Originally Posted by Serge *******
If you think that Forester or I mean to imply that that bikes are equivalent to other road vehicles, then we have a major misunderstanding. But I know you're not the only one who has gotten this impression.
Yes, I have the impression from you and several others, including Forester, and I don't feel the disclaimers negate that.
Originally Posted by Serge *******
The wording Forester has chosen in the VC principle is very precise. I don't know if you've given it the attention it deserves: Cyclists fare best when they act and are treated as drivers of vehicles.
I've given Forester more attention than he deserves.
Originally Posted by Serge *******
But I never interpreted an equivalence of bicycles to other vehicles in the wording of the VC principle or in anything else I've ever read by Forester, and I certainly never meant to imply such an equivalence in anything I've ever written. The implications of such a premise are of course absurd, as you point out.
I snipped much of that to save space, and because I have a cold and don't feel like writing much. I maintain that this is precisely the attitude I have seen from you, Bruce, Forester, and others to various degrees. I see all vehicles as different (and all operators of such vehicles as different as well) hence my support for special-use lanes and many other facilities.
If you agree that bikes are not equivalent to cars, then you can not say that:
- cyclists can always negotiate traffic, in all conditions on all roads
- all roads are appropriate for use by all cyclists
- bike facilities are not needed at any time by anyone
- there is no need to give bikes special consideration when designing any roads
Further, if you do indeed agree with the above, then you should also agree that:
- the separation created by bike lanes and pathways is needed by some cyclist, some of the time
- bike facilities
such as bike lanes are needed in some places/times for at least some people
- we need to give bikes and cyclists special consideration, as we do other vehicles and users
So Serge, despite your anti bike-lane views, your claims of segregation, etc. do you now agree with me that bike lanes and/or other similar facilities are needed, and that merely riding vesicularly on "standard" roads (ie. no bike allowanced made) will not meet the needs of all cyclists?
I am well aware that in some conditions mixing traffic works well (even taken to the extreme of removing all traffic separation, as the Dutch are trying). In other situations this is impossible, eg. Ontario 400 series highways with a posted minimum speed limit of 60km/h. In that case the only options a complete ban on bikes, or special accommodations. Are you advocating a ban on bikes?
(Crap, this is a long message after all. )