When there's a transit strike in a US city...
All right, I'm starting off with an iffy proposition. There aren't many US cities with real transit systems: New York, Boston, San Francisco, Chicago and a few others.
OK, so now that we've got that out of the way, let's proceed: In a US city with a transit system has a transit worker's strike, what happens?
Well, if history (at least here in NYC) is any guide, the city will try to make it easier for cars to enter and park. A road shoulder or part of a bridge might be designated as an ad hoc bike and pedestrian lane. And, given the way things are today, the city just might grant more Uber permits.
Now you might think I'm being cranky and cynical. (I am a New Yorker, after all!) But we all know that when it comes to bicycling or transportation, the most forward-thinking American cities might do something the Danes or Dutch did twenty years ago.
Yesterday, transit workers went on strike in the Netherlands. Yes, in the whole country, not just in Amsterdam or Rotterdam. That work stoppage involves, not only train and bus operators, but all other workers in those areas, as well as on trams and ferries.
That last item is important because Amsterdam isn't the only part of the country that's laced with canals. Also, the geography of the capital and other Dutch cities means that getting from one part of town or another often involves crossing a body of water.
So what did authorities in Amsterdam do? They closed the IJ Tunnel--an artery as important to the city as, say, the Brooklyn Battery, Queens-Midtown, Lincoln or Holland (!) tunnels are to New York--to "fast moving" traffic. They then opened the mile-long tube, which connects the center of the city with its north end--to bicycles. Pedestrians, though, still aren't allowed.
The way commuters are howling over the prospect of congestion pricing, can you imagine how they'd react if any of those tunnels were opened to cyclists?
All right, I'm starting off with an iffy proposition. There aren't many US cities with real transit systems: New York, Boston, San Francisco, Chicago and a few others.
OK, so now that we've got that out of the way, let's proceed: In a US city with a transit system has a transit worker's strike, what happens?
Well, if history (at least here in NYC) is any guide, the city will try to make it easier for cars to enter and park. A road shoulder or part of a bridge might be designated as an ad hoc bike and pedestrian lane. And, given the way things are today, the city just might grant more Uber permits.
Now you might think I'm being cranky and cynical. (I am a New Yorker, after all!) But we all know that when it comes to bicycling or transportation, the most forward-thinking American cities might do something the Danes or Dutch did twenty years ago.
Yesterday, transit workers went on strike in the Netherlands. Yes, in the whole country, not just in Amsterdam or Rotterdam. That work stoppage involves, not only train and bus operators, but all other workers in those areas, as well as on trams and ferries.
That last item is important because Amsterdam isn't the only part of the country that's laced with canals. Also, the geography of the capital and other Dutch cities means that getting from one part of town or another often involves crossing a body of water.
So what did authorities in Amsterdam do? They closed the IJ Tunnel--an artery as important to the city as, say, the Brooklyn Battery, Queens-Midtown, Lincoln or Holland (!) tunnels are to New York--to "fast moving" traffic. They then opened the mile-long tube, which connects the center of the city with its north end--to bicycles. Pedestrians, though, still aren't allowed.
The way commuters are howling over the prospect of congestion pricing, can you imagine how they'd react if any of those tunnels were opened to cyclists?
