The Desire Lines of Bicycle Users in Amsterdam
The Desire Lines of Bicycle Users in Amsterdam
9 intersections
19.500 cyclists
9 hours
Juli 2014
Contact
Copenhagenize Design Co:
Clotilde Imbert
University of Amserdam:
Marco te Brömmelstroet
The Desire Lines of cyclists in Amsterdam
Data collection and analyse by:
University of Amsterdam
TM Urban Culture (Stadscultuur)
Teacher: Olga Sezneva and Adriaan Rottenberg
Maps and report:
Copenhagenize Design Co. - Clotilde Imbert
University of Amsterdam - Marco te Brömmelstroet
Report commissioned by the Amsterdam municipality (DIVV Department)
University of Amsterdam (AISSR)
Plantage Muidergracht 14
1018 TV Amsterdam
the Netherlands
Copenhagenize Design Co.
Trangravsvej 8
1436 Copenhagen K
Denmark
2
The Desire Lines of the bicycle users in Amsterdam
Introduction
Methodology
Intersection n°1: Meester Treublaan & Weesperzijde
Intersection n°2: Frederiksplein
Intersection n°3: Meester Visserplein & Jobenbreestraat
Intersection n°4: Stadhouderskade & Ferdinand Bolstraat
Intersection n°5: Ceintuurbaan & Ferdinand Bolstraat
Intersection n°6: Stadhouderskade & Museumbrug
Intersection n°7: Nassauplein & Westerpark
Intersection n°8: Czaar Peterstraat & Crusuiuskade
Intersection n°9: Linnaeusstraat & Wijttenbachstraat
Conclusion
4
5
6
10
12
14
16 18
20
22
24
26
3
Introduction
The behaviour of cyclists and specifically Amsterdam cyclists, is a recurring theme in public debate.
In many of these discussions, the majority of cyclists are deemed to display a strongly anarchic attitude. Although everyone can provide anecdotal evidence to confirm this allegation, there is precious
little structural insight into the actual behaviour of Amsterdam’s cyclists.
This lack of research is quite surprising, not only because of the pervasiveness of the debate, but
also because in many parts of the city, cyclists are by far the majority of road users. And also, more
and more parties actively state that they want to further increase their numbers. But how can we
design the traffic space for these – very welcome – road users if we don’t even know how they actually behave? To remedy this situation, we have charted the behaviour of over 18,000 cyclists at a
selection of intersections, which should give us a clearer picture.
The way we give shape to our infrastructures determines in large measure the tactical opportunities
for cyclists to take. However, cyclists are extremely savvy at finding their own way. If this leads to
large-scale undesirable or unpredictable behaviour – e.g. ignoring red lights, cutting corners – the
policy reflex is often to correct this behaviour by increasing police controls or by installing physical
measures, such as raising the kerb at places where cyclists take a shortcut across a zebra . By
means of this research we aim to question this reflex. We think that there might be a lot to learn from
cyclists’ swarm behaviour and how this interacts with the road design. Due to the exponential growth
of the number of bikes, the road design is often not adequate. It looks like some intersections only
continue to function by the grace of individual cyclists adopting and sharing new rules of conduct in
communication with each other. In his book To Save Everything, Click Here, Evgeny Morozov has
given a good summary of the added value this offers by stating that civil disobedience is an important signal to learn from: ‘[it] has a great signalling value, as it can indicate that the law in question
doesn’t correspond to common belief or morality’. In short, the tensions and irritations witnessed at
intersections are an important source of insight and a possible engine for change.
4
Methodology
In this report we address the general research question: How do Amsterdam cyclists interact with
design, each other and other road users and how do they experience this? In collaboration with the
City of Amsterdam ten intersections were selected which seemed to show most clearly this discrepancy between design and behaviour and which were practically suited as a focus for our research.
Figure: Monitored intersections in Amsterdam
Each intersection was allocated to a group of three first-year sociology students from the University
of Amsterdam. On February 17th, 18th or 19th 2014, during one hour of the morning or afternoon rush
hour, the students shot video material, which was then given an extensive quantitative analysis,
focusing on the various routes cyclists took to cross the intersection. For each, the routes that were
taken by two or more cyclists were mapped to create an understanding of the choreography of the
intersection.
This methodology is based on the“Desire Lines Analysis Tool” created and developed by Copenhagenize Design Co. It was used for the first time for understanding the behaviour of the cyclists
in Copenhagen in 2012. During 12 hours an intersection was filmed and then analysed in order to
figure out the behaviour of the cyclists and to collect unique data. Then, the methodology was applied to four main intersections in the city.
In addition, we looked at the correlation between design and behaviour, identifying three categories
of cyclists:
• Conformists: cyclists who stick to all the formal rules and designed routes;
• Momentumists: cyclists who follow their own route and adapt certain formal rules to suit their
own ends, without causing any dangerous situations or conflicts (e.g. turning right through a red
sign);
• Recklists: cyclists who recklessly ignore the rules, for instance they through a red light, and
thereby cause conflict with other road users.
Finally, in addition to the research into the revealed behaviour of cyclists, the students conducted
interviews in the week after the video recordings to gain insight into the experiences and emotions of
cyclists at these intersections. They developed their own ways of doing this; some used ride-along
interview techniques, while others interviewed people that waited at the traffic light. In general, open
questions were asked about stress levels, anxiety, general experiences and possible solutions.
Below, we report on the analysis (maps, diagram, data) of each separate intersection. The Elandsgracht intersection was left out due to lack of usable data.
5
Intersection n°1:
Meester Treublaan & Weesperzijde
Basics
The intersection Meesler Treublaan & Weesperijde, which is located just
outside the southern part of Amsterdam, forms the main passageway between the east and the south of the city. Moreover, Weesperijde street runs
across the river Amster and forms an excellent short-cut for cyclists to and
from the city center. The intersection is located near the major public transportation hub Amsterdam Amstel, to one of the main buildings of the University of Amsterdam and to the S112 highway, which is the main passageway
for cars to and from the smaller towns Dulvendrecht and Utrecht. Due to
this location, the intersection has to endure an intensive load of traffic, especially during morning and afternoon rush hours. It therefore essential that
the layout of the intersection is designed to be able to process the amount
of traffic, and more importantly also to process the right type (cyclists, cars,
public transport etc.) of users of the intersection.
Behaviour analysis
A total of 3,165 cyclists were counted from 08:45 till 09:45 in the morning
on February 18th 2014. The crossing can’t handle the amount of traffic during
rush hour, mostly because there were bottlenecks in the intersection layout.
Moreover, inconveniences were also noted with traffic signs, traffic lights
and waiting space for cyclists at certain points.
Corner B (1,002 cyclists)
Most of the cyclists behave according to the rules. The conformists use
mostly the line B2 (56%) and the line B1 (35.7%). There is only a small
amount of momentumists, mostly using line B8 (2.8%) which is a little shortcut. There was one serious recklist who cycled at a very high speed between
cyclists waiting for the red light.
6
Behaviour analysis
Corner A (514 cyclists)
At this street corner, not a single rule breaker, only a few momentumists
were noticed. Most cyclists (81,3 %) are conformists and followed the line
A2 from the Mr. Treublaan towards the Berlagebrug.
Corner C (1,067 cyclists)
Most of the cyclists who are coming from the bridge are conformists, most of
them choose the line C2 (46.1%) and second is the line C1 (38.1%). There
were many people (line C5: 7.2%) who had to wait on the road next to cars
because there was not enough waiting space. This pressure especially occurred when the bridge has just closed and dozens of cyclists are coming
down from the bridge.
7
Behaviour analysis
Corner D (572 cyclists)
65.2 % are conformists. A small amount of momentumists cycled on the
road in the wrong direction or used the crosswalk and other momentumists
took different short-cuts (17.2%).
8
Cyclists experiences
Many people referred to the junction as dangerous and felt anxious while cycling over it. They experience this main intersection in a negative way because
of overcrowding and cyclists’ not giving right of passage.
Bicycle Users
Recklists
2%
Momentumists 9%
Conformists
89%
9
Intersection n°2:
Frederiksplein
Basics
The Frederiksplein intersection is a large, central crossing which gives a connection between the East side of Amsterdam (Weesperbuurt and Plantage),
the South area of Amsterdam and the city center, including the Leidseplein
and Museumplein. It is particularly interesting, because it has a different layout than most of the other crossings in Amsterdam; is it widely set up, and
there is lots of space for cyclists as well as for cars. Frederiksplein is also
a very complex intersection with multiple lanes users can take. This could
cause confusion for the users and increase the numbers of trajectories for
the cyclists.
Behaviour analysis
There were 1,744 cyclists crossing Frederiksplein from 4:26 till 5:26pm on
February 18th 2014. After analysing the video 21 lines were drawn and categorised. 15 desire lines were used by at least two people.
84% of the 1,744 cyclists during that hour conformed to the rules of that
intersection and are considered as conformists, 9% as momentumist, and
7% as recklists.
Although the intersection is highly regulated by traffic lights and there are
already clear lanes mapped out that cyclists should take, there were a lot of
momentumists who made up their own routes. There were no extreme recklists who put themselves or others in great danger. Recklists can be divided
in people who visibly cross the red light and cycle on the pedestrian lane.
10
Cyclists experiences
Cyclists crossing Frederiksplein have different kind of feelings. They felt stressed,
angry and even alive, but not emotionally unattached or blasé. Moreover, people
do look at each other on the intersection and negotiate with one another about
what they’re going to do. However, this is not really unconscious or automatic.
Bicycle Users
Recklists
7%
Momentumists
9%
Conformists
84%
11
Intersection n°3:
Meester Visserplein & Jobenbreestraat
Basics
The Meester Visserplein intersection in Amsterdam is one of the top-10
busiest intersections in the city (Dienst Infrastructuur Verkeer en Vervoer,
2010:29), specifically during rush hour. The intersection combines a busy
arterial road into the city with the main cycle route for cyclists hailing from
Amsterdam-Oost towards the center. The physical layout of the intersection
serves as a catalyst for congestion. It is a combination of four different cycle
routes, converging in a very small space. Since it is a T-intersection for car
traffic, the cyclists that come from Jodenbreestraat have to make a double
crossing. Due to this peculiar situation, there are a number of protection
islands situated in the physical space.
Behaviour analysis
2,278 cyclists used the intersection in less than an hour during our observations in the morning rush hour. The busiest moment was at the beginning
of our observations around 08:30 am: the first 18 minutes accounted for
43% of traffic, the last 18 minutes only for 20% of traffic.
86% of cyclists behaved as conformists, 11% as momentumist, and 3% as
recklists. The physical design seems to force people into certain behaviour.
However, cyclists at the junction show a certain degree of street wisdom:
people cycling on the intersection know how to cross it in the most efficient
manner. This is supported by the data, which shows that on some routes a
considerable amount of cyclists used a shortcut.
12
Cyclists experiences
A small majority of interviewed cyclists did not experience danger or bodily stress
at the crossing. A minority of cyclists did state that they do experience stress.
Although we found a high percentage of conformists, several cyclists stated that
they experience hindrance from the infrastructural lay-out. Five out of ten interviewees regarded the physical design of the junction as confusing and unclear.
At times when the amount of cyclists peaks, a number of them flow over into momentumist paths. The ones that stated to experience stress, expressed that this
stress was not due to other cyclists, but due to the limited space for manoeuvring.
Bicycle Users
Recklists
3%
Momentumists
11%
Conformists
86%
13
Intersection n°4:
Stadhouderskade & Ferdinand Bolstraat
Basics
Ferdinand Bolstraat & Stadhouderskade intersection is located in Center/
South Amsterdam, nearby the Heineken Experience. It is one of the main
entrances for cycling traffic from the south of Amsterdam into the city center. This intersection has been recently refurbished to provide more visible
space for cyclists. Every corner of it has at least one traffic light in order to
coordinate the flow of cars and cyclists. A tramway line runs through Ferdinand Bolstraat. White dotted lines and yield marking on the ground indicate
to the cyclists the space dedicated to them. No “island” channels the flow of
cyclists at the corners.
Behaviour analysis
The total amount of cyclists who crossed the intersection during afternoon
rush hour from 04:30 till 05:30pm is 2,192.
Ferdinand Bolstraat & Stadhouderskade intersection has 3 intended cyclistroutes per site (with corner D being the exception). However, many cyclists
took different routes systematically, thereby creating multiple desire lines.
Cyclists bended the rules by taking short-cuts in the middle of the intersection, cycling on the side-walk or cycling in the wrong direction.
14
Cyclists experiences
Cyclists experience the intersection as both very crowded, which is often linked
to negative feelings (9 out of 13 respondents), and good or fine (8 out of 13 respondents).
Surprisingly, cyclists’ attention goes to traffic lights. Interestingly, this stimulated
the interaction with other cars. In fact, all respondents noted that they were
interacting with other cars, whilst 11 out of 13 mentioned the interaction with other
cyclists. However, the difference is small.
Bicycle Users
Recklists
8%
Momentumists
6%
Conformists
86%
15
Intersection n°5:
Ceintuurbaan & Ferdinand Bolstraat
Basics
Ceintuurbaan & Ferdinand Bolstraat intersection is situated in the Pijp in
Amsterdam. The North direction is under severe construction as a consequence of the metro construction works. The construction limits cars and
trams to cross from North to South. Only pedestrians, cyclists and scooters
are able to move around the construction, but under special circumstances.
The road contains four traffic lights, which allow cyclists to cross at every
corner of the intersection, three traffic lights for cars, three directions where
trams come from and four pedestrian crossings.
Behaviour analysis
There were 2,279 cyclists between from 8:25 till 9:25 am on February 18w
2014.
87% of the cyclists during that hour conformed to the rules of that crossing and are considered as conformists, 4% as momentumist, and 3% as
recklists.
16
Cyclists experiences
The construction resulted in unclear traffic lines and interruption of paths. This
construction has a lot of effect on the traffic and the experience of traffic users.
Cyclist say they are more alert and concentrated around this intersection and
know they have to be aware of unexpected moves of other traffic crossing it. Cyclists have to anticipate more and be flexible.
The respondents at first argue that the intersection is chaotic. But then they argue, due to the chaos, it allows them to take risks and bend rules.
Interactions with other cyclists is an important notion when it comes to cross the
intersection. Cyclists are able to maneuver and position themselves safely on the
intersection by adjusting pace and the rhythm of other cyclists.
Bicycle Users
Recklists
3%
Momentumists
4%
Conformists
93%
17
Intersection n°6:
Stadhouderskade & Museumbrug
Basics
Museumbrug & Stadhouderskade is an average-sized intersection. It connects the museum district with the city center. Stadhouderskade is part of
the inner ring for car traffic (S100). The path that crosses the Rijksmuseum
is only accessible for cyclists and pedestrians. There are three points with
traffic lights for cyclists.
Behaviour analysis
The counting was realised on February 19th 2914 from 8:25 till 9:25am.
Within this morning rush hour 3,038 cyclists crossed this intersection.
Roughly 80% of the cyclists are conformists, which means that 20% is
not. Momentumists make up 12.3% of all cyclists and recklists 7.6%. Most
of the momentumists can be found at corner B and C where they take the
turn right through a red light and take elephant paths. The elephant path at
corner C uses the pedestrian lane and passes the street light when turning
right.
18
Cyclists experiences
Cyclists that turned right on green and those that took their own desire line in
order to avoid waiting for a red light lead us to conclude that virtually every cyclist
would have taken the elephant path when he or she would have encountered a
red light. These are also the paths that take least effort.
Bicycle Users
Recklists
8%
Momentumists
12%
Conformists
80%
19
Intersection n°7:
Nassauplein & Westerpark
Basics
Nassauplein is a wide and very complex intersection.The biggest obstacle
for the cars and cyclists is the bridge that opens about three times an hour.
When the bridge opens all the cyclists and cars amass in front of the bridge
but there seems to be enough room for everybody to stand and no dangerous situation are created due to the bridge.
20
Behaviour analysis
The counting was realised on February 18th 2914 from 4:00 till 4:00pm. Within this afternoon rush hour 1,112 cyclists crossed this intersection.
The map shows 29 trajectories bicycle users follow to cross this intersection. Only 5 of them are lines used by momentumists. The quite high amount
of momentumists indicate a cycling culture built around street wisdom.
Bicycle Users
Recklists
3%
Momentumists
9%
Conformists
88%
Cyclists experiences
From the interviews with the cyclists on Nassauplein we find that the biggest irritations or stressful moments come from crowdedness on the crossing. Insufficient
space for cyclists leads to congestions and it seems important for cyclists to stop
as little as possible. Also the fact that the traffic lights malfunction occasionally
leads to a lot of complaints and a feeling of unsafety by the cyclists. The resulting
stress is seen as an accepted part though.
21
Intersection n°8:
Czaar Peterstraat & Cruquiuskade
Basics
Czaar Peterstraat & Cruquiuskade intersection is located on the east side
of the city, linking the east harbour area (family oriented housing location)
with the city center. The north-south route is a main route to the central railway station of Amsterdam. The intersection has seperated bike paths and
bicycle traffic lights on all four corners. At each corner, “islands” channel the
flows of cyclists. Tramway lines run in the middle of Czaar Peterstraat.
Behaviour analysis
From 8:30 till 09:30, 1,591 cyclists crossed the intersection on February
18th 2014 . The cyclists followed 11 different trajectories whose 6 can be
considered as “Desire Lines”.
The data reveals that 87% of the cyclists are conformists. Around 3% of
the total amount of cyclists bend the rules and can be consider as momentumists. The results show that only 5 cyclists from the 1,591 behaved as
recklists. On the other hand, 156 times people crossed from one side to another while the traffic light showed red (almost 10%) they were considered
here as recklists.
22
Cyclists experiences
From the 9 interviews, 8 respondents told us that they regularly jump a red light.
These respondents don’t necessarily see jumping a red light as a bad thing. It
is something that more cyclists do and it is therefore a normal thing, especially
because it does not always cause danger. Other respondents confirmed this by
stating that since they cross the intersection everyday, they understand how the
intersection works and they know when and where it is safe to run a red light.
Another finding was the distinction between insiders and outsiders that respondents made. In their opinion people from Amsterdam are less afraid of cycling in Amsterdam then people who do not originally come from Amsterdam.
Bicycle Users
Recklists
10 %
Momentumists
3%
Conformists
87%
23
Intersection n°9:
Linnaeusstraat & Wijttenbachstraat
Basics
Wijttenbachstraat & Linnaeusstraat intersection is located in the east part of
Amsterdam and is a heavily used intersection (top 10 of most busy Amsterdam intersections). First, there are three tram lines, located at the middle of
the road, that cross it, Next to these lines there are one way traffic roads.
The bicycle paths are all separated from the traffic roads and also intended
for one way traffic. To separate the different roads, the crossing contains
median strips. There are also a lot of refuge islands to help the pedestrians
cross the intersection. It contains four zebra crossings, a lot of shark’s teeth
and “bicycle crossings”.
Behaviour analysis
The total amount of cyclists who crossed the intersection during morning
rush hour from 08:30 till 09:30 is 2,201 on February 18th 2014. The map
highlights that cyclists do not always follow the official paths and “make”
their own paths. 93% of cyclists behaved as conformists, 5% as momentumist, and 2% as recklists.
24
Cyclists experiences
The interviews shows that cyclists experience the crossing as chaotic and not
efficiently structured. They use words as messy, unclear, crooked, narrow and
hectic. They pointed out that the lanes are too narrow, which affect their way of
passing through the environment. The respondents point out that they are in constant negotiation, affected by others in their behaviour and decisions. They said
that they use different tactics to deal with the crowdedness on the intersection, as
jumping the red light or cutting the corners.
Five of the six respondents claim that they don’t pass through a red light at this
intersection since it’s too dangerous. One respondent pointed out that the structure of the intersection creates tensions between cyclists coming from different
directions.
Bicycle Users
Recklists
2%
Momentumists
5%
Conformists
93%
25
Conclusion
This report started with the observation that the behavior of cyclists, and specifically Amsterdam
cyclists, is increasingly and consistently problematized in the public debate. Although there is
worldwide attention for Amsterdam cycling problems and solutions, there is fairly limited systematized knowledge into the behavior of these cyclists. This is especially true on the level of the tactical level of cyclists’ behavior on crossings.
Together with students from the Sociology department of the University of Amsterdam, we set out
to collect such systematized insights. A total of nine intersections were analyzed through a combination of quantitative video analysis (one hour of rush hour traffic in third week of February 2014)
and qualitative interview techniques. We were especially interested in how cyclists interact with
each other, other road users and with the infrastructure itself. As a central research tool we used
the Desire Lines Analysis Tool, created and developed by Copenhagenize Design Co.
As a general conclusion, the outcomes of the Desire Lines Analysis suggest that the cycling infrastructure at these crossings is under severe pressure by the sheer numbers of cyclists in peak
hour traffic. As a result, the limitations of this infrastructure is challenged every day by the users.
Bicycle Users
Recklists
6%
Momentumists
7%
Conformists
87%
Although 87% of all 19.500 cyclists conform to all rules, there is a significant group that follows
shortcuts, use sidewalks, adapt right-of-way rules or negate traffic lights. With strong differences
between crossings, in general this behavior is quite social. It provides solutions for individuals, but
also ensures an effective use of the infrastructure for all users. Below, we also offer some more
detailed reflections:
• The nine intersections are very crowded. The video material is from February, so we expect
even more cyclists in spring and summer
• The general impression is that traffic is highly chaotic during rush hour but there were no serious conflicts observed.
• Most cyclists are used to this chaos, but many are also irritated by it. Even to the extend that
they tend to avoid it.
• The width of lanes does not fit the numbers of cyclists during rush hour. On most directions and
on most crossings there is continuous ebb and flow.
• There is a significant lack of waiting space at the traffic lights. This is especially the case for left
turning traffic.
26
• T
he large majority of cyclists are “conformists” but the number of “momentumists” and “recklists” are substantial.
• Most crossings have a large number of different Desire Lines:
- around the «vluchtheuvels»
- in the middle of the intersection when the traffic light is green for left turning traffic
- on the sidewalks (to cut corners for right turning)
- cycling in a wrong direction on a bi-directional track to avoid waiting at the traffic light
when there is a long line.
• Cyclists are more likely to bend traffic rules when the intersection is crowded. They are then
almost “forced” to bend the rules.
• This rule bending behavior often resolves apparent capacity problems or repairs ineffective
right-of-way situations.
• The sidewalks seem to be a natural extension of the bike tracks. They cut the corners or bike
on islands and the space between the car and bike lanes very often.
Discussion
These findings do not represent the often heard image of Amsterdam rogue cyclists. Instead it
shows that the number of cyclists on intersections during rush hour are overwhelming the current
cycling infrastructure. The cyclists are able to renegotiate the rules to solve most of these issues,
but the interviewees suggest that this leads to high, and uncomfortable levels of stress. There is a
need to look at these crossings with these insights to develop design solutions that meet this new
reality, in which cyclists are the dominant mode. Most trends, supported by policies, point into the
direction of a further increase of their numbers.
With this analysis we have developed a quite substantive set of systematized knowledge on cyclists’ behavior in Amsterdam. Still, we feel that it is just a start. Although it provides powerful
insight into problems and possible solutions for intersection design, measuring these intersections
at a single moment in time also raises all kinds of new questions. Are numbers and behavior constant over time (i.e different seasons)? Are these intersections representative for Amsterdam? And
what about the more general Dutch situation? What would happen when the design changes? Are
there more general rules that can be generated from the elements of the infrastructure that allow
us to generalize?
27