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.

Car Tax Dead but Congestion Charge Gets a Lift

A proposal to levy a flat monthly tax on Budapest car owners looked dead on arrival today. Budapest City Hall, grasping for a life line to pull BKV out of its financial quagmire, was considering a monthly tax of almost HUF 10,000 a month on car owners, which would raise an estimated HUF 32 billion per year. But the idea lasted about half a news cycle. Mayor Istvan Tarlos and just about everyone else denied having anything to do with introducing the proposal, and by Wednesday afternoon, the mayor was saying it was stillborn.

The encouraging news is that the idea of a congestion charge is still alive. Antal Rogan, mayor of District V and leader of the Fidesz faction in the City Assembly, pronouced that this would be would be a "more rational and reasonable solution."

I am in complete agreement. The reason a congestion charge would be better is because it would be levied only on drivers entering downtown. Car owners who don't come downtown or who come by another mode (public transport, foot, boat or bike) don't have to pay.

With congestion charges, the intent is to put a price on road use and thereby pressure some car owners to not drive downtown. The avoided traffic leads to reduced congestion, while the remaining traffic yields revenue that can be used to improve non-car mobility options (public transport, bike lanes and foot paths), which will lead to further reduction in car use. A virtuous cycle.

Congestion charges are very controversial because you're asking people to pay something that they currently get for free. However, the free-of-charge status quo does come with a price: travelers' time. It is partly because road use is free that they're so crowded. Putting a price on them will mean that those who don't really need to drive downtown will avoid the trip while those who do need to will be able to make the journey on less congested streets. This perspective prompted a New Zealand blogger to say that congestion charging should really be sold as a "congestion avoidance" scheme.

Some conservative bloggers have argued -- a bit disingenuously -- that such charges are unfair because they tax the poor so the rich can drive fast. But roadways are a valuable, limited resource and there's no reason why they should be free of charge to everyone at all times. And, in any case, a congestion charge can be implemented to include consideration for social fairness, including income-based discounts.

I imagine the flat, monthly tax seemed an attractive option to decision makers because it would be relatively simple and inexpensive to implement. A congestion charging scheme, by contrast, will involve a cordon of ANPR cameras that monitor every entry point into downtown along with enabling legislation at the national level and more. However, there's no sense in taxing every car owner regardless of their travel habits. I hope the city leadership can use the opportunity of the current crisis to push forward a sensible idea.

Diversion Time

BKV: Not a particularly diverting experience, either.

For the past several weeks, local news sites have been chronicling the financial crisis facing Budapest public transport company BKV. With payment deadlines on several huge loans coming up next month, a day of reckoning is drawing near, and BKV's prospects look dismal from every angle: they don't have enough money of their own and their would-be backstop, the Hungarian national government, can't handle its own problems, let alone Budapest's. And in any case, Prime Minister Viktor Orbán has little incentive and far less good will to stick his neck out for political independent István Tarlos, the capital's mayor.

Anyway, Erik D'Amato lays out the state of play in a thoroughgoing post on caboodle.hu. The article sums up the financial and political aspects of the story, and takes the added step, seldom taken by Hungarian journalists, of considering the impacts on "you the reader." If the crisis does devolve into a transit worker strike and service shutdown, hundreds of thousands of people will be stuck without their usual mode of transport.

Erik mentions an index.hu survey on what mode of transport readers would use in case of a BKV shutdown. The #1 response (by a 2-1 margin over #2, a private car): the bicycle. Erik editorialises:

"(That's) something that might be a fun temporary diversion in summer, but hardly one in the dead of a Central European winter."

On the contrary, I imagine the Index readers fully appreciate the challenges of riding a bike in a Central European winter: You need to dress warmly and you need to beware of slippery spots when it's below freezing. Not a big deal. Commuters in Denmark and Sweden bike through winters that make the ones here seem like a trip to the Király baths: a little dank and gloomy, perhaps, but generally pretty warm.

I can imagine a Scandinavian reading Erik's comment about the fear of cycling in the "dead" of one of our winters, and thinking. "What a bunch of wussies!" Just the same thought occurred to me this morning as I was bumping down the tracks on the HÉV by Pannonia telep. I looked out the window and noticed a woman about 65-70 years of age bicycling along on the road next to us. She was bundled up in a scarf and big ski parka, and, although her determined expression did not suggest  she was having "a fun temporary diversion," neither did she seem in an advanced state of hypothermia. I imagine she was regarding all of us in the HÉV, and thinking, "What a bunch of wussies!"

That said, I don't look forward to a BKV shutdown. The system carries approximately 55-60 percent of city traffic in downtown Budapest, so you can't take it away without causing major problems.

On Friday, as a first condition of getting emergency government subsidies for BKV, Mayor Tarlos submitted a plan to secure the long-term financial sustainability of the public transport system. Along with fare hikes, the plan calls for the implementation of an inner-city congestion charge and the establishment of a network of park and rides on the congestion zone's periphery. These ideas were mooted several years ago by former Mayor Gábor Demszky, but there's never been any action on them. Just as the city has made no real attempt to achieve its stated goal of a 15% modal share for cycling by 2015.

If there will be a silver lining to the BKV crisis, it may be that it will finally kick-start some ad hoc action on the city transport system's strategic development.

Change of Course

The spring Critical Mass was announced last week and the organisers are saying it's the last one!

To me, the message was a bombshell. Critical Mass has become an institution in Budapest, and not just for cyclists. With rides attracting tens of thousands every occasion, Budapest Critical Mass is believed to be the biggest CM in the world. As a major city event, it's up there with the Sziget Festival, Formula 1, Saint Stephen's Day and the Budapest Bucsú. It's a mass popular event, with participants of all ages, all walks of life and all political persuasions.

Having gone off twice per year since 2004, it's hard imagining an Earth Day or Mobility Week passing without a Critical Mass. Yet this is exactly what will happen after what's being called the "Utolsó Budapest Critical Mass," this April 30.

The announcement explains that the main goal of the ride has already been achieved: to create a critical mass of voters who support transport cycling in Budapest. The goal's been met despite the fact that Budapest is still not a bike-friendly city, the organisers say. Now, it's up to you, they add: "Critical Mass is yours."

Despite being taken aback, I've come to the conclusion that the organisers have made the right decision. Critical Mass has, indeed, managed to build a culture of everyday cycling where one hardly existed. Before CM entered the picture, there were few cyclists on city streets other than bike messengers. These days the picture is entirely different -- on main cycling routes during rush hour, you get caught in queues at traffic signals.

While giving CM all due credit for popularising everyday cycling, it hasn't been nearly as successful in lobbying City Hall. Critical Mass organisers have always wanted to influence city transport policy. CM rides in the past have usually had a theme, sometimes attached to a detailed wish list of cyclists' priorities that they hoped city leaders would take on board. Before last fall's municipal elections, the CM after party included a candidates' forum in which the competing parties presented their cycling policies. Such public events have only been part of the lobbying effort -- all the while, CM leaders have been meeting with assembly members and transport staff behind the scene in hopes of getting better conditions for cyclists.

But the work with City Hall hasn't been fruitful. In terms of downtown infrastructure, we've seen very little happen since 2004. Probably the most positive developments have been the bike lanes (or "sharrows", really, since cars can legally drive on them) on the kiskörút, Thököly út and Alkotmány utca. There was the construction of the path on Bajcsy-Zsilinszky út, although that path infuriated CM organisers because it took space from pedestrians and is on only one side of the street. There is a promise of better cycling accommodation on the renovated Margit bridge, but City Hall has wavered on that commitment so many times that it's anybody's guess about how it will eventually look.

The city hasn't done much in terms of public education or promotion of city cycling. That's basically been left to the activists themselves (with some pro bono help from local advertising agencies). Even the little bicycle traffic monitoring that's been done has been carried out by volunteers and private supporters.

It's hard to say what it will take to get a pro-cycling city government. But if CM couldn't bring this about with 80,000 demonstrators (spring of 2008), maybe it's time to try something else.

I called CM an "institution" and it occurs to me that that's actually what CM shouldn't be. A political movement that evolves into an institution is no longer about change. And what cyclists desperately need, even more than an enjoyable bike jamboree twice a year, is change.

Conference Veto a Bad Sign

Budapest won't host the Velo-City bicycling conference in 2013, according to a notice posted on the Hungarian Cyclists Club website on Friday.

Club President János László explained in the notice that the conference owner, the European Cycling Federation, and Budapest City Hall could not agree on a legal matter in the hosting contract. Details weren't given but the consensus among speculators at criticalmass.hu is that the new regime at Budapest City Hall simply doesn't consider bicycling enough of a priority.

Velo-city, held every two years, is the biggest conference in Europe dedicated to the promotion of cycling as a lifestyle and means of transport, gathering hundreds of transport planners and experts from city administrations and advocates from civil society. It routinely features top international speakers in the field of sustainable transport, with recent examples being Janette Sadik-Khan, of New York's Transportation Department; former Bogota Mayor Enrique Penalosa and Danish urban planner Jan Gehl.

For host cities, Velo-City is a chance to demonstrate work they've done and commitment they've made to mainstream cycling into their transport networks. Recent hosts have included Copenhagen, Brussels and Munich.

The Hungarian Cycling Club has been working to get the conference in Budapest for some time. The city made the short list to host in 2011 but lost to Seville. It won the bid for 2013 and, as of this writing, was still down on the ECF's website as the "decided" host for that year's event.

But these plans were made during Budapest's previous administration, and now that a different mayor is in charge, István Tarlos, the plan is off. The event apparently costs around EUR 400,000 to pull off, which is not a minor expense. Admission and exhibition fees bring in revenue but the city has to guarantee full coverage -- as it should. Hosting Velo-city is a privilege; it's an excellent promotion of the city's livability and progressive approach to urban transport.

However, the Tarlos administration apparently doesn't think it's worth the effort. I can remember well when Mayor Demszky gave a similar rebuff to cyclists back in 2005, announcing that it wasn't worth investing further in bike paths when existing ones weren't used. In the ensuing years, the crowds at Critical Mass grew into the tens of thousands and and everyday cycling grew increasingly popular, despite lack of help from City Hall. The mayor eventually changed his tone, in words at least. We didn't get as much investment as we wanted, but it was clear that the mayor came to respect cyclists as a tenacious and estimable lobbying group.

Local bike bloggers are already looking forward to this spring's Critical Mass, and how we can reassert ourselves in city politics. A couple writers mentioned setting on a focussed, concrete political aim: like getting cycling lanes or tracks around the nagykörút. This is a good idea, one I've favoured for years. I'm also hoping the new mayor's indifferent attitude toward cycling will provoke a turnout that's impossible to ignore.