Good. The fewer cars for frivolous purposes, the better

I don’t like it either but it’s very easy to get around if you aren’t in a car. So a good example.

That's the point. Maintaining car infra is expensive, so owning a car should be expensive and discouraged. That's why there using a car to get to a destination usually is much slower compared to a bike. Cars are still allowed for the people that either really need them or don't need them but are willing to pay extra But I agree that Utrecht is a better city bc of less tourists and even more bike infra

Of course, and I admire that, but its therefore not a good example of a city where cars, pedestrians and bikes coexist (because its not meant to be one)

Why? All of them coexist and most efficient ones get preferential treatment, for example priority on intersections/semaphores, more direct/shorter paths for mass transit and bikes What's not that good is the train quality/frequency/price, for this Switzerland is much better (pricey but good quality and frequent), but NL is still ahead of many countries even in this regard