The Urban Cycling Movement is out of step with its own goals. As dollars for transportation shrink the importance of sustainable transportation options increases. The one place where this disconnect is most obvious in the antiquated transportation hierarchy is in regards to the placement of privately owned bicycles.
The focus going forward should always be centered around paying transportation options. Any vehicle that requires on street parking at the expense of the tax payer should be lowered in its valuation in the transportation hierarchy. That certainly describes privately owned bicycles.
In sharp contrast the city has BikeShare options that not only generate revenue for themselves but come with their own on street parking footprint which does not add to that created by the stations themselves. The position of these bicycles is also elevated in that it created jobs for inner city residents. That means taxable income which helps both the city and the worker.
Finally the BikeShare bikes design is one provides some keep elements which will make future improvements possible. Unlike their privately owned counterparts, BikeShare bikes have by definition been equipped with hub generators. This means that effective lighting that contributes to the safety of the rider is already there. But more importantly electronic devices that aid in powering collision-avoidance technology can be adapted to these vehicles without concern for batteries.
I would propose that the Transportation Hierarchy instead be adapted to look like this: