How to Build a Better Trike Lane (and Get More People Out on Trikes)
I am not joking when I prefer tricycles over bicycles.
When people encounter words such as “tricycles,” there is a malicious judgment which assumes triking as a juvenile activity. Perhaps, being unable to balance on two wheels instead of three is seen as less honorable– haply, less brave, or even to say less “manly,” whatever that is supposed to mean. We alienate those who cannot afford bicycles in youth and those whose parents did not have time to teach their kids how to ride on two wheels. In a sense, to promote “bike lanes” over “trike lanes” or “cycling lanes” is to make public space usable only for people with special training and special set of skills, which is the very element the bicycle advocate is arguing against.
Of course, these lanes do not discriminate between trikes and bikes. The above mentioned statement is to point out how our judgment really hinders us from promoting changes which might be seemingly an improvement for the city. Cycling (biking, triking, uniking, etc.) makes the city accessible to people of all age, preferably those who can use their legs freely. Yet, when I think about cycling, I make judgments: 1) it will be dangerous and hectic to get through the cars and 2) there will be no place for me to park the cycles safely.
Then there are problems with work ethics, which did not develop for cyclists, but for walkers and mass transit users and drivers. I can listen to the radio in a car, get to my destination faster, and even carry other people. I can read a play or two, do my homework, beg for money, have a feast or take a nap in the subway. I can have an active conversation, stop when I need to, enter whichever buildings, and do all things I want when I am on my feet. Cycling requires my whole self, but only gets one job done–getting to the destination. The modern work ethics works around the theme of plures in unum: we want more and more things stuffed together into one action or one device.
Roskowski says maybe the biggest change is psychological. I dare Roskowski to take more confidence with that claim. Between our judgments and trends of behaviors, the fate of city cycling is destined to wane. The placing of extra lanes will not be the solution itself, rather it should be an attempt to change the psychological factor that runs behind this initiation.
3 Comments
woo seok choi
March 29, 2016I’m not sure what your stance is on implementing new bike lanes, but you introduce interesting points.
You mention that bike lanes are assumed for two-wheelers and that other -ikes are stigmatized. I mean, I agree, but riding a bike is a pretty common skill, and it does come off as odd that you wouldn’t know how to ride one. Then again, no one is really going to have a condescending view of you if you don’t know how to ride a bike. So I don’t think that bike lanes select for any special training or skill. Everyone knows how to ride a bike.
You mention some concerns that cyclists may have from riding in a city. I think having separate bike lanes takes care of the whole “riding is dangerous and scary” aspect. I think most drivers agree that it’s nerve-racking and rage-inducing to have cyclists weaving in and out of your lane. Having bike lanes prevents reckless behavior from both driver and cyclist. Also, I don’t think most cyclists have trouble finding parking in the first place. The city has so many railings and poles to chain up your bike to. It’s a common sight and pedestrians don’t seem to mind.
Your mentioning of plures in unum was pretty cool. I agree that cycling requires the whole self. It’s pretty hard to multitask while focusing on cycling. But I also think that’s the way it is with driving. It’s simply because both cycling and driving present imminent physical dangers if not conducted with complete concentration. When walking and riding the train, you can be more carefree and indulge in other activities.
Ben
March 29, 2016The most interesting point that I think you bring up is the idea that by promoting the use of bicycles, the author is almost discriminating against other forms of cycling. While I don’t necessarily agree with that, I like how it enforces the idea that there definitely is a psychological stigma associated with bicycling (and other forms of cycling as well). It seems that both you and the author would agree that the only way to conquer this feeling is to make cycling through the city more widespread and “normal” for lack of a better word. However, you then bring up a couple of issues as to why this is much easier said than done. Here I’d have to disagree. While cycling may not offer residents the same multitasking ability as other forms of transportation, it provides its own unique advantages. I think that most people who cycle regularly would tell you that they cycle not just because of the green aspect that comes along with it, but because they enjoy it overall. When mixed with automobiles in the street it does pose a dangerous threat, but the whole idea behind this article to increase bike lanes aims to solve this problem in an effort to get more cyclists out on the streets to the point where cycling is seen in a better light as a practical form of transportation throughout the city.
Tala Azar
April 3, 2016You bring up some really great points Lucius! Like Ben, one of the things that stood out to me was the idea of biking as a task that requires your entire body. Bringing up this point seems especially applicable to the NYC streets, because our city in particular has such a prominent work ethic embedded in its residents. This is obvious when one looks around in a subway car or on the bus, which is personally my favorite location for writing papers. However, I do believe that those who bike are aware of this and would choose another mode of transportation for the day if they were planning on getting work done during their commute. In general, I see bike riding as a respite from the hustle and bustle and- for those who enjoy and are able to ride a bike- something that contributes to an increased quality of life.