Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

A common urban intersection in the Netherlands (2018)

bicycledutch.wordpress.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

201–210 of 339 posts

Re: A common urban intersection in the Netherlands (2018)

#201

Post by bb86754 »

snakeyjake wrote: post #195
isoprophlex wrote: post #131

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Having recently read "Amerikanen Lopen Niet" (Americans Don't Walk), the power dynamic you describe seems to be entirely real. Because a car is essential for economic survival in the USA, it's probably difficult for some to accept alternate realities from the status quo.

Americans will never walk. Where I live, today's high temperature is lower than the low temperature in Amsterdam. In August the average low temperature is higher than the average high temperature in Amsterdam. Nobody, not even the hardiest Dutchman is going to walk or cycle when it is 27C at midnight in the summer and 0C at the warmest in the winter with four months of "Amsterdam weather" sprinkled between summer and…

DC might not be the best comparison here as far as American cities go. I - and most people I know - walk around the city year round and I live on the top of a pretty steep hill.

Re: A common urban intersection in the Netherlands (2018)

#202

Post by potato3732842 »

isoprophlex wrote: post #96

It's the urban planning, but I'll point out that it's the requirements and responibilities put on the drivers as well. Driving lessons for me consisted for 80% of learning how to ALWAYS ALWAYS track all the cyclists and pedestrians in urban environments, how to approach an intersection and have complete visual on whatever the weaker parties might be doing. A very defensive "assume weird shit can happen any time, and…

Driver's ed in the US in any state with much urbanization to speak of is like that too (there's 50 states with 50 different curriculums with differing levels of specificity so generalizing is ill advised unless you're looking to intentionally mislead) unless perhaps one took it long ago or in somewhere so rural that other traffic wasn't relevant.

Re: A common urban intersection in the Netherlands (2018)

#203

Post by itronitron »

miggol wrote: post #149
itronitron wrote: post #55

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Can someone explain this, the italicized part below, in more detail? >> When you approach from the side street, as a driver, the order of dealing with other traffic is different, but the priority is similar. First you will notice a speed bump. The complete intersection is on a raised table. Pedestrians would not have priority if the street was level, but now that it isn’t the “exit construction” rule could apply and…

This is a part of the national design language of the roads in The Netherlands. Almost universally the following two rules hold: pedestrians walk on a raised pavement next to the road, and through roads have priority. To compliment those existing rules, exits from side streets where pedestrians on the through road have priority include a raised hump that brings motorists up to pavement level. That emphasizes that it…

Is there priority for the pedestrian if they are already crossing the side street when a car driving down the side street approaches the intersection, or can the pedestrian be run over by the car without consequence to the driver?

Re: A common urban intersection in the Netherlands (2018)

#204

Post by deivid »

snakeyjake wrote: post #195
isoprophlex wrote: post #131

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Having recently read "Amerikanen Lopen Niet" (Americans Don't Walk), the power dynamic you describe seems to be entirely real. Because a car is essential for economic survival in the USA, it's probably difficult for some to accept alternate realities from the status quo.

Americans will never walk. Where I live, today's high temperature is lower than the low temperature in Amsterdam. In August the average low temperature is higher than the average high temperature in Amsterdam. Nobody, not even the hardiest Dutchman is going to walk or cycle when it is 27C at midnight in the summer and 0C at the warmest in the winter with four months of "Amsterdam weather" sprinkled between summer and…

In Amsterdam, you usually don't cycle more than ~3km for a "normal destination" (groceries, a generic bar or cafe, stores) and in general, ~7km is the limit for "specific destinations" (going to bar X, ), above that, usually people take transport, though there are some that often cycle >50km

At 3km, anything but the most extreme weather/elevation can be tolerated, I've seen people cycling in what is effectively tornado weather (orange alerts -> 100+ km/h gusts of wind). As distances get larger, the tolerance for these factors diminishes significantly, are you sure it's not the distances that are the problem?

Re: A common urban intersection in the Netherlands (2018)

#205

Post by vanderZwan »

snakeyjake wrote: post #195
isoprophlex wrote: post #131

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Having recently read "Amerikanen Lopen Niet" (Americans Don't Walk), the power dynamic you describe seems to be entirely real. Because a car is essential for economic survival in the USA, it's probably difficult for some to accept alternate realities from the status quo.

Americans will never walk. Where I live, today's high temperature is lower than the low temperature in Amsterdam. In August the average low temperature is higher than the average high temperature in Amsterdam. Nobody, not even the hardiest Dutchman is going to walk or cycle when it is 27C at midnight in the summer and 0C at the warmest in the winter with four months of "Amsterdam weather" sprinkled between summer and…

A lot of Americans I know in real life (rightfully) complain that non-Americans treat their culture as if it's a homogeneous monolith, despite its enormous geographical and cultural diversity. So you have to excuse me for chuckling at blanket statements like "Americans will never walk"

Re: A common urban intersection in the Netherlands (2018)

#206

Post by lenlorijn »

m4rc3lv wrote: post #151

The problem in the Netherlands nowadays is not the interaction between motorists verus cyclists, but ebikes versus normal bikes. Lot of accidents happen on the bycicle roads

By far the largest amount of cyclist deaths and injury are still caused by cars. The ebikes just get more news coverage because they're novel. But cars are heavier and go faster so will almost always be more dangerous to other cyclists and pedestrians.

Re: A common urban intersection in the Netherlands (2018)

#207

Post by Hates_ »

ndsipa_pomu wrote: post #76

This design highlights a major failing with UK cycle "infrastructure". Here, we often have shared use pavements with sometimes a bit of white paint to designate the pedestrian and cycle lanes, but they cede priority at every single side road. The problem is that it makes cycling using them really awkward as it takes significant energy for cyclists to slow down and then speed up multiple times. The irony is that if yo…

I was pleasantly surprised to find one of the major London cycle lanes that goes from Tower Bridge to Greenwich gives priority to cyclists crossing side roads https://maps.app.goo.gl/b3SweRqzvNehTcE38

Re: A common urban intersection in the Netherlands (2018)

#208

Post by mp05 »

globular-toast wrote: post #147
ndsipa_pomu wrote: post #76

This design highlights a major failing with UK cycle "infrastructure". Here, we often have shared use pavements with sometimes a bit of white paint to designate the pedestrian and cycle lanes, but they cede priority at every single side road. The problem is that it makes cycling using them really awkward as it takes significant energy for cyclists to slow down and then speed up multiple times. The irony is that if yo…

The problem in the UK is a deep cultural one. First we have to understand that, all things being equal, cars "win" by default on the roads. They are bigger, heavier, faster and more powerful (thanks to burning fossil fuels), and the operators are more reckless and inconsiderate due to being shielded from the outside world. That means their presence on the roads automatically makes it more dangerous and unpleasant for…

> They are bigger, heavier, faster and more powerful (thanks to burning fossil fuels)

Or perhaps thanks to a DC motor and a battery? Not sure exactly why you’re singling out ICEs in this point you’re making. Would be curious to know if there is some particular reason? I’d argue EVs are more powerful on average, if not the staggering majority of cases.

Re: A common urban intersection in the Netherlands (2018)

#209

Post by holoduke »

Neonlicht wrote: post #187
globular-toast wrote: post #147

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The problem in the UK is a deep cultural one. First we have to understand that, all things being equal, cars "win" by default on the roads. They are bigger, heavier, faster and more powerful (thanks to burning fossil fuels), and the operators are more reckless and inconsiderate due to being shielded from the outside world. That means their presence on the roads automatically makes it more dangerous and unpleasant for…

What makes the Netherlands special is not the bike paths. Its the law. When there is an accident between a car and a bike it is always the fault of the car. Its the driver who gets the insurance claim no questions asked. Cyclists get special protection. This is not something other countries can adapt because it requires a deep moral shift.

Thats absoluyely not true. There is the so called principle of dual causality. If you hit a car you might have to pay 50% depending on situation. If its clearly the biker its still 0% for the car.

Re: A common urban intersection in the Netherlands (2018)

#210

Post by ndsipa_pomu »

mp05 wrote: post #208
globular-toast wrote: post #147

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The problem in the UK is a deep cultural one. First we have to understand that, all things being equal, cars "win" by default on the roads. They are bigger, heavier, faster and more powerful (thanks to burning fossil fuels), and the operators are more reckless and inconsiderate due to being shielded from the outside world. That means their presence on the roads automatically makes it more dangerous and unpleasant for…

> They are bigger, heavier, faster and more powerful (thanks to burning fossil fuels) Or perhaps thanks to a DC motor and a battery? Not sure exactly why you’re singling out ICEs in this point you’re making. Would be curious to know if there is some particular reason? I’d argue EVs are more powerful on average, if not the staggering majority of cases.

Probably something about the worldwide climate catastrophe caused by humanity continuing to burn fossil fuels at an ever increasing rate.
Post reply on HN