Author: chrisberggren415@gmail.com

Sydney, for many the gateway to Australia and Oceania, is one of the most spectacularly sited harbor cities in the world and is the undisputed economic and tourist capital of the land down under. It is exceptionally well-endowed with natural assets including more than 70 urban beaches, more than any other major world city. The city is flanked by two national parks, at its northern and southern edges, and is graced with one of the world’s largest natural harbors. Most of the land abutting the harbor is protected parkland which has been developed with scenic walking paths and bike trails. Throughout the urban area, including the central business district (CBD), parks and reserves are within easy walking distance.

Despite its overall reliance on cars, the city has an extensive, multi-modal system of public transit, and it is possible to live in most of Sydney without owning a car. Still, with an ever growing population, the strain on roads has caused a worsening of traffic jams, lending credence to the need for a paradigm shift in urban planning.

Transportation in Sydney

Like the United States, Australian transportation tends to be dominated by private automobiles operated over public infrastructure (e.g. bridges, streets and highways). Although this is true in Sydney, with 53% of residents commuting to work by car, the city has the highest percentage of transit users in Australia. The city’s matrix of public transit includes Sydney Buses, the city’s preponderant mode, City Rail, and Sydney Ferries, with seven lines emanating out from Circular Quay.

Circular Quay is also the main hub of City Rail, which provides the city with a commuter-based heavy rail service. City Rail, despite being a convenient and comfortable method of travel within certain areas of the city and many distant suburbs, lacks service to certain other densely settled areas like high-profile Northern Beaches and Eastern Suburbs locales, its residents having to drive or take buses for everyday activities.

No Local Government in Sydney

Australian cities are not represented by local governments but by the state, yet have elected councils for planning and administration. This system has some commonality to that of U.S. cities which, under state charters, don’t have full control in matters of transportation but, nonetheless have some autonomy that local Australian jurisdictions do not. Accordingly, transportation and other key government services of Sydney are controlled by the state of New South Wales. Since the 1940’s, in reaction to Sydney’s large proportion of the state’s residents, the state government has worked to solidify its power by discouraging local governments from forming through variations of redistricting and other methods.

Scenic Nature Trails and Beautiful Beaches

With one of the world’s largest protected harbors and a complex pattern of coves and inlets, Sydney is graced with a cornucopia of pleasant and distinct neighborhoods, many with their own beach and reserve. One of the city’s most beautiful settings is the Pacific Ocean fronting ‘Bondi to Coogee Walk’, where the annual Sculpture by the Sea exhibition is staged. Huge crowds descend upon the stunning coastline trail to see cutting-edge sculptures from the world’s most acclaimed sculpture artists.

Another amazing feature of Sydney are the outdoor pools at numerous beaches. These rock pools are naturally filled with ocean water and set in beautiful surroundings, and are free for all to enjoy. Most ocean beaches have ‘Surf and Lifesaver’ clubs, where legions of Sydney children learn how to swim, and people of all ages are taught to surf. The SLC’s are fitted with bathrooms, showers, and change rooms, befitting the leisure-oriented Aussie lifestyle where people are known to swim or surf the breakers just before or after work.

Strengthening Sydney’s Sustainability

In a 2012 Sydney Morning Herald article, a report by Price Waterhouse Coopers was published saying that Sydney was ranked fourth worst of the world’s most influential cities in terms of transport and infrastructure. However, by 2025, after years of renewed calls for smart solutions, the city has significantly improved its public transportation network, leading to lower congestion at numerous key locations. Sydney is on pace to continue adding sustainable transportation and infrastructure through 2032 and beyond.

The enormous livability of the city could be further enhanced by traffic calming and a deeper commitment to creating a robust active mobility network (urban bike trails). Its CBD could transition over time into a predominately pedestrian, bicycle, and transit zone, perhaps borrowing a few tricks from Paris and Copenhagen. It is hard to overstate the assets of Sydney, as there are many, and with some additional changes to urban planning the city can become even more livable as well as economically sustainable for the 21st century.

The fireworks over Sarande at midnight were spectacular and uniquely emblematic of Albanian culture. Unlike typical celebrations in other countries, these pyrotechnics came from hundreds of citizen “contributors” across the city, illuminating the hillside town overlooking the open bay. This spontaneous, communal display reflected the deeper cultural essence of Albania – a society characterized by profound social cohesion and multi-generational connections that are exceptional even by Balkan standards.

As an American expatriate, I’ve discovered that Albanians possess an extraordinary spirit of genuine engagement that transcends typical social interactions. This isn’t merely an anecdotal observation, but a profound cultural characteristic. A recent experience exemplifies this perfectly: a local shop owner, upon hearing about my minor technical problem, not only offered assistance but spent over half an hour helping me resolve an issue with my phone – a gesture of spontaneous kindness that would be rare in more individualistic societies.

The Albanians I’ve encountered consistently demonstrate a warmth and communal spirit that challenges the more transactional relationships common in more industrialized nations, revealing a culture where human connection takes precedence over efficiency or personal convenience.

Traditional Eastern European Culture

The Albanian culture is old-school and very traditional. Men don’t wash dishes or do the laundry or other household tasks that are considered women’s work. During non-working hours, men hang out with their male friends in coffee shops, taverns, and parks talking or playing board games. Women are rarely seen in these places, their cultural preference being to spend time with friends and family (other women) when they are not taking care of children or tending to household tasks.

Financial Realities in a Developing Economy

The average monthly salary of $800 makes living in modern Albania a challenge especially for citizens living in the capital Tirana. Rents there have been rising in recent years amid an expanding economy, putting a strain on personal budgets. Elsewhere in the country, prices for housing are more reasonable even relative to the lower earnings away from the capital but still high for the typical Albanian.

Nonetheless, this is a nation of resilient people whose parents or grandparents endured the hardships of a communist regime. Families stick together and supplement their income through multiple income streams like small-scale agriculture and remittances from relatives working abroad. For now, the standard of living remains modest and as such the majority of people are focused on providing for basic needs rather than discretionary spending, highlighting the economic challenges facing this developing nation.

Cash is King in Albania

Albanian merchants overwhelmingly prefer cash payments due to exorbitant bank and credit card fees, which can consume up to 15-18% of their annual receipts – a significantly higher proportion compared to merchants in more affluent countries.It is therefore standard practice for locals and mindful expats to carry plenty of cash and to use it to pay for mostly everything. Therein lies a practical lesson for international visitors and an ancillary feature of Albania’s “informal economy” that benefits its citizens.

Land of Mosques and Churches

Albania is a religiously tolerant country. There are many Christians and Muslims living side by side in communities across the country. In Sarande, the local mosque broadcasts the prayer call on its loudspeakers five times a day, as is standard practice in Islamic communities around the world. The prayer calls are timed to the position of the sun, not the clock, and occur at first light, the solar zenith, the afternoon midpoint, just after sunset, and the last light when the sky becomes completely dark.

Christmas is observed in Albania but is much less of a gift-giving occasion than it is in the United States and other Western countries. Families will often have a lunch to celebrate the occasion on Christmas Day and/or, to a lesser extent, a dinner on Christmas Eve. Christmas is much more of a gift-giving and celebratory event on December 31 – New Year’s Eve, while Christian Orthodox people celebrate Christmas on January 7th.

Albanian Hospitality

The Albanian people are remarkably responsive when help is needed and are widely known for being accommodating and genuine. According to a study published in the Eastern European Journal of Regional Studies in 2019, the nation demonstrates a strong cultural pattern of informal mutual assistance networks. The people of Albania consistently show a deep sense of regard and respect for others, as evidenced by their willingness to engage in situations and problem solving. This is true both in society at large and within formal and institutional settings.

I recently met a Swedish man (born in the U.S.A.) visiting Albania on a long stay with his wife and children. The man recounted that he had been bitten by a stray dog and went to the hospital here in Sarande out of concern of being infected with rabies. He said that getting in the door of the hospital and being seen by a doctor was a very simple process and there was no problem with anything – he wasn’t asked to fill out paperwork or to produce identification. There was no intake procedure, protocol, or waiting time.

He just walked in and asked to speak to somebody in English and an orderly came right over and he asked the orderly for a doctor who spoke English regarding his dog bite. The orderly said “no problem” or words to that effect and he went away for a moment. Then a doctor came out in a moment and informed the man there was no longer any rabies cases in Sarande.

Years ago the authorities had conducted a number of aerial rabies vaccine drops that the local population of stray dogs consumed, which completely eradicated rabies in this part of Albania. Of course this was good news for the visiting Swede but the main feeling he had come away with was how simple and human-scaled his interaction with the people at the hospital had been.

Albanian Friends and Family

Albanian society is renowned for its exceptionally strong family bonds and multigenerational support systems. According to sociologist Besim Gollopeni’s 2015 study in the European Journal of Social Sciences, the Albanian family structure remains one of the most cohesive in Europe, with extended families commonly living together or in close proximity, sharing resources, and providing mutual emotional and practical support.

This deep-rooted family orientation extends naturally to friendships, where Albanians tend to incorporate close friends into their family circle, treating them with the same level of commitment and loyalty they show their relatives.

The best way to make friends with an Albanian is to not let on that you will be leaving anytime soon. Most people here (and everywhere) don’t want to invest time and energy in short-term relationships. New arrivals should play it cool even when not planning to stay indefinitely, as the reality in many cases is the unpredictability of the future. In other words, it’s not impossible that you will elect to remain rather than to move on.

The Future of Albania

There have been some strong indications of a brighter road ahead for Albania. It has the potential for a prosperous future which is taking shape in the form of a gigantic new marina complex in Vlore, which has attracted the attention of big-name investors from overseas. The development has the potential to be a catalyst for more projects and greater riches for the national economy in the coming decades.

Furthermore, the country is awaiting the grand-opening of the Vlore International Airport in 2025, the country’s second major airport after Tirana’s. In recent years, the country’s global visibility has risen substantially as foreign tourists have begun to discover its amazing culture and splendid scenery.

Nevertheless, Albania’s avenue to the future faces both opportunities and challenges within its political framework. The country’s progress toward EU membership, while advancing with formal candidate status since 2014, continues to be slowed by concerns over corruption and the need for judicial reform. Most analysts project Albania’s earliest possible EU accession around 2030, though this timeline remains fluid.

The country’s political system shows promise through its stable democratic elections and improving transparency measures, yet persistent issues with patronage networks and administrative inefficiency continue to concern international observers.

On the positive side, Albania’s young population and increasing digitalization of government services suggest potential for more agile governance, while its strategic position as a NATO member and growing regional influence strengthen its diplomatic hand. The government’s commitment to infrastructure development, as evidenced by the projects in Vlore, demonstrates a capacity for long-term planning that could help overcome traditional bureaucratic obstacles.

At the dawn of the 20th century, most American cities of over 10,000 residents had their own, privately owned streetcar company. The trolley lines were built by real-estate developers to entice buyers to purchase homes and to increase the value of the homes they were selling. During the late 19th Century, this was the primary mode of interurban transit. With the advent of transcontinental railroad service in 1869, folks could travel across the region, state, or country by taking their neighborhood streetcar downtown and boarding a long-distance train. And so began the golden-age of rail transportation.

GM and the Removal of Rail-Based Transit

In 1922, with Ford’s Model-T having made inroads in the still nascent automobile market, there were still vast numbers of people relying on streetcars as their sole means of transportation. General Motors (GM) President and CEO Alfred P. Sloan saw an enormous money-making opportunity and established a special company unit charged with replacing streetcars with cars, trucks, and buses. By converting streetcar lines into bus routes, knowing the lack of appeal of bus riding, he counted on huge numbers of people buying cars.

Origins of the Highway Lobby

Sloan courted oil companies, tire manufacturers, and anyone having to do with motorized transportation to create the National Highway Users Conference in 1932, an enormous umbrella association with more Washington lobbying power than any other interest group. This group was the beginning of what we know today as the highway lobby, the powerful interest group responsible for keeping the country in automobile dependency.Pushing America into Automobile DependencyThe prime vehicle for pushing America into automobile dependency was the GM front company National City Lines (NCL), according to many accounts. NCL was a bus company reorganized in 1936 by GM into a holding company with the express purpose of acquiring and converting streetcar companies into bus routes. NCL began by purchasing 13 transit companies, including two recently improved streetcar lines in Butte, MT and Beaumont, TX, and by 1947 had acquired more than 100 streetcar systems in 45 cities.Case-in-Point: The Destruction of Los Angeles Streetcar LinesThe Los Angeles Railway was sold to NCL in 1945 and renamed Los Angeles Transit Lines. In its heyday, there had been over 1200 trolleys serving more than 20 streetcar lines. Rather than simply replacing streetcars with buses in the beginning, NCL used deceptive tactics such as the ‘slow and painful’ method of cutting service by gradually reducing service frequency. Streetcars appearing every five minutes would now only appear every 10 minutes, then 12; and after awhile, the 12 minute frequency interval would be reduced to 15 minutes, then to 20, and then to 30 minutes. Frustrated passengers would stop riding the streetcars, giving NCL a financial reason to replace them with buses, much of which they did in the late 1940’s to early 1950’s. This type of scenario was repeated in many cities across the country, despite much public outcry.Replacing Private Transit with Publicly Funded HighwaysIn 1949, GM and others were convicted in federal court for conspiracy to monopolize interstate commerce. Nonetheless, the streetcar systems continued to be bled dry and replaced by belching, pollution-spewing diesel buses. Moreover, the highway lobby gained a substantial White House foothold with the 1953 appointment of GM President Charles Wilson as secretary of defense. Wilson pushed for a nationwide, freeway building program, saying it was essential for national security. This claim played conveniently into the defensive, cold-war narrative of the era. That same year, Francis DuPont, whose family owned the largest share of General Motors, became the chief administrator of the federal highways. He was the key to Congress passing the largest public works bill in history, the 1956 Federal-Aid Highway Act – a gargantuan $25 billion, 41,000 mile highway building project to be paid for with a gas tax. More highways meant more driving, then more taxes, then more roads, in a perpetual cycle which continues today.The Return of Rail to American CitiesIn automobile dependent Los Angeles, the nation’s second most populated city with a large, sprawling land-mass, rail transit is today making a comeback, if not fast enough to start tearing down some of the freeways built over old streetcar lines. Much of the credit for the city’s growing rail-based transit system goes to former mayor Tom Bradley, who in the 1990s pushed hard to build a high-quality transit system, one that could transport far greater numbers of passengers than buses. This revival is not unique to Los Angeles. Portland, Oregon has developed one of the nation’s most successful light rail systems with its MAX Light Rail, which began operation in 1986 and now spans over 60 miles with 97 stations. Denver’s RTD Light Rail has expanded significantly since its 1994 inception, now covering 58.5 miles of track and serving as a vital transportation artery for the growing metropolitan area.In the Northeast, cities like Boston have maintained and expanded their historic subway and trolley systems. The Massachusetts Bay Transportation Authority (MBTA) operates the nation’s oldest subway system, which continues to serve as a crucial part of the city’s transportation infrastructure. Meanwhile, Washington D.C.’s Metro system, opened in 1976, has grown to be the third-busiest rapid transit system in the country.Perhaps most notably, Salt Lake City—a traditionally car-centric western city—has developed an extensive light rail system called TRAX since 1999, demonstrating that rail transit can succeed even in less densely populated areas when properly planned and executed. Similarly, Phoenix’s Valley Metro Rail, operational since 2008, has exceeded ridership projections and sparked transit-oriented development across the metropolitan area.These examples illustrate a growing recognition among American cities that robust rail systems are not merely nostalgic throwbacks but essential components of modern urban transportation infrastructure.Building the Future: Policy Steps for Transit RenaissanceFor American cities to fully realize the benefits of comprehensive public transportation, several key policy initiatives must be prioritized. First, federal funding mechanisms must shift from heavily favoring highway construction to providing sustained investment in public transit infrastructure. This requires revising funding formulas that have historically allocated 80% of transportation dollars to highways and only 20% to public transit.Second, state and local zoning laws need reform to encourage transit-oriented development—higher density, mixed-use communities around transit stations that generate consistent ridership while reducing car dependence. Cities like Arlington, Virginia have demonstrated how strategic density along transit corridors can create vibrant communities while preserving nearby single-family neighborhoods.Third, regional transportation authorities must be empowered to coordinate seamless connections between local transit, regional commuter rail, and emerging high-speed rail corridors. The fragmentation of transit governance has historically undermined efficiency and user experience.The benefits of these policy shifts would be transformative. American cities would see reduced traffic congestion, saving billions in productivity and fuel costs. Environmental impacts would decrease significantly, with lower greenhouse gas emissions and improved air quality. Economic development would flourish around transit nodes, creating jobs and increasing property values. Most importantly, transportation equity would improve as car-free mobility options expand for elderly, disabled, low-income, and youth populations.The interconnection of local transit with regional and high-speed rail would create a transportation ecosystem where Americans could conveniently travel between and within cities without requiring automobile ownership—a return to the freedom of mobility that characterized the golden age of rail, but with 21st century technology and efficiency. This comprehensive approach represents not just a transportation strategy, but a vision for more sustainable, equitable, and economically vibrant American cities.

In the 21st century, Americans grapple with a wide range of expanding societal problems like obesity and its associated health issues, traffic gridlock, reduced family time, and a lack of city centers and “third places”. Third-places are places we like to go such as book stores, gyms, libraries, parks, and other spots where we meet people known or unknown, some of whom we likely share common interests. If we ask ourselves what brought on our societal problems, we might realize that longer work hours and the nation’s suburbanization (normalized in the late 20th century) has siloed a majority of us into bedroom “communities”, effectively isolating us in our homes.

My time overseas provided me with a perspective that many Americans who have traveled abroad can relate to – an appreciation for high-quality town centers and the slower pace of life that comes from not having to drive everywhere for all activities. Upon returning to the U.S. from a trip to Spain and France, I experienced a jarring sense of contrast; a “reverse culture shock” that remains vivid in my memory over 30 years later. The absence of pedestrian life was striking – no one walking, nobody on a bicycle, not a soul was in sight, presenting a sort of apocalyptic landscape.

How the U.S. became a car-dependent nation has its origins in the early prioritization of automobiles at the exclusion of streetcars and bicycles. These eco-friendly-transportation modes had been prominent in most American towns of more than 10,000 people until the 1930s. Today, several European cities have become sustainability models in the utilization of the simple bicycle as a major tool in the restoration of transportation balance.

Bikes: Healthy for People and Cities

The health benefits of regular cycling are substantial and well-documented across numerous studies. In some European countries with universal healthcare, governments have recognized cycling as an effective preventive health measure that warrants investment. Research has consistently shown that regular cycling can reduce mortality rates among adults by approximately 30% compared to non-cyclists. This reduction comes from improvements in cardiovascular health, decreased obesity rates, and better mental health outcomes.

One notable example is the city of Copenhagen, where health economists have calculated annual healthcare savings of approximately $100 million directly attributable to bicycle commuting. These calculations don’t even account for the broader economic benefits from increased productivity of a healthier workforce, reduced absenteeism, decreased road maintenance costs, and reduced traffic congestion.

The economic case for cycling infrastructure becomes even more compelling when examining the full cost-benefit analysis. While building grade-separated bikeways costs approximately two million dollars per mile per side, these investments typically pay for themselves within five years through healthcare savings and economic benefits. Economic impact studies estimate that every mile cycled yields a net gain for society of 21 cents, compared to a net loss of 12 cents per mile driven by car. These figures include both savings in the public sector from reduced health care costs and increases in private sector economic activity in bicycle-friendly districts.

Furthermore, the physical activity associated with regular cycling helps combat the obesity epidemic that costs the American healthcare system billions of dollars annually. Studies show that people who commute by bicycle are leaner and healthier than those who drive. As healthcare costs continue to rise in the United States, preventive measures like encouraging active transportation deserve serious consideration as cost-effective public health interventions.

Bicycle Commuting and Green Cities

Today, more people bike to work in greater Copenhagen than in the whole of the United States, with commuters riding an average of three and a half miles each way. This remarkable achievement didn’t happen overnight. Over the past 30 years, Copenhagen has implemented a strategic vision that gradually reclaimed urban space from cars and reallocated it to bicycles and pedestrians. This transformation involved not just building bike lanes, but rethinking the entire urban landscape to prioritize human-scaled mobility.

The environmental benefits of this shift have been substantial. Each person who chooses to commute by bicycle rather than car reduces carbon emissions by approximately 1,500 pounds per year. When multiplied across thousands of daily commuters, the impact on urban air quality and greenhouse gas emissions is significant. Cities with high bicycle mode shares consistently report better air quality metrics and lower carbon footprints than comparable car-centric cities.

In the Netherlands, where cycling culture is perhaps the most inclusive globally, the Dutch Cycling Embassy (DCE) has emerged as a leader in promoting sustainable urban mobility. The DCE shares the Dutch model with business and government leaders worldwide who are grappling with challenges of urbanization, city revitalization, and the need for sustainable transit solutions. The Dutch experience demonstrates that bicycles directly contribute to better health and urban livability, road safety, cleaner air, improved traffic flow, decreased social isolation, and economic vitality.

What’s particularly notable about the Dutch approach is its inclusivity. Cycling isn’t just for the young, fit, or environmentally conscious – it’s for everyone. In the Netherlands, people of all ages and abilities cycle regularly, from children to seniors. This inclusivity stems from comprehensive infrastructure that makes cycling safe and convenient for all, regardless of physical ability or confidence level.

Green cities also benefit from the space efficiency of bicycles. A single car parking space can accommodate up to 12 bicycles, allowing for more efficient use of valuable urban real estate. This space efficiency translates to more room for parks, plazas, outdoor dining, and other amenities that enhance urban quality of life.

The Bicycle is a Valid Form of Transit

In the American context, transitioning to bicycle-friendly infrastructure requires a fundamental shift in how we perceive bicycle transportation. Rather than viewing it as a recreational activity or a niche hobby for enthusiasts, we must recognize cycling as a legitimate and practical transportation option for everyday Americans going about their daily business.

This shift requires reframing bicycle users as regular citizens using an efficient mode of transport, rather than as “cyclists” belonging to a subculture. The Danish consulting firm Copenhagenize advises cities on precisely this kind of rebranding through behavior and marketing campaigns. Their very name represents the concept of making cities more livable through the development of “Complete Streets” – a concept that has gained traction in the United States through a namesake non-profit organization dedicated to building and promoting better streets for everyone.

For bicycle infrastructure to function effectively as transit, it must be designed with the same level of care and attention as other transportation systems. This means creating connected networks of protected bike lanes, bicycle traffic signals, secure bicycle parking, and integration with public transit systems. When implemented comprehensively, such infrastructure can make cycling a competitive option in terms of travel time, cost, and convenience compared to driving, especially for trips under five miles, which represent approximately 60% of all urban trips in America.

The validity of bicycles as transit is further supported by their remarkable efficiency. Bicycles are the most energy-efficient form of transportation ever invented, requiring significantly less energy per passenger-mile than cars, buses, or even walking. In congested urban environments, bicycles often outperform cars in terms of door-to-door travel time, especially during peak hours.Moreover, bicycle infrastructure is remarkably cost-effective compared to other transit investments. While a mile of protected bike lane costs approximately $1-2 million to construct, a mile of urban freeway can cost upwards of $60 million. This economic efficiency makes bicycle infrastructure an attractive option for cities working with limited transportation budgets.

Livable Cities and Bike Infrastructure

As our municipalities struggle with declining state and federal funds, empty sidewalks, and questions of how and where to best accommodate new growth, leaders must look to model cities for inspiration on proven green strategies. For value-driven solutions, they should visit Buenos Aires to see how transforming the curbside space along quieter streets every eight blocks or so is a low-cost/high-yield proposition for safe and equitable active mobility.They can visit the Netherlands and Denmark and see how some of the many smaller cities outside of the famous Amsterdam and Copenhagen have been planned. Of course, every city in the world is laid out differently and is required to accommodate Complete Streets infrastructure in unique ways. Many cities in Europe have a limited land mass, having similar amounts of total land as the diminutive city-proper areas of Boston and San Francisco. While numerous cities in the US have large areas in which to accommodate future growth, especially in the Sunbelt, in reality they can only achieve long-term viability and vitality by centering development within existing, built-up areas.Today’s singles and young families desire meaningful town life that allows them to walk or bike on safe paths through downtown’s filled with shops, entertainment, and urban amenities. As the Dutch and Danish urban models have demonstrated, substantial numbers of people would ride bikes routinely if proper and extensive tracks were incorporated into our cities. The simple bike can unlock the door to smart growth in America, without compromising our love affair with cars.

Pedaling Forward: A Call to Action for American Cities

The success stories of bicycle infrastructure in American cities provide compelling evidence that what works in Copenhagen and Amsterdam can indeed work here. Minneapolis, despite its harsh winters, has developed one of the most extensive urban bike networks in the country, with over 200 miles of bikeways. The city’s investment in bicycle infrastructure has paid dividends in public health, reduced congestion, and economic development along cycling corridors.

Portland, Oregon transformed itself from a car-dependent city to one where 7% of commuters now travel by bicycle—a remarkable achievement by American standards. The city achieved this through consistent investment in protected bike lanes, bicycle boulevards, and bicycle-friendly policies. Portland’s success demonstrates that significant mode shift is possible with sustained commitment to bicycle infrastructure.

New York City, under former Transportation Commissioner Janette Sadik-Khan, added over 400 miles of bike lanes in just six years, demonstrating that even the largest, most complex American cities can rapidly transform their transportation networks. The results have been impressive: increased cycling, decreased crashes, and improved retail sales along corridors with protected bike lanes.

San Francisco has pioneered innovative approaches like the “wiggle”—a bicycle route that zigzags through neighborhoods to avoid steep hills—and protected intersections that dramatically improve safety at conflict points between bicycles and motor vehicles.These American success stories show that a comprehensive national strategy requires:1. Political commitment to comprehensive bicycle networks with meaningful funding2. National design standards for safety and comfort for all ages and abilities3. Tax incentives for bicycle commuting and integration with public transit4. Federal infrastructure funding specifically for bicycle and pedestrian projects5. Integration of bicycle planning into all transportation and land use decisionsThe bicycle represents a simple yet powerful solution to many urban challenges facing America today. By investing in bicycle infrastructure, we can create healthier communities, reduce emissions, ease congestion, and build more vibrant cities. The evidence from both American and international cities demonstrates that when safe, connected bicycle networks are built, people will use them.The path forward is clear. With political will and strategic investment in bicycle infrastructure, we can transform our cities into more sustainable, livable places for all. The bicycle revolution is underway—it’s time for America to fully embrace it.

Arriving at San Jose International Airport on a flight from New York City, I challenged myself to rely on public transit to get around during my three day trip to the San Mateo County coast of California. As a born and bred San Franciscan who is a frequent flier, it is somewhat surprising that I’d never used this airport serving the Silicon Valley, 50 miles south of San Francisco.

Stretched across those 50 miles of the San Francisco peninsula is an unbroken line of suburbs including Palo Alto, Redwood City, San Mateo, and Millbrae, the latter of which has a transit center and large mixed-use development near San Francisco International Airport.

CalTrain – Heavy Rail Suburban Transit

To traverse the peninsula, as it is referred to in the region, one can take Caltrain, a popular and recently electrified heavy rail line. Caltrain operates a fleet of double-decker trains which on weekends runs only once per hour. The weekday schedule is adequately robust and includes a few express trains during the morning and evening commutes. Traveling from San Francisco all the way to San Jose? One wouldn’t want to miss the express train, called Baby Bullet, as the local train is a tiresome, 22-stop slog lasting an hour and a half. Add more time for “last-mile” connections at the beginning and end points of the run (walking, biking, taking a bus) and double it for round-trips and you’re looking at seriously formidable blocks of time spent just getting to and from your destination.

Therefore, it is no exaggeration in referring to such lengthy, soul-sucking trips as “journeys”. When the federal government prioritizes public and active transportation the way it has its massive highway system since the 1950s, car-dependency in American society will wane.

Transit Connectivity in San Mateo County

Transit connectivity refers to how all of the public transportation modes in a region fit together to serve the riding public. Connectivity concerns all the aspects of a single trip such as the ease of connections (how long the walk is), the frequency and reliability of those connections, the condition of stations and vehicles, whether a service is local or express, and methods of payment.

One thing that is glaringly apparent about the San Francisco Bay Area is the unwieldy number of transit lines that are operated by different authorities with often competitive goals. This situation is manifested by suboptimal frequency and service reliability across a plurality of local systems, leading to a lack of seamless transfers and egregious journey times for non-drivers. 40% of Americans don’t drive, meaning that transit deficiencies as described here affect millions of people by effectively isolating them from full societal participation.

SamTrans – Commuter and Local Bus Routes

SamTrans is San Mateo County’s public bus system and covers a large portion of the peninsula all the way from downtown San Francisco south to Palo Alto, a distance of 36 miles. During my short stay in San Mateo County, population 725,000, I took Sam Trans buses twice and each of those two trips could have been much faster with fewer stops and reduced transfer times. One day, for example, my 24-mile trip from Redwood City to Montara required three buses. Door to door, including walk and wait times, this trip took an unruly three and a quarter hours! Had I driven, it would have taken just 40 minutes. Stories like this illustrate the reality of life in America and demonstrate why the United States is a car-dependent nation like no other in the developed world.

Life Without a Car on the San Francisco Peninsula

Living without a car is mind-blowingly tough in the San Mateo county suburbs of San Francisco, at least if a person must commute everyday using multiple modes of transit. There is no accountability by bus companies regarding schedule reliability and riders must phone call centers to inquire about delays.

Most bus stops don’t have posted schedule times (some have schedule frequency but not arrival times) so one never knows when, or even if, a bus will turn up. Riders are further shamed by the lack of shelter at many bus stops, which force them to stand out in the elements beside fast moving streams of traffic. There are other issues like the no-free transfer policy and a lack of schedule coordination – buses connecting with others requiring long, intermediate wait times.

This is all a direct and sad result of the policy of the U.S. government to prioritize cars over all other modes and Complete Streets. Complete Streets is now a well-known, widely implemented policy in hundreds of cities from coast to coast but is still in its infancy as it only came to be in the early 21st century. Complete streets are those planned for safe access for every user including pedestrians cyclists transit users and motorists. In the early 1900’s, most cities had streetcar lines and many bicycle riders, as well as complete, walkable streets. Without giving up its love-affair with cars, America could again be a country of walkable places and high-quality transit.

Copenhagenization, the integration of bicycles as a primary mode of transit, began with a photograph taken by Mikael Colville-Andersen in 2006. Captivated by a cyclist lost in thought at a traffic light, he snapped a picture, capturing not just her but also other cyclists gliding by. This transformative image went viral, sparking a global movement and establishing Mr Colville-Andersen as the leading consultant and speaker on urban mobility. During our coffee chat, he shared insights about the company he founded, Copenhagenize, and the evolution of cycling as transportation.

A Short History of Bicycles

In the 1880s, when the first modern bicycle emerged, personal transportation was primarily limited to walking, horseback riding, and horse-drawn carriages and streetcars. The bicycle ushered in a new era of active mobility, with a much greater practical range over walking that was remarkably inexpensive and accessible to the masses. All the way into the 1950’s, bikes remained popular because tram and streetcar companies were still in business and provided alternative transport to the bicycle on bad weather days as well as for people with lengthy commutes.

Bicycle ridership dropped precipitously after the 1950s as marketing by the automotive industry ignited some poor-choice planning in cities. Streetcar networks were reduced or dismantled altogether to make room for the automobile and its massive appetite for urban space, taking with it a large share of bike riders. Today, multimodal planning is catching hold as cities realize they can still accommodate cars while reclaiming space for bike commuters and express bus lanes.

Bicycles Not Taken Seriously in American Cities

Urban chaos and an alarming rise in middle-class car ownership in major nations like China and India are prompting cities to rethink street designs and transit options. In the U.S., while some cities are recognizing the everyday utility of bikes and making changes to accommodate them, most still lack quality cycling infrastructure. The majority of bike lanes in the United States consist merely of painted lines next to traffic, often placing cyclists in dangerous situations. Moreover, American societal conditioning favoring the automobile, combined with a political system that leads to incremental, piecemeal changes, hampers significant improvements to bicycle infrastructure.

Urban Mobility Models for Planners

American business leaders, urban planners, and active transportation advocates have traveled to European bike capitals for years to study and observe urban mobility standards there. The key benefits of such business trips are the witnessing of real-life examples that might be applicable back home in their own jurisdictions. To this end, the power of lessons learned in an exemplary urban mobility environment is magnified when more than one country is visited since national policies vary due to cultural and geographic differences. A good example would be the comparison of two classic cities from different countries, Amsterdam and Copenhagen.

Both cities are famous bike capitals for a good reason which is the high level of safety and culture of cycling as a primary mode of transportation. Copenhagen has more automobile traffic and wider, straighter roads than Amsterdam, which helps explain its more rigid system of traffic signals and road separation from bicycle lanes compared to Amsterdam. Bike lanes are often raised to sidewalk level in Copenhagen whereas Amsterdam relies on red paint and physical barriers.

In both cities, drivers are very courteous and cautious around bike riders, maintaining slower speeds and reticent to honk their horns even when a cyclist isn’t following correct cycling etiquette. Many drivers are themselves also cyclists and, importantly, the overall prevalence of bicycles as a vehicle choice has led to a cycling-centered culture that is practically non-existent in the United States.

The Rise of Cycling-Centered Cities

Global awareness is fueling a bicycle boom, but America still struggles to normalize cycling as a transit option. In the U.S., cyclists are often stigmatized as either impoverished or recreational, deterring potential commuters. This social bias wrongly emphasizes individual cyclist behavior instead of comprehensive road design. Nevertheless, the number of Americans switching to bikes for utilitarian purposes is rising every year.

Cities around the country are fostering more favorable environments like slow-streets, bike-share, and separated bike lanes. Meanwhile, across the Atlantic Ocean, robust change has been gathering steam in a variety of European countries not formerly known for cyclist centered urban design. Several cities in Spain, for example Barcelona, Valencia, and Seville have in recent years built out extensive networks of bike lanes.

Valencia has transformed its urban landscape with the ambitious “Anell Ciclista” (Cycling Ring) project, creating a 10-kilometer protected bike lane circuit encircling the historic city center. This network connects to over 40 kilometers of additional cycling infrastructure along the reclaimed Turia riverbed garden, allowing cyclists to traverse the entire city safely separated from motor traffic. Valencia’s commitment to cycling infrastructure has resulted in a 20% increase in daily bike commuters since 2022.

Paris has made stunning progress in its cycling infrastructure, expanding from just 200 kilometers of bike lanes in 2015 to over 1,000 kilometers by 2024. Mayor Anne Hidalgo’s “Plan Vélo” has systematically transformed the French capital, removing car lanes and parking spaces to create protected bike corridors along major boulevards and connecting previously isolated cycling networks into a comprehensive system. This remarkable transformation has positioned Paris as one of Europe’s most rapidly evolving cycling cities, preparing it for further innovations in the coming years.

More Livable Cities through Urban Mobility

Bicycles represent an effective tool for enhancing urban livability, offering a silent, compact solution that harmonizes human movement with city landscapes while engendering personal wellness. Inspired by the success of places with multi-modal engineering standards, cities in the U.S. like Minneapolis and Portland have embraced the bicycle as a serious transit mode and made notable progress creating infrastructure that encourages more people to cycle. Parents in these and other American cities have started ferrying their young children to school with cargo e-bikes, something almost unheard of 10 years ago.

With improved e-bike battery technology introduced in 2015, e-bike sales in the United States and Europe have risen sharply in the intervening years. Helping to encourage the continuation of escalating bike sales is a plethora of bike advocacy organizations like the European Cyclists’ Federation and the League of American bicyclists, the latter of which published a list of 450 bike friendly cities in the country.

With greater numbers of people from all walks of life pressing bikes into service in their everyday lives, urban planners around the world are prioritizing human-scale design and integrating bike and pedestrian infrastructure with public transit. As cities continue to transform, bicycles are resurfacing not just as a mode of transportation, but as a powerful catalyst for reimagining urban spaces—metamorphosing concrete jungles into more human-centered places where mobility is a bridge between individual and community.

The Future of Urban Cycling

As cycling continues to reshape urban landscapes worldwide, forward-thinking cities are now developing comprehensive policy frameworks and ambitious goals to further cement bicycles as legitimate transportation. These initiatives go beyond mere infrastructure creation to address systemic barriers and create truly bicycle-friendly cities.

In San Francisco, the Slow Streets program—which temporarily restricted vehicle traffic on residential roads during the pandemic—recently received approval for permanent expansion over the coming years. This innovative approach will transform over 100 miles of residential streets into bicycle and pedestrian priority corridors with limited local vehicle access, creating a secondary transportation network that complements the city’s traditional protected bike lane system. Similar programs are gaining traction in Oakland, Seattle, and Boston, where residents have embraced calmer, safer neighborhood streets.

New York City has committed to an unprecedented “Five Borough Bike Blueprint” that promises to add 250 miles of protected bike lanes by 2030, with at least 30 miles to be built annually. The plan intentionally prioritizes historically underserved neighborhoods, recognizing that equitable access to safe cycling infrastructure is essential for transportation justice. NYC’s commitment includes not just bike lanes but also 25,000 new bike parking spaces at transit hubs, schools, and commercial districts to solve the “last mile” problem for multimodal commuters.

In Paris, Mayor Hidalgo has doubled down on her transformation of the city with a new “Paris 100% Cyclable” initiative announced in late 2024. This ambitious plan aims to make every street in Paris safely navigable by bicycle by 2030, eliminating all “cycling dead ends” while converting several major thoroughfares into bicycle highways with synchronized traffic signals calibrated to cycling speeds. Perhaps most notably, Paris is pioneering “cycling schools” for adults and children, recognizing that infrastructure alone isn’t enough—cultural shifts and confidence-building are equally vital to increasing ridership among all demographics.

The most promising aspect of these initiatives is their comprehensive approach. Modern cycling policy no longer treats bike lanes as isolated projects but integrates them into broader visions of urban transformation addressing climate change, public health, economic vitality, and social cohesion. As these ambitious plans take shape, they signal a fundamental reimagining of urban space—one that prioritizes human movement and connection over vehicle throughput and storage.

The bicycle, once relegated to recreation or consigned to the margins of transportation planning, has emerged as a powerful symbol and practical tool for creating more sustainable, equitable, and livable cities. As we look toward the urban landscapes of tomorrow, the continued expansion of cycling infrastructure represents not just an alternative mode of transit, but a fundamentally different relationship between people and the places they inhabit.