@mstone 219893 wrote:
I’m not familiar with the road and it’s hard to tell scale from the picture, but is it actually marked as a bike lane? VDOT sometimes marks shoulder lines to visually narrow the road for traffic calming, without marking them as an actual bike lane (typically because they’re substandard). If that’s the case, there is no standard to argue. If it is marked as a bike lane then you might be able to argue standards (or they might just un-bikelane it as a low-effort solution).
Note that this is yet another thing for people with a windshield perspective to complain about: “that cyclist isn’t even using the bike lane that the stupid bicycle lobby took away from my wide luxurious car lane!!!!” “it isn’t a bike lane, it was because too many of you jerks were speeding.”
This one is unambiguously marked as a bike lane: The view looking southbound, just south of LRT
It’s hard to imagine anyone is thrilled with this design. If I’m going to ride on that road, I have to take the lane for my own safety. Given that, sharrows would be better than an unusable bike lane. At least they’d communicate the expectation to motorists that cyclists have a good reason to be in the lane.
Much better would be a road diet dropping to one motorist lane each way, coupled with other traffic calming measures. That could increase the number of AHS students riding to school and decrease the number of teen drivers speeding through a heavily populated area. Plus the street clearly can’t support so much automobile capacity for thru-drivers anyway, given the small fraction of green time it gets from the traffic light duty cycle at LRT.
.
