David Byrne - 'I plan my routes based on where the bike lanes are'
 

He's been biking in NYC since the 70's, and he's happy to have facilities.

http://video.nytimes.com/video/2009/...20video&st=cse

OK, fixed the video link above.

:thumb:

I look for routes with lower speed differential (between me and other vehicles) and lower traffic density. If high speed and/or high density can't be avoided, then I look for a shareable width outside lane, preferably one that has not been defaced with a bike lane.

The density and type of junctions (cross-streets, driveways, controlled vs. uncontrolled intersections, etc.) can also be a factor.

If the temperature is below 60 degrees F (which eliminates 90% of the obliviots), if my destination makes it an appropriate choice, and if I'm not in a hurry, I might hop onto the MUP for some of the journey. Being committed to following the rules for drivers of vehicles and enjoying a quiet ride away from car fumes are not mutually exclusive propositions.

:roflmao:

let's say, high roller, you had to get from downtown to west boise/meridian to a business off Ustick road. how would you go about that exactly? avoiding the obvious transportation cooridor of Ustick and its best still vehicular bicycling conditions for fastest access because your city facilitates roadway bicycling with bikelanes?


:roflmao:

Boise is a bit more, oh, sprawly than NYC. I bet its a bit different. have you ever ridden your bike in a major american city? which ones, and when?

I plan my routes by where i have to go. how the road is laid out is no consequence to me, but i realize and recognize palpable differences between how shared lanes feel versus bikelaned streets.

there is a qualitative difference between a neighborhood street and a 45 mph arterial with narrow lanes, and that is why transportational vehicluar cyclists like high roller choose lower speed low volume routes. john forester would call that an 'inferiority complex' but its simply human nature.

have you read 'the four types of cyclist' by roger geller yet, high roller? your choice of low speed low volume routes places you in the B grade cyclists by the FHWA and the enthused and confident typeology of Geller. I suspect in NYC you'd be riding the well provided bike specific roadway architecture there as David Byrne does.

'shareable wide outside lanes' are a suburban luxury, and not everywhere in the suburbs at that.

Yes, rode Ustick to work in southeast Boise when we lived in Meridian. 34 mile round trip commute every day for a couple years. Kind of glad I'm not doing that one any more.

Not sure how you define “major american city”, or why that's germane to the discussion, but I have relied on a bicycle as my primary means of transport in the following places: Boise (25 years), Los Angeles (21 years), Minneapolis/St. Paul (5 years), and Anchorage, AK (1 year).

Boise’s downtown core is very similar to many other cities I have seen. High density, slower speeds, one-way streets, and a more interconnected grid layout make cycling much more pleasant than out in the suburbs, with their over-reliance on high-speed arterials and dead-end side streets. And yes, we have plenty of narrow 45 mph arterials here too. I ride them when I have to, taking as much of the lane as I need (such as on my current daily work commute), and choose calmer parallel routes when they are available and not too far out of the way. Wouldn’t anyone? Where did you get the idea that facilities minimalists must also be masochists? Or that they must derive some kind of narcissistic pleasure in creating perturbations in the trafffic flow around them? There are things a city can do to become more bike friendly besides splattering white paint all over the place.

Traffic speed, traffic density, shareable outside lanes, and inter-connectivity are the essential components of the algorithm for me; bike lanes are not. If a shoulder is wide enough for a decently wide bike lane, then it is wide enough to serve even better without the paint: less debris, fewer tire punctures, fewer close passes, and no subliminal message to motorists that I must be confined to a space that is often not conducive to defensive and prudent cycling.

I honestly think you are confused about shoulders, bike lanes etc.

like randya points out, little of what you pine for is even relevant in a city like New York.

a shoulder is always marked with a stripe so removing a shoulder stripe isn't in the playbook no way no how.

They put in bikelanes for riders like you, high roller, with your natural aversion to high speed narrow laned roads.

and to go West on Ustick you'd be okay choosing Ustick with its bikelane to satisify your desire for a more pleasant riding experience than a narrow laned 45 mph arterial.


youre bluster about 'wide shareable lanes without paint' is transparent in its self deceit.

'facility minimalists' :roflmao: can't admit to themselves that riding conditions are empirically improved by adding bike enhancements that do not contradict the rules of the road, are vehicular by design and improve a cooridor for cyclists like high roller that have an aversion to fast busy traffic on narrow high speed roads.

Like Ustick. Now, high roller doesn't have to look for that alternate route!

once you've admitted to yourself your self delusion and deceit perhaps the thread can move forward about David Byrne's perspective on accommodating human scaled transportation in the big apple.

regarding New York City and not suburban idylls of the spurious, here's an excellent presentation about " active infrastructure" in NYC. It outlines out enhancing the health quotient and liveability in NYC from one the foremost researchers in the field of bicycling transportation, John Pucher...

bicycling and walking for all New Yorkers: a path to improved public health

this paints a very compelling portrait of the benefits from bike infrastructure in cities like New York (or Boise's "dense urban grid" :D) in a large and easy to understand format.

puchers report resonates with david byrne's analysis.

Stop making sense!

This sort of abuse is counterproductive. To the extent you care about cycling advocacy and safety you would be well advised to dial the vitriol way down.