Bravo, Mark. Nice to see some balance in the Ballston-Patch.

"Yes, a car may have to cross a bike lane to turn right. No, a driver should not cruise along - half in the lane, half out - before making the turn. Just using a turn signal and making sure no one is there before starting the turn would be great, thanks."

Do you think that a car should pull far right -- blocking the bike lane -- before making a right-hand turn? Personally, I think they should.

I bike to work and all throughout Arlington. While I appreciate Arlington's attempt to create what passes for bike lanes here in the County, for the most part the painted bike lane strips we have in Arlington are inadequate, especially on Wilson/Clarendon Boulevard. Bicyclists share the lane with both parked and moving cars and it is a real trick not to get hit or have a door open and hit you as you ride by. If anything the painted lines give bikers and cars a false sense of security. We need real bike lanes here that are not shared with cars. Unrealistic maybe (due to our space limitations and budget constraints), but if that is the case, then we should call the cheap bike lanes we do have what they really are-faux bike lanes-- designed to make us feel good and believe that we are actually being bike friendly. It is similar to the rules about needing two people in a car to travel in certain HOV lanes. Whatever way you want to rationalize it, a date is not a carpool. A bike lane with some painted lines and a picture of a bicyclist, that serves a dual purpose as a parking and turning lane, is not a bike lane. It is just some painted lines and pictures. Maybe we should just push for prettier pictures and more vibrant colors. At least our faux bike lanes would be more attractive.

The new Maryland Driver's manual describes the right turn across a bike lane this way:
"Try to avoid any chance that a bicycle will be to your right or in your right blind spot when you turn right. Before starting a right turn, move as far to the right as practicable within the bike lane, shoulder, or right turn lane. Yield to bicycles as to any other vehicle proceeding straight."

I personally think this is the safest way to prevent a right hook.

My big complaint about cyclists is that they ride on the steet, or sidewalk, at night without a front light or a rear red reflector. I almost hit a cyclists at the top of the exit ramp to the Memorial bridge. It was dark, he had no lights and he was crossing in front of me from the side walk on the wrong side of the road.
I grew up in a small town in Ohio. We had no bike lanes, we rode on the street. We had to get a license for our bycycle. To get that, one had to pay $1 and pass a safety inspection conducted by the police and basic knowledge of traffic rules .(ie turning hand signals, when you had to have your light on etc.)The safety inspection required you to have a front white light and a rear red reflector. This made riding safer for all and taught me, at a young age, to respect the law.

>>>Some drivers have developed a habit of pretending that bike lanes are turning lanes<<<

I largely agree with the article, but this sentence comes with a footnote... I'm admittedly not too familiar with Virginia, but in DC and MD: bike lanes often have a dashed portion approaching intersections which indicate the crossing over point as motorists enter in the turn lane.

While these crossing-over points feel pretty intuitive in the MD suburbs -- where the turning lane is readily apparent -- in DC the turn lanes may not quite seem as visibly so & can be quite narrower. There are a number of areas in DC where the bike lane seems to be a part of the turn lane, as it has striped markings and the combined width is still only about 8-10 ft.

Continuing w/ Geof Gee's comment:

>>>Do you think that a car should pull far right -- blocking the bike lane -- before making a right-hand turn? Personally, I think they should.<<<

There may also be some benefit to right-turns shifting into a turn lane, if provided, as it separates the conflict points into two areas. First they can change lanes, watching to see that they do not cross too near to any adjacent bicyclists. Then they can pay attention to traffic from the left & crossing pedestrians without worrying about bicyclists coming up on their right, from behind. Sans a turn lane: the motorist is now looking in 3 directions; and by the time they've checked their third location the 1st is likely to have changed its situation.

I should probably have been clearer - I was thinking particularly about those cars rolling along in the bike lanes where there already *is* a right turn lane to the right of the bike lane (see, e.g., Fairfax & Glebe, or Wilson & Veitch (pictured in the photos)). That said, I don't think it's helpful (or safe) for drivers to stack up in the right-hand bike lane to make a two lane street into a three lane street (see, e.g., Clarendon & Highland).

Andrew - I'm a fan of the dashed lines (which avoid creating what some call "coffin corners") to end bike lanes before intersections. Cyclists should take the lane at that point, cross the intersection, and then return to the bike lane if it's safe.

I had a feeling that was what you meant; but the "I must comment on everything on the internet" itch swelled within me. Thanks for the clarification!

<i>My big complaint about cyclists is that they ride on the street, or sidewalk, at night without a front light or a rear red reflector.</i>

I support the idea that it should be culturally accepted to bike at night and be safe. However, I definitely agree that this action puts a responsibility on the cyclist to equip his or her bike appropriately with flashing lights on both the back and front. When it's not abysmally hot out, I wear a bright yellow jacket as well. Unfortunately, lights are pretty expensive, which is why the Washington Area Bicyclists' Association program to give out bike lights in low-income neighborhoods to those without them is so important.