Complaints about priority, and police dogs vs. bikes

After last week's blog post including a video from local TV which illustrated the efforts taken to ensure that the cycle-paths of Drenthe are well maintained, here's another view. There are protests about the plans to renew a particular junction, which is now showing its age.

The introduction to the video says "Drenthe is a real cycling province. Cycle-paths go everywhere, and when the weather's fine it's extremely pleasant to ride around the countryside. However, according to work-group Kop van Drenthe, there is still more to be done to make cycle-paths better".

At the moment, cyclists have priority over motorists across one road at this old junction, but if the plans of the local government are implemented, cyclists will lose this advantage. The protesters have been invited to have a meeting with the local government so that an agreeable compromise can be reached:


One of the reasons why the infrastructure continues to improve in the Netherlands is that people continue to complain about what they have and continue to strive to make it better. There is no complacency and no celebration of having "finished" anything. To stop making improvements would mean starting to slide backwards. Therefore, progress is continual.

This is the junction which is the subject of the video. Street-view shows the North-South cycle-path on the west side as having been dug up. This happened two years ago when this cycle-path was (massively) improved in quality. The cycle-path on the east of this road (South-North) will be improved with the work on the junction:


Grotere kaart weergeven


I thought readers might also enjoy this video, which is coverage of a competition for police dogs. At 25 seconds in you'll see how police dogs are trained to handle those who try to flee from the police by bicycle:


In another example of a protest, last year, I wrote about complaints in Groningen which helped to prevent that city from winning the "cycle city of the year" competition.

Groningen. Not Fietsstad 2011.

A few weeks ago, Mark wrote about how 's-Hertogenbosch had won the Fietsstad 2011 competition. Groningen had also entered in the competition. However, many locals didn't think it was good enough to be called a "cycling city". The local TV news carried the following video, titled "Still much work for Groningen Cycling City":



In this video:

• 0:00 : Groningen wants to become the most cycle friendly city in the Netherlands once again.
• 0:10 : But is the city really so cycle friendly ? The local government has much work to do to get the title.
• 0:20 : "For pensioners, the new Berlage bridge is a test like the Alpe d'Huez". There are many complaints.
• 0:30 : Fietsersbond representative: "The incline is too steep"
• 0:45 : Further, consideration is needed that the most dangerous junction in the Netherlands is within Groningen. The crossing by the Rodeweg, Boterdiep and Korreweg (see earlier post about this junction)
• 1:00 : Interview with people talking about the danger of the junction. "People come along quickly and it's difficult to see"
• 1:15 : It's not obvious and therefore it's dangerous. "I need eyes in the back of my head and in both sides", "students come along here in a hurry and don't look. The junction is dangerous."
• 1:40 : In 2002, Groningen got the award Fietsstad 2002, but how about this time ?
• 1:52 : Fietsersbond representative: "I think it's impossible this time"
• 1:57 : The Fietsersbond also see problems in other areas of the city, including by the railway station.
• 2:00 : Local politician: "I've not heard of this problem of the bridge being too steep but I'll take a look"

I covered the most dangerous junction in the Netherlands a few months back. 14 injuries amongst all types of road users were reported here in three years, a better record than junctions in London and Cambridge.

A test like the Alpe d'Huez ? Read more discussion of this bridge including a video of riding over it.

As for the steepness of the new bridge, which of course includes separated cycling infrastructure as do all bridges, I think many readers from outside this country wouldn't see the problem here either.

How space is allocated on that
"problem" bridge. This would be
cause for celebration in any
other country.

Oh to have such "problems". But this is quite illustrative of what has made the Netherlands the leading country in cycle usage. Nothing is ever finished. Groningen may have won "Cycle City 2002", but that doesn't mean that they can sit in their laurels and expect to win "Cycle City 2011". Many improvements have been made in Groningen in the last 9 years, but they were not enough. Other cities have done more. It's a brave person who talks of any Dutch city as a "Cycling City", as they'll soon have someone pointing out the defects, which even if they might be minor elsewhere, are of great concern here.

The correct decision was made
's-Hertogenbosch has a few lower cycling modal share than does Groningen. It's actually relatively low for any city in the Netherlands, nothing special indeed. However, what 's-Hertogenbosch has done in recent years is to make bold plans and to achieve real growth. For this reason it is far better than 's-Hertogenbosch won the prize than Groningen. Groningen has more cycling than any other place in the Netherlands, indeed than any other place in the world. But the city also has too much dated and lack-lustre infrastructure. Groningen has work to do.

Meanwhile, exaggeration continues elsewhere
In Britain and America, things are entirely different. For example, in Dumfries and Galloway with a cycling modal share of approximately 3%, the local transport strategy says "Overall, cycling and walking infrastructure is considered to be of a good standard and the council consequently considers that only incremental improvements to existing networks will be required in the short term".

Meanwhile, in the USA, some people think that Portland "has a great infrastructure" and that with a 4% modal share for bikes, it is second only to Amsterdam. The same "second to Amsterdam" claim was made by Cambridge in the 1990s.

To make such a claim is absurd for both these cities. There's nothing wrong with positive speaking. However, they some grounding in fact is needed. While the Dutch are modest and have frustrating reluctance even to call Groningen a "cycling city" even though it has the highest cycling modal share in the world, other places in the world are keen to exaggerate relatively small achievements.

For a model of what is possible, the best place to look remains the Netherlands. Campaigners in the Netherlands set their sights high and rather than hyping their cities they make clear what is not good enough and work towards fixing it. Campaigners elsewhere must also make sure that they don't set their sights too low and that they don't overly praise actions taken which not entirely positive. Doing so results in a distinct lack of progress, as seen in most other places in the world.