Bas Govers
-
Upload
newcycling -
Category
Education
-
view
129 -
download
7
description
Transcript of Bas Govers
1
Love cycling Go Dutch Planning urban development- think people, think bike in the NetherlandsHow to integrate biking in our cities and urban developments?
5 november 2013
Newcastle
Bas Govers [email protected]
2
Structure: how to…
1) More then cycle infrastructure! 2) Urban trends: more cycling to come! 3)The example of Utrecht: giving the city
back to the people 4) Cycle highways
▪ The power of highways▪ Solutions in a urban environment▪ Solutions in a suburban environment
5) Conclusions
3
More then cycle infrastructure
1
4
Policy: spatial planning
1950 1960 1970 1980 1990 2000 2010
VINEX: wijken
3e Nota RO: groeikernen
2e Nota RO: groeisteden
5
The ‘vinex’ developments (1990 – 2010) based on cycling!
Concentrating new urban developments around the cities; enforcing the level of service in the city
Large enough for elementary daily services on a short distance (5.000 houses)
Full separation from the main carstructures Around railway-stations; bike and PT-
facilities On cycling-distance from the city
6
And in the residential areas, Houten cycling city
7
School areas Hart
8
Policy: shopping, schools, medical care in the neigbourhood
9
Policy: sustainable road safety
10
Urban trends: more cyling to come!
2
11
The revival of the city: attractiveness as a economic tool
Winners: historical inercities, mixed areas, high ‘experience-value’
Utrecht, Groningen, Maastricht, Den Haag, Rotterdam, Amsterdam (Centrum, De Pijp, Oud-West)
Losers: suburban areas, monofunctional offices and shoppingcentres▪ Almere, Purmerend, Zoetermeer,
Spijkenisse
12
Trends: new urban inhabitants- Young families- Highly educated- Urban lifestyle
13
Trends: new urban inhabitants in ‘Zuid’ and ‘West’, not in ‘noord’.
14
Trends: healthy living
Effects on health of cycling regularly (Univ.Utrecht):
+ 250 dgn more by fysical exercise
- 2 dgn less by risk of accidents
- 10 dgn less by poor air-quality
15
Some facts
In Amsterdam: 1990: bikeshare 33%, cars 39%2010: bikeshare 47% cars 31%1990: 6% bike to station2010: 40% bike to station
In Utrecht:
22.000 parkingplaces for bikes
In the stationsarea in 2020
16
Revival of the city, new inhabitants Healthy living Sustainability: rising costs of mobility ‘Experience’ and ‘attactiveness as an economic tool
Conclusion: ▪ Intensifiing cities▪ Need for attractive environments ▪ Cycling is playing a key role
How can we manage this? Let’s have a closer look at Utrecht
Trends: more cycling!
17
The example of Utrecht: giving the city back to the people!
3
18
This is Utrecht
Uit: Magazine Utrecht Stad van Kennis & Cultuur
“City of knowledge and culture”
19
Protests to enlarging the Ringroad (national project)
20
Air-quality enforces hard measures but no solutions
21
No more newtowns; but intensifiing the city leads to more traffic
Locaties uit het Stadsdebat Dynamisch Stedelijk Masterplan(www.stadsdebatutrecht.nl)
22
New deal: making Utrecht no 1 cycling city
Collegeprogramma Mobiliteit “Dit college gaat van Utrecht de OV- en fietsstad van Nederland maken”
“…om de stad ook in de toekomst duurzaam bereikbaar te houden”
“…aantrekkelijke alternatieven voor de automobiliteit van, naar en binnen Utrecht”
“Een schaalsprong in het openbaar vervoer is daarbij een even onvermijdelijk als wenselijk perspectief”
“…samen met het Rijk, het bestuur regio Utrecht (BRU) en de NS”
“Voor een gezonde, leefbare en duurzame ruimte neemt het college maatregelen die alternatieven bieden voor de huidige groei van de automobiliteit”
23
Utrecht Attractive and Attainable (2030 ten opzichte van 2010)
24
Redistributing the public space!Road capacity (TU Delft, people per lane of 3,5 m)
25
26
3 mobility environments
ABC
27
3 mobility environments
ABC
28
Car-acces: giving people choices
ABC
AB
C
29
The principles of the A-environment
Attractivity as a leading principle Reducing car traffic, destination only Redistributing public space
from cardominated parking ring to attractive cycling ring
Redesigning the barriers for cyclists In the innercity: cycling for destination
30
31
32
“there are bikes everywhere”
33
34
35
36
Streets for people
37
Cycle-highways in to the city
4
38
39
Sterroutes Den HaagF12 en F44 – C-zone
40
Accessibility/Economy The Hague
E-bikes go 50% to 75% faster, widening the catchment area by 75%.
41
Change of modal choice
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
tot 2.5 km 2.5-3.7 km 3.7-5 km 5-7.5 km 7.5-10 km 10 km >
fiets
auto Beoogde verschuiving
42
B –environment: Urban solutions
43
Next to main road or through the neighborhoods?
44
Attractive cycling roads as a tool
Route 1 Leidseweg
Route 2 Weg der VN
45
Attractive cycling roads as a tool
Route 1 = 1,8 km Route 2 = 1,6 km
82% choses route 1 15% choses route 2
46
Reden keuze route
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
Ko
rte
r in
afs
tan
d
Sn
elle
r in
tijd
Le
uks
te/p
retti
gst
e/m
oo
iste
Reden
Per
cen
tag
e
Route 1
Route 2
47Verdeling ingeschatte reistijd
0
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
5 6 7 8 10 15 20
Ingeschatte reistijd in minuten
Aan
tal
48
Cycle-streets (width 4 meter)
49
Roundabout: nonstop
50
51
Urban-environment: quality of places
52
Principles of the urban environment (B)
Cycling highways: attractive, fast and safe No massive carroads (max 15.000 per day) Only inside-ringroad traffic allowed Attractive boulevards, spatial continuity Balance of modes: easy crossing in the
whole area Quality of places
53
Suburban environments (C)
54
55
56
Principles of the C-environment
Keeping bicycles away from the carenvironment
Cycling highways: fast and easy Car-, PT and biking structures on separate
tracks In centres: quality of public spaces
57
Cycle highways: using railwaytracksWidth profile: minimum 4 x 1 meter = 4 m(speed 10 – 40 km/h)
58
Design: Priority Cycleway along the railway
59
Meeliften: Hanzespoorlijn Zwolle
60
Attractive view -> water old railway – San Remo Italy
61
Own Identity( F35 in 2011 in Twente NL)
62
Intersectionssource : www.fietssnelwegen.nl
63
Nonstop in 2 levels
64
Taking cycling to the next level
Giving the city back to the people Attractiveness as a leading principle Redistribution of public space: A, B, C Clear principles for car traffic
▪ A: no trough-traffic; car as guest▪ B: no high intensities; balance▪ C: seperate structures