One of the key lessons from Dutch cycling history is cities didn't start with protected lanes. They began by making streets safer, calmer and more inviting; with lower speeds, parking restrictions, traffic filters and reduced through-traffic to create an environment in which cycling could flourish.🧵
Post
Yet planners elsewhere often reverse this sequence: building segregated lanes assuming people will use them and support will follow. When those lanes are expensive, disruptive, isolated or lightly used, they become easy targets for opposition; creating a vicious circle of low ridership and support.
11 reposts86 likes
The better approach is to create the conditions for cycling first: build demand; then invest in high-end infrastructure where the numbers justify. Not every street needs a protected lane, and sometimes the most important intervention is just a street where cars have been slowed, filtered or removed.
Therefore, the main takeaway from the Netherlands shouldn’t be to just build more bike lanes. It should be to make the act of getting on a bike easy at first, and let the network grow from there. As Dutch planners learned long ago, the most important part of your bike plan is actually the car plan.🔚