Urban Design and Human Behavior Block Environmental Efforts

I recently saw this video on one of my favorite online communities, and it gave me pause for thought. The average person might view this video and think something like, "wow, this pretentious and stubborn New York biker is deliberately putting himself in harms way to prove a point. Let's watch it again!"

A typical, if unobstructed, bike lane in NYC.

While I did watch the video several times, it was not solely for the comedic effect. I actually admire this man, Casey Neistat, not for making me mindlessly giggle and gasp for three minutes and four seconds, but for bringing awareness to the internet community about several things: poor urban design in major cities, the faults of auto-centric communities, human behaviors that hinder good stewardship practices, and finally, equality issues associated with mode of transportation in the USA.

Yet, I didn't feel like it would be appropriate to make these claims without first reading at least the circulation element of the NY plan. But low and behold, my five minute Google search for such a document was fruitless as, I soon realized with a quick reference to Fulton and Shigley's Guide to California Planning (4th ed.) that just because California has an excellent mandated planning document--the general plan--this does not mean that any other states do. What a pity.

Stephen Hammer of the Gotham Gazette agreed with me in his 2006 article, saying that such a large, global city is going to need a plan like the one used in London to be able to tackle the issues faced by Bloomberg. Hammer also notes such issues like how increasing commercial redevelopment in some neighborhoods with limited public transport will increase the number of car trips and thus congestion, or how some neighborhoods with good land-use potential for increased public circulation may not have the electrical capacity to do so. In short, transportation is an issue for the growing and redeveloping city of New York.

Later on in my search, I found that the New York City Department of City Planning does seem to be making efforts at bettering these transportation issues. On their front page (copyright 2013), the NYC DCP has an Agency Strategic Plan, which can either be viewed as a powerpoint with notes included beneath the slides or as a video narrated by Commissioner Burden. While this is a far cry from a proper General Plan document (like the ones by the City of San Diego or the City of Seattle), yet it notes specialized master plans for the individual neighborhoods (which are unfortunately not readily available online).

The NYC DCP video claims to take a "neighborhood approach to smart development" and already boasts  "dense, mixed use neighborhoods centered around extensive transit network" and that "New Yorkers choose to get around by means other than cars". While all of these statements are true (thank goodness for the New York Subway!), how could it be that actual New Yorkers are still so dissatisfied with the bike paths in NYC? While NYC DCP even has a bicycle and greenway planning division "committed to making bicycling a vital part of the transportation system", the fact still stands that this historic city of huge economic, social, and cultural importance is first and foremost an auto-dominated city. What is a society saying when it purposely places bike lanes between parked cars and traffic, and then allows those lanes to be blocked by rubbish or vehicles? Clearly, NYC is saying that it is more focused on pleasing those people who chose to pay into the fossil fuel economy than those who decide to lower their own emissions. Perhaps those people who choose emissions and physical inactivity should be most inconvenienced in their daily mobility.

This notion ties into the socioeconomic inequalities and environmental injustices that I believe are at play in this situation. In large European cities where biking is prevalent, and even in some innovative American cities like San Fransisco, the bikers are often regarded highly enough to merit a different street structure where the parked cars protect bikers from traffic. Here, the city and its citizens have decided that human life and environmental efforts like bike riding are more valuable than an automobile. By doing so, the biker is kept safer while still giving the benefits of clean air and zero net energy use to the drivers.

Unprotected bike lanes can be hazardous to riders.

Finally, cars are used in America as a status symbol. The common paradigm today is that the rich can afford to travel in luxury on their own watch, while the lower classes are forced to take public transportation and ride their bikes. However, in a world where everyone rides a bike to work, the gap in equality is significantly reduced, and everyone benefits from increased health, lower emissions, and better mood. 

So what?

New York City , which is over a hundred years old, is bound to have some issues incorporating public demand for increased modes of alternative transportation, namely bicycling. However, just because there  are bike lanes painted onto the asphalt does not mean that bikers will be safe riding in them or that they are always be clear for riding. It is my humble opinion that the NYC DCP (especially their Bicycle and Greenway Division) should get cracking on designing and implementing solutions. If the NYC DCP BGWPD were to implement safe, protected (parked car barrier), and even scenic bike ways throughout the city through urban redesign, perhaps more people would be enticed to ride their bike, or at least to acknowledge and respect bikers for lessening their carbon footprint. In this way, all New York citizens and the environmental quality of their fair city would benefit.