Nine Things Prague Should Learn from Vienna When It Comes to Cycling Infrastructure

1. Treat Cycling as a Desirable Mode of City Transport
In Vienna, they clearly want the city to be bikeable and actively encourage commuters to switch from private cars or public transit to bicycles. In Prague, support exists mostly on paper; almost no money goes toward urban cycling infrastructure. Meanwhile, Vienna invests tens of millions of euros annually.

2. Build Continuous Arterial Corridors, Not Isolated Islands
Vienna placed its bets on continuous transit corridors where you can ride for kilometers without having to dismount. Prague, by contrast, relies on haphazard measures—typically „tolerance zones“ like legalized pedestrian paths, sidewalks, or advisory bike lanes. In Vienna, I never found myself (legally) weaving through pedestrians; in Prague, aggressively mixed-use infrastructure is standard. Cycle routes lack separation and are so rare that they end up becoming linear parks rather than traffic arteries.

3. Clearly Mark Cycling Infrastructure
Contraflow bike lanes in Vienna feature prominent road markings (giant pictograms), cycle tracks are highlighted in green, and junction crossings are clear and easy to navigate. In Prague, whenever I do use a legal sidewalk or contraflow lane, „primary road users“ often act aggressively because they don’t even realize I’m acting legally. I’m not asking for more traffic signs—Vienna actually has a fraction of the road signage Prague has.

4. Utilize Side Streets, Not Necessarily Main Thoroughfares
Long two-way cycling streets like Goldschlagstraße or Mollardgasse route cyclists through quiet residential streets where traffic needs to be calmed anyway. In Prague, obvious candidates would be Mánesova and Lucemburská instead of Vinohradská, or Rytířská instead of Na Příkopě. I haven’t encountered a single fully functional bicycle street on that scale in Prague. The closest equivalent might be Lupáčova Street—all 246 meters of it, complete with cobblestones down the middle.

5. Thoroughly Address Intersections
This is the biggest contrast with Prague. In Vienna, you never see a bike route simply „end“ at a busy intersection, leaving the cyclist to figure it out alone. Vienna doesn’t expect me to make a left turn like a car (the Želivského intersection in Prague comes to mind).

6. Don’t Force Cycling Infrastructure Where It Doesn’t Belong
Outside the primary network, Vienna often leaves streets to cars and trams rather than painting bike lanes that lead from nowhere to nowhere. Doing less—but keeping it continuous and high quality—works much better.

7. Bike Infrastructure Should Serve Cyclists, Not Act as Visual Speed Bumps
Inviting cyclists via road markings onto urban highways, overcrowded pedestrian zones, or singletrack-like paths strikes me as inappropriate.

8. Stop Implementing Anti-Cycling Measures
Covering over a hundred kilometers on foot and by bike, I didn’t encounter a single cobblestone or unnecessary set of stairs—passive obstacles Prague has in abundance. I honestly believe that in Prague, these are often designed intentionally to make cycling as unpleasant as possible.

9. Recognize That Infrastructure Creates Demand
High-quality, safe routes bring everyday people onto bikes—people who would otherwise drive or take public transit. A higher volume of cyclists further enhances the overall feeling of safety. Vienna’s growth in cycling mode share from 7% to 11% over five years is proof of that.

I hope that Prague will follow Vienna’s example one day. Unfortunately, I don’t get the sense that it’s heading in that direction anytime soon.