In German Suburb, Life Goes On Without Cars (2009)

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/05/12/science/earth/12suburb.html?_r=2&em

by organicgrant • 16 years ago

127 202 16 years ago

organicgrant11• 16 years ago

In Vauban, near the French and Swiss borders, streets are completely “car-free” — except the main thoroughfare headed to Freiburg

bitboxer7• 16 years ago

I lived in Münster, Germany for a few years. Münster is THE bike town in germany. Statistically every citizen has 1.8 bikes. And i begann to love biking there. A lot is done in that city to make biking the #1 way of transportation. Now I am living in Cologne, Germany and see the difference. I miss the good bike lanes but I kept biking in cologne.

Nothing is better for your head than biking a few miles home after a hard day of work.

train_robber2• 16 years ago

Yes absolutely. I used to live in a suburb of Stuttgart, and that was around the first time I really tried biking. It was definitely worth it, the well maintained bike lanes, the free burning of the fat, lovely relaxing scenery and off course a few extra bucks saved per day. Biking lanes, is in my book a top investment a city can make, wonder why not many keep it high on their priorities.

organicgrant11• 16 years ago

Boulder, CO in USA has done a LOT for putting in bike lanes. Very bike-friendly city. Up there with Portland, OR and Austin, TX

rb2k_3• 16 years ago

Which Suburb?

zwieback2• 16 years ago

I grew up in a suburb of Stuttgart and rode my bike everywhere - the hills are execellent to speed down and burn fat on the way up.

Now I live in Corvallis and it's a great bike town as well.

noonespecial• 16 years ago

I lived in Frankfurt for many years when I was young and just took for granted the fact that I could bike just about anywhere without tangling with cars. Paths through the forest, farm roads, bike paths through towns, one could just ride forever.

When I returned to the USA where I was born, I noticed that every American had a gaggle of dusty, low quality bikes in their garages that never got used. There were no bike paths anywhere and riding on the roads looked like suicide. I once asked someone why they even had the bikes; where do you ride them? He answered without hesitation that you could load the bikes in the car and drive across town to where there was a park with a bike trail. I though it was a quick witted joke (load the bikes in the car and drive to ride them).

It was not.

Kliment• 16 years ago

Nice to see another Köln-resident here. Meet up at some point?

stevoski• 16 years ago

Ditto...

bitboxer7• 16 years ago

Yeah...a HN Cologne Meetup would be great!

bitboxer7• 16 years ago

Everyone: write me at bodo (a) bitboxer . de . I will setup a google group and stuff for a cologne hn meetup.

coffeejunk2• 16 years ago

I now live in Munich, which also calls itself a bike town. Although there are a lot of people riding their bikes, the streets are not at all as bike friendly as the ones in Münster. Each trip is somewhere between a suicide mission and a pleasant journey depending on where you want to go.

moconnor• 16 years ago

I'm in Munich too; compared to the UK it feels like a cyclist's paradise, especially with the ubahn as a backup in case the heavens really open.

cosmohh• 16 years ago

Sure, compared to towns like Münster, Freiburg or Amsterdam, Munich could offer better bike support, but there are still lots of bike lanes and you are rarely forced to use car lanes, so I would still consider it quite bike friendly.

organicgrant11• 16 years ago

Ever notice that in much of Europe bikes get used for work as well as general transportation/play?

In EU: postman, grocery getting/delivery, common commute vehicle, etc etc

In USA: NYC bike couriers.

ugh4• 16 years ago

I have met quite a few Americans who think of biking as a sport first and as a means of transport second which is exactly opposite to how I perceive biking (I’m from Germany). That might have something to do with city planning (many places where you would want to go are actually realistically reachable by bike), it might (and I’m quite fond of that hypothesis) also have something to do with driving age. 16 in the USA, 18 in Germany.

coffeejunk2• 16 years ago

Driving age is definitely a big factor, but also public transportation. The village I lived during my childhood had literally no public transportation. Therefore the only option to get anywhere was the bike.

roc3• 16 years ago

It's considered sport first, because transportation by bike is usually impractical in the US. (Outside of maybe a half-dozen cities and some one-off "I work a mile from home" anecdotes, it's almost entirely impractical)

The average commute (one-way) is about 25km. There will be no bike lanes. The drivers on the road will generally have no clue how they should deal with you, if they even notice you. The sidewalks (where US bikers sometimes find refuge, as no-one walks in America either) are sporadic, at best. Your destination probably won't have so much as a simple bike rack, let alone a shower.

Because of this, when adults in America think of biking, they (generally) think of putting their bikes on the car and driving to a place that was designed to have decent/sane space for biking. (usually parks)

Children can effectively bike around subdivisions, mostly because they have nowhere to go aside from their friends houses and the corner store.

So biking is seen by adults as either being sport, or --frankly-- a whimsical sort of transport. Because to bike in most the US you have to be, in some sense, not serious about trying to get anywhere.

khafra• 16 years ago

I would buy an Xtracycle or other cargo bicycle if it didn't cost more than the cars some of my friends drive :(. Perhaps they're cheaper in Europe.

organicgrant11• 16 years ago

Xtracycle add-on model isn't that expensive. Last I knew - like $169.

I have friends that use trailers from http://bikesatwork.com/

Very inexpensive. Easily attached, and you can use your bike regularly whenever you want.

bobbyflanders2• 16 years ago

In other words, I should come into work completely drenched in sweat? In many parts of the USA, it is very humid and temperatures can easily reach 90 and above. How do you expect people to bike in such conditions? In addition, many people commute long distances to work, which may take up to an hour just by car.

Bikes are great, but not very practical.

bitboxer7• 16 years ago

I knew a guy who biked 50 Miles to work and showered at work. Everything is doable :) .

A few friends of me bike in spain during the summer. You see, it can be done. All that's needed is a small shower at work and you are even fresher than by driving with your car. And sweating in the rush hour.

If you drive more than 20 Miles you can't go by bike, yes, but you can drive shopping or to your friend by bike. Try to use it to go to the nearest pub on weekends.

Just try it :) .

davidu• 16 years ago

It gets humid in Europe, too. They survive.

masklinn6• 16 years ago

Most of Europe is far drier than the US. I don't know of any place in Europe which would be similar to Japan or Florida (consistent high heat and very high humidity during months on end in Summer), though they might very well exist.

ugh4• 16 years ago

Bikes are great, but not very practical … if the infrastructure isn’t there. You know, city planning and stuff. I think the goal is not to get people to drive 50 miles to work, the goal is to make it possible for them to live so close to work (or appropriate public transport infrastructure) that they can bike there (or use public transport).

You are right, bikes wouldn’t work in every case but sometimes they can replace cars just fine.

bitboxer7• 16 years ago

Same can be said about cars :) .

JohnFritzen• 16 years ago

Bikes already have the infrastructure, they are called "roads".

masklinn6• 16 years ago

> In other words, I should come into work completely drenched in sweat?

With enough training (build up the habit) and if you don't exert yourself too much (it's not like you have to go 20mph all the way), you shouldn't sweat too much. Add in a pair of showers on work site and you're golden.

> In addition, many people commute long distances to work, which may take up to an hour just by car.

That's an issue of brain-dead urban planning and stupid personal housing considerations, not of bikes.

> Bikes are great, but not very practical.

The article, and all of Amsterdam or Münster, already prove you wrong. Why do you make declamations which are already disproven before they even get out your mouth?

organicgrant11• 16 years ago

If you choose to live 50+ miles from work and commute everyday...you're making a compromise for a reason (spouse, slow real estate market, etc). But likely...you're doing it wrong. I am seeing an emergence of physically aware programmers who realize sitting in a chair all day isn't an healthy environment. Biking to and from work gives some great exercise and time to clear your head.

pg gets ideas in the shower. I get them cruising on the bike. Same effect.

bobbyflanders2• 16 years ago

All great solutions, but the infrastructure just isn't there (as already mentioned).

Blame it in "brain-dead urban planning", or "stupid housing considerations", but that doesn't change the fact that biking to work is simply not possible for most people.

If you live in the suburbs of New York, biking to Manhattan to work just isn't practical. If you live in the middle of the country, biking to work can be a nightmare. If you live down South, again, very difficult. If you live in San Francisco, hope that your job is downhill.

Let's build a better infrastructure, and not accuse people of being inconsiderate or stupid.

derefr• 16 years ago

Perhaps people would be better off not living in these places where it's impossible to survive without a climate-controlled bubble-environment :)

Niten2• 16 years ago

I often bike to work, which for me is about 26 miles each direction. I take a shower right before I leave, and when I get there I just have to rinse down and change out of my cycling jersey. The theory behind the pre-ride shower is that body odor is caused by bacteria on your skin, and showering temporarily knocks out enough of your bacteria that it won't cause significant odor during your ride. (I'm not aware of actual science on this topic, but I've asked a trusted coworker whether I smell after riding into work, and he says I don't. So there's your anecdotal data point...) So for me the bike is extremely practical even living in an area that wasn't designed with bicycles in mind.

As for humidity, this is in south Florida—if we can manage it here, then we can handle the humidity pretty much anywhere in the US.

Now I'm not saying everyone can or should bike a 52-mile round trip to work. But the point of this article is that this little experimental suburb has 5,500 people within a single square mile; biking or walking is a perfectly reasonable way to traverse such a small area at nearly any level of fitness, especially when you don't have to worry about automotive traffic, and for the few people who can't manage that there's the public transport option. Even on our hottest days here in south Florida, one can easily bike a mile, fully dressed, without breaking a sweat.

jonknee• 16 years ago

> Even on our hottest days here in south Florida, one can easily bike a mile, fully dressed, without breaking a sweat.

Perhaps we're different, but I break a sweat in a couple minutes simply going outside in FL this time of year. Add riding a bike and I'm drenched.

dejv• 16 years ago

In Europe there are good public transport in each city, so you don't need car at all.

I use to commute 35 miles each way without owning car, it was taking quite a lot of time, so I moved closer to work, but I still don't own car.

guelo• 16 years ago

Do you realize that millions of people bike to work everyday right here in the good ol USA?

delackner2• 16 years ago

If this argument was in favor of cars, for me it would be the same: Where am I supposed to park? You expect me to pay $400 a month just to park a car at home and another $400 to park it at the office? Cars are fun, but not very practical.

It all depends on the environment you are in, which is not a static unchangeable monolith. You have choices. Maybe living somewhere where biking is practical would involve making choices that go against your priorities, but those are your priorities.

pmccool• 16 years ago

As well as what others have suggested (shower at work, don't try hard, etc) there are electric bicycles available that would address this issue. I've not tried one myself, but they seem to have a following.

As for the long distances, I've known people to drive some of the way, stop where it's easy to park and ride the last bit (generally the bit with the most traffic congestion, so it can work quite well).

lispm2• 16 years ago

I live in Hamburg, Germany. I always tried to use the bicycle for any regular work route under 20km.

I use to use my bicycle for a job where I lived outside and the company was in some inner part in Hamburg. 18km.

I also used it when I lived in some inner part and was working in some part of the harbour. 16km. There was a Fitness center near the office, I was a member of that chain of fitness centers. I was using the bicycle to get to that fitness center and have a shower there. Then I walked to the office.

I would expect that it is important to take a shower before walking into office. It's just a matter of planning. Really good companies have showers for their employees. For example many of the larger companies have some kind of sports facilities.

Additional to taking a shower, one also needs some fresh clothes. Also you need a save place for the bicycle.

It takes some planning and organization, but once you use your bicycle three or more times per week to get to work and back it pays back.

The excellent fitness is what you get in return.

Currently I live in a suburb. The whole area is reduced to 30km/h for cars. I use my bicycle a lot. Bus station is 50 meters away. The bus comes every 20 minutes. The bus takes me in 5 or 10 minutes to two local city centers. The next local train is 15 minutes walking or 5 minutes by bus. That local train gets you in 18 minutes into Hamburg City. So, public transport is sufficient for me. Though there is also a Autobahn nearby. Generally connectivity is great.

In the inner city of Hamburg one can now rent bicycles and a lot of planning is now done to improve the whole bicycle co system. Even the port authority of the Hamburg port, one of the largest in the world, thinks about using bicycles - they are working on a 'master plan' for using bicycles in the harbour region: http://www.hamburg-port-authority.de/presse-und-aktuelles/ne...

confuzatron2• 16 years ago

All problems can be overcome, @bobbyflanders, if you just let the light of Jesus flood into your life! :)

(sorry, I meant 'bikes', not Jesus).

EDIT: I knew this would get down-voted. No sense of humour these bicyclists ;)

I my case, I have a short commute, but mostly drive it, because cycling is much more effort, and much less comfortable than driving. Sorry to have an incorrect opinion.

confuzatron2• 16 years ago

Okay, okay. I'll cycle to work, next time it isn't raining.

benJIman2• 16 years ago

Just wear lycra. People don't wear it because of how it looks. It's fast wicking. Even in mid 30s celsius I get to work far less sweaty than taking public transport.

Most people who complain about sweat are trying to cycle in cotton. Just change when you get to work.

harscoat3• 16 years ago

21st Century, that anybody can argue against (in this thread or elsewhere) that going by bike to work is way better, healthier, more humanly fulfilling, than by car leaves me speechless. Vote for mayors pro bike roads or ask for showers at work, there is always a solution.

whatusername4• 16 years ago

Some of us live in cities where it rains pretty frequently. Today would be lovely on a bike. Yesterday in the rain - not so much.

bitboxer7• 16 years ago

Muenster is one of the cities with the most raining days in germany. Still nearly everyone drives by bike. There is no such thing as bad weather. Only bad choice in clothing :).

harscoat3• 16 years ago

I understand, I just said "argue against", not "evbdy has to".

gritzko• 16 years ago

Netherlands is a really rainy country. Still, bikes are extremely popular, like the average is 2 bikes per person. The typical commute scheme is (1) bike to the station, then (2) train (trains are good, really good), then (3) another bike to work.

unwind• 16 years ago

In Sweden (average 164 days/year with rain), there's a saying typically used by parents when their kids complain about the weather.

It goes, translated very verbatim: "there is no bad weather, only bad clothes". It's far snappier in Swedish where it rhymes, but I guess the point comes across, still.

Update: after reading a few more comments, I guess this doesn't address the other end of the spectrum, that it can be too warm/humid to go by bike. Score one for cultural bias.

arethuza4• 16 years ago

If you have a decent waterproof jacket, sensible shoes and maybe waterproof overtrousers for when it gets really wet then even walking in the pouring rain is fairly comfortable.

credo• 16 years ago

well, here is one argument that you may not have heard :)

as per http://www.denverpost.com/election2010/ci_15673894 Republican gubernatorial candidate Dan Maes is warning voters that Denver Mayor John Hickenlooper's policies, particularly his efforts to boost bike riding "could threaten our personal freedoms"

w00pla• 16 years ago

Especially the handicapped and elderly like bikes (or not). A good train system (such in Japan) is much better). That way even children and elderly can travel long distances.

sliverstorm8• 16 years ago

I'm not going to say that we should all be in cars, but I used to ride my bicycle everywhere-

I ride motorcycles now, and I still get a lot of the upsides- open to the environment, a physical activity (though more mild than biking at a hard pace), and my stress levels are lower.

But it has one more huge upside; back when I bicycled all the time, I'd always arrive everywhere hot and sweaty. Workplaces can install showers, but what about the supermarket? The library? Classrooms? Your girlfriend's house? (which of course has showers, but back then her parents would NOT have approved)

If you're going to build a city with all of those things a few blocks away, then it's an easy ride and no big deal, but that's a pretty major overhaul. I don't see it working in existing cities. Plus, besides problems with showers, the time commitment in existing cities is pretty big. I live rather close to my job, and it would still take me 1-2 hours to get there by bicycle.

Once again, not that I love cars everywhere all the time, but it's a pretty darn big feat to switch to bicycles in many American cities.

disclaimer: I do love my bikes, I'm kind of a petrol head.

joss82• 16 years ago

1-2 hours away by bicycle is not "rather close", it's downright far.

Why not find a place where you can cycle to work in 10-15 minutes? I did it and it works great. It gives you lots of free time (short commute) and money (no car ownership). So much so that I started a freelance shop on the side.

jacquesm9• 16 years ago

I don't think it's fair to class riding a motorcycle as a physical activity, if riding a motorcycle is then so is riding a car. Yes, I've done my bit of biking and yes, it's more of a 'workout' (if that's even an appropriate term) compared to riding a car but it's nowhere near the exercise you get on a bike, either by duration or by distance travelled.

Also, most of the memories I've got from riding motorcycles long distance are that you arrive stiff as a board from not moving for that long.

wazoox• 16 years ago

> I live rather close to my job, and it would still take > me 1-2 hours to get there by bicycle.

Funny, I live as far as is bearable from my job, and it would take me a bit more than 1 hour to get there by bicycle (and 35 to 45 minutes by car). How your scales can be stretched by motor vehicles :)

oostevo2• 16 years ago

[Somewhat off-topic from bicycles in cities; my apologies.]

Do you not get sweaty on motorcycles? Even with a fully mesh jacket, I arrive everywhere _drenched_. In the height of the summer, I put on an athletic shirt and keep my real shirt in a bag to change into when I get to my destination.

If anything, I'd say bicycles are better because it's difficult to go fast enough to require the safety gear that a motorcycle does.

Disclaimer: new motorcyclist, used to race bicycles at a high level; I'm kind of a pedal head.

run4yourlives11• 16 years ago

Better is the word I'm going to hit on in your comment. I'd love to bike to work. I've even considered it actually, this in spite of the following:

- I live in Vancouver. It rains 5 months of the year.

- I have a 30km commute, my car is faster (By a longshot, not by a few minutes).

- My car does not require I have a shower after getting to work.

- My car is more adaptable: I can carry extra work home, I can stop for a coffee, I can schedule a meeting in the morning or afternoon and then hit the office.

There are many ways in which my car is "better". Healthier? No. More humanly fulfilling? Well, that depends. Is it more humanly fulfilling to spend the time commuting on my bike or with my kids? -

BrandonM2• 16 years ago

I upvoted you, but I found myself wondering why you have a 30km commute. You mention that you would be more humanly fulfilled if you spent more time with your kids; why are you fine with wasting an hour commuting every day?

I've been paying more attention lately to perceived requirements. So often we assume that we have to continue living or working where we currently are, and that we have to build our lives around that. The truth is contrary to that: almost everything in your life can be changed, and it's often much easier than you think.

xinsight• 16 years ago

Sure, if you live 30km from where you work, you probably aren't going to ride a bike (or walk, or take transit). If you lived <5km, you'd waste less time commuting.

re: rain - sounds like rain gear is important. So are fenders.

re: showering - i've found that simply biking at a more relaxed pace avoids the whole sweat issue (besides in the morning, it's not the hottest time of the day. Biking home might be more of a problem, but then there is a shower at the end.) Plus even if you have some hills, you get in shape and will barely notice the exercise.

re: carrying extra work - what exactly are you carrying? I find i can haul a laptop and a lot of junk with a pair of panniers. Also good for picking up groceries.

Also, besides the environmental issues mentioned - i'm always amazed that drivers don't love cyclists. Every bike on the road means less traffic and one more parking space.

pragmatic2• 16 years ago

Where do you live?

Does it reach 95 degress F with almost 100% humidity in the summer and -50 degrees F in the winter? Does it ever snow 12 inches+ at a time? Is there every freezing rain followed by inches of snow covering it?

My point is, what works in California doesn't work in Fargo or Minneapolis. Even driving a diesel automobile. They gel up bad. Same with electric cars, the temperature (hot and cold) kills batteries.

If I lived in Santa Barbara, yeah, biking to work would be awesome.

sedachv• 16 years ago

Minneapolis not good for bikes? Tell that to Black Label.

akgerber4• 16 years ago

Have you ever been to Minneapolis? Minneapolis has an incredible network of bikeways and is a place where bike commuting is very popular. Most folks don't do it all winter, but it's doable: http://www.civiacycles.com/whattowear/

And personal experience as a Milwaueean on my part says biking in the cold feels awesome. You get that great warm-on-the-inside, crisp-on-the-outside feeling. The downside is that it can be sketchy on ill-designed roads.

syncsynchalt• 16 years ago

Minneapolis? The #1 Bike City in the country? http://www.bicycling.com/news/featured-stories/1-bike-city-m...

SpacemanSpiff• 16 years ago

Reminds me of this lovely movie: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MDqUKj1GwJY&feature=relat...

Makes me miss living in Berlin!

Luc3• 16 years ago

I think having the right legal framework helps a lot to get a good bicycle culture.

Here in Belgium, when a car hits a bicyclist, the car driver's insurance will always pay for bodily damage of the bicyclist, even if the bicyclist is at fault.

Most streets where I live (in the center of Antwerp) are one-way for cars, but two-way for bicycles. And cars are limited to 30 km/h.

My wife goes to work on her bicycle and gets paid for it (per km) by her employer, enough to buy a new bike every year.

At busy crossings with stop lights, bicycles get a designated space in front of the cars. That way when the light turns green the bicyclists can get going first, safely turn etc.

I just saw 2 policemen on bicycles pass in front of my window...

Measures like these help make bicycling something accepted by society, not something only crazy lycra-clad hipsters do.

jacquesm9• 16 years ago

Contrast that with cycling in the states where you're derided and people throw stuff at you from passing cars (beer cans seem to be a favourite projectile).

In the cities it's still somewhat doable but outside it's simply impossible. No separate lanes, cars passing you within inches, risking you being clipped by a mirror.

sliverstorm8• 16 years ago

That happens most often when you are on a road you really don't belong on. Are you familiar with Highway 9? (for those who don't know, twisty steep 2-lane mountain road, very popular with bicyclists who ride in the middle of the lane and later complain about all the cars) Though they love it to death, that road was not built for cyclists, and it's far too expensive to expand it to give the cyclists their own lane.

olefoo2• 16 years ago

I've biked all over the western United States, and I've never had actual beer cans thrown at me. That said I have been on the receiving end of a certain amount of aggressive driving and general idiocy but the prevalence is pretty much the same city or country.

run4yourlives11• 16 years ago

Here in Belgium, when a car hits a bicyclist, the car driver's insurance will always pay for bodily damage of the bicyclist, even if the bicyclist is at fault.

Sorry, but doesn't anyone have an issue with this? Why is there an expectation that cyclists cannot possibly be held responsible for their actions?

By this logic, if my mini hits a bus, I shouldn't be responsible, even if I ran a red light.

I tend to agree with most of the other points, but this one is ridiculous.

fortes2• 16 years ago

Well, there's a huge asymmetry between a car hitting a bike and vice-versa. So I'd guess it's not that the bike can't be held responsible, but that the potential downside for a biker is death, while the car would likely just suffer some dents.

Whether or not that causes reckless behavior on the biker's part, I don't know. But I can imagine the argument.

dwiel2• 16 years ago

Biking by itself is not that dangerous. Biking near cars is dangerous. If you want to drive around in a 2 ton vehicle with the power to kill, you better damn be responsible for it.

Also, there is an imbalance in incentives to not get in an accident. If a car and a bike get in a wreck, the person driving has almost no risk of injury where the person on bike is at risk of dying or getting seriously injured, depending on the situation. This law gives people driving a little more reason to be more careful.

Also, keep in mind in the US, if a car hits a pedestrian, the driver's insurance always pays no matter whose at fault.

roc3• 16 years ago

I'm not seeing a huge difference between that and the state of vehicle laws in my home state (Michigan).

Here, if you strike another car, you're at fault. Regardless of what another vehicle does, you're expected to maintain safe stopping distance and an 'exit' if your lane needs to be vacated in an emergency.

I have a friend who actually did get a ticket for hitting a car that ran a red light. Granted, the car running the light got a ticket for breaking the law, but 'fault' for the collision was assigned to my friend.

Luc3• 16 years ago

The law is more complex than I perhaps made it seem. The car's insurer can for example sue the bicyclist afterwards to get some money back if they think they can prove something (but they have to pay first, that's the default). There's also a provision that it doesn't apply for knowingly getting into a dangerous situation (but, on the other hand, if a bicyclist runs a red light thinking it's safe, this provision wouldn't be triggered).

I haven't heard anyone call it ridiculous before, so it's probably down to me not explaining it very well or not knowing all the details.

It's also not a law tailor-made for bicyclists, it applies to all 'vulnerable road users', i.e. pedestrians, skaters, also passengers in cars...

dylanz2• 16 years ago

Luc, can you describe your wife's employers bicycle policy? I'm trying to set one up at my company as well, and haven't found the ideal plan yet. Suggestions welcome!

Luc3• 16 years ago

I don't have access to the exact agreement at the moment.

My wife's employer, funnily enough, is a petroleum company. I think the bike policies of the company are those set out by Collective Bargaining Agreement (negotiations between employer and employee organisations) for the whole petroleum sector, but I can't find a good English language article.

Colruyt, a supermarket company in Belgium, is well known as having a successful bicycle policy. E.g.

- company-owned bicycles placed at the train station closest to the HQ so people can use the train to commute

- free bicycles for employees who use them at least 3 times a week for their commute

- 0.15 eurocent per kilometer compensation

This is just the bicycle part of it though. They also have programs to facilitate and encourage car-pooling, or to encourage use of scooters instead of cars. Their trucks must be >95% full before delivering, they use rail as much as possible etc. (Some of this is from memory, don't shoot me if I'm off by a few cent or percent).

Coincidentally Colruyt is also the most profitable and fastest growing supermarket chain in Belgium.

One more thing - a lot of this is backed by laws or measures in the tax code. E.g. the 'compensation per km' is tax-free to the employee and there are likewise tax reductions on the employer's side. So these things may be harder to implement in a different country.

brc2• 16 years ago

I get the point - and I support the development of car-free suburbs for people who want them. Streets safe for children, people saying hello instead of staring from behind closed windows, etc. Less local pollution, more friendly streets, less accidents : all pluses.

I just don't want to see some zealot telling me I can't have a car, and that I am some sort of evil person for having one.

Further, not everywhere is suitable. Someone riding around cities near me have got high humidity and steep hills to deal with : you don't ride a bike without some serious fitness. Those cruisy bikes you see in Amsterdam, Copenhagen and Cambridge are of no use.

What I'm saying : there should be no laws against this type of thing, and no laws saying you should do it. Entirely personal choice all round.

For my part I have a large car but work from home, so it gets driven maybe once per fortnight. There's no way I would part with it : it's my ticket to freedom when I do choose to get out and about. And I enjoy it thoroughly when I do.

eru4• 16 years ago

I find lots of strange laws (or just rules / contracts) much more acceptable locally, where you can choose to live in this community or not --- than would be acceptable on a larger scale like a nation.

whatajoke• 16 years ago

> I just don't want to see some zealot telling me I can't have a car, and that I am some sort of evil person for having one.

Not everybody thinks about you when choosing the people they want to live with. You argue like a conservative asshole berating a bunch of hippies for choosing their own way of life.

> What I'm saying : there should be no laws against this type of thing, and no laws saying you should do it. Entirely personal choice all round.

That is entirely upto the people living in those subuebs. If they decide that you should drive your car around rather than through their suburb, then I don't see how it violates your personal freedom. Next you will be bitching about congestion charges.

brc2• 16 years ago

You missed my point.

If you read my comment, I think it's a good idea. I just don't want legislation either for or against the idea. If people want to live in car-less suburbs, I support that. I don't support being forced to live in a car-less suburb, that's all.

monos• 16 years ago

  > I just don't want to see some zealot telling me I can't have a car,
  > and that I am some sort of evil person for having one.

I am not saying you are a bad person, but giving a car to everyone - like we do right now - is a terrible idea.

I'm hoping for legislation that will ban private persons from buying cars. No one (...) needs half a ton of metal and 70PS to move his 70kg ass.

oostevo2• 16 years ago

I'm paraphrasing Jay Leno who was being interviewed on a car show, so take this with the appropriate number of grains of salt, but ...

I'd like to see cars go the way of the horse. Horses used to be used for transportation, everybody had one, and they were abused to a huge degree. Then cars came along, and now horses are kept just by enthusiasts who care for them a great deal and go riding for fun every once in a while.

I think the best of both worlds would be for [insert your car alternative of choice here] to develop enough to replace the car for commuting and errands, with just a few thousand cars for people who like to drive them around tracks or through the countryside every once in a while.

pchristensen4• 16 years ago

"I just don't want to see some zealot telling me I can't have a car, and that I am some sort of evil person for having one."

In the US, it's basically illegal to build any kind of development that doesn't require a car or two. Some exceptions, like Kentlands in MD, or Stapleton in Denver, require developers to prepare plans in advance, lobby for variances to zoning and parking requirements. It's also harder to get financing for non-standard projects. All this means that unless you're building a standard subdivision, an office park, or a strip mall, you're at a competitive disadvantage and incur higher costs and risks.

Let there be no illusion that the "market" provided the built environment we have.

MichaelSalib4• 16 years ago

I am saddened that I can only give this comment one upvote.

In fact, in most US cities, it is illegal to build high density development like the kind that already exists in those cities.

anamax5• 16 years ago

> It's also harder to get financing for non-standard projects.

That's the market speaking.

forinti• 16 years ago

I guess you have to have lived through a car phase to discover that you can do without and be better off.

Here in Brazil people are currently enamoured by their new wealth and I see cars getting bigger and bigger.

khandelwal• 16 years ago

One of the great things about riding your bike into downtown (or into town) is that parking for bikes is easier to find and closer to your destination than that for cars. For years, the only way I'd go to the Alamo Drafthouse in downtown Austin was by bike.

ritarius• 16 years ago

check out my tangentially related project: http://abogo.cnt.org/ tells you how much the average household in your neighborhood spends on transportation. Let me know what you think!

Marticus• 16 years ago

But being the NY Times, are we sure they didn't just jump the gun again and it's all misrepresented? MAYBE THEY RIDE MOPEDS.

organicgrant11• 16 years ago

Mopeds aren't cars

pragmatic2• 16 years ago

Isn't this a simple function of population density? Can we just say that and be done with this stupid argument?

If the US had the population density of Japan or parts of Europe, yes we could all bike and have super fast broadband. That's not the case.

roc3• 16 years ago

The US doesn't have the population density of Japan or Europe because of our zoning laws. The barriers to even try these kinds of developments in the US are massive. The barriers to build yet-another cul-de-sac subdivision of mcmansions that are proven to increase congestion, travel-time, stress, infrastructure cost, individual waste and municipal waste are non-existent.

Zoning laws dictate density. We have sprawl because our laws engineered it and we were lucky enough to have the wealth and space to allow such frivolous waste to continue for so long.

MichaelSalib4• 16 years ago

I don't think this argument works. For starters, parts of the US are very high density: density in NYC or Boston or SFO exceeds that of many European cities. And yet we don't have super fast broadband for super low prices in those places in general, even though though the density is high enough to support it. It seems a little ridiculous that people in extremely high density environments in the US have much worse broadband options that people living in rural Sweden.

akgerber4• 16 years ago

Most American cities and streetcar suburbs are built at a density where it is very practical to bike. Even many new suburbs are built at a bikable density, though the non-grid/non-connecting infrastructure is often such that trips are twice as long as they should be, and in high-speed traffic.

organicgrant11• 16 years ago

I like this article, because it's really about noncomformity. Hackers aren't afraid of social and cultural norms. To be truly excellent, you can't follow the crowd.

98% of zoning laws in the US are about maintaining the status quo. The status quo is sort of meh.

Hackers, bikers, entrepreneurs, and other daring souls mix it up. And the world is a better place for it.

Mix it up.

nradov• 16 years ago

My office building is finally going to install showers. :-) But someone stole my bike. :-(

In German Suburb, Life Goes On Without Cars (2009)

Related Stories