Originally Posted by patc

Neither. Both represent unreasonable extremes.

Bikes are vehicles and should always behave as such on any road or pathway. Not all roads are cyclist-friendly: that may be due to the speed or volume of traffic, the grade of a hill, the total length of the roadway, number of stops or intersection, or its ability to connect points A and B. That does not mean the road can't be used, merely that it would not be the desired choice for many.

An urban road network (and here I will include pathways and sidewalks) must provide safe, convenient, and comfortable transportation for as many people as possible. Sometimes that may mean offering a pathway giving cyclists the option of going directly from point A to B by-passing a winding road with steep hills and many intersections. Sometimes that means providing expressways for car traffic to go from one region to another quickly. Sometimes that means public-transit only corridors to move large numbers of people efficiently. Sometimes that means adding pedestrian crossings at places other than intersections.

I reject your model of cycling as something divisible or representable as "VC" and "CS". Bikes combine a car's ability to use roads, with a pedestrian's ability to use narrow pathways. A cyclist has a more difficult time than a car with frequent stops and steep grades, and often travels more slowly, but is also more manoeuvrable and does not need wide travel paths.

A good road network can include any combination of roads, bike lanes, and pathways, sidewalks, and other facilities. A good network should allow users a variety of travel options allowing for personal skills, preferences, comfort, convenience, efficiency, and each vehicle's strengths and weaknesses. A blind adherence to what you term either VC or CS principles would result in a road network that fails to satisfy more than a minority of users.


Bike lanes are spaces on pavement and painted lines. People read into them whatever they want to suit their preconceptions.


I'm not familiar with any cycling facilities influenced by what you call "the CS principle". I am familiar with a city rich in options from moderately good roads (some with bike lanes, some with wide lanes) to three networks of pathways. I hope can continue to enjoy this rich environment, and that dogmatic single vision people never ruin it for us. I want to have options that allow me to decide what mix of relative safety, comfort, and travel time I want given my needs, ability, and even whims.