>>1164536>problem seems to be:>1. that thing is not really a bike lane, just part of the road with some paintIt is a bike lane. I don't know the naming conventions everywhere but where I live the DOT has the following classes of lanes:
1) Protected. These are separated from travel lanes with a buffer. The buffer can be raised curbs for total separation and protection (best and safest, but more expensive), bollards, planters (cheap and keep vehicles out), a painted median, or sometimes there is a painted buffer and then a parking lane. That extra painted buffer is so parked vehicles don't encroach into the bike lane.
2) Conventional: These are painted lanes directly adjacent to travel lanes, the standard run of the mill lane. You are mingling much closer to moving vehicles. These are better than no lane but not always good. If there is a parking lane then you have to deal with vehicles crossing into and over the bike lane to access the spaces.
3) Shared lane: No designated lane. You share the side of the road with vehicles. If you're lucky there are at least "sharrows" on the road to let drivers know there is a lane present and you're supposed to be there.
4) Signed Route: Not an actual lane. Literally nothing. There are some signs from the 1950s that direct cyclists along certain routes.
While
>>1164508 doesn't fit into the standards of my DOT, it'd be somewhere between protected and conventional. It has a buffer, albeit a pretty small one. You can see it has a larger buffer with the right turn lane to the right. In my city they've realized this is not good (having the right turn lane cross over the bike lane) and now like to totally protect the bike lane on the right curb of the road and keep other traffic to the left.
See examples in pic related.
