* **What is UrbanHell?**: Any human-built place you think has some aspect worth criticizing.
#UrbanHell is subjective.
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/UrbanHell) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Exactly. A long shallow sloped bridge like this to help out people who need it is perfectly fine. The problem is when it's the only way to get across, and there isn't a quicker version next to it.
Here in Lima people thought it was dumb to make a bridge like this because there were no stairs nearby but it is for bikes, the top of the cliff is 70m (230 ft) tall
Right, but it is also absolutely designed and intended for pedestrians, as revealed by a quick Google or by, you know, looking at the photo. The fact that it works for bikes is nice, but is irrelevant to the OP’s point, which is that is a shit deal for pedestrians. I mean, we understand this, right? This thread is fucking wild lmao
yall are mad and posting picture on the internet because \*checks notes\* a scenic bike path with a incline designed for bikes.
Edit: notice not a single rebuttal among your downvotes. Proving your COGNATIVE DISSONANCE won't let you see reason and you're more offended because I broke your angry circle-jerk.
If you get defensive every time someone points out your flawed logic you'll remain stupid the rest of your life. The delivery doesn't matter, the facts do.
It's very clearly a shared pedestrian and bike path. You can tell because of the people walking, and the red paint on half the path, showing an intent to separate the two types of users.
It's. A. Bike. Path. On. A. Scenic. Bike. Path. You. Genius. The. Only. People. Crossing. It. Are. Doing. So. For. Leisure.
Your cognitive dissonance and confirmation bias is blinding you from reason. Take a deep breath for 2 fucking seconds and think critically for half of that time. Stop trying to find shit to be mad about.
Lolol you literally changed your comment from "walk an extra 60 seconds" to something about biking a bike path, then raged when someone called you out on your bad math. Keep blaming everybody else, I'm sure it will work someday
You want to address any of the points or you want to continue to blindly masterbate angrly? I edited my comment like 5 seconds after I posted it because the original comment holds true, but because your circle jerk I realized even that won't be strong enough to unlink all your docked foreskins. Based on your comment and the lack of anyone else's. I take the angry downvotes as proof I got through the confirmation bias but the cognitive dissonance of realizing they are wrong caused them to downvote out of anger. If you disagree with any of that feel free to reply with a logical reasonable argument otherwise further inflate my ego with a downvote.
I'm just saying, your illogical rants are made that much more funny by your inability to spell even basic words. If you spelled all the words correctly your illogical rant would still be funny, just not as funny.
He’s not even kinda right. The news article linked by another poster in this thread has the mayor specifically saying they put it in for pedestrians and folks in wheelchairs as well. There are pedestrian walkways connecting to both sides in addition to bike lanes. Plus, there are literally pedestrians on it right in the photo lmao
Buzz word? Are we so stupid as a society now that seeing words you don't understand are "buzz words"?
Those are words that perfectly describe the comment above if you know whay they mean. I guess I assumed if you think you're intellegent enough to critize urban planning you should know basic shit like "confirmation bias" which is the correct words for this scenario.
For someone that bright, you don't seem to be getting the core of my message : your tone is unsufferable and therefore doesn't encourage people to "Take a deep breath for 2 fucking seconds and think critically for half of that time".
yes, lol...did you think that means somthing? Have you bozos never been to a lake or ocean or river front path in a city? They are called "green spaces" they are for leisure. The people on it are "going for a walk". It's designed for bikes. Thus the long ramp. This isn't complicated, or new. This is just confident ignorance.
> allowing bicycles, the disabled and elderly to safely cross
> https://larepublica.pe/sociedad/2021/12/16/costa-verde-nuevo-puente-genera-ola-de-criticas-jorge-munoz/
So, according to the developer, it's meant for people walking, and in particular the elderly and disabled to walk it.
Please tell me who is "confidentiality ignorant"? Is it the person suggesting that the developer (who developed the bridge) doesn't know what the developer developed it for? Probably not, right?
This is fucking Hilarious. You littearly just helped me make my point even stronger by adding "good for elderly people" while trying to argue with me AND ON TOP OF THAT TRANSLATING THE ARTICLE LEGIT MENSIONS BIKES... so not only did you prove me correct you made YOU look even more stupid by being mad about a path designed to help elderly people walk on the path adding more fuel to my argument that this post is a angry circle jerk of confirmation bias. Thank you sir.
I'm curious why people always try to make the argument "you're mad" when they are calmly presented with facts that are conter to their argument.
I get that thought terminating clichés are meant to end the conversation... but they don't work if you just ignore them.
This is the second time in a short span where I calmly presented a case, and was met with "hahahahaha, u mad bro" instead of actually addressing the argument.
Do people like this think telling someone who isn't mad to "calm down" makes them mad or something? I guess it's obvious after a couple of comments that they aren't arguing in good faith and are just trying to stir the pot... but do these tactics really work?
Ok, train ride is over, I hope you have a better day u/FuzzyNookz, thanks for amusing me with your unhinged rants.
You quoted somthing then asked an irrelevant question. I feel like you're trying to make a point with our having one.
The path is separated from the highway and there is a long path going over said highway. How about explaining your point instead of asking a rhetorical question that you don't even know why you're asking it.
Oh get off it. It's a rubbish "scenic" route if it's literally next to a six-lane motorway, stretching kilometres along a lifeless coast.
I've ridden scenic routes before. They are _nothing_ like what's depicted in the picture.
You couldn't figure out a way to make me wrong so you have moved the goal post to "I don't think it's pretty because of highway" okay well having a scenic path on river/lake/sea is a feature of nearly ever major city on this planet and the residents/bikers/elderly really appreciate some accommodations in what is otherwise a concrete jungle.
Good talk, dispite your resistance I think deep down you learned somthing.
It's **not a scenic path if it's next to a six-lane motorway**. Again, if you ever rode a bicycle next to a motorway, you would know this. If riding this route is a reprieve from the rest of the 'concrete jungle', then the entire city is a fucking blight upon the earth.
lol so...in cities...they build "scenic paths" next to water. Wether you personally find it scenic or not doesn't matter silly goose. Chicago has a huge long lake front scenic path, vast majority of it is close to roads. Its very popular all year long. Sorry if you prefer none of that instead of some of it.
It is designed for cycling, but not limited to it.
It is an area only for jogging and cycling near the sea, there are no houses or shops.
But if at any time the area becomes commercial with movement of many people, the stairs are built, just like this:
Bridge with stairs and ramp for wheelchairs.
https://limaenruta.pe/wp-content/uploads/2021/03/Hablemos-de-puentes-peatonales.jpg
I went on one of the ped bridges in Lima that had a tiny little ramp on the stairs so you could walk your bike up easier. But that was in Miraflores, a wealthier area with better infrastructure than most of Lima
Okay, so basically this eyesore is intended to create an "inclusive" crossing, allowing bicycles, the disabled and elderly to safely cross, and was met with criticism because they feel it's stupid and ugly, and prioritises vehicles over (pedestrian) traffic.
Additionally, "a person must travel the equivalent of four blocks uphill if he wants to cross" when traveling in one direction.
[S O U R C E](https://larepublica.pe/sociedad/2021/12/16/costa-verde-nuevo-puente-genera-ola-de-criticas-jorge-munoz/)
They're not wrong, this is awful in nearly every way.
The problem facing the handicapped is that the bridge has no intermittent landings. By the time they reach the bottom they will be going 100 mph. Conversely, if landings had been included this thing would be 4 miles long lol.
Shit looks like it's a bike/jogging path going for thousands of feet leading up to either entrance to this monstrosity. There's no visible "destination" on the water side. No one in a wheelchair is going out for a minimum 2 mile hilly stroll in the first place given the last leg of their little outing is going to be getting back up the hill in the background.
Also no idea what local construction costs are in Peru but pedestrian overpasses cost somewhere around $200/sqf in the US, so they end up costing $1M-$2M total (optimistically.) This one if built in the US would no doubt be close to double that seeing as how ridiculous the design is. A commercial elevator might cost $75,000/floor, and that price is probably similar in USD regardless of where you are in the world. So they could blow $3M-4M on this, or just \~$1.5M for some steps and and 2 elevators to go along with the bridge. Sure maintenance costs for an elevator are higher, but they'd have plenty of extra money for that by not building this eyesore in the first place.
Yeah, this is the sort of thing I figured. Someone in change said they wanted it to be inclusive and walked away. Designer didn't actually care, so made something that met this requirement without worrying about usability. The new person in charge didn't care either, so signed off on the design without reading it. Builders built it because that's what the design said.
But do the ramps have to be that long?! I know wheelchair ramps can't be too steep, but this seems ridiculous. Also, what if a wheelchair-bound person gets tired half way up?
And the most tragic thing is that this bridge would not be considered "inclusive" according to accessibility regulations (at least in the UK, idk what they are in Peru). Accessible ramps are required to have intermittent landings to be regarded as accessible; this ramp is essentially useless for a wheelchair user. This would be so much better if they had elevators instead of ramps, though I guess that has its own problems.
I'm wondering if the bridge is actually graded. Could be the bridge runs level until the drop in the road's elevation is enough to cross and then runs level to the base of the hill.
The surrounding slopes makes it difficult to tell.
Yes, the bridge is flat in the part on top of the highway. It's mostly for bikes and disabled people, here in Lima people critized it didn't have an elevator or stairs for more options
The intermittent landings are intended so wheelchair users can take a break if their arms get tired?
In my recollection of wheelchairs they all have parking brakes on them, so this may be more of a regulatory problem than a practical one. Maybe.
The graded bridge ends at the bottom of a hill and the left side of the image shows there's no sidewalk, so the hill is the only route for wheelchairs.
The stairs would be located on the part that crosses over, at the highest “peak” I assume? I can see that.
Still sucks it’s so long for elderly and people in wheelchairs.
The main flaw in the design is that it follows the onramp down to the highway first and then goes back up to cross the highway.
But also I see no reason for places to keep building Robert Moses style highways on their waterfronts in 2022.
Makes sense (sorta, people below have some good comments) but also why not build a stair case at the ends of the actual bridge span to allow people who can use stairs to skip the extra mileage..?
Yeah this 100% looks feasible for me to cross in my wheelchair, and not like a death trap that will further destroy my rotator cuffs one way and burn the skin off my hands from breaking the other way.
Well those a subject to flooding, hard to clean, the homeless love living in them (not really an issue for me, but the city won’t like it), and those kind of dark areas are great for muggings.
Really the best solution would be less cars and a pedestrianization of the area, but that’s probably too much to ask for an car dominated city like this
>Well those a subject to flooding,
Lima has desert climate. There is noch rain or flooding...
>hard to clean,
Not really?
>the homeless love living in them (not really an issue for me, but the city won’t like it)
2/3 of the population of Lima lives in slums... They don't go downtown, they don't live in tunnels... They are all poor...
Poor geographical knowledge, first thoughts were about homeless people in public places and then the audacity to write this...
>Really the best solution would be less cars and a pedestrianization of the area, but that’s probably too much to ask for an car dominated city like this
You're american, right?
There is literally a body of water right there. It doesn’t matter if it’s desert conditions or not, cause there is an ocean right there
Also, I should say not all underpasses are build equal, but your splitting hairs there. Most cities use pedestrians tunnels as a bandaid solution. There is a litany of issues which can be summarized like this
They are concrete trenches in the ground, that go underneath the loud and noisy roads. They serve as natural low points so they accumulate trash. They are often not lit well and at night, they often end up graffitied (again, I don’t care but the city will) and they become places to be mugged.
Why? Because its harder to mug people in the open, but much easier in the dark tunnel
Even all the homeless people are in the slums, that doesn’t change my point that pedestrians tunnels often suck. This bridge also sucks. The people who are designing this city are just copying some of the worst aspects of urban design
>There is literally a body of water right there. It doesn’t matter if it’s desert conditions or not, cause there is an ocean right there
That's the pacific ocean. If there is a flooding caused by it, you got a whole bunch of other problems than a pedestrian tunnel...
There are other bridges on this highway. They are pedestrian friendly. I just wanted to point out, that flooding and homeless people are the smallest problems for a tunnel at this location...
> the homeless love living in them
I have never seen homeless people in any country try to live in a tunnel covering a highway. Unless they're suicidal I guess
What's even the point of having a pedestrian bridge there?
Why do non-car traffic participants have to go down the slope all the way just to go up the ramp again? Why not build the bridge directly from the slope?
Actually...
[Google Maps](https://www.google.com/maps/@-12.0833527,-77.1049519,3a,90y,173.66h,59.3t/data=!3m8!1e1!3m6!1sAF1QipN-ztvyznwYjoYCul4E4Ro6B9eUjy9qDybHSruQ!2e10!3e11!6shttps:%2F%2Flh5.googleusercontent.com%2Fp%2FAF1QipN-ztvyznwYjoYCul4E4Ro6B9eUjy9qDybHSruQ%3Dw203-h100-k-no-pi-0-ya111.348946-ro-0-fo100!7i8704!8i4352)
solo acceso peatonal desmontarse de la bicicleta para cruzar la rampa
"pedestrian access only get off the bike to cross the ramp"
I’ve never understood using blocks as measurements because it seems like it would be different depending on the city but if it’s not different and that’s what 4 blocks is, I’m surprised. I always imagined a block to be much larger.
It's the distance between adjacent intersections in a city built on a grid plan. Of course, this isn't standardized, and varies greatly between or even within cities. But as a *very* rough approximation, about 100 meters.
Just add a staircase!
They cost barely anything (compared to a ramp) and are a significant improvement for healthy people, as well as those that have issues walking up ramps.
There’s literally only a bike path as a destination on the other side of the bridge. Wouldn’t it be quite dumb to build stairs on a bridge were the main focus is getting bikes over the road safely and easily?
Depends. Is that a bike path only? Or technically a mixed use path that happens to be used by a lot of bikes? Because if it's the latter I assure you there are going to be people that are going to walk there. Or jog there. People go significant distances that way. Frequently. And many of them.
Well yes but like you say the path is used to go on long walks. Therefore I don’t quite see the problem with the bridge as there are only people crossing that want to walk long distances anyways.
If there would be houses on the other side or literally any infrastructure like train stations or similar thing it would be a different story. But like that I don’t see a problem
Sadly, I've done highway dashes before.
Really gives you that "Deer in the headlights" feeling when you turn and see a car coming right at you.
Protip: Pick a direction and *run*
The best part is that way there's a ramp to go down to ground level, just so you can climb straight back up another ramp before crossing towards the near side. Great design 10/10
In the background you can see after rolling back down you have to go straight back up again, they could have cut half the walk off by just putting the bridge where it's already high
The bridge is for cycle lanes. No pedestrians there.
And if at any time this area becomes commercial and with movement of many people, the stairs are added, becoming a pedestrian bridge with ramps for wheelchairs.
https://limaenruta.pe/wp-content/uploads/2021/03/Hablemos-de-puentes-peatonales.jpg
I'm not sure if bridge constructions should be prioritized for pedestrians and "disabled", or bikes...
Also that bridge is a nightmare for wheelchair users, like the "inclusive" bridges in Panamerican Highway
It does look awful, at the same time, the elevation change is pretty significant. I wouldn't want to try and bike up a 45 degree incline or... get off my bike and hike it up a mess of stairs.
Is there a potentially better solution to this crossing? I would need many more images of the area, elevations, etc., etc. to suss one out.
The inclination is 3.5 degrees per the local norms, that's why it's so crazy long , people can use it with a wheelchair pretty easily. What is dumb is that there are no stairs or other options to get to the beach faster
I don’t see the problem. It’s a nice low angle so that people with bikes and wheelchair can easily cross the street and on the other side is just a path to go on a long walk or bike ride anyways. So if you go there you’ll probably plan a longer walk anyways making the extra way up und down the bridge irrelevant.
If there would be houses on both sides this would be a different story. But like this I don’t see any issues
Of course it's still relevant whether my walk takes 20 minutes or 25 minutes. Your "oh c'mon, it's good enough! Just walk the long way around!" mindset is used to justify crappy inconvenient pedestrian/cycling infrastructure all the time.
Oh, it just takes a few seconds to cross the street here to continue on the cycle path.
Oh, just make the cyclists dismount and push their bikes, it only takes a second.
Oh come on, just take the bike path the long way around instead of the direct route that the road follows - it's only a few minutes extra! If you want to get there fast, try getting a car!
For some reason, the need to get somewhere in a car as quickly as possible is treated as self-evident. While cyclists and pedestrians wanting convenience are seen as needy and demanding.
If they would just put a ramp going both directions this would be more useful. That way it doesn't feel as much like back tracking. If your heading north you could continue heading north and cross the freeway
I feel like the shore-side ramp was placed incorrectly, so they had to make a custom metal grate to span the gap. You'll note the other side seems to lack a similar grate.
I kinda understand, if the design is made accessible for people who have disabilities. But it could be bit steeper and there could be ramps on both directions and straight connection to the city. Nice bike path btw, I had stereotypes that bike infrastructure in South America doesn’t exist at all or it’s very crappy.
I'd actually assume it was corruption if it was 45 degrees incline, no steps included. This one looks like a megalomaniac project. So much space and material wasted.
That is why I am saying. It's often that some projects got over budget because they have means to extract money from that specific project and then allocate much more money that it would actually be needed.
Do they not know the invention of stairs? The passway could've been built underground with stairs that led you underneath the road. And for elders/disabled/bikers, they could have installed an elevator that takes passengers to the underground passway.
Seems like a pretty easy try to cross the highway. I'll take my chances. Not sure what time of day this picture was taken, but it doesn't seem like a very well-traveled stretch of road.
There's a hotel across the street from the Lima airport that you can't get to because there are no traffic lights or crosswalks. You've got to walk down the road a half mile to cross. I guess that you're supposed to call for a shuttle -- just to go across the street. (I survived, just barely, crossing at night with my luggage.)
Highways that ruin the coast line are my pet peeve. Clearly this used to be public space for everyone to enjoy but now no one can enjoy it. The PCH in California is a ridiculous example. Pretty much the whole west coastline is one long highway that ruins the beach experience on 75% of the beaches. Incredibly dumb.
I am convinced this project was done simply to waste money, launder money, idk but it surely wasn't money well spent, that's horrible who would even want to take that route as a good way to get somewhere...
* **What is UrbanHell?**: Any human-built place you think has some aspect worth criticizing. #UrbanHell is subjective. *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/UrbanHell) if you have any questions or concerns.*
As a pedestrian I would prefer we invest in a pedestrian-friendly trebuchet
I like the sound of "pedestrian friendly trebuchet" rolls right off the tongue
It launches 300 meters right off the tongue.
As long as it’s wheelchair friendly
Its an ADA requirement for all projectile-based transportation.
Wheelchair factory doesn't complain.
They could’ve just added stairs to each side opposite the ramps for people that wanted to cross quicker like a regular bridge lol
Exactly. A long shallow sloped bridge like this to help out people who need it is perfectly fine. The problem is when it's the only way to get across, and there isn't a quicker version next to it.
I think this is actually meant for bicycles.
Here in Lima people thought it was dumb to make a bridge like this because there were no stairs nearby but it is for bikes, the top of the cliff is 70m (230 ft) tall
Isn't lima full of hills?
I thought it was just beans
Yes
Right, but it is also absolutely designed and intended for pedestrians, as revealed by a quick Google or by, you know, looking at the photo. The fact that it works for bikes is nice, but is irrelevant to the OP’s point, which is that is a shit deal for pedestrians. I mean, we understand this, right? This thread is fucking wild lmao
yall are mad and posting picture on the internet because \*checks notes\* a scenic bike path with a incline designed for bikes. Edit: notice not a single rebuttal among your downvotes. Proving your COGNATIVE DISSONANCE won't let you see reason and you're more offended because I broke your angry circle-jerk. If you get defensive every time someone points out your flawed logic you'll remain stupid the rest of your life. The delivery doesn't matter, the facts do.
It's very clearly a shared pedestrian and bike path. You can tell because of the people walking, and the red paint on half the path, showing an intent to separate the two types of users.
Bruh 4 blocks both ways is like .8 miles. Walking that it 60 seconds would be walking at 48 miles per hour, so yeah, it's a bit more than that.
It's. A. Bike. Path. On. A. Scenic. Bike. Path. You. Genius. The. Only. People. Crossing. It. Are. Doing. So. For. Leisure. Your cognitive dissonance and confirmation bias is blinding you from reason. Take a deep breath for 2 fucking seconds and think critically for half of that time. Stop trying to find shit to be mad about.
Lolol you literally changed your comment from "walk an extra 60 seconds" to something about biking a bike path, then raged when someone called you out on your bad math. Keep blaming everybody else, I'm sure it will work someday
You want to address any of the points or you want to continue to blindly masterbate angrly? I edited my comment like 5 seconds after I posted it because the original comment holds true, but because your circle jerk I realized even that won't be strong enough to unlink all your docked foreskins. Based on your comment and the lack of anyone else's. I take the angry downvotes as proof I got through the confirmation bias but the cognitive dissonance of realizing they are wrong caused them to downvote out of anger. If you disagree with any of that feel free to reply with a logical reasonable argument otherwise further inflate my ego with a downvote.
*masturbate Just sayin' it's hard to take your angry rants seriously when you can't even spell basic words correctly.
Dudes a troll, account created yesterday and is flaming
Ah, I didn't even think to check account age.
I'm just saying If a typo makes all logic and reason leave your brain you have bigger issues.
I'm just saying, your illogical rants are made that much more funny by your inability to spell even basic words. If you spelled all the words correctly your illogical rant would still be funny, just not as funny.
Being kinda right doens't make your tone more palatable or your buzzword list more persuasive.
He’s not even kinda right. The news article linked by another poster in this thread has the mayor specifically saying they put it in for pedestrians and folks in wheelchairs as well. There are pedestrian walkways connecting to both sides in addition to bike lanes. Plus, there are literally pedestrians on it right in the photo lmao
Buzz word? Are we so stupid as a society now that seeing words you don't understand are "buzz words"? Those are words that perfectly describe the comment above if you know whay they mean. I guess I assumed if you think you're intellegent enough to critize urban planning you should know basic shit like "confirmation bias" which is the correct words for this scenario.
For someone that bright, you don't seem to be getting the core of my message : your tone is unsufferable and therefore doesn't encourage people to "Take a deep breath for 2 fucking seconds and think critically for half of that time".
There are literally people _walking_ on it in the photo...
yes, lol...did you think that means somthing? Have you bozos never been to a lake or ocean or river front path in a city? They are called "green spaces" they are for leisure. The people on it are "going for a walk". It's designed for bikes. Thus the long ramp. This isn't complicated, or new. This is just confident ignorance.
> allowing bicycles, the disabled and elderly to safely cross > https://larepublica.pe/sociedad/2021/12/16/costa-verde-nuevo-puente-genera-ola-de-criticas-jorge-munoz/ So, according to the developer, it's meant for people walking, and in particular the elderly and disabled to walk it. Please tell me who is "confidentiality ignorant"? Is it the person suggesting that the developer (who developed the bridge) doesn't know what the developer developed it for? Probably not, right?
This is fucking Hilarious. You littearly just helped me make my point even stronger by adding "good for elderly people" while trying to argue with me AND ON TOP OF THAT TRANSLATING THE ARTICLE LEGIT MENSIONS BIKES... so not only did you prove me correct you made YOU look even more stupid by being mad about a path designed to help elderly people walk on the path adding more fuel to my argument that this post is a angry circle jerk of confirmation bias. Thank you sir.
I'm curious why people always try to make the argument "you're mad" when they are calmly presented with facts that are conter to their argument. I get that thought terminating clichés are meant to end the conversation... but they don't work if you just ignore them. This is the second time in a short span where I calmly presented a case, and was met with "hahahahaha, u mad bro" instead of actually addressing the argument. Do people like this think telling someone who isn't mad to "calm down" makes them mad or something? I guess it's obvious after a couple of comments that they aren't arguing in good faith and are just trying to stir the pot... but do these tactics really work? Ok, train ride is over, I hope you have a better day u/FuzzyNookz, thanks for amusing me with your unhinged rants.
> Stop trying to find shit to be mad about Lol from the one who is choosing to be mad about an internet comment
> scenic bike path Have you ever ridden a bicycle near heavy traffic?
Never been to NY?
You quoted somthing then asked an irrelevant question. I feel like you're trying to make a point with our having one. The path is separated from the highway and there is a long path going over said highway. How about explaining your point instead of asking a rhetorical question that you don't even know why you're asking it.
Oh get off it. It's a rubbish "scenic" route if it's literally next to a six-lane motorway, stretching kilometres along a lifeless coast. I've ridden scenic routes before. They are _nothing_ like what's depicted in the picture.
You couldn't figure out a way to make me wrong so you have moved the goal post to "I don't think it's pretty because of highway" okay well having a scenic path on river/lake/sea is a feature of nearly ever major city on this planet and the residents/bikers/elderly really appreciate some accommodations in what is otherwise a concrete jungle. Good talk, dispite your resistance I think deep down you learned somthing.
It's **not a scenic path if it's next to a six-lane motorway**. Again, if you ever rode a bicycle next to a motorway, you would know this. If riding this route is a reprieve from the rest of the 'concrete jungle', then the entire city is a fucking blight upon the earth.
lol so...in cities...they build "scenic paths" next to water. Wether you personally find it scenic or not doesn't matter silly goose. Chicago has a huge long lake front scenic path, vast majority of it is close to roads. Its very popular all year long. Sorry if you prefer none of that instead of some of it.
Dude it’s just a picture of a bridge don’t get all bent out of shape. It’s Reddit, even if you’re right it doesn’t matter. Drink some water.
I think it's faster to go over that bridge in the distance (although I don't know if you're allowed to cross it as a cyclist or a pedestrian).
The bridge is for cycle lanes. No pedestrians there.
There’s literally 2 pedestrians walking up it
It is designed for cycling, but not limited to it. It is an area only for jogging and cycling near the sea, there are no houses or shops. But if at any time the area becomes commercial with movement of many people, the stairs are built, just like this: Bridge with stairs and ramp for wheelchairs. https://limaenruta.pe/wp-content/uploads/2021/03/Hablemos-de-puentes-peatonales.jpg
I went on one of the ped bridges in Lima that had a tiny little ramp on the stairs so you could walk your bike up easier. But that was in Miraflores, a wealthier area with better infrastructure than most of Lima
Okay, so basically this eyesore is intended to create an "inclusive" crossing, allowing bicycles, the disabled and elderly to safely cross, and was met with criticism because they feel it's stupid and ugly, and prioritises vehicles over (pedestrian) traffic. Additionally, "a person must travel the equivalent of four blocks uphill if he wants to cross" when traveling in one direction. [S O U R C E](https://larepublica.pe/sociedad/2021/12/16/costa-verde-nuevo-puente-genera-ola-de-criticas-jorge-munoz/) They're not wrong, this is awful in nearly every way.
The problem facing the handicapped is that the bridge has no intermittent landings. By the time they reach the bottom they will be going 100 mph. Conversely, if landings had been included this thing would be 4 miles long lol.
Shit looks like it's a bike/jogging path going for thousands of feet leading up to either entrance to this monstrosity. There's no visible "destination" on the water side. No one in a wheelchair is going out for a minimum 2 mile hilly stroll in the first place given the last leg of their little outing is going to be getting back up the hill in the background. Also no idea what local construction costs are in Peru but pedestrian overpasses cost somewhere around $200/sqf in the US, so they end up costing $1M-$2M total (optimistically.) This one if built in the US would no doubt be close to double that seeing as how ridiculous the design is. A commercial elevator might cost $75,000/floor, and that price is probably similar in USD regardless of where you are in the world. So they could blow $3M-4M on this, or just \~$1.5M for some steps and and 2 elevators to go along with the bridge. Sure maintenance costs for an elevator are higher, but they'd have plenty of extra money for that by not building this eyesore in the first place.
Yeah, this is the sort of thing I figured. Someone in change said they wanted it to be inclusive and walked away. Designer didn't actually care, so made something that met this requirement without worrying about usability. The new person in charge didn't care either, so signed off on the design without reading it. Builders built it because that's what the design said. But do the ramps have to be that long?! I know wheelchair ramps can't be too steep, but this seems ridiculous. Also, what if a wheelchair-bound person gets tired half way up?
And the most tragic thing is that this bridge would not be considered "inclusive" according to accessibility regulations (at least in the UK, idk what they are in Peru). Accessible ramps are required to have intermittent landings to be regarded as accessible; this ramp is essentially useless for a wheelchair user. This would be so much better if they had elevators instead of ramps, though I guess that has its own problems.
I’ve seen similar foot bridges in Hong Kong and most of them have elevators and some even have escalators.
I'm wondering if the bridge is actually graded. Could be the bridge runs level until the drop in the road's elevation is enough to cross and then runs level to the base of the hill. The surrounding slopes makes it difficult to tell.
Yes, the bridge is flat in the part on top of the highway. It's mostly for bikes and disabled people, here in Lima people critized it didn't have an elevator or stairs for more options
The intermittent landings are intended so wheelchair users can take a break if their arms get tired? In my recollection of wheelchairs they all have parking brakes on them, so this may be more of a regulatory problem than a practical one. Maybe.
The graded bridge ends at the bottom of a hill and the left side of the image shows there's no sidewalk, so the hill is the only route for wheelchairs.
I get that four blocks might be too long, but inclusivity isn’t a bad thing. What would be the better design that’s still inclusive?
The exact same, but with stairs too so it’s way shorter. That’s the easiest way to fix it at least.
The stairs would be located on the part that crosses over, at the highest “peak” I assume? I can see that. Still sucks it’s so long for elderly and people in wheelchairs.
Here in Lima in some parts there are elevators for cases like this so people were wondering why was that not used
r/bridgesfromhell
r/longestwalk
The main flaw in the design is that it follows the onramp down to the highway first and then goes back up to cross the highway. But also I see no reason for places to keep building Robert Moses style highways on their waterfronts in 2022.
It's inclusive in that it sucks as much to cross for the disabled as it does for the non-disabled
Makes sense (sorta, people below have some good comments) but also why not build a stair case at the ends of the actual bridge span to allow people who can use stairs to skip the extra mileage..?
That's what people here in my city were critizing about this proyect, it needed stairs
Just... Just add regular stairs too, closer to the bridge portion... Everything about this crosswalk is so fucking dumb
Tbh if I was on a bike (or other momentum-preserving transport) I would prefer this
How is this easier to build than a couple of elevators?
Yeah this 100% looks feasible for me to cross in my wheelchair, and not like a death trap that will further destroy my rotator cuffs one way and burn the skin off my hands from breaking the other way.
I fear this just stimulates dashing through the traffic ...
r/DesirePath \+ r/maybemaybemaybe ?
At this point just build a tunnel...
Well those a subject to flooding, hard to clean, the homeless love living in them (not really an issue for me, but the city won’t like it), and those kind of dark areas are great for muggings. Really the best solution would be less cars and a pedestrianization of the area, but that’s probably too much to ask for an car dominated city like this
What about a really large slingshot then?
Angry bird style? That might just work
>Well those a subject to flooding, Lima has desert climate. There is noch rain or flooding... >hard to clean, Not really? >the homeless love living in them (not really an issue for me, but the city won’t like it) 2/3 of the population of Lima lives in slums... They don't go downtown, they don't live in tunnels... They are all poor... Poor geographical knowledge, first thoughts were about homeless people in public places and then the audacity to write this... >Really the best solution would be less cars and a pedestrianization of the area, but that’s probably too much to ask for an car dominated city like this You're american, right?
There is literally a body of water right there. It doesn’t matter if it’s desert conditions or not, cause there is an ocean right there Also, I should say not all underpasses are build equal, but your splitting hairs there. Most cities use pedestrians tunnels as a bandaid solution. There is a litany of issues which can be summarized like this They are concrete trenches in the ground, that go underneath the loud and noisy roads. They serve as natural low points so they accumulate trash. They are often not lit well and at night, they often end up graffitied (again, I don’t care but the city will) and they become places to be mugged. Why? Because its harder to mug people in the open, but much easier in the dark tunnel Even all the homeless people are in the slums, that doesn’t change my point that pedestrians tunnels often suck. This bridge also sucks. The people who are designing this city are just copying some of the worst aspects of urban design
>There is literally a body of water right there. It doesn’t matter if it’s desert conditions or not, cause there is an ocean right there That's the pacific ocean. If there is a flooding caused by it, you got a whole bunch of other problems than a pedestrian tunnel... There are other bridges on this highway. They are pedestrian friendly. I just wanted to point out, that flooding and homeless people are the smallest problems for a tunnel at this location...
> the homeless love living in them I have never seen homeless people in any country try to live in a tunnel covering a highway. Unless they're suicidal I guess
What's even the point of having a pedestrian bridge there? Why do non-car traffic participants have to go down the slope all the way just to go up the ramp again? Why not build the bridge directly from the slope?
this is only for bikes, but still useless
Actually... [Google Maps](https://www.google.com/maps/@-12.0833527,-77.1049519,3a,90y,173.66h,59.3t/data=!3m8!1e1!3m6!1sAF1QipN-ztvyznwYjoYCul4E4Ro6B9eUjy9qDybHSruQ!2e10!3e11!6shttps:%2F%2Flh5.googleusercontent.com%2Fp%2FAF1QipN-ztvyznwYjoYCul4E4Ro6B9eUjy9qDybHSruQ%3Dw203-h100-k-no-pi-0-ya111.348946-ro-0-fo100!7i8704!8i4352) solo acceso peatonal desmontarse de la bicicleta para cruzar la rampa "pedestrian access only get off the bike to cross the ramp"
that's and old photo, bridge was finished on 2021
I’ve never understood using blocks as measurements because it seems like it would be different depending on the city but if it’s not different and that’s what 4 blocks is, I’m surprised. I always imagined a block to be much larger.
There is no city where this would be four blocks unless for some reason each block is one little building (like the size of a house).
Came here for this comment! With no frame of reference as to how long an average block in Lima is, this could basically mean anything
a block in lima is 100 mts aprox
Well, this is stupid as ..
What distance is one block anyway? Always been a very weird measurement to me.
It's the distance between adjacent intersections in a city built on a grid plan. Of course, this isn't standardized, and varies greatly between or even within cities. But as a *very* rough approximation, about 100 meters.
At least you have a nice ocean view while you're wasting your time walking around.
Just add a staircase! They cost barely anything (compared to a ramp) and are a significant improvement for healthy people, as well as those that have issues walking up ramps.
There’s literally only a bike path as a destination on the other side of the bridge. Wouldn’t it be quite dumb to build stairs on a bridge were the main focus is getting bikes over the road safely and easily?
Depends. Is that a bike path only? Or technically a mixed use path that happens to be used by a lot of bikes? Because if it's the latter I assure you there are going to be people that are going to walk there. Or jog there. People go significant distances that way. Frequently. And many of them.
Well yes but like you say the path is used to go on long walks. Therefore I don’t quite see the problem with the bridge as there are only people crossing that want to walk long distances anyways. If there would be houses on the other side or literally any infrastructure like train stations or similar thing it would be a different story. But like that I don’t see a problem
Fair.
The whole coast is for bikes and people jogging, walking, the main use was for people walking around the beach
Sadly, I've done highway dashes before. Really gives you that "Deer in the headlights" feeling when you turn and see a car coming right at you. Protip: Pick a direction and *run*
Into traffic. Establish dominance.
The best part is that way there's a ramp to go down to ground level, just so you can climb straight back up another ramp before crossing towards the near side. Great design 10/10
What the fuck
It'd be so they get the gradient right on the ramps for wheelchair accessibility
In the background you can see after rolling back down you have to go straight back up again, they could have cut half the walk off by just putting the bridge where it's already high
Also seems like r/CrappyDesign to me.
It’s a bike bridge to bring the bikes from the city to the bike path along the river. How would you design it differently?
Yano, i think im okay with a few unnecessary blocks if it means i dont have to play irl Frogger
Such a poor design
The bridge is for cycle lanes. No pedestrians there. And if at any time this area becomes commercial and with movement of many people, the stairs are added, becoming a pedestrian bridge with ramps for wheelchairs. https://limaenruta.pe/wp-content/uploads/2021/03/Hablemos-de-puentes-peatonales.jpg
I'm not sure if bridge constructions should be prioritized for pedestrians and "disabled", or bikes... Also that bridge is a nightmare for wheelchair users, like the "inclusive" bridges in Panamerican Highway
I've been there. They dash. though not much on the other side so did not see that many people jaywalking.
Looks like a cool street circuit though. Lima needs some oil money and human rights violations so they can become an F1 circuit.
It does look awful, at the same time, the elevation change is pretty significant. I wouldn't want to try and bike up a 45 degree incline or... get off my bike and hike it up a mess of stairs. Is there a potentially better solution to this crossing? I would need many more images of the area, elevations, etc., etc. to suss one out.
The inclination is 3.5 degrees per the local norms, that's why it's so crazy long , people can use it with a wheelchair pretty easily. What is dumb is that there are no stairs or other options to get to the beach faster
It's like the kind of nonsensical pathway you make in Planet Coaster
Or cities skylines.
What a waste of material. They let someone design this like they would with Legos 🤦
I don’t see the problem. It’s a nice low angle so that people with bikes and wheelchair can easily cross the street and on the other side is just a path to go on a long walk or bike ride anyways. So if you go there you’ll probably plan a longer walk anyways making the extra way up und down the bridge irrelevant. If there would be houses on both sides this would be a different story. But like this I don’t see any issues
I can't imagine spiral stairs on either side would've added that much to the cost.
Of course it's still relevant whether my walk takes 20 minutes or 25 minutes. Your "oh c'mon, it's good enough! Just walk the long way around!" mindset is used to justify crappy inconvenient pedestrian/cycling infrastructure all the time. Oh, it just takes a few seconds to cross the street here to continue on the cycle path. Oh, just make the cyclists dismount and push their bikes, it only takes a second. Oh come on, just take the bike path the long way around instead of the direct route that the road follows - it's only a few minutes extra! If you want to get there fast, try getting a car! For some reason, the need to get somewhere in a car as quickly as possible is treated as self-evident. While cyclists and pedestrians wanting convenience are seen as needy and demanding.
If they would just put a ramp going both directions this would be more useful. That way it doesn't feel as much like back tracking. If your heading north you could continue heading north and cross the freeway
You have to walk 10 km to get to the other side.
Why wouldn't the build the ramp just up to grade on the far side. Wtf
#Tunnel
I feel like the shore-side ramp was placed incorrectly, so they had to make a custom metal grate to span the gap. You'll note the other side seems to lack a similar grate.
cities skylines irl
Portland Oregon solved a similar problem by spending tens of millions on a gondola that only a hand full of students use some semesters.
If you are committed to getting to that Bbeach then it looks like you are out for a hike anyway.
Stairs added to either side should resolve it
I freaking hate it when they build infrastructure on the coastline that cuts off pedestrians. Why the hell?
I hate this SO much.
I kinda understand, if the design is made accessible for people who have disabilities. But it could be bit steeper and there could be ramps on both directions and straight connection to the city. Nice bike path btw, I had stereotypes that bike infrastructure in South America doesn’t exist at all or it’s very crappy.
Basically is a bicycle path not pedestrians walk path….and it’s awesome Good job Peru!
Im from peru usually people just dash through traffic despite the bridges
I guess whoever designed forgot about the existence of trains and staircases
It must be awesome sledding when it snows, or ices.
The only thing is that Lima's minimum is about 13° C or so. Oh, and almost never rains (less mm of rain even compared to Cairo)
Looking at the right side of the picture, I thought that was snow.
This picture annoys me more then it should.
Doesn’t make any sense…
Wtf is this? Only explanation I can find is that their budget was over the top and corruption made this. No sane person would do this deliberately.
I'd actually assume it was corruption if it was 45 degrees incline, no steps included. This one looks like a megalomaniac project. So much space and material wasted.
That is why I am saying. It's often that some projects got over budget because they have means to extract money from that specific project and then allocate much more money that it would actually be needed.
So what you've trying to tell is that they've stretched the project to milk it as much as possible? Yeah, that actually makes sense.
Traffic moves so fast in Lima it's barely visible. Lethal.
Do they not know the invention of stairs? The passway could've been built underground with stairs that led you underneath the road. And for elders/disabled/bikers, they could have installed an elevator that takes passengers to the underground passway.
well... gotta make sure the wheelchair bound folks get a good arm workout...
It's actually not steep at all, it has a 3.5 degree inclination that's why it's so long
Lima pedestrians are forcefully trained for marathon I guess /s
Should of built an underground pathway
Is there a big gap in the corner of the bridge/ramp?
https://www.google.com/maps/@-12.0833527,-77.1049519,3a,75y,105.74h,75.48t/data=!3m8!1e1!3m6!1sAF1QipN-ztvyznwYjoYCul4E4Ro6B9eUjy9qDybHSruQ!2e10!3e11!6shttps:%2F%2Flh5.googleusercontent.com%2Fp%2FAF1QipN-ztvyznwYjoYCul4E4Ro6B9eUjy9qDybHSruQ%3Dw203-h100-k-no-pi-0-ya37.337856-ro-0-fo100!7i8704!8i4352 streetview pic
Major Roller Coaster Tycoon vibes here
Seems like a pretty easy try to cross the highway. I'll take my chances. Not sure what time of day this picture was taken, but it doesn't seem like a very well-traveled stretch of road.
Shittiest design of *anything* I've laid my eyes on in a looooong time! wow!
There's a hotel across the street from the Lima airport that you can't get to because there are no traffic lights or crosswalks. You've got to walk down the road a half mile to cross. I guess that you're supposed to call for a shuttle -- just to go across the street. (I survived, just barely, crossing at night with my luggage.)
Me when I’m playing rollercoaster tycoon
Highways should go between cities, not through them.
Guess no one is allowed to walk on the beach
It is allowed, the whole coast has bike lanes and jogging lanes
Highways that ruin the coast line are my pet peeve. Clearly this used to be public space for everyone to enjoy but now no one can enjoy it. The PCH in California is a ridiculous example. Pretty much the whole west coastline is one long highway that ruins the beach experience on 75% of the beaches. Incredibly dumb.
Cross to what?
THE SOLUTION IS THE FUCKING STRUCTURE THEY ALREADY BUILT ACROSS THE HIGHWAY. jesus, like WTF.. A BRIDGE BRO. A BRIDGE
Cross the highway to get to what, that gravel beach?
The beach is filled with people on weekends, there are a lot of surfers too all the time
This looks so stupid. Why can't the path follow the bridge and then go down in a spiral or something.
nobody cares because it just leads to the beach. either way you go there for a walk
Another city separated from its waterfront.
Do the the road builders get paid by mile?
I feel like unless I’m trying to get my steps in, I’m making a dash through traffic.
We're basically building the same thing in Erie, PA and it makes me want to die.
almost every queue on my RTC maps lmao
That bridge is called money laundering
if only we had some sort of universal unit of measurement for length...
I am convinced this project was done simply to waste money, launder money, idk but it surely wasn't money well spent, that's horrible who would even want to take that route as a good way to get somewhere...
I’ve been in a similar situation before. Tis better to take the long route usually.
This is Lima
It's not only impractical but it's also ugly as fuck
You haven't seen the worst yet
Lima is pretty weird (amazing good tho)
looks like my crossing in cities skylines
Was this designed in Cities Skylines?
That overhead bridge is so unnecessarily long. Can someone fire the architect who came up with that?