Nicholas Willie
ENST-70
11-11-09
Paper Draft #1
Sustainable transportation in New York City: spurring an increase in
bicycle use
I.
Introduction
Motor vehicle use in New York City and throughout the United States is largely
unsustainable. Motor vehicle use within major cities can relatively easily be decreased by
encouraging the use of other modes of transportation such as cycling, which would decrease
dependence of fossil fuel use, ease traffic congestion, and increase the health of individuals. New
York City has made laudable efforts to increase the levels of bicycle use within its boundaries,
yet the currently available literature shows that they have areas in which they can improve their
efforts. Increasing the rate of construction of bicycle paths and lanes, increasing bicycle
education, the development of social events that introduce people to cycling, and demonstrating
the safety of city cycling should be the foremost goals of New York City.
To demonstrate that New York City requires a shift in its priorities and methods of
increasing bicycle use within its limits I employ a broad qualitative analysis. By reviewing the
literature that pertains to bicycle use, I reveal general principles that any organization should
strongly consider in the implementation of bicycling planning. Thus in the second section of this
paper I review a variety of papers detailing cases studies and stated preference studies. While
some of the information gained from these sources is conflicting overall trends and
recommendations have converged in recent years and there are numerous points on which the
literature offers a broad consensus from a variety of types of studies. Case studies from other
cities and communities are extensively discussed, as they are illustrative of the practical
1
difficulties in increasing bicycle use. Nevertheless, there are issues associated with applying the
results of case studies to an area as diverse and complicated as New York City, so a discussion of
these issues is included.
Stated preference studies are not without issue either. While they gleam valuable
information about what people feel are more important to them, for example with regards to the
safety of traveling by bicycle, these fears and concerns are not always warranted. To
accommodate all of the changes which individuals would like to see before beginning to cycle
regularly would be very costly. A method of addressing this concern is through education efforts,
which could prove invaluable and cost effective in New York City. Furthermore, the concerns of
one community (of a given study) versus another are not always comparable, and may change
over time. It appears however that a hierarchy of concerns and perceived limiting factors to
bicycle use can be developed by analyzing the results of studies from areas with varying degrees
of bicycle usage (i.e., those cities with higher bicycle use typically have different, less ‘serious’
concerns that those with lower use).
In the third section of this paper I examine the current state of infrastructure within New
York City as pertaining to cycling. The state of the infrastructure is indicative of the nature of
possible improvements with regard to cycling. As well, descriptions of current transportation
modes of within the city limits are discussed. The major shortcoming to the transportation
system at this point is a widespread lack of connectivity between bike lanes and paths, which
necessitate riding on regular, unaccommodating city roads, which serves to deter use of bicycles
by would-be cyclists.
The fourth section of this paper examines the city’s plans to encourage bicycle use and
recent city projects. To assess the general principles of the city’s plans to encourage bicycle use
2
over the past twelve years, I review New York City Department of Planning’s 1997 Bicycle
Master Plan, the city’s in use and most current and comprehensive document discussing bicycle.
This plan contains generally sound principles and advice. Additionally, I review the relevant
portions of Michael Bloomberg’s PlaNYC, which may prove to be the guide for future
improvements and changes in transportation in New York City.
The fifth section of this paper discusses actual improvements to bicycle related
infrastructure since the implementation of the Bicycle Master Plan, and discussions of their
effectiveness in light of section II are included. The rate of implementation of the features of the
plan is shown to have been less than satisfactory, particularly with regard to the construction of
bicycle lanes and paths throughout the city. Furthermore, the lack of use of the educational
system to promote cycling is a serious omission by the Department of Transportation.
Discussions of New York City’s progress at large, including the strengths and
weaknesses of its efforts and future proposals are included in section six. As well,
recommendations of efforts to be emphasized and included in future efforts are included. A
collection of other types of papers that are informative of ways to increase bicycle use are
mentioned, as well as discussions of their limitations and the need for more research into the
effectiveness of various methods. The clearest modes for improving cycling rates in New York
City are to increase the construction and connectivity of bicycle paths and lanes and increase
social programs to encourage more bicycle use particularly through education systems.
Cycling will be a crucial mode of transportation within the coming decades in cities
throughout the United States. New York City would do well to serve as a model for other US
cities in leading the way towards a more sustainable transportation system, just as cities
throughout Europe currently serve as examples of the extent to which non-fossil fuel based
3
transportation can support a population. While New York City already has a respectable amount
of bicycle use for an American city, it is suitable for vast and rapid increases. The PlaNYC put
forward by Mayor Bloomberg represents an important step to making such increases.
II.
Literature Review and Analysis
A number of the papers I examined obtained data using stated preference methods to
answer questions about what factors most heavily influenced the decisions of people to use
bicycles for commuting or other purposes. Included in most stated preference studies reviewed
here include descriptions of individual characteristics that affect preference, including age,
household structure, sex, and income. It is possible that the constant exposure of New York City
residents results in them being less concerned about proximity to traffic while cycling, or that
current non-cyclists are more fearful than typical of cycling near traffic. Without a cross regional
examination of preferences, it is difficult to conclude how the preferences of non-cycling New
Yorkers (the population of interest here) compare to those discussed in this section. However,
broad consensus does emerge in the manner of preferences when reviewing numerous case
studies and stated preference surveys, which provides meaningful insight into the ways to best
attempt to increase cycling in New York City.
One study finds that users are willing to pay the highest price for designated bike-lanes,
followed by absence of parking on the street and finally by taking a bike lane facility off road
(Tilahun et al. 2007). Tilahun et al. also note that at the extreme respondents were willing to
travel up to twenty minutes more to switch from unmarked on-road facilities with side parking to
an off road bicycle trail. This study included a sample of workers, excluding students and
faculty, of the University of Minnesota.
4
Sener et al. (2009), in a study of bicycle route choice preferences in Texas, also found
that bicyclists prefer routes with no parking, then routes with angled parking, and prefer rides
with continuous biking facilities (no red lights, stop signs, etc), lower traffic volume, lower
vehicle speeds. However, this study only included members of the currently bicycling
population, only about half of which used their bikes for non-commuting purposes. Sener et al.
note that angled parking is preferred to parallel parking as it allows a little more maneuvering
room for bicyclists and more time for cyclists to react since they can better see cars backing out.
On the other hand such parking arrangements, which increase the amount of available parking (at
the cost of losing one traffic lane, but also gaining a bike lane), reduce the ability of drivers to
observe traffic conditions when they are backing out (McAnanama 2008). A more satisfactory
alternative might be to use ‘back-in / head-out angle parking’, which has been shown to reduce
cyclist accidents compared to parallel parking setups (McAnanama 2008).
Sener et al. (2009) note that the cyclists in their study prefer all purpose lanes to bike
lanes, and suggest that this may reflect the preference of cyclists to have more maneuvering
room by not being boxed into a bicycling lane. They also suggest that this may be associated
with the concept of vehicular bicycling, the notion that motorists should be educated to treat
bicyclists as lawful users of roadways, and the proponents of which oppose bike lanes because
they promote the belief that bicyclist are not legitimate users of ordinary roads. While these
results likely do not generally apply to the population of interest in this study: non cyclists in
New York City, they do raise an important point about the importance of education in
encouraging bicycle use. Sener et al. (2009) also note that commuter bicyclists can be attracted
by reducing travel times.
5
Steg and Gifford (2005) found that people are most strongly opposed to changes that
could increase the sustainability of transportation when they believe that these changes will
result in a decrease in their quality of life. Consequently, they recommend that policy makers
resist the urge to take actions that result in restrictions of freedoms, for if transport policies
aimed at reducing car used are taken by the public as threatening their freedom, they may be
motivated to continue driving, regardless of possible negative consequences. So while increasing
the gas price by a real 1982-84 dollar increases the probability of cycling by 1.5 percent for
males and one percent for females, raising gas taxes is not likely a good avenue of exploration
for increasing bicycle use (Rashad 2007).
Within the confines of New York City, car dependency is relatively low compared to the
United States as a whole, and roughly on part with European cities which have higher bicycle
use rates. Thus within the city, resistance to transport policy changes resulting in reduced car use
will likely have relatively smaller effects on quality of life, and citizens may even realize the
various benefits of decreased motor vehicle use: less traffic jams, less noise, less localized
pollution, etc (Steg and Gifford 2005). Again, this highlights the role of education in increasing
bicycle use, as if people better informed of the benefits of increasing bicycle use and decreasing
motor vehicle use, they their expectations of quality of life changes will shift.
Moudon et al. (2005), Hunt and Abraham (2006), and Rietveld (2004) note that policy
and intervention programs could increase levels of cycling by improving actual and perceived
environmental conditions, particularly as they relate to cyclist safety. However, Krizek (2004)
notes that while considerable research supports this finding, there is little conclusive evidence to
suggest that those facilities commonly created to increase cyclist safety actually do so.
Hanson and Young (2006) and Batterbury (2003) find that it can be quite effective for
6
activists to pressure elected officials to select transportation managers that see sustainable
transportation/bikeways as crucial to overall transportation systems. One crucial finding is that
people are typically more inclined to walk rather than use bus systems or cycle, so it may be
beneficial to maintain and/or improve pedestrian infrastructures along with bicycling facilities
(Sungyop 2008). Also, congestion charging and parking regulations can have significant impacts
on automobile use on short trips, regardless of the presence of other infrastructures (Sungyop
2008, Krizek 2004).
Chang and Chen (2009) note that regardless of policy effectiveness in increasing the
sustainability of transportation, the feasibility of implementing public policy plays a crucial role
in determining what policies, if any, are implemented. Officials need to feel that a policy is
feasible in order to have a positive attitude towards its implementation. It is important to note
that feasibility is not an absolute, but that it is a matter of degree and depends on objective
constraints as well as subjective considerations. Public opinion, regardless of its ‘scientific’
merit, plays a large role in policy officials’ subjective considerations. And since the development
of cycling infrastructure and programming within New York City requires interdepartmental
collaboration, as well as collaboration with state and federal governments (depending on funding
sources), it is imperative that officials responsible for the implementation of changes within the
city are confident in their odds of success, and that they have sufficient ability to achieve such
changes. Chang and Chen found that senior Taiwanese governmental officials believe that
providing better public transportation services is more practicable than limiting private car use
by increasing usage costs. US policymakers likely feel much the same; if they do, then to avoid
angering the public, they would be inclined to implement options such as building friendlier
walking and bicycling environments.
7
In a review of a ‘ride to work’ event in Australia, Rose and Marfurt (2007) found that
27% of those who rode to work for the first time in such an event were still riding to work five
months after the event. As well, over 4/5ths of first time event goers found that the event had a
positive influence on their readiness to ride to work, and 57% indicated that the event influenced
their decision to ride on the day of the event (to try commuting by bicycle). These results were
achieved without changing any infrastructure, or provisioning changes in transportation of any
form. This is suggestive of the power that such social initiatives may have in encouraging bicycle
use. The particular event in this study was run by Bicycle Victoria, Australia’s largest cycling
membership organization, and relied heavily on promotion through workplaces. The only
significant monetary cost involved in the event was the provisioning of free breakfasts
throughout Victoria. The aspects of the event that participants valued the most were ‘Being part
of a big event that promotes cycling’, ‘Seeing lots of people riding to work’, ‘Free breakfast in
city/town centre or workplace’ and ‘Publicity the vent generates about riding to work’. Most of
the valued aspects of the event were in fact intangible things.
Rose and Marfurt (2007) find in their study that daily circumstances such as weather and
out of work commitments were the most commonly cited reasons for not riding to work, or not
riding to work often, with concerns about the safety of cycling on the road also featuring
prevalently. They note that concerns about inadequate shower and locker facilities now appear to
be greater deterrents to bicycle use than inadequate bike parking facilities, and postulate that this
is due to an increase in the quantity of adequate parking facilities in recent years.
In a similar vein, Blickstein and Hanson (2001) found that ‘Critical Mass’ events, which
are typically monthly rush hour mass bike rides through major cities such as New York City or
San Francisco, encourage dialogue about the role of bicycle use in American cities at the events
8
themselves and by spurring discussion on the internet. They found that such events have the
ability to influence local, regional, and global problems as well as motivate changes in the
behavior of city planners. In interviews with representatives of bicycling advocacy organizations
within San Francisco and other areas, the authors found that many felt that the events acted as a
catalyst for getting more people on bikes and more bicyclists involved in advocacy efforts. A
survey of San Francisco Critical Mass participants they completed shows that 59% of
participants commute by bicycle, 6% walk, and only 14% drive to work. Gathering together so
many like minded individuals on a regular basis could prove to be an effective way to increase
the visibility of cycling within New York City.
Pucher and Buehler (2006) note that despite Canada’s cooler climate, cycling levels in
Canadian cities are higher than in US cities (in fact, cycling levels in the Yukon territory are
roughly twice as high as those of California). Factors leading to this disparity are varied. Higher
population densities in Canadian cities contribute to average trip distances of less than half those
in US cities, making them more bikeable. The costs of owning and driving a car in Canada are
higher, and incomes are lower. Canadian cities have more bicycle friendly infrastructure in place,
such as bike lanes and paths, traffic calmed neighborhoods, and bike parking. As well, cycling
has a better safety record in Canada, which Pucher and Buehler speculate could be due to more
extensive training courses, better cycling facilities, stricter police enforcement of traffic
regulations, or more considerate driving behavior of motorists in Canada. Nevertheless, cycling
in Canada occurs at levels much lower than in Western European cities, where the bike share of
travel averages about 5-10% of urban trips, with a high of 32% in the Netherlands.
One reason for the North American-Western Europe disparity in cycling levels dates back
to the 1970s when Western European countries shifted their urban transport policies to curb car
9
travel and promote transit, cycling, and walking as the socially and environmentally friendly
means of travel (Pucher and Buehler 2006). Gasoline prices in Western Europe are about three
times as high as in the US, and twice as high as in Canada, almost entirely due to differences in
rates of taxation. Europe has stricter land use policies that lead to higher urban densities than
Canada or the US, and even driver licensing is more stringent and expensive in Europe.
Unfortunately, sudden imposition of similar policy ‘sticks’ in the US is not likely a politically
feasible option at this time.
Cycling facilities in Western Europe are superior to those in Canada, which are in turn
superior to those in the US. As well, cycling education plays an important role in Western
European nations, with all school children benefiting from mandatory cycling training by the
third or fourth grade in Germany, the Netherlands, and Denmark. Further, these children must
pass a police-administered test to show that they can cycle safely, since most children walk or
cycle to school (Pucher and Buehler 2006). As well, Rietveld and Daniel (2004) in a study of
Dutch provinces found that the cultural traditions of different groups has an influence on their
likelihood to use a bicycle as a means of transportation, which reinforces the notion that
education could play an important role in increasing bicycle use.
III.
The current state of New York City bicycling infrastructure
Bruce Schaller notes that except for a few bike paths along parkways, nearly all the bike
paths and lanes in NYC require cyclists and motorists to watch out for each other, and when they
do not, serious accidents can and do take place. Yet the number of traffic accidents involving
cyclists in NYC had declined roughly 40 percent in the past decade while the number of people
10
cycling has increased by a similar percentage, suggesting that as motorists see more bicyclists
they are more likely to be aware of them and watch out for them (Schaller 2006).
Cycling advocates point out that the city has only moved very slowly to complete its
1997 master plan in the decade since its inception, with regards to the creation of a citywide
network of bicycle facilities (Schaller 2006). The city was only one-fifth of the way toward the
master plan goal of 909 miles of paths and lanes, having roughly doubled the milage of off street
paths from 51 to 100 miles and on street paths lanes from 41 to 90 miles, in 2006 (Schaller
2006). The lack of connections between bike lanes may serve as a deterrent to cycling, as not all
cyclists feel equally comfortable traveling on regular city streets.
New York City’s mass transit systems appear to be well connected within and between
the five boroughs. The primary difference between the five boroughs that will have an effect on
the efficacy of cycling as a mode of transportation is population density, as it ought to serve as a
decent proxy for mean travel times for people making trips. By far Manhattan has the highest
population density, and it is thus the best suited borough for use of bicycles as transportation.
Staten Island has the lowest population density, but it is the only borough that has experienced
growth each decade between 1950 and 2000 (Mayor's Office of Long-Term Planning &
Sustainability 2007). Brooklyn, Queens, and the Bronx are comparably suited for increases in
cycling. However, to best assess how many resources should be allocated to a given borough or
other area, it is imperative that more localized data be collected, particularly the mean trips times
and distances of people within a given area, and the number of individuals already cycling, if the
largest net increase in cycling is desired. If the goal is simply to increase cycling, then it may be
simpler politically and logistically to simply allocate funds based on populations/population
densities.
11
IV.
City Planning: Past and Present
To assess the general principles that have guided increases in bicycle usage, I have
reviewed New York City Department of Planning’s 1997 Bicycle Master Plan, the city’s most
current and comprehensive document discussing bicycle use within city limits. Some of the
priorities that this plan outlined were encouraging bicycle use through the implementation of a
variety of social programs, increasing on-street bicycle lanes, building secure parking facilities
for bicycles, and developing infrastructure (particularly passage on bridges) to allow easy
movement for cyclists between the five boroughs. Further, the report detailed means of
facilitating the use of bicycles in conjunction with mass transit systems, expanding its Greenway
system, and educating the public, particularly children, about bicycle safety.
The Department of Transportation and the Department of Citywide Administrative
Services have recently shown commitment to increasing and improving the city’s indoor bicycle
parking spaces. In late 2008 the city supported a City Council bill that would require existing
buildings to provide bicycle assess, and the Department of City Planning drafted a zoning text
amendment to require indoor, secure bike parking new developments or enlargements of multifamily residences, community facilities, and commercial buildings (Mayor's Office of LongTerm Planning & Sustainability 2009).
In 2008 the Department of Transportation made significant progress, installing 80.9 lane
miles of bicycle lanes and installing 1,211 new bicycle parking racks (Mayor's Office of LongTerm Planning & Sustainability 2009). It has planned to install 50 lane miles of new bicycle
lanes in 2009 as well as 400 additional parking racks. Interestingly, the PlaNYC target
installation rate for bike parking facilities was only 400 for 2008. Perhaps the Department of
Transportation saw the relative lack of racks as limiting cycling, but it is more likely that the
12
economic costs of installing new bike racks was lower than that of creating bike lanes.
Regardless, it appears that the Department of Transportation is committed to taking steps to
facilitate more cycling within the city, even if only to enhance its public image. According to the
PlaNYC progress report, the Department of Transportation claims it has observed 35 percent
growth in commuter cycling between 2007 and 2008.
V.
Recent City efforts to increase bicycle usage
Andew Vesselinovitch, director of the city’s bicycle program from 2001, quit in 2006
over concerns that the city was hindering efforts to implement the plans laid out in the cities
master plan He claimed the DOT commissioner shot down half of the proposals his six-person
office put forward while he was there, and that lack of funding was not the issue, but rather
bureaucratic resistance, with higher ranking officials giving community boards veto power over
proposed lanes (Hope 2006).
VI.
Discussion of future possibilities
The low costs associated with building bike paths and lanes is a feasible solution due to the
positive externalities that they carry, and are likely more politically feasible than such policies as
raising gas taxes (Rashad 2007).
Farrell (2009) notes in a recent NY Times article that some bicycle infrastructure
designers would like to see ‘bike freeways’ constructed throughout certain areas of New York
City, noting that they would encourage cycling for fitness by providing less interrupted
passageways for cyclists, as well as for transportation, by reducing travel times. While this
appears to be a worthwhile option to consider when looking forwards to the distant future of
bicycling in New York City, at the moment it should not be given priority over more essential
13
goals such as increasing the connectivity of already constructed paths and lanes, as per the
Bicycle Master Plan.
Another project idea of growing popularity is that of turning Broadway into a Greenway.
This may prove to be a more practical project to be undertaken in the near future. A number of
stretches of blocks of Broadway have already been modified, with the number of traffic lanes
being halved from four to two, resulting in space use for benches, chairs, trees, flowers, and a
bicycle lane (Donohue 2008). This increase of ‘park’ like space, and pedestrian and cyclist
mobility, offers a return to a Manhattan that is even more dominated by non-private vehicular
transport. Of note, the bicycle lanes constructed on these blocks are placed between the plaza
areas and the sidewalk, keeping the cyclists separated from traffic, which we have seen is likely
to increase bicycle use in these areas. If all of Broadway was similarly converted, this would
provide a convenient and safe way to
Some cycling advocates have suggested that an effective means of making bicycle use a
more culturally ingrained facet of life is to encourage cycling to school for children, with the
supervision of adult chaperones. However, this is another avenue that likely will need more time
to be developed. Few parents would likely approve of their children, supervised or not, riding to
school on regular roads. Implementation of ideas such as this, which are not without merit, will
likely have to wait until the cities bicycle lanes and paths are better connected, and they most
likely will have to have voluntary participation, due to liability concerns.
Cherry et al. (2009) examined the environmental impacts of electric bicycles, which are
quite prevalent in China, and could possibility entice people who would not otherwise use
bicycling infrastructures to do so. It was found that electric bicycle use has more negative
14
environmental effects than walking or bicycling, similar effects (in magnitude) to bus use, but
effects several times lower than transportation by automobile or motorcycle. However, one of the
pollutants on which electric bicycles in this study perform very poorly is lead, because of the
widespread use of low cost lead acid batteries in China. These batteries require frequent
replacing, up to five times in the life of a bicycle, due to their short lifespan of deep discharge.
The lack of tailpipe emissions of electric bicycles means that they would not likely decrease the
quality of enjoyment of other bike path users. As long as electric bicycle use can be encouraged
as an alternative over car or motorcycle use, they should be, even if they use lead acid batteries.
However, nickel metal hydride batteries and lithium-ion batteries, while much more costly per
battery have similar life cycle costs to lead batteries, and are a cleaner technology (Cherry et al.
2009).
Rashad (2007) discusses the health related benefits of cycling. His contributions are
valuable in that they provide a ‘bottom line’, however tenuous, that could be presented to
members of the non cycling community that may encourage them to utilize cycling as a form of
transportation. According to his estimates, cycling can obesity by 2.4 to 20 and 3.4 to 3.4
percentage points for males and females, which at an estimated cost increase of $732 due to
obesity, could reduce national medical expenditures by minimum of roughly six billion dollars.
As well, cycling may contribute to increased mental health, and thus contribute to declines in
depression and suicide. Greater public knowledge of such information may help the general
public find efforts to increase cycling within New York City as more palatable.
VII. Conclusions
15
Bibliography
BLICKSTEIN, SUSAN, and SUSAN HANSON. "Critical mass: forging a politics of sustainable mobility in."
Transportation, 2001: 347-362.
Cherry, Christopher R., Jonathan X. Weinert, and Yang Xinmiao. "Comparative environmental impacts of electric
bikes in China." Transportation Research Part D, 2009: 281-290.
Donohue, Pete. "City to make two Broadway lanes bikes, walkers only for seven blocks." NY Daily News, July 10,
2008.
Hope, Bradley. "Bicycle Tsar Quits, Saying Goal To Increase Safety, Lanes Is Stymied." The Sun. July 24, 2006.
http://www.nysun.com/new-york/bicycle-tsar-quits-saying-goal-to-increase-safety/36609/ (accessed Novemer 7,
2009).
Mayor's Office of Long-Term Planning & Sustainability. "PlaNYC Progress Report 2009." City Hall, New York City,
2009.
Mayor's Office of Long-Term Planning & Sustainability. "PlaNYC Report: A Greener, Greater New York." City Hall,
New York City, 2007.
McAnanama, Glenn. "The Case Against Pull-in Angle Parking." STREETSBLOG.org. January 3, 2008.
http://www.streetsblog.org/2008/01/03/the-case-against-pull-in-angle-parking/ (accessed November 8, 2009).
Pucher, John, and Ralph Buehler. "Why Canadians cycle more than Americans: A comparative." Transport Policy,
2006: 265-279.
Rashad, Inas. "Cycling: An Increasingly Untouched Source of Physical and Mental Health." NBER WORKING PAPER
SERIES, 2007.
Rose, Geoff, and Heidi Marfurt. "Travel behaviour change impacts of a major ride." Transportation Research Part A,
2007: 351-364.
Schaller, Bruce. "Biking It." Gotham Gazette. July 2006.
http://www.gothamgazette.com/article/transportation/20060718/16/1910/ (accessed November 7, 2009).
Sener, Ipek N., Naveen Eluru, and Chandra R. Bhat. "An analysis of bicycle route choice preferences."
Transportation, 2009: 511–539.
Steg, Linda, and Robert Gifford. "Sustainable transportation and quality of life." Journal of Transport Geography,
2005: 59-69.
Tilahun, Nebiyou Y., David M. Levinson, and Kevin J. Krizek. "Trails, lanes, or traffic: Valuing bicycle facilities."
Transportation Research Part A, 2007: 287-301.
16