Top of the News

Chosen and ranked by Crosscut editors. Click date for previous days.

Mouse over headline for description.

more top of the news

Advertisement

Advertisement

Transportation »

May 9, 2007 10:00 AM | last updated May 9, 2007 10:18 AM
Alan Durning

The author commuting in Seattle.

Advertisement
Advertisement

Cascadia is North America's bicycle-commuting capital, but look at Europe

The Netherlands, Denmark, and Germany all put us to shame. Fortunately, it's not a race.

By Alan Durning

Editor's note: This article is one of a series called Bicycle Neglect, posted on the Web site of Sightline, a Seattle-based think tank that advocates sustainability.


There are more bicycles in my family than people: five people, seven bikes, and no car. That's not the usual Cascadian ratio. In the greater Seattle area, for example, the typical household has 2.4 people, 1.4 bikes, and 1.9 motor vehicles. More than 40 percent of Seattle-area households don't have even one bicycle, much less one bike per person, according to survey research by the Puget Sound Regional Council (1.8 MB PDF). Worse, even bike owners aren't necessarily bike riders: Four-fifths of the residents of Washington don't get on a bike at all in a typical year. There's a lot of Bicycle Neglect going on.

But there are also signs of bicycle growth in Cascadia — signs that "car-head" is receding here. If this trend accelerates, many good things could follow, as they have in the European cities that have replaced Bicycle Neglect with Bicycle Respect.

Cascadia is the North American leader in cycling. British Columbia has the highest bike commuting rates in Canada; Oregon has the highest in the United States. Every other Northwest state is above the national average. When the League of American Bicyclists scanned the United States in 2006 for bicycle-friendly communities, it found just 11 that met its standards. Four of them were in the Northwest: Corvallis, Eugene, and Portland, Ore., and Olympia, Wash. Northwest cities also stood out in a similar 2004 study by the Thunderhead Alliance (170K PDF), a bike advocacy group.

Within Cascadia, the stand-out cities are the west-of-the-Cascades university towns: Corvallis, where more than 8 percent of commute trips are by bike; Eugene, where more than 6 percent of commute trips are by bike; and Victoria, B.C., where almost 5 percent of commute trips are by bike. Olympia and Bellingham, Wash., are also in the running.

Cascadia's big metro areas do respectably, too. Greater Vancouver leads with 1.9 percent of commute trips by bike (and 3 percent inside the city — twice the ratio of one decade ago), according to Translink's 2007 Transportation Plan (3.0 MB PDF) and the Vancouver Neighborhood Transportation office. Greater Portland comes next at 0.8 percent (and 2.6 percent in the city — almost twice the proportion of a decade ago); followed by greater Seattle at 0.7 percent.

Cycling is not evenly distributed across metro areas, of course. It's heavily concentrated in complete, compact neighborhoods that are close to the urban core. Small, campus-dominated cities like Eugene and Corvallis are therefore naturals for cycling. So are the historic street-car neighborhoods that anchor the Northwest's big cities: draw a circle with a four-mile radius around the downtown of any Cascadia city and you'll usually capture not only its most compact neighborhoods but also a large share of its bike commuters. In Portland, for example, more than 60 percent of regular cycle commuters live in such neighborhoods, and those neighborhoods have also accounted for most of the growth in biking over the past decade, as this City of Portland map of bike commuting by neighborhood (912K PDF) shows. The darker a census bloc, the more residents bike to work.

Overall, Cascadia's cyclists make up slightly more than 1 percent of all commuters; perhaps 2 percent of all trips in the metropolitan areas of the region are taken by bike. That figure puts Cascadia at three times the U.S. average and on a par with Canada overall.

But it's still only 2 percent of trips. (And because bicycle trips are typically short, biking accounts for an even smaller share of all distance traveled in the region: probably only 1 percent.) For comparison, at last tally, Germans made 12 percent of trips by bike; Danes 20 percent; and the Dutch 38 percent — according to data gathered by researchers John Pucher and Lewis Dijkstra (80K PDF).

In the bicycling meccas of Europe, human-powered trips actually outnumber trips by car, according to this data from the Victoria Transport Research Institute. In Amsterdam and Copenhagen, for example, almost half of all trips are made under human power. In Copenhagen, some 85 percent of residents own a bike according to Brian Hansen, the city's senior advisor on cycling (7.8 MB PDF). (Say, that's almost like the people-to-bikes ratio in my family!) And 60 percent of Copenhageners — all people, including the old, young, disabled, and infirm — ride a bike on any given day. (Even my car-less family doesn't ride that much!) Cycling is even more prevalent in Amsterdam.

Northern Europe's cyclomania is staggering. Consider this: Cycling is concentrated among the young in Cascadia, as most places; it peaks between ages 16 and 24 at levels around 4 percent. Even among these most two-wheeled of all Northwesterners, however, bike use is a fraction of levels in northern Europe. In fact, young Cascadians don't even match the bicycling levels of Germans over the age of 75. That's right: Germans in their late 70s and 80s bike more — on 7 percent of all trips — than Cascadia teens and twentysomethings. And the Dutch? Dutch seniors (again, over age 75) take fully a quarter of their trips by bike. They walk for another quarter.

What's more, in the Netherlands, Germany, and Denmark, cycling has been growing more rapidly as a share of all transportation than has cycling in Cascadia. In Amsterdam, cycling has risen from 30 percent to 40 percent of trips since 1990. In Copenhagen, bikes have now overtaken motor vehicles for commuting into downtown.

What explains the vast disparities in cycling rates? Car-head.

Yes, but how?

Well, most importantly, it's compact communities: northern European cities are far more densely built than Cascadia cities, which makes them naturals for cycling. Urban trips in northern Europe are half as long, on average, which makes them more bikable.

It's also traffic laws and enforcement, good bicycling bridges, the extent and quality of bicycling facilities and infrastructure, and the northern European approach to safety and driver's education. There may be a cultural cause, too: Paris is as densely settled as Amsterdam, and Parisians drive almost as little as northern Europeans. But Parisians don't bike much; they mostly walk and ride transit. (In my car-less family, the males ride their bikes while the females prefer their feet and the bus. So I say, "Men are from Amsterdam; women are from Paris." Cringe. Sorry.)

In bicycle road racing, you don't win unless you stay up with the pack – the peloton – because of the aerodynamic advantage of tight formations. If you fall behind, you'll probably never catch up.

What's Cascadia's standing in the race for bicycle-friendly urban transportation — transportation that's affordable, equitable, energy efficient, and climate safe? Well, the region is the North American leader in bicycling; we set the pace for the peloton. Bicycling has never been more prevalent in Cascadia than it is today, and it's steadily gaining in many Northwest cities.

But pull the camera back until you can see the whole race route. You'll see that the peloton we're pacing in North America is not the main one. The real contenders are in northern Europe, and they're pulling away from us. We're the leaders of the laggards.

Fortunately, building complete, compact communities isn't a winner-take-all sport. Leading the trailers is still good. It means that Cascadia is seizing more of the rewards of cycle-friendly communities — from lively streets to energy independence, from narrowed waistlines to widened access to affordable transportation. The expanding lead of the European peloton is, however, a bracing reminder to do more, to speed ahead toward the end of Bicycle Neglect.

Research assistance: Deric Gruen. Copyright © 2007 by Sightline. Reposted with permission.

Comments
Seattle is not Amsterdam
Report a violationPosted by: smitcat on May 9, 2007 10:27 AM
I'm tired of hearing how virtuous the Dutch are, how they ride their bikes everywhere. Perhaps if Seattle were as flat as Amsterdam, we'd bike everywhere, too! I'd bike to work, if I didn't have to climb up to the top of Phinney Ridge from my Ballard home.
RE: Seattle is not Amsterdam
Report a violationPosted by: Matt on May 9, 2007 12:44 PM
(resists urge to post link to the bicycle lift) Ah, here's a good solution for you.
RE: Seattle is not Amsterdam
Report a violationPosted by: dj on May 9, 2007 10:20 PM
I hear they have hills just as "massive" as Phinney Ridge in British Columbia, Germany and other areas where even the elderly commute on bicycles. Bikes come with these things called gears that, amazingly, allow you to go up hills! Can you walk up Phinney? Then you can bike up Phinney.
RE: Seattle is not Amsterdam
Report a violationPosted by: Uncle Mike on May 11, 2007 8:28 AM
I agree with both commentators that Seattle is not Amsterdam... or Berlin, or Frankfurt, or Copenhagen, or Cologne.... All these ancient cities were built on flat areas, as it made sense in ancient times not to build a city on steep slopes unless absolutely necessary. Before bikes and cars, there were horses and people walking, and they could not pull loads up steep hills then, as now. Seattle, at that time, occupied a small sliver of land along the waterfront, extending toward Ballard but hugging the shore all the way. The rich people on top of Queen Anne or Capital Hill used huge wagon teams that zigzaged up the hill to their summer homes. Seattle did not settle its hills until the advent of streetcars and automobiles.

I encourage people to visit other countries and see how they adapt bicycling. Bike paths follow natural topography to reduce hills. People don't ride over hills, they ride around them. They don't try and make bicycling dangerous with helmet laws, or bicycling in the roadway. In most of these countries, autos are legally 'at fault' in bike-car accidents. Bicycles are expensive and heavy, not $200 toys. The interior of cities are closed to cars.

Understanding the limits of the bike, we should follow Joe Follansbee's remarks and consider how we can make bicycling make more sense, thinking long term. When we turn all of our shoreline and flat areas into luxury condos, then those areas aren't available for bike paths and walking paths. When the city staff models roadbuilding for the industry minimums only (see Ballard and Fremont Bridges, and the pedestrian bridges on SR99), then we won't have the infrastructure we need. When councilors like anti-bike activist Richard Conlin (he has blocked every effort to extend bicycling brought before him, and he's responsible for the idiotic Shilshole bike path) fails to include bike paths on the Westlake Avenue remodel, then talking about bicycling as a alternative to the car is really a waste of time. Joe is right, but we need to think in terms of getting rid of Conlin, demanding common sense solutions, holding politicians accountable, and firing large numbers of incompetant city staffers at SDOT.
A Modest Proposal: Vengeful Infrastructure
Report a violationPosted by: Stuka on May 9, 2007 7:00 PM
I know how we can keep up with the Dutch (who I'm sure ride around their doomed flood plain wearing wooden shoes). Build a velodrome in the middle of the Seattle Center. It would be connected to the Tacoma Dome parking lot by a "37-mile long one-way bike path." This would be the Greg Palmer Memorial Velodrome and this is how it would work: Greg would ride his bike around in circles while other circling cyclists in cars or on bikes would try to shove him off the road. Eventually, this activity would suitably justify the "Memorial" tag on the new velodrome. More importantly, it this method of memorializing would be of higher legality than anthrax.

I am completely serious about this and no one should think that I'm kidding. If you do you are not sufficiently "humor impaired." Greg will never find out about our plot to have him circle ceaselessly like a political vulture pondering a lame duck president because this is a written medium." He's probably at home right now moving his lips through the Comic Classics version of "The Hardy Boys Steal Bikes and Leave Them in a Slag Heap" by Johnathan Swift.

Greg might say that this proposal is "elitist arrogant self-righteous crap," and tell us that cyclists can ride drunk without getting arrested in this town. I say, as Harry Cohn would sort of say, "Don't even ignore him." Instead, make an offhand reference to someone's giant posterior without mentioning which humor columnist or which city. In this city we might even call it a Houyhnhnmic Ass, but that might be impolite and too political.

Acknowledgements to Lilliputians and Houynonymns everywhere, and if you don't get the jokes all bicycle paths lead to Greg's post.
Bicycle Enthusiasts Should Focus on Changing Long-Term Behavior
Report a violationPosted by: jfollansbee on May 10, 2007 6:36 AM
I have never found the "Seattle ought to be more like [fill in city name here]" argument persuasive. It's always apples to oranges, in my view. I think bicycle enthusiasts might get more traction if they focused on changing long-term behavior. If you want adults to use cars less, encourage their children to bike to school. What if a bicyclist who commutes to work every day agreed to guide a group of bike-riding kids to school as part of his route? Or what if the school bus company created a bicyclist unit to be bike-to-school guides, meeting a group of kids on a corner and leading them to their destination? As a parent, I would welcome this as a way to give my kids some outdoor exercise, as well as a way to safely transport them to school. (My 10-year-old daughter has asked me to let her ride. But the only route is via a four-lane road that's hellish during the morning rush, and so I've refused permission.) Long-term, I bet some of those kids would learn that bicycling to work is a viable alternative. That's better than riding out of misplaced guilt over how Seattle isn't like Paris or Eugene.
D'accord
Report a violationPosted by: dj on May 10, 2007 1:03 PM
That's a great idea, jfollansbee. Guilt is a poor motivator, in general. I don't bike out of some sense of duty. I hate spandex, I should add, and regard as silly all that goofy logo-ridden astronaut clothing favored by some cyclists. I bike -- slowly and in drab coloration -- because I find it enjoyable. I can enjoy the fresh air, the smell of someone baking bread or cooking a burger as I pass by a residence and I get a better sense of the city's living personality every day. When I have to drive, I miss all that. I don't feel guilty driving my car when I have to. Sometimes you need your car. I just prefer being on a bike.
Send 'em south
Report a violationPosted by: pmac on May 10, 2007 5:17 PM
In my opinion, Joe is right but for the wrong reason. He said "I think bicycle enthusiasts might get more traction if they focused on changing long-term behavior." The real long-term behavior needing attention is the complete lawlessness cyclists show.

I think that bicycles are like public transit -- great in theory, but lousy in actual practice.

Cyclists routinely and constantly break laws on roadways, and until they actually stop at stoplights and stop signs, they'll never earn the respect of drivers. (I haven't been on a bike in a while, I admit, but I have done my share of STPs. And even my 3-year-old knows that "red means stop.")

I work in Fremont, where for a while a few motorcycle cops ticketed the cyclists who ignored the clearly marked stop signs. Hooray for the cops. Obviously, this isn't going to be a high priority for them, but I was always glad to see a few scofflaws get tickets. This morning I just about mowed down a cyclist (on my scooter, not a car) because they didn't stop at the stop sign. Do cyclists just become blind when the pull on their spandex?

Buses seem like a great way of going from one place to another until you realize that you don't want to go downtown or to the U District, and it'll take 45 minutes and a half-mile walk to a bus that only comes every half hour, to go the distance that would take 10-15 minutes in a car or on a scooter.

In theory, bikes seem like a great thing, until you realize that they're going to ignore you and other motorized vehicles, and if you hit them (even though it's clearly their fault) you're going to be at fault, and you'll feel bad (at least a bit), to boot.

Over the past few years, I've changed my mind: until cyclists learn the rules of the road, I'd prefer that they all follow that one-way road to the Tacoma Dome.
RE: Send 'em south
Report a violationPosted by: dj on May 10, 2007 11:56 PM
Yeah, right, the "complete lawlessness" of cyclists ... Good grief. At least Greg Palmer pretended he was joking about this red herring. Anyone could, of course, make the same complaints about all the reckless people driving cars, or scooters for that matter. It's funny how so many anti-bike people like to make this generalization (note: all generalizations are false) and then contort logic to complain as if this alleged crazed biking is somehow endangering them in their cars or motorbikes. Huh? Is your motorbike made of crepe paper or something? What a strange mix of puritanical indignation and self-indulgence afflicts so many of you Seattle folks. I bet you get really mad at jaywalkers, too, even when there are no cars in sight.

I bicycle almost every day and most cyclists do obey the rules. Cyclists often go out of their way to avoid irritating motorists. For example, cyclists don't have to get over. They can occupy a lane, if they want. That's the law. But most cyclists do get over -- because motorists go nuts if delayed for a microsecond. Why don't you actually try riding a bicycle around here? You'll quickly see where the real risk comes from. Or heck, just go ahead and run into the scofflaws if it really bothers you that much. That'll make you feel better.
RE: Send 'em south
Report a violationPosted by: pmac on May 11, 2007 9:50 AM
No, most cyclists don't obey the rules. If they did, it wouldn't be a problem. Bicycles are required to be as far right as practicable -- not possible, so there's no reason to ride in the gutter -- but you are wrong, they can't occupy a full lane.

"SMC 11.44.040 Riding on roadways.

"Every person operating a bicycle upon a roadway at a speed slower than the normal and reasonable flow of motor vehicle traffic thereon shall ride as near to the right side of the right through lane as is safe..."

Go to any intersection and watch the bikes run the stop signs and red lights. Go to Fremont, if you can't find an intersection near you.

And I frankly wouldn't care that they break the law, if it didn't make it so damned hard to drive! I'd feel terrible if I hit a bike, even if they were running a red light. A little less terrible than if I were at fault, but terrible nonetheless.

So, go ahead and break the law -- and ride in the middle of the lane -- but don't do it when I'm around, please.
RE: Send 'em south
Report a violationPosted by: dj on May 11, 2007 10:09 AM
You don't even appear to read what you right. Being in the lane, even off to the right, is still in the lane. Clearly, you are not aware that most bike accidents result from people opening their doors while parked on the side. Cyclists, for their own safety, should be at least 3-4 feet away from parked cars -- which puts them well into the lane. But, as I said, most cyclists put themselves at risk from parked cars because they feel the need to stay out of the way of you irritable, impatient motorists. It would be crazy not to. I bike almost every day. I see how most cyclists behave. Yes, some cyclists disobey traffic rules -- just like some motorists drive arrogantly, recklessly and lawlessly. You don't bike but you want to believe that most cyclists are somehow uniquely bad actors. That's the same as bikers wrongly believing that most people in cars are hostile to them. Such angry finger-pointing is both juvenile and counterproductive. That's why Greg Palmer's "humor" on this subject was so disappointing. Sorry, but most people out there on bikes and in cars and on scooters are boring, decent and law-abiding. You are just speaking from ignorance and bias, pmac, based on what scientists call a sampling error. But go ahead and believe what you want. Belief is much stronger than reason.
RE: Send 'em south
Report a violationPosted by: dj on May 11, 2007 10:17 AM
Er, "write" is what I meant. Apparently, I also don't read what I write, right?
Advertisement
Advertisement

Sign up for Crosscut's free weekday newsletter e-mail.
About Crosscut
Advertising Info
Crosscut's list of RSS feeds.

Advertisement

Advertisement

Advertisement


About Crosscut »
Crosscut Seattle is an online newspaper for the Pacific Northwest, including Washington, Oregon, Idaho, and British Columbia. It's a guide to local and regional news, a place to report and discuss news, and a platform for new tools to convey news.

• More about Crosscut

Contact Crosscut

Tools

Sign up for Crosscut's daily newsletter
About Crosscut
Advertising Info
Crosscut's list of RSS feeds.
Advertisement