A base presentation started at CEU, Budapest in July 2018, then revised for a delegation and most recently presented at the Cycling Research Board, University van Amsterdam, November 2018.

1. Smart city - Discourse vs Inclusion
Amsterdam, 23 October 2018
Peter Biczok,
@bicyclize
Mobility Expert
Mobilock & Bicyclize

7. Intertraffic 2018
Street use
Shops?
Children?
Less abled?
City use =! Mobility
City attractiveness = Accessibility

8. Smart Mobility?
Capacity: 4,000-6,000 ppl per lane per hour
Traffic lights, designated crossing, pro speed regulation
Street Economics: €0
Street Social value: integration, diversity - low

9. Intelligent mobility
Capacity: 36,000 ppl
per lane per hour
(22k+14k)
“Shared” space.
No regulation
Street Economics:
shops, restaurants
Street Social value:
integration, diversity -
high

11. Motor vehicle Electric vehicle Self-driving vehicle

12. Ticket to future: 3 Stops to Sustainable Mobility. UITP, International Association
of Public Transport, Brussels, 2003, based on Botma & Pependrecht, Traffic
operation of bicycle traffic, TU Delft, 1991

18. Mobility - function
Economic function
- access to activities
- “cost”
Social function
- exposure to diversity
- mental/physical health
- democratic societies
Car
Public
Transit
Walk Bike
Social
Exp
Low Higher High High
Spatial
exp
Super
ficial
Low
Intense,
but Low
High
te Brömmelstroet et al: Travelling together alone and alone together: mobility
and potential exposure to diversity, 2017, Applied Mobilities

19. Bike-Train integration
Kager and Harms: Synergies from Improved Cycling-Transit Integration:
Towards an integrated urban mobility system, 2017, OECD-ITF Working
paper

20. Bike-Train integration
Credit: (Kager, Harms, 2017)

21. Bike-Train integration
Credit: (Kager, Harms, 2017)
Station choice
Portfolio of options
Customisation

24. Moscow
Catchment Area:
Metro stations
accessed by foot
vs train stations by bike
Walking
catchment
area
Cycling
catchment
area
5, 10, 15 mins

27. QUESTIONS
PETER@MOBILOCK.NL