In the 1960s, just over 1 billion people lived in cities. Today, that number is four times greater. It is estimated that in 30 years, three-quarters of the population will choose to live in a more or less urbanized area. Most of us will spend our lives in urban surroundings. Even if, by definition, we live in rural areas. Are cities in Poland expanding? Of course! Are their populations growing? Not necessarily! Officially, since the beginning of this century, the number of city dwellers in Poland has been decreasing. These statistics illustrate the phenomenon of "urban sprawl." The English equivalent better captures the nature of the phenomenon. Cities have "sprawled" into areas where land costs are lower. It should be noted that this cost is narrowly understood as the expenditure necessary to acquire a plot of land and prepare it for development.

What comes first? A city for bikes or a bike to the city?

Why am I writing about this here? Because the history of the bicycle is inextricably linked to the history of urban development. Many of today's automakers began by producing two-wheelers. Just as cars began to dominate their workshops and early production lines, bicycles began to lose the battle for dominance on city streets. It's hard to imagine today, but in the late 19th century, even American cities were a paradise for cyclists. Polish cities have undergone a truly revolutionary transformation in recent years when it comes to their attitudes towards cyclists. This, of course, doesn't change the fact that every visit to a city like Copenhagen is accompanied by a deep sense of shame, as well as the awareness of how far we still are from the best. In this situation, it's easy to assume that just as our civilizational backwardness relative to the wealthier parts of Europe is quite permanent, so too is our perception of a modern city. It turns out, however, that (bicycle) Rome wasn't built in a day. The transport infrastructure of Amsterdam, Berlin, Copenhagen, and Vienna today is the result of transformations that paralleled social and economic changes that began in the late 19th century. To say these changes were harmonious or gentle would be a gross understatement. Therefore, we have planned several materials that:

1. We will look at how (mainly) European cities have changed (this is the entry)
2. What are the current best standards for cycling infrastructure?
3. We will show how thinking about bicycles can influence the design (even!) of residential buildings.

Cities for bicycles - a bit of history

The beginnings of beginnings

Let's first briefly examine the successive phases of the bicycle's development. How it was used and perceived naturally influenced decisions about whether and what place it deserved in the city. From around 1860 to the 1880s, the bicycle, or rather, penny-farthing, was practically exclusively the toy of the bourgeoisie. Those who rode the unstable (high rear wheel) bicycle craved danger and adventure. More a curiosity than anything else, this invention had no impact on urban thinking. It wasn't until the late 19th century that the so-called "safety bicycle" appeared (safer because the front and rear wheels were finally the same size, and the lowered frame allowed for safe climbing onto the saddle). Thanks to this innovation, cycling became accessible to not necessarily the wealthiest city dwellers (and, of course, even women). However, the bicycle remained an expensive and relatively difficult-to-find item. At the same time, it was an interesting and prestigious one. This was the period when cycling clubs and societies flourished. These organizations actively strived to ensure that cycling was, firstly, legally permitted on sidewalks, roads, paths, etc. Another important aspect was the convenience of bicycle paths. Cars were scarce back then, so throngs of cyclists first fought for paved roads. It's worth remembering that in the 19th century, even wealthier European countries lacked networks of paved roads outside cities. It's worth noting that paved roads back then were nothing like our asphalt streets. But it is to the first cyclists that we owe, in part, the development of city streets, sidewalks, routes and squares.

Welcome to the 20th century

The third phase of development in the use of two-wheelers occurred before World War I. Mass production allowed for lower prices, and bicycles became increasingly popular among working people. First, among the more affluent (doctors, lawyers, entrepreneurs), gradually reaching higher-earning workers and rural residents. The interwar period intensified this trend. Furthermore, bicycles became simpler (chain guards, complicated luggage racks, etc. disappeared). Massive urbanization and rapid industrialization resulted in a surge in the number of two-wheelers. By the mid-1930s, there were 15 million bicycles in Germany, over 9 million in Great Britain, 7 million in France, and 2 million in tiny Belgium. Incidentally, at the same time, the number of bicycles in Poland slightly exceeded 1 million. The rapidly growing number of bicycles and the changing demographics of cyclists are influencing thinking about how cities should change. Furthermore, a growing number of motorists are beginning to compete for road access on a larger scale. The construction of new streets, the widening of existing ones, the filling of canals, and the rapid urbanization of new areas all occurred on varying scales and at varying paces across Europe during the interwar period. The subtle "pushing" of cyclists onto separate roads is motivated by road safety concerns. But it is also becoming increasingly common to think of cyclists as "inferior" road users. As a danger to others, they are "separated" from routes designated for modern, motorized transport.

Post-war times

The rapidly developing and prospering Western Europe, growing wealthy after World War II, spared no expense in building new motorways. And its inhabitants were happy to spend their swelling guilders, marks, and crowns on the latest Peugeots, Opels, and Volkswagens. The bicycle, meanwhile, became increasingly associated with backwardness and low social and economic status. The future, after all, was supposed to belong to passenger cars (for those who had, as it were, "made it"), and possibly also to public transport (for those who hadn't yet, or certainly wouldn't, "make it"). Add to this a fascination with America and an openness to ambitious urban redevelopment programs in the spirit of modernism (Le Courbusirer et consortes), and we see a new urbanism in Europe. Urban planning whose ambitions can perhaps only be rivaled by those in the spirit of socialist realism. A notable exception here was the Netherlands and, to a lesser extent, Denmark, where culturally bicycles were not relegated to the role of sports and recreation or a means of transport for the less well-off. It wasn't until the oil crisis of the 1970s and the decisive stance of urban activists, who protested (unsurprisingly) particularly vigorously in the Netherlands against the rising number of car accident victims (especially children), that the government's thinking changed. You can read a very interesting article about this largely unknown revolution here . As a side note, we're planning a bicycle guide to Amsterdam. You can read about exploring Berlin , Vienna , and Tel Aviv by bike on our blog today.

Today

Were it not for rising oil prices and social unrest, it's likely that European cities would more closely resemble those in the United States. We would have large urban centers dominated by high-rise buildings, with residents often living on the outskirts. Passenger cars would crowd slow-moving expressways with increasingly narrow sidewalks, and few pedestrians would dart along. Discussing what a city can and should look like is difficult. It quickly evokes emotions, as it concerns what our lives might look like. Everything is fine when we refer to general ideas. After all, everyone would like to have a modern and well-functioning city that provides (among other things) clean air, convenient access to stores, fast and affordable transportation to school or work. And, of course, greenery outside. But let's take a specific street or area. Every change will bring an equal number of enthusiasts and opponents. After all, removing parking spaces from the street and building a convenient bike path in its place will appeal to a young couple, especially one without a car and children. But what about a mature couple caring for even older parents? Parents who not only live on the other side of town but also require daily care and the ensuing car journeys?

What's next?

It's no coincidence that the right-wing press in our country tends to favor expanding car routes in cities, sometimes openly mocking gay cyclists who demonstrate their utopian ideas with EU funds. Even this aspect of our lives has not only a personal but also a political dimension for us. Add to this the tangle of interests of property owners, investors, architects, urban planners, and local government activists. We're virtually guaranteed endless discussions about what the ideal city, at least in terms of transportation, should look like. We have no ambition to indoctrinate, let alone dare to lecture anyone. But we believe that the bicycle is a good alternative to the car. However, we prioritize a substantive conversation. That's why we write about history and culture, economic and technical conditions, so that everyone can form their own opinion. As mentioned, the next sections will be devoted to bicycle infrastructure and bicycle architecture. If anyone is interested in the history of bicycles themselves, we wrote about it on our blog , also mentioning national achievements.