Binky

Bike paths done right.... so it IS possible.

Picture from Holland.

Bmach

That looks confusing as a driver. Plus if the bike lane is the elevated piece how do you get to the street that goes off to the upper left? Maybe a pix showing more would make it easier to understand.

Alligator

And the real question is whether they plow the path when it snows.

Kat12

To me it looks possibly like you need to come down the elevated area, join up with the non-elevated path (at a juncture out of the frame), and then go back? It's the best way I can see. However, that path seems to lead to nowhere-- it connects to another lane, but I can't tell if that is for cars. It's wider than the bike paths and marked differently, but also marked differently than the car lanes...

livedarklions

https://bicycledutch.wordpress.com/2...-in-naaldwijk/

BobbyG

I found it!

Google Maps: https://www.google.com/maps/place/De...59!4d4.2194977

Article: https://bicycledutch.wordpress.com/2...-in-naaldwijk/

Video from the article:

Riveting

Clearly they plow the snow. Any municipality in a snowy region plows their bike paths, at least here in Denver they do it very soon after the snow stops falling. But where does the snow get pushed to when it does get plowed, the sides of the elevated sections look solid and have no shoulder to store the snow, Do they just plow it into piles and then toss it over the side somehow, while trying to avoid the roads below?

livedarklions

"The province wants to test a completely new type of asphalt, that won’t even get slippery in temperatures of minus 5 degrees Celsius. This will reduce the cost of maintenance and the cost of keeping the bridge free of snow and ice."

From the link I posted.

Riveting

I can see the magic in a non-slippery surface, but where does the snow go? Is the surface possibly heated to just above freezing and it melts away?

livedarklions

Sorry, I forgot to make it clear I was quoting the article I linked. I have no idea how it works.

genec

Bike paths done right... OK... if they are anything like the Oulu Finland bike paths, which are a separate transportation network from the streets used by cars, and only intersect where they have to. Funny reading the comments here... as if the bike paths must join the streets... Not really necessary, if the networks are designed well.

But IMHO, that street network looks like a driver's nighmare... you best be in the proper lane when you reach that inner circle of hell. Yikes!

Oh and yes, in Finland they do plow the paths in winter, except the paths that lead right to the beaches... "no one goes to the beach in winter..."

indyfabz

Judging from climate data for Naaldwijk, doesn't seem like they get much accumulating snow. Average lows for the winter months are above freezing.

noisebeam

Designed well means they go to all the residential and businesses locations. I can ride all over, across, up and down and around and to/from various cities here on a network of hundreds of miles of paths, but few if any take me where I need to go which happens to be where all the streets go. So cyclists either need to use the streets or the paths need to intersect ever street, at least at every intersection if not more frequently.

Riveting

Ah, I didn't realize the Netherlands with it being so far north, yet it has so little snow, it must be the proximity to the water/sea that regulates the temps. there, like the west coast of the US is regulated by the Pacific. So it has great cycling infrastructure, is not too hot in the summer (high of 70 F in Aug), and rarely gets below freezing (low of 35 F in Feb), and gets minimal snowfall. Yet another reason it's on my cycling bucket list.

genec

Actually, you have a somewhat "typical American" viewpoint... and have encountered a typical American "bikes are toys and belong in parks" attitude. While your area may have loads of "recreational paths," little thought is given to a bike as a regular means of transit.

Almost all locations have front doors and back doors... If the front door opens on to a large car parking lot, can the back door open onto a nice bike path? This can be done with a well designed transportation network.

Now this isn't to say that all paths and streets are separated in Oulu... out toward the residential areas for instance they do somewhat merge, but in the business areas, there is a great deal of separation, using bridges and underpasses to minimize the potential interaction of bikes and cars. The system is laid out in such a way that cyclists get the short cut, while motorists may have to "go around."

Davis, California tried something similar, and used a system of cul-d-sacs for cars, with bike paths connecting the residential areas outside the cul-d-sacs. The Davis system isn't complete nor perfect, and along the way lost support from the typical driving public... but below you can see how they used a "parallel" yet separate network in an attempt to reduce the interaction between motorists and cyclists.




Oulu takes this notion one step further and has a large car free zone in the center city area, with car parking lots surrounding that core zone. Taxis and service vehicles can enter the core zone, otherwise, the "traffic" is limited to bikes and pedestrians. In Paris, there is a similar situation in the Latin Quarter... with delivery vehicles being allowed to enter only at certain times.

Further, one has to ask, do we really need cars parking on every inch of roadway? Or is it possible to limit entrance and parking to certain areas and cluster merchants around those areas, while allowing free access to non motorized people.

Barcelona does something a bit different... they have main traffic boulevards, with parallel low speed streets for parking, with bicycle paths on the dividers between these or inside of the low speed streets.

London is trying to limit traffic in a central core area by using fees... the results have been somewhat mixed.

The typical American approach is to design and build cities/roads as if the automobile must visit each front door and no one ever walks... and then later, try to shoehorn in some paint designated areas for anything not a car... so we end up with lots of confusing stripes, crosswalks and various colors of paint to designate merge and safe areas... but as these are an afterthought; one may find that they have to trek up to a 1/2 mile away to find a suitable crosswalk, or even further, if a freeway exists. (This of course has lead to our proliferation of "drive thru" everything... from fast food, to coffee, to even funeral homes.)

rumrunn6

the side rails on the fly-over aren't high enough for the nutz in the US

genec

For the short spans that are actually "in the air," I suspect they could just plow/push the snow to a part that is at ground level and then pile it there.

Stadjer

An issue with elevated bike paths is that you can't take the speed coming down with you on your way up like with bicycle tunnels. But tunnels are more expensive, can get complicated depending on the soil and have other drawbacks. Elevating the road for cars is also much more expensive because of weight. The cycle path only has to carry an ambulance and maintenance or snow/ice cleaning car. Slopes like that aren't very popular, but if there's no good alternative people will use them.

So it's cheap and will make city hall look good, especially in aerial pictures. It's up to the highest standard, by international comparison, but it's not excellent cycling infrastructure within that frame and one could even say there's money saved at the expense of the cyclists. It's not like we experience a shortage of hills to climb and want them man made. Don't get me wrong, I'm not opposed to compromises and I like like the lightness of the design.

rossiny

I'm surprised we don't all move to Holland. The town im in now in SE Wisconsin is surprisingly bikeable. However about 15 + years ago in Chicago suburbia, no way could you bike or commute on roads only the few designated routes or trails. Once you leave the city its all roads , 4 lane highways, expressways ,, only for cars and subdivisions neighborhoods..

CrankyOne

Two books you might enjoy: https://www.amazon.com/Melissa-Brunt...3147233&sr=8-2

Also check older posts on: A view from the cycle path

CrankyOne

Yes. I believe a tunnel was ruled out on this one because of social safety issues. Given its location and the length of the tunnels they did not feel it safe to do normal tunnels, even the very large ones that are normally used when social safety is a concern, so they'd have to have effectively done a raised turbo which would be quite expensive.

UniChris

Carrying approach speed through tunnels is perhaps not something that should be encouraged anyway.

Especially if the approaches aren't aligned with the tunnel bore such that you can see all the way through.

Was thinking about this after getting passed on the approach to and within our longest local tunnel by a group ride. At the time it was kind of fun as they were pretty much the only others out after dark on a night where snow flurries had become rain and I'd been seeing the lead headlight gaining on me for half a mile.

But in retrospect I thought about how their presence in the oncoming lane of the tunnel would have been invisible to anyone on the oncoming descent that's "around" a maybe 30 degree corner from the tunnel itself. With lights in the tunnel, their lights might not have been visible either. Given they were the only others I'd seen in an hour, it worked out. But I don't know that they wouldn't have made the same move at a time when oncoming bike traffic zooming down the hill would be more likely.

I don't always remember, but even at a reactive speed I often ring my bell when approaching blind tunnels...

Stadjer

In the Dutch context that's fine, and a standard consideration for city planners, just like visibility is. The speed will go up a few kilometers to still not very impressive, just to give a nudge for comfort.

work4bike

This is a really good example of a bike path done WRONG. At first glance it seems as if the motorist had to have done this on purpose, but what really happened was that the motorist was looking down a one-way street, looking for a chance to go and then went immediately when an opening spotted. The only problem was the bike path was going the opposite direction. I know this is the motorists fault, but it's also a case of a poorly designed cycling infrastructure.

I'd be tempted to cycle in the road in lieu of that bike path.

EDIT: Correction, it was not a one-way street, but in effect same difference.

UniChris

Indeed, I'm rather upset that the designs for a lot of upcoming projects in my area use these deceptively deadly bidirectional paths that leave you riding in the wrong direction for your side of the road that they are immediately adjacent to. That means every cross street and driveway risks meeting a driver who's looking the other way and ignoring the possibility of anyone going in your direction.
​
I'm going to be particularly upset if space to build them comes via lane realignment that costs removal of shoulder space from the correct side of the road for that direction of travel.

The theory, apparently, is that people won't ride unless you build dangerous infrastructure that gives a false sense of safety...