The reality is that there are plenty of places around the world that have transitioned from car-centric to mass-transit centric / self-propulsion-centric cities. Deliveries can happen with bikes and for larger things trucks can use side street. Really, only the elderly or disabled really need to get dropped off right at the door. Others should get fined for blocking traffic. Once you've been to a nice city and you see it all work out like the bike optimists talk of it working you see that they're right about most of it. The only thing I think they get a little wrong is that some of them over-estimate the speed they think they'll be able to bike. Good cities tend to have way more cyclists and this is safer, but slower. Don't get me wrong, I'm a speed demon with my bike, but I'd take a European city over an American one any day of the week.
>"The reality is that there are plenty of places around the world that have transitioned from car-centric to mass-transit centric / self-propulsion-centric cities."
Indeed and I think that is the OPs point. NYC simply has not, that is what I believe is what he meant by saying that "better civic planning" is the answer. NYC simply "bolted on" the promotion of biking in the quickest way possible - using some paint. It's not a holistic solution. Getting mad at violations in the half baked implementations like this seems counter productive. I also don't see much in the way of self-regulating behavior with the biking community. People constantly ignore directional bike lanes on one way street(that's why there's arrow.), run lights at intersections, weave between pedestrian in a cross walk etc. I could walk around with a pedestrian cam and spot just as many violations. My point is that is not productive. The current half-baked system is bad for everyone not just bikers.
If NYC wanted to get serious about biking they would adopt permanent bike only streets say a couple in uptown/downtown direction and couple int he cross town direction.
