Percentage of road side Dutch paths that are unidirectional in normal traffic direction?ly

SA_SA_SA
Posts: 1659
Joined: 31 Oct 2009, 1:46pm

Percentage of road side Dutch paths that are unidirectional in normal traffic direction?ly

Postby SA_SA_SA » 29 Jan 2018, 8:34pm

Does anyone know what the Percentage of road side Dutch paths that are unidirectional in normal traffic direction (ie cyclists cycle in same direction as adjacent traffic lane) is?

BY adjacent I means separated by kerb (I presume there are no 2 way routes separated only by paint: that would be scary).

I ask because I have seen it claimed that the dutch abandoned such 2 way routes adjacent to roads due to the extra hazard at road side junctions, but all the examples I have seen of 'utopian 'dutch paths are of the 2 way variety, and thus they are what get copied (and worsened) when transferred to the UK.

Surely the dutch should be swiftly converting such 2 way routes to a unidirectional one on the expected side of the road?
------------You may not use this post in Cycle or other magazine ------ 8)

User avatar
mjr
Posts: 10781
Joined: 20 Jun 2011, 7:06pm
Location: Norfolk or Somerset, mostly
Contact:

Re: Percentage of road side Dutch paths that are unidirectional in normal traffic direction?ly

Postby mjr » 29 Jan 2018, 9:53pm

I suspect someone with their own open street map database could give a number if you want number rather than length, but in my brief experience, most urban cycleways are unidirectional but there will be the occasional user riding the wrong way rather than make two left turns or U turns, whereas most rural ones are bidirectional.

The rural ones tend to be more picturesque, though.

London, Cambridge, Norwich and probably others have built one way tracks up both sides of some roads recently, although I've seen later London ones built two way, sometimes where it made sense because of fewer side roads or similar, but as often it seemed to be because they daren't move parking to between the carriageway and cycleway or other motoring reason.
MJR, mostly pedalling 3-speed roadsters. KL+West Norfolk BUG incl social easy rides http://www.klwnbug.co.uk
All the above is CC-By-SA and no other implied copyright license to Cycle magazine.

SA_SA_SA
Posts: 1659
Joined: 31 Oct 2009, 1:46pm

Re: Percentage of road side Dutch paths that are unidirectional in normal traffic direction?ly

Postby SA_SA_SA » 30 Jan 2018, 11:58am

Ahh, I was asking about the ratio of uni to bi-directional road-adjacent dutch paths in Holland not the UK :)
------------You may not use this post in Cycle or other magazine ------ 8)

User avatar
mjr
Posts: 10781
Joined: 20 Jun 2011, 7:06pm
Location: Norfolk or Somerset, mostly
Contact:

Re: Percentage of road side Dutch paths that are unidirectional in normal traffic direction?ly

Postby mjr » 30 Jan 2018, 12:07pm

SA_SA_SA wrote:Ahh, I was asking about the ratio of uni to bi-directional road-adjacent dutch paths in Holland not the UK :)

The first two paragraphs of my reply are about the Netherlands, although I should have mentioned that I've only cycled in the Hollands, Utrecht and Zeeland so far - the eastern provinces may be different, but I doubt it as I think they all follow their CROW much more than our highway authorities follow DMRB or MfS.

I commented on the UK cities in reply to "they are what get copied (and worsened) when transferred to the UK" because I don't think it's completely true any more.
MJR, mostly pedalling 3-speed roadsters. KL+West Norfolk BUG incl social easy rides http://www.klwnbug.co.uk
All the above is CC-By-SA and no other implied copyright license to Cycle magazine.

Wanlock Dod
Posts: 270
Joined: 28 Sep 2016, 5:48pm

Re: Percentage of road side Dutch paths that are unidirectional in normal traffic direction?ly

Postby Wanlock Dod » 30 Jan 2018, 12:39pm

My experiences of the Netherlands are of 2-way provision on both sides of the road being quite common for busy roads, presumably because it reduces the need for cyclists to cross quite a lot. The exception would be in rural areas where provision would only be on one side. I don't recall that much one way provision for cyclists over there, and would probably consider it to be the exception rather than the rule, and I think that they are doing this for the benefit of cyclists, to make it easier for them. Safe and convenient infrastructure is continuous.

My limited experiences of segregated infrastructure in the UK are than it tends to be 2-way, but that this is more to keep all the cyclists together for the convenience of motorists than it is for cyclists. It often seems to require rather a lot more crossing of the road than seems like the safest way. Because cyclists have to spend so much time on the road one way infrastructure on both sides always seems like a better solution here to me because it is often rather easier to reintegrate with traffic.

I don't do all that much urban cycling in either country to be honest though.

Vorpal
Moderator
Posts: 15672
Joined: 19 Jan 2009, 3:34pm
Location: Not there ;)

Re: Percentage of road side Dutch paths that are unidirectional in normal traffic direction?ly

Postby Vorpal » 30 Jan 2018, 2:01pm

IIRC, in engineering terms, it's fairly complex to work out whether a two-way path is permitted. It depends how far from the road it can be, whether there is space for signalised, protected crossings at junctions, whether there is space for cycle path on both sides of the road, what is the pedal cycle traffic density, and how it will connect to other facilities.

The standards are fairly clear about it, specifying minimum separation from the main carriageway, and things like that. Also, many bidirectional tracks are well away from the road, or completely separate infrastructure, so it would be unreasonable to compare them to a facility that is next and parallel to a road.
“In some ways, it is easier to be a dissident, for then one is without responsibility.”
― Nelson Mandela, Long Walk to Freedom

Wanlock Dod
Posts: 270
Joined: 28 Sep 2016, 5:48pm

Re: Percentage of road side Dutch paths that are unidirectional in normal traffic direction?ly

Postby Wanlock Dod » 30 Jan 2018, 3:32pm

Vorpal wrote:...well away from the road...

I find this about rather a lot of their infrastructure, and I'm sure it's better for it. I've certainly never had to cycle on a pavement on the wrong side of the road over there.

User avatar
Tigerbiten
Posts: 1602
Joined: 29 Jun 2009, 6:49am

Re: Percentage of road side Dutch paths that are unidirectional in normal traffic direction?ly

Postby Tigerbiten » 30 Jan 2018, 4:45pm

Do you mean like (https://goo.gl/maps/uj2hwrvHwqD2) a center lane and two half unidirectional lanes outside it.
I found that system tended to on quiet back lanes.

Vorpal
Moderator
Posts: 15672
Joined: 19 Jan 2009, 3:34pm
Location: Not there ;)

Re: Percentage of road side Dutch paths that are unidirectional in normal traffic direction?ly

Postby Vorpal » 30 Jan 2018, 11:07pm

Tigerbiten wrote:Do you mean like (https://goo.gl/maps/uj2hwrvHwqD2) a center lane and two half unidirectional lanes outside it.
I found that system tended to on quiet back lanes.

I think SA_SA_SA is asking about
https://www.google.no/maps/@52.3321962, ... 312!8i6656 or https://www.google.no/maps/@52.3315697, ... 376!8i2688
versus
https://www.google.no/maps/@52.3490481, ... 312!8i6656 or
https://www.google.no/maps/@52.3495369, ... 376!8i2688

The second type are theoretically meant to be used in the same direction as motor traffic, but in fact a significant minority cycle the wrong way on them.
“In some ways, it is easier to be a dissident, for then one is without responsibility.”
― Nelson Mandela, Long Walk to Freedom