
Why can't all cities have bike bridges like Copenhagen's Cycle Snake? (2014) - Osiris30
https://www.theguardian.com/cities/2014/jul/14/bike-lanes-bridge-copenhagen-new-cycle-snake-cykelslangen
======
tokai
I personally avoid the bike bridge and take the long way around. It's a
gimmicky solution. There are always pedestrians on the bridge, mainly due to
bad integration in the preexisting infrastructure. Busy rush hour bike
commuters and clueless tourist on a narrow, fenced off, bike lane is not a
good combination.

The article even hints at the real interesting story about bike infrastructure
in copenhagen - the super bike lanes. But I guess that the bright red snake
brings in more clicks.

~~~
Someone1234
Even in the short video you can see someone walk across it pushing a
stroller/buggy. While I was watching I was actually thinking that it needed a
pedestrian sidewalk.

~~~
mcv
Yeah, lack of a sidewalk is asking for trouble.

A comparable bridge in Amsterdam, the Nescio Bridge[1] across a major canal
does have a sidewalk. Only at some point the pedestrian and cycle paths split
and pedestrians are supposed to take the stairs, but some people still walk on
the bike path. I guess the lesson is that you really do need sidewalk
everywhere.

[1]
[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nescio_Bridge](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nescio_Bridge)

~~~
Doxin
To be fair, I often see tourists in amsterdam managing to walk themselves onto
highways, ignoring the various no entry signs. At some point you'll have to
educate road users instead of trying to make the roads more fool-proof.

~~~
mcv
On highways?! I've never seen that in Amsterdam. Tourists straying onto bike
paths are sadly way too common, though.

------
PunchTornado
Doing my driving lessons and my instructor is always ranting about cyclists.
That they don't pay for all this infrastructure that is being built for them.

Mate, roads and bridges are being built from tax money and everyone pays for
it.

~~~
justinator
Indeed. In the US, infrastructure like roads is heavily subsidized.

This is my go-to article to share:

[https://momentummag.com/free-rider-myth/](https://momentummag.com/free-rider-
myth/)

From TFA: _What if I told you that by driving a car you become a freeloader, a
drain on the economy? That people who bicycle instead are subsidizing a road
system that they are largely not welcome on? In order to break even on the
cost of roads and pay for every driver who uses them each year, we would need
54% of commuters using a bicycle as their sole means of transportation._

~~~
wool_gather
Nice article, thanks for sharing that! I also liked this tidbit from the
linked paper
([http://www.vtpi.org/whoserd.pdf](http://www.vtpi.org/whoserd.pdf)):

> Critics sometimes argue that walking and cycling primarily provide
> recreational travel [...] “Why should I— either as a highway user-tax payer
> or a general taxpayer—have to pay for someone else’s hobby?”

> Travel surveys indicate that about half of all [cycling/walking] is
> “recreational,” including travel for exercise, sport and cultural events,
> and socializing (Kuzmyak and Dill 2012; Litman 2012), but _so is more than
> half of all motor vehicle travel (BTS 2002). [emphasis mine]_

~~~
justinator
That's very interesting. I'm somewhat in the outdoor industry, so the whole,
ride-to-destination element of outdoor hobbies is a curious thing, in as much
as the hobbies themselves - say, hiking, backpacking, mountain biking, are in
National Forest (or similar) which have Leave No Trace Principles.

The companies in these industries really tout these eco/enviro-friendly
activities as perhaps a alternative to four-wheel-drivin' or whatever.
Preservation of these nature resources is another big topic these companies
talk about.

But if one was to just zooms out, a significant amount of time/money is spent
just getting to the place the hobby is done in, and there's certainly a lot of
environmentally detrimental overhead associated with driving for hours in a
car. It always leaves me scratching my head, really. Although we've done a
good job with saying that some areas are important and need to be protected,
we're also happy enough to put in vast ribbons of concrete roadway to get to
them.

A bit of an aside, I apologize.

~~~
frabbit
It's a great aside. And as the debate about over-crowding of the last
remaining wildernesses is bound to develop, I wonder whether some "price/cost"
which involves the effort expended to get to those places is appropriate.

~~~
justinator
It's going to be an interesting conversation, and I fear: a bit messy. One of
the ways that you illustrate value in say, a Wilderness area or a National
Park is by allowing visitation, so people can see first hand how unique an
area is. If merely getting to the area is hard to do, these places won't be
seen as so valuable to the general population (higher classes will have no
problem getting to them, so it because a class issue all of a sudden).

At least in the States, what we desperately need is a lower impact mass
transportation system. I've heard all the arguments against railways (etc),
and I don't disagree there's good points in those arguments. But it's not
something I see pro-environment special interest groups that are around the
outdoor industry really push. One such is,

[https://protectourwinters.org/](https://protectourwinters.org/)

I actually don't know what these people do - they seem like they want to be
lobbyists, but I think it's just grass-roots call of action type stuff to get
people out to vote. Which I think is a fine idea, but there's so much more we
can do.

------
Animats
Geography. They have a placid waterway in the middle of the city. It's only
220m long. It's not like there's a whole elevated bikeway system.

It's like Tokyo's Haneda monorail, built out over a waterway because it was
empty space.

~~~
theoh
You're focusing too much on the particular spatial circumstances of this
bridge (extended linear structure along a waterway).

The article is clearly calling for appealing, well-designed, grade-separated
cycling infrastructure, not a literally identical solution in every city.

~~~
Animats
But where to put it? Access ramps have to be shallow and thus take up
considerable street space. Ramps are as long as those for an elevated road;
they're just narrower. Long spirals and zig-zags are a pain; few people use
those things unless there's no alternative, such as a freeway overcrossing.

China has a 7km elevated bikeway.[1] But they already had an elevated busway
on that route; the bikeway just hangs underneath. Los Angeles had a 9 mile
elevated bicycle tollway in 1900, but it was unprofitable and was torn down.

Market St. in SF has an "elevated bikeway" test, but they mean elevation to
curb height, not a few meters up.

[1] [https://www.weforum.org/agenda/2017/07/china-has-just-
built-...](https://www.weforum.org/agenda/2017/07/china-has-just-built-the-
world-s-longest-elevated-cycle-path/)

~~~
theoh
There are context-specific problems to be solved in every city, but the idea
is that an innovative design process can help, or should at least be
considered. It's not reasonable to expect an instant universal solution (that
kind of universal modular solution, by the way, is what "infrastructure" often
does end up looking like). This article is arguing for a cultural change; it's
about fresh thinking and working with the particularity of local spatial
conditions in a creative way. It takes a lot of determination.

Here are some examples of comparable projects:

In North America:

[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/James_D._Pfluger_Pedestrian_an...](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/James_D._Pfluger_Pedestrian_and_Bicycle_Bridge)
[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gibbs_Street_Pedestrian_Bridge](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gibbs_Street_Pedestrian_Bridge)
[https://www.oregonlive.com/expo/erry-2018/05/378c21c6dc8756/...](https://www.oregonlive.com/expo/erry-2018/05/378c21c6dc8756/check_out_portlands_next_carfr.html)
[https://www.ggnltd.com/lower-rainier-vista-and-pedestrian-
la...](https://www.ggnltd.com/lower-rainier-vista-and-pedestrian-land-bridge/)

In Europe:

[https://bicycledutch.wordpress.com/2017/04/11/the-dafne-
schi...](https://bicycledutch.wordpress.com/2017/04/11/the-dafne-schippers-
bridge-is-open/) .
[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hoge_Brug](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hoge_Brug)
[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nescio_Bridge](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nescio_Bridge)
[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hovenring](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hovenring)
[https://www.duic.nl/algemeen/officiele-naam-rabobrug-
bekend-...](https://www.duic.nl/algemeen/officiele-naam-rabobrug-bekend-
moreelsebrug/) [https://www.archdaily.com/295646/melkwegbrug-next-
architects](https://www.archdaily.com/295646/melkwegbrug-next-architects)
[http://www.inzynierbudownictwa.pl/biznes,inwestycje,artykul,...](http://www.inzynierbudownictwa.pl/biznes,inwestycje,artykul,pierwsza_w_polsce_okragla_kladka_dla_pieszych_otwarta,6068)
[https://www.fastcompany.com/3056028/from-the-dutch-a-
pedestr...](https://www.fastcompany.com/3056028/from-the-dutch-a-pedestrian-
underpass-youll-actually-want-to-walk-through)

------
MrTonyD
Surprised that this article didn't mention that Copenhagen used to be a car-
clogged city with lots of pollution. Over 30 years ago a decision was made to
focus on bicycles as a way to improve quality of life. There was even a
government organization dedicated to improving quality of life. So policy and
government matter, and really do impact our lives.

I read an entire book about this topic, but I've forgotten the name.

~~~
bjourne
Do you have any reference for that? I've been to Copenhagen many times and it
is hard to image that the city ever had congestion problems.

~~~
MrTonyD
I've read about it several times now - from several sources, so it seems to be
common knowledge is some circles. There is a famous architect who was in
charge of the "quality of life" government organization which was established
in response, and he wrote a book which was translated into English. I've tried
to remember his name - I know he had an entire Wiki page dedicated to him, but
it's just been too many years.

------
Theodores
Failure of imagination.

You may scoff but imagination has a huge part of it.

If you commute by bike then it doesn't take that long before you wish there
was some magic pathway that just carried you over those congested, road-
blocked areas.

In my dreams of such magic pathways I usually imagine something a little wider
than this orange route with a more definite median and more substantial fences
at the side to keep the wind at bay, plus a surface that reduces rolling
resistance.

The thing is that I keep these thoughts to myself as I struggle along making
it alive over and around really oppressive multi-lane highways. I feel as if I
am the lone crazy idiot on some of these commutes. And I am. 99% of my fellow
road users are in cars, genuinely too scared to ride a bike - and I don't
blame them. From that stuck-in-a-box, sitting-in-traffic viewpoint the dreams
are different (more lanes, setting off earlier, less traffic) and there just
isn't that imagination going on to have a super bike highway when getting on a
bike is unimaginable.

~~~
YawningAngel
You don't share space with road traffic in Copenhagen anyway, as the bike
lanes are completely separate.

~~~
Theodores
The article asks why _other_ cities can't have bike bridges.

My point is that if people can't imagine getting out of their tin box and onto
a bike then they are not going to imagine having amazing bike highways as per
the article.

In London a few years ago a footbridge across the Thames opened that had
resonance problems that made it unsuitable for the task intended. The simple
solution would have been to make it bicycles only and spend money on a new
footbridge. Instead they spent a fortune upgrading a perfectly good bridge
(for bikes) to make it a pedestrian bridge. The imagination was not there to
just give it over to the cyclists and make it part of the cycle highway
network that Ken Livingstone started (for Boris Johnston to take credit for).

In Copenhagen they do have the critical mass of cyclists for imaginative cycle
highways to happen, other cities where people are stuck in tin boxes lack that
because people can't even imagine cycling.

~~~
YawningAngel
London has more than enough cyclists to support a cycle bridge, but
unfortunately you'd have to cycle along the South Bank to get to the
millennium bridge, which is a non starter in any case.

------
nisse72
Auckland has one too, over one of the country's busiest motorway junctions:

[https://www.stuff.co.nz/auckland/86702560/Aucklands-hot-
pink...](https://www.stuff.co.nz/auckland/86702560/Aucklands-hot-pink-
cycleway-the-Lightpath-picks-up-international-award)

However we are also looking forward to a new cycleway alongside the harbour
bridge (skypath) and eventually around the harbour (seapath), but these wheels
are turning very slowly:

[http://www.skypath.org.nz/the-seapath/](http://www.skypath.org.nz/the-
seapath/)

------
jtr1
Lots of factors, but I suspect at root it's just a matter of political will.
Does a high enough proportion of all cities want bike bridges and do they have
a responsive and resourced enough government to build them? I live in Boston,
where commuting by bike is unfortunately still very dangerous in a lot of the
city. Bike advocates are a small but vocal minority and the city has sort of
responded to them, but is not moving very quickly to build out our bike
infrastructure. It would take a lot more to make this happen anywhere in the
~five year frame.

There's a real chicken-and-egg problem, too. Safe, pleasant bike lanes would
likely do a lot to boost bike ridership while at the same time, higher rates
of bike ridership are needed to "justify" their construction.

------
edaemon
Portland, OR, opened the Tilikum Crossing in 2015:
[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tilikum_Crossing](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tilikum_Crossing)

It's much bigger than this Cycle Snake but it carries pedestrians, personal
vehicles like bikes, public transit, and emergency vehicles. The city is still
adapting things to use it but it already carries 2000+ bikes per day, the new
light rail line uses it, it completed the East-West streetcar loop, and
various bus routes have moved or are being moved to it from the crowded
regular bridges.

I can't speak for everyone but I think it has really benefited the city.

------
legulere
Because in most places the people planning new cycle ways drive cars and don’t
cycle.

~~~
beatgammit
I think it should be mandatory that everyone rides a bike for some amount of
time before getting a driver's license, and everyone in city planning should
be required to use various forms of transit throughout the year.

------
INTPenis
The bicycle super highways connecting rural areas with Copenhagen are much
more interesting because they aim to lower pollution of car commuters going
into Copenhagen instead of those moving inside Copenhagen.

------
DenisM
The space below the bridge will end up rather dark and ugly. Take a walk under
a highway bridge to get a taste of it. If you think I exaggerate the effect
due to larger size of the highway, take a walk under the monorail in Seattle.
The monorail is roughly the size of the bike bridge and the space below is a
place where no one wants to be.

A splendid idea otherwise though, so long as both minimal and maximum speeds
are enforced.

~~~
bobthepanda
The monorail corridor is developed with plenty of shops and apartments. The
main issue is that the road under it is so wide and unpleasant to cross, as
well as slightly dangerous due to the fact that it divides a one-way road in
half. But this isn't really that bad:
[https://www.google.com/maps/@47.614548,-122.3406401,3a,60y,1...](https://www.google.com/maps/@47.614548,-122.3406401,3a,60y,134.28h,81.03t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sOWmiRJ6wPkK2MAwcEkTKyQ!2e0!7i16384!8i8192)

If Fifth were two-way I would have a lot less of an issue with the monorail,
though it would be nice if they added a stop in the vicinity of Denny Way.

------
BurningFrog
Maybe the Scooter Revolution will result in new and better cycle/scooter
infrastructure everywhere.

------
edejong
Well, because Utrecht has something like that as well:
[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SPFgFoxeLCY](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SPFgFoxeLCY)

~~~
reaperducer
And Chicago's is almost complete. It's more than three times as long as the
one in Copenhagen, and completes a nearly 19-mile-long bicycle path along Lake
Michigan.

[http://www.navypierflyover.com](http://www.navypierflyover.com)

Construction pictures:

[https://www.chicagoarchitecture.org/2017/03/08/navy-pier-
byp...](https://www.chicagoarchitecture.org/2017/03/08/navy-pier-bypass-looks-
ready-for-next-phase/)

------
NotANaN
Why can't all cities have waterways clean enough for swimming like
Copenhagen's Harbor Baths?

------
mothsonasloth
The short and simple answer is, Denmark is its own culture bubble and has a
large amount of money in the treasury to throw at projects like this.

Articles like this really make me wonder if the the Guardian is becoming out
of touch with the general public. With writing like this that fails to
comprehend that every city is unique and nuanced in its problems and how it
solves them.

I love Copenhagen and its culture, but its cycling concepts and other road
rules wouldn't translate well in the UK.

Is this just clickbait trash?

~~~
YawningAngel
Can you explain why you think this is the case? I've lived in Copenhagen and
London, and it isn't apparent to me why the ideas applied in Copenhagen
wouldn't work here.

~~~
theoh
The people to talk to about this are architects and town planners. They tend
to be acutely aware of cultural differences between different countries, to
the point that it starts to be a problem (because cultural stereotyping comes
into play).

When I studied architecture in London, there was a lot of envy expressed
toward continental urbanism (Copenhagen, but also Barcelona, Vienna, Zurich).
In general, continental European cities are a bit more regimented in their
design, compared to the traditionally liberal culture of the UK. Planning can
be feel a bit more heavy-handed on the continent, and in the UK it tends to be
more laissez-faire.

There is long-standing suspicion of continental European norms in the UK, as
I'm sure you are aware. This is part and parcel of Brexit.

Somewhere extreme like Singapore manages to be extremely well organised and
liveable at the price of being a bit paternalistic. I think that's the extreme
"high organization" end of the spectrum, where the state can really make very
large interventions.

------
slr555
Commenting on cycling is always fraught but here are a couple of observations.
The population of NYC is 10x that of the city of Copenhagen. The population
density of Manhattan is approximately 6x that of Copenhagen (corrected from
earlier mistake). Solutions that work in small European cities do not
necessarily scale in a manner that would be useful in other international
metropolitan cities. Cycling advocates often point to successes in Northern
European cities that represent entire different transportation landscapes from
other larger cities around the world.

~~~
stannol
Not sure why the overall population matters here. Bicycle trips typically do
not cover large distances in cities, that's what public transport is for. And
when it comes to density, Paris has twice the density of NYC and still has
cycling infrastructure that is in a whole different league than that of NYC.
NYC could in fact do much much better.

~~~
slr555
Population size matters as does density because there are more people that
need to fit in a smaller footprint. The original post states that other cities
should employ Copenhagen like solutions but the room simply does not exist in
NYC no matter how much we would wish it so.

