Originally Posted by
FBinNY
Unless you propose 100% separation of bikes from the roads, we'll always be spending a decent amount of time on shared roads. I have no aversion to segregated facilities along major corridors, but we still need to address the issue of safety on shared roads, because that's where bicyclists will be riding a large percentage of the time.
Also, the safety/segregation argument works two ways. If we keep saying that sharing roads is unsafe, we might get a remedy we don't want, total segregation and a ban from many roads for our own safety.
Frankly I don't believe a ban from "taking the lane" as indicated in the report, on high speed arterial roads, is such a bad thing. I don't believe the report established that "sharing the roads" is the problem, but that "taking the lane" as "a standard practice" may not be such a good idea. That is the specific issue they addressed right up front. Sharing the roads through the use of buffered bike lanes was one suggested practice.
My own anecdotal view is that speed differential on various types of roads is the key to understanding when taking the lane vice using separate or buffered facilities is the best practice. Taking the lane while riding 16 MPH on a 25-30 MPH road is far less likely to be deadly in a rear end collision than taking the lane and doing 16MPH while on a 55MPH road. Trying to lump all roads under a heading of "shared roads" leads to broad generalizations that are quickly dismissed.