Dutch urban policies that promote pedestrian and bicycle mobility : case studies of Rotterdam, Groningen, and Delft

In the United States, decreased physical mobility and increased automobile dependence is a significant problem. Current regulations and policies promote urban environments that adversely impact residents' health. In fact, there is a growing body of evidence which documents the adverse health impacts of common land use patterns in the United States. A wide range of zoning, development, and transportation regulations and guidelines that restrict mixed-use development and compact urban design result in travel distances that are often too great to walk or bike. On the other hand, nearly half of all automobile trips in the United States are two miles or shorter. Yet, due to the fact that current regulations and policies do not even require pedestrian or bicycle facilities to be constructed, the option to walk or cycle to a destination is severely inhibited. Given the growing health, environmental and economic externalities associated with this type of urban environment, a change in regulations and policy is needed. After examining the above mentioned problems in the United States, I formulated the objective to learn from The Netherlands, which has succeeded in making cycling and walking a safe and attractive alternative to driving. Living in The Netherlands and experiencing this first-hand furthered my interest in learning how the Dutch had achieved such high cycling rates and contributed to pedestrian oriented development. Therefore, I decided to look at Dutch policies that promoted pedestrian and bicycle mobility. Moreover, I wanted to not only explore the urban policies in The Netherlands to gain a critical understanding of how these policies promote pedestrian and bicycle mobility but also to see what provisions could be used as examples for improving walking and cycling conditions in the United States. Accordingly, the most transferable measures that were found are applied to the Sustainable Community Development Code (SCDC) of the Rocky Mountain Land Use Institute in the United States. In order to gain a critical understanding of the Dutch approach, I chose to do case studies of three cities in The Netherlands: Rotterdam, Groningen, and Delft. These three cities all have different contexts and approaches for facilitating pedestrian and bicycle transit. Therefore, it was beneficial to research the various perspectives. Rotterdam, Groningen, and Delft were also beneficial cities to study based on their varying sizes: respectively large, medium-size, and small based on Dutch standards. The theoretical framework for the research was established by conducting a literature review on urban policies that contribute to bicycle and pedestrian mobility. The literature review revealed two broad categories for consideration: the built environment (transportation systems; land-use patterns; and urban design) and policy instruments (hard and soft). These two categories, along with the location, established the scope for my research. I established an analytical framework to define how the data would be collected and subsequently analyzed. The data collection has two components and is the same for each of the three cities. The components are: (1) fieldwork, consisting of interviews and observations; and (2) desk research which is a review of the policies collected as well as a literature study. Once the data was collected, I applied the SCDC attributes to it to determine which measures are applicable to the United States. The SCDC is structured by policies provisions, which can be an approach to removing obstacles, suggesting incentives that might be created, or focusing on enacting standards that might be adopted to ensure progress in a particular area. Levels of effort are then assigned to these innovative approaches. While several differences exist between The Netherlands and the United States, the Dutch approach provides many invaluable lessons for improving bicycle and pedestrian infrastructure in the United States. Conventional wisdom might suggest that the differences in history, culture, topography, and climate are responsible for the success in The Netherlands, however, this research as well as other studies done in this field reveal that polices are the impetus for making cities either people-friendly or car-friendly. Notably, most of the data collected pertains to bicycles as much more is needed for these systems as opposed to pedestrian facilities. The case studies revealed that the promotion of bicycle use requires political support and continuous attention. This not only means specific bicycle policy, but that the bicycle is applicable and supported by all policies. The bicycle should also be regarded as a main transport mode, being taken into account along with motorized transport and public transport. Additionally, municipalities in The Netherlands uniformly use the guidelines published in the Design Manual for Bicycle Traffic, which describes what is required for the creation of bicycle-friendly infrastructure. The Design Manual for Bicycle Traffic developed by CROW provides numerous guidelines that if applied can assist in making the bicycle a full fledge participant in an overall traffic and transport system. In the context of The Netherlands, these guidelines demonstrate that if good functional policy guidelines are available, then they will be used and it is not even necessary to make them compulsory. The lesson for the United States is that a uniform, functional, and knowledgeable set of policy guidelines like the one provided in the CROW manual can be the starting point for changing legislation in this field. A small project which incorporates the necessary measures for bicycle traffic can be initiated, then if successful, can be applied in other communities and in this way standards can be developed that promote the bicycle as a main mode of transport. The other benefit to creating a set of regulatory standards is that uniformity in these systems creates a seamless system for users, meaning that if the system is easily recognizable, then it is more comfortable to use, and thus will gain more participants and in addition increase safety as users will know how to behave.