The real difference: when people noticed in the 1970s that cars were killing children in distressing numbers, the Dutch decided to design safer streets. North Americans decided to keep kids home instead.
The key point is that it starts with mindset, not with bike lanes. People wanted safe streets. Politicians learned that they had to oppose large financial interests to avoid being voted out. So policies started to focus on street safety. The *result* of that was changing attitudes of law enforcement, road engineers, etc, and that eventually led to regulations and infrastructure that benefitted walking, cycling, and public transport. A side effect, btw, is fewer cars needed, and thus a less stressful driving experience. The bike lanes are not the cause, they are the effect.
@@wfkonynenberg5242 That might be dangerous in your country,but not in the Netherlands!They have bin riding their bikes for a long time already.You could almost say that they are born on a bike.And everything for bikes are a whole lot better than in your country.
Of course Dutch-style city and infrastructure planning could work everywhere. As this video points out, the Netherlands went down the path of car dependence, too, but we managed to fix that. A point the Not Just Bikes channel has made repeatedly is: the Netherlands did not get from being in car hell to its present state overnight, it got there through incremental improvements over the course of decades. If the commitment is there, anything is achievable, just don't expect to be able to achieve everything within a couple of years. The big obstacle in America is the lack of commitment. There are still far too many people who think car dependency is a good thing. (Minor nitpick: At 0:22 522 persons per *square* kilometer, please)
The difference is the Netherlands makes new rules to bike infrastructure so the next time The streets are repaved they get the better infrastructure Meanwhile in America it's one at a time and each one is a battle to be built in the first place and then new politicians get voted in and it gets reversed.
@@matthewboyd8689 The latest trick is that they got rid of most of the detailed technical rules and replaced them with "the party responsible for the street may be held liable for damage if an accident was in part due to the street not being up to best current practice for street safety". You'ld be amazed how effective such financial incentive is in ensuring that everyone keeps their streets aligned with international best practices for safety (for all street users, not just the car drivers)...
@@wfkonynenberg5242 It's really impressive how much incentives can help. Make the cities responsible for the safety of their residents, as they should be, and they can either strive to improve in a multitude of different ways, or go bankrupt with no state bailout.
@@pbilk the interesting question then is: is it good, safe, infrastructure? I have seen enough examples in North America where either a) the engineers weren't interested in doing a good job or b) the engineers knowingly made it unnecessarily unsafe or c) the engineers were forced by regulations to make it unsafe.
Bigger (non-Dutch) cities in North-Western Europe just show what’s possible for North America. I just hope to see more people realizing that more than what we see now!
Its fine to compare with dutch cities there are only about 15 cities in the states bigger population than amsterdam they are exceptions not the rule. And even these biggest cities are so wide they in many ways can be compared to the dutch 'randstad'.
@@dutchbicyclerides-ss1ko Yes, but the Dutch density is on another level compared to the rest of Europe, the biggest cities excluded. But you are right too.
@@dezwollenaartjes the end point I guess is that the states and Canada have many places that are not far of average Dutch cities not all but probably 70% using the exceptions why it’s not possible is too easy. In some ways many avg size European cities are harder because of how old age/room
@@dutchbicyclerides-ss1ko I think only Almere and Lelystad would be comparable like that, too be honest. The rest of the cities are all old, though. Only these two were built in the Flevopolder, so a lot later, and could definitely serve as an example for NA, I think.
What always amazes me about these N-american councils and NIMBYs is that they're perfectly fine with designing streets that completely discriminate against a whole group of road users (cyclists) and completely exclude them, and are in many cases even fine with discriminating against and excluding pedestrians as well. It's insane that this is the norm there. And then especially considering investment in bike lanes and pedestrian infrastructure is relatively low cost, and maintenance is extremely low, and the return on investment is quite high, it's even more insane this is the norm there. There are bike paths in my city that handle thousands of bikes every day, that are in almost as good a condition as when they were built 25y ago. Meanwhile every road that handles thousands of cars every day built 25y ago is either full of potholes, has been repaired multiple times, or has been resurfaced at least once since. Building safe bike and pedestrian infrastructure is a win-win for every city no matter where it is. Then again, we've still got resistance by car addicts here too, even though the evidence it works is all around us.
I think they irony of it is they often talk about we need to be protective of children and seniors but because their decisions children can't really bike safely and seniors who can't drive or for health reasons or they enjoy biking can't fully do it because there's not a safe way for them to do so.
I think it's also incredible that the US is so far ahead the rest of the world with ADA, and has been for quite a while now, but you still need a car to get anywhere. In the Netherlands people use all kinds of mobility helps, but you might still encounter stairs or high kerbs making it difficult to reach your destination.
Totally agree! It’s crazy how overlooked bike lanes and pedestrian paths are, especially since they’re so beneficial and cost-effective. It's awesome to see places where it's done right. Hope more cities catch on soon! Especially mine (Toronto)..
As an American living in Amsterdam, the things stopping America from making Dutch style improvements are purely mental - desire, will, politics, education of urbanism/transit/etc, and truer understanding of what cities can be. This isn't to discount some of the concerns and criticisms nor is it to say that Amsterdam is 'purely' better (and thus American cities are purely worse). Rather, when someone talks about distance and size, for instance, it merely needs a better context and framing and understanding. Getting from Amsterdam to Delft, for instance, will take about 50 minutes plus a little bit of extra time to get from door to station and vice versa. On the surface, I can see Americans getting shocked that it takes an hour. However, the suburb of Boston I grew up in is about the same distance... and takes the same amount of time to get to Boston from. The difference is that getting to the nearest train station is a 15 minute drive with no option for bus, tram, metro, or bike. If we think of American suburbs as towns and villages, the distance argument kinda... doesn't make any sense any more because we can still point to small towns in the Netherlands that are well connected to transit, that are still designed for people, and ALSO still very much suburban, semi-rural, or rural.
What I can't wrap my head around is why the Americans simply don't relinquish their zoning laws regarding separating residence and commerce. That would enable mixed development projects. It seems to me that letting the free market take care of what goes where is the most American thing to do.
I think the big difference is that we Dutch go to school at 5 years old and a lot of us do this on our own. I walked or bicycled to school on my own and that gives us an early feeling of independence , that experience carries in to adult life. I've never felt unsafe in traffic and I'm from the 60's.
Kindergarten in the USA usually starts at 5 years old. We have dedicated school buses that take children to school. Only children in 1 mile of a school have to walk. The rest get road transport. My home is 3.5 miles away from our schools, which are all grouped together. My city is 25 square miles. My home is on one edge of my city. Many homes in my suburban city are even further away from the schools than mine is. Despite that, my home is actually closer to the schools in our neighboring suburban city, but since we aren't citizens of that city, our kids are forbidden from using those schools. Even if you lived right next to a neighboring city's school, but didn't belong to that city because the city's border ended at your property, you would still not be allowed to utilize that school. The same goes for county school systems, too. These are public-funded government schools. Those rules don't apply to private schools, which you pay for and don't have as much government oversight.
All comes down to zoning, every city in the Netherlands consists of multiple suburbs and each suburb has all primary functions for daily shopping, medical and work. only industrial isn't allowed, but small business and commercial businesses are allowed, as long its not polluting (air and noise). with this "Dutch Zoning" most daily activities are reachable by bike and foot.
Many of the cities, like mine, in the USA are suburban cities. We have shopping, medical, small businesses and commercial enterprises, as well as industrial. Most of the populace of these suburban cities commute daily to larger cities for work. Suburbs don't have enough jobs to keep its people from having to travel elsewhere to earn a living. Also, many two adult households have the adults commuting in two different directions. Generally, we choose a location between the jobs to settle. Since jobs may be located in two different major cities, the place to settle is a suburb, or exurb, between them. Cities in the USA, even within a single State, can be many driving hours away from one another. The people in my suburban city tend to commute to one or the other of two major cities in my State. Those cities are approximately 1 1/2 hours away or 90 miles (1mile per driving minute) from each other. My suburban city is located between them. It takes me about 30 minutes driving to get to one of them and about just over an hour to get to the other since my city is almost exactly between them.
@@laurie7689 On a smaller scale we in the Netherlands had the same problem. We built suburbs some 20 km from the central city. After 20 years, the communities in these suburbs said, we want as many jobs here as there are adult inhabitants. Again 20 years later, that was achieved. But still (exxagerated) half of the people left the city every morning and an equal amount of people entered the city every morning for work. Now, with another generation you see that it stabilizes and people start to work more at home or within the city they live. Now, 25% leaves the city or comes to it every day for work. It is a slow, slow process.
@@ronaldderooij1774 Yes, there are calls here for more remote work by employers, BUT they are forcing employees back into the centralized offices instead at the risk of firing employees if they don't comply.
It's entirely a mentality problem for Americans. They are unwilling to make positive change. I believe that old cities that have been in decline for a while are the best candidates for walkable regeneration. Baltimore has kept most of the historic centre intact, so the structure is there to transform streets with bike lanes. It's so cheap to make improvements, so they might as well.
i live in baltimore, and i really hope we can become the poster child for a dutch reform in america. we just recently got a light rail expansion, and i hope that puts us in the right path
American cities are becoming more walkable, Delaware just passed an anti stroad law, Milwaukee is building more bike lanes to reduce traffic, Anchorage and Austin just banned off street parking.
Not only are Americans completely unwilling to make positive changes, they are even more unwilling to do so when it's a change that isn't invented in their own country. They're so damn nationalistic and stubborn that it will ruin them at one point. Especially with the two party system, and _especially_ with the constant ripping up of everything the previous president did, they're just not getting anywhere. Some cities are making steps in the right direction currently, but I have a feeling that they're just one election away, either local or federal, from getting all the progress ripped away again.
As a Dutchie. The North American who are made tons of videos how well organised the Netherlands is with all its bikelanes, trains ride like metro. Guys "the Netherlands" is more than "de Randstad (Amsterdam, Utrecht, Rotterdam) and surrounding smaller cities and villages. Just take a look at all provinces. There's so much more to explore. Yes I know there's a lot of work in the afformentioned cities and what not. Grab or steel a bike in A'dam and do a NL tour as a whole. Love to see a video of that. Would be great!
People often forget that we had the same mindset as Americans 6 decades ago and it took us 5 decades of protests riots and straight up revolts before we we got rid of it America can do it but they got a long road ahead if them if they truly want too
The big cities in the USA may want to, but the rest of us here don't need to, so there is no desire. The more people a place has, the more it needs to do with little space. Places with low density have plenty of space and just spread out. There is no fight for space.
Also, for those resisting this, know how sales for small shops in cities go up with bikes. Compare biking a shopping street with driving. On a bike you can see much better what's on offer and more easily stop on impulse, then with a car. Parking is already a hindrance. Then notice in the Netherland clips above how many people are outside in bars and cafés? Walking and meeting others. Having a life. We work to live. Anglo Saxon culture thinks, advertises, propagandises you live to work. But for whom? For what?
The main point is that it starts with money. In the 1950s and 1960s, Dutch cities wanted to become like American cities, but discovered they could not afford it. The biggest cities came a long way, but the others almost went bankrupt after building a few wide bridges. Since the Netherlands had already built a good network of highways between 1925 and 1945, which ran outside the cities, the cities could not use money meant for highway construction either. Local politicians were pretty desperate in the late 1960s, but then the bicycle lobby came up with a plan that would be affordable. The local politicians didn't want to admit that they were listening to those cycling anarchists, so they said it was because of the children. Then came the oil crisis in the 1970s and over time, it turned out that building for people not cars just works.
I don't think the Netherlands was referred to as a city even once in the video, although it is definitely the same size as and shares many characteristics with many metropolitan areas in the United States and Canada. Which is the entire point of the video.
The Netherlands is a sort of city-state. You can easily commute from one side of the country to the other. But, as a city-state, they can self-organize without having a State or Federal level to deal with. And this made transitioning away from cars way much easier.
I think one of the biggest differences is transportation is view from a convenience perspective to get you from point A to B . Outside of North America ( excluding the Canadian province of Quebec and Mexico) transportation discussions often think about lifestyle and incorporate the most vulnerable members of society like children. Having the ability of young people and seniors having the freedom to go to their places like school and stores by walking or biking changes the perspective of a person in their latter years. The hold " license things " in North America use to be seen as a right or passage. Zoning is so outdated as well car, single detach homes and big box stores take priority over everything else.
Boulder, CO is very much NOT flat, but is one of the most bicycle friendly cities in the US. Hills are not a valid excuse. As you've said, the main obstacles are political will and corruption, and public misconception.
@@MissMoontree don’t forget franchise auto dealer owners, developers and land speculators. They usually have the most influence at the local level while the oil lobby influences the states and congress. Our mayor received $200,000 from the California Association of Realtors, a major California developer lobby. Kinda hard to push politicians to change with that kind of cash flowing into their pockets.
If the Dutch had waited for the infrastructure to take the bicycle they wouldn't have got it. Govenment didn't make this happen, it followed. It followed well, with long term foresight and integrated plans, but it was forced and it was a close call. Government was successful because it stopped forcing car culture onto the people top down.
But is was forced (also) as a result of the protests of 'Stop de IKindermoord. (Stop the child murder). Among other protests. Luckily there was the oil crisis in 1973, at the right moment that helped to make the beginning of the change.
In North America, bike lanes aren't understood because of conservatism. Compared to The Netherlands, the USA is extremely conservative. Car is king, the zoning system in cities doesn't help and nobody wants change. Here in NL, we also don't want to change, but we dare to experiment with new things. A lot of road infrastructure you see in The Netherlands has come a very long way, and many mistakes have been made in the past. We have been putting through changes (with ups and downs) to infrastructure for 40-50 years, while the US has only been holding back changes, and still does so.
at 5:21, where you encircled the area in the netherlands, assuming 4 people per unit, that comes out to around 2000 people in that square. Compared to what is shown for Toronto, that is only 80 people in that square.
Make the people that are responsible for a road also responsible for the health of the people on it AND the people that life around it. That is one rule in The Netherlands.
One interesting detail is that in the 50's, the Dutch hired American urban planners to design their cities. These urban planners came up with cities filled with motorways. That's the urban sprawl hangover that took decades to recover from.
This video is severely hampered by the extreme vocal fry. I couldn't get through the first few minutes of it. Why are you all but whispering while narrating the voiceover? PROJECT for crying out loud.
America can change but it has to want that change to happen. It means densifying urban areas and another mindset when thinking about living. It can happen
Most of the USA is NOT urban, but suburban and rural. Those of us in the suburbs DON'T want our place to be densified and urban. The urban areas can densify all they want to, so long as they leave the suburban and rural areas out of it.
It's funny how you opted to compare the netherlands to an american city because when I first started existing in online spaces with europeans and would talk about America I told them to think of American states as countries instead to get slightly more in line with the scaling.
They're called states for a reason. The Netherlands is a state, too, as is Japan, Germany, the UK, and Canada, and the US as a whole. The difference is that individual American states don't have full sovereignty on all matters, but for anything on the scale of a city and bicycle infrastructure, they absolutely do.
It is this mindset 'in the olden days everything was better' that is wrong. And yes, I belong to the same group as 'not in my backyard', the problem is exactly that group. America decided to build roads for cars because it could. Not because it was smart. Strong Towns tells you how that happened, and the only reason why it is still happening is, sorry to say, a lack of social awareness. Nimby's ef up, first be segregation, now by 'we are right'. They are wrong, but you can't get them out of there cars, and those without a mass behind them striving for change are bound to lose. Your problem isn't the will to change, it is 'the system' that is wrong.
Whats funny is that you said it’s one of the densest cities in the world. Though it’s not a city, the whole country (especially the west) is so well connected that it might as well be one big city!
@@simdal3088 No we're not, the housing shortage is a global problem, so the cause must be global, not local. I'd say the increasing wealth gap is the cause, when rich people buy all the homes as investment vehicles, house prices will go up. And the rich control local government (Don't believe me? Look at what size of houses are being built in your gemeente) so new housing projects are slowed down as much as possible. And nimbys sure don't help either.
It’s definitely a difference in approach and culture. What these Canadian/American politicians were saying about ending bike lanes: that would be political suicide in the Netherlands.
European cyclist (French) here. There are three major issues with your argument regarding the weather. 1. On snowy days, according to your chart, for the years 2016 and 2018, there is a difference of nearly one month. Going from a few days to almost one and a half months of snow cover starts to become significant enough to invalidate the use of the bike as a primary mode of daily transportation. 2. You are completely silent on the amount of snowfall. In Europe, over the last 20-30 years, when it snows, it doesn't exceed a few centimeters, 10-15 at most. In Canada, in cities like Toronto, it's much more. As your images show, North American cities are equipped with snowplows. This type of equipment is extremely rare in Europe. The use of such equipment has heavy consequences on road wear. This is very evident in Montreal, where the passage of snowplows leads to severe road deterioration, creating many potholes that are extremely dangerous when cycling. 3. You are completely silent on the question of temperatures. Average winter temperatures in Amsterdam do not drop below 1°C. In Toronto, it's around -8°C. Furthermore, there are many extremely cold days in Toronto, with temperatures frequently dropping below -20°C. This happens every year. By comparison, temperature records over the last 70 years have never reached -20°C in Amsterdam. All this to say that winters in North America are much more extreme than in Western Europe, and this is a real barrier to the development of cycling as a daily mode of transportation, preventing the development of effective public policies around cycling.
The challenge for Americans, primarily, is that 1) we have a large country with massive differences between regions, and yet 2) we want everything to be a one-size-fits-all approach.
I like to think that my home state of Florida is doing a slightly better job lately with building road infrastructure that accommodates all road users after years of being the poster child of having the deadliest roads and some of the worst urban planning in the country where it is practically impossible to live without a car. My experiences are largely in Central FL and the municipalities here have been working together to create a working bicycle trail network across the region. It's decades away from being fully realized and there are still large gaps to complete but I can happily report there are more places I can reach on bike than there was 10-15 years ago when the municipalities here finally started getting serious about bicycle infrastructure. Quite a lot of people use the trails too. There's really no excuses to not building bike infrastructure. Florida is flat like the Netherlands and has better weather year round - however the summer heat and humidity is brutal here, not to mention the frequent downpours this time of year but with proper preparation, it's feasible to get around here by bike.
Weather + wind (what we call the dutch mountain) are probably a more than good balance for most cities with hills. And ebikes help also in the netherland for this. Its indeed time and the will to change in some ways given the space and size (in area) for many usa/canada cities this means much can be done on that level and also means it has to be ground up city by city and sadly most likely by political sides. Places can lead by example even in the netherlands not all cities are the same. Much of the 'completeness' of the dutch bicycle network is between cities/villages/nature and that is less needed (or less possible) in much bigger countries and would be more between city cores and suburbs but again thats under local control. I admit i am a outsider but it looks to me if you can build political will locally it can be done place by place since the state or country level is impossible and not needed for a few decades.
Key difference is that in North America, particularly in the US, sustainable transport solutions have been politicised, while in the Netherlands, they're seen from a utilitarian lens, simply as the name implies - transport solutions, and nothing else. Dutch pragmatism at its finest.
Interesting point about the pragmatic approach within the Netherlands. It's certainly disheartening to witness transit projects falter with each change in political leadership…
amsterdam itself is not even a good representation of how our Bike roads look like or how it should look like. for that you have to go to Utrecht. buty for some reason you all think that amsterdam is the only city in the Netherlands. they have among the worst designed bike infrastructure of the Netherlands. places like Utrecht Groningen and other cities have it way better.
You discussed rain, hills, snow but you intentionally over looked temperature. Your inconsistent in your comparisons. One moment your comparing city to city, then cities to countries. You completely ignore, culture.
Never mind that the innercity Amsterdam is very different from the rest of the Netherlands. Just go to Breda Central Station and it is just like America minus the people.
One thing that’s wrong so far watching this, you’re comparing trip distance from cities to an entire country. Most people still drive in the Netherlands, and when we do, we go to different cities, making the trip distance much greater on average. You have to compare it city per city. Another thing that’s quite off. When it snows in the Netherlands, the snow is gone by afternoon, Toronto might only get double the amount of days of snow, but in much greater quantities, and don’t forget how there are only so many days in winter. The two are absolutely not comparable. There are a bunch of reasons why cycling doesn’t really work in North American with the exception of a few area’s. Weather, density and terrain are just a few of those, and just because one factor is not relevant, doesn’t mean others aren’t. They must all align to create a place that even has the possibility to be bikable. Once you have those, then you can add the infrastructure to accommodate it. Plopping down bike lines everywhere just for the sake of it is also useless and a waste if no one will use it. The Netherlands has the perfect combination to accommodate cycling. There are places in North America where biking is certainly feasible, such as Boston, downtown Toronto (in summer), nyc, LA (flat areas), and Chicago as well in the summer. But that’s the issue, it will never be as convenient all year and everywhere in the city as outside of the downtown and inner cities the cities are just not dense enough. In the Netherlands the suburbs are dense because they have to be, because we are literally completely packed inside these tiny borders. Even the farmland is extremely dense with many farmers having to go out of business. There are more farmers than available farmland. As a result everything must be built dense which makes it bikable. North America has quite literally too much land so no wonder they build low density. Why not get a huge mansion in north america than a small row house in dutch suburbs for the same amount of money.
Winter weather is not an issue. Bike use rates are high even in cities that do have lots of snow accumulation, like Stockholm or Oulu. You just have to commit to plowing sidewalks and bike paths the way you plow streets. Terrain is rarely that much of an issue for short trips, and ebikes are making it even less of an issue. Yeah, the Dutch have an advantage in flatness, but somewhat hilly cities have high bike use too. Density isn't an issue until you get to outright rural areas. A good walkable neighborhood has 10,000 people/km2; someone on a bike could access just as many people, in the same time, at only 1000 people/km2. The real problems are how it's laid out in the US: cul-de-sacs and wide separation of housing and other destinations... and, of course, safety. But that's a choice. And you know? Low-density suburbs have _plenty of room_ for bike paths or simply wide sidewalks. They have no excuse.
@@mindstalk winter weather yes is an extra commitment, and again every extra commitment stacks up against making a place less bike-friendly. I live in arguably one of the hilliest places in the Netherlands, Nijmegen, and yes people bike, ofc but there isn’t any place in the Netherlands which you would really consider hilly or mountainous like many other cities. I agree connectivity between cul de sac neighborhood can be massively improved, and indeed there is plenty of space for bike lanes. My point was that there is no reason to build 10.000/sq km neighborhoods in the suburbs when there is no demand for it. And while it should definitely be more accessible to bike in the suburbs, a true bike culture like you see in the Netherlands is simply not attainable when you have low density, really hot or really cold weather. I’m not arguing against the use of bikes, but saying how there are a dozen factors which all add up against a bike culture, and why other european countries can’t catch up with Dutch cycling culture either as only the Netherlands has all of the perfect conditions. Yes it gets a little snow and rains but these are extremely mild compared to other places. Good example is Spain for example, which has a lot of terrain features, is extremely hot, as a result, Spanish cities focus mainly on walking and public transit, and not biking. The Netherlands also just has ideal cityscape for biking. The entire country basically acts like one big city with cities being relatively small and density clustered making cities close to one another even allowing you to bike from one town to another. Other places in the world just don’t have that, and especially in North America, cities are just so insanely far spread. All factors just allow for a low demand in biking in North America (also in urban places)
This is a decent video but, 30 seconds in and you're already wrong like three times. Amsterdam pop. density is about 5,000 people per sq/km. "522 persons / km" doesn't makes sense. It's an area measurement. Second what do you mean by infrastructure nowhere else in the world? Copenhagen, Paris, Singapore, Montreal... they all have good bike systems since that's what you are focusing on. Then I also don't understand what you mean it doesn't look like anywhere in North American, then just show row buildings. Yes the architecture is unique but the form isn't. New York, Boston, Philly, Toronto, Montreal etc. I continued and you're wrong about the average commute distance too. Where are you getting your stats? It's otherwise a good video, overall I think you're correct that the issue we have here is a political one, but it's undercut by all the small errors you make at the beginning. Also comparing Amsterdam to Penticton is iffy, why not compare it to like London, Ontario or Winnipeg, Hamilton etc.? They're closer in area and pop.
Well I disagree wit that. And I live in the Netherlands and my main means of transport is my bycicle. The Netherlands is very small and densly populated. Both are required to have a good national bycicle infrastructure. The longest route you can make here is from Groningen to Maastricht. Which is around 330-350KM. (around 17 hours by bike) Now take a similar route from Miami to Seatle. Which is 5 306 km (around 13 days by bike). So going across country by bike is difficult but feasible in the Netherlands, to nearly impossible in the US. And even going from city to city the distance is a lot shorter in the Netherlands. Here basically everything lines up for it being nearly perfect. This is why other smaller countries are decently good at bike infrastructure. For example Belgium and Denmark. However within cities you are correct. And it would be smart for all cities to go for a livable design.
@@SanderEversNobody cycles from Groningen to Maastricht as transport...that's why there are cars or trains. If someone does that, it is purely for recreation/fun. Your last sentence states what cycling-infrastructure as transport is ment for; within buildup areas.
@@SanderEvers Nobody bikes from Groningen to Maastricht, that is what trains are for. Distance between cities doesn't matter, commute distance is what matters and the Dutch commute longer distances so that definitely is not an excuse. Cost isn't an excuse, because cycling infrastructure is cheaper than car infrastructure. Safety isn't an excuse, because bicycles cause less deaths than cars. Weather isn't an excuse because the weather in the Netherlands is atrocious. Elevation changes are only relevant if your commute distances are comparable or larger. They aren't. Not even close. So that isn't an excuse either. The pleasure of driving isn't an excuse, because with less heavy traffic driving is more pleasurable and takes less time.
Florida is flatter than The Netherlands. It is also swamp country similar to The Netherlands, but with nicer weather. It would be an ideal experiment to start here with cycling infrastructure the Dutch way.
@@RealConstructor Yes I agree, I'm from Florida and there has been movement here in building out better bike infrastructure. Florida has the right variables to experiment with, there's so much space that most roads can handle bike lanes or dedicated off-street path/trails. Every year I'm seeing more and more people on bikes both traditional and electric, and a number of other small personal transport vehicles - they need space too. There's also untapped demographics here that would pick up cycling more easily - particularly tourists and the elderly, it's just a matter of building out the the infrastructure for them and they will use it.
If you want cycling to become the norm, you first have to make it normal. Cycling in the US is seen as a thing for fitness freaks with helmets and spandex shirts and 21 gear racing bikes, shouting at all cars and sweating while they boast of their endeavours. Look mate, we hate those too, here in the NL. The midlife crisists. ‘Normal’ is a guy in his workclothes, commuting on a Granny bike that’s about as old as granny herself. A mother with a bakfiets bringing the kids to daycare. Or the other way round of course. Normal is not having special equipment. As long as even cyclists themselves think of themselves as special, it ain’t happening. That’s why it worked here. Average Joe and Jane were the ones demanding the change.
You make it normal by making it safe to bike. (Or by people not being able to afford to drive, but that's not an option now.) North Americans aren't going to bike and then demand infrastructure, they'll bike when there's good infrastructure (mostly meaning separation from fast cars, whether by protected bike paths or wide sidewalks or by physically slow shared streets.)
@@mindstalk It also really helps if there are destinations nearby, so you need zoning that allows stores, bars, schools, churches, and other destinations within a couple miles of each home. If people can see the church and school from their house but they can't get there without a car because they have to cross a highway, then they will start demanding walking and cycling infrastructure.
@@bramvanduijn8086 Where I live in the USA, it is illegal to have bars near schools and churches. The sin shops (as they are referred to) have to be kept at a distance and preferably less visible. Tobacco shops and adult book stores also fall into that category.
The average commute distance in Boston is 10 MILES not km. And Boston has one of the most compact commutes in North America. Sorry to be a hater but the whole basis for your argument is a fraud.
You want ot start with making some laws that protect bikers (bicyclers) instead of what you currently have. Now it's "roadwarrior"protection instead of protecting vulnerable travellers
Kind of a straw man argument to take Amsterdam as the average Dutch. Amsterdam in the Netherlands is often named as an exception. Commutes also take place on a metropolitan or regional level, where bikes play a role but there are not many people biking 22 km. The video doesn’t explicitly say so, but it does imply it. I know data is hard especially making a reasoning about cities, since they are so complex. But I think if you got other people on board with the video that have an expertise insight on the topic, there could be an even better video.
People keep saying bike friendly cities are great. Yeah for bikers not drivers. Im a new driver in the Netherlands and bikes on the roads are the cause of 100% of my road stress and road rage....
U can can call this message rude or what...If u wont change lazyness, then u cant do all. Its all about changing ur mindset. if people in the u.s or canada still take a car for a 100 meter/300 foot walk then nothing change or even for a 200 meter 300 foot walk take a bike then nothing change. Also ur city planning sucks because its build for cars only! If there are no side walks or any like that ...nothing changes. Sorry but u can call me rude but i am dutch and if u cant look in a mirror ....sorry for u then.
My last suburban neighborhood had sidewalks. We never used them, ourselves, and I never saw anybody else using them. My current suburban neighborhood doesn't have sidewalks. I see people on the roads, walking and jogging. It all depends on the people in an area. The problem is that people move around to other neighborhoods every so many years. We don't stay in any place long enough anymore to develop a culture.
When it comes to roads and stuff also means we pay alot of taxes and lots of it goes to street design...i mean yeah..nice :P When it comes to taxes Netherlands aint cheap.
"Surprisingly the Netherlands does get snow"??? My dude. We are over 50 degrees north. Thats the same latitude as Newfoundland. Whats surprising is that our winters arent as brutal as one would expect. Also, the Netherlands isnt a city. There is more to the country than urban sprawl. Most the country is farmland and water. Cities only take up like 10% of the land area. Please do some more research before making a video.
Stockholm is the place if you want to smash NA arguments. All the statistics they give you for why you can't bike in NA are worse in Stockholm and somehow biking works there.
@@acchaladka they probably mean like worse weather (it's pretty cold and wet there), more hills, that and the large amount of waterways spread the city out more
Or take a look at Oulu in Finland, which has declared itself the unofficial capital of year-round cycling. They have built themselves an extensive well connected network of bicycle and foot paths, which in wintertime is kept available for safe biking and walking. Though maybe not comparable in size or statistics, it certainly is impressive!! Oulu, Finland 🇫🇮
There is so much wrong with this video. You can’t just compare a city to an entire country. You did make city-city comparisons too, but not consistently. The projection of the Netherlands on top of those cities was also *extremely* out of proportion. The point of the video did come across however. It just wasn’t crazily well argued.
Lol, no in this case, he clearly explained why he could. Zuid Holland is a province with a bigger urban density than some American cities. Those cities have little in common with Dutch cities, and more with provinces. Besides, the densely populated area in the Netherlands is referred to as Randstad (edge city). It is about half of a mega city. From an American perspective, Amsterdam and Haarlem are just two neighborhoods of the same city.
@@MissMoontree “Can the Netherlands serve as an urban planning precedent for *other* cities” He’s clearly not talking about just the randstad here. The issue with him using Amsterdam and the Netherlands interchangeably is that it takes away from his point. Example: he mentioned the percentage of trips taken by walking/pt/biking in the Netherlands being 50% stating that’s a lower percentage than in NA. He’s right on this, however; Boston has similar percentages. Him not properly making the distinction between the country and the city gives opportunity to a false interpretation of Boston being on the right track because it’s on par with the Netherlands as a whole. He started off with an introduction on the Netherlands (inconsistent with the images) to later shift focus towards Amsterdam without making a clear distinction. A shame, because most of what he said was absolutely correct, just worded extremely poorly.
The real difference:
when people noticed in the 1970s that cars were killing children in distressing numbers, the Dutch decided to design safer streets.
North Americans decided to keep kids home instead.
The Dutch said it was unacceptable. America said it was necessary. =(
The key point is that it starts with mindset, not with bike lanes. People wanted safe streets. Politicians learned that they had to oppose large financial interests to avoid being voted out. So policies started to focus on street safety. The *result* of that was changing attitudes of law enforcement, road engineers, etc, and that eventually led to regulations and infrastructure that benefitted walking, cycling, and public transport. A side effect, btw, is fewer cars needed, and thus a less stressful driving experience.
The bike lanes are not the cause, they are the effect.
So the teachers come to the homes??🤨🤨🤨
@@jooproos6559 Nah, mom has plenty of time to bring them all to their schools and pick them up in the 2nd car.
@@wfkonynenberg5242 That might be dangerous in your country,but not in the Netherlands!They have bin riding their bikes for a long time already.You could almost say that they are born on a bike.And everything for bikes are a whole lot better than in your country.
Of course Dutch-style city and infrastructure planning could work everywhere. As this video points out, the Netherlands went down the path of car dependence, too, but we managed to fix that. A point the Not Just Bikes channel has made repeatedly is: the Netherlands did not get from being in car hell to its present state overnight, it got there through incremental improvements over the course of decades. If the commitment is there, anything is achievable, just don't expect to be able to achieve everything within a couple of years.
The big obstacle in America is the lack of commitment. There are still far too many people who think car dependency is a good thing.
(Minor nitpick: At 0:22 522 persons per *square* kilometer, please)
We proud in what we can as a small country and we famous for it xD
The difference is the Netherlands makes new rules to bike infrastructure so the next time The streets are repaved they get the better infrastructure
Meanwhile in America it's one at a time and each one is a battle to be built in the first place and then new politicians get voted in and it gets reversed.
@@matthewboyd8689 The latest trick is that they got rid of most of the detailed technical rules and replaced them with "the party responsible for the street may be held liable for damage if an accident was in part due to the street not being up to best current practice for street safety". You'ld be amazed how effective such financial incentive is in ensuring that everyone keeps their streets aligned with international best practices for safety (for all street users, not just the car drivers)...
@@wfkonynenberg5242 It's really impressive how much incentives can help. Make the cities responsible for the safety of their residents, as they should be, and they can either strive to improve in a multitude of different ways, or go bankrupt with no state bailout.
Definitely agree!
In my city in Ontario, Canada every newly paved road is getting some form of cycling infrastructure.
@@pbilk the interesting question then is: is it good, safe, infrastructure? I have seen enough examples in North America where either
a) the engineers weren't interested in doing a good job
or
b) the engineers knowingly made it unnecessarily unsafe
or
c) the engineers were forced by regulations to make it unsafe.
Bigger (non-Dutch) cities in North-Western Europe just show what’s possible for North America. I just hope to see more people realizing that more than what we see now!
The US are refugees only, willing to travel all over the US for a lousy job.
Dutch people are here to stay, keep the refugees out !
Its fine to compare with dutch cities there are only about 15 cities in the states bigger population than amsterdam they are exceptions not the rule. And even these biggest cities are so wide they in many ways can be compared to the dutch 'randstad'.
@@dutchbicyclerides-ss1ko Yes, but the Dutch density is on another level compared to the rest of Europe, the biggest cities excluded. But you are right too.
@@dezwollenaartjes the end point I guess is that the states and Canada have many places that are not far of average Dutch cities not all but probably 70% using the exceptions why it’s not possible is too easy. In some ways many avg size European cities are harder because of how old age/room
@@dutchbicyclerides-ss1ko I think only Almere and Lelystad would be comparable like that, too be honest. The rest of the cities are all old, though. Only these two were built in the Flevopolder, so a lot later, and could definitely serve as an example for NA, I think.
What always amazes me about these N-american councils and NIMBYs is that they're perfectly fine with designing streets that completely discriminate against a whole group of road users (cyclists) and completely exclude them, and are in many cases even fine with discriminating against and excluding pedestrians as well.
It's insane that this is the norm there.
And then especially considering investment in bike lanes and pedestrian infrastructure is relatively low cost, and maintenance is extremely low, and the return on investment is quite high, it's even more insane this is the norm there.
There are bike paths in my city that handle thousands of bikes every day, that are in almost as good a condition as when they were built 25y ago. Meanwhile every road that handles thousands of cars every day built 25y ago is either full of potholes, has been repaired multiple times, or has been resurfaced at least once since.
Building safe bike and pedestrian infrastructure is a win-win for every city no matter where it is.
Then again, we've still got resistance by car addicts here too, even though the evidence it works is all around us.
I think they irony of it is they often talk about we need to be protective of children and seniors but because their decisions children can't really bike safely and seniors who can't drive or for health reasons or they enjoy biking can't fully do it because there's not a safe way for them to do so.
I think it's also incredible that the US is so far ahead the rest of the world with ADA, and has been for quite a while now, but you still need a car to get anywhere. In the Netherlands people use all kinds of mobility helps, but you might still encounter stairs or high kerbs making it difficult to reach your destination.
Totally agree! It’s crazy how overlooked bike lanes and pedestrian paths are, especially since they’re so beneficial and cost-effective. It's awesome to see places where it's done right. Hope more cities catch on soon! Especially mine (Toronto)..
It's inspiring to see how the Netherlands' bike lane designs could transform North American cities!
The US are refugees only, willing to travel all over the US for a lousy job.
Dutch people are here to stay, keep the refugees out !
As an American living in Amsterdam, the things stopping America from making Dutch style improvements are purely mental - desire, will, politics, education of urbanism/transit/etc, and truer understanding of what cities can be. This isn't to discount some of the concerns and criticisms nor is it to say that Amsterdam is 'purely' better (and thus American cities are purely worse).
Rather, when someone talks about distance and size, for instance, it merely needs a better context and framing and understanding. Getting from Amsterdam to Delft, for instance, will take about 50 minutes plus a little bit of extra time to get from door to station and vice versa. On the surface, I can see Americans getting shocked that it takes an hour. However, the suburb of Boston I grew up in is about the same distance... and takes the same amount of time to get to Boston from. The difference is that getting to the nearest train station is a 15 minute drive with no option for bus, tram, metro, or bike.
If we think of American suburbs as towns and villages, the distance argument kinda... doesn't make any sense any more because we can still point to small towns in the Netherlands that are well connected to transit, that are still designed for people, and ALSO still very much suburban, semi-rural, or rural.
What I can't wrap my head around is why the Americans simply don't relinquish their zoning laws regarding separating residence and commerce. That would enable mixed development projects. It seems to me that letting the free market take care of what goes where is the most American thing to do.
I think the big difference is that we Dutch go to school at 5 years old and a lot of us do this on our own.
I walked or bicycled to school on my own and that gives us an early feeling of independence , that experience carries in to adult life.
I've never felt unsafe in traffic and I'm from the 60's.
Kindergarten in the USA usually starts at 5 years old. We have dedicated school buses that take children to school. Only children in 1 mile of a school have to walk. The rest get road transport. My home is 3.5 miles away from our schools, which are all grouped together. My city is 25 square miles. My home is on one edge of my city. Many homes in my suburban city are even further away from the schools than mine is. Despite that, my home is actually closer to the schools in our neighboring suburban city, but since we aren't citizens of that city, our kids are forbidden from using those schools. Even if you lived right next to a neighboring city's school, but didn't belong to that city because the city's border ended at your property, you would still not be allowed to utilize that school. The same goes for county school systems, too. These are public-funded government schools. Those rules don't apply to private schools, which you pay for and don't have as much government oversight.
@@laurie7689 3.5 miles (5.5km) isn't that far , easy doable cycling . . . especially when you're young.
School starts at 4 years old. wtf bro.
@@TheSuperappelflap That is an option , not a rule .
Compulsory education (leerplicht) starts at 5 years 'bro'.
@@bebobism I have never heard of any kid not going to school at 4 years old, I had no idea, but you are correct! Apologies.
All comes down to zoning, every city in the Netherlands consists of multiple suburbs and each suburb has all primary functions for daily shopping, medical and work. only industrial isn't allowed, but small business and commercial businesses are allowed, as long its not polluting (air and noise). with this "Dutch Zoning" most daily activities are reachable by bike and foot.
Many of the cities, like mine, in the USA are suburban cities. We have shopping, medical, small businesses and commercial enterprises, as well as industrial. Most of the populace of these suburban cities commute daily to larger cities for work. Suburbs don't have enough jobs to keep its people from having to travel elsewhere to earn a living. Also, many two adult households have the adults commuting in two different directions. Generally, we choose a location between the jobs to settle. Since jobs may be located in two different major cities, the place to settle is a suburb, or exurb, between them. Cities in the USA, even within a single State, can be many driving hours away from one another. The people in my suburban city tend to commute to one or the other of two major cities in my State. Those cities are approximately 1 1/2 hours away or 90 miles (1mile per driving minute) from each other. My suburban city is located between them. It takes me about 30 minutes driving to get to one of them and about just over an hour to get to the other since my city is almost exactly between them.
@@laurie7689 On a smaller scale we in the Netherlands had the same problem. We built suburbs some 20 km from the central city. After 20 years, the communities in these suburbs said, we want as many jobs here as there are adult inhabitants. Again 20 years later, that was achieved. But still (exxagerated) half of the people left the city every morning and an equal amount of people entered the city every morning for work. Now, with another generation you see that it stabilizes and people start to work more at home or within the city they live. Now, 25% leaves the city or comes to it every day for work. It is a slow, slow process.
@@ronaldderooij1774 Yes, there are calls here for more remote work by employers, BUT they are forcing employees back into the centralized offices instead at the risk of firing employees if they don't comply.
It's entirely a mentality problem for Americans. They are unwilling to make positive change. I believe that old cities that have been in decline for a while are the best candidates for walkable regeneration. Baltimore has kept most of the historic centre intact, so the structure is there to transform streets with bike lanes. It's so cheap to make improvements, so they might as well.
i live in baltimore, and i really hope we can become the poster child for a dutch reform in america. we just recently got a light rail expansion, and i hope that puts us in the right path
American cities are becoming more walkable, Delaware just passed an anti stroad law, Milwaukee is building more bike lanes to reduce traffic, Anchorage and Austin just banned off street parking.
@@CTJM_Middleton i had no idea about delaware banning stroads! i travel to delaware semi - often, so thats great news to hear
Not only are Americans completely unwilling to make positive changes, they are even more unwilling to do so when it's a change that isn't invented in their own country. They're so damn nationalistic and stubborn that it will ruin them at one point. Especially with the two party system, and _especially_ with the constant ripping up of everything the previous president did, they're just not getting anywhere. Some cities are making steps in the right direction currently, but I have a feeling that they're just one election away, either local or federal, from getting all the progress ripped away again.
@@CTJM_Middleton Oh that's great news! Thanks for sharing!
I'm your man. I was born and raised in Richmond BC and I've lived in Haarlem Holland for 15 years. We can do this. I know what to do.
Maybe you should return to the US?😄
@@jooproos6559 My ancestors landed on Manhattan island in 1683 so it'd be like going back :)
As a Dutchie. The North American who are made tons of videos how well organised the Netherlands is with all its bikelanes, trains ride like metro. Guys "the Netherlands" is more than "de Randstad (Amsterdam, Utrecht, Rotterdam) and surrounding smaller cities and villages. Just take a look at all provinces. There's so much more to explore. Yes I know there's a lot of work in the afformentioned cities and what not. Grab or steel a bike in A'dam and do a NL tour as a whole. Love to see a video of that. Would be great!
People often forget that we had the same mindset as Americans 6 decades ago and it took us 5 decades of protests riots and straight up revolts before we we got rid of it
America can do it but they got a long road ahead if them if they truly want too
The big cities in the USA may want to, but the rest of us here don't need to, so there is no desire. The more people a place has, the more it needs to do with little space. Places with low density have plenty of space and just spread out. There is no fight for space.
Also, for those resisting this, know how sales for small shops in cities go up with bikes. Compare biking a shopping street with driving.
On a bike you can see much better what's on offer and more easily stop on impulse, then with a car. Parking is already a hindrance. Then notice in the Netherland clips above how many people are outside in bars and cafés? Walking and meeting others. Having a life.
We work to live. Anglo Saxon culture thinks, advertises, propagandises you live to work. But for whom? For what?
Great point, 100 percent agree!
The main point is that it starts with money. In the 1950s and 1960s, Dutch cities wanted to become like American cities, but discovered they could not afford it. The biggest cities came a long way, but the others almost went bankrupt after building a few wide bridges. Since the Netherlands had already built a good network of highways between 1925 and 1945, which ran outside the cities, the cities could not use money meant for highway construction either. Local politicians were pretty desperate in the late 1960s, but then the bicycle lobby came up with a plan that would be affordable. The local politicians didn't want to admit that they were listening to those cycling anarchists, so they said it was because of the children. Then came the oil crisis in the 1970s and over time, it turned out that building for people not cars just works.
It’s funny hearing this guy refer to the Netherlands as a city over and over again
I don't think the Netherlands was referred to as a city even once in the video, although it is definitely the same size as and shares many characteristics with many metropolitan areas in the United States and Canada. Which is the entire point of the video.
@@cmmartti He definitely did, when he first introduced it as a country, then called it one of the most densely populated cities on earth
It's not entirely unreasonable to think like that. The Netherlands is unique. The entire country really feels a lot more like a huge city
The Netherlands is a sort of city-state. You can easily commute from one side of the country to the other.
But, as a city-state, they can self-organize without having a State or Federal level to deal with. And this made transitioning away from cars way much easier.
@@nyxw Maybe in the randstad, up north here it does not feel like that.
I think one of the biggest differences is transportation is view from a convenience perspective to get you from point A to B . Outside of North America ( excluding the Canadian province of Quebec and Mexico) transportation discussions often think about lifestyle and incorporate the most vulnerable members of society like children. Having the ability of young people and seniors having the freedom to go to their places like school and stores by walking or biking changes the perspective of a person in their latter years. The hold " license things " in North America use to be seen as a right or passage. Zoning is so outdated as well car, single detach homes and big box stores take priority over everything else.
3:50 Of course... blame it one the bike lanes. 🤣
Thank god I live in a country where politicians embrace biking culture.
Jealous!!
Brilliant video. Thanks for sharing!!
Thanks for the comment, appreciate it!
Boulder, CO is very much NOT flat, but is one of the most bicycle friendly cities in the US. Hills are not a valid excuse. As you've said, the main obstacles are political will and corruption, and public misconception.
Sounds great! I'll definitely add Boulder to my list of places to visit!
I guess I haven’t figured out the REAL reason unless it was the last issue: political cowardice & disinterest
The US are refugees only, willing to travel all over the US for a lousy job.
Dutch people are here to stay, keep the refugees out !
Probably some oil lobbies too.
It was definitely political cowardice. And political corruption.
@@MissMoontree don’t forget franchise auto dealer owners, developers and land speculators. They usually have the most influence at the local level while the oil lobby influences the states and congress. Our mayor received $200,000 from the California Association of Realtors, a major California developer lobby. Kinda hard to push politicians to change with that kind of cash flowing into their pockets.
If the Dutch had waited for the infrastructure to take the bicycle they wouldn't have got it. Govenment didn't make this happen, it followed. It followed well, with long term foresight and integrated plans, but it was forced and it was a close call. Government was successful because it stopped forcing car culture onto the people top down.
But is was forced (also) as a result of the protests of 'Stop de IKindermoord. (Stop the child murder). Among other protests. Luckily there was the oil crisis in 1973, at the right moment that helped to make the beginning of the change.
In North America, bike lanes aren't understood because of conservatism. Compared to The Netherlands, the USA is extremely conservative. Car is king, the zoning system in cities doesn't help and nobody wants change. Here in NL, we also don't want to change, but we dare to experiment with new things. A lot of road infrastructure you see in The Netherlands has come a very long way, and many mistakes have been made in the past. We have been putting through changes (with ups and downs) to infrastructure for 40-50 years, while the US has only been holding back changes, and still does so.
True, the left in America is so unhinged and detached from reality it creates a instant aversion for anything proposed by them.
That doesn't make sense, cars are a newer invention than bicycles. Conservatives should want the old methods to be used more, right?
at 5:21, where you encircled the area in the netherlands, assuming 4 people per unit, that comes out to around 2000 people in that square. Compared to what is shown for Toronto, that is only 80 people in that square.
Make the people that are responsible for a road also responsible for the health of the people on it AND the people that life around it.
That is one rule in The Netherlands.
Really good point.
One interesting detail is that in the 50's, the Dutch hired American urban planners to design their cities. These urban planners came up with cities filled with motorways. That's the urban sprawl hangover that took decades to recover from.
I live precisely in one of the Amsterdam streets depicted in this video. Ask me anything.
This video is severely hampered by the extreme vocal fry. I couldn't get through the first few minutes of it. Why are you all but whispering while narrating the voiceover? PROJECT for crying out loud.
Thanks for the feedback, will try and fix in the next video.
America can change but it has to want that change to happen. It means densifying urban areas and another mindset when thinking about living. It can happen
Definitely agree!
Most of the USA is NOT urban, but suburban and rural. Those of us in the suburbs DON'T want our place to be densified and urban. The urban areas can densify all they want to, so long as they leave the suburban and rural areas out of it.
the 'we can't do it'-mentality never works
it's the American't Dream
It's funny how you opted to compare the netherlands to an american city because when I first started existing in online spaces with europeans and would talk about America I told them to think of American states as countries instead to get slightly more in line with the scaling.
They're called states for a reason. The Netherlands is a state, too, as is Japan, Germany, the UK, and Canada, and the US as a whole. The difference is that individual American states don't have full sovereignty on all matters, but for anything on the scale of a city and bicycle infrastructure, they absolutely do.
It is this mindset 'in the olden days everything was better' that is wrong. And yes, I belong to the same group as 'not in my backyard', the problem is exactly that group. America decided to build roads for cars because it could. Not because it was smart. Strong Towns tells you how that happened, and the only reason why it is still happening is, sorry to say, a lack of social awareness. Nimby's ef up, first be segregation, now by 'we are right'. They are wrong, but you can't get them out of there cars, and those without a mass behind them striving for change are bound to lose. Your problem isn't the will to change, it is 'the system' that is wrong.
Whats funny is that you said it’s one of the densest cities in the world. Though it’s not a city, the whole country (especially the west) is so well connected that it might as well be one big city!
Oops, my bad! I definitely meant country, not city. I should have also clarified / illustrated the Randstad. Thanks for the comment!
You could have shown Oulu (Uleåborg) for the weather comparison too...
The amount of the unpleasant days 😑 3:03 The Rain is a blessing
Interesting, wouldn’t expect that
@@AdambYates if you live in a desert like me you will understand what i mean
The rain is a blessing in general. At least for me. And I’m Dutch 😅
I want to live in Netherlands now😭
The US are refugees only, willing to travel all over the US for a lousy job.
Dutch people are here to stay, keep the refugees out !
We are at capacity, we rather have you stay put.
Haha
@@simdal3088 No we're not, the housing shortage is a global problem, so the cause must be global, not local. I'd say the increasing wealth gap is the cause, when rich people buy all the homes as investment vehicles, house prices will go up. And the rich control local government (Don't believe me? Look at what size of houses are being built in your gemeente) so new housing projects are slowed down as much as possible. And nimbys sure don't help either.
@@bramvanduijn8086 You are correct. We are not at capacity. We are at least 3 million people over capacity.
It’s definitely a difference in approach and culture. What these Canadian/American politicians were saying about ending bike lanes: that would be political suicide in the Netherlands.
European cyclist (French) here.
There are three major issues with your argument regarding the weather.
1. On snowy days, according to your chart, for the years 2016 and 2018, there is a difference of nearly one month. Going from a few days to almost one and a half months of snow cover starts to become significant enough to invalidate the use of the bike as a primary mode of daily transportation.
2. You are completely silent on the amount of snowfall. In Europe, over the last 20-30 years, when it snows, it doesn't exceed a few centimeters, 10-15 at most. In Canada, in cities like Toronto, it's much more. As your images show, North American cities are equipped with snowplows. This type of equipment is extremely rare in Europe. The use of such equipment has heavy consequences on road wear. This is very evident in Montreal, where the passage of snowplows leads to severe road deterioration, creating many potholes that are extremely dangerous when cycling.
3. You are completely silent on the question of temperatures. Average winter temperatures in Amsterdam do not drop below 1°C. In Toronto, it's around -8°C. Furthermore, there are many extremely cold days in Toronto, with temperatures frequently dropping below -20°C. This happens every year. By comparison, temperature records over the last 70 years have never reached -20°C in Amsterdam.
All this to say that winters in North America are much more extreme than in Western Europe, and this is a real barrier to the development of cycling as a daily mode of transportation, preventing the development of effective public policies around cycling.
The challenge for Americans, primarily, is that 1) we have a large country with massive differences between regions, and yet 2) we want everything to be a one-size-fits-all approach.
The US really sucks
Haha
I like to think that my home state of Florida is doing a slightly better job lately with building road infrastructure that accommodates all road users after years of being the poster child of having the deadliest roads and some of the worst urban planning in the country where it is practically impossible to live without a car. My experiences are largely in Central FL and the municipalities here have been working together to create a working bicycle trail network across the region. It's decades away from being fully realized and there are still large gaps to complete but I can happily report there are more places I can reach on bike than there was 10-15 years ago when the municipalities here finally started getting serious about bicycle infrastructure. Quite a lot of people use the trails too. There's really no excuses to not building bike infrastructure. Florida is flat like the Netherlands and has better weather year round - however the summer heat and humidity is brutal here, not to mention the frequent downpours this time of year but with proper preparation, it's feasible to get around here by bike.
NL is closer to 18 million inhabitants now. Focussed in the western part of the country, mostly.
Weather + wind (what we call the dutch mountain) are probably a more than good balance for most cities with hills. And ebikes help also in the netherland for this. Its indeed time and the will to change in some ways given the space and size (in area) for many usa/canada cities this means much can be done on that level and also means it has to be ground up city by city and sadly most likely by political sides. Places can lead by example even in the netherlands not all cities are the same. Much of the 'completeness' of the dutch bicycle network is between cities/villages/nature and that is less needed (or less possible) in much bigger countries and would be more between city cores and suburbs but again thats under local control. I admit i am a outsider but it looks to me if you can build political will locally it can be done place by place since the state or country level is impossible and not needed for a few decades.
Key difference is that in North America, particularly in the US, sustainable transport solutions have been politicised, while in the Netherlands, they're seen from a utilitarian lens, simply as the name implies - transport solutions, and nothing else. Dutch pragmatism at its finest.
Interesting point about the pragmatic approach within the Netherlands. It's certainly disheartening to witness transit projects falter with each change in political leadership…
@@AdambYates come visit us 😊
There’s plenty of space in North American cities to build a perfect bike infrastructure
100% agree!
amsterdam itself is not even a good representation of how our Bike roads look like or how it should look like. for that you have to go to Utrecht. buty for some reason you all think that amsterdam is the only city in the Netherlands. they have among the worst designed bike infrastructure of the Netherlands. places like Utrecht Groningen and other cities have it way better.
You discussed rain, hills, snow but you intentionally over looked temperature. Your inconsistent in your comparisons. One moment your comparing city to city, then cities to countries. You completely ignore, culture.
Also have a look at Paris. They really moved away their car-centric approach in only a few years.
Hills, seize, climate … it’s all about excuses and political (popular) will !!
💯
Let's just build some cool new, self sustaining walkable towns in North America.
The US are refugees only, willing to travel all over the US for a lousy job.
Dutch people are here to stay, keep the refugees out !
Would be awesome!
Buy up the old dead and dying towns and you could probably do that.
Never mind that the innercity Amsterdam is very different from the rest of the Netherlands. Just go to Breda Central Station and it is just like America minus the people.
We could just Imitate Japan. The next generation are all weebs, so that is an easy sell to Americans.
I love this kind of video
Thanks, appreciate the comment!
4:25 this clip is deranged lol
The Netherlands is not a city bruh
The Netherlands is one big urban area with many open spaces. That is, in fact, a city.
@@Hbraam the Randstad is indeed one big city, but the creator of the video kept using Amsterdam and the Netherlands interchangeably
My mistake for the inconsistencies! Definitely should have explained the Randstad!
One thing that’s wrong so far watching this, you’re comparing trip distance from cities to an entire country. Most people still drive in the Netherlands, and when we do, we go to different cities, making the trip distance much greater on average. You have to compare it city per city.
Another thing that’s quite off. When it snows in the Netherlands, the snow is gone by afternoon, Toronto might only get double the amount of days of snow, but in much greater quantities, and don’t forget how there are only so many days in winter. The two are absolutely not comparable.
There are a bunch of reasons why cycling doesn’t really work in North American with the exception of a few area’s. Weather, density and terrain are just a few of those, and just because one factor is not relevant, doesn’t mean others aren’t. They must all align to create a place that even has the possibility to be bikable. Once you have those, then you can add the infrastructure to accommodate it. Plopping down bike lines everywhere just for the sake of it is also useless and a waste if no one will use it. The Netherlands has the perfect combination to accommodate cycling. There are places in North America where biking is certainly feasible, such as Boston, downtown Toronto (in summer), nyc, LA (flat areas), and Chicago as well in the summer. But that’s the issue, it will never be as convenient all year and everywhere in the city as outside of the downtown and inner cities the cities are just not dense enough. In the Netherlands the suburbs are dense because they have to be, because we are literally completely packed inside these tiny borders. Even the farmland is extremely dense with many farmers having to go out of business. There are more farmers than available farmland. As a result everything must be built dense which makes it bikable. North America has quite literally too much land so no wonder they build low density. Why not get a huge mansion in north america than a small row house in dutch suburbs for the same amount of money.
Winter weather is not an issue. Bike use rates are high even in cities that do have lots of snow accumulation, like Stockholm or Oulu. You just have to commit to plowing sidewalks and bike paths the way you plow streets.
Terrain is rarely that much of an issue for short trips, and ebikes are making it even less of an issue. Yeah, the Dutch have an advantage in flatness, but somewhat hilly cities have high bike use too.
Density isn't an issue until you get to outright rural areas. A good walkable neighborhood has 10,000 people/km2; someone on a bike could access just as many people, in the same time, at only 1000 people/km2. The real problems are how it's laid out in the US: cul-de-sacs and wide separation of housing and other destinations... and, of course, safety. But that's a choice.
And you know? Low-density suburbs have _plenty of room_ for bike paths or simply wide sidewalks. They have no excuse.
@@mindstalk winter weather yes is an extra commitment, and again every extra commitment stacks up against making a place less bike-friendly. I live in arguably one of the hilliest places in the Netherlands, Nijmegen, and yes people bike, ofc but there isn’t any place in the Netherlands which you would really consider hilly or mountainous like many other cities.
I agree connectivity between cul de sac neighborhood can be massively improved, and indeed there is plenty of space for bike lanes. My point was that there is no reason to build 10.000/sq km neighborhoods in the suburbs when there is no demand for it. And while it should definitely be more accessible to bike in the suburbs, a true bike culture like you see in the Netherlands is simply not attainable when you have low density, really hot or really cold weather. I’m not arguing against the use of bikes, but saying how there are a dozen factors which all add up against a bike culture, and why other european countries can’t catch up with Dutch cycling culture either as only the Netherlands has all of the perfect conditions. Yes it gets a little snow and rains but these are extremely mild compared to other places.
Good example is Spain for example, which has a lot of terrain features, is extremely hot, as a result, Spanish cities focus mainly on walking and public transit, and not biking. The Netherlands also just has ideal cityscape for biking. The entire country basically acts like one big city with cities being relatively small and density clustered making cities close to one another even allowing you to bike from one town to another. Other places in the world just don’t have that, and especially in North America, cities are just so insanely far spread. All factors just allow for a low demand in biking in North America (also in urban places)
0:34 is Utrecht, not Amsterdam ;)
"But the Netherlands is flat!"
Yes it is, but that also means it's windy AF here 😂
Bring back mopeds!! Be bike when u want it but then u can turn on the engine and go like 40 miles per hour
The Netherlands, one of the densest cities in Europe.
Oops, my mistake, meant Country!
This is a decent video but, 30 seconds in and you're already wrong like three times. Amsterdam pop. density is about 5,000 people per sq/km. "522 persons / km" doesn't makes sense. It's an area measurement.
Second what do you mean by infrastructure nowhere else in the world? Copenhagen, Paris, Singapore, Montreal... they all have good bike systems since that's what you are focusing on. Then I also don't understand what you mean it doesn't look like anywhere in North American, then just show row buildings. Yes the architecture is unique but the form isn't. New York, Boston, Philly, Toronto, Montreal etc. I continued and you're wrong about the average commute distance too.
Where are you getting your stats?
It's otherwise a good video, overall I think you're correct that the issue we have here is a political one, but it's undercut by all the small errors you make at the beginning. Also comparing Amsterdam to Penticton is iffy, why not compare it to like London, Ontario or Winnipeg, Hamilton etc.? They're closer in area and pop.
Size is bullshit excuse
Well I disagree wit that. And I live in the Netherlands and my main means of transport is my bycicle. The Netherlands is very small and densly populated. Both are required to have a good national bycicle infrastructure. The longest route you can make here is from Groningen to Maastricht. Which is around 330-350KM. (around 17 hours by bike) Now take a similar route from Miami to Seatle. Which is 5 306 km (around 13 days by bike). So going across country by bike is difficult but feasible in the Netherlands, to nearly impossible in the US. And even going from city to city the distance is a lot shorter in the Netherlands. Here basically everything lines up for it being nearly perfect. This is why other smaller countries are decently good at bike infrastructure. For example Belgium and Denmark.
However within cities you are correct. And it would be smart for all cities to go for a livable design.
@@SanderEversNobody cycles from Groningen to Maastricht as transport...that's why there are cars or trains. If someone does that, it is purely for recreation/fun. Your last sentence states what cycling-infrastructure as transport is ment for; within buildup areas.
@@SanderEvers Most people live in cities or metro areas. Most trips are within metro areas.
@@SanderEvers Nobody bikes from Groningen to Maastricht, that is what trains are for. Distance between cities doesn't matter, commute distance is what matters and the Dutch commute longer distances so that definitely is not an excuse.
Cost isn't an excuse, because cycling infrastructure is cheaper than car infrastructure.
Safety isn't an excuse, because bicycles cause less deaths than cars.
Weather isn't an excuse because the weather in the Netherlands is atrocious.
Elevation changes are only relevant if your commute distances are comparable or larger. They aren't. Not even close. So that isn't an excuse either.
The pleasure of driving isn't an excuse, because with less heavy traffic driving is more pleasurable and takes less time.
The real reason is we vote for better politicians.....
Good point!
The difference is politics
💯
There is only one reason why America has not been able to achieve progress in many fields, partisan divide.
That is because we want different things; or, if we want the same thing, then we want to use different means.
I want my city to be more walkable
Haha Me too!
How many hills are there in the cities? Yes, there will be very hilly cities, but the majority is not that hilly.
Florida is flatter than The Netherlands. It is also swamp country similar to The Netherlands, but with nicer weather. It would be an ideal experiment to start here with cycling infrastructure the Dutch way.
@@RealConstructor Yes I agree, I'm from Florida and there has been movement here in building out better bike infrastructure. Florida has the right variables to experiment with, there's so much space that most roads can handle bike lanes or dedicated off-street path/trails. Every year I'm seeing more and more people on bikes both traditional and electric, and a number of other small personal transport vehicles - they need space too. There's also untapped demographics here that would pick up cycling more easily - particularly tourists and the elderly, it's just a matter of building out the the infrastructure for them and they will use it.
If you want cycling to become the norm, you first have to make it normal. Cycling in the US is seen as a thing for fitness freaks with helmets and spandex shirts and 21 gear racing bikes, shouting at all cars and sweating while they boast of their endeavours. Look mate, we hate those too, here in the NL. The midlife crisists.
‘Normal’ is a guy in his workclothes, commuting on a Granny bike that’s about as old as granny herself. A mother with a bakfiets bringing the kids to daycare. Or the other way round of course. Normal is not having special equipment. As long as even cyclists themselves think of themselves as special, it ain’t happening. That’s why it worked here. Average Joe and Jane were the ones demanding the change.
You make it normal by making it safe to bike. (Or by people not being able to afford to drive, but that's not an option now.) North Americans aren't going to bike and then demand infrastructure, they'll bike when there's good infrastructure (mostly meaning separation from fast cars, whether by protected bike paths or wide sidewalks or by physically slow shared streets.)
@@mindstalk It also really helps if there are destinations nearby, so you need zoning that allows stores, bars, schools, churches, and other destinations within a couple miles of each home. If people can see the church and school from their house but they can't get there without a car because they have to cross a highway, then they will start demanding walking and cycling infrastructure.
Yep, a bunch of fitness freaks. They are looked upon with scorn by many US Americans.
@@bramvanduijn8086 Where I live in the USA, it is illegal to have bars near schools and churches. The sin shops (as they are referred to) have to be kept at a distance and preferably less visible. Tobacco shops and adult book stores also fall into that category.
The average commute distance in Boston is 10 MILES not km. And Boston has one of the most compact commutes in North America. Sorry to be a hater but the whole basis for your argument is a fraud.
Good video, but vocal fry ASMR-NPR voice ruined it for me.
Thanks for the feedback, will try and fix in the next video.
America first needs to adjust its zoning laws, then way about a century until the cities have densified.
You want ot start with making some laws that protect bikers (bicyclers) instead of what you currently have.
Now it's "roadwarrior"protection instead of protecting vulnerable travellers
I live in Penticton, I did not vote for any of those idiots, it's so embarrassing. But I will say the lake to lake bike lane is amazing!
It's like therapy, it's not gonna work if you don't want it to.
Haha very accurate
Kind of a straw man argument to take Amsterdam as the average Dutch.
Amsterdam in the Netherlands is often named as an exception.
Commutes also take place on a metropolitan or regional level, where bikes play a role but there are not many people biking 22 km. The video doesn’t explicitly say so, but it does imply it.
I know data is hard especially making a reasoning about cities, since they are so complex.
But I think if you got other people on board with the video that have an expertise insight on the topic, there could be an even better video.
It’s a mental blockade to change. Same with climate, cars, education and guns. Think big is a talking not in acting in America.
People keep saying bike friendly cities are great. Yeah for bikers not drivers. Im a new driver in the Netherlands and bikes on the roads are the cause of 100% of my road stress and road rage....
Interesting, surprising to hear because Waze lists it as the best place to drive in the world. Are you in Amsterdam or another city?
U can can call this message rude or what...If u wont change lazyness, then u cant do all. Its all about changing ur mindset. if people in the u.s or canada still take a car for a 100 meter/300 foot walk then nothing change or even for a 200 meter 300 foot walk take a bike then nothing change. Also ur city planning sucks because its build for cars only! If there are no side walks or any like that ...nothing changes. Sorry but u can call me rude but i am dutch and if u cant look in a mirror ....sorry for u then.
My last suburban neighborhood had sidewalks. We never used them, ourselves, and I never saw anybody else using them. My current suburban neighborhood doesn't have sidewalks. I see people on the roads, walking and jogging. It all depends on the people in an area. The problem is that people move around to other neighborhoods every so many years. We don't stay in any place long enough anymore to develop a culture.
North America is just 1 big dystopia
When it comes to roads and stuff also means we pay alot of taxes and lots of it goes to street design...i mean yeah..nice :P When it comes to taxes Netherlands aint cheap.
American cities are becoming more walkable.
Definitely getting better! It’s been a huge change in mentally over the last 10 years. Really nice to see.
"Surprisingly the Netherlands does get snow"??? My dude. We are over 50 degrees north. Thats the same latitude as Newfoundland. Whats surprising is that our winters arent as brutal as one would expect.
Also, the Netherlands isnt a city. There is more to the country than urban sprawl. Most the country is farmland and water. Cities only take up like 10% of the land area.
Please do some more research before making a video.
I blame zoning laws and greedy politicians that get pay offs from the auto industry
Go to Montréal. It is also possible there
Plan to go this summer!
0:18 No it's not
You act like this isn’t in the US when it is, and many places are becoming more walkable. Look at Carmel, Indiana for example.
Yep, you’re definitely right, Carmel is a great example!
America should go Danish instead❤🇩🇰🇺🇸🇨🇦
Stockholm is the place if you want to smash NA arguments. All the statistics they give you for why you can't bike in NA are worse in Stockholm and somehow biking works there.
Define "worse" please ?@hanstun1
@@acchaladka they probably mean like worse weather (it's pretty cold and wet there), more hills, that and the large amount of waterways spread the city out more
@@acchaladka Colder, snowier, separated on islands with bridges, hills ... you name it, worse!
Or take a look at Oulu in Finland, which has declared itself the unofficial capital of year-round cycling.
They have built themselves an extensive well connected network of bicycle and foot paths, which in wintertime is kept available for safe biking and walking. Though maybe not comparable in size or statistics, it certainly is impressive!! Oulu, Finland 🇫🇮
😀
This vocal fry is making this video unwatchable
Thanks for the feedback, will try and fix in the next video.
Why do you talk so weird in the video stop that pls I feel uncomfortable
Thanks for the feedback, will try and fix in the next video.
car sales are big business and oil to so why bikes lol
I agree with you, however, I will not be subscribing because your voice is too irritating.
Thanks for the feedback, will try and fix in the next video.
There is so much wrong with this video. You can’t just compare a city to an entire country. You did make city-city comparisons too, but not consistently.
The projection of the Netherlands on top of those cities was also *extremely* out of proportion.
The point of the video did come across however. It just wasn’t crazily well argued.
The US are refugees only, willing to travel all over the US for a lousy job.
Dutch people are here to stay, keep the refugees out !
Lol, no in this case, he clearly explained why he could. Zuid Holland is a province with a bigger urban density than some American cities. Those cities have little in common with Dutch cities, and more with provinces. Besides, the densely populated area in the Netherlands is referred to as Randstad (edge city). It is about half of a mega city. From an American perspective, Amsterdam and Haarlem are just two neighborhoods of the same city.
@@MissMoontree “Can the Netherlands serve as an urban planning precedent for *other* cities” He’s clearly not talking about just the randstad here.
The issue with him using Amsterdam and the Netherlands interchangeably is that it takes away from his point. Example: he mentioned the percentage of trips taken by walking/pt/biking in the Netherlands being 50% stating that’s a lower percentage than in NA. He’s right on this, however; Boston has similar percentages. Him not properly making the distinction between the country and the city gives opportunity to a false interpretation of Boston being on the right track because it’s on par with the Netherlands as a whole.
He started off with an introduction on the Netherlands (inconsistent with the images) to later shift focus towards Amsterdam without making a clear distinction. A shame, because most of what he said was absolutely correct, just worded extremely poorly.
is dutch going to watch to go on their subways in 5 years after they import half of the 3rd world?
And it is socialist.
Heavily subsidizing car infrastructure despite it bankrupting American cities is also very socialist and not free market, apparently.
that's not so difficult,Dutch flat small