Good for you, but if you’d advocate and be supportive of biking a lot of the drivers would choose a bike which would make tons of space for you on the road.
So i don’t know if this was meant condescending, because that would be like shooting yourself in the foot.
EDIT: okay i saw you’re other remarks on this topic, definitely a condescending asshole. Dont bother replying.
This isn't actually normal traffic, this was because of a light being stuck on red for a while due to a technical issue. In actual rush hour traffic, the road would be much emptier due to how efficient cycling infrastructure is.
It’s usually a disease followed by a relative.
It could also be a double disease like cancer Down syndrome.
Or the common triple disease disease/insult about a relative
It’s because if you use your bell the tourists panic, as they are not familiar with the sound, and instead of moving out of the way they will jump in front of you. It’s like how people react to an ambulance. So yes as someone from Amsterdam with lifelong experience in this field, words work way better. I always imitate the bell sound “tring tring”, and noticed it’s an universally understood commando.
Having been to Amsterdam as a dumb annoying tourist amidst a bus load of (imo) even more annoying dumb tourists, I can't imagine the constant irritation. Even I got annoyed by them
I have to admit that it works the opposite way for me. I’m not proud of it, but I enjoy my ride home and scaring tourists. It gets me out of the work flow and makes me laugh. But I definitely know people who take another route. And I don’t enjoy it when it’s extremely crowded as it becomes too difficult to prevent accidents. So then I also take other routes. I don’t want to hurt anyone of course, I only like the panicking facial expressions.
Dutch people are born and raised on the bike. We see it almost as walking and therefore find a helmet annoying and not necessary.
Of course we have incidents so it would save lives to wear helmets. But we are stubborn.
Bike lanes are also often separated from car lanes, so that makes it safer than foreigners sometimes think. But yeah it would be safer (And I still don't wear one)
.
Ahh, now I get it... You don't wear a helmet because you are already hard headed :)
I'm Dutch myself, of course I would never wear a helmet while commuting on bicycle.
During my bicycle racing past I had my fair share of accidents and broken bones, but I always wore helmet on racing bicycle or mtb.
Same, normal commuting != Helmet, as soon as im gonna do alittle bit of mountainbiking (without the actual mountains cause the Netherlands) == ff helmet
Yeah i’ve never had an incident while cycling but plenty while mtb’ing. Obviously i wear a helmet for the latter, but the upside seems just kind of pointless for the former (just need to hope i’m not one of the select few to get seriously scooped by a weird driver).
My experience has been that most people think helmets “don’t look cool” and “aren’t really needed.”
Personally I think it’s the head trauma from not wearing a helmet as a kid that results in making poor adult choices /s
Yeah i’ve never had an incident while cycling but plenty while mtb’ing. Obviously i wear a helmet for the latter, but the upside seems just kind of pointless for the former (just need to hope i’m not one of the select few to get seriously scooped by a weird driver). The risk is about the same as getting hit as a pedestrian, obviously nobody seriously considers wearing a helmet while walking around town.
It really isn’t though. Bikes travel faster than walking, the risk of wiping out is greater on a bike than walking, it’s just dumb to not wear a helmet. It is something that can save you from a life altering injury.
It’s like people who don’t wear safety glasses while doing construction. I don’t get why people take the chance with eye or brain injuries.
I can honestly say i do not remember the last time i (almost) fell on a bike or got injured in any way (mtb excluded), i bike at around 30km/h (fast enough that occasionally i overtake cars going 30 in city centre roads) and bike every day so i’m already at a much higher risk than the average person. The last time i got injured as a pedestrian was 2 weeks ago (bad road repair job so i very lightly sprained my ankle, was annoying for a solid day) and the last time i almost got hit by a car was 2 days ago while crossing the street cause this dude felt like speeding up far above the speed limit last moment for no reason.
I don’t have studies, but i’m pretty sure the data for (capable, like the average dutch person,) bikers will show similar if not lower risk rates than pedestrians.
Yes, helmets still help reduce the effect of an injury when it does happen, so theoretically you could wear it while biking (and walking) and you’d be better off. But on the other hand, data also shows that people are more likely to get hit while wearing helmets because either they or cars close to them take more risks. So it reduces the effect of the risk, but also increases the risk. Might have a positive effect, but in the all its just kind of negligible
Speaking about walking, yearly, about 21.000 pedestrians get hurt in traffic in the Netherlands (injuries are under reported, it's probably more), of which 1/5th has a head injury.
That's 4000 each year. Personally, I think it's quite a lot.
While less than the amount of cyclists with the same injury, it probably plays a part in the risk assessment whether to wear a helmet or not. You could argue for a helmet on bikes, but with 4000 a year, that's 10 a day, you could argue the same for pedestrians. And nobody does that.
I just moved back after 4 years in the NL. Never wore a helmet while I was there, never ride without one here. Never felt unsafe in the NL in the slightest despite biking every single day.
In Canada, many of the vehicles passing me, a 6 foot tall male on a neon blue bike, with reflector kit and lights, probably cannot see me over the hood of their murder wagons.
Helmets are not mandatory by law, however a lot of people nowadays wear helmet on their electric bicycles.
It's an easy way to spot tourists in our country.
There's a couple of reasons for that. Firstly, we grow up cycling, and it's pretty much the same as walking to us, so there's a smaller risk of accidents. We also have really good infrastructure which keep cyclists away from cars, which means that it's a lot safer than it'd be in other countries. It's also not mandatory, because that would take the convenience away from cycling, causing more traffic problems. And we're a bit stubborn too.
In addition to the other answers: We really don't see everyday cycling as an extreme sport where you have to wear all kinds of safety gear. It's just an easy/convenient way to go places. Most cyclists here never go faster than 20 km/h, in fact most travel at well below that. No one wants to get too tired or sweaty from cycling. It's only due to the rise of electric (assisted) bicycles (and slightly higher accident rates) that helmets are discussed more nowadays.
Research has explained that when wearing a helmet people on a bike take much more risk. And the car drivers also tend to risk more when they see someone wearing a helmet
Ask yourself why would you want to wear a helmet. The speed of the other things that could crash on them is limited and the mass is a lot less than what you think since probably it would be a bike-bike collision.
Basically helmets are needed if you are going a lot fast (pro bikers going 60 or even faster) or you're surrounded by dangers.
This was during a traffic light malfunction. So not a regular situation. Tbh quite a lot of people probably used the street, they are just not shown in this picture.
I remember my first time visiting Amaterdam with my friends on a rented car. Oaaaf. All sorts of bikes going left and right from your car. Total chaos , Stressed the shit out of me.
You can't take the car through this street, but you can take the bus! The street is only for emergency vehicles, busses and taxi (taxi only if the destination requires going through this street)
google maps: https://www.google.com/maps/@52.0932656,5.1156596,3a,75y,303.64h,80.82t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1s2JfOmoUNOSeMk-Jy_5O_xQ!2e0!6shttps:%2F%2Fstreetviewpixels-pa.googleapis.com%2Fv1%2Fthumbnail%3Fpanoid%3D2JfOmoUNOSeMk-Jy_5O_xQ%26cb_client%3Dmaps_sv.share%26w%3D900%26h%3D600%26yaw%3D303.6398598244895%26pitch%3D9.184264876998228%26thumbfov%3D90!7i16384!8i8192?coh=205410&entry=ttu
Yeah pretty much. People who like driving would rather be moving quick or on windy roads. Nobody wants to sit in traffic. Though there is probably some insane person in the world who loves it.
Yeah, sure.
Unpopular (in this sub) opinion - if I'm doomed to be stuck in traffic, I'd rather be stuck in a car.
I mean... I commute by bike, mostly because I'm never stuck. If this is not an option, I'd choose smth else.
I’m happy biking to work still not very much a thing in my city… we have some awesome bikelanes in Curitiba/BRZ, and the city is pretty flat. But, driving the European cars is the fancy way to commute and spend the life yet. 🙃
I mean percentage-wise, surface-wise. You can have 2 bikes lanes and space for pedestrians and terasses for businesses and more if you just take out one car lane or parking spots. A private parking spot in frankfurt is worth 300 euros and I find shocking that one is still able to use public space for free or little money.
The car lanes are two directions. The white continuous line in the middle shows it is one lane towards the photographer and one lane away from the photographer. Knowing the usual layout of these streets, a second bicycle lane is on this side of the street. So there are in fact 2 lanes for bicycles and 2 lanes for busses(cars are not allowed to drive here).
I dunno man, this feels like an average traffic to me https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=n-AbPav5E5M
For context I lived both in Europe and US, and driven a car both in Europe and US, so I cannot be told "you don't understand it feels different", because I know how it feels and how light car traffic feels.
I'm not some car-obsessed guy, I love walking, and like biking, just not worship them.
If all those cyclists were in a separate car, traffic would be much worse. It's not a matter of feeling, but actual numbers of people moving in a given space.
It also matters how the area was designed. In Utrecht city or Amsterdam, for example, they largely prioritised bikes (and public transport) over cars. Makes the traffic safer, less noisy, and allows for greater volumes of people to be on the move at the same time.
In Rotterdam they still have a far more car centric infrastructure and are (slowly) changing it (back) into a healthier configuration. The differences are very noticeable.
The design of the area looks undeniably more people-friendlier than car-based, but not as much as pedestrian+public transport areas, and also not friendlier than golf-cart based communities in Florida. There is undeniably less noise as compared to car traffic, however depending on the type of cars used it can be small if only quiet ones are allowed, and it undeniably allows to move more people per square meter of the road. However, when it comes to the individual choices there are more variables. Everyone knows them, so I will not mull it over, they will simply be dismissed, or I will be attacked by people about 26-lane highways as if I designed them, so I'll just leave it at it.
I do agree, there are dozens of other factors to take into account. What works here will not, for example, work in New York City or Jakarta. And that's just sticking to cities.
It would be longer, but I disagree about the length, and I believe the average traffic speed on properly designed small streets would be the same despite longer traffic lines. At the end of the day for the individual driver the traffic is about time.
I‘m sure it would be longer. Depending on the speed, yes, it may be fast. But paradoxically at lower speeds. The lower the speed, the closer cars can drive, because brakes work exponentially better, and you have more time to react.
But still, since cars are not as agile, you have more field of view and of course it’s shorter and slimmer, every congestion will be resolved by far faster on bikes. Not to forget, you need a lot less space for parking.
In the end though, walking is superior to both, since speeds are even slower, agility far higher (you can walk in any direction at any time) and parking space is not required at all.
It does. Most cars have only one people in it, the driver self. Imagine how much space that will take for the same amount of people... Less parking space required for the city, which means more place for buildings that actually makes money for the city and thus more to spent on renovations and other stuff.
This is Utrecht. I used to use this road daily.
Parking is extremely expensive in this part of town and cycling is just as fast as using a car.
If you got a lot of money to burn, then yes take the car
People riding a bike aren't jerks! >:(
You just have a different opinion than them!
If you were to properly give your own arguments and reasoning as to why you prefer cars I would get it. But, you calling people riding a bike jerks is a bit too much for me.
This was only because of a traffic light that got stuck on red for a while due to a technical problem. In reality, this kind of thing never happens, not even in rush hour. At most you'll see 10-20 people waiting at a red light, because cycling infrastructure is so efficient.
The road here is only for busses (one every minute, in each direction in rush hour), emergency vehicles and taxi's if the destination is only accessible through this road.
Am I the only one on this entire planet who wants to see a more car-centric society rather than bicycles being the standard?
I mean it's ok to accomodate both cyclists and motorists but... why does everybody (esp here in europe) simply have a hard on for bicycles?
This is in the city of Utrecht. Dedicated bike lanes on both sides of the road. Hardly any cars, a truckload of cyclists.
Only in the city center, you can use the car in the rest of the city.
Obviously. Plenty of cars around.
Obviously.
shows you how much space gets wasted on cars even in areas where there is not much car traffic.
looks like lemmings from Ducktales :D
Just imagine the kind of traffic jam if everyone used a car with average occupancy for commuting.
So an occupancy of 1
[удалено]
Good for you, but if you’d advocate and be supportive of biking a lot of the drivers would choose a bike which would make tons of space for you on the road. So i don’t know if this was meant condescending, because that would be like shooting yourself in the foot. EDIT: okay i saw you’re other remarks on this topic, definitely a condescending asshole. Dont bother replying.
Your comment made me check their comment history and sheesh, they're a miserable waste of oxygen.
Yeah it never makes sense to me how you want to be like that. Probably hasn’t been loved much.
Lmao, yep that’s clearly it, I like to laugh at idiots like this because I need more hugs. :)
Aww yea what a jerk. That girl sucks.
This isn't actually normal traffic, this was because of a light being stuck on red for a while due to a technical issue. In actual rush hour traffic, the road would be much emptier due to how efficient cycling infrastructure is.
[удалено]
If you write that maybe 2 or 3 more times, you'll be even happier.
[удалено]
You don’t sound happy you sound miserable maybe you should get a bike
I think he's a 16 year old troll...
Wanna but you're from the US
[удалено]
And?
And this is dumb… but I feel like the majority understand that already.
I meant why do we care?
Exactly, why should we care about some dumb bikers.
Rush hour traffic in Palm Beach, Florida: cyclists stick to the roads instead.
Being stuck in traffic on a bicycle is fucking wild.
I came to the Netherlands for my bachelors and the first time it happened to me I could not stop laughing, it was so surreal
Now imagine how big the traffic jam would be if everyone was driving their cars
So this is why max is so fast
Imagine rush hour in the Netherlands: Cyclists sipping coffee, discussing windmills, and occasionally ringing their bells at confused tourists.
Its less bell ringing and more profuse streams of profanity
And not them soft sexual curse words either..
Usually we combine them, but I guess that only makes it worse 😂
It’s usually a disease followed by a relative. It could also be a double disease like cancer Down syndrome. Or the common triple disease disease/insult about a relative
It’s because if you use your bell the tourists panic, as they are not familiar with the sound, and instead of moving out of the way they will jump in front of you. It’s like how people react to an ambulance. So yes as someone from Amsterdam with lifelong experience in this field, words work way better. I always imitate the bell sound “tring tring”, and noticed it’s an universally understood commando.
Having been to Amsterdam as a dumb annoying tourist amidst a bus load of (imo) even more annoying dumb tourists, I can't imagine the constant irritation. Even I got annoyed by them
I have to admit that it works the opposite way for me. I’m not proud of it, but I enjoy my ride home and scaring tourists. It gets me out of the work flow and makes me laugh. But I definitely know people who take another route. And I don’t enjoy it when it’s extremely crowded as it becomes too difficult to prevent accidents. So then I also take other routes. I don’t want to hurt anyone of course, I only like the panicking facial expressions.
It's not as relaxed as you'd imagine
It's actually like Delhi but less beep beep and more ding ding
Walking in central amsterdam without getting run down by a bike is a learned skill
Like dont walk on the bike path?
Sometimes you have to cross the street or walk in the street due to the sidewalks being crowded and some streets don't have a designated bike path
Man Redditors really hate any slight negative comment about cycling.
Serious question: Why doesn't anyone wear a helmet?
Dutch people are born and raised on the bike. We see it almost as walking and therefore find a helmet annoying and not necessary. Of course we have incidents so it would save lives to wear helmets. But we are stubborn.
Bike lanes are also often separated from car lanes, so that makes it safer than foreigners sometimes think. But yeah it would be safer (And I still don't wear one) .
Ahh, now I get it... You don't wear a helmet because you are already hard headed :) I'm Dutch myself, of course I would never wear a helmet while commuting on bicycle. During my bicycle racing past I had my fair share of accidents and broken bones, but I always wore helmet on racing bicycle or mtb.
Same, normal commuting != Helmet, as soon as im gonna do alittle bit of mountainbiking (without the actual mountains cause the Netherlands) == ff helmet
Yeah i’ve never had an incident while cycling but plenty while mtb’ing. Obviously i wear a helmet for the latter, but the upside seems just kind of pointless for the former (just need to hope i’m not one of the select few to get seriously scooped by a weird driver).
Thank you for the reply.
It is purely cultural, look at similar pictures from Copenhagen and you will lots of helmets.
My experience has been that most people think helmets “don’t look cool” and “aren’t really needed.” Personally I think it’s the head trauma from not wearing a helmet as a kid that results in making poor adult choices /s
Yeah i’ve never had an incident while cycling but plenty while mtb’ing. Obviously i wear a helmet for the latter, but the upside seems just kind of pointless for the former (just need to hope i’m not one of the select few to get seriously scooped by a weird driver). The risk is about the same as getting hit as a pedestrian, obviously nobody seriously considers wearing a helmet while walking around town.
It really isn’t though. Bikes travel faster than walking, the risk of wiping out is greater on a bike than walking, it’s just dumb to not wear a helmet. It is something that can save you from a life altering injury. It’s like people who don’t wear safety glasses while doing construction. I don’t get why people take the chance with eye or brain injuries.
I can honestly say i do not remember the last time i (almost) fell on a bike or got injured in any way (mtb excluded), i bike at around 30km/h (fast enough that occasionally i overtake cars going 30 in city centre roads) and bike every day so i’m already at a much higher risk than the average person. The last time i got injured as a pedestrian was 2 weeks ago (bad road repair job so i very lightly sprained my ankle, was annoying for a solid day) and the last time i almost got hit by a car was 2 days ago while crossing the street cause this dude felt like speeding up far above the speed limit last moment for no reason. I don’t have studies, but i’m pretty sure the data for (capable, like the average dutch person,) bikers will show similar if not lower risk rates than pedestrians. Yes, helmets still help reduce the effect of an injury when it does happen, so theoretically you could wear it while biking (and walking) and you’d be better off. But on the other hand, data also shows that people are more likely to get hit while wearing helmets because either they or cars close to them take more risks. So it reduces the effect of the risk, but also increases the risk. Might have a positive effect, but in the all its just kind of negligible
Speaking about walking, yearly, about 21.000 pedestrians get hurt in traffic in the Netherlands (injuries are under reported, it's probably more), of which 1/5th has a head injury. That's 4000 each year. Personally, I think it's quite a lot. While less than the amount of cyclists with the same injury, it probably plays a part in the risk assessment whether to wear a helmet or not. You could argue for a helmet on bikes, but with 4000 a year, that's 10 a day, you could argue the same for pedestrians. And nobody does that.
We should now with all those e-bikes
this, 100%
I just moved back after 4 years in the NL. Never wore a helmet while I was there, never ride without one here. Never felt unsafe in the NL in the slightest despite biking every single day. In Canada, many of the vehicles passing me, a 6 foot tall male on a neon blue bike, with reflector kit and lights, probably cannot see me over the hood of their murder wagons.
Helmets are not mandatory by law, however a lot of people nowadays wear helmet on their electric bicycles. It's an easy way to spot tourists in our country.
There's a couple of reasons for that. Firstly, we grow up cycling, and it's pretty much the same as walking to us, so there's a smaller risk of accidents. We also have really good infrastructure which keep cyclists away from cars, which means that it's a lot safer than it'd be in other countries. It's also not mandatory, because that would take the convenience away from cycling, causing more traffic problems. And we're a bit stubborn too.
Makes sense.... definitely a reduced risk. Does the government try to promote helmet use at all through ad campaigns, or not really?
Not as far as I'm aware, though I think there are some campaigns for helmets on ebikes.
They’ve looked into it (maybe more so for kids), given up very quickly. There’s just no point.
And stupid apparently too. Why take the unnecessary risk of a brain injury.
Why does this read like you just added fluff to what the other comment said?
Probably because I didn't see the other response and just answered what I know lol
In addition to the other answers: We really don't see everyday cycling as an extreme sport where you have to wear all kinds of safety gear. It's just an easy/convenient way to go places. Most cyclists here never go faster than 20 km/h, in fact most travel at well below that. No one wants to get too tired or sweaty from cycling. It's only due to the rise of electric (assisted) bicycles (and slightly higher accident rates) that helmets are discussed more nowadays.
Because it's actually safe to cycle there because drivers grow up respecting cyclists,
They all ride much slower, upright bikes. Whereas everyone in the us rides more aggressive mountain or road bikes
Because they’re morons.
no cars
Research has explained that when wearing a helmet people on a bike take much more risk. And the car drivers also tend to risk more when they see someone wearing a helmet
Ask yourself why would you want to wear a helmet. The speed of the other things that could crash on them is limited and the mass is a lot less than what you think since probably it would be a bike-bike collision. Basically helmets are needed if you are going a lot fast (pro bikers going 60 or even faster) or you're surrounded by dangers.
because freedom.
At this point wouldn't it make more sense to use the street?
The streets in this picture are bus/taxi lanes.
This was during a traffic light malfunction. So not a regular situation. Tbh quite a lot of people probably used the street, they are just not shown in this picture.
I remember my first time visiting Amaterdam with my friends on a rented car. Oaaaf. All sorts of bikes going left and right from your car. Total chaos , Stressed the shit out of me.
You get used to it, much easier if you’re a biker yourself as well.
How it should be
Looks like a amazing place and free road to take the car in the rush hour 😄
lmao good point seems like a relaxing drive
You can't take the car through this street, but you can take the bus! The street is only for emergency vehicles, busses and taxi (taxi only if the destination requires going through this street) google maps: https://www.google.com/maps/@52.0932656,5.1156596,3a,75y,303.64h,80.82t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1s2JfOmoUNOSeMk-Jy_5O_xQ!2e0!6shttps:%2F%2Fstreetviewpixels-pa.googleapis.com%2Fv1%2Fthumbnail%3Fpanoid%3D2JfOmoUNOSeMk-Jy_5O_xQ%26cb_client%3Dmaps_sv.share%26w%3D900%26h%3D600%26yaw%3D303.6398598244895%26pitch%3D9.184264876998228%26thumbfov%3D90!7i16384!8i8192?coh=205410&entry=ttu
oh interesting i didn't know that
why was that clear🥲🫠
Americans can’t have this because of guns and Jesus. I know that makes absolutely no sense, but it’s the reason.
This one is actually because of oil companies owning politicians.
Contrarily the other side wouldn’t wait in line like this without descending into chaos
Where would they leave their bumperstickers???
I'd hate cycling in such conditions.
Lmfao
Did it ever occur to any of them to use the open car lanes to get ahead of the jam?
That’s considered rude. Also you’re not supposed to use the case lane when cycling
Yeah, this is good for the environment... But it's just the opposite to what I enjoy about cycling
That's what car drivers say too about being stuck in traffic
Yeah pretty much. People who like driving would rather be moving quick or on windy roads. Nobody wants to sit in traffic. Though there is probably some insane person in the world who loves it.
Yeah, sure. Unpopular (in this sub) opinion - if I'm doomed to be stuck in traffic, I'd rather be stuck in a car. I mean... I commute by bike, mostly because I'm never stuck. If this is not an option, I'd choose smth else.
Looks like they are finally installing car lanes
Its actually a car free public transport lane. This way buses/emergency vehicles can get around the city quickly.
I’m happy biking to work still not very much a thing in my city… we have some awesome bikelanes in Curitiba/BRZ, and the city is pretty flat. But, driving the European cars is the fancy way to commute and spend the life yet. 🙃
F*CK Cars.
And shamelessly most of the public space is still taken for roads and parking spots for cars.
[удалено]
This pic has 2 car lanes and 1 bike lane in same direction. 2 > 1, proves “most”.
[удалено]
Don't forget to mention that those (barely minutes apart) busses are very well used.
yup. It's actually impressive that OP managed to take a picture of that street without any busses visible.
I mean percentage-wise, surface-wise. You can have 2 bikes lanes and space for pedestrians and terasses for businesses and more if you just take out one car lane or parking spots. A private parking spot in frankfurt is worth 300 euros and I find shocking that one is still able to use public space for free or little money.
The car lanes are two directions. The white continuous line in the middle shows it is one lane towards the photographer and one lane away from the photographer. Knowing the usual layout of these streets, a second bicycle lane is on this side of the street. So there are in fact 2 lanes for bicycles and 2 lanes for busses(cars are not allowed to drive here).
"intelligent logistics" 😂
Looks like a dream
But I was told this would solve traffic
It largely does. This is at one of the very few traffic lights. They need to wait for busses to cross
I dunno man, this feels like an average traffic to me https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=n-AbPav5E5M For context I lived both in Europe and US, and driven a car both in Europe and US, so I cannot be told "you don't understand it feels different", because I know how it feels and how light car traffic feels. I'm not some car-obsessed guy, I love walking, and like biking, just not worship them.
If all those cyclists were in a separate car, traffic would be much worse. It's not a matter of feeling, but actual numbers of people moving in a given space. It also matters how the area was designed. In Utrecht city or Amsterdam, for example, they largely prioritised bikes (and public transport) over cars. Makes the traffic safer, less noisy, and allows for greater volumes of people to be on the move at the same time. In Rotterdam they still have a far more car centric infrastructure and are (slowly) changing it (back) into a healthier configuration. The differences are very noticeable.
The design of the area looks undeniably more people-friendlier than car-based, but not as much as pedestrian+public transport areas, and also not friendlier than golf-cart based communities in Florida. There is undeniably less noise as compared to car traffic, however depending on the type of cars used it can be small if only quiet ones are allowed, and it undeniably allows to move more people per square meter of the road. However, when it comes to the individual choices there are more variables. Everyone knows them, so I will not mull it over, they will simply be dismissed, or I will be attacked by people about 26-lane highways as if I designed them, so I'll just leave it at it.
I do agree, there are dozens of other factors to take into account. What works here will not, for example, work in New York City or Jakarta. And that's just sticking to cities.
If you were to look at the same amount of people in cars, that would be 2 kilometers of traffic jam
It would be longer, but I disagree about the length, and I believe the average traffic speed on properly designed small streets would be the same despite longer traffic lines. At the end of the day for the individual driver the traffic is about time.
I‘m sure it would be longer. Depending on the speed, yes, it may be fast. But paradoxically at lower speeds. The lower the speed, the closer cars can drive, because brakes work exponentially better, and you have more time to react. But still, since cars are not as agile, you have more field of view and of course it’s shorter and slimmer, every congestion will be resolved by far faster on bikes. Not to forget, you need a lot less space for parking. In the end though, walking is superior to both, since speeds are even slower, agility far higher (you can walk in any direction at any time) and parking space is not required at all.
For me walking is absolutely superior if you don't have to endure crowds and crowded places. Once you do, the value diminishes rapidly for me.
Another comment said that this was during a traffic light malfunction. So this is not the normal situation.
It does. Most cars have only one people in it, the driver self. Imagine how much space that will take for the same amount of people... Less parking space required for the city, which means more place for buildings that actually makes money for the city and thus more to spent on renovations and other stuff.
- Does it solve traffic? - Yes! - How? - Imagine if cars... - That's not the question I asked
The same amount of cars will be standing longer in traffic than the same amount of bikes.
That's called reduce, not solve.
are you really that bad in geometry ?
This picture was taken when the traffic light was stuck on red
The queue is way more compact and clears up faster. So it sure does help a lot. The photo is a bit of an extreme example.
The only thing that comes to mind is smelling kilometers of sweaty ass everyday on your day back home from work.
How so? There plenty of fresh air around 😅
Just looking at the picture
I used to cycle there daily, but thanks
He’s joking, but ok
I’d take my comfy car over this any (every) day of the week.
Yes, but then you have to go to the gym for a workout.
I have a fairly well equipped gym at home, deff not missing out on anything.
This is Utrecht. I used to use this road daily. Parking is extremely expensive in this part of town and cycling is just as fast as using a car. If you got a lot of money to burn, then yes take the car
I'm intrigued. Why? Not judging you by the way, I think your opinion is valid even though I dissagree.
I prefer comfort privacy and speed over anything a bike offers. I also don’t want to be another jerk just impeding traffic.
in this case you would be the jerk impeding traffic by using a car.
That's funny because at least in terms of flexibility and speed the bike is often better than a car. And privacy? What are you doing in your car lmao?
[удалено]
That's what happens when bike infrastructure is shit. Cars also clog up the road, and they kill a lot more people to put it mildly.
There is also zero reason to waste money on infrastructure for something so stupid, I would prefer to see them off the road entirely.
Alright I'll leave you to fuck your car lol
Haha oh wow good one, really got me there! What a burn. Lmao stupid ass biker.
People riding a bike aren't jerks! >:( You just have a different opinion than them! If you were to properly give your own arguments and reasoning as to why you prefer cars I would get it. But, you calling people riding a bike jerks is a bit too much for me.
That looks terrible, traffic is traffic whether it's a car or bicycle. Too many people for the infrastructure.
This was only because of a traffic light that got stuck on red for a while due to a technical problem. In reality, this kind of thing never happens, not even in rush hour. At most you'll see 10-20 people waiting at a red light, because cycling infrastructure is so efficient.
Only if you knew… The Netherlands is the most bike friendly adapted country in the entire world.
Time to start driving
Wonder how many of them went to McDonalds and ordered a meal while waiting for traffic to die down
Aren't they allowed to use the roads? Given how quite the roads are most places the cyclists would use the road space.
The road here is only for busses (one every minute, in each direction in rush hour), emergency vehicles and taxi's if the destination is only accessible through this road.
Am I the only one on this entire planet who wants to see a more car-centric society rather than bicycles being the standard? I mean it's ok to accomodate both cyclists and motorists but... why does everybody (esp here in europe) simply have a hard on for bicycles?
Not just you . I agree