I might be a little biased since I am the filmmaker, but I agree with Aaron.

It might be useful for the beginning cyclists but I have no idea how there is any comparision. None was meant. The NHTSA video is what it is, but we still would like the city to try some separated bike lanes.

To the first point, the NYCSR video is advocating for physically separated bike lanes, a new type of bike infrastructure for New York City. The NHTSA video is providing basic tips for safe riding. The two videos are not at all trying to do the same thing.

Second, the NHTSA video seems like it could be useful to children or beginner suburban cyclists but it doesn’t do much of anything to address the big challenges that urban commuters face regularly. Tips on riding in heavy traffic or dealing with pedestrians or potholes or double parked cars or big trucks would be useful. Wear a helmet and check your tires? Not so useful.

*National Highway Traffic Safety Administration

Hope you are checking back…see here

http://www.tfl.gov.uk/cycles/company/standards.shtml

That should get you started.

The ramp, which allowed bicyclists access to a bridge over the F.D.R. connecting the southern terminus of the UES Greenway and East 62nd Street has been closed. Bicyclists are now required to carry bikes up a temporary stair. There is a sign stating that the ramp is only “temporarily” closed, but I am not too hopeful. The city has studied the feasibility of extending the East River Greenway between 50th and 61st Street, but it has no plans to do so before 2018 (http://www.nyc.gov/html/dcp/html/mwg/maps_2_3_3.shtml ). Even as other portions of the East Side Greenway further south–such as the United Nations portion due for completion in 2008 ( http://www.nyc.gov/html/dcp/html/mwg/maps_2_3_1.shtml )–are completed on time, the lack of a ramp at 62nd street will leave those new portions isolated from the rest of the network. So this “temporary” 62nd St. bridge closure represents “two steps back” in relation to any future “step forward” for physically separate bike lanes in East Midtown.

The city has not erected signs warning southbound Greenway bicyclists to exit at 72nd Street if they wish to avoid the stairs, but that is the now the southernmost point at which bicyclists can access the UES segment of the Greenway without portage. Here are some pics of what’s in store if you decide to venture south of 72nd, as well as of the FDR service road that the city is building at fabulous expense instead of extending the Greenway:

http://www.flickr.com/photos/43954081@N00/sets/72157594483481393/

Geez, way to go above and beyond! Thanks for the linkage and all, and as I always say, just contact us if you want DVDs to support your mission. All of our stuff is Creative Commons, so the pieces exist for the good of the world and changing it for the better.

I’ve linked to it from our BUG site
http://www.sharkbike.org.au

For the link I created an animated GIF with screenshots from the video – a kind of teaser. Of course you’re welcome to copy it to your site and offer it to others.

Hopefully with the energy being generated by the video, NYC and other cities will now start to consider some separated paths and get us more in line with the rest of the civilized world.

Appreciate the feedback as always. If you need some copies on DVD to help advocate, make sure to hit me at trorb(at)earthlink.net

http://www.livablestreets.info/node/925

**btw, forgive me if I’m using the phrase “Class II” wrongly. I believe it refers to the “standard bike lane”—i.e., the kind on the side of the road with just two white stripes a few feet apart (and sometimes a buffer area)—that’s what I mean when I say “Class II” in this comment. (Someone tell me if that’s wrong, please!)**

First, I, for one, can’t imagine any real likelihood of “columns” of double-parked cars forming alongside bike lanes, because you rarely see a column of double-parked cars anywhere. Yes, double-parking is pathologically common, but not so common that “columns” often form.

Second, cyclists in such a lane, riding between legal parkers and, more realistically a HANDFUL of double-parkers, can generally see into the double-parked cars, and tell whether those cars are likely to suddenly invade the cyclist’s space.

Third, I actually saw such an arrangement, and it looked and felt quite safe! As luck would have it, just yesterday I happened upon the following scene in Manhattan’s 8th Ave. Class II lane in W. 50s. From left to right: 1, the normal column of legal parkers, 2, the bike lane, then 3, some double-parkers (clear of the bike lane, and fully in the CAR lane). I must say that was the ONLY time that that lane has ever looked to me like a safe place to ride—and surprisingly, between the legal parkers and the one or two double-parkers, it actually seemed roomy (but only for single-file cyclists, of course)!

Fourth, and most importantly, I suspect that staying in a straight line in such a clear bike lane, even “between two columns of parked cars,” is safer (and more fun) than weaving into and out of car traffic (and into and out of visibility) almost once every block.

Of course I wish we weren’t even discussing this, because as I’ve often blathered, I don’t even like Class II lanes. I think Class II lanes and, to a lesser extent, even buffered Class II lanes, are fatally flawed by being on the road’s margin. BUT, I make this lengthy rebuttal because I suspect they’re going to be with us for a while, even in spite of the City’s planned expansion of bike routes, in spite of the excitement here about physically separated lanes, AND even if I magically get the City to look at (and like) my soon-to-be-finished alternative bike lane design!

To recap this treatise, I have long thought that the most effective way to protect Class II lanes from being rendered useless by double-parkers (like they are every day, at almost every other block!) would be to 1. acknowledge that condoned double-parking is probably not going away soon, plus 2. compel double-parkers to park not in a bike lane, but in the adjacent car lane.

Remember, double-parking in a bike lane hurts three groups of people (cyclists, legal parkers, and other motorists, because a car in a bike lane is so wide that it obstructs the adjacent car lane too)—double-parking in a CAR lane hurts only one group (motorists)—who are hurt by double-parking in a bike lane! For all this, I suggest that double-parking in a car lane adjacent to a Class II lane is indeed better for cyclists, and in fact everyone. If Streetsblog were my 8th Grade English class, I’d totally be getting an A for this one.