Holding the Line Against Family Fun

As a committed foot soldier in the urban cycling movement, I take pride in the few battle scars I've picked up over the years. The one I got this weekend was no exception.

On Saturday morning, I went from our flat on Margit körút over to District VIII to pick up a bike for my 6-year-old boy, Lance. I was joined on the excursion by Lance, and also by his 11-month-old sister, Sequoia.

We met up with the seller of the bike, Lance did a test ride, and we decided to take it. Lance had been given a cool dirt bike just a week earlier, but it's on the large side. This other bike seemed just the right size to tide Lance over until he's big enough for the dirt bike.

So we took the bike and started for home. Lance rode it while I walked briskly behind. This was fine for the few blocks back to the körút, but not for the full 4-5 kilometres back to the flat. Not with the heavy traffic and not with me having Sequoia on my back.

So we boarded the 4-6 tram near the Corvin cinema and were on our way. I'm aware that bicycles aren't allowed on the tram, but I thought in this instance I'd be OK. Afterall, it was a little child's bike, no bigger than a pram or shopping trolley, which are perfectly legal. And there was the fact that I had two kids in tow, which usually makes you seem more sympathetic.

Famous last words. Before we got to the next stop, a pair of inspectors stepped up and motioned to the bike: "A kerékpárt nem szabad szállítani." (It's against the rules to bring bikes on board.)

So we were busted. Fined HUF 6,000 (about EUR 23) and made to get off the tram at Oktogon and walk the rest of the way home -- about two kilometres. After I'd paid, the inspector who'd been doing most of the talking shrugged and said to me in English, "I'm sorry. That's the rule in Hungary."

I can understand limiting bike access on crowded public transport lines at rush hour. But to go after little kids with little bikes on a Saturday morning when the tram's half empty? No wonder the inspector seemed ashamed of himself.

Today, I was on the tram, and a woman got on with a 4-or 5-year-old boy. Little helmet on his head and a bicycle in tow. They'd probably been riding on Margit Island, and were taking the safe way back home. And, of course, what was I thinking: Where are the police when you need them!??

Mind the Rules while Biking to Work

Two major cycling campaigns got underway today: first, the spring Bike to Work contest, which pits companies against one another to see whose employees can log more kilometres in a months' time commuting by bike. The second is the National Police's long-promised crackdown on scofflaw cyclists. This will reportedly last three weeks and entail random police checks for reflectors and working lamps, as well as breathiliser tests for those suspected of drunk cycling.

A conspiracy theorist might wonder if the police didn't intentionally schedule their dragnet to coincide with Bike to Work, just because the pickings would be easier.

However, according to the kerekagy.hu blog, the enforcement campaign has the support of Hungary's main transport cycling NGO, the Hungarian Cyclists Club (MK). At a public announcement of the crackdown last week, the police's spokesman was joined by MK President János László, who noted that the measure was not against cyclists or cycling, but rather about safe riding.

During this announcement, nationwide statistics were cited about cycling injuries and cycling deaths in 2010. However, they weren't put into any context so I wasn't sure if I should be alarmed, relieved or indifferent. One statistic that was interesting, however, was that cycling numbers in Budapest have doubled during the last four years, while death and injuries to cyclists haven't grown at all. This mirrors experience in cities the world over: practically anywhere where levels of urban cycling have grown, traffic injuries involving cyclists have either held steady or gone down. It's become a universal maxim that the more cyclists there are on the road, the safer it is for individual cyclists.

It follows that if authorities have only our safety mind, they would do better by taking measures to promote cycling. Not that I'm against following road rules and riding responsibly. These are clearly important to cycling safety. What's missing is a comprehensive approach that balances enforcement with campaigns to promote cycling as a healthy and enjoyable mode of urban travel; the development of safe, separate infrastructure for city cycling; more stringent penalties and better enforcement of speeding violations by motorists, etc., etc.

The "etc., etc." can be found in a study published in 2005 on safety conditions for "vulnerable road users" in European countries whose safety records are below the EU average (Hungary's among them). The study suggests that enforcement and better cycling behaviour is needed, but so are several other measures, including those directed at motorists.

Transport of London has put out a Cycle Safety Action Plan that takes an even more sympathetic approach toward cyclists. It recommends nine specific actions, just one one of them concerning enforcement. The other measures involve changes to mindsets and the urban environment to better accommodate and encourage cycling.

Like Budapest, London is at an early stage of cycling development. But the city government there is taking better strides to ensure it flourishes.

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.

Ninja count results

Following up on my last post on the Hungarian "ninja" count ...

On Friday evening, approximately 85 volunteers across the country spent 20 minutes along various streets and bike paths and counted passing cyclists while also noting how well they were illuminated.

In total, 2,461 cyclists were counted and of those 77 percent had at least one lamp on their bikes, with the other 23 percent falling into the category of "ninja," meaning they had no lights and were practically invisible. My guess was that 80 percent would have light, which was almost correct.

The number who had both a front and rear lamp -- being in perfect accord with legal requirements -- was just 57 percent. Not so good. If I'm reading the numbers correctly, 6 percent had just a front lamp while 12 percent had just a tail lamp.

The excel sheet with all the numbers, including places where the counts were made, was posted by Critical Mass head honcho Gábor Kürti here.

Ninja count

It's cycling season again, and one of the principals at criticalmass.hu wants to know what portion of cyclists in Hungary ride with lights at night. He's calling for volunteer counters around the country to make sample bike-traffic counts along routes of their choosing between 7 and 7:20 p.m. on Friday.

You're just asked to count passing cyclists for 20 minutes while noting how many have just a front lamp, haw many have just a rear lamp, how many have both, and how many have neither. You then upload the results as a comment to the original blog post. The full details are there (though only in Hungarian).

The call for volunteers doesn't say what inspired the idea, though the issue of bike lighting is certainly a timely one. Legal requirements on bike lighting were tightened up in last year's revision of the Hungarian Traffic Code. Cyclists are now required to not only have front and rear lamps after dark, but also side reflectors on their wheel spokes, and, if you're riding outside city limits, a reflective vest on your person.

During last fall's Critical Mass in Budapest, police, for the first time ever, were handing out citations to participants without all the requisite bling. In recent months, the national police have warned they'll make extra effort this spring to enforce cycling rules. They've threatened to screen bikes for required lamps with random checks that might even take place during daylight hours. (Tip to police: spotting lampless bikes is easier after dark.)

Anyway, I have nothing against legal requirements for bike lights. Even in bike-friendly Netherlands, this is one area where the authorities are quite fussy with cyclists. I won't get on a high horse in this matter, having found myself past dark on many occasions with lights that were dim to dark because of dead batteries. That said, the "bike ninjas" speeding through the Budapest night without lights are a pet peeve of mine. It seems the minimalist aesthetic among some fixie riders can make them averse to putting anything on their bikes, including lamps. Ironically, unlit cyclists are probably most dangerous when they're on bike paths, where there are no car headlights or street lighting to illuminate them reflectively.

But aside from puristic fixie riders and the occasional battery-bereft duffer (me!), it is my impression that the majority of riders DO use lights past dark. My ballpark guess would be 80 percent. We'll see in a couple days how close I am.

Cycling Group Turns Other Cheek

Here's one I don't know WHAT to make of: The European Cycling Federation, last week snubbed by Budapest City Hall, which decided to renege on its commitment to host the ECF's 2013 Velo-City conference, is now showering the Hungarians with praise.

According to a Tuesday press release from the ECF, in its use of EU transport subsidies, Hungary spends about twice as much on cycling as the average country. My first question is, "Where's all the money going?" Maybe there are some fantastic cycling routes in the hinterland that I'm not aware of. But judging by the main ones, as in the government's self-declared top-priority routes -- the Eurovelo 6 and the circuit around Balaton -- the money has not yielded great results.

The second question is, "Why is the ECF showering Hungary with praise just now?" As I noted in my previous post, Budapest last year had won the honor of hosting the ECF's biannual conference, Velo-City, in 2013, but last Friday, the Tarlos administration renegged on the deal, citing an unspecified legal problem.

Then, just as the ECF scratched Budapest from the Velo-City conference page on its website, here comes a press release with the organisation's president, Bernie Ensink (right in photo), shaking the hand of Hungarian Tourism Minister Endre Horvath (sorry: Doctor Endre Horvath -- other guy in photo), and a message congratulating him on Hungary's outstanding record on cycling spending.

Of course, we have to recognise that Budapest City Hall IS NOT the Hungarian government (even if they're both run by the same party). At any rate, it sure seems sporting of the ECF. It can't be a small effort to identify a host city for an event as huge as Velo-City (400-500 guests, EUR 400,000 cost). At present, according to ECF's site, the host application process is reopened and starting from scratch. Maybe ECF is hoping the public kudos they've bestowed on the Hungarian government will inspire Budapest City Hall to rethink its withdrawal from such a prestigious cycling event.

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.