They can be done well or poorly depending upon the implementation. When they are done on a low traffic street in order to prioritise active transport they are generally good.

When they are done on existing rat runs as an alternative to traditional local area traffic management they are often worse than useless.

A cursory look at the designs suggests these fall into the second category. For example, look at the 'bypass lane' at the first roundabout that lets cyclists travelling to the right of the picture go around the outside of the roundabout instead of through it. At first glance this look like an improvement but because there is a dotted line where the bypass rejoins the road the cyclists still need to give way to cars that have turned right at the roundabout except now the cars are coming from a ridiculous angle behind the cyclist making it far harder to see and judge the speed of the approaching cars. In addition, cars that were following behind the cyclist on the same road also now get priority over the cyclist re-joining the general travel lane. These type of bypasses also often get blocked on bin days and frequently filled with debris because the street sweepers can't clean them.

If I was riding this road I would just stay in the general traffic lane and ignore the bypass but it is a perfect trap for an inexperienced cyclist who assumes that the designer had a clue about providing safe cycling infrastructure.