We have got a task at school, commissioned by Statsbygg, to develop Tullinløkka into something nice. The idea is to possibly extend the campus of UiO and use the buildings of Nasjonalgalleriet and Historisk Museum for teaching. (N.G. is moving to Vestbanen as we all know, and H.M. to Bjørvika).

We want to change Tullinløkka into a lively area related to the University. Should we create a park, or is it too close to Slottsparken? A building? A square? For the public or only for students?

What do you think? No matter where you come from, I just want to hear what other forumers think.

For those who don't know, the area is about 100m x 100m, and this is how it looks like today:

http://i326.photobucket.com/albums/k439/marshol/P9061314.jpg

http://i326.photobucket.com/albums/k439/marshol/P9061316.jpg

http://i326.photobucket.com/albums/k439/marshol/P9061320.jpg

http://i326.photobucket.com/albums/k439/marshol/P9061323.jpg

Make it a park for excotic birds and plants. No, I'm not joking..

A park with a giant fountain

Large playground, there is nothing for kids in the existing downtown parks... :)

Make it a park for excotic birds and plants. No, I'm not joking..

I knew you wouldn't be able to stay away!
Welcome back! :)

Tullinløkka, Oslo - what to do/construct?

It's an interesting plot, that also has been discussed earlier in here quite some times... Personally I would love to see Nasjonalmuseet staying there, and get some kind of expansion above and/or under ground, but I guess that's getting more and more unlikely. There are certainly enough parks in the area with both universitetshagen and slottsparken right by, so it should preferably be some kind of square with some kind of activity but not like universitetsplassen, which is just a rush by-square:ohno:). I like that you/they want to include the university in the plans, but turning the museums into auditiorums/group rooms, is probably a worse idea than rebuilding the climate stuffs so the buildings can be used for exhibitions, as originally planed. There are plenty of other private groups/foundations that can use these buildings as galleries/atiliers/museums etc, which IMO is a the correct use of the buildings, if one should preserve them... An historic building lose much of it's historic value if it's use/purpose is changed too much.

Eitherway, give the square to the people (don't know if playground is right, as the area is mostly offices, even more if the museums move). Make a restaurant or something, with or without walkable roof. Since the square also has a tramstop, the posibilities are really endless!

Thanks for your inputs! ;)
There is great potential and many opportunities here.

Tullinløkka should be kept as a square, with generous amounts of greenery but not big trees that block the views to the buildings. For example, trees in front of the back of the university could be cut down and the plain pilasters decorated to offer a better facade to the square. The northern side could do with a complete rebuilding, except for maybe the cornerbuildings. Part of the new buildings could be an extension for Savoy, the rest administrative offices for the university as well as one or two state of the art lecture halls. Shops or cafes at ground level to make it a pleasant and lively student square. Long stone benches to provide plenty of seating for students reading in the sun, and maybe a fountain in the middle. There are a lot of squares in the area, but they are either too small or too cluttered, this is one of Oslo's last chances for a real grand and open square.
An entrance in the middle of the square to a subterrenean space leading to both museums and the northern side works better with an integrated museum space, which is what I initially would have favoured. If university takes over, however, I would drop that, but continue to use Nasjonalgalleriet as exhibition space. It could be used to exhibit art done by promising students at the art academy, which is also nearby. After all, this was the original use of the building, for student sculptors.
One last thing I would do is dismantle the current spaceship structure in the middle of the square, and use materials from it for the new structures on the northside. Subterranean parking space might also make good sense, but entry and exit to this must be discreet.

^^ You really had a lot to offer, thanks. I'll show it to my group and we will consider all the suggestions and finally (and hopefully) make a good alternative.

Make it a park for excotic birds and plants. No, I'm not joking..

that could actually be amazing - but rather than a park something like crystal palace or kew gardens

http://www.copyrightexpired.com/hawkins/nyc/large/_crystal%20palace%20postcard.jpg


http://www.radford.edu/~dsamson/London/Kew%20Gardens%20-%20July%202005%20124.jpg

or this place in madrid....

http://mullinsj.files.wordpress.com/2009/04/116crystal-palace.jpg

^ That's for Tøyen! Hopefully we will see construction start on that one sooner rather than later.

http://www.sh-arkitekter.no/bilder/2009/09/Botanisk-hage3.jpg

Talking about Tøyen, where is the new location for that greenhouse?

It's located (http://maps.google.no/maps?f=q&source=s_q&hl=no&geocode=&q=t%C3%B8yen&sll=59.917914,10.774959&sspn=0.003861,0.009602&ie=UTF8&hq=&hnear=T%C3%B8yen,+Oslo&ll=59.918549,10.773715&spn=0.001931,0.004801&t=h&z=18) between the botanical garden, Munchs parkinglot and Ring2, it's currently a gravel area hosting the circus when they are in town.

Thats what I was hoping for. Hate that parkinglot...

Finally Tullinløkka will get a facelift, Statsbygg setting the job out for bids now:

http://www.statsbygg.no/FilSystem/files/aktuelt/tullinLandskap-185.jpg
http://www.statsbygg.no/Aktuelt/Nyheter/Statsbygg--setter-i-stand-Tullinlokka/

They're keeping the parking lots on two sides?:weird:

Temporarily yes...

Better overview of the plan (from Ingeniorens link):
http://www.statsbygg.no/FilSystem/files/aktuelt/TullinloekkaL10002LandskapsplanA1.pdf

I don't like the parking lot part and I prefer cobblestones to gravel.

^^It's temporary, so it makes sence.

But what does temporary means in this instance? A year or is it like the Eiffel tower?

But what does temporary means in this instance? A year or is it like the Eiffel tower?

Well, at least till the museums move. Nasjonalmuseet at Vestbanen anad Kulturhistorisk museum at Middelalderparken are projects we won't see done in probably 5 years, maybe more for Kulturhistorisk. When new functions have moved in, it's easier for Statsbygg and the polticians to see what's the need for this square, is my theory:)

Is this a test to see if the plot will work as a park?

^^I hope you are right. I personally have some scepticism when it comes to the public sector and "temporary". I think it should be renovated with the same kind of tiles as used on in front of the historic museum but of course anything is better than what we currently have.
:)

How about a big underground parking... with a park on top! :)

Step in right direction anyway!

If we are to build new larger parking garages downtown it would be better to locate them closer to E18 - Vestbanen or Langkaia.

Today (July 5) I've seen that they were scraping the asphalt from the area. Does it mean they began building the park already?

^^ The works is scheduled to start in week 28. I'm not completely sure which week it is now though. Link to Statsbygg: http://www.statsbygg.no/en/Aktuelt/Nyheter/Miljolandskap-Anlegg-AS-til-Tullinlokka/

@Lawnmower: The park they're creating now is just a temporary thing. A final decission for future use of Tullinløkka is still nowhere near.

Feller råtne trær på Tullinløkka (http://www.bygg.no/2011/08/trefelling-paa-tullinloekka)

http://www.bygg.no/cache/image/37719/53/tullinløkka-trær1-bredde.jpg

Åpnet nye Tullinløkka (http://dittoslo.no/indre-by/apnet-nye-tullinlokka-1.6576115)

http://dittoslo.no/polopoly_fs/tullin-1.6576118!/image/150313876.jpg_gen/derivatives/derivative_article_480/150313876.jpg

^^ The building row in the back there looks absolutely crap!

I like this angle better:

http://www.bygg.no/cache/image/41544/53/tjo-11-10-24-46-tullinlokka-bredde.jpg

http://www.bygg.no/2011/10/79695.0

Not completely sure what we should use the asphalted square in the middle to though.

Basketball?

Looks decent.. Will check if it`s any good for bbqing once the weather gets warmer..

The building row in the back there looks absolutely crap!

No, crap looks good in comparison.

^^ Hopefully some of them will go eventually, like they did on the other side of the same block.

Åpnet nye Tullinløkka (http://dittoslo.no/indre-by/apnet-nye-tullinlokka-1.6576115)

http://dittoslo.no/polopoly_fs/tullin-1.6576118!/image/150313876.jpg_gen/derivatives/derivative_article_480/150313876.jpg

There's no doubt, this square has to be turned into a park permanently. :cheers:

Oh god, oh god, oh god!!!!!!!!!!!!!!:eek:!


Entra eiendom and MAD arkitekter suggests 2 (!!!!!) 20-22 floor highrises in the quarter bordering Tullinløkka. They hope to get the University of Oslo as the biggest attendant.

Render:

http://www.bygg.no/cache/image/44397/53/tullinkvartalet-bredde.jpg

Link: http://www.bygg.no/2012/01/entra-lanserer-visjon-for-tullinloekka


It's perfect!! And with the new metro-station planed in the area, it might also be realizeable. I'm frauding here!:drool:

Worst location ever for a fatrise. Hopefully this can get peoples eyes up so they start realizing that we need a place dedicated to higher, slimmer highrises elsewhere (oslo s).

^^Buzz-killer!

http://www.mad.no/prod_images/doc_136_4.jpg


www.mad.no

Fatrise? Not compared to any other tall building in the area. Or in Oslo as a whole for that matter.

But those highrises will of course never happen...

http://www.mad.no/prod_images/doc_136_4.jpg

Fatrise? Not compared to any other tall building in the area. Or in Oslo as a whole for that matter.

That isn't saying much though ...

You must be joking - it's right in the middle of the 2nd densest highrise area in the city and public transport nearly as good as Oslo S. Even pbe suggested buildings of 20-30 floors in this area!

But is it to daring for City hall and Holme? Probably....

Yes, but not a single one of the highrises in the area looks remotely okay. They all have disadvantages of highrises (blocking view, breaking with surrounding buldings) with none of the pros. And PBE have done a lot of weird stuff so I don't really care that much about their opinion. Isn't it better to use the few opportunities we will get to build high on building a skyline too?

Following Ring1 from Filipstad to Sørenga with as much highrises as possible would be a good way of building a skyline... Having a new couple of tallest in between St.Olavs and Holbergs (here) as well as a couple of 20 floor buildings in Regj.kv would be a good improvement of the skyline for sure!

And how are you planing to do that when almost all buildings along the stretch are protected? And it won't be much a skyline with these modest heights.
Having a new couple of tallest in between St.Olavs and Holbergs (here) as well as a couple of 20 floor buildings in Regj.kv would be a good improvement of the skyline for sure!
If you want a completely flat and low "skyline" row, then sure. Not exactly what I would call a skyline though. More closer to a wall separating one part of the city with another Israel style. It's much better to build a proper, high and slim skyline cluster around Oslo S imho.

It's a beginning - and there are plenty of buildings here with low value to replace...

BTW: Are there any highrises you are against or are there any places you think highrises don't fit in?

The new Oslo-design for highrises appearently... :)

Very unlikely :)

lol, WTF Mad,

We need to get rid of those three-floor brick buildings too though, and the new structure should adapt to the party walls of the corner buildings. I am also sceptical to a single design.

Too fat imo.

Here you can read a summary from a meeting with Pbe and Bya:
http://web102881.pbe.oslo.kommune.no/saksinnsyn/casedet.asp?mode=all&caseno=201113592

I kinda like it, but we all know it will be reduced in size. It is very similar to the proposed Oslo S design, but since it looks like that won't be happening, I wouldn't mind having it here instead.

Me like the idea! Great work MAD! :banana:

I wonder how long it will take until Riksantikvaren comes along and list the whole building row. Two days?

Really nice project. Would have preffered them a bit taller for a slimmer look, but this is a huge upgrade of the area :)

Aftenposten have also written an article about it:

http://www.aftenposten.no/kultur/Se-Oslos-nye-kunnskapskvartal-6744550.html

For all practical purposes i believe this is a socalled volume studie. The design itself can be quite something different both in regards to look and shape.

I believe such a high volume could work here, but i would definitely argue that the plot at Tullinløkka that hasnt been developed needs to be stakeholder numero uno. What is going to come here is quite vital in my opinion. But since it actually is in the background i cant see that a high usage should stop the development. Besides the fucking byantikvar offcourse.

1. What does regulations say?
2. What and why should not regulations be the main premissgiver in this case?
3. What are the plans and what is the probability of a high priority building will come to Tullinløkka? on the parking lot.
4. And why for fucking sake cant towers contain apartments? Thats what we need more of and especially in down town. Every god damn tall building is either a hotel (with arguable design) or a office complex? I say make it at least one residential tower, but with extremely high standards to exterior quality.

Last but not least, dont let 10-15 years go by discussing the fucking shit out of the volume and height of this, i just cant take more discussions of this.

There are no apartment complex in the whole quartal as of now, so who are you really effecting by putting up apartments here. Everyone has gone home by the time office hours are over anyway.

I want apartments in at least one tower, better if both. Get it done!

And last but not least, dont change it into two boxes with absolutely no design. If boxes is wanted, i can draw them up for you, no architect even needed!

I understand Galros argument in general, but honestly I don't see what negative impact these highrises will have.

Of course these won't have any big skyline impact, but it's not all about skyline either.

If we had a historical center of greater value than we actually have, I could have seen the advantages of keeping the majority of the city low and a distinct part of the city tall, but I really don't see the need for this in Oslo.

On the contrary, the public spaces surrounding these buildings, above all tullinløkka, will be far more exciting than they are today, with the proposed buildings. This part of the city has good potential but many ugly functionalist buildings; if we can replace some of them with highrises it would lead to a better-looking, more modern and more attractive city.

I have dreamt about a singel 200 m scraper on this location for a long time. that will never happen so I applaud this. It looks great and will be a huge improvement of this area.

http://ap.mnocdn.no/incoming/article6744547.ece/ALTERNATES/w780c169/afp000280921.jpg?updated=190120121513

If we absolutely should have highrises here, why don't design something thin with proper height? 24 floors laughable low. I'm sure you can get caravans that are higher now days.

It would have been one thing if looked like this:
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/c/cc/Torre_Agbar_-_Barcelona-doyler79.jpg

Or this:
http://www.urbed.coop/sites/default/files/Malmo-Turning-Torso_0.jpg


Or this:
http://zoominlocal.com/pub-files/123638353149b1b72b32dc5/pub/Reflections010111_010121/lib/13008482244d895e60f3bea.jpg

Now it only offers the worst of both worlds: Low, unimpressive but at the same time blocking view, breaking with surrounding and casting shadows. And it will be even less impressive after going through Riksantikvarens system.

^^Troll-Galro: Complains about a building being too fat... Posts pictures of buildings that are fatter.:troll:

Don't you get that for such (relatively) short highrise-builidings, there's just a limit to how narrow you can make each floor without removing every economical aspect there is?

^^ They have higher height though so they can bear more mass gracefully. But of course you may be right: Perhaps this location can't support thin highrises while still being profitable, and therefore isn't suited highrises at all. I don't know.

And...

If we are to gather all information about the project, shouldn't we also post all renders? From MAD's homepage:

http://www.mad.no/prod_images/doc_136_5.jpg

http://www.mad.no/prod_images/doc_136_6.jpg

http://www.mad.no/prod_images/doc_136_7.jpg


(ups, size)

^^ They have higher height though so they can bear more mass gracefully. But of course you may be right: Perhaps this location can't support thin highrises while still being profitable, and therefore isn't suited highrises at all. I don't know.

Any company want a highrise to be as profitable as possible, especially in Norway where it will never be profitable in building beautiful tall and less profitable Dubaish skyscrapers. To be realistic, 24 floors is very good for Tullinløkka. I bet the project will be reduced in height though, just as Krystallklar (MAD also made the first concept for Krystallklar, 127m tall).

Any company want a highrise to be as profitable as possible, especially in Norway where it will never be profitable in building beautiful tall and less profitable Dubaish skyscrapers. To be realistic, 24 floors is very good for Tullinløkka. I bet the project will be reduced in height though, just as Krystallklar (MAD also made the first concept for Krystallklar, 127m tall).

Now it's not. 24 floor is poor as you are then left with only the negative effects while not getting a sleek, high and impressive thing unless it have a very special design. If they double it then I would be more positive - and Riksantikvaren would get a heart attack. So win win there in other words.

my issue is not so much the towers, the area already has a good share of midrises (relatively speaking), so there isnt much skyline to spoil anyway. The problem as I see it is the failure to create a gracefil cityscape. I realise there are factors, which are beyond the power of MAD here, concerning keeping the three floor brick buildings for instance. Its the combination of compromises, though, that keep on producing mediocre results for our city,

Now it's not. 24 floor is poor as you are then left with only the negative effects while not getting a sleek, high and impressive thing unless it have a very special design. If they double it then I would be more positive - and Riksantikvaren would get a heart attack. So win win there in other words.

I was more aiming to wanting a sleek building at 24 floors wouldn't be profitable. If you want a profitable building hat still appear as sleek you have to go to between 200-400m, which will never go through the office of Riksantikvaren and is therefor unrealistic.

No, I think 150m is enough to make sleek/good looking while profitable highrises. Torre Agbar shown above is only 140m high yet appears sleek enough for me. :)

Why would we want a building that looks like a bloody(!) tampon ?:?

It looks like a huge dildo. Girls are attracted to dildoes while Men are attracted to Girls again, so in other words the vibrancy of the place is secured with that shape.

Barcelona is awesome with Torre Agbar! Though i would not call Torre Agbar very sleek. Its a lot about design which is another thing we seem to suck at in Norway.

So Galro, are you against highrises there as long as its not 150m tall? Because i think we're been kinda fortunate here with 22+24 floors and should gather all support to this. If this doesn't get much support we will end up with something far less dense, that is for sure.

^^

I don't know about apartments. Do 15 20million kr apartments really add that much city life? I think a good mix of shops, bars and restaurants would do more for the local community..

And I think it's important to have offices here to counteract the whole decentralization trend going on with Fornebu and the likes. Apartments could be located a block or two away, for offices a location like this is crucial. Just think about the visibility, proximity to Vika, public transport, etc.

So Galro, are you against highrises there as long as its not 150m tall? Because i think we're been kinda fortunate here with 22+24 floors and should gather all support to this. If this doesn't get much support we will end up with something far less dense, that is for sure.

I won't support this development, no. I think the current density of the block is fine. The biggest problem is the ugly buildings. I also think Oslo got enough half-high highrises scattered around the innercity as it is. We don't need more of that.

And no offense meant to MAD (if they are reading this), but I can't say that I'm too big fan of the actual architecture/design of the building either. It seems to me like just another glass box. I'm willing to accept glass boxes at places like Skøyen (quite far out in other words), but think central location like this requires architecture with some neat details to capture this much spoken about "human scale", not just impersonal glass walls.

I will say though that I love how the actual Tullinløkka looks in the render.

Needless to say, I'm very much in favor of this. I like the design, but more importantly, it does exactly what I think we should do a lot more of in this city: it keeps the street level with the older buildings while at the same time increases density by utilizing the large blocks we're blessed with in much of the city. You can get light and an open feeling down to pedestrian level, while having a building that has the balls to be visible and, yes, it will provide something to the faraway looks of the city. So, no, Galro, I don't agree with your point of view.

I said that I like the design, but it's not perfect. Upon seeing it, I got the feeling that it's more interesting at the bottom than towards the top. There's not much going on above the 10-12th floor where they becomes more of regular boxes than anything else. I get a feeling that I want to get out my danish cheese cutter and make some more angles and setbacks on the top on the clay model - preferably by compensating upwards. That won't make it harder to get through authorities either; you can't go lower than 0%.

Speaking of which - Janne Wilberg actually want to place people underground?!? She wants to reduce heights and give the people more light by in stead placing them underground? wtf?? :?

I can only wonder what that meeting must have been like:

"Oh, I love the concept; can you make it 8 floors in stead?"

I think we must remember that this is still just a concept, hence why they look like simple glass boxes. We're currently standing where we stood when MAD made the first 127m tall concept of Biskop Gunnerus Gate 14b whch later became Krystallklar by Jarmund. The only thing we should discuss in this matter now is the volume and height and what impact this would have on the surroundings, not the exterior facades.

But the thing is that I'm not a fan of the volumes and height either. The only thing I agree with is that something should be done with the block, but this is not it.

I would like to see something along these lines personally: Two large atriums in the middle of the building as the natural meeting point (that's the black circles are supposed to indicate) and building placed somewhat randomly around them creating a lot of small, narrow and cosy alleyways between them (the red lines is supposed to say "hey, I'm an alleyway"). Numbers of floor: No higher than 10. The lost cornerbuilding towards Henrik Ibsens Gate could also be rebuilt.

http://img585.imageshack.us/img585/4453/tullinlkka.png

I would like to see something along these lines personally: Two large atriums in the middle of the building as the natural meeting point (that's the black circles are supposed to indicate) and building placed somewhat randomly around them creating a lot of small, narrow and cosy alleyways between them (the red lines is supposed to say "hey, I'm an alleyway").

Essentially, you would like discontinued city walls, and wind tunnels in between? Please, tell me where you've seen this work?

Numbers of floor: No higher than 10.

Is even Borgarting to tall for you?:?

The lost cornerbuilding towards Henrik Ibsens Gate could also be rebuilt.

How has this anything to do with Tullinløkka?!?!?

Essentially, you would like discontinued city walls, and wind tunnels in between? Please, tell me where you've seen this work?

You know that MAD would like to open the block too according to their proposal too, right? And yes I have seen it work. Just go a couple of blocks closer Oslo S and take a look at Citypassagen and then you can see for yourself. Afterwards you can go down to Aker Brygge or Tjuvholmen. And if that's isn't enough, then you can visit thousands of passageways and alleys all around Europe. :)


Is even Borgarting to tall for you?:?

I would prefer either a lower or a much higher buildings, yes. But given that it's hiden inside a side street then I don't really care that much. I think it's bigger shame they only want for a boring as hell glass box though with no effort what so ever put into making the surrounding streetscape nice.


How has this anything to do with Tullinløkka?!?!?

It belongs to the same block as MADs proposal, but I don't know if Entra owns the building. Of course neither this or MADs proposal is located at Tullinløkka but it's here the discussion about the proposals took place.

It belongs to the same block as MADs proposal, but I don't know if Entra owns the building. Of course neither this or MADs proposal is located at Tullinløkka but it's here the discussion about the proposals took place.

Henrik Ibsens gate: http://kart.finn.no/?lng=10.73143&lat=59.91522&zoom=19&mapType=finnvector&streetview=true&svx=261410.23056651&svy=6649665.3820473&sa=257.0738896513832&sp=6.621580086573996&streetViewState=1

I thought you ment the corner building there.

Okay, I thought the whole upgraded part of Ring 1 was called Henrik Ibsens Gate, but apparently not.

^^You're probably confusing it with the term "Ibsenringen", which was a working title on Ring 1 when it was built in the 80ies - early 90ies.

I really don't see your side here, Galro. Sure, an alleyway can be nice, but why would you want the buildings to "turn in on themselves" and create a separate, secluded space when you have a natural gathering point to get (and poison) air right in front of them? And exactly what is so wrong about breaking up the cityscape and give us a little more variation in stead of just continuing the carpet of low-rises that already exists everywhere? Sure, I agree that taller and slimmer is better, and perhaps we could petition them to do a study on that (personally I'm a real sucker for "crowns" and tapering spires), but in terms of "disadvantages with high-rises", surely it's better to pull back from the street and let more light down than building 35 m right up to the edge?

I really don't see your side here, Galro. Sure, an alleyway can be nice, but why would you want the buildings to "turn in on themselves" and create a separate, secluded space when you have a natural gathering point to get (and poison) air right in front of them?

Because:
1. It makes the city interesting and it gives us more to explore. People love small and narrow street, as they are usually very pedestrian friendly. Just take a look at most old towns.

2. The whole point behind the development as far as I understood was to create a meeting point between the university, students and a big publishing house (schibsted). Or at least that's how it is getting sold to the public. MAD included two open areas inside their building (to create the meeting points I presume) and I therefore did the same with my suggestion.


And exactly what is so wrong about breaking up the cityscape and give us a little more variation in stead of just continuing the carpet of low-rises that already exists everywhere?

Because I and many other think it is ugly. Oslo (at least not this part) isn't exactly what I would call a carpet city. Instead we have highrises boxes placed randomly around. Has this given Oslo a good reputation for being an exciting city that breaks with the carpet lowrises? No, not as far as I am aware, instead many think it is the ugliest city in the world who have no idea what its doing. Shouldn't the goal be to create a city people will like to be and to live in?

Sure, I agree that taller and slimmer is better, and perhaps we could petition them to do a study on that (personally I'm a real sucker for "crowns" and tapering spires), but in terms of "disadvantages with high-rises", surely it's better to pull back from the street and let more light down than building 35 m right up to the edge?
No, not really. The shadow problem isn't so much for the street that surround them (our narrow streets are getting covered in shadows even with Grunerløkkas density) but more the park and open squares close by as highrise shadows reach longer. It won't change the view either which is the other problem.

Planinitiativ hos Pbe,
http://web102881.pbe.oslo.kommune.no/saksinnsyn/casedet.asp?mode=all&caseno=201200848

Det arbeides etter følgende framdriftsplan:
 Planinitiativ januar 2012
 Høring av planprogram april-mai 2012
 Innsending av planprogram juni 2012
 Fastsetting av planprogram oktober 2012
 Utarbeidelse av planskisse januar 2012 – november 2012
 Medvirkningsaktiviteter august-september 2012
 Innsendelse av planskisse til PBE november 2012
 Utarbeidelse av planforslag desember 2012 – februar 2013
 Offentlig ettersyn av planforslag med utredninger mars 2013 – april 2013
 Saksbehandling og politisk behandling våren/høsten 2013
 Vedtak reguleringsplan høsten 2013