Comments by "Lynott Parris" (@DenUitvreter) on "City Beautiful" channel.

@gert-janvanderlee5307 No. The natural gas was actually detrimental to the Dutch economy and when turning point came regarding to cycling, in the 70's, that effect was already strong.
3
@gert-janvanderlee5307 Initially yes, but it also increased the value of the guilder, the currency making the manufacturing industry dependent on export less competitive. That is the original "Dutch disease". That was already in effect when the turn towards more cycling instead of letting the car take over was translating to infrastructure adaptation.
3
@gert-janvanderlee5307 That you didn't know it doesn't make it nonsense. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dutch_disease
3
As I have been saying for years and also the channel NotJustBikes has argued, Americans better take Copenhagen as an example than Dutch cities. The Netherlands has much more cyclists, less car traffic and cycling infrastructure that is already in the phase that cycling lanes are removed because they mostly facilitate car traffic going fast. America and many European countries still have to go through the previous phases of a good cycling environment.
3
@gert-janvanderlee5307 What bicyle lanes do in a cycling friendly urban environment is allowing cars to drive faster safely, so it's basically a feuture serving car traffic. In the most cycling friendly cities you see more cycling streets coming, where the rare cars have to yield to cyclists and stay behind them. The most cycling friendly area's of cities like Groningen and Utrecht have less cycling lanes than 20 years ago.
1
@gert-janvanderlee5307 I've been living in this country far longer than NotJustBikes and unlike him in a cycling friendly Dutch city, with far less cycling lanes. Cycling lanes are needed for safety when there's lots of car traffic. In more cycling friendly cities you need far less because the cars will adapt to the cyclists on the same piece of road.
1