12 ms·

I lived there for a year. I think you forget that everyone owns a bicycle, everyone rides their bicycle everywhere, and almost every single street has a separa

by Mo3 4y ago

I lived there for a year. I think you forget that everyone owns a bicycle, everyone rides their bicycle everywhere, and almost every single street has a separated bicycle lane. There are more bicycle lanes than in any other country on earth (22,000 miles in a country ten times smaller than California) [1], there's even bicycle highways and intersections. Public transport is exceptionally good as well. Everything is highly walkable and accessible, everything you want to do is doable and everywhere you want to go is reachable. You should check it out sometime, these pictures don't really show it. (jacquesm in this thread is spot on too though. There's not that much life going on in Almere itself.) [1] https://www.opencyclemap.org/?zoom=7&lat=51.48412&lon=8.08713&layers=B0000 https://www.opencyclemap.org/?zoom=7&lat=51.48412&lon=8.0871...

sandworm101 4y ago
But every parking spot in the picture seems to have a car parked in it.
- Mo3 4y ago
  Of course there's still cars. They are just not used exclusively or frequently. If I remember the statistics correctly, in cities trips are made 30-45% by bicycle, 25-40% by public transport and the rest is cars.
imilk 4y ago
I've never been there and was just making a quick assessment by Google Maps. It is nice that you can bike anywhere, but I'm mostly seeing residential neighborhoods (~10 blocks wide of identical row homes) pretty spaced out around a town center without amenities in their area. So in terms of meeting someone for a coffee/meal/beer/event it looks like you'll have to hop on a bicycle unless you want to go on a 20-30 minute walk past monotonous homes. Which is not that different than suburbs anywhere else.
- Mo3 4y ago
  Of course there's going to be some level of separation between residential areas and other areas - but contrary to, for example the US, where you have to walk for miles or put your life in danger bicycling between a suburb and the city center - the distances are quite negligible and the space in between is friendly towards anything that is not a car. Public transport intervals are measured in minutes, and unlike in the US, it not only connects the suburbs to the city center, but the suburbs to other suburbs as well. Really, everything you want to do is doable and everywhere you want to go is reachable. I miss it. Regarding coffee/meal/beer, there's little shops or cafes or restaurants mixed into the residential areas as well. This video details the fantastic engineering very well: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lP-G-inkkDg https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lP-G-inkkDg This is specifically about differences between US and Europe but also a great watch: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6K8KEoZwMRY https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6K8KEoZwMRY
  - imilk 4y ago
    I guess so but I'm seeing 1-2 restaurants/bars in sub-neighborhoods that are about 1.5km wide. I'm not saying the city is bad by any means, I'm just saying that it falls very short in what I would hope to be the "future of urban life". Maybe the future of smaller towns or exurbs. But there seems to be a lack of necessary dynamic spaces that change in character throughout the day as people flow in and out that you look for in great urban areas.
    - Mo3 4y ago
      I mean, it is an experiment. Nothing more, nothing less. I'm sorry the BBC is dependent on clickbait titles, but Almere is really nothing too special as I have also mentioned in my original post referring to another users great post here. Some of these concepts have been in place in other cities around the Netherlands for a while, and (imo) work better there. There is not much life going on in Almere, which might explain the lack of density of restaurants or whatever you see. It's really just that Almere is artificial land reclaimed from the sea, so they have quite a lot of space there to experiment with their weird metal houses and green roofs. Almere is a little less dense than other cities nearby.
  - 4y ago
- prmoustache 4y ago
  I work for a company who's headquarters are there. It has great infras (railway, bicycle lanes), everything is modern but...it is pretty boring, lacking character. You can't create and buy a thousand years of history.
- calt 4y ago
  > you'll have to hop on a bicycle But that's exactly what you're missing. Hopping on a Dutch bicycle in a dutch city is like walking, but better. No helmet required. No hassle of dealing with cars trying to kill you. No pain from hunched over road bike posture. Just unlock your bike and go.
  - imilk 4y ago
    Walking in a urban area well designed for it also requires no helmet, no hassle of dealing with cars trying to kill you, and no pain from hunched over road bike posture. You also can stop and chat or pop into businesses easier and don't have to park or lock up your bike anywhere. I love biking, but it's a bit shortsighted to think that bicycling in urban areas can replicate the same benefits of a city that is well designed for walking.
    - mrsuprawsm 4y ago
      >I love biking, but it's a bit shortsighted to think that bicycling in urban areas can replicate the same benefits of a city that is well designed for walking. That's exactly the point, in the Netherlands it can and does. Sometimes you walk, sometimes you cycle, it just depends on the context of your specific trip. (Are you going one place or many? Is the weather a bit cold today? Will it rain a lot later?). Both options are pretty much as good as each other.
      - imilk 4y ago
        Well my original larger point is that the city we're all discussing here is not walkable at all. And you can't make up for that by saying, "Well I know it's a 1.5km walk through identical rowhomes to the nearest pub, but the fact that you can bike there instead makes it the future of urban living." Almere looks to be a commuter suburb to Amsterdam, where no culture, events, or urban life of any significance takes place. The fact that it is bikable is nice, but there are plenty of suburbs with well designed bike infrastructure. And that in no way does bikability supplant a well design urban area with residential, commercial, park, & event spaces combined together to create a dynamic living environment.
brailsafe 4y ago
As someone who's lived in cities inspired by Garden City, this looks very British (by their own admission) and extremely suburban. So I gotta agree with the parent's observation. The only difference being small streets which inherently slow traffic, and probably better bike and public transit infrastructure, but everywhere has good public transit if it's tiny now. The garden city movement was a giant compromise between city and rural life, almost by definition. This is one of the most suburban places I've ever seen, it just might be marginally more Dutch of one. There's literally a Dunkin' donuts, Starbucks, and Chanel store all within what looks like a place you drive or bike to to then walk around for a bit and leave, which to me is reminiscent of some places on the outskirts of L.A. Seems like it would probably be better to just ride your bike to Amsterdam if what you want. On the other hand, that's just my observation. What did you get out of living there? Was it the quiet, or the parks? Did you meet people easily?
- Mo3 4y ago
  I was not a particular fan of Almere (please refer to jacquesm’s post on details), however, it being a Dutch city, various general benefits of Dutch city design and engineering also apply there - these are what I am really trying to point at. Almere itself is rather boring and devoid of life. It’s simply artificial land reclaimed from the sea with no history or story to it.
jltsiren 4y ago
Urban areas are not just walkable but walk-centric. They are built under the assumption that most people don't move faster than 4-5 km/h. Places that want to attract people must be close to each other in local centers, or people don't go to them. Bicycles are more suburban than urban. Because they allow people to move flexibly at a relatively high speed, they encourage suburban structure, where things are spread out over a larger area. They are functionally similar to cars, but on a smaller scale.
- ethanbond 4y ago
  Uhh… this seems like an excessively pedantic distinction. What’s the source of truth you’re pulling from here?
  - jltsiren 4y ago
    People may have different definitions for "urban" and "suburban". Regardless of the words used, there is a huge difference between a city designed for walking and a city designed for people using vehicles (cars, public transport, bicycles).
    - calt 4y ago
      Just move bicycles from being grouped with cars to being grouped with walking, and you're correct. Dutch cities are designed for walking and bicycles. It helps that the bicycles are also designed for dutch cities. Upright, comfortable, a bit heavy and slow, and can be locked up for short times without needing to be locked to anything.
      - jltsiren 4y ago
        You can't design a city for both walking and bicycles. You can only make compromises between them. The slow Dutch bicycles are still 2.5x to 3x faster than the average pedestrian, which makes them convenient for distances most people would not consider walkable. If most people are comfortable with using bicycles over such distances, it encourages a more spread out urban structure. People often use bicycles in cities because they are convenient and as fast as or faster than driving a car or using public transport. That is the reason why bicycles should be grouped with other vehicles and not with walking.
Melkman 4y ago
Indeed, Almere is a sleeping city. Many inhabitants moved from Amsterdam to Almere since gentrification has made housing in Amsterdam almost unobtainable for people with a median income. Almere is comfortable enough and you can get by without a car. But the fun still is in Amsterdam only a half an hour train ride away. In the US it would be called a suburb of Amsterdam.

by Mo3 4y ago

sandworm101 4y ago

But every parking spot in the picture seems to have a car parked in it.

Mo3 4y ago
Of course there's still cars. They are just not used exclusively or frequently. If I remember the statistics correctly, in cities trips are made 30-45% by bicycle, 25-40% by public transport and the rest is cars.

imilk 4y ago

I've never been there and was just making a quick assessment by Google Maps. It is nice that you can bike anywhere, but I'm mostly seeing residential neighborhoods (~10 blocks wide of identical row homes) pretty spaced out around a town center without amenities in their area. So in terms of meeting someone for a coffee/meal/beer/event it looks like you'll have to hop on a bicycle unless you want to go on a 20-30 minute walk past monotonous homes. Which is not that different than suburbs anywhere else.

Mo3 4y ago
Of course there's going to be some level of separation between residential areas and other areas - but contrary to, for example the US, where you have to walk for miles or put your life in danger bicycling between a suburb and the city center - the distances are quite negligible and the space in between is friendly towards anything that is not a car. Public transport intervals are measured in minutes, and unlike in the US, it not only connects the suburbs to the city center, but the suburbs to other suburbs as well. Really, everything you want to do is doable and everywhere you want to go is reachable. I miss it. Regarding coffee/meal/beer, there's little shops or cafes or restaurants mixed into the residential areas as well. This video details the fantastic engineering very well: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lP-G-inkkDg https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lP-G-inkkDg This is specifically about differences between US and Europe but also a great watch: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6K8KEoZwMRY https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6K8KEoZwMRY
- imilk 4y ago
  I guess so but I'm seeing 1-2 restaurants/bars in sub-neighborhoods that are about 1.5km wide. I'm not saying the city is bad by any means, I'm just saying that it falls very short in what I would hope to be the "future of urban life". Maybe the future of smaller towns or exurbs. But there seems to be a lack of necessary dynamic spaces that change in character throughout the day as people flow in and out that you look for in great urban areas.
  - Mo3 4y ago
    I mean, it is an experiment. Nothing more, nothing less. I'm sorry the BBC is dependent on clickbait titles, but Almere is really nothing too special as I have also mentioned in my original post referring to another users great post here. Some of these concepts have been in place in other cities around the Netherlands for a while, and (imo) work better there. There is not much life going on in Almere, which might explain the lack of density of restaurants or whatever you see. It's really just that Almere is artificial land reclaimed from the sea, so they have quite a lot of space there to experiment with their weird metal houses and green roofs. Almere is a little less dense than other cities nearby.
- 4y ago
prmoustache 4y ago
I work for a company who's headquarters are there. It has great infras (railway, bicycle lanes), everything is modern but...it is pretty boring, lacking character. You can't create and buy a thousand years of history.
calt 4y ago
> you'll have to hop on a bicycle But that's exactly what you're missing. Hopping on a Dutch bicycle in a dutch city is like walking, but better. No helmet required. No hassle of dealing with cars trying to kill you. No pain from hunched over road bike posture. Just unlock your bike and go.
- imilk 4y ago
  Walking in a urban area well designed for it also requires no helmet, no hassle of dealing with cars trying to kill you, and no pain from hunched over road bike posture. You also can stop and chat or pop into businesses easier and don't have to park or lock up your bike anywhere. I love biking, but it's a bit shortsighted to think that bicycling in urban areas can replicate the same benefits of a city that is well designed for walking.
  - mrsuprawsm 4y ago
    >I love biking, but it's a bit shortsighted to think that bicycling in urban areas can replicate the same benefits of a city that is well designed for walking. That's exactly the point, in the Netherlands it can and does. Sometimes you walk, sometimes you cycle, it just depends on the context of your specific trip. (Are you going one place or many? Is the weather a bit cold today? Will it rain a lot later?). Both options are pretty much as good as each other.
    - imilk 4y ago
      Well my original larger point is that the city we're all discussing here is not walkable at all. And you can't make up for that by saying, "Well I know it's a 1.5km walk through identical rowhomes to the nearest pub, but the fact that you can bike there instead makes it the future of urban living." Almere looks to be a commuter suburb to Amsterdam, where no culture, events, or urban life of any significance takes place. The fact that it is bikable is nice, but there are plenty of suburbs with well designed bike infrastructure. And that in no way does bikability supplant a well design urban area with residential, commercial, park, & event spaces combined together to create a dynamic living environment.

brailsafe 4y ago

As someone who's lived in cities inspired by Garden City, this looks very British (by their own admission) and extremely suburban. So I gotta agree with the parent's observation. The only difference being small streets which inherently slow traffic, and probably better bike and public transit infrastructure, but everywhere has good public transit if it's tiny now. The garden city movement was a giant compromise between city and rural life, almost by definition. This is one of the most suburban places I've ever seen, it just might be marginally more Dutch of one. There's literally a Dunkin' donuts, Starbucks, and Chanel store all within what looks like a place you drive or bike to to then walk around for a bit and leave, which to me is reminiscent of some places on the outskirts of L.A. Seems like it would probably be better to just ride your bike to Amsterdam if what you want. On the other hand, that's just my observation. What did you get out of living there? Was it the quiet, or the parks? Did you meet people easily?

Mo3 4y ago
I was not a particular fan of Almere (please refer to jacquesm’s post on details), however, it being a Dutch city, various general benefits of Dutch city design and engineering also apply there - these are what I am really trying to point at. Almere itself is rather boring and devoid of life. It’s simply artificial land reclaimed from the sea with no history or story to it.

jltsiren 4y ago

Urban areas are not just walkable but walk-centric. They are built under the assumption that most people don't move faster than 4-5 km/h. Places that want to attract people must be close to each other in local centers, or people don't go to them. Bicycles are more suburban than urban. Because they allow people to move flexibly at a relatively high speed, they encourage suburban structure, where things are spread out over a larger area. They are functionally similar to cars, but on a smaller scale.

ethanbond 4y ago
Uhh… this seems like an excessively pedantic distinction. What’s the source of truth you’re pulling from here?
- jltsiren 4y ago
  People may have different definitions for "urban" and "suburban". Regardless of the words used, there is a huge difference between a city designed for walking and a city designed for people using vehicles (cars, public transport, bicycles).
  - calt 4y ago
    Just move bicycles from being grouped with cars to being grouped with walking, and you're correct. Dutch cities are designed for walking and bicycles. It helps that the bicycles are also designed for dutch cities. Upright, comfortable, a bit heavy and slow, and can be locked up for short times without needing to be locked to anything.
    - jltsiren 4y ago
      You can't design a city for both walking and bicycles. You can only make compromises between them. The slow Dutch bicycles are still 2.5x to 3x faster than the average pedestrian, which makes them convenient for distances most people would not consider walkable. If most people are comfortable with using bicycles over such distances, it encourages a more spread out urban structure. People often use bicycles in cities because they are convenient and as fast as or faster than driving a car or using public transport. That is the reason why bicycles should be grouped with other vehicles and not with walking.

Melkman 4y ago

Indeed, Almere is a sleeping city. Many inhabitants moved from Amsterdam to Almere since gentrification has made housing in Amsterdam almost unobtainable for people with a median income. Almere is comfortable enough and you can get by without a car. But the fun still is in Amsterdam only a half an hour train ride away. In the US it would be called a suburb of Amsterdam.