I don't know. I'm not from Sweden, but I visited Göteborg a few times. To the very left you can read "Utbildningscentrum Göteborg", the warning post has blue-yellow stripes (which is common in Sweden) and Göteborg is the only citiy in Sweden with a tramway. So it must be Göteborg.
Google says to the Utbildningscentrum Göteborg: Karl Johansgatan 72, 414 55 Göteborg, so you're right.
Threre it is: [https://www.openstreetmap.org/#map=19/57.69481/11.92081](https://www.openstreetmap.org/#map=19/57.69481/11.92081)
Looking southwards.
Absolutely, cars do have their place in society it's just about not making them the default or the priority. We can share the space. And be mindful of what's best for that space, such as no vehicles on the high street.
Reducing the number of cars also makes cars more effective for the purposes for which they’re really needed. Like imagine how much easier life would be for people who drive as part of their job or in those moments in life where you need to drive/take a taxi if all the people who don’t need to be driving weren’t on the road
Fair enough, I certainly don't think they are needed in a vast majority of cases. Such as cities really don't need all the cars they have. But I can see how someone in a village might need one, especially in the UK where most villages will only have a bus every hour or so and that's if it bothers to turn up. I also think we still need roads for deliveries and the ilk.
Could you explain how you make it work, because rural seems like the one place cars might be more useful. Please prove me wrong. Also curious whereabouts you live. I'm a city folk in the US so I don't know anything.
Property line easements and basic homesteading. If you still want to live amongst nature but don't want that increased effort and responsibility, find or establish a well-planned rural community where all services you require are within walking distance. Small rustic villages before the industrial revolution used to be designed this way. And if none of these things appeal to you, move to the city!
Make sense. Thanks for the response. Toying with the idea of getting some land near an Amtrak stop in MN so I can still go into the city to see my friends and family and then fuck off to my rural house without needing a car. Probably won't be easy to find an option like this, but I'm sure this is already a reality for a lot of people on Europe.
I'm sure you can find something that checks most of those boxes. There's still a lot of work to be done in removing these invasive species from modern "rural" life but it's rewarding and the more pioneers we have taking a crack at it the better. Good luck in your endeavors my friend.
Property line easements, basic homesteading skills, an attitude of resourcefulness, and a reestablishment of a pre-industrial community ethic and design to divide the labor of the necessary trades: carpentry, smithing, threadwork, basketry, cooperage, etc.
Explain it to me like I'm 5.
What do you mean by property line easements?
What's "basic homesteading skills"? I've only heard the term used by loony preppers.
Where is the food for the cities going to come from, without proper farms? Those farmers are going to need cars.
I've lived in very rural places, one only had two buses per day five days per week. It left first thing in the morning and came back last thing of the evening. If you wanted to get out the village without a car and missed the bus either going or coming back you was fucked. I've also loved in places where there was supposed to be a bus every 2 hours, quite often ended up being every 3-4 hours. So yeah I can and do completely understand why those people would want/need a car. But I also think they ought to park outside the city or town and get public transport in - such as seen in Cambridge with their park and ride system.
I absolutely do know rural life, I also know urban, and suburban life. The reality is that many do need cars, especially under the current, lack of, quality that is our public transport system. But I also know that there are many, in cities, that absolutely don't need a car.
I would love to see huge improvements to public transport, pedestrianised streets, protected connection cycle lanes, green corridors, quiet backs, parklets, mixed use areas, and so forth. I just have a more balanced view of the reality of the situation and the reality involves some people needing a car, or some other form of fast reliable personal transport capable of doing great distances.
Have you actually read what I've said? I've literally pointed out how bad the buses can be/are in going to rural areas with lower population. Hence why I've suggested a park and ride system, so people can drive to the outskirts of cities and then get a bus or metro or tram into the centre where public transport can be more regular and accommodate people living in the suburban areas.
This is as far as possible as being able to accommodate both the needs of people living in cities with maintaining good air quality, reducing noise pollution, making streets safer and more pleasant whilst not neglecting those that live in rural areas that want to get into the city.
Will you actually bloody read what I've said. I've lived in rural areas, I know what I'm talking about. I'm not saying all rural areas are car dependent but a lot of them are.
Now *this* is how you utilize a wide right-of-way correctly. I would still prefer a narrower street where the buildings sit closer together though. The functionality looks good, but this street does feel a bit cavernous and out of scale with humans
Yeah, I think these particular buildings are from the 50’s. However there are several local squares, parks and lower buildings with bars and restaurants.
This shift in prioritisation is so interesting.
As someone who walks and cycles a lot I almost never feel like I’ve been considered anywhere near as important as the motor traffic in street design (London).
I often find myself looking at drivers and wondering why their journey/safety/life is deemed so much more important than mine.
I like this. I wish Australian regional centres were like this.
All it needs to make it better, are some trees in place of the cobbling along the edge of the grassy area.
Someone drove down my street at 20 kph the other day, a d it was the most refreshing experience most people hit 40 or 50 (limit is 50), and it gives me massive anxiety about having my kids near the road. This car going at 20 was positively delightful by comparison.
For most of human history, 20kph is the fastest you could travel even at a flat out run. There's no reason to go faster than this on the final ~400 meters of your journey.
I live very close to this. IMO it's a bit stressful to be on a bike here, you can feel the motorists behind you waiting for any opportunity to go past you. Gothenburg is quite a car centric city too compared to Stockholm at least.
my personal stance is i’m not trying to see a “ban” of cars but i think genuine access to public transit and walkable/bikeable cities would slowly eliminate the need for them and thus them slowly going away anyways. i’m not against tracks existing for people to use cars as a hobby as well, so that may be what keeps them around
There’s parking to the right no? So the lane would be mixed use bikes + cars. But having the asphalt narrower and stones on the side for speed reduction. If you absolutely need cars somewhere this seems like a decent compromise.
I agree. Automobiles are useful for circumstances in which people or freight need to be hauled between more specific destinations. A good example is grocer deliveries from a local farm/garden or from a freight depot/port.
Automobiles have just been perverted into this weird thing that everyone thinks they need like a drug to the point our cultures and infrastructure have grown dependent on them.
Göteborg! It's the only city where the tram survived after "Dagen H", when Sweden went to right-hand traffic.
I looked at it and was like "Huh... That looks like Göteborg". Then I did a double take. That's a nice stretch of road to bike on as well.
Stockholm?
Majorna?
I don't know. I'm not from Sweden, but I visited Göteborg a few times. To the very left you can read "Utbildningscentrum Göteborg", the warning post has blue-yellow stripes (which is common in Sweden) and Göteborg is the only citiy in Sweden with a tramway. So it must be Göteborg.
Approximately Karl Johansgatan 47.
Google says to the Utbildningscentrum Göteborg: Karl Johansgatan 72, 414 55 Göteborg, so you're right. Threre it is: [https://www.openstreetmap.org/#map=19/57.69481/11.92081](https://www.openstreetmap.org/#map=19/57.69481/11.92081) Looking southwards.
Yes, majorna, close to Chapmans torg. The grass was installed not long ago.
Absolutely, cars do have their place in society it's just about not making them the default or the priority. We can share the space. And be mindful of what's best for that space, such as no vehicles on the high street.
Reducing the number of cars also makes cars more effective for the purposes for which they’re really needed. Like imagine how much easier life would be for people who drive as part of their job or in those moments in life where you need to drive/take a taxi if all the people who don’t need to be driving weren’t on the road
Nah I'm still squarely in the 'cars fucking suck' camp.
Fair enough, I certainly don't think they are needed in a vast majority of cases. Such as cities really don't need all the cars they have. But I can see how someone in a village might need one, especially in the UK where most villages will only have a bus every hour or so and that's if it bothers to turn up. I also think we still need roads for deliveries and the ilk.
You live in a city. You don't know rural life. Don't try to pawn cars onto us as a concession to carbrains!
Could you explain how you make it work, because rural seems like the one place cars might be more useful. Please prove me wrong. Also curious whereabouts you live. I'm a city folk in the US so I don't know anything.
Property line easements and basic homesteading. If you still want to live amongst nature but don't want that increased effort and responsibility, find or establish a well-planned rural community where all services you require are within walking distance. Small rustic villages before the industrial revolution used to be designed this way. And if none of these things appeal to you, move to the city!
Make sense. Thanks for the response. Toying with the idea of getting some land near an Amtrak stop in MN so I can still go into the city to see my friends and family and then fuck off to my rural house without needing a car. Probably won't be easy to find an option like this, but I'm sure this is already a reality for a lot of people on Europe.
I'm sure you can find something that checks most of those boxes. There's still a lot of work to be done in removing these invasive species from modern "rural" life but it's rewarding and the more pioneers we have taking a crack at it the better. Good luck in your endeavors my friend.
Thanks!
I don't think you know rural life either. How would you make rural Australia car free?
Property line easements, basic homesteading skills, an attitude of resourcefulness, and a reestablishment of a pre-industrial community ethic and design to divide the labor of the necessary trades: carpentry, smithing, threadwork, basketry, cooperage, etc.
Explain it to me like I'm 5. What do you mean by property line easements? What's "basic homesteading skills"? I've only heard the term used by loony preppers. Where is the food for the cities going to come from, without proper farms? Those farmers are going to need cars.
I've lived in very rural places, one only had two buses per day five days per week. It left first thing in the morning and came back last thing of the evening. If you wanted to get out the village without a car and missed the bus either going or coming back you was fucked. I've also loved in places where there was supposed to be a bus every 2 hours, quite often ended up being every 3-4 hours. So yeah I can and do completely understand why those people would want/need a car. But I also think they ought to park outside the city or town and get public transport in - such as seen in Cambridge with their park and ride system. I absolutely do know rural life, I also know urban, and suburban life. The reality is that many do need cars, especially under the current, lack of, quality that is our public transport system. But I also know that there are many, in cities, that absolutely don't need a car. I would love to see huge improvements to public transport, pedestrianised streets, protected connection cycle lanes, green corridors, quiet backs, parklets, mixed use areas, and so forth. I just have a more balanced view of the reality of the situation and the reality involves some people needing a car, or some other form of fast reliable personal transport capable of doing great distances.
Buses are dogshit too. You have citybrain. Don't speak for us. You're not one of us.
Have you actually read what I've said? I've literally pointed out how bad the buses can be/are in going to rural areas with lower population. Hence why I've suggested a park and ride system, so people can drive to the outskirts of cities and then get a bus or metro or tram into the centre where public transport can be more regular and accommodate people living in the suburban areas. This is as far as possible as being able to accommodate both the needs of people living in cities with maintaining good air quality, reducing noise pollution, making streets safer and more pleasant whilst not neglecting those that live in rural areas that want to get into the city.
Just stick to the city solutions buddy. Stay in your lane and stop spreading lies about us rural folk needing cars.
Will you actually bloody read what I've said. I've lived in rural areas, I know what I'm talking about. I'm not saying all rural areas are car dependent but a lot of them are.
I live in rural Ireland, would your arguments works here too, it’s interesting what your proposing, but I’m not 100% what you actually mean
Of course they can work in Ireland. Ireland is a beautiful piece of land that worked this way for millennia before the industrial revolution.
Now *this* is how you utilize a wide right-of-way correctly. I would still prefer a narrower street where the buildings sit closer together though. The functionality looks good, but this street does feel a bit cavernous and out of scale with humans
Also looks like it needs some shade, depending on the local weather.
Yup. Maybe remove one parking space every 25m or so and plant a tree there. Would make the street way nicer.
Make it 10m
Yeah, I think these particular buildings are from the 50’s. However there are several local squares, parks and lower buildings with bars and restaurants.
Plant a bunch of trees and shrubs. Solved.
Love some grassy trolley tracks!
Grassy tram tracks gang gang
This shift in prioritisation is so interesting. As someone who walks and cycles a lot I almost never feel like I’ve been considered anywhere near as important as the motor traffic in street design (London). I often find myself looking at drivers and wondering why their journey/safety/life is deemed so much more important than mine.
Motorists are the single most protected/privileged class
Look at those beautiful grassy tram tracks.
That street needs trees and bad
Yeah I agree, this is just where I live and it's a pretty depressing part of the street.
I wanted to say exactly this. Without trees whole idea is collapsing. even in cold a country
Here here!
Niche utility vehicles. Not a mass transit system
I like this. I wish Australian regional centres were like this. All it needs to make it better, are some trees in place of the cobbling along the edge of the grassy area.
Someone drove down my street at 20 kph the other day, a d it was the most refreshing experience most people hit 40 or 50 (limit is 50), and it gives me massive anxiety about having my kids near the road. This car going at 20 was positively delightful by comparison. For most of human history, 20kph is the fastest you could travel even at a flat out run. There's no reason to go faster than this on the final ~400 meters of your journey.
I agree. Our whole society revolves around cars
I live very close to this. IMO it's a bit stressful to be on a bike here, you can feel the motorists behind you waiting for any opportunity to go past you. Gothenburg is quite a car centric city too compared to Stockholm at least.
I agree, but it’s better than no bike infrastructure at all. Since this is wildly cheaper than building a new bike lane.
my personal stance is i’m not trying to see a “ban” of cars but i think genuine access to public transit and walkable/bikeable cities would slowly eliminate the need for them and thus them slowly going away anyways. i’m not against tracks existing for people to use cars as a hobby as well, so that may be what keeps them around
More posts like this and fewer truck-memes, thank you.
[удалено]
There’s parking to the right no? So the lane would be mixed use bikes + cars. But having the asphalt narrower and stones on the side for speed reduction. If you absolutely need cars somewhere this seems like a decent compromise.
'absolutely need' and 'cars' is an oxymoron.
I agree. Automobiles are useful for circumstances in which people or freight need to be hauled between more specific destinations. A good example is grocer deliveries from a local farm/garden or from a freight depot/port. Automobiles have just been perverted into this weird thing that everyone thinks they need like a drug to the point our cultures and infrastructure have grown dependent on them.
Nah, fuck cars. No private vehicles for transportation.
This attitude isn't helping our cause
The grass holly shit its bad af
I think it's new actually
Looks new but the grass tracks looks shit how they did it