4 ms·

Oslo is still heavily lacking in bike accessibility, more so than the article presents. New bike paths are around the periphery of the center. In the city cent

Oslo is still heavily lacking in bike accessibility, more so than the article presents. New bike paths are around the periphery of the center. In the city center, there are close to zero bike parking spots. Everyone who wants to take the bike to work, must have parking in the workplace. In addition the tram tracks on many streets are a hazard to taking the bike. But things are improving here slowly Public transport though is probably the best in the world per capita, with subway, buses or trams going every couple of minutes. So this compensates (as the article states). Overall the reduction of cars is a great improvement overall.

tyfon 8y ago
Public transportation is indeed good, I didn't have a car when I lived there. Now I live in the countryside so I have a Toyota. But as someone who lives outside of Oslo it is hell visiting my friends that still live there if I want to bring my children and need to use the car. It's also almost impossible to bike around in the winter as the snow clearing efforts are not really up to standards anymore. While I support less cars in the centre I think they went a bit too far in this case.
- mikepurvis 8y ago
  Typically the suggested solution in these cases is parking at a commuter rail lot somewhere out of town and then taking the train in. Obviously that requires restraint and forward-planning in terms of how much stuff you can bring, but should be doable in most cases.
  - tyfon 8y ago
    Yes it is possible, but instead of 30 minutes each way by car it takes 1.5 - 2 hours each way depending on how well the different transportation systems correspond. With a three year old and a seven year old it's not so easy.
    - mikepurvis 8y ago
      Totally appreciate that— I have kids myself in the same age range, and we've taken lots of trips together by bus, subway, and regional rail, so I do hear where you're coming from. At the same time, the road access and parking facilities that you need to exist at your destination in order to be able to drive door to door do have real costs, and those costs aren't borne by the person who drives in a few times a year to visit. I suspect that there is probably a sliding scale of mechanisms by which you could trade money and time/convenience back and forth on this trip— for example, paying more to park closer in to the city (shorter transit trip) or transferring to a cab and paying the cab (instead of transit) to get between your parking spot and destination. You haven't previously had to consider these options because the default one was so obviously the cheapest and most convenient; maybe that's part of the value of cities drawing a hard line on this, that now everyone who previously just drove by default now really has to consider alternatives. Anyway, I really do respect Oslo and other cities for giving this a try— despite the inconvenience to people in your situation, it'll be neat to see more of what else comes of it.
vinay427 8y ago
> Public transport though is probably the best in the world per capita, with subway, buses or trams going every couple of minutes. I believe Zürich would like to have a word. Not that this is a competition, but it's an even smaller city (by population) with incredibly extensive public transport that's well-known for its punctuality. It really is quite easy living without a car when you have a multiple reasonable options in any of these cities with well-developed public transport.
- masklinn 8y ago
  > I believe Zürich would like to have a word. Not that this is a competition I don't know, public transport accessibility, frequency and quality is finally a competition I could get behind.
khawkins 8y ago
From just looking on Google Maps/street view, it seems like they primarily converted one road into strictly bike traffic, keeping the roads parallel to it typical road traffic. I don't think it's a bad idea, but to pretend like it is now devoid of vehicles is to advocate for a pipe dream fantasy. In fact, the business pictured at the top corners a 4-lane vehicle traffic road with no bike lanes.

tyfon 8y ago

Public transportation is indeed good, I didn't have a car when I lived there. Now I live in the countryside so I have a Toyota. But as someone who lives outside of Oslo it is hell visiting my friends that still live there if I want to bring my children and need to use the car. It's also almost impossible to bike around in the winter as the snow clearing efforts are not really up to standards anymore. While I support less cars in the centre I think they went a bit too far in this case.

mikepurvis 8y ago
Typically the suggested solution in these cases is parking at a commuter rail lot somewhere out of town and then taking the train in. Obviously that requires restraint and forward-planning in terms of how much stuff you can bring, but should be doable in most cases.
- tyfon 8y ago
  Yes it is possible, but instead of 30 minutes each way by car it takes 1.5 - 2 hours each way depending on how well the different transportation systems correspond. With a three year old and a seven year old it's not so easy.
  - mikepurvis 8y ago
    Totally appreciate that— I have kids myself in the same age range, and we've taken lots of trips together by bus, subway, and regional rail, so I do hear where you're coming from. At the same time, the road access and parking facilities that you need to exist at your destination in order to be able to drive door to door do have real costs, and those costs aren't borne by the person who drives in a few times a year to visit. I suspect that there is probably a sliding scale of mechanisms by which you could trade money and time/convenience back and forth on this trip— for example, paying more to park closer in to the city (shorter transit trip) or transferring to a cab and paying the cab (instead of transit) to get between your parking spot and destination. You haven't previously had to consider these options because the default one was so obviously the cheapest and most convenient; maybe that's part of the value of cities drawing a hard line on this, that now everyone who previously just drove by default now really has to consider alternatives. Anyway, I really do respect Oslo and other cities for giving this a try— despite the inconvenience to people in your situation, it'll be neat to see more of what else comes of it.

vinay427 8y ago

> Public transport though is probably the best in the world per capita, with subway, buses or trams going every couple of minutes. I believe Zürich would like to have a word. Not that this is a competition, but it's an even smaller city (by population) with incredibly extensive public transport that's well-known for its punctuality. It really is quite easy living without a car when you have a multiple reasonable options in any of these cities with well-developed public transport.

masklinn 8y ago
> I believe Zürich would like to have a word. Not that this is a competition I don't know, public transport accessibility, frequency and quality is finally a competition I could get behind.

khawkins 8y ago

From just looking on Google Maps/street view, it seems like they primarily converted one road into strictly bike traffic, keeping the roads parallel to it typical road traffic. I don't think it's a bad idea, but to pretend like it is now devoid of vehicles is to advocate for a pipe dream fantasy. In fact, the business pictured at the top corners a 4-lane vehicle traffic road with no bike lanes.