I get what you're saying but you ever tried biking in Amsterdam at rush hour? There's just as much congestion. Nobody's going to die in a crash though, I'll give you that. But the experience itself is more crowded.
I think what you're looking for is a more rural existence.
> I think what you're looking for is a more rural existence.
Speaking for myself, absolutely not. The amount of things available in cities compared to rural areas is immense. I’ve lived in both.
Theater, music venues, libraries, restaurants, beer gardens, good food markets, schools. I have all of this writhing walking and biking distance. You don’t get that in rural areas without needing a car.
Rural areas are actually bike-averse. No shoulders, high speed limits, drunk drivers, asshole angry white guy pickup truck drivers, conservative contempt for "liberal" bicyclists.
They SHOULD be better but... no.
Then again my urban experience is Minneapolis St Paul, possibly the most bike-able city outside of winter I've seen.
i just saw the same in a documentary about biking in germany. major roads in rural areas have absolutely no space for bikes. cars go at the speed limit, and riding a bike from one village to the next is more dangerous than any city.
It depends. Many major roads have separate bike paths and if they don't there's always the option to use smaller, less travelled side roads but you have to plan your route in that case.
well that situation was what was shown in the documentary. i can't say how common that is, but given the cost and notorious lack of funds i think it is more common than we like. i could be wrong though. we could use google streetview to check.
as for alternative roads, that really depends. generally from my experience between two neighboring villages there tends to be only one road, unless you want to make a big detour. sometimes alternate roads exist when and old main road is replaced with a new one on a different route.
I do / have done the London cycle superhighway at rush hour - it's pretty much the same deal (although i would call any electric bikes "powered" and question if they should be on the same path / as powerful).
The point is if there was a dedicated (about a metre wide, cut off from road traffic by a raised kerb) cycle lane not just through Londons busiest roads but ... well everywhere there is a car road.
Just say if you want a car there you should also have a bicycle.
We seem to think that the industrial revolution chnaged something - like globally there should be some kind of "profit".
I think it's just we as a species get to still be at a subsistence level, just a higher subsistence level.
NB- re london cycleways - yeah people do die. The cannon street path was opposite the LFB station and they did not have far to go to wash the blood away sadly.
> although i would call any electric bikes "powered" and question if they should be on the same path / as powerful
Sort of agree, although an electric assist (for people who aren't in great shape, to get over hills) might be an exception. Limit it to 15mph or whatever.
Like the sibling mentioned, a pedal assist makes intersections safer - at least, it seems that way here in the southeast of the US. Barreling through a walkway and endangering the people around them is the problem, but it is kind of difficult to sell a bike with the potential for the former that doesn't have the latter as well.
It would be so nice to share most roads - but like op mentioned traveling through the historical European sites, the greenways being built here are approximating that. It is changing our city government significantly. Hope it is yours as well.
I'm daily cycling through Amsterdam (City center) at rush hours (8 am, 5 pm), it's busy but no congestion (longer than 10 seconds). But you definitely need some cycling skills and know your way around.
I think what you're looking for is a more rural existence.