I was just in the inaugural caravan from crossing over 611, and the no shoulders feels to me like a safety measure. The road is narrow, and I think the lack of shoulders, along with fences and other elements, just mentally makes you want to go slow. It's a claustrophic road, to be sure.

There are lights at: Lower State, Bristol, Likekiln, County Line, Horsham, Costco, and Knapp.

True enough, but I guess I'm a little biased because I have to sit in Chalfont traffic most mornings on my commute to work. It's got to help relieve the traffic in that area. It's better than nothing! This route took 80 years (1932) to come to fruition. Maybe in another 80 years they'll replace it with a twelve lane 120mph super highway. Some will probably complain that that's not enough.

We can blame Buckingham Twp. for "rancorous and relentless" opposition to the expressway (as expressed by the federal district court judge who rejected Buckingham's lawsuit).

All rightey, I drove on it both ways from 611 to 309 yesterday. It is a lovely road, aesthetically speaking, and I enjoyed driving it (other than hitting every darn light save one). On the other hand, the limited access and lack of vehicles coming onto the highway from shopping centers and small side roads was definitely a plus and makes for a safer drive. Is it traffic game changer for the old 202? Not convinced. People coming from Lansdale direction aren't going to want to deal with the rush hour traffic from the section of 309 from five points to the parkway, so will likely just peel off onto the old 202, for starters. Is it dangerous? Very possibly. Lots of hills and curves... Imagine ice and snow... they will have to be on top of the weather to keep it safe to drive on. The bike lane is nice, but there really is no room for error and imho could have been done in the walking area (kept separate by a solid line, just as it is on the road). Not that biking is the preferred mode of travel in the USA, so it's not likely to be crowded with bike riders, but one distracted driver passing a bike rider... Swerving a little... I shudder. I will definitely use ot over the old 202 for heading in that direction, but am still skeptical that it will achieve the goal of easing trtaffic congestion on the old 202.

Oh and I meant to add, regarding bikes... Part of my problem with the bike lane is that Americans in general don't seem to see the need to "share the road". I doubt that we (in general) will see the bike lane as a bike lane, more likely we will see it as a shoulder area for automobiles (despite all the reminders painted directly onto the pavement). It would be nice if people would be more open to the idea of sharing the road with bikes. That's a two way street of course, but I see more rude car drivers than rude bike riders, and the general attitude seems to be "cars own the road". :-( okee dokee, will sit on my hands now. :-)

As I was driving home from work tonight, I thought of another issue regarding bicyclists riding on the shoulders on the parkway. The shoulders are only five feet wide, but a new "Four Foot Safe Passing Law" went into effect in PA on April 2, 2012. Assuming that some drivers obey that law, it will cause traffic backups as they wait (traveling at the biker's speed) for oncoming traffic to clear so that they may cross over the double yellow line to provide the mandated four foot clearance. But, more likely, less responsible drivers will be either crossing the double yellow line at inopportune times (oncoming traffic) or coming too close to the bicyclists. Both of these infractions are also likely to happen at relatively high speeds, as well. This is a recipe for disaster. It seems to me that this new law was not taken into consideration when it was decided to designate the shoulders as biking lanes. The law and the five foot wide shoulders are incompatible, IMHO.

I'm not sure the intent of the construction of this road was to help each individual commuter... rather to ease congestion on the one-lane roads we all wend our way through. I can only hope it does that...