I am now two and a half weeks into my Bike Study Abroad trip and have spent time transporting myself by bike in both Copenhagen and Amsterdam. Biking in these places is similar in many ways, but there are also distinct differences between them.

Similarity: Cautious, Respectful Car Drivers

In Copenhagen and Amsterdam, I was impressed by how cars and bikes interacted. In both places, cars are patient with people on bikes and seem to always be paying close attention to their surroundings. As an amateur person on a bike, I benefited from this tendency. On several occasions, I found myself in the middle of an intersection when I probably should not have been. And yet…

No one honked impatiently at me.

I did not get crushed like a bug.

No one made a fuss.

The only reason I knew I had made a mistake was that none of the other people on bikes at the intersection joined me on my daring charge towards destiny. That, and the fact that the car drivers who actually had the right of way began inching slowly forward to make some progress while also accommodating my mistake. They continued calmly on their way once their path was clear. This is a distinct and welcome difference from what I have experienced in Eugene, where I sometimes even get honked at when the pedestrian light is green and I am using the crosswalk. How dare I endeavor to cross the street on foot?!

Similarity: Robust Network of Bike Infrastructure Separate from Cars and Pedestrians

Both places also have robust transportation networks that provide separate space for bikes, pedestrians, and cars. The bike infrastructure is comprehensive, meaning that people on bikes can turn down pretty much any street and feel confident that they belong there. This characteristic is important for encouraging high rates of bike usage because people are confident that they can efficiently fulfill their daily needs by bike. They also have several route options for each destination they want to visit, allowing them to avoid areas they do not like, or add other destinations to their route to maximize efficiency through “trip-chaining.”

Similarity: Uni-Directional Bike Lanes

Both Copenhagen and Amsterdam have mostly uni-directional bike lanes on either side of the street. Although there are some benefits to two-way bike lanes (less need to cross car lanes to get to the lane going in the direction you want to go, for example), I find that I prefer uni-directional lanes. Especially in an area where there is already a lot for my brain to process, having to worry about dodging bikes coming from the opposite direction just adds more to my cognitive load.

Uni-directional lanes also simplify intersections for people on bikes. Instead of having to navigate the complexities of two intersections — one for the two-way bike traffic and then the car intersection — they need only understand and navigate a single, larger intersection.

The only place I have experienced two-way bike traffic so far on this trip was during our short stay in Malmo, Sweden. I did like some things about it. In certain situations, for example, two-way bike lanes made me feel more separate from car traffic because the trail was on the outer edge of the road, which reduced interaction with cars. It seems like this observation would hold only on the outer edges of cities though — once you get into the downtown area, there is not really an outer edge to cling to, and so it seems like uni-directional lanes make more sense in these areas. To me, two-way bike lanes have a much more ‘recreational’ feel to them. I associate them with being separate from/interacting less with traffic, and therefore having fewer options to efficiently access the destinations I might want to visit within a city.

Difference: Rule-Following vs. Flow

Biking in Copenhagen feels very different from biking in Amsterdam. In Copenhagen, the rules of biking feel relatively rigid. In Amsterdam, they feel relatively loose.

Biking successfully in Copenhagen relies on closely following traffic rules. It is difficult to find an intersection in Copenhagen without separate traffic lights for cars, people on bikes, and pedestrians. People on bikes and pedestrians rarely cross a street if their respective lights are red. It seemed like there were a lot places where I had to stop completely, and then get back up to speed again.

Biking in Amsterdam, on the other hand, relies a lot on “going with the flow.” There are far fewer intersections with traffic lights. In fact, on our scavenger hunt, we located a multi-lane intersection of car, tram, bike, and pedestrian traffic with zero traffic lights…it flowed beautifully, and was mesmerizing to watch. We even saw a gaggle of school children (with adult chaperones) flow serenely through the network of crosswalks as bikes and cars slowed and moved cautiously through when they could. I came to a full stop much less frequently in Amsterdam. In many places, there are “yield teeth” on the ground for bikes instead of stop lights, which means you can keep going as long as there is no one coming from the left or right.

Difference: Number of Cars

Before I began this trip, I assumed that there would be noticeably fewer cars in both Copenhagen and Amsterdam than what I am used to seeing at home. Overall, this assumption has held true, but I was still surprised that I saw as many cars as I did, especially in Copenhagen. Copenhagen has far more car traffic than I thought it would, but it feels easy and safe to navigate by bike because the bike infrastructure is so effective. I noticed that, comparatively, Amsterdam definitely seems to have fewer cars.

My guess is that this is due, at least in part, to how each city is designed. Compared to Amsterdam, Copenhagen seems like it would be a much more pleasant driving experience. Its streets are relatively wide and easy to navigate by car. Amsterdam, on the other hand, seems like it would be an awful place to drive. My understanding is that the city design pushes cars that want to travel with any sort of efficiency out to the A10 Ring Road that “rings” the city’s outer edge. Once the driver reaches the point along that ring that is closest to where she want to end up, she must navigate narrow streets, tram lines, curb bulb outs, and sidewalk and cycle track grade changes as she works her way back in towards the center of the city. And then pay an arm, leg, and maybe even something extra, to park. All of these obstacles make for some pretty frustrating and slow going.

Difference: Visual Cues for Bike Infrastructure

The way that the two cities visually signal bicycle infrastructure is different too.

In Copenhagen, cycle tracks are the same color as the street. People on bikes know where the lanes are because they are often raised a few inches above the grade of the street and/or because they are delineated as a separate lane on the street and marked by the white painted bicycle icon.

In Amsterdam, the city paves many of the bike lanes with red-tinted asphalt or bricks. Anything paved in red means that bikes have priority. The appearance of bike infrastructure in Amsterdam is less consistent than in Copenhagen – there are some areas where red-tinted lanes suddenly give way to gray, bumpy (and even some broken) paving stones. In some places, it was difficult to tell whether I was on a bike lane or on a sidewalk.

Difference: Clarity and Protection at Intersections

One of the differences that took me most by surprise is how different intersections feel in the two cities.

In rigid, rule-abiding Copenhagen, traffic lights make it very clear who was supposed to go when. Because the raised cycle tracks tend to descend to street level and place people on bikes temporarily at the level of car traffic, however, things can get a little unclear, especially for people trying to turn left. I was never quite sure where to move and wait when I needed to turn left.

In flowy, non-stop Amsterdam, intersections feel surprisingly well-defined and protected. Instead of mixing with car traffic at intersections, the infrastructure clearly delineates space that belongs to people on bikes waiting to cross. I also like that left turn arrows and lane markers clearly show where people who wish to turn left at the intersection should flow and wait for the next traffic signal to turn green.

During our bike tour in Amsterdam, we got to see an example of the relatively new “Banana and Fries” intersection model, which is meant as a way to keep the ever increasing number of people on bikes safer in these areas. The “banana” is a raised, curved barrier that protects people on bikes at a corner. The “fries” refer to the funnel-like design that provides more room for people on bikes waiting on one side of the intersection. The lane then narrows gradually to its smallest point as it crosses the street. This design improves throughput because more people can line up at the stopping point and then taper down gradually once the light turns green and the bikes get back up to speed at different rates.

Conclusion

My general assessment is that if you give yourself some time to adjust to the different models, you can safely get around by bike in either of these cities. I suspect, however, that most people will prefer one style over the other. If I could design my own city, I would combine the reliable traffic light and raised cycle track system of Copenhagen with Amsterdam’s protected intersection corners and clearly marked left turn lanes for bikes. Oh what a world that would be.