daily menu » rate the banner | guess the city | one on oneforums map | privacy policy | DMCA | news magazine | posting guidelines

Go Back   SkyscraperCity > Infrastructure and Mobility Forums > Highways & Autobahns

Highways & Autobahns All about automobility



Global Announcement

As a general reminder, please respect others and respect copyrights. Go here to familiarize yourself with our posting policy.


Reply

 
Thread Tools
Old September 18th, 2009, 06:22 PM   #401
keber
Moderator
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Slovenia
Posts: 9,878
Likes (Received): 1364

Quote:
Originally Posted by rimorski View Post
Wow... almost completely underground bypass... why is that? Because of urbanism, topography or ecology - light and noise pollution? It must be expensive!
Area around Vällingby (Bromma suburb) is very populated with lower density housing. Also Drottingholm with king- (or queen-) castle and parks is probably protected. Probably 30 years ago this motorway would be built mostly on surface, but times have changed in whole Europe.
keber no está en línea   Reply With Quote

Sponsored Links
Old September 18th, 2009, 10:07 PM   #402
Attii
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Posts: 216
Likes (Received): 9

Quote:
Originally Posted by keber View Post
.. Probably 30 years ago this motorway would be built mostly on surface, but times have changed in whole Europe.
this is exactly when it it should`ve been built..nonetheless it`s better late than never.. the Essingeleden {the road used at present as a bypass ] is practically choked most of the time
Attii no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old September 18th, 2009, 11:53 PM   #403
Dahlis
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Posts: 837
Likes (Received): 107

Quote:
Originally Posted by ChrisZwolle View Post
Better have controlled sprawl than uncontrolled sprawl without good infrastructure. Not building motorways never stopped population growth...
A motorway is not good infrastructure in a city, we need metros, tramslines, light rail and city streets. And 27 billion will get us a lot of that.
Dahlis no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old September 19th, 2009, 12:00 AM   #404
ChrisZwolle
Road user
 
ChrisZwolle's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Zwolle
Posts: 43,575
Likes (Received): 19366

Quote:
Originally Posted by Dahlis View Post
A motorway is not good infrastructure in a city, we need metros, tramslines, light rail and city streets. And 27 billion will get us a lot of that.
The usual blah-blah.

How's a tram line gonna help through traffic?
ChrisZwolle está en línea ahora   Reply With Quote
Old September 19th, 2009, 12:54 AM   #405
Dahlis
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Posts: 837
Likes (Received): 107

Quote:
Originally Posted by ChrisZwolle View Post
The usual blah-blah.

How's a tram line gonna help through traffic?

Less people will drive if the line is properly thought out.
Planning massive motorways is something they did in the 60s, it didnt work then and it wont work now. It has nothing to do with the enviroment its just outdated modernistic planning.
Dahlis no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old September 19th, 2009, 10:29 AM   #406
ChrisZwolle
Road user
 
ChrisZwolle's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Zwolle
Posts: 43,575
Likes (Received): 19366

Quote:
Originally Posted by Dahlis View Post
Less people will drive if the line is properly thought out.
Planning massive motorways is something they did in the 60s, it didnt work then and it wont work now. It has nothing to do with the enviroment its just outdated modernistic planning.
It worked great until the 80's when guys thinking the way you think thought it would be better to just stop building them. That's why they don't work as good now. And you say, they won't work, why is everybody still driving? Cause it's faster, more reliable and comfortable.
ChrisZwolle está en línea ahora   Reply With Quote
Old September 19th, 2009, 02:21 PM   #407
keber
Moderator
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Slovenia
Posts: 9,878
Likes (Received): 1364

Quote:
Originally Posted by Dahlis View Post
A motorway is not good infrastructure in a city, we need metros, tramslines, light rail and city streets. And 27 billion will get us a lot of that.
Stockholm has all of that and in my opinion pretty good quality. Motorway network, however is not adequate for a city of that size.
keber no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old September 19th, 2009, 04:52 PM   #408
BigMike90
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: Johannesburg
Posts: 169
Likes (Received): 4

ok one thing, why is the speedlimit 110?? I drove back and forward from helsingborg to stockholm....... they can easily put the speed limit up with low traffic and good roads.

Would make travelling through Sweden a lot more pleasant!!
BigMike90 no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old September 19th, 2009, 06:18 PM   #409
Schweden
Registered Loser
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Barcelona/Gothenburg
Posts: 558
Likes (Received): 40

Quote:
Originally Posted by BigMike90 View Post
ok one thing, why is the speedlimit 110??
noone knows
Schweden no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old September 20th, 2009, 01:00 AM   #410
Morsue
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Stockholm
Posts: 1,282
Likes (Received): 46

Quote:
Originally Posted by BigMike90 View Post
ok one thing, why is the speedlimit 110?? I drove back and forward from helsingborg to stockholm....... they can easily put the speed limit up with low traffic and good roads.

Would make travelling through Sweden a lot more pleasant!!
There are some sections between Helsingborg and Stockholm that have a 120 limit. Sweden recently introduced a new list of limits. Previously they were at 20 kmh intervals, 30-50-70-90-110, but now the intervals are 10 kmh. So the limit can be anything between 20 and 120 kmh. Before that, the maximum allowed speed on any road was 110, now it's 120.
Morsue no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old September 20th, 2009, 11:08 PM   #411
Dahlis
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Posts: 837
Likes (Received): 107

Quote:
Originally Posted by ChrisZwolle View Post
It worked great until the 80's when guys thinking the way you think thought it would be better to just stop building them. That's why they don't work as good now. And you say, they won't work, why is everybody still driving? Cause it's faster, more reliable and comfortable.
They drive because many of the suburbs are built to be car dependant, thats what we need to get away from. The more motorways we have the more people will make stupid choices about where to live and soon the new motorway will be full aswell and people will start complaining and demanding a new one. Cars are great, I love them but they cant be masstransport for everywone in a city.
Dahlis no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old September 20th, 2009, 11:13 PM   #412
Dahlis
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Posts: 837
Likes (Received): 107

Quote:
Originally Posted by keber View Post
Stockholm has all of that and in my opinion pretty good quality. Motorway network, however is not adequate for a city of that size.
A proper dense city does not need motorways. Motorways are parasites, they make the cities less dense. We need streets not motorways and the modernistic 60s planning need to stop.
Dahlis no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old September 20th, 2009, 11:16 PM   #413
ChrisZwolle
Road user
 
ChrisZwolle's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Zwolle
Posts: 43,575
Likes (Received): 19366

Why build a dense city if that's not what the people want? Sounds like communism. The state decides, not the people?
ChrisZwolle está en línea ahora   Reply With Quote
Old September 21st, 2009, 07:14 PM   #414
kanterberg
Registered User
 
kanterberg's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Stockholm
Posts: 176
Likes (Received): 4

Quote:
Originally Posted by Morsue View Post
Five? How are you counting then? I can see six in total, four on the stretch between Kungens Kurva and Häggvik. I missed out on trafikplats Akalla.
My mistake, obviously.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Dahlis View Post
A proper dense city does not need motorways. Motorways are parasites, they make the cities less dense. We need streets not motorways and the modernistic 60s planning need to stop.
I agree building motorways in the city center certainly has a 1960 "modernistic city planning"-feel to it... just look at the awful Centralbron central bridge, a 3x3 (130 000 AADT) motorway straight through Stockholm's old town.

However, this is not in any way a valid argument against the bypass. Stockholm is expected to grow by another 500 000 people in the next 30 years and no major north-south connections have been built since Essingeleden was opened in 1967. As the city is built on islands there are only so many places where you can cross north-south; Slussen, Västerbron and Essingeleden... and that's it! Westwards the next north-south connection over the water is in Eskilstuna more than 100 km away. Not only does this make our infrastructure extremely sensitive, it also means that Stockholm will eventually be completely split in two without a bypass connecting north and south Stockholm.

So building the bypass is good for the environment since we can get traffic away from the city center. It also makes it possible for the city to grow and it makes sure that we don't split the region - and the labour market (!) - in two.
kanterberg no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old September 21st, 2009, 07:18 PM   #415
ChrisZwolle
Road user
 
ChrisZwolle's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Zwolle
Posts: 43,575
Likes (Received): 19366

Quote:
Originally Posted by kanterberg View Post
I agree building motorways in the city center certainly has a 1960 "modernistic city planning"-feel to it... just look at the awful Centralbron central bridge, a 3x3 (130 000 AADT) motorway straight through Stockholm's old town.
1960's planning or not, the traffic volumes surely justify a freeway through the center, as you said 130.000 AADT. Freeways near city centers are a necessary evil. Try to imagine what happens if you want to handle 130.000 vehicles per day through narrow surface streets. You can handle 130.000 on 6 lanes freeflowing, but you need 10 - 12 when there are traffic lights. I never understood why some people even advocate to tear down high volumes freeways and replace it with a boulevard.

The congestion will last all day long, emissions will significantly increase, the entire city center would be choked with traffic, and may even lose some competitiveness and liveability.
ChrisZwolle está en línea ahora   Reply With Quote
Old September 21st, 2009, 10:16 PM   #416
wyqtor
Coexist
 
wyqtor's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Posts: 1,129
Likes (Received): 2

Why isn't it obvious in Europe that better commerce = better economy = bigger sum of money to grow and plant trees, to give to scientists so that they can design electric cars, etc?
wyqtor no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old September 21st, 2009, 11:31 PM   #417
Dahlis
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Posts: 837
Likes (Received): 107

Quote:
Originally Posted by ChrisZwolle View Post
Why build a dense city if that's not what the people want? Sounds like communism. The state decides, not the people?
People do want dense cities, just look at the prices. We need more city not more suburbs sprawl and motorways.
Dahlis no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old September 21st, 2009, 11:39 PM   #418
keber
Moderator
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Slovenia
Posts: 9,878
Likes (Received): 1364

Why people then move out of city centres (not all of course)?
keber no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old September 22nd, 2009, 12:45 AM   #419
Dahlis
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Posts: 837
Likes (Received): 107

Quote:
Originally Posted by keber View Post
Why people then move out of city centres (not all of course)?
They dont, and in the historic cases when they did the did it reluctantly or for some 70s green wave enviremental reason.
Dahlis no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old September 22nd, 2009, 11:30 AM   #420
ChrisZwolle
Road user
 
ChrisZwolle's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Zwolle
Posts: 43,575
Likes (Received): 19366

I'm sorry to burst that bubble, but people are moving out of city centers and surrounding areas for decades. The problem is city centers are either overpriced housing or social housing, most families don't want or can't live in either one.

Strict land control causes housing bubbles because they become unaffordable, that's why you need suburbs which are less dense. Of course, a city full of skyscrapers and high density housing is very cool and urbanistic, but you also have to be realistic, they appeal to a limited audience. Sweden is not Hong Kong or Japan.

Look at the city of Amsterdam for instance. About 70% of the housing is social housing for low income groups. The rest are owner housing with a median housing price of 600.000 euros. Which means this is unaffordable for about any median income group. So everybody moves out to surrounding suburbs, leaving the city with a lot of low income groups and a sizeable group of the very rich, but Joe office job is barely present in the city.
ChrisZwolle está en línea ahora   Reply With Quote


Reply

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Related topics on SkyscraperCity


All times are GMT +2. The time now is 01:33 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11 Beta 4
Copyright ©2000 - 2018, vBulletin Solutions Inc.
Feedback Buttons provided by Advanced Post Thanks / Like (Pro) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2018 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.

vBulletin Optimisation provided by vB Optimise (Pro) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2018 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.

SkyscraperCity ☆ In Urbanity We trust ☆ about us | privacy policy | DMCA policy

tech management by Sysprosium