Timeline for Can I walk to the Netherlands from Weeze, Germany (NRN)?
Current License: CC BY-SA 4.0
12 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Feb 20 at 13:22 | comment | added | Janus Bahs Jacquet | @StephanKolassa The area may be residential, but that doesn’t mean the road is. If you Street View up and down the road a bit, you’ll see that there is a reasonably amount of traffic, and quite a lot of it is large lorries, some even timber lorries. My parents live close to a road that’s very similar to this one, and while I do sometimes walk on it, it’s not exactly safe, because a lot of cars, including lorries, go quite fast, and there are only gutters. | |
| Feb 20 at 13:18 | comment | added | Janus Bahs Jacquet | @phoog On the German side, there’s no pavement or gutters at all (at least bit further down the road – there’s about 100 m of road right after the border that mysteriously isn’t on Street View), only the bike lane. On the Dutch side, the pavement ends about 20 m after the bike lane ends, leaving only narrow gutters. So in this particular case, it would absolutely be safer to stay on the bike lane side until it ends and then walk in the gutter on the left-hand side, without crossing the road at all. | |
| Feb 19 at 22:38 | comment | added | Reznik | @Stephan Kolassa, All I'm trying to say is that it's perfectly acceptable to use the cycle lane, and there's no reason to scare OP into taking ANY risk out of fear of getting an EXTREMELY unlikely fine. Yes, crossing this road is very low risk, but without any gain to anyone, therefore unnecessary. I would certainly stay on the safe side of that nice line of trees. And if you check Google street view you will see a pretty heavy truck coming your way. | |
| Feb 19 at 19:07 | comment | added | Willem van Rumpt | Outside city limits, pedestrians are fully expected to walk on bicycle lanes. Preferably in the opposite direction the bicycles are travelling in (if possible). With in city limits you just walk where it's most safe and convenient. In the example from google maps, I'd definitely choose the bicycle lane. | |
| Feb 19 at 14:39 | comment | added | Stephan Kolassa | Hm. This is obviously a residential area, and there are zero cars on this specific picture. I would not expect a lot of traffic here at any time of day, so I don't quite see that "unnecessarily unsafe" or "very dangerous" aspect, as long as you look left and right before crossing. | |
| Feb 19 at 14:37 | comment | added | phoog | @Reznik for the easternmost 30 m or so of the Dutch portion of that road, yes. West of that point, it's a proper sidewalk. And the bike path to the south of the road ends at the curve, forcing pedestrians and cyclists both to cross at that point. So the choice of sidewalk or cycle path isn't a choice between crossing twice and not having to cross; it's a choice between crossing once closer to the border or once farther from it. | |
| Feb 19 at 14:16 | comment | added | Reznik | @phoog As you said yourself, that's a gutter rather than a sidewalk. No one would expect you to walk there. Not the police, and probably not any motorist, which could make it very dangerous. Imagine two trucks passing each other at night with you walking there... | |
| Feb 19 at 12:40 | comment | added | phoog | @Reznik it seems the sidewalk ends as you pass the last building on the Dutch side of the border on your way into Germany, though the gutter remains up to the border itself (rather too narrow for comfort, I expect). So for someone entering the Netherlands from Germany, it would be necessary to cross the road only once, 30 meters or so past the border. | |
| Feb 19 at 12:14 | history | edited | phoog | CC BY-SA 4.0 |
deleted 5 characters in body
|
| Feb 19 at 8:40 | comment | added | Reznik | @11684 I was just about to post a comment saying that using a dedicated bike lane as a pedestrian is not at all common where I live (in a Dutch city), but it is allowed when no dedicated "pedestrian lane" is available. The "beautiful sidewalk" here ends after maybe 100m and crossing the road twice to use it would be unnecessarily unsafe. | |
| Feb 19 at 8:22 | comment | added | 11684 | “… which can be used also by pedestrians” but shouldn’t. In the picture you posted there is a beautiful sidewalk, for pedestrians only, on the left side of the photograph. That is where pedestrians should go. | |
| Feb 18 at 19:19 | history | answered | L.Dutch | CC BY-SA 4.0 |