Originally Posted by
RobertHurst
Cycling tends to be easier on wider roads. I'm not exactly blown away by this concept.
Keep in mind though if passing distance is your windmill that the addition of a bike lane stripe to 35-mph-plus roads (I know you like the idea of bike lanes on high speed roads) seems to decrease passing distance.
And I doubt it is wise to install infrastructure that is designed to attract fearful beginners first, and provide improved utility for all cyclists second. So the trick is to attract beginners while not throwing them and all the current cyclists under the proverbial bus. I think it can be done. But some of the more "attractive" designs are outright dangerous in my opinion and rather silly. Now let's see what Forester has to say...
What do you suggest for high speed traffic corridors? I think you recommend completely separated infrastructure. I can get behind that.
smooth overtaking in a separate lane on a 35mph road is not nearly the frightful proposition as its made out to be, nor do bikelanes on higher speed traffic corridors throw existing cyclists 'under the proverbial bus'
60mph roads in SoCAL likely need something to more positively promote bicycling, they aren't going to be striping sharrows in a 60 mph traffic lane.
Baltimore cyclists need some combination of countermeasures to help induce bicycling. I suspect a combination of sharrows and bikelanes along routes recognized as significant for bike travel would be a great starting position - oh, right, they're already doing that.
And the data seeping in from Baltimore, as limited as it is, supports more room for bicyclists and the positive effects from bikelanes on roadway traffic dynamics.