Bicycling in a Commuter Society

Reading the Article by Sarah Goodyear made it seem that making cities more  accommodating for bicyclists would be without difficulty.  Although she lists the pros of adding bike lanes to cities, she fails to address or provide solutions for cities that are already fully developed.  In fact she only mentions that there are issues associated with city’s accommodating for potential bicyclists when she mentions Gabe Klein’s depression (in a jokingly manner too).  The problem is that with cities that are already developed, such as NYC, the only way to fully accommodate this class of commuters would mean stealing space from already narrow streets, clogged with heavy traffic at almost all times of the day.  Less car lanes for biking, simply to try to incentivize people that may or may not even be interested in biking to work/to the store/to a park, etc.. . would only further cripple transportation in the city for those that do not use public transit.

Also for many people, biking is simply unfeasible. Those that commute to Manhattan from outer boroughs, or possibly even from Manhattan to outer boroughs, would not want to bike for half an hour or more, to show up to work hot and sweaty.

There are of course solutions to this.  Bringing the bicyclists, airborne above the streets, or perhaps even underground.  Another solution is to determine ways to curb car traffic within Manhattan by perhaps using a congestion charge system as is in use in London.  Reducing traffic on streets can justify taking street space from motorists and giving it to bicyclists.  Both of these solutions come at a heavy cost, the former would take away aesthetically from the city while costing upwards of millions of dollars, while the latter would only anger motorists that rely on driving to get into the city.

Recognizing that Manhattan is a commuter society, it is essential to know that multiple facets of transport need to be available, however, the pros and cons of reevaluating existing structures and transit must be heavily analyzed.  While I am not against the idea of biking to be a reliable means of transport in the city, at the present time it simply does not seem feasible.  Instead it should be looked at more for the expansion and development of newer cities.

On a slight deviation, the article Eric Jaffe points out the flaws in our already established transportation system that can be fixed relatively easily. Our city and all cities should look towards these solutions that can have a large impact with a relatively low cost, and politics should not get in the way of this. Although Cuomo’s multibillion revamp of the New Penn Station, will possibly improve the transient moments people spend in the center as they shuffle towards their train, it has less of a chance of improving their commute. To me, and to many, a moving city is an efficient city. Increasing capacity and decreasing the time from A to B should be the most important objective for a city planner working on public transit projects.