Originally Posted by patc

I think its a strange combination of separated and integrated facility, and I'd really like to hear from the engineers why they went this way. If you can merge into the nearest lane at any point, I would not consider it separated (I refuse to use 'segregated'). This design allows that, albeit through a shoulder, so its not truly separated. On the other hand I can't really call it integrated either when the "bike lane" is not adjacent to the other travel lanes.

If nothing else its different, and may be worth building for that reason alone. The feedback from people actually using the road will be far more valuable then our opinions.