[byteofbits]

As someone who has recently started to use cycle lanes to move around London I disagree with the view expressed in the article. Many of the cycle lanes I use everyday in West / Central London are only painted.

I personally feel much safer in a cycle lane, even if only a painted one, simply because I don't have to worry as much about getting side-swiped by a bus. Seeing the end of a painted cycle lane is a good indication that the road ahead requires more complex navigation and will often cause me to slow down and be more cautious.

[C1sc0cat]

As some one who used to cycle a lot in London - the problem is the use of the reserved space at stop lines for cyclists as it teaches cyclist to aggressively undertake cars to get to the front.

An before you down vote me - undertaking and getting hit causes 90% (aprox) of the fatal casualties in London.

[jessaustin]

Could you define that term? All I'm getting are "a formal pledge or promise" and "the occupation of an undertaker".

[dmurray]

Undertaking = passing on the left, in a system where traffic is meant to drive on the left and pass on the right. By analogy with overtaking, for passing on the right.

Cyclists (in a bike lane or not) undertaking heavier vehicles certainly are involved in a lot of serious accidents. However it's a very twisted view of reality to say that this causes accidents. The proximate cause is the heavy vehicles turning left or pulling to the left without regard for the cyclist in their blind spot.

[jessaustin]

Oh that's a nice word! Being alive is better than being right, so blind spots are a bad place to be. Actually it's fine to be right behind a big vehicle, but I never want to be beside them for more than a couple of seconds...

[C1sc0cat]

No if you take very risky action you do cause accidents - and you do bear some responsibility.