Just to compare, this is the utopian dream for Toronto:
There are approx. 18 cars and trucks in that image.
They are taking up SIGNIFICANTLY more space, and are causing traffic.
Still, we keep saying, “give us more of this, please!”.
Insanity or stupidity?
Unpopular opinion: getting rid of cars is good, but if you’ve ever been to the streets of Amsterdam, it’s a bike nightmare.
Streets are generally narrow, so bikers form a neverending swarm and barely regard the pedestrians. From a bikers’ perspective, you’re constantly riding in a flow, so you can’t really afford to stop or turn over for a break.
Amsterdam should either figure out how to manage that flow, or expand the public transportation like buses and trams - which are really the most compact ways to drive people around.
Having cyclists all around comes with all sorts of unwritten rules, people need to get used to it for it to function properly. Amsterdam has a lot of tourist that aren’t used to the bicycle-culture, don’t know the unwritten rules, and at the same time to local populace expects them to, so that causes problems. You’ll notice that other dutch cities like Utrecht and Groningen have it figured out much better, have a far smoother experience, but perhaps have it easier because there are less tourists.
Fair!
As a person who regularly cycles through Amsterdam (even the centre), the issus is tourist pedestrians. The city does a bare minimum to cater for these travellers, because most of the visits are temporal.
As a cyclist and/or pedestrian, I am never frustrated by locals cycling or walking.
The rule is “its harder for a cyclist to stop than a pedestrian, so be predictable with where you are going and we’ll all avoid an accident”.
The flow people you walk about is a problem for travellers, not for locals.
Might be true - I haven’t been there for long enough to adapt. But in the hindsight it often felt like this rule was taken into an absolute where you might have to wait a solid minute to then swiftly run through the crossing, hoping you won’t be run over. And it’s way worse in the city center, yeah.
As a visitor, you very quickly learn to look out for bikes. They’re nearly silent and they’re everywhere. Look before you step into a bike lane or it’s going to end in tears. The problem is that, later in the evening, the tourists have some weed and a few trippels, then they’re back out on the streets again, with no remaining situational awareness.
Amsterdammers hate public transport.
I had an English friend who learned to bicycle. It opens the city up in ways that are not possible with even great public transport.
For example, the Vondelpark goes roughly east/west for some distance. Crossing that north/south by bicycle takes a few minutes. Crossing by public transport means going around it, basically.
Some cyclists ignore lights and crosswalks, like some pedestrians. But overall it basically works. Just look left and right before stepping into a street and you’ll probably be fine.
Sounds like poor planning and issues of a relatively old city. On the other hand, same is the issue with bicycles, so, yeah.
You’re never going to get public transport to every street corner. It can always be better, but honestly having big sections of green without streets running through them is a good idea, not something to plan away…
And how would that nightmare be if everyone was in a car?
Amsterdam doesn’t have much of a bicycle issue, really.
No better, indeed. Just pointing out that there are current issues with the way it’s organized, so there is a lot of room for improvement and it shouldn’t be seen as a perfect bike utopia it’s often posed as.
If you ask me, Scandinavian countries often have a better thought out bike infrastructure, with plenty of separate bike lanes that are planned in a way as to allow bikers and pedestrians to easily coexist and have plenty of space.
Scandi cities are far lower-density than Dutch cities.