What’s odd about the illustration above? It shows a residential street with a lane for people who ride bikes. There are also sidewalks for people who walk.
Look at the opposite side of the street. There is a double yellow line quite close to the curb. It isn’t a trick of the camera angle or a feature of my poor photo skills.
The double yellow line shows the centre line of the road. People who drive have the central portion. People who cycle have a demarked lane if they are going in the same direction as people who drive. People who drive can’t fit into the far side curb lane, but people who bike can. Ergo, a counter flow lane. A counter flow that treats the people who cycle as equals to those who drive cars.
Here’s the view from the other side of the street:
And here’s a closer up photo of the centre of the street, showing it has been re-striped from a two-direction facility primarily for the convenience of people who drive, to a more inclusive street design that accommodates people who drive cars AND people who drive bikes.
There isn’t any big signage warning of counter flow lanes, no war on cars verbiage, just reliance on the tried-and-true public road conventions of a double yellow line separating directions of flow plus a curbside space for people who cycle that gently separates them from people who drive cars.
More proof people who cycle are cheap dates.
where is this?
Are you sure this is not a one way street?
for people who drive cars, it is lined as a two way street, for people who cycle it is one direction on a bike lane, parallel to cars, and for the opposite direction the have a traffic lane suitable for very narrow vehicles like bikes.
putting up no cars type signs can aggravate people who drive, this lane marking struck me as much more positive and downplays the special treatment for people who bike