In the middle of one of the busiest highways in Amsterdam is a new attraction: marked proudly on the map is the Weesperknip (“Weesper cut”), boxes of flowers, some artificial grass, benches and a blackboard of social events.
Sitting with two colleagues and the remains of lunch, Paul van Oosterom gives it a five-star review. “This street is normally a racetrack,” he says.
“This shows it is possible to make something of the city. There’s no opposition at all here.”
The real action is a few metres away where a huge road sign warns drivers to “turn around here”. Not because of unavoidable roadworks: instead, the Weesperstraat is closed off for six weeks in an experiment to test driver tolerance for a low-traffic capital.
Melanie van der Horst, deputy mayor for traffic, transport and air quality, explains that the aim was to explore what would happen if a busy road was shut in a rapidly-growing city. “If we don’t do anything, car traffic will grow by 40%,” she says. “We know what the traffic models say, but this has never been tested in practice … so it’s pretty exciting.”
From 12 June until 23 July, between 6am and 11pm, a road that carries 1,500 cars an hour in the rush hour is closed to motorised vehicles – alongside three ancillary roads.
While emergency vehicles, transport for children and vulnerable people, and one taxi firm are allowed past, one car driver after another explodes in rage after being told to reverse. “They are bullying drivers,” says Xander van Zelderen. “That and nothing more!”
Ronald de Bruin, a traffic warden on his first day, says: “I am hearing things like: ‘Which idiot closes the road on the busiest street in Amsterdam at this time of year?’”
This has been a question at two emergency council debates on reports that an ambulance had been held up for two hours in traffic, school buses were initially not allowed through “the cut” and that the Kattenburg neighbourhood was swamped with traffic. Taxi drivers have blockaded roads, and last week 100 residents took to the streets in a noisy protest.
Stijn Nijssen, councillor for the centre-right VVD, is critical of delays for emergency vehicles in the gridlock. “The situation is dangerous,” he says. “Half of the city is full of almost constant traffic jams, which means greenhouse gas emissions are increasing and the air quality for local residents is deteriorating.”
But air quality is one of the reasons given by advocates of the experiment. Elise Moeskops, councillor and D66 party spokeswoman on transport, says: “We need to try something, if you look at pollution rates. At some hours it exceeds European norms. If you look at the data on fine particulates, it is seriously affecting the health of people that live there.”
Several years ago, GreenLeft-led Amsterdam proudly announced it would be the world’s first travel emissions-free city by 2025. This year, it is bringing in a 30kph (18.5mph) limit for most roads, and another 14 “cuts” to major roads are planned.
But Walther Ploos van Amstel, professor in city logistics at Amsterdam University of Applied Sciences, believes that a proper masterplan is lacking, including stimulating more pedestrian traffic.
“This is just giving the middle finger to a metal thing,” he says. “It is picking up a stick and hitting cars, with no discussion of the why. We should take a step back and think about the story of the city, connected to the region.”
Others worry that car bans will serve some wealthy city-dwellers better than others. “In general, this will benefit the people living inside the city and disadvantage people from outside the city who see no other way than to travel by car because of limited public transport or the nature of their jobs,” says Tim Verlaan, a historian focusing on city renewal, at the University of Amsterdam.
“It is being presented as a measure for the common good but that’s not entirely true. In a way, it’s also a social experiment to see how people react.”
Having survived two challenges, the experiment will probably run to its bitter or sweet end – which is good, according to Marco te Brömmelstroet, professor in urban mobility futures at the University of Amsterdam and an advocate of radical but feasible experiments.
“In low-traffic neighbourhoods in London, you see fierce resistance and polarisation,” he says. “Ghent cut through-traffic a couple of years ago in an experimental way. The resistance against change is fierce, violent and dominant … but, after the fact, nobody wants to go back.
“Nobody measures how many children go to school by themselves now or how many neighbours use the public space to meet other neighbours.”
Back at the temporary park on the Weesperknip, a couple of residents consider the toddler race advertised for yesterday morning.
Faye van ’t Hull, a cyclist, takes the criticism with a pinch of salt.
“Only the plastic grass isn’t so good,” she says, “for a city with a green heart.”
