Amsterdam is flat, San Francisco is not. The Dutch love to sail and so do San Franciscans. The Dutch look hot on bikes, San Francisco cyclists are both hot and not. How can these two cities be so alike and disimilar? It’s all about the bike.
Joe Peach’s post, “How San Francisco Became a Cycling City Against the Odds” draws a connection between Amsterdam and San Francisco that one would not necessarily expect, bikes. In addition to outlining San Francisco’s history of bike activism, the article includes a quote from Program Director of the San Francisco Bicycle Coalition, Andy Thornley that I just love. Thornley explains how and why San Francisco cycling grew by 58% from 2005 – 2010 despite zero infrastructure growth.
Well, for sure, there’s no place else like SF, with the combination of mild climate and urban density and smart, self-defining culture, the traditions of environmentalism, social justice, participatory politics, street theater and un-self-consciousness – we’re not people who get hung up on what we’re supposed to be doing or thinking, or how we look when we’re doing our thing, so the “childishness” and “down-class” stigmas of riding a bike don’t discourage us so much.
While infrastructure is hugely important for sustaining and growing urban cycling in American cities — If you didn’t feel safe or supported on a ride through the city, would you really dare to ride? — infrastructure is not an excuse. Here’s where San Franciscans can beat their chests. Peach concludes his post:
“San Francisco’s physical bicycle network may not inspire envy, but the attitudes of its politicians and its people does, accomplishing far more than most cities, without any kind of infrastructural assistance.”
twitter.com/timbuk2