[micheljansen]

The thing is, they are neither, really.

Bicycles are not comparable to motor vehicles, as they are much slower (50 km/h vs ~15-20 km/h).

Bicycles are also not comparable to pedestrians, as they are much faster (5 km/h vs ~15-20 km/h).

I think it's a mistake to mix traffic that differs in speed by a factor of 3.

As someone who moved from the Netherlands to London, it has taken me years to adjust to absence of real bicycle lanes. They really do seem like the best answer to me.

[crocowhile]

I agree with you in principle but let me make a cheeky comment: Average speed of a motor vehicle in London is 8.98 mph ( http://www.itv.com/news/london/update/2012-11-19/tfl-average... ) so way lower than average bike commuter speed (~12-15mph)

[micheljansen]

Haha, I'm sure that's true (in fact, it's one of the reasons many prefer cycling), but I'd argue that the average speed matters a lot less than the top speed. Stop and go traffic, where one minute cycles whizz past cars and the next it's the other way around, is probably the worst of both worlds.

[stephendedalus]

I agree. When would you like to exchange your car for a bicycle when the roads are turned back over to pedestrians and cyclists? Road bike or mountain bike?

[joncrocks]

Does that mean we can get 'fast walker' and 'slow walker' lanes as well? :-)

[micheljansen]

Do you walk 3 times as fast as a normal pedestrian? :P