As a Dutch person I am pleasantly surprised by this article, it gets basically everything right. One thing though is that our geography works well with biking. I visited the US recently and you can drive for 30 minutes in a car and you are still in LA, if you drive for 30 minutes in the Netherlands you're in a completely different city. Everything is just closer and hence more bike-able.
As a dutch person I would absolutely NOT want to ride a bike in the US, it's simply too dangerous. There are so many cars that are not looking out for cyclists. For example, I never saw my Uber/Lyft driver peek over his shoulder. In the Netherlands we fail our driving exam if we forget this even once. Another example is the insane speed cars fly past the "share the road"-bikelanes. It's crazy. I would feel really unsafe on a bike in the US.
> As a dutch person I would absolutely NOT want to ride a bike in the US, it's simply too dangerous.
I understand this perspective, but as a counter to this, if no one bikes in the US then this won't change. I ride all over San Francisco. In the last 18 years of me living here things have gotten better and better for the cyclist, but there are still many areas that can be improved. I encourage you to support local organizations, like the San Francisco Bicycle Coalition, which can pressure local governments to make changes that improve safety for all cyclists.
For too long in the US we've designed our roads with the idea that cars have some right to the road that others do not. We're finally starting to rectify that in cities across the country, and it's only getting better.
> One thing though is that our geography works well with biking. I visited the US recently and you can drive for 30 minutes in a car and you are still in LA, if you drive for 30 minutes in the Netherlands you're in a completely different city.
That's not geography, that's urban planning, or a lack of it. America's geographic size meant that we could sprawl, not that we had to.
And indeed, especially in the post-WW2 era, we collectively chose to sprawl out far and wide, greatly favoring the automobile at the expense of walking, biking, and transit.
> I would feel really unsafe on a bike in the US.
That makes sense, since yeah, it's dangerous as hell. Got hit twice the last year before I moved to Munich.
As an American, whenever I see articles about Dutch cycling culture, the thing that stands out to me is that nobody is wearing helmets.
In the US, I wouldn't dream of doing that - it's just too dangerous, because there's too much risk of being involved in a high speed collision. But, after having spent some time in the Netherlands, it's come to feel like a minor injustice every time I put my helmet on. It's a little reminder of how, in the US and much the rest of the world, we have blithely turned our public right-of-way into a space that's fundamentally dangerous for humans to be in.
I'm a long-time bike commuter in the U.S (Portland, OR suburbs). Your comment reminds me of a Dutch colleague I once worked with. He was adamant that cycling conditions were too dangerous here. As a relative statement compared to the Netherlands, I'm sure that's true. For me personally, the health benefits and general enjoyment make it worthwhile. Also, it's important to know what you're doing when cycling in traffic, even in a "bike friendly" city. Unfortunately, there's no formal education in the USA around that topic, like there is for driving an automobile.
>>> As a dutch person I would absolutely NOT want to ride a bike in the US, it's simply too dangerous.
A lot of Americans also think it's too dangerous. It's an obstacle to getting more people on bikes.
When people at my workplace see me with my bike, or find out that I'm a cyclist, they beg me to be careful, promise to wear a helmet, and so forth. I have friends who are avid cyclists, but who limit their riding to dedicated bike paths or off-road trails, because they don't feel safe riding on the roads.
Just looking at pictures and videos, it's apparent to me that cyclists in the US and Netherlands have very different riding habits due to the differences in conditions. The Dutch seem so carefree. Americans seem to have a much more wary, defensive, and sometimes aggressive style, and may prefer more maneuverable bikes for a reason. You'd probably get used to it, as lots of us do.
We also probably have to pay more attention to planning our routes to avoid the worst of traffic. I know all of the dedicated bike paths and side roads in my town. Google Maps gives different routes for bikes and cars. Residential streets have lots of cars but not a lot of traffic volume. I actually encounter relatively few cars on my rides.
Much as I defend cycling in the US, I'd still prefer the Dutch environment.
> I visited the US recently and you can drive for 30 minutes in a car and you are still in LA, if you drive for 30 minutes in the Netherlands you're in a completely different city.
But what difference does that make? Why would I be more likely to visit a different city rather than another part of a bigger city?
It's cultural, as well. One time a car of people in Houston drove me off the road onto the curb. They screamed out of their window "why you biking out here, you trying to die?"
Very select cities are pretty good for biking. Boulder CO, for instance is pretty great b/c most people there bike. But yeah for a lot of places it's a nightmare.
Also our metro areas tend to spread out quite a bit, so to get from one area to another typically involves biking >5 miles.
The geography is fine, really. LA is flat and has decent-ish weather (too hot at times though)
The buildings and motorways are an absolutely hellscape of trash design, though. Whole damn city is an asphalt desert with a building sprinkled here and there. Why? Because laws force businesses and homes to have parking that often takes up more space than the building itself.
>"One thing though is that our geography works well with biking."
And the topography doesn't hurt - its flat as a pancake.
Also isn't it possible to basically ride between every city in the Netherlands? I once biked from Rotterdam to Den Hague using only bike paths and protected bike lanes. I got the impression that I could continue riding to Amsterdam in the same fashion if wanted to.
Ive nearly been hit by cars twice as a law abiding pedestrian in the 6 months I have been in Seattle,so theres no way I am cycling here. And as a city on the West Coast, I am sure it is more bike friendly than most in the states. Fortunately, I work and live near downtown, so I can walk my daily commute.
Another factor is the population density. I live in a region that is geographically just a bit larger than the Netherlands and has a population of about 300,000 (The Upper Peninsula of Michigan).
Of course that doesn't apply in US areas that do have higher population density, but there's a lot of country over here.
I’ve stopped peaking over my shoulders ever since I’ve gotten a car with a bunch of sensors and cameras. Now it seems like it is more dangerous to take the time to look back and instead just rely on the fairly reliable sensor indicator in the side review mirrors. It’s not even like you can do both, unfortunately, since you either look here or there.
I wonder how much driving will change with technology before we get full self driving cars?
But ya, the USA still sucks for bikes. It’s not just the cars, but that you are in the same road with the cars in the first place. Netherlands is much better in that regard, with bike trails everywhere and intersections heavily engineered with an eye towards cyclist safety. Not to mention the laws are heavily biased toward cyclists.
Basically everything, except one thing: the speed threshold where physically separate bike lanes are mandatory is 50km/h, not 30. That happily coincides with the in-city speed limit for cars.
You will still find many physically separated bike lanes even on 50-kph roads if they carry heavy traffic, but it's not mandated by law. It just happens that sharing a road with cyclists also slows down cars, and that decreases traffic throughput.
> As a dutch person I would absolutely NOT want to ride a bike in the US, it's simply too dangerous.
well, while it's very safe to ride a bike here in Netherlands, sh*t still happens regularly and crazy drivers are there. Past year I had this accident : https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lUY7psClcbQ
LA resident here for eleven years (coming from ATL which has its own horrible traffic and is worse by miles for bike commuting, fwiw).
> I visited the US recently and you can drive for 30 minutes in a car and you are still in LA, if you drive for 30 minutes in the Netherlands you're in a completely different city.
My not-so-pedantic comments to these facts are (a) LA is freaking HUGE (if ever fly into LAX at night, pay attention to when the earth becomes a solid carpet of city lights. It's a looong way from the shoreline). We aren't constrained by water on three or four sides like say, NYC/Manhattan or San Francisco.
And, (b), at LA's 101/10/405/surface street speeds, thirty minutes may only be three or four miles (or two, if you venture to travel at The Wrong Times), while you can get to one of the major secondary cities (Anaheim, for example) in about fifty minutes if you time it well.
So, while technically true, those points aren't representative of How Things Really Are, imho.
(me: exclusive transit/bike commuter here for 6+ years)
Almost everything :) It says that there needs to be a separated, protected bike lane on every road that has a maximum speed over 30 km/h. This is not true (and pretty infeasible, too). The vast majority of average boring roads in residential areas have a 50 km/h maximum speed and no separated bike lanes (and often, if the road is small/quiet enough, not a marked bike lane at all). Most countryside roads have a 80 km/h maximum speed and no bike lanes.
I bet some details were left out that accidentally made it incorrect. I can imagine that there's some law/guideline going on that if a road is particularly busy, then it needs to be either max 30 kph or have separated bike lanes. But most suburban roads or countryside aren't particularly busy.
> As a dutch person I would absolutely NOT want to ride a bike in the US,
It depends where you are. I used to spend a lot of time in Raleigh and Cary, North Carolina and often borrowed a bike to cycle from Cary to Raleigh and around both places, I was told by many Americans that it was dangerous but in fact I only had one slightly difficult moment in hundreds of kilometres of cycling and that was a low speed bus that came within ten centimetres of me.
It got only one thing wrong: there are roads that allow 50km/h and 60km/h without dedicated cycling roads (or with curbs). The former sometimes has no cycling indication, the latter is seen with a 1.5 width car lane with two smaller res bicycle lanes around it.
These are rarely seen in cities though but are very common in rural areas (the Dutch rural, which would probably be 'suburban' in the US).
> One thing though is that our geography works well with biking.
Yeah, that one. Your country is ridiculously flat with highest peak of around 300m above see level.
On the other hand, there are a lot of raining days in Netherlands! I was very surprised that Dutch don't care too much about weather, they ride on sunny days same as on rainy days.
Well part of the reason everything is so spread out and part of the reason cars drive like that IS because it is such a car-centric infrastructure. More bikers and a political push to change zoning laws and city planning would help alleviate all of the issues you mentioned
There’s an interesting clip from a documentary in 1972 about the neighborhood De Pijp in Amsterdam, when it was still very much a car-centric city. At the time children in the area protested how dangerous the streets had become and how they lacked safe areas to play.
Compared to the situation now, it’s vastly improved. Fortunately the car did not win and the city did not destroy itself with a highway through the middle.
Edit
Here’s another (recent) documentary you might find interesting:
It was the same with Denmark. And especially Copenhagen. They went from a very car-centric society to a remarkably bike-centric one. Despite bad weather. All due to the Oil Crisis. Unlike other governments in the rest of EU, it seems that both the Dutch and the Danes understood a change was needed.
I've read urbanism brochures from the 1960s, when the Technical University was getting moved from central Copenhagen to a suburb (Lyngby), and it's remarkable how car-centric the design was. An old airport, where the runway was converted into a huge parking lot, and commuting by car was carefully considered to weight all decisions.
I'm curious how you though the article failed to cover this issue? In fact, that's the first example that the article covers, that car-centric planning in Rotterdam post-WWII was changed to be bike-friendly in the 1970s.
Did the article get rewritten after you commented?
Bicycle Dutch, the blog you posted, also has a great YouTube channel detailing Dutch bike infrastructure and some of its history: https://www.youtube.com/bicycledutch
A main one not pointed out: cars are always (extreme negligence would be the tipping point) liable for crashes with cyclists and pedestrians. That's quite supportive for keeping an eye out for possible danger. To support that liability insurance is obligatory for motorists.
The one on left vs. right really is not even close to an issue. I would guess most MPs of most parties cycle to work. There is literally not a (native) child that doesn't bike by 7. We even have courses for newcomers to learn how to cycle.
It isn't all fun and games. I had to ride the bike to school for 5 years. Over in the neighbouring city. A 45 minute ride. Alone. Through wind, rain, wind and wind. And rain. That's also part of the culture, because it's safe and ok to send kids, 12 years old, on their own, in the dark over unlit forest roads. Through the wind. Also wind. Saves on bus fare. Which is also typically Dutch.
> The Dutch use bikes as a tool to feed their transit system: 50 percent of all trips that take place on the transit system in the Netherlands begin with a bicycle ride.
This is why I'm still waiting for Google Maps and the likes to include an "I have a bike and am willing to use it to get to the closest train/metro/bus station" option.
Don’t believe the lies! All the pictures in this article show a sunny city with happy cyclists. Apart from the last 2 months this is demonstrably false since everyone who lives in the Netherlands knows that if starts to rain the second you get outside to grab your bike and a strong headwind will follow you relentlessly, even when you make a 180 turn.
Those are the facts. Don’t believe this propaganda.
I was amazed at how mellow everyone in Amsterdam seemed while riding their bikes.
In US cities, most cyclist act like they're in a race. They must run every stop sign, charge down every hill, graze every pedestrian... in downtown Amsterdam most people were going at a leisurely pace and if you get in their way, they just ding a little bell at you.
Another way in which biking in (some parts of) the US isn't casual: pretty much every biker you see in Silicon Valley has bike shorts, a jersey advertising a race or energy drink, clip-in shoes and is riding at VO₂ max. I feel out of place tooling around in street clothes.
> Dutch design manual classifies roads depending on the speed of the cars traveling in them. If there’s any major difference in speed, then full separation is required
> What is the speed threshold?
> Anything where cars are traveling faster than 30 kph. So, what’s that, 19 mph?
As a Dutchman, this is so obviously wrong that it makes me doubt everything factual in the book they wrote. 50 roads without physical separation are the default, and 60 roads are often back roads where there is not enough traffic to warrant the space (=money) required for a separated cycling lane so those typically also have no physical barriers.
I guess the limit is 70km/h, as I can't off the top of my head think of any 70-80 road where cyclists don't have separate infrastructure, though I'm sure one can find an exception.
I was very surprised to learn that in Germany, they have no trouble with having people drive without even an indicated bike lane (I'd feel unsafe driving on a 50 road if people drive 50, there is no space left over, and there is no bike lane outlined) on 100km/h roads.
> Cycle tracks are all paved with this easily identified red pavement, an inch-thick top coat of dyed red asphalt
Inch-thick? 2.6cm? Have they even been to the country at all? Never have I ever seen the red paint so thick that you'd notice it when driving onto it, I'm fairly certain that doesn't exist anywhere in the country. The only tactile paint we have is the white lines on the sides of highways, which I assume is to wake dozers up.
My wife and I were in Amsterdam a few weeks ago for a music festival and we were blown away by how easy it was to get around on a bike. I don't have much to add to what's in the article just to say that I was shocked by how comfortable riding a bike in Amsterdam is. I live in Austin, TX and would never in a million years ride to work here. There is so little infrastructure to make regular bicycle riding less risky.
Oddly enough I’m in Dordrecht, NL right now on a work trip and it’s bike heaven here. Bike lanes the size of car lanes. Bike depos next to the train station that are a block long. Everywhere you go there’s close to 50 bikes parked outside.
It’s a great place to visit. Lots of nice people and history.
The thing about NL is that it's totally flat and a tiny piece of land. The biking culture is a result of their geography, not anything else. For example, in Norway, where biking infrastructure is quite decent and people are generally positive about biking/being environmentally responsible, biking is simply impossible in most cases because of the larger hilly landmass and the cold snowy winters.
The Netherlands are (is?) also very flat. If you go up a tower with a viewing area in one of the bigger cities, you'll see what I mean. You can see really far in the horizon! Maybe it's just easier to bike there so more people do it?
I once drove my bike through The Netherlands, Germany, Luxembourg, France and Belgium.
They all have bike lanes (well France sometimes have them) but what is different is that most bike lanes in The Netherlands are separated from other lanes. So you are and feel mutch safer.
So I believe that bike lanes are not enough. They should be realy separated from other trafic.
I love this, but I wonder if cycling in The Netherlands is similar to my experience in Germany.
I would classify myself as a "wielrenner". In Berlin for example, whilst the cycling infrastructure is also generally good as a cyclist you're practically forced to use these really thin cycle paths full of "fietser"s (to continue the Dutch terminology). That, in combination with generally very bumpy paths, can make getting from A-B quickly highly frustrating. However, cycling on the road is a nightmare. In some situations its forbidden altogether, and generally drivers are really aggressive about your mere presence even when they're perfectly capable of driving around you. Coming from the UK, I'd actually rather drive on the road with the knowledge that I'm a first-class citizen of said road, and be able to cycle at my own pace.
the bike alone doesn’t replace the private automobile, and neither does public transit, but when you combine the two, that’s when the magic happens. Then the car becomes redundant in cities.
I love the picture of a guy moving a bed on an oversized and strange (to my eyes) three wheeler.
Visiting San Francisco and San Jose every year, I don't see many improvements. US is for cars right now how it looks like. Uber, Light Train, renting a car, but no options to just take a bike from hotel to a conference site.
From having spent quite some time in Amsterdam, I would say that you're safer on a bike than on foot. When a biker rings the bell on you in Amsterdam it's not a heads up or suggestion to get out of the way like in the rest of the world; it's quite possibly the last thing you will ever hear. From my experience, they go fast and expect you to move out of the way. Or you could try to not walk in bike lanes, I guess; not that I had much luck identifying them.
> But the biggest education — while it’s not mandatory throughout the country, it’s done by most schools — is students around grade four or five, in the 10 and 11 age range, start taking cycling skills courses.
Having been raised in The Netherlands, and being educated from kindergarten till university, and having three kids older than 11 years... I've never heard about a _cycling skill course_ in Dutch schools. Sure, there a classes (part of primary school education) about traffic rules, but children learn to cycle in their play time. I guess 75% of kids know how to drive a bicycle before they're 6 years old.
> Between the ages of 11 and 12 they have to take a written exam to show that they understand the rules of the road. They also do a practical exam.
Indeed, these exist. But the only training for that practical exam that I'm aware of is that the teacher is biking the route (it is known in advance) once with the kids, like a week before that "fietsexamen".
Oh, and nowadays that exam is part of Fietsexamen Nederland (related to Veilig Verkeer Nederland?), not the Fietsersbond.
[+] [-] Rainymood|7 years ago|reply
As a dutch person I would absolutely NOT want to ride a bike in the US, it's simply too dangerous. There are so many cars that are not looking out for cyclists. For example, I never saw my Uber/Lyft driver peek over his shoulder. In the Netherlands we fail our driving exam if we forget this even once. Another example is the insane speed cars fly past the "share the road"-bikelanes. It's crazy. I would feel really unsafe on a bike in the US.
[+] [-] bluejekyll|7 years ago|reply
I understand this perspective, but as a counter to this, if no one bikes in the US then this won't change. I ride all over San Francisco. In the last 18 years of me living here things have gotten better and better for the cyclist, but there are still many areas that can be improved. I encourage you to support local organizations, like the San Francisco Bicycle Coalition, which can pressure local governments to make changes that improve safety for all cyclists.
For too long in the US we've designed our roads with the idea that cars have some right to the road that others do not. We're finally starting to rectify that in cities across the country, and it's only getting better.
[+] [-] TulliusCicero|7 years ago|reply
That's not geography, that's urban planning, or a lack of it. America's geographic size meant that we could sprawl, not that we had to.
And indeed, especially in the post-WW2 era, we collectively chose to sprawl out far and wide, greatly favoring the automobile at the expense of walking, biking, and transit.
> I would feel really unsafe on a bike in the US.
That makes sense, since yeah, it's dangerous as hell. Got hit twice the last year before I moved to Munich.
[+] [-] bunderbunder|7 years ago|reply
In the US, I wouldn't dream of doing that - it's just too dangerous, because there's too much risk of being involved in a high speed collision. But, after having spent some time in the Netherlands, it's come to feel like a minor injustice every time I put my helmet on. It's a little reminder of how, in the US and much the rest of the world, we have blithely turned our public right-of-way into a space that's fundamentally dangerous for humans to be in.
[+] [-] mkirschner|7 years ago|reply
[+] [-] analog31|7 years ago|reply
A lot of Americans also think it's too dangerous. It's an obstacle to getting more people on bikes.
When people at my workplace see me with my bike, or find out that I'm a cyclist, they beg me to be careful, promise to wear a helmet, and so forth. I have friends who are avid cyclists, but who limit their riding to dedicated bike paths or off-road trails, because they don't feel safe riding on the roads.
Just looking at pictures and videos, it's apparent to me that cyclists in the US and Netherlands have very different riding habits due to the differences in conditions. The Dutch seem so carefree. Americans seem to have a much more wary, defensive, and sometimes aggressive style, and may prefer more maneuverable bikes for a reason. You'd probably get used to it, as lots of us do.
We also probably have to pay more attention to planning our routes to avoid the worst of traffic. I know all of the dedicated bike paths and side roads in my town. Google Maps gives different routes for bikes and cars. Residential streets have lots of cars but not a lot of traffic volume. I actually encounter relatively few cars on my rides.
Much as I defend cycling in the US, I'd still prefer the Dutch environment.
[+] [-] megaremote|7 years ago|reply
But what difference does that make? Why would I be more likely to visit a different city rather than another part of a bigger city?
[+] [-] komali2|7 years ago|reply
I was in the bike lane...
[+] [-] the-dude|7 years ago|reply
[+] [-] tenaciousDaniel|7 years ago|reply
Also our metro areas tend to spread out quite a bit, so to get from one area to another typically involves biking >5 miles.
[+] [-] CalRobert|7 years ago|reply
The buildings and motorways are an absolutely hellscape of trash design, though. Whole damn city is an asphalt desert with a building sprinkled here and there. Why? Because laws force businesses and homes to have parking that often takes up more space than the building itself.
[+] [-] ptaipale|7 years ago|reply
[+] [-] bogomipz|7 years ago|reply
And the topography doesn't hurt - its flat as a pancake.
Also isn't it possible to basically ride between every city in the Netherlands? I once biked from Rotterdam to Den Hague using only bike paths and protected bike lanes. I got the impression that I could continue riding to Amsterdam in the same fashion if wanted to.
[+] [-] prestonh|7 years ago|reply
[+] [-] maxerickson|7 years ago|reply
Of course that doesn't apply in US areas that do have higher population density, but there's a lot of country over here.
[+] [-] seanmcdirmid|7 years ago|reply
I wonder how much driving will change with technology before we get full self driving cars?
But ya, the USA still sucks for bikes. It’s not just the cars, but that you are in the same road with the cars in the first place. Netherlands is much better in that regard, with bike trails everywhere and intersections heavily engineered with an eye towards cyclist safety. Not to mention the laws are heavily biased toward cyclists.
[+] [-] tremon|7 years ago|reply
You will still find many physically separated bike lanes even on 50-kph roads if they carry heavy traffic, but it's not mandated by law. It just happens that sharing a road with cyclists also slows down cars, and that decreases traffic throughput.
[+] [-] sAbakumoff|7 years ago|reply
well, while it's very safe to ride a bike here in Netherlands, sh*t still happens regularly and crazy drivers are there. Past year I had this accident : https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lUY7psClcbQ
[+] [-] AceyMan|7 years ago|reply
> I visited the US recently and you can drive for 30 minutes in a car and you are still in LA, if you drive for 30 minutes in the Netherlands you're in a completely different city.
My not-so-pedantic comments to these facts are (a) LA is freaking HUGE (if ever fly into LAX at night, pay attention to when the earth becomes a solid carpet of city lights. It's a looong way from the shoreline). We aren't constrained by water on three or four sides like say, NYC/Manhattan or San Francisco.
And, (b), at LA's 101/10/405/surface street speeds, thirty minutes may only be three or four miles (or two, if you venture to travel at The Wrong Times), while you can get to one of the major secondary cities (Anaheim, for example) in about fifty minutes if you time it well.
So, while technically true, those points aren't representative of How Things Really Are, imho. (me: exclusive transit/bike commuter here for 6+ years)
[+] [-] skrebbel|7 years ago|reply
Almost everything :) It says that there needs to be a separated, protected bike lane on every road that has a maximum speed over 30 km/h. This is not true (and pretty infeasible, too). The vast majority of average boring roads in residential areas have a 50 km/h maximum speed and no separated bike lanes (and often, if the road is small/quiet enough, not a marked bike lane at all). Most countryside roads have a 80 km/h maximum speed and no bike lanes.
I bet some details were left out that accidentally made it incorrect. I can imagine that there's some law/guideline going on that if a road is particularly busy, then it needs to be either max 30 kph or have separated bike lanes. But most suburban roads or countryside aren't particularly busy.
[+] [-] kwhitefoot|7 years ago|reply
It depends where you are. I used to spend a lot of time in Raleigh and Cary, North Carolina and often borrowed a bike to cycle from Cary to Raleigh and around both places, I was told by many Americans that it was dangerous but in fact I only had one slightly difficult moment in hundreds of kilometres of cycling and that was a low speed bus that came within ten centimetres of me.
[+] [-] rahkiin|7 years ago|reply
[+] [-] jiri|7 years ago|reply
Yeah, that one. Your country is ridiculously flat with highest peak of around 300m above see level.
On the other hand, there are a lot of raining days in Netherlands! I was very surprised that Dutch don't care too much about weather, they ride on sunny days same as on rainy days.
[+] [-] culiuniversal|7 years ago|reply
[+] [-] cr1895|7 years ago|reply
There’s an interesting clip from a documentary in 1972 about the neighborhood De Pijp in Amsterdam, when it was still very much a car-centric city. At the time children in the area protested how dangerous the streets had become and how they lacked safe areas to play.
https://bicycledutch.wordpress.com/2013/12/12/amsterdam-chil...
Compared to the situation now, it’s vastly improved. Fortunately the car did not win and the city did not destroy itself with a highway through the middle.
Edit
Here’s another (recent) documentary you might find interesting:
https://vimeo.com/123480693
[+] [-] nextos|7 years ago|reply
I've read urbanism brochures from the 1960s, when the Technical University was getting moved from central Copenhagen to a suburb (Lyngby), and it's remarkable how car-centric the design was. An old airport, where the runway was converted into a huge parking lot, and commuting by car was carefully considered to weight all decisions.
[+] [-] sAbakumoff|7 years ago|reply
[+] [-] tonyedgecombe|7 years ago|reply
[+] [-] greglindahl|7 years ago|reply
I'm curious how you though the article failed to cover this issue? In fact, that's the first example that the article covers, that car-centric planning in Rotterdam post-WWII was changed to be bike-friendly in the 1970s.
Did the article get rewritten after you commented?
[+] [-] dddw|7 years ago|reply
[+] [-] edaemon|7 years ago|reply
[+] [-] jimmaswell|7 years ago|reply
Why did the kids want to play on the streets instead of parks or something?
[+] [-] wjnc|7 years ago|reply
The one on left vs. right really is not even close to an issue. I would guess most MPs of most parties cycle to work. There is literally not a (native) child that doesn't bike by 7. We even have courses for newcomers to learn how to cycle.
[+] [-] neals|7 years ago|reply
I don't own a bike any more.
[+] [-] Elte|7 years ago|reply
This is why I'm still waiting for Google Maps and the likes to include an "I have a bike and am willing to use it to get to the closest train/metro/bus station" option.
[+] [-] dstick|7 years ago|reply
Those are the facts. Don’t believe this propaganda.
[+] [-] phil248|7 years ago|reply
In US cities, most cyclist act like they're in a race. They must run every stop sign, charge down every hill, graze every pedestrian... in downtown Amsterdam most people were going at a leisurely pace and if you get in their way, they just ding a little bell at you.
[+] [-] tlb|7 years ago|reply
[+] [-] lucb1e|7 years ago|reply
> What is the speed threshold?
> Anything where cars are traveling faster than 30 kph. So, what’s that, 19 mph?
As a Dutchman, this is so obviously wrong that it makes me doubt everything factual in the book they wrote. 50 roads without physical separation are the default, and 60 roads are often back roads where there is not enough traffic to warrant the space (=money) required for a separated cycling lane so those typically also have no physical barriers.
I guess the limit is 70km/h, as I can't off the top of my head think of any 70-80 road where cyclists don't have separate infrastructure, though I'm sure one can find an exception.
I was very surprised to learn that in Germany, they have no trouble with having people drive without even an indicated bike lane (I'd feel unsafe driving on a 50 road if people drive 50, there is no space left over, and there is no bike lane outlined) on 100km/h roads.
> Cycle tracks are all paved with this easily identified red pavement, an inch-thick top coat of dyed red asphalt
Inch-thick? 2.6cm? Have they even been to the country at all? Never have I ever seen the red paint so thick that you'd notice it when driving onto it, I'm fairly certain that doesn't exist anywhere in the country. The only tactile paint we have is the white lines on the sides of highways, which I assume is to wake dozers up.
[+] [-] dopamean|7 years ago|reply
[+] [-] brightball|7 years ago|reply
It’s a great place to visit. Lots of nice people and history.
[+] [-] dgut|7 years ago|reply
[+] [-] sxp62000|7 years ago|reply
[+] [-] pasta|7 years ago|reply
They all have bike lanes (well France sometimes have them) but what is different is that most bike lanes in The Netherlands are separated from other lanes. So you are and feel mutch safer.
So I believe that bike lanes are not enough. They should be realy separated from other trafic.
[+] [-] 2T1Qka0rEiPr|7 years ago|reply
I would classify myself as a "wielrenner". In Berlin for example, whilst the cycling infrastructure is also generally good as a cyclist you're practically forced to use these really thin cycle paths full of "fietser"s (to continue the Dutch terminology). That, in combination with generally very bumpy paths, can make getting from A-B quickly highly frustrating. However, cycling on the road is a nightmare. In some situations its forbidden altogether, and generally drivers are really aggressive about your mere presence even when they're perfectly capable of driving around you. Coming from the UK, I'd actually rather drive on the road with the knowledge that I'm a first-class citizen of said road, and be able to cycle at my own pace.
[+] [-] Vinnl|7 years ago|reply
A presentation with a ton of examples of small infrastructural touches that make it safer to cycle in the Netherlands.
[+] [-] DoreenMichele|7 years ago|reply
I love the picture of a guy moving a bed on an oversized and strange (to my eyes) three wheeler.
[+] [-] novaRom|7 years ago|reply
[+] [-] codr4|7 years ago|reply
[+] [-] jschulenklopper|7 years ago|reply
Having been raised in The Netherlands, and being educated from kindergarten till university, and having three kids older than 11 years... I've never heard about a _cycling skill course_ in Dutch schools. Sure, there a classes (part of primary school education) about traffic rules, but children learn to cycle in their play time. I guess 75% of kids know how to drive a bicycle before they're 6 years old.
> Between the ages of 11 and 12 they have to take a written exam to show that they understand the rules of the road. They also do a practical exam.
Indeed, these exist. But the only training for that practical exam that I'm aware of is that the teacher is biking the route (it is known in advance) once with the kids, like a week before that "fietsexamen".
Oh, and nowadays that exam is part of Fietsexamen Nederland (related to Veilig Verkeer Nederland?), not the Fietsersbond.