Mayor Kicks the Hornets' Nest

What was he thinking?

The April 23 cycling demonstration (formerly Critical Mass, now I Bike Budapest) is shaping up into a political showdown with Mayor István Tarlós.
Tarlós declared back in February that he believed cycling development in downtown had gone too far (while also claiming Budapest had become an "extremely public-transport oriented" city). In recent days, activists circulated an official document showing Tarlós's point-by-point plan of paring back pro-cycling measures. In it, the mayor declares he would:

1. no longer prioritise the creation of bike routes that offer the shortest path from points A to B;
2. no longer paint yellow bicycle pictograms on streets that also have separate sidewalk bike paths;
3. revisit recently created bike contraflow lanes on one-way streets (about 120 such lanes in the city) and remove them except in exceptional circumstances;
4. not allow bicycle traffic in bus lanes unless the lanes are at least 4.5 metres wide;
5. on streets with bike lanes, prohibit cyclists from riding in bus lanes (undoubtedly, this applies to Bajcsy-Zsilinszky, although the bike accommodation there is technically a "bike path" not a lane)

Afterwards, Index.hu published a point-by-point response to the proposals, explaining how all of them have improved the bikeability of the city, and how Tarlós's proposals would reverse this progress. The Index article follows a more exhaustive set of recommendations concerning the next 10 years of cycling development from the Hungarian Cyclists Club. Both documents were written with care, with all propositions backed with evidence and reasoned arguments.

The mayor's response could not be described as reasonable. It was rather hysterical. The short communiqué signed by the mayor's communications director called the backlash to Tarlós's proposals:

"... a mysterious defamation campaign instigated by the tabloid press whose claims nearly violate the criminal code and border on slander."

The statement goes on to say that the mayor has "never called for the ending of cycling development" and that over the past  20 years, cycling development has never been as good as it has been during Tarlós's term.

And then it claims that "rational cycling development" is not the same as "the unrestrained terror of a minority of radical cyclists".

It seems to me that the one guilty of slander is Tarlós. The people he's calling a radical minority are the organisers and participants of the city's most popular civil movement since the founding of the democratic state. The Critical Mass ride (now re-branded as I Bike Budapest) has always drawn tens of thousands of participants -- in 2013 it drew an estimated 100,000. It's mainstream. The Hungarian Cyclists Club is a well-established NGO -- the biggest cycling lobbying group in the country, not a radical fringe group. And Index.hu, although obviously differing with the mayor politically, is one of the most visited news portals in Hungary.

Tarlós has really kicked a hornets' nest with this one. And his timing couldn't be better. Expect a big turned out for I Bike Budapest.

Pretext for removing bike-bus lanes?

The fast way to bike Bajcsy.

It looks like the mayor is getting set to close down Budapest's ground-breaking shared bus-bike lanes on Bajcsy-Zsilinszky ut. Mayor István Tarlós declared earlier this year that he didn't approve of the lanes -- or practically anything else that has to do with non-car urban transport. And in recent days, city road crews have been spotted conducting traffic counts of cyclists using the lanes, according to a post on the I Bike Budapest Facebook page. Looks like a pretext for shutting the lanes to bike traffic.

The bike-bus lanes were created in spring 2013 as an alternative to the narrow two-way bike lane on Bajcsy's west-side sidewalk. For various reasons, many cyclists prefer to ride on the street on Bajcsy, but because buses are prioritised on the Bajcsy's outside lanes, cyclists were not allowed to ride there.

By law, unless cyclists are given explicit permission to share a bus lane, they're supposed to ride in the second lane over, and not along the curb where slower traffic normally belongs. It was a contradiction in the traffic regime: In order to ride legally, cyclists had to ride between lanes of faster motor traffic. It's a dangerous place to be and shared bike-bus lanes were meant to correct the problem.

The mayor has said he doesn't like cyclists to be in bus lanes because it slows down bus traffic. Which is an odd justification for a mayor who otherwise seems opposed to buses -- or any form of transport other than a single-passenger occupied vehicle.

Bad times for sustainable transport in Budapest. But a good time to be an activist.

Mayor dismantles Budapest Transport Centre

Yay, cars! (Image taken out of context -- shamelessly -- from http://444.hu/category/ikertornyok/)

It's taken more than a year, but Mayor István Tarlós last week finally managed to undo a key reform that had set Budapest on a course for a less car-centric, more sustainable city.

Tarlós sealed his anti-sustainability campaign by getting the City Assembly to dismantle the Budapest Transport Centre (BKK), the supra-administrative body set up in January 2011 so that city transport -- including roads, motor traffic, parking and public transport -- could be managed in a coherent, integrated way.

Tarlós criticised BKK for "overstepping its remit" and creating an "extremely public transport-oriented" environment. The mayor believes car drivers have suffered too much under BKK's stewardship, so he came up with a proposal that essentially restores transport management to what it was five years ago. According to the Assembly's decision, BKK will be stripped of its authority over roads and motor traffic, and will now look after just public transport and taxi regulation. It also keeps the task of strategic planning, while being in a much weaker position to implement plans.

Management of roads and traffic will be given to a separate administration, the Budapest Public Road Authority (Budapest Közút Zrt.).

Last week's vote was just the last smash up in a slow-motion car wreck that began November, 2014, when the City Assembly, at Tarlós's urging, voted to subsume BKK under a higher-level administrative body (Budapest City Management Center -- Budapesti Városüzemeltetési Központ) controlled by the mayor. A month later, Tarlos canned Dávid Vitézy, the 20-something wunderkind who headed BKK and tallied many victories for public transport. Tarlós publicly derided Vitézy because he didn't know how to drive, and also because Vitézy was achieving things too quickly. In an interview a year ago, Tarlós explained it wasn't that he didn't like Vitézy's changes, he just didn't like the speed of the changes. The mayor replaced Vitézy with a more agreeable and, presumably, slower manager, and with last week's restructuring, the BKK menace was buried. It takes effect in April.


BKK was a progressive umbrella transport agency modeled on successful global examples such as Transport for London and the Land Transport Authority of Singapore. With control of roads, BKK could effectively boost alternatives to the car by reprioritising road space and traffic management. For example, BKK created several priority bus/bike lanes in the downtown area and established new bicycle lanes and on-street bike parking. BKK could also give buses and trams traffic-signal prioritisation -- and we can already see in recent weeks how a lack of signal priority is undermining the potential of the new 19 tram line. In addition, BKK could enforce traffic rules to protect sustainable transport, for example by towing cars parked on bus stops, bike lanes or on Bubi public bike docking stations.

This gave the the city an efficient tool to make public transport faster, more reliable and, thus, more attractive to the traveling public. As Vitézy noted in a recent  response to Tarlos's move, revenues (from ticket and pass sales) for public transport grew by 20% during his four-year tenure at BKK, while fares stayed the same.

At first, BKK's castration might seem like a gift to motorists. But if it leads to a significant shift from public transport ridership and cycling to more car use -- and it's certain to do so -- traffic jams will get worse and everybody will suffer, including car users.

Lastly, this is sure to impair Budapest's ability to attract EU transport subsidies, because basic funding criteria favor projects that reduce congestion, save energy, improve air quality and combat climate change. Recent Budapest projects like the renovation of Margit Bridge, the new metro, the Fonodó tram project in Buda, and, of course, the Bubi bike share system, all received EU subsidies due to their positive environmental impacts. Tarlós's strategic direction completely contradicts these aims and just looks self-defeating.

Mayor outlines dismal vision of out-moded transport

Tarlos, left, is all about charisma and vision.

Budapest's conservative mayor, István Tarlós, gave the cycling movement a kick in the teeth yesterday, threatening to get rid of downtown's shared bike-bus lanes and consider compulsory operating licences for cyclists.

He also labeled as "dangerous" the recently introduced system of contraflow bike lanes, and promised to subject them to a review by a secret working group.

Further, Tarlós poured cold water on a marvellous conceptual plan, revealed just this week, that would create a pedestrian-friendly Pest embankment and establish two bike lanes on the Chain Bridge.

The mayor's proposals came during a transport-themed press conference Thursday, outlining, among other things, plans for future transport financing and the city's obligation to introduce congestion charging (no earlier than 2017, he promised).

The Hungarian Cyclists Club reacted in an open letter urging the City Assembly and the councils of Budapest's district governments to reject the proposals. If you'd like to express your personal disgust with these ideas, check the options at the bottom of the link.

The club's letter objected firstly to the closed process in which the proposals were developed. Tarlós said they came from a "working group" whose members weren't identified and who didn't consult with the cyclists club on its cycling provisions. Illiberal democracy in action!

Tarlós's ideas are based on his rejection of a basic principle of cycling development: that routes should be designed to give cyclists the shortest path between points A and B. This is the only way to make cycling practical and attractive as a means of transport. Tarlós complained that the city can't make this an "absolute priority".

Not that it ever has. The cycling movement has campaigned for many years to end the old-fashioned practice of creating circuitous bikeways that snake on sidewalks around hidden side streets. Long-standing campaigns to put bike lanes on the Nagykörút and on Rákóczi út are examples of trying to make cycling convenient and practical, and Tarlos's statement is a clear rejection of these proposals.

Paradoxically, Tarlós's anti-cycling agenda, and assurances of continued car-friendly transport, are wrapped in an overall concept that he calls an "extremely public transport oriented" system. He thinks cycling, the most space-efficient means of transport next to walking, is a main barrier to fast public transport.

This is why the shared bike-lanes need to be removed, he said. He provided no evidence that bikes are holding up buses, while ignoring the actual cause of slow bus service: traffic jams on streets that DON'T have priority transit lanes.

Tarlós called contraflow cycling lanes "dangerous", despite the fact that there have been no serious accidents on them. Contraflow lanes have been a success in cities the world over, not only making cycling more convenient, but actually enhancing safety because they allow for eye-to-eye contact between motorist and cyclist.

Tarlós also cited safety as a justification for operating licenses for cyclists, which he said could be implemented by 2018. He bases the idea, also unsupported, on his assertion that "eight out of ten cyclists run red lights." Tarlós declared: "Cycling culture is not developing at the same rate as cycling infrastructure."

In fact cycling culture has been developing and safety has been improving. Semi-annual observations organised by the movement have shown that more and more cyclists are using lamps after dark, for instance. And the overall incidence of serious road injuries and fatalities among cyclists has decreased in Budapest, in step with the increase in cyclist numbers. This improvement mirrors countless international examples: Promotion of cycling levels is the best way to improve cycling safety.

To cap off his dismal vision for a more retrograde city, Tarlós criticised the most exciting elements of a new development concept for the Pest embankment and Chain Bridge. The plan, focussed on the embankment between the Margit and Szabadság bridges, proposes a mix of motor-traffic reduction and elimination along different segments. Traffic on the Chain Bridge would be reduced to one lane for motor traffic heading toward Buda. The saved space would be given to bike lanes.

But Tarlós was clear in his opposition to the concept: "The city leadership does not plan for one-way traffic on the Chain Bridge or closing traffic on the lower Pest bank."

Critical Mass Reunion Tour??

She deserves better than a gutter!

The Budapest cycling movement is back! An open invitation is up on Facebook for a cycling demonstration around the Nagykörút at 5:30 p.m. September 22, i.e. evening rush hour on European Car-Free Day. As a bonus, sunny weather's predicted.

It sounds an awful lot like the fall Critical Mass rides or yore, which were held at the same time on the same date. But the head honchos of the former Critical Mass, Sinya and Kuku of Hajtas Pajtas, don't appear to be spearheading this one -- nor is anyone else. The Facebook page doesn't identify anyone as organiser or leader. It's just a page declaring: "Let the Nagykörút be bikeable!" A text below reads:

It's been five years since the Nagykörút Critical Mass, but the situation is still the same. Instead of plans and promises, we want concrete steps! Therefore, we call for a common Car-free Day ride to re-draw attention to the matter of the Nagykörút!

It's actually been four years since the Nagykörút Critical Mass: the one that had no route, where we just went down to occupy the street, riding back and forth between the Szabadság bridge and Margit bridge on the Pest side. But the need for bikeways on the Nagykörút is an evergreen issue, and it's made especially timely this fall with the roll-out of Budapest's new bike-share system. 

In anticipation of a new wave of novice urban cyclists flooding downtown on bright green Bubi bikes, the city carried out a big programme of bike-friendly improvements to downtown streets in the system coverage area. The improvements included new bike racks, new contraflow cycling lanes and new signage. But the most needed improvement of all was left out -- bikeways for the Nagykörút.

For many trips to and from and around downtown, the Nagykörút offers the most convenient route. But the road space is mainly taken up by cars -- four lanes for moving ones, and a lane on each side for parked ones. It's legal to ride your bike on the Nagykörút but often the traffic is going so fast you feel like you're risking your life. (For a short while last year, car speeds on the Nagykörút were reduced slightly in order to prioritise tram traffic. Mayor Tarlos put the kibash on that last fall and restored the Formula 1 flavour of things.

It's insanity to have  a beautiful new bike-sharing system with several docking points on a road that feels (and smells!) like a high-speed expressway. Car traffic on the Nagykörút should be cut down to one lane going in each direction with the speed limit reduced to 30 kph. In this way, the Nagykörút would not only be bikeable, it'd be shoppable, walkable, pram-able and dine-able. 

When Critical Mass came to an end more than a year ago, organisers said it was because its mission had been fulfilled. They said they needed to turn their attention to more targetted, behind-the-scenes lobbying. But in the absence of Critical Mass, we're missing a sense of community and solidarity among cyclists and wish-to-be cyclists. And when we're dealt with setbacks, like the never-ending postponement of the congestion charge, the cancellation of priority bus lanes or the sweeping under the rug of brilliant cycling plans for the Margit körút  -- there needs to be a loud, visible response. A big turnout on September 22 will be just the thing.

What: Bike demonstration for cycling accommodation on the Nagykörút
When: Starts 5:30 p.m. September 22
Where: Jászai Mari tér
 

Congestion charge flames out

Rush hour on Erzsebet Bridge.

So congestion charging in Budapest is dead -- again. Last Friday, Parliament took up a proposal that would have given municipalities (such as Budapest) the right to implement such a charge. The bill went down in a crushing 305-14 vote. The measure, proposed by the super-majority Fidesz party, garnered support from just two of its own MPs; the other supporters were from the left-leaning green party LMP. Even one of the two Fidesz representatives who submitted the bill voted against it.

Well, what did we expect? This idea, mooted and buried multiple times by former Free Democrat Mayor Gábor Demszky, was suddenly revived in January as City Hall groped for ideas to save its public transport  company, BKV, from going bankrupt. At first, City Hall released a trial balloon concerning an annual tax on car ownership, and after the predictable media outcry, the idea was dropped.

V District Mayor Antal Rogán, of Fidesz, voiced support for the idea of congestion charging, and somehow City Hall got on board. Mayor István Tarlós, who ran on the Fidesz ticket during his campaign but who has strained relations with the party leadership, walked a fine line on the issue. He stressed first and foremost that the idea was not his own, but one that he was forced to consider because his predecessor (Demszky) had promised it as a condition for getting EU funding for the Fourth Metro line. The proposal gained traction as a kind-of emergency fiscal measure along with proposals to further milk public transport users, including increased fares, application of VAT on ticket sales (already implemented) and reductions in social discounts.

My initial skepticism was based on the apparent rush with which it would be implemented. Congestion charging is an extremely controversial way to deal with traffic problems and invariably takes a lot of time and care to put in place. In Europe, although several cities have studied the idea and have attempted to bring it into force, just two, London and Stockholm, have implemented a proper congestion charge. A congestion charge is now being piloted in Milan, but only after several years experience with a less expansive eco-charging scheme.

Authorities here seemed clueless about what they were getting into. The suggested timetable for implementation was simply not realistic: City Hall said it would be up and running in a year's time, by July 2013. Never mind feasibility studies, never mind public consultation, never mind a system design, never mind public tenders for the necessary hardware and software.

Last month, I heard a presentation by David Vitezy, director of the city's umbrella transport coordinating center, BKK. He spoke about various transport schemes in Budapest, including the congestion charge. I asked him how BKK was going to manage political opposition to the idea. His answer amazed me: There was no political opposition, he said. The City Assembly and the leadership of virtually all of Budapest's district governments agreed congestion charging needed to be implemented, he said, adding that because the previous government obliged the city to implement it, everyone had political cover.

Granted, that was before the media started to take the idea seriously. In the ensuing few weeks, the idea started to unravel as the press ran one story after another about the charge's potential pitfalls. Streets on the perimeter of the cordon would be filled with parked cars, home values would go down in neighbourhoods outside the zone, drivers would find loopholes to avoid the charge. One article made the dubious argument that the charge would largely be state money circulating back into state coffers. Why? Because state offices account for a "good portion" of downtown workplaces.

A couple weeks ago, Mayor Tarlos looked to be back-tracking when he suggested, rather than having a congestion fee, there would just be a toll on the city's bridges. This would be easier to implement and, I suppose, more populist because it would target mainly Rozsadomb yuppies.

Funnily enough, there was very little forewarning in the press about the Parliamentary vote. The proposal was submitted by its fickle proponents just three weeks earlier and, like most legislation going through the single-party dominated body, it came to a vote with no public debate, despite its decisive consequence. I reckon it took nearly everyone by surprise except the MPs themselves. It definitely did me -- even though I knew that, as in other countries, there would have to be law modifications at the national level to enable the congestion charge. But in Hungary's case, there just wasn't any noise about this critical stage of the process.

One of the ironies is that it was pressure from the Fidesz government that drove City Hall to moot the idea in the first place. Congestion charging was part of the long-term fiscal stability plan that City Hall bashed together this spring in the wake of BKV's debt crisis. The government compelled the city to draft the plan as a condition for paying off BKV's loans. Now that the government has shot down a central pillar of the same plan, how can it maintain its tough stance on BKV subsidies?

As to where this leaves Budapest in light of the previous quid pro quo with the European Union, I have no idea. It's clear from media reports that city leaders are happy to wash their hands of it. The current administration "never insisted" on the congestion charge, according to a statement on the BKK website. City Hall is also arguing that the measure was premature and that if it ever does go forward, it should be preceded by strategic investments in park and rides and other transport infrastructure. That's precisely what Mayor Demszky said when he successfully put off congestion charging until he was well out of office.

Mayor's retreat not alarming

I'm tired. Got back from a work trip last night about 11:30 p.m., and went straight to bed. Problem was, though, that it was warm and muggy and we had to leave our bedroom window wide open for air. Ours being a downtown flat, there's noise to deal with. For myself, I can put up with the traffic noise, but last night there was a car alarm going off, and it seemed to be within a block or two of our flat. It would go off and chirp like a psychotic cuckoo clock for 30-40 seconds, then go quiet for 5 minutes and then go off again. After awhile my wife got up without a word and shuffled off to a quieter corner of the flat where the windows are closed. I was inclined to suffer the car alarm for the sake of cool air, but I just wasn't tired enough to get to sleep, and the intrusiveness of this car alarm started to grate.

At around 1:30 a.m., I got up, got dressed and went down to find the source of this noise. Walked down the street about two blocks and I spotted the offending car just as its alarm burst to life in a blast of noise and flashing yellow lights. Of course, no criminal activity was taking place, and no one but me had taken interest in the matter. It was just a stupid car alarm, afterall.

But I was determined to do something about it. A loose cobblestone next to the curb beckoned me to take justice into my own hands, but I was afraid breaking the car's windshield might just aggravate the problem.

So I did the civilised thing and went to the local police precinct. To shorten the story, some patrol officers were summoned and they accompanied me to the car, took down the plate number, phoned it in to dispatch, and said they would contact the owner. I went home, the alarm went off twice more, but it cut short the second time and did not go off again. I eventually got to sleep around 2:30 a.m.

I'm just relating the story as an example of why I am so zealously against car culture, particularly in the city. You could say it's a case of one irresponsible car owner, but I can imagine many reasons why that person didn't come to turn off his or her alarm. The fact is, car alarms are just one of many chronic, noisome, anti-social, seemingly intractable aspects of our car-based transport system, and Budapest needs desperately to work on more humane alternatives.

----

Speaking of which, Budapest's Mayor Istvan Tarlos demonstrated yet again his zeal for regressive, backwards-looking transport policy. On May 30, a new priority bus lane was implemented on the Budaörs city entrance from the M1 and M7 motorways. The bus-way, which displaced one of two car-traffic lanes, was seen as a means of reducing the number of cars entering the city by offering a stick (restricting car traffic flow) and carrot (introducing prioritised buses that present regular car drivers with a faster means of commuting).

However, four days after the lanes were put into use, Tarlos discontinued them in the wake of car-driver protests. He cited "technical problems" but it was clearly just a lack of political spine.

Bus priority is a simple idea that has worked wonderfully in cities throughout the world. In Dublin, for instance, bus prioritisation on major radial routes into the city has sped up average commuting times, increased the overall carrying capacity of roads during rush hour, and reduced car modal share. Car commuters griped at first, but over time, the effectiveness of the idea became evident, and its popularity has paved the way for bus prioritisation throughout the Irish capital's metro area.

It takes some political grit, though, and unfortunately this is missing in Budapest.

Right winger stumps for cycling

The presumed next mayor of Budapest, István Tarlós of the center-right Fidesz party, gave some nice but predictable lip service to the cause of city cycling at a campaign event earlier this month.
As reported on caboodle.hu, the current mayor of Óbuda had this to say:

Traffic in the capital should be viewed as an integrated system, within which cyclists must be treated as equal partners, Tarlós said, adding that "the right proportion should be established between cars and bicycles."

Not to be cynical, but Mayor Demszky has also, over the course of his 20-year sway as city mayor, waxed lyrically about the virtues of cycling and the need to do more for our cause. The difficulty has always been in execution, particularly in cases where motorists had to be confronted. I doubt that any longtime followers of cycling politics were seduced by Tarlós's words. We'll have to see how they're embodied in action.

My skepticism is partly a superficial impression. Tarlós ran against Demszky four years ago, and in his campaign posters, he was always this hulking, unsmiling figure in a dark suit. He was the picture of either a mafia don or a rather unsympathetic director of a funeral parlour. In one poster, he was surrounded by several archetypal urbanites, including a fit, young woman on a bicycle. Even in this poster, Tarlós was unsmiling in his big, dark suit -- it was unimaginable that he could have any personal connection with anyone else in the photo. The visual dissonance was so stark, it created the impression that the picture was Photoshopped even though it (probably) wasn't.

For the current campaign, Tarlós has lost the suit and his bottle-blonde hair has been tousled -- probably by his hair dresser. However, the last bit of sloganeering I heard from him was characteristically right wing: something to do with "security and economic development" for Budapest. Let's hope the bicycling talk was more than just a compulsory campaign drill to appease some of his centrist detractors.