SkyscraperCity Forum banner

INFRASTRUKTUR | Norske jernbaner | Railways

184K views 1K replies 81 participants last post by  Never give up 
#1 ·
#720 ·
If this was a question of the highest population, and not its density. I'm pretty sure you all would want to use the number of the municipality. But of course you are right - but then again, what is the city and what is not? Stavanger's municipality border lines are not that big, and in direct contact with others, such as Sandnes. So if we disregard the municipality border lines and see the cities as a whole, Stavanger and its surrounding surpass Trondheim in size and population. One angles the facts as it suits, I guess.

EDIT: Btw sorry folks for sidetracking this thread! I rest my case :)
 
#721 ·
If this was a question of the highest population, and not its density. I'm pretty sure you all would want to use the number of the municipality. But of course you are right - but then again, what is the city and what is not? )
The urban area is usually consider to be the city. The municipality border is just an artificial line without much meaning in this context.
 
#728 ·
Very exciting weeks ahead: On thursday we will hopefully get a prioritized list of which rail sections of the IC Triangle should be expanded to double rail track first, and which train line alignments are preferred.

On February 29 the proposal for "Nasjonal TransportPlan 2014-2029" will be published :yes:

Will be very interesting to see which rail and road projects that are prioritized and when they will be built! I am hoping for a very ambitious transport plan that prioritizes public transport even more than today.
 
#725 ·
The Oslo - Bergen - Stavanger over Haukeli connection should be build based on one simple fact:
The money made in order to build the entire network, and much much more comes from this region.
Hordaland and Rogaland makes up such a huge amount of Norway's gdp in comparison to our population (About 36-38% of the gdp, from a population of less than 20% of total), that the region deserves a huge investment even if it does not have a population high enough today to justify the construction.
In fact, you should double the traffic volume just based on economic output (who deserves what), and add for future population growth, which is very high in this region.

My last point is that the cost here all accounts for using norwegian manual labor. In a country where we don't have enough workers to supply our own oilindustry northwards, it is rediculous if we don't take in cheap labor from a country like Spain, Italy or Greece, pay them wages according to their own national tarifs, and then transport them back home. It would be like working offshore, or being in the army. It just annoys the hell out of me when I hear all the labor unions telling us that we cannot do this. Because we can! We just have to change some laws or rules...

Rant out.
 
#734 ·
There are pretty massive damages to the train set. Pretty incredible to see it so destroyed without even have been in traffic:



The accident is said to have occured by a track switch. 3 out of 5 carts derailed, and destroyed 200 meters of railroad on Vestfoldbanen. The line between Holm-Nykirke is currently loaded with construction as the line is realigned and expanded for two-way rails. This may very well also be part of the cause.

Derailing accidents in Norway not caused by weather has for the last years been caused by insufficient maintainance on either railroads (NSB/Brynsbakken 2010) or trains (SJ/Kongsvinger 2010), or human failure (Cargonet/Sydhavna 2010) so it will be interesting to see what was the cause here. I think we can rule out the weather.
 
#735 ·
Intercity-triangle can be planned and built in 10 years, according to JBV. The most opitimal solution is 13 years, though. Total cost is estimated at 130 bio NOK for all three stretches, a total of 230 km. The plan is four trains per hour each way, with optimal speeds of up to 250 km/h on almost all lines.

Link to JBV and all the reports: http://www.jernbaneverket.no/no/Nyh.../InterCity-kan-planlegges-og-bygges-pa-ti-ar/


The rest is up to the politicians, I guess...
 
#737 ·
Now, this isn' t mostly an Oslo-project, but more of a project to ensure people can live in cities 100 km outside of the city, while still commuting to the Oslo business-market. The gainers here are people in Østfold, Vestfold (/Telemark) and Oppland/Hedmark, neither bordering Oslo at all. More correctly it's an Østlandet-project, and Østlandet is region consistening of just above half of the Norwegian population, and almost 3/4ths of the population growth.
 
#740 ·
^^actually, it should be "almost 2/3rds". And I would certainly applaud any sign showing politicians on State level starting to realize the cost of more than 1% yearly population growth in this country. The tåkeprat is only getting worse, as consequenses of being the fastest growing country in Europe appears in new forms every day.
 
#745 ·
I could potentially live at Stange if I had a job around Oslo S and it would take me 50 minutes to get there. That's not much more than with bike/subway today inside Oslo. I think it's the right way to do it; have stations before people. Isn't that typically how many towns have come to be, like Lillestrøm, which Bannor must have confused with Oslo? :lol:

I think we would see rapid development around the less-than-an-hour-away stations. Oslo is expected to grow with a couple hundred thousand, without touching the forests or the parks, and with every attempt at something higher than 5 floors being cut down? Open up Stange, I would say (but plan it properly)
 
#746 · (Edited)
Stange is fairly close to Hamar though, so you could make the argument it would be better to get everyone on there. Then again how much time do you actually lose by making one or two stops extra? And as bookings says, the places with stations will probably see increased growth due to the expanded job market.

I really like the plan in itself, and it is good they are very determined to get it done quickly. This gives us an opportunity to build some great new urban areas focused around the train stations, if the politicians seize this opportunity. With (hopefully) a large increase in activity they can provide a very good basis for some great, lively centres across the region.
 
#747 ·
The stretch between Tangen and Brummundal is only 35 km, and yet it could get as many as 4 stations. With acceleration, stopping and waiting time per station that's quite a bit of extra time. The stretch between Skøyen and Asker is roughly 35 km, and intercity trains only stop at a total of 4 stations.

Could it really be defended that such a sparsely populated area should have the same station density as one of the most populated areas in the country?

A better solution would be to have one intercity station in Hamar, and to run local feeder trains on the old track between Tangen and Brummundal.
 
#748 ·
Well, there might be just one station between Eidsvoll and Hamar, but I'm pretty sure not all trains will stop at all stations (like Tangen and Stange). If you just have feeder trains for these stations, the whole point is lost. Anyway, this map is probably not complete, places like Jessheim and Kløfta should be there. It's not a big deal; express-trains run like hell between Lillehammer-Hamar-Oslo, and others stop more often. 4 trains per hour should be enough for 2 express ones and 2 "slow" ones. At a place like Tangen, that would at least mean one train per hour, which is as good (or bad) as commuters on the Gjøvik-line get today. And people still use that one (I've done, for a long, dreadful year)

If they could also extend the Gjøvik-line up to Lillehammer, more cargo could be put on this.

But my point is that more stations should not be a problem, but they need to make it possible to run through them quite fast.
 
#751 · (Edited)
And Bookings, how can the train stop at both OSL and Jessheim?:lol: This stretch is also already completed.
But will all trains go through OSL? Some will surely go through Jessheim (one of the fastest growing conurbations in the country, already at 17000), but perhaps that stretch of rail is just not good enough for speed?

Yeah, Norway certainly needs policies that encourages sprawl ... That's the thing the country have lacked.
Linked to above quote also; It's not sprawl to promote density around stations. We might as well just accept the fact that even if Oslo would develop Manhattan-like density, not everybody would actually prefer to live like that. If you can have a villa 5 minutes from a small downtown around a station, that's much better than a villa on the outskirts of endless Oslo-sprawl. I've lived in both the US and Switzerland. US; endless sprawl linked with highways, all space filled with houses and grass. Switzerland: strings of towns with dense cores, and a small ring of houses around each. Efficient trains make it worthwhile to live within short distance of a station, even if that station is 100-120 km away from the place you work. Trains of all shades are active; express ones and those that stop at the smallest cowshed. In any case, they are all quite fast in between the stations.

I think it's promoting MORE sprawl by not using the railway to shorten distances. Even if forumers might be above average interested in density and highrises, you got to see what people want. Those who want villas, unable to fit it into Oslo, will sprawl as close as possible. Today that means places like Skedsmokorset etc. Soon it will be up Nittedal (I only know the eastern parts, I'm sure there are examples from south and west also). A Swiss model is preferable, EVEN if that means there is a station at Stange :)

Edit: and I would like to see a link Moss-Skoppum :)
 
#752 · (Edited)
I didn't mention any highrises. I'm generally against them with the exception of a few places. You think the only alternatives is to either build Manhatten-style hoods or increase the size of Oslos metro to incorporate places like Stange into it? If we built up Grorudalen with same density as Torshov or Homansbyen (which is not high by any standards) then we would have enough to house as many people as we will ever need. As for what people want: I think you will find that houses and apartments at Homansbyen is quite a lot more expensive than at Stange. The same goes for most "high density" central places. It don't appear to me like people agrees with in you in what they want. People who move out usually do it because of the high price you have to pay to live central.
 
#753 ·
Well now, no reason to get upset because of Stange or any other place. It's not specifically about Stange either, it's about the IC-triangle having few stations (and thus potentially be a few minutes faster), or more stations (which not always have to be used by all trains). It doesn't matter how many people you can put into Oslo, be it Majorstua-style or Manhattan, there will be a market for single houses and less density also. All I'm saying is that faster trains allow these markets to develop around stations farther away than today, and that this is, in my eyes, a good thing. Homansbyen is expensive because it is central, but how do you explain the higher prices of Holmenkollen or Tåsen, further away? I'd like to think that type of house matters also. And, sure, there's room for hundreds of thousands in Groruddalen (where I now live), but then there will be people who would want something else. Believe it or not, I want more space around me than I used to (yes, I've also lived in the traditional 1890s blocks of Majorstua, in a huge apartment). I think people want diversity, and some people want to live rural, but still need to work in the city. There are many reasons for "sprawl", and the prices downtown is one of them, not necessarily the only one.

As I said, if I could live at Stange or Tangen, with a sailboat on Mjøsa, and get to my job in Oslo in less than an hour, I would. Then the suckers from Hamar could spend another 2 minutes to get to Oslo for all I care :)
 
#754 · (Edited)
Yes, but we already have plenty of single houses. We shouldn't encourage to build more of them. Especially not on farmland (like at Stange). It should be much more important to get a fast and effective connection between the already built up areas.

Homansbyen is expensive because it is central, but how do you explain the higher prices of Holmenkollen or Tåsen, further away?
Mostly due to the views and the location. Holmenkollen have more high density commies than Homansbyen and the building have about the same space between them (with a few exceptions of course) so I don't think you can use the lack of density as the cause. A building that would have been seen as ghetto at Tveita is considered to be very desirable at Holmenkollen. It have very little to do with the building style.

Besides, I'm not completely sure why you think I'm upset?
 
#756 ·
Besides, I'm not completely sure why you think I'm upset?
ah, I guess I read an accusation from your question. Nevermind. Anyway, the station cities must be properly planned, and I don't think we should only have stations where tons of people already live, but do like they did with the metro in the 50s; Extend it out "to nowhere", and then regulate for houses and small town development. Hopefully one can learn from the mistakes done then. And I agree location is important, but location means a lot of things, and what it doesn't mean is that all people at Stange live where they do because they can't afford Homansbyen. So what I'm saying is that it doesn't necessarily "solve the sprawl" by densifying Oslo. Some people just want to live differently. Then better to use fast communication to thin sprawl, like around stations for 150-200 kms around Oslo, than to have Oslo balloon out in all directions. You cannot force people to live dense and urban. Ok, I promise I'll stop blaspheming now :)

Maybe not Stange, but instead perhaps just a station between Eidsvoll and Tangen (30 km), and open up for terraced semi-urban housing down towards Mjøsa. Oh, I already broke my promise..
 
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Top