and busy. Shared ones are often not in the best shape either where I live.
One sub reason: weaving in and out of traffic. If the bike lane forces you back into traffic periodically, because of its design, or because of frequent blockages in the bike lane, That re-entry into car traffic flow is really dangerous. I prefer to maintain in the car lane If the alternative involves leaving and re-entering the car Lane more than once or twice per mile.
A lot of these issues would be solved by wide enough bike lanes and lanes on both sides.
5:22 for the whole group to have done that and done that so far ahead means that this is something they were aware of ahead of time, possibly because that landscaping truck parks there every single day.
I think it's mostly because it's a weird intersection where you're able to turn right from a single direction lane to a two-direction lane on the opposite side of the street. If it's your first time, you might not see the bike lane at first.
www.google.com/maps/@45.5582238,-73.5485882,36m/data=!3m1!1e3?entry=ttu&g_ep=EgoyMDI0MDkwNC4wIKXMDSoASAFQAw%3D%3D
Now you figure that out !!!
Our City planners have alread seen that the 2-directional bicycle lane arcosses back and forth across the road as well as heads up a couple side streets.
While I’m an advocate for better bike lanes, cyclist who ignores them are totally in their right to do so in Quebec. Drivers who want cyclists out of the road are perpetuating the idea that roads are for car only. But not only municipal roads aren’t pay for by drivers but by citizen of the city, there are more chance that a cyclist is actually paying for the road it use compared to a driver that might comes from a far away town.
In my city, the bike lane is commonly filled with broken glass, metal shards, rocks, and other debris swept in from the car lanes.
On Maisonneuve in Montréal, it is sooo much faster to go on the road then on the bike lane. The lights are synchronized for the cars and cars get more green light due to left turns signals. When you bike you have to stop every two intersection. If you go on the road though, you can clear 4-5 intersections without a problem.
when i take the REV on st-denis , if i keep 28-30 k steady , i discover the green light are almost synch
@@fredfred9000 Those speeds are a good clip! but in my experience at that point the light isn't the issue but slower riders and frequent pedestrians or clueless people getting out of cars. Idaho stop, baby!
Would De maisonneuve be right-turn only for cars, it would provide much needed safety for cyclists as well as shortening the light cycles.
Everybody in City Hall must cycle to work at least one week a year.
And for one month every year, they must take public transit.
My city is 60 by 200 kilometers. Very few people could cover the distance to City Hall by bicycle and about half wouldn't make it by transit in a day.
I would suggest your idea be used for city and traffic planners though.
@@weldonyoung1013 isn’t it a bit crazy that traveling 100+km for a couple of hours a day is so easy while biking even 5km for 20 min is so dangerous?
@@Basta11 I always though that came down to blood flow.
Sedentary life vs vigorous activity.
But can't figure out why official & planners figure bicyclists can go via the odyssey route though many unnecessary neighborhoods.
Maybe that's blood flow too.
Where I live (Brisbane, Australia) the most common reason bicycle riders don't ride in the bike lane is because it is not a bike lane. Local council and the state government allow cars to park in bike lanes, or they assume that a hard shoulder is a bike lane. Hence many bicycle riders would rather stay on the road (not the car lane as you called it) and have clear travel.
I often find myself outside cycle lanes in Germany. Most of infrastructure is shoved bike lanes into sidewalks or roads as this country refuses to widen streets, ends up painting the ground, squeezing everyone and call it a day. Inside cities, these lanes can be too narrow, wrong surface type for road bikes, too many clueless tourists, unmaintained (glass shards, large rubbish bins, etc) and outside cities, the design is bad. You can easily miss an "entrance" to a bike lane and you have to either u-turn in the middle of a 4 lane road or ride for another couple of kilometers and hope there's an opening back to the lane. Intercity bike lanes are the least maintained in terms of asphalt condition, broken glasses, too bumpy due to tree roots growing, placed 1 inch from the farmlands that fills them with muds and have quite strange path turns (too twisty or not straight) because the priority of smooth flow is only given to cars.
I have been riding in and around Munich, Dusseldorf and Freiburg. All of them share the same characteristics. Worst of all? Drivers here can be absolute vile putting your life in danger and honk at you because you're ignoring a bike lane. They believe if you miss your bike lane, the rest of the law doesn't apply to you.
I will often bypass bike lanes/infrastructure when it winds or curves sharply when it isn’t very busy on the street, I’m trying to go 30-40 kph and it’s very dangerous to be swerving around at that speed and if I can just go straight at the side of the car lanes.
At slower speeds the bike lanes like that (built in the leftover space beside the road, wherever that may be) make a lot more sense than closer to driving. Ottawa has lots of “cycling routes” where you’re switching almost every block between paint, a separated lane, flexiposts, etc. It’s very inconsistent and unless it’s busy on the road, sometimes it’s over complicated just based on the design(s).
If the comments are coming from Montrealers, just assume it's because of construction! Trying to get from East to West around Papineau has turned into a whole side quest at this point and not just for drivers, cyclists and pedestrians too. So cyclists are just trying to get through, same as everyone else.
You mentioned that, due to lack of snow clearing, cyclists are either forced to ride in the street -- or not at all.
1. It's worth mentioning, that they aren't forced into the street. They are forced into a narrower, icy, and overall much more dangerous street.
2. As for the option to not cycle at all, that is not an option for people who want to eat and pay their rent and have no other option (sometimes for weeks on end...).
I'm a sports cyclist and fast commuter. I live in the 3-borders region of Belgium/Germany/Netherlands. In the Netherlands, it's great. There are some areas where the bike lanes have a surface that is not nice to ride on a road bike, but almost all streets have some form of bike lane. In Belgium, there are pretty much no bike lanes at all. Which is actually better than Germany, where it's a mess of shared paths that turn into sidewalks, wide separated bike paths that start suddenly and if you miss the entry point you have to either turn around or keep riding on the road until the next intersection. Or the lane suddenly switches sides, forcing you to cross the road. Or the two-way line suddenly splits into two lanes on both sides. Or the path suddenly ends. Basically a patchwork network of all different kinds of bike lane, a few hundred meters at a time. All this is why I generally avoid riding in Germany, or if I have to, I stay on the road if the "bike lane" is suboptimal.
I avoid cycle lanes in Central London because they're often rubbish and poorly maintained.
They appear like normal cycle lanes, but riding them is a torture.
Many of the bike lanes in Ottawa are more dangerous than biking on the road. Usually I just stay off major road and go down parallel streets.
When the bike trail has not been re-paved for 15 years... I'm riding on the road
Good video. In my region I generally avoid streets with bike lanes because they often make it more difficult to cycle. The two-way ones of the worse because they are more dangerous at intersections and often are only there for a short distance, necessitating crossing and re-crossing streets. Again, I am speaking about my area only.
In NYC, bikes can ride in traffic if they feel safer there. Vehicular cyclists are partly the reason the US hasn’t made more bike lanes. They think if they are “good enough” cyclists people will like them. The truth is many people just want any reason to get anything that isn’t a car off the street.
Two big things I’m seeing here in Salt Lake City in addition to your list: Road conditions are terrible in a lot of bike lanes. They’ll eventually be fully paved but for now they’re mostly gutter lanes with a small median. There is also an increase in e-bikes here, many of which prefer to ride at or near traffic speeds which isn’t safe to do in cramped gutter bike lanes or when passing a pedal-powered cyclist like myself.
I often yell at cars “why are you driving on this street. There’s a perfectly good street over there.”
As someone who rides 20+mph the lane feels safer to me. I like painted bike lanes that let me move back and forth seamlessly between them. Protected lanes honestly feel more like a way to get me "out of the way" of car traffic more than a way to protect me. I feel at risk of cars turning into or out of side streets, as well as pedestrians popping out from between parked cars. I recognize they're very useful for slower cyclists though.
I noticed that in Downtown Edmonton. Especially 103st. That moving trucks will occupy it, or construction will block the bike lanes.
But even if nothing is in the protected bike lane.
I will sometimes find cyclists using the narrow two lane road.
At the time, I was an Amazon driver, so it was really annoying.
But your video is a good explanation
My bike lanes are full of broken glass.
One thing I love about biking in Paris, biking in the general purpose lanes is explicitly allowed, even when there is a bike line on the road. On the most popular routes, like Boulevard de Sébastopol, there is often too much traffic in the bike lanes and so I'll ride outside of the bike lanes (mostly sticking to the bus lane, but going around the buses and taxis when they are stopped in the bus lane).
My issue, as someone who primarily drives, but has a cyclist partner, is people going FAR too fast in bike lanes. If you're going 35+ mph on a 20mph street and your bike lane is inbetween the road and cars, TAKE THE LANE, PLEASE! The further away from cars you are the more time I have to see you coming. If you're doing 40mph downhill in a dense area where cars go 20mph, GET OUT OF THE BIKE LANE!
I've almost hit a couple college students who like to scream down the hill passing cars in the bike lane. I do my best to look, but I have less than a 1/4 of a second to react to them when they're going that speed. I am a very empathetic person and it's going to traumatize me if I end up pulling out in front of a cyclist I cannot see coming. I am sadly disabled so I have to drive most places. I have an e-trike, but I can't get to a lot of places with it due to poor roadways.
Bike lanes can by bumpy and twisty compared to a parallel road.
You also might want to use the road if the bike path is completely in the dooring zone.
That's two reasons more.
For many reasons: 1/ Lack of continuity 2/ Dangerous entrance or exit (roundabout) 3/ Bad pavement (snow, ice, holes, leaves, mud, bumps, glass) 4/ Too many people (pedestrians, bikes, scooters, etc.) 5/ Too narrow 6/ Too scary (esp. for women at night) 7/Not well indicated 8/ Not compulsory (cycle path vs cycle lane) etc..
There are a few spots where the bike path is very poorly maintained, and the parallel street is nice and smooth with little car traffic. So in those spots, I briefly switch to the street.
I've done the same here in Nova Scotia with 100 Series Highway (4-lane limited access 100kph) and the older major Trunk Highways.
Literally had an idiot in a pickup truck swerve towards me because he was mad I wasn't riding in the bike lane that for one, was ending in 20m and is safer to merge into traffic a bit before it ends, and the bike lane was under construction anyways. I hate pickups.
In San Diego, the paint they are using is VERY thick and makes the bike lanes super bumpy, so a lot of us just won't use the bike paths in some areas. Most notably on 4th and 5th ave in bankers hill, but other places too. It kind of sucks honestly. There are also a lot of lanes that now have bike green lights that turn red super early so cars can turn right across the lane, and because these stoplights are so short for us we end up stopping at every block, so it's just faster to use the actual street lane. San Diego, completely missing the mark in a lot of bike infrastructure.
I often avoid the bike lanes in my city, as they tend to be poorly maintained and replete with potholes.
I bike commute in the Los Angeles area, and seeing videos that show how well developed bike infrastructure is in other places is really really frustrating. Parts of my ride there is neither a bike line, nor a shoulder, nor even a sidewalk. Some roads are so rough that I get have almost slipped on low piles of weathered asphalt devolved into sand. These cities that feature in bike centered UA-cam channels look like goddamn paradises.
I have become lost on a cycle lane due to a confusing and poorly signposted junction so I ended up on the road. I think quite often infrastructure gets designed around the budget rather than by cyclists who know what is actually useful. I know of several examples locally of really bizzare attempts at bicycle infrastructure that just leave me perplexed.
My state specifically has laws that say bikes are entitled to be on roads, but must obey traffic signs and signals as if they were a car. They may also be on the sidewalk, but must slow and yield to all pedestrians.
That's pretty reasonable, more places should be like that.
It is often disadvantageous for cyclist to go outside of the bike lane. Most of the time if cyclist did, it is for a reason.
Drivers who complain about cyclists out of a bike lane are missing a fundamental point: bike lanes are built mostly for the benefit of cyclists, not motorists. They're not built to keep cyclists out of the way of motorists so that motorists can have exclusive use of the travel lanes. They are built to provide a car-free lane for cyclists. So when a bike lane is unusable, the bike can use the travel lane. Some places require cyclists to use a bike facility when available, and others don't. New York State has such a law, and I think it is misguided and should be repealed, for the reasons you cite.
See also this video where Casey Neistat gets a ticket in NYC for not using the bike lane. I normally don't hear of this happening, but it can happen. ua-cam.com/video/bzE-IMaegzQ/v-deo.html