Budapest Vies for International Recognition

Budapest is one of three cities shortlisted to hold the 2011 Velo-City international cycling conference. This would be quite a big deal, as it's regarded as the premier international cycling planning conference in the world. It brings together hundreds of people from various fields who are involved in cycling policy and promotion. Check out the description here.

Held (almost) annually since 1980, it would bring cycling's top experts from around Europe and the world to examine what's on offer in Budapest. By so doing, it may help shame city burghurs into implementing some cycling facilities that are up to international standards.

The local NGO Hungarian Cycling Club (MKK) with the support of City Hall, spearheaded the application for the event, which was conceived and still owned by the European Cyclists Federation. The document, available on the Internet in English, explains how Budapest would manage to put on a four-day event (slated for May 31-June 3 at the Millináris), including conference and an exhibition, and how it would cover the EUR 400,000 expense through participation fees and sponsorship.

Part of criteria for the host city is to have exemplary local cycling facilities that conference participants can inspect and learn from. On this score, Budapest is wanting (guaranteed, there is no bike lane or parking centre or rental scheme in Budapest that isn't done 10 times better in several cities in Northern Europe). However, the application pledges that such facilities will be in place in time for the conference. These would include new cycling lanes on Margit híd (to be included in a refurbishment slated for 2009); bidirectional lanes on the Kiskörút (to be built in connection with construction of the Metro 4); and new lanes on Kossuth Lajos út.

Two of the most convincing arguments, in my opinion, are one, that Budapest has perhaps the biggest Critical Mass ride in the world, which demonstrates a huge potential for cycling here; and two, that there's never been Velo-City conference in Eastern Europe. The second point might appeal to ECF's charitable side, as there's no denying that this region lags behind Western Europe in transport cycling, even more so than in other aspects of urban development. It could be argued that holding a conference in Budapest, as opposed to a typical cycling paradise in Northern Europe (like Münich, host of the last Velo-City in 2007), stands to benefit more than just one city, but a whole region that's at a similar stage of development and confronting similar challenges on the path to bike friendliness.

One difficulty, though, is that one of the other shortlisted cities (along with Seville) is an Eastern European neighbour: Prague. They have better beer, but we have cheaper hotels. We'll see what wins the day.

Prague Envy

Cycling development in Prague is going gangbusters compared to Budapest -- or at least it would seem so. A recent article gives a concise but comprehensive picture of the transport cycling scene in the Czech capital.

Official data from Prague City Hall shows cyclists with a 0.5-2 percent modal share, on par with the figures from Budapest. But Budapest's data is more than 10 years old, and the numbers have clearly gone up since then, especially considering the whole Critical Mass phenomenon only got started in 2004. (Tellingly, Prague's most recent Critical Mass drew 4,000 riders, compared to about 15,000 at Budapest's last one and 80,000 during the spring 2007 ride.)

Despite the fact that more people bike in Budapest, Prague seems to be doing a better job at cycling development.

A few tidbits from the article:

• Budapest has about 160 km of paths and routes while Prague has 135 km of bike paths and 360 of signed routes.
  
• Prague's long-term plan calls for the completion of more than 670 km of routes. Budapest is shooting no higher than 500.
  
• Prague has a new bike-share system (see photo). Budapest has none.
  
• Prague City Hall has a monitoring system in place to follow trends in cycling traffic (cycling trips are up 47% over the last three years). Budapest has no such system. And with no data on cycling levels, what rational basis is there for developing infrastructure and other services?
  

How can it be that the city with more demand for cycling improvements is getting less supply?

Prague Makes a Smooth Move

Compared to Budapest, Prague is not much of a cycling city -- this was immediately apparent to me when I took a ride around the Czech capital a couple weekends ago. My guide for the ride was Daniel Mourek, a former Prague city council member and longtime cycling activist. He pointed up a couple reasons for this, one being that, until recently, city burghurs have refused to allow any cycling accomodation in the historic city centre due primarily to aesthetic reasons: cycling paths wouldn't go with the centre's characteristic Old World cobblestones.

There are other reasons that cycling is less popular there . Prague is a big walking town, with about 20% of all intracity trips being by foot. The terrain is a bit hillier than in Budapest and public transport, due to larger subsidies and a more sensible time-based ticketing system, is more affordable. 

But in the coming years, we can expect Prague to close at least part of the cycling gap with Budapest. For one thing, Prague is spending serious money on cycling -- about EUR 2.5 million annually, an amount that has grown steadily over the last seven years, from the time city leaders agreed once and for all that cycling should be a priority. This amount is about double what Budapest is spending, despite the fact there's much greater interest in transport cycling here.

The other thing is that the guardians of Prague's historically protected centre have capitulated on the bike path dispute. After the disastrous floods of August 2002, the pedestrian quay along the east bank of the Vltava River had to be rebuilt, including with new cobblestones. The original reconstruction didn't include a cycling path, but after activists laid on the pressure, City Hall agreed to a solution in which twin tracks of smooth, tan stone were laid down the cobblestone korzó. The tracks are very narrow -- maybe 50 cm -- but they provide bump-free passage through the cobblestones while also blending in with the rest of the stonework. This accomodation demonstrated to the cycling naysayers in the historic district that bike paths needn't detract from the Prague's Medieval charm.

It seems to me that this type of compromise could serve as an example to other European cities that struggle to reconcile historic preservation with modern development. This includes Budapest, with a prime example being the main square at Óbuda. The  north-south cycling route from Budapest to the Danube Bend cuts right across this square, and it's the least pleasant part of the journey because of the cobblestones. Another example is Andrássy út, where the cycling paths on both sides of the street intermittently cross cobblestone bus stops. 

These are examples of when biking accomodation doesn't necessarily have to cost more, but rather just needs to be given some consideration before roads are built.