I wonder how the cost of one policeman posted there every night for 50 years compares to continuing to run 24/7 ferries. Specially dilluted on top of the cost of building the tunnel itself.

In suppose it's not a question of money, but the lack people willing to take such a position. It's not a glamorous job and most have better things to do with their time.

CCTVs for a long bridge/tunnel might be enough. As it would take quite a while to leave they do not seem like an ideal mugging place?

Drunk people, homeless shelters. It's a choatic area in Amsterdam, will attract lots of things and certain people don't care about CCTV, hoodie is enough to cover up. Police is always understaffed in nights of a weekend so they just don't really look forward to a new hotspot they need to go and check up on. Just happened last week that a friend jumped in between a 16 year old boy being beaten up, the police eventually came but left quickly and didn't want to call an ambulance because of lack of resources, he had to go to the ER himself. Turns out it was so bad he needed surgery the next day.

Would you take that job for 50k/year? I wouldn't. Would you take it for 500k/year? I would. So, it is a question of money at the end of the day.

Not in any realistic scenario, no.

The ferry needs at least 2 people on it, right?

In Rotterdam they close the Maastunnel to cyclists and pedestrians at night. There are also people stationed in it during the day at either end. I don't see why Amsterdam couldn't do the same.

A tunnel that you can't use at night makes it significant less useful. I really enjoy returning home by bike at night when public transport has stopped or is running on significantly reduced capacity.

I wouldn't say significant. The vast majority of cyclists will use it mainly (or only) to travel to and from offices/schools/universities/shops. A tunnel that's closed at night will still be really useful. Especially if the alternative is not having a tunnel due to safety concerns.

if you are going to invest 100's of millions probably better to do it right. Current idea is a bridge far away from the central station which is even more silly.

It depends on what you mean by “right”. Just because it would be “better” to have a tunnel you could use at night versus a day only one doesn’t mean a day only one wouldn’t be better than the current situation. If a day only tunnel would save money in the long term (due to replacing ferries), take pressure off of other modes of transport, and increase revenue due to induced demand allowing people who may have otherwise not traveled into out or out of the city center on a given day choosing to because of the tunnel option, then it makes sense. Not building it until you could “figure out” how to keep it open at night sounds like a “perfect being the enemy of good” situation. If 50,000 people per day would use the tunnel, not building it because 2,500 people per night couldn’t use it isn’t a good solution.

The tunnel in Bergen is also closed at night.

I saw something in the news today that the gemeente has earmarked €100m for the bridge, 1/3rd of the total (another 100m coming from another source, and the remaining to be raised.) Bike tunnels under the IJ apparently (so I recall reading, anyway) also have the issue that to have not too steep slopes at the end, the entry/exit points will have to be a reasonable distance from the water itself.

https://nltimes.nl/2023/04/28/amsterdam-pushing-eu100-millio...

Haha but yeah they always have some sort of plan. Not long ago, maybe 5 years ago, a bicycle bridge was pretty close, I created the site where the people living could vote on different options of the bridge, but they also needed approvement from the national governemnt because it affects the water way and they didn't approve: https://www.at5.nl/artikelen/207386/javabrug-definitief-van-...

It wasn't the best plan anyway, was too far from CS close to Pakhuis de Zwager.

But keeps happening. Too many stakeholders, and lack of urgency.

Yeah the steepness is also a problem, few designs proposed had a spiral down from the station, looked pretty cool. Others had a sort of bike lift, and indeed others made it start between Dam square and Central station.

Other links for those reading Dutch

https://archive.is/p4UJA

https://www.at5.nl/artikelen/220208/amsterdam-zet-miljoenen-...

Some people probably think the city look worse because of them but there are some really nice cycling+pedestrian bridges in Copenhagen.

There's also the very poorly designed Inderhavnsbro bridge. It looks nice enough, but they just made some dumb choices in how they've laid it out.

https://www.archdaily.com/868904/copenhagens-latest-piece-of...

Ah yes I remember being surprised at those chicanes that are so prone to issues between cyclists and pedestrians. I took it in not too busy times/days so it was ok in that regards but it must really be annoying during rush hours.

The old bridges are about same size, and prettier: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Magere_Brug.

However this would be a much larger bridger goes over a much larger river that need to support frequent travel of large boats.

I think pretty is subjective. I am not a fan soulless all modern cities. For example I once went to Almere in the Netherlands and I found it quite depressing.

But on the other hand I like cities which keep very old building and pieces of architectures alongside much more modern ones and I think you can always discuss details but Copenhagen is generally a good example of that. Having said that I have not known Copenhagen in the 1960-1970's so maybe older people would tell me it was much prettier back then.