Why is cycling so popular in the Netherlands

cubes · Post by **cubes** » 29 Sep 2013, 22:21

It's too sensible for any government in the country to ever introduce!

PS_RalphW · Post by **PS_RalphW** » 30 Sep 2013, 09:27

Previously, I haven't been a great fan of off-road cycle paths, because they are always poorly built, badly maintained, and firmly place cyclists as lower priority than road traffic at road junctions, whilst increasing conflicts with pedestrians and cars turning into driveways, etc.

However, since moving to a village out of town, whilst all the above are still true, the stress reduction of being able to cycle in a straight line at reasonable speed without worrying that every single vehicle passing at 60mph+ is going to abruptly terminate your life, is dramatic. A 6 mile commute through a busy city in rush hour is a major undertaking, on a country cycle path it is a pleasant warm-up.

ujoni08 · Post by **ujoni08** » 30 Sep 2013, 21:50

Agreed. I use a three-mile canal-side path, and it's a totally different experience. My bike is now covered in dog-poo, though...

JavaScriptDonkey · Post by **JavaScriptDonkey** » 30 Sep 2013, 23:10

Which probably brings us to a point where we should consider why cycling should be considered a door-to-door activity.

We have embraced the concept that cars have restricted access in towns to account for pedestrians so why should we believe that cycling everywhere without getting off is a given?

Centre Parks have found need for 'no bikes' routes on their sites - perhaps the same is necessary in towns.

Or is the appeal of a personal transport module too addictive?

woodburner · Post by **woodburner** » 30 Sep 2013, 23:16

JavaScriptDonkey wrote:Centre Parks have found need for 'no bikes' routes on their sites - perhaps the same is necessary in towns.

It certainly necessary in order to remove the cycling, moronic tendency from pavements.

JavaScriptDonkey · Post by **JavaScriptDonkey** » 01 Oct 2013, 22:41

cubes wrote:Then close one lane of some roads, make them one-way with the other lane a bi-directional cycle lane. Give people financial encouragement to cycle to work rather than (pretty poor0 disincentives to drive.

I think you just invented the bus lane.

Post by **kenneal - lagger** » 02 Oct 2013, 05:32

JavaScriptDonkey wrote:
cubes wrote:Then close one lane of some roads, make them one-way with the other lane a bi-directional cycle lane. Give people financial encouragement to cycle to work rather than (pretty poor0 disincentives to drive.
I think you just invented the bus lane.

No! dumbo! That's for ....

the_lyniezian · Post by **the_lyniezian** » 02 Oct 2013, 18:10

JavaScriptDonkey wrote:
cubes wrote:Then close one lane of some roads, make them one-way with the other lane a bi-directional cycle lane. Give people financial encouragement to cycle to work rather than (pretty poor0 disincentives to drive.
I think you just invented the bus lane.

And much like bus lanes, this idea will turn out to be counter-productive as it won't encourage people to get out of their cars, whilst making the overall traffic flow situation twice as bad (thereby increasing unnecessary CO2 emissions and fossil fuel waste).

"If you build it they will come" never seems to work in reality.

Post by **kenneal - lagger** » 02 Oct 2013, 18:27

the_lyniezian wrote:"If you build it they will come" never seems to work in reality.

It did, and still does, with cars. If you built, or build, a road the cars will come to fill it. With political will it could work in reverse. Unfortunately we would need a dictatorship to persuade most of the very large number of energy addicts to reduce their "right" to consume.

PS_RalphW · Post by **PS_RalphW** » 02 Oct 2013, 22:18

There is a very good (by UK standards) cycle lane from my village to Cambridge and, although I don't see many bikes on it at any one time, I think the numbers do add up. This morning it was raining and the vehicle queue into town started half an mile further out. This always happens in bad weather, and is largely due to extra cars driven by fair weather cyclists. I wouldn't cycle into town if the bike lane wasn't there, Because there road is too dangerous.

the_lyniezian · Post by **the_lyniezian** » 03 Oct 2013, 00:40

kenneal - lagger wrote:
the_lyniezian wrote:"If you build it they will come" never seems to work in reality.
It did, and still does, with cars. If you built, or build, a road the cars will come to fill it. With political will it could work in reverse. Unfortunately we would need a dictatorship to persuade most of the very large number of energy addicts to reduce their "right" to consume.

Well, that is true, but only because people were wanting to drive cars anyway.

I think the more likely thing to convince said energy addicts (which, cars aside, I am one, sadly) will be inaffordability. Sure, for now the demand for fuel is inelastic, but what happens when we really start to hit the downslope and fuel prices skyrocket? Perhaps when driving to work becomes more expensive than it's worth in terms of wages, some people might start to look for cheaper options like cycling. Until then, yes perhaps a dose of dictatorship might help but likely people would resent such pressure from on high. And how would you do it?

By such a time, anyway, I think the buses will be all but gone- by next April they will be from my neighbourhood so I hear (though there is one which goes from ten minutes walk away that I often use, which will still be there).

cubes · Post by **cubes** » 08 Oct 2013, 16:37

Maybe the way for cyclists to get attention to the lack of decent investment in cycling is for commuter cyclists to 'strike' for one or more day. Drive instead of cycling to work and see how much the regular drivers enjoy the added congestion.

RenewableCandy · Post by **RenewableCandy** » 09 Oct 2013, 16:55

Can we just do a reality check here about cars?

Most car journeys these days are done by peope who are actually working (i.e. they are "visiting clients" wot used to be called customers). The freer the roads are, the more (prospective) clients/customers they can, and hence will, visit. Thus, more roads lead inevitably to more cars (strictly speaking, to more miles travelled).

Reducing the road capacity will thus lead to a reduction in the number of miles travelled. This has actually happened, for example when they were repairing a crucial bridge here in York. There's a similar case in London, sorry I've no ref but I bet it's easy to find.

ujoni08 · Post by **ujoni08** » 10 Oct 2013, 21:49

There's an article here with an embedded video of cycling in Groningen, Holland:

http://www.treehugger.com/bikes/youve-s ... -bike.html

Pepperman · Post by **Pepperman** » 11 Oct 2013, 10:21

RenewableCandy wrote:Can we just do a reality check here about cars?

Most car journeys these days are done by peope who are actually working (i.e. they are "visiting clients" wot used to be called customers). The freer the roads are, the more (prospective) clients/customers they can, and hence will, visit. Thus, more roads lead inevitably to more cars (strictly speaking, to more miles travelled).

Reducing the road capacity will thus lead to a reduction in the number of miles travelled. This has actually happened, for example when they were repairing a crucial bridge here in York. There's a similar case in London, sorry I've no ref but I bet it's easy to find.

More journeys and miles driven are actually for 'leisure' purposes rather than business. You can see the average journeys and miles per person by purpose and mode here:

https://www.gov.uk/government/statistic ... e-of-trips

The number of people driving on business is relatively low compared with the number of people driving for leisure but they rack up a lot of miles per person so it definitely adds up.

If you include commuting as driving for business (which strictly it isn't) then it's not all that much less than leisure driving.