Besides some of the painted buffered bike lanes work pretty well most of the time. I ride in those whenever I can.

Here the sidewalk is where most of the cyclists are, even when a bike lanes is right there. It is legal.
I assume this is because the bike lanes are as I stated that bad in Tempe.

Just last night, I am in a bike lane that ends for a Right only turn lane for the intersection. A huge truck wants to turn right. I merge out of the bike lane across the front of the truck (truck doesn’t overtake) and sit on the left side of the travel lane. All so a truck can turn right. Of course after I get through the intersection I head back over to the bike lane. The part where I need most protection and they tell me to use the road.

Not true in NYC:

http://www.bicycledefensefund.org/bikelaw.html

Bike Lanes
You are NOT required to ride in the bike lane.

—34 RCNY 4-12(p)(1) states that bicyclists should ride in usable bike lanes, unless they are preparing to turn, or are avoiding unsafe conditions (including but not limited to, fixed or moving objects, motor vehicles, bicycles, pedestrians, pushcarts, animals, surface hazards).

Q: Isn’t this an overstatement of the law? It seems to me that the law says that bikes have to stay in bike lanes.
A: No. If you look at the full text of the statute it clearly grants cyclists the discretion to ride in the bike lane or not, according to whether the cyclist deems it safe. As safe, usable bike lanes are extremely rare in New York City, cyclists are not required to endanger themselves by riding in unsafe bike lanes.

Q: But- but- aren’t you saying that cyclists can ride wherever they want whenever they want? That’s crazy!
A: No. Cyclists are still required to follow all other applicable traffic laws, such as riding the right way on one-way streets (VTL 1127(a)), and exercising due care (VTL § 1146). They are not, however, required to ride in the bike lane if there is any reason not to.

Non-bicyclist here, btw. Streetsblog isn’t just for bikers.

Macho bicyclists, who are accustomed to riding in traffic at 20 miles per hour or more, don’t want to be “marginalized” by bike lanes.

Most people are not willing even to try bicycling in traffic. Bike lanes and paths are essential to promoting a mode shift among these people. The very safe European-style bike lanes that Alan Durning described in a recent article will, of course, promote the biggest mode shift.

Unfortunately, the machos don’t seem to care about promoting a mode shift.

This article says: “A network of seven bike boulevards has been used to great effect in Berkeley.” As one of the activists who helped plan this bike boulevard network and push it through city government, I can assure everyone that, in the denser parts of the city (eg, Channing south of campus), the bike boulevards do have striped bike lanes.

The best model for shared space is the short section of a bicycle boulevard that is a “slow street,” with speed humps to slow traffic to 15 mph, slow enough to make novice bicyclists feel safe. But when we were getting this through city government, some of the loudest objections came from a couple of macho bicyclists who typically bicycled at 20 mph and did not want to slow down to 15 mph.

Fact
We wouldn’t need seperation if we had good drivers.
Bike lanes only sperate traffic so the auto can go faster. They do litte for my safety in terms of design, maintenance, road hazzards, or seperation.
A standard bike lane is 5 feet. A traffic lane is 7 feet. Yet they allow substandard bike lanes.
Thye very rarely design a road with a bike lane. The bike lanes are simply added onto the road.
Bike lanes are put on streets already with traffic calming and 25 mph speed limits.
In a bike lane you will be passed closer and faster.
No thanks keep your stinking bike lane.

As a former lifelong bike commuter (I’ve stopped since moving to NYC because only the subway is feasible for my particular commute) I must say that I tend to feel the same way as Will Campbell. Bike lanes ghettoize bicyclists into a segment of the roadway that is not always the safest place for them to be. Bicyclists need to the freedom to “take a lane” as necessary to avoid obstructions and swinging car doors, and bike lanes tend to assure drivers that bicyclists will remain right of the white line.

At the same time, bike lanes are completely necessary to getting more bicyclists on the street, which is essential for improving bicycle safety more generally.

This is an old debate, but on balance I think our policies should skew toward attracting more cyclists.

As a bike commuter, I can take bike lanes or leave them.

As a biking advocate, I don’t see how pretending there’s no difference between a multi-ton car and a kid on a bike is going to promote greater bike use.

bike lanes have their problems, for sure – mainly limited by poor design and implementation – but from my experience they do raise driver awareness that there are other folks out there with legal rights to the public right of way. until drivers are put through a rigorous ‘road users’ section of their basic training – and pay the price when they do not treat other users as equals – bike lanes, psa’s, awareness campaigns, critical mass, and bike to work week are good places to start making a difference.