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 March 18th, 2009, 03:14 AM   #501
54°26′S 3°24′E
Registered User
 
54°26′S 3°24′E's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 812
Likes (Received): 155

Quote:
Originally Posted by ChrisZwolle View Post
To me, a 2x2 motorway on the E6 route seems out of the question due to way too low traffic volumes. But are there plans to say; realign parts of the E6 so traffic flow quality will be increased?
Chriswolle, as you perhaps remember, this was the topic of a lengthy discussion here some time ago....

There are ways of shortening both alternative Oslo-Trondheim routes by several kms. If you draw a straight line between Trondheim and Oslo the distance is less than 400 km, compared with less than 500 km E6-Rv3-E6, and more than 540 along E6. Correspondingly, a straight line is almost 200 km (40 %) shorter than the currrent road on Oslo-Bergen, and 150-250 km (30-50 %) shorter on Oslo-Stavanger. However, it is very hard to build even close to straight roads everywhere in Norway. On Oslo-Bergen and Oslo-Stavanger some people argue that the main route should be along the current E134, which would be significantly shorter than the current main roads (E18/E39 to Stavanger and E14 to Bergen). There is currently no plans for a major realignment of E6, except that some argue that it should follow the current rv 3 (44 km shorter), which most transit traffic uses anyway.

There is probably a lot more to gain per dollar by increasing the speed of travel. Currently, the average speed is less than 70 km/h. If this was increased to say 120 km/h, the driving time will be reduced by roughly 3 hours down to little more than four hours. Since a 7 hour+ trip usually require a major break, the effective time savings will be even larger. This effect will be somewhat smaller, however, if a motorway would be built along E6 rather than rv 3, because E6 would be longer.

Currently, there are at least four sources of traffic increase on the major intercity routes in Norway (Oslo-Stavanger, Oslo-Bergen and Oslo-Trondheim).
1. Transfer of traffic from air: Currently the share of passenger traffic on all routes traveling by car/bus is less than 40 %, somewhat smaller than the air traffic share. Transfer from air is desirable from an environmental point of view, Oslo-Bergen and Oslo-Trondheim is currently ranks fourth and sixth, respectively, among the busies air routes in Europe. A lot of this traffic is budget traffic.
2. Transfer of traffic from competing roads: Currently the traffic is split between multiple roads on each link. If one of the routes are built as a motorway, and the other(s) not, some (most ?) of the transit traffic can be transferred. Prioritizing is however not something Norwegian politicians have been very clever at in the past, however.... In the case of Oslo-Trondheim, we have the E6 and rv 3, but rv 3 is dominating on the transit traffic.
3. Population growth: The population growth in Norway is currently quite high, and the population will probably approach 7 million in 2050, up from less than 5 million today.
4. Traveling frequency per person increase: Like it or not, the traffic has increased more than the population growth, and has doubled only during the last 25 years.

According to a recent study, point 3 and 4 above will lead to a total daily pax (air/railway/car/bus) Trondheim-Oslo of around 16 000 already in 10 years without any improvements in infrastructure.

There is no doubt that neither Rv 3 or E6 will have any capacity problems in the parts with the least traffic in the near future. However, motorways will lead to:
*Far better safety (on such long drives you easily get sleepy, and head-on crashes are a major source of fatal accidents)
*Lower pollution (less acceleration/deacceleration/hills/kms and transfer from air)
*Better economy due to huge time savings

The current Norwegian standard call for narrow motorway (20 m) when expected AADT 20 years ahead is larger than 12 000, and 1+2 access restricted road ("autostrasse"/express road) from 8000 AADT. Longer tunnels require a second tube for lower AADTs (down to 8000 for 10 km and longer). Such long tunnels are quite likely at least on Oslo-Stavanger/Bergen. However, in order to get a significantly transfer of traffic from air, I think a motorway is needed also on the least trafficated parts of the Oslo-Trondheim/Bergen/Stavanger routes.
Quote:
Originally Posted by IceCheese View Post
Agreed that only 2+2 highway to Lillehammer will be enough, if the rest of the road would get a higher standard regarding width and the climbs would be reduced. But there has to be some sort of transportation that can compete with the plane on the stretch, so either way we would need a better railroad connection (HSR?). But eitherway if a new railroad or a new road would be constructed between Oslo and Trondheim, we would save a LOT on building the two at the same time (in the same paths).
I certainly agree with the latter part, I am also unsure whether it is wise to push a 2+2 further north than Lillehammer on the current E6, since that valley is quite narrow and has a very valuable/pittoresque landscape. However, along rv 3 there is plenty of space for 2+2, and this is where HSR would be most viable due to the lower construction costs.. In any case, Gardermoen-Lillehammer and Støren-Steinkjer (E6) and Kolomoen-Elverum (rv 3) should be fixed first.
__________________
Norway needs a new transport infrastructure network, let's start now!

Last edited by 54°26′S 3°24′E; March 18th, 2009 at 03:25 AM.
54°26′S 3°24′E no está en línea   Reply With Quote

Sponsored Links
Old March 18th, 2009, 03:29 AM   #502
54°26′S 3°24′E
Registered User
 
54°26′S 3°24′E's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 812
Likes (Received): 155

..
__________________
Norway needs a new transport infrastructure network, let's start now!

Last edited by 54°26′S 3°24′E; March 19th, 2009 at 02:59 AM.
54°26′S 3°24′E no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old March 18th, 2009, 11:05 AM   #503
Ingenioren
Registered User
 
Ingenioren's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Oslo
Posts: 5,605
Likes (Received): 584

We don't need 2+2 all the way to have a safe road, build 1+1(+ extra lane at times), maybe with 2+2 in tunnels. 2+2 is almost the same as 1+1 when it comes to safety.
__________________
I want to see some construction!
Ingenioren no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old March 18th, 2009, 02:58 PM   #504
IceCheese
Scandi-friendly
 
IceCheese's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Canada is my city
Posts: 7,228
Likes (Received): 925

The new highway E18 between Krosby and Knapstad in Østfold blows their budget by 160 mio, making the bill to 1,3 bio NOK. Crisis in the construction business seems to avoid Statens Vegvesen...

The part of the same road between Vinterbro and Retvet in Akershus is also left out of the transportation plan as people may have noticed, so there won't be 2+2 there for a while. Not that the new Vinterbro krysset that will be done this fall is dimensioned for it eitherway...

Good "klatteutbygging" by the government yet again!
__________________
Oslo/Copenhagen - The True Capital of Scandinavia.


Take a look at my Photo Mess!
IceCheese no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old March 18th, 2009, 10:15 PM   #505
Ingenioren
Registered User
 
Ingenioren's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Oslo
Posts: 5,605
Likes (Received): 584

And that part is probably the one with the most trafic aswell, why is Østfold always getting their way?
__________________
I want to see some construction!
Ingenioren no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old March 18th, 2009, 10:18 PM   #506
ElviS77
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Posts: 564
Likes (Received): 54

Quote:
Originally Posted by 54°26′S 3°24′E View Post
Currently, the average speed is less than 70 km/h.
I'm not getting into this again, but I really wonder about this claim (it's part of a government analysis, right?). I've never gone that slow Oslo-Stavanger, Oslo-Bergen and certainly not Oslo-Trondheim, and even if I go a bit faster than the average motorist, this seems strange.
ElviS77 no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old March 18th, 2009, 10:24 PM   #507
ElviS77
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Posts: 564
Likes (Received): 54

Quote:
Originally Posted by 54°26′S 3°24′E View Post
Tunnels would solve this on alternative shorter, and currently more trafficked routes.
Again: I don't say I agree, but elevation and winter closure have been the main arguments. As for Navarsæte being from Sogn og Fjordane (actually Sogndal, I think), Hemsedal would make just as much sense in that respect.
ElviS77 no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old March 18th, 2009, 10:24 PM   #508
Ingenioren
Registered User
 
Ingenioren's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Oslo
Posts: 5,605
Likes (Received): 584

Aftenposten did a story about this a few weeks ago:

http://www.aftenposten.no/nyheter/ir...cle2953195.ece
__________________
I want to see some construction!
Ingenioren no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old March 18th, 2009, 10:30 PM   #509
ElviS77
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Posts: 564
Likes (Received): 54

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ingenioren View Post
Aftenposten did a story about this a few weeks ago:

http://www.aftenposten.no/nyheter/ir...cle2953195.ece
The article says that Oslo–Trondheim (498 km) will take 7hours, 13 min, thus the average speed is 69 km/h. Even including about 30 mins of breaks, I've yet to spend 7 hours and 13 minutes en route Oslo-Trondheim, even at Easter... Aftenposten is a nice newspaper, but I don't think all that many of its reporters get to Trondheim by road...
ElviS77 no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old March 19th, 2009, 12:46 AM   #510
IceCheese
Scandi-friendly
 
IceCheese's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Canada is my city
Posts: 7,228
Likes (Received): 925

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ingenioren View Post
And that part is probably the one with the most trafic aswell, why is Østfold always getting their way?
Because they are financing their part with toll booths. No way in hell the population of Ås and Ski will accept a new tollboth at Nygård, or where it would be.
__________________
Oslo/Copenhagen - The True Capital of Scandinavia.


Take a look at my Photo Mess!
IceCheese no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old March 19th, 2009, 01:38 AM   #511
Ingenioren
Registered User
 
Ingenioren's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Oslo
Posts: 5,605
Likes (Received): 584

You just take and take, but give nothing back don't you! Toll free E6 did you get tough.... I read somewhere the government thinks we have finally reached a point for some parts of the country where tolls are to high and no more toll projects can get approved....


Not updated, but it gives an impression....
__________________
I want to see some construction!

Last edited by Ingenioren; March 19th, 2009 at 01:45 AM.
Ingenioren no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old March 19th, 2009, 02:01 AM   #512
IceCheese
Scandi-friendly
 
IceCheese's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Canada is my city
Posts: 7,228
Likes (Received): 925

What? I'm pretty sure someone in this thread (or was it in the N&B part) that Trondheim/Trøndelag had to have the most tolled stretches in the country (ok, I won't battle).

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ingenioren View Post
You just take and take, but give nothing back don't you!
Well, there isn't much local commitment for this specific stretch. Only indre Østfold is fighting for it, so let them also pay for it, we say!
__________________
Oslo/Copenhagen - The True Capital of Scandinavia.


Take a look at my Photo Mess!
IceCheese no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old March 19th, 2009, 02:55 AM   #513
54°26′S 3°24′E
Registered User
 
54°26′S 3°24′E's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 812
Likes (Received): 155

At least I never said that. What I did claim was that
1. The higher degree of infrastructure investments in the Oslo area is not because these areas is higher tolled than the rest of the country
2. For someone living a bit off the most urban areas sometimes needs to pay a massive amount of toll just to get anywhere.
3. Trøndelag always for some reason seems to get the worst toll deals with the government.

The city council of Trondheim actually removed the toll ring on December 1st, 2005 because the labor party had promised to do so. Now, apparantly, those promises does not count any more, so they plan to introduce several new "payment points" around the city. "No no, it is not a toll ring, they are payment points", is turning into a classic labor party new speak. In addition, there are talks about introducing a new toll road from Orkanger to the Hitra tunnel, such that the people living on Hitra/Frøya, the most important export region of central Norway, probably need to go through at least 8 toll points only to get through to the regional airport. And of course, it does not stop there, the local politicians want to toll the entire E6 in Sør-Trøndelag county south of Trondheim, from Stjørdal to Åsen, also on E6, and a grand toll package of Fosen is also being pushed. The E6 packages is of course on the grand government map of road projects for the next 10 years, but there is not a single cent promised.... (That is btw also true regarding rv 23, as far as I understand)

Regarding E18 from Vinterbro, it needs improvement like a lot of roads in Norway, but I guess with the massive investments that has taken place on the E6 in the areas, and not at least the 12 billion NOK promised for the next decade on railway, I guess the area has received it piece of the much too small cake.....
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ingenioren View Post
We don't need 2+2 all the way to have a safe road, build 1+1(+ extra lane at times), maybe with 2+2 in tunnels. 2+2 is almost the same as 1+1 when it comes to safety.
That is only because the speed is lower. On a four lane motorway you can have much higher speed with the same level of safety, and because you will have less accelerations and deaccelarations, the emissions will be lower. In order to avoid blocking the road for emergency vehicles etc., a 1+1 or 1+2 needs to be quite wide. 1+2 is for instance 14.5 m wide according to the standard. That is only 25 % less than a narrow motorway in terms of width, and in terms of cost the difference is less.
Quote:
Originally Posted by ElviS77 View Post
The article says that Oslo–Trondheim (498 km) will take 7hours, 13 min, thus the average speed is 69 km/h. Even including about 30 mins of breaks, I've yet to spend 7 hours and 13 minutes en route Oslo-Trondheim, even at Easter... Aftenposten is a nice newspaper, but I don't think all that many of its reporters get to Trondheim by road...
I guess we are not the average motorist...., they are are only citing a report from Rambøll. One point of the report is that the difference with other countries would be larger for heavy vehicles.
__________________
Norway needs a new transport infrastructure network, let's start now!
54°26′S 3°24′E no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old March 19th, 2009, 03:34 AM   #514
IceCheese
Scandi-friendly
 
IceCheese's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Canada is my city
Posts: 7,228
Likes (Received): 925

I think we can agree that none of these places should've had toll financing in the first place..

Though E18 may be more than great without an expansion to a highway, there should've been done some safety measures a long time ago. Article from 2006 in my local paper:
Quote:
E18 gjennom Follo er det veifolk kaller en gammeldags vei, med mange av- og påkjøringer som har ført til flere alvorlige ulykker.
Statistikk fra Statens vegvesen for strekningen fra Østfold grense til Svartskog, viser at det har vært 155 ulykker på veien siden 1996. 12 personer har mistet livet. Det har vært syv meget alvorlige ulykker, 24 alvorlige og 189 ulykker med lettere skader. Alt i løpet av ti år.
Thoug the modernisation of Nygårdskrysset (intersection towards Ski) and Holstadkrysset (intersection towards Ås)(a bad solution here though) has helped, there's a lot to go...
__________________
Oslo/Copenhagen - The True Capital of Scandinavia.


Take a look at my Photo Mess!
IceCheese no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old March 19th, 2009, 03:35 AM   #515
54°26′S 3°24′E
Registered User
 
54°26′S 3°24′E's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 812
Likes (Received): 155

E6 - Highway priorities and construction - the Norwegian way

As I said, of course the road should be completed. But there are unfortunately many other roads that need a fix in this country.

I just discovered this report from 2006, which calculates the benefits of improving E-6 from south to north in Norway to 90 km/h speed limit. The main results of the report are summarized in the table below:

*Signed vel.: The current speed limit (as of 2006 I guess, the speed limit north of Gardemoen was lowered at some point)
*Saved time: The amount of time saved if the E6 through the county would get 90 km/h
*Saved costs: The total transport savings with a new road
*Req. investments: The required investments according to the government to get the E6 up to standard in the various counties.

Based on this, I calculated the annual return rate for improving the road. Østfold is not on the list because E6 is already up to standard there. Of course, this is not exact science, since some of the places "up to standard" means 100, whereas at other places it means 80 km/h. Also there are often many other benefits of upgrading a highway, like a reduction in emissions, improved health in towns which the old highways go through and not at least a reduction in accident numbers and costs. Anyway the table gives an idea where it makes economic sense to invest. The last two columns show the main government investments (i.e. not tolls, as these reduce the economic benefit of the road) in the various counties. I believe they say quite a lot about Norwegian political priorities. Too bad there are no similar numbers for certain other projects around our country.....

The problem is that a real and realistic analysis of where it would be most cost efficient to build roads in this country seems to lack almost completely. For projects that are ready to by built, some sort of analysis often are made, but it does not seem to have any effect on the investment choices by the government.

At the same time, just south of Trondheim they plan to start construction of a new E6 next year:

Currently, the traffic of this ridiculous two-lane road is around 25000 AADT. In addition a parallel local road has around 20 000 AADT, and they believe about half that traffic will be transferred to E6 once it is up to standard. I.e., probably E6 will have around 35 000 AADT at the opening day, not including general traffic increase. Despite of this, the Norwegian government does not want to pay a penny (i.e. all tolls) and this being Norway, they will build less than a km, and then wait for five years before they start construction on the remainder of the project, giving a total construction time of 10 years for 10 km of motorway....
__________________
Norway needs a new transport infrastructure network, let's start now!

Last edited by 54°26′S 3°24′E; March 19th, 2009 at 08:57 PM.
54°26′S 3°24′E no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old March 19th, 2009, 09:11 PM   #516
54°26′S 3°24′E
Registered User
 
54°26′S 3°24′E's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 812
Likes (Received): 155

"4-lanes Oslo-Trondheim is good macroeconomic investment"

Yesterday the Norwegian weekly engineering magazine had an article about the profitability for the society of building a four lane motorway Trondheim-Oslo. The article was based on an interview with a researcher in socio-economics in a different corner of the country. A quick translation:
Headline: -Four lane motorway is profitable
Abstract: Construction of a motorway from Trondheim to Oslo only needs to take 10 years, but then it has to be built continously, according to researcher.
__________________
Norway needs a new transport infrastructure network, let's start now!
54°26′S 3°24′E no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old March 19th, 2009, 11:33 PM   #517
IceCheese
Scandi-friendly
 
IceCheese's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Canada is my city
Posts: 7,228
Likes (Received): 925

Road building won't drive the inflation through the roof? Blasphemy!
__________________
Oslo/Copenhagen - The True Capital of Scandinavia.


Take a look at my Photo Mess!
IceCheese no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old March 26th, 2009, 02:11 AM   #518
IceCheese
Scandi-friendly
 
IceCheese's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Canada is my city
Posts: 7,228
Likes (Received): 925

"Would you want the responsibilty for this road?"


This is the governments "gift" to the conties: 44.200 km of national roads to be in charge for. The news is that though the transfer is almost ready, no actual increase in fundings has been spoken of, and no one knows how large the maintainance gap actually is. Basicly it's just a way for the government to leave others with the blame, I would guess.

Whole article in Norwegian, for all readers:

Quote:
Gir bort 44.200 km nedslitte veier

Her er Regjeringens «gave» til fylkene.
JOHN HULTGREN SVEINUNG BERG BENTZRØD

*Regjeringen overlater ansvaret for riksveiene til fylkene.

*Summen fylkene får til å utbedre veiene, skal etter planen være klar i mai.

*Det vil ta minst et år før den faktiske prislappen for utbedringene er klar.

*Fylkene har store innvendinger og ber om å få overta veier i god stand.


Regjeringen beholder dagens stamveier – og litt av riksveiene – og dumper resten av det norske veinettet over på fylkeskommunene 1. januar. Dette kaller regjeringen en overføring av store økonomiske verdier, og beskriver det nærmest som en gest. Fylkesveiene overtas vederlagsfritt.

Samtidig presiseres det at veiene, 44.200 km, overtas med den standard de har på overføringstidspunktet, og med tilhørende rettigheter og plikter. Pliktene kommer Regjeringen raskt inn på. I ny Nasjonal transportplan står det blant annet at «...overføringen stiller store krav til fylkeskommunenes oppfølging av sitt nye ansvarsområde. Nasjonale målsettinger for trafikksikkerhet må ivaretas, og Regjeringen vurderer å innføre minstestandarder, eller tiltaksstandarder, for fylkesveiene.»

Aftenposten kan dokumentere at det er svært mye som er uklart rundt overføringen av veiene:

* Regjeringen peker selv på at en mengde spørsmål reises om hvordan utgiftene til veiene skal fordeles, hvordan pengene skal overføres, og hva minstestandardene skal gå ut på.

* Det er foreløpig ikke klart hvilket departement som skal hjelpe fylkeskommunene med finansieringen – Kommunal- og regionaldepartementet eller Samferdselsdepartementet.

* Da overføringene av veiene ble behandlet i Stortinget var utgangspunktet at de skulle overføres til regioner, ikke til fylker. Men innføring av regionene har latt vente på seg.

Det er i dag ingen som vet hva forfall og manglende vedlikehold beløper seg til. Ifølge en rapport fra Statens veivesen fra 2005, er Hordaland det fylket med størst etterslep.

Opplysningsrådet for Veitrafikken har regnet på tall fra ulike statlige kilder, og sier at forfallet på veinettet som blir fylkenes ansvar fra nyttår, er på mellom 25 og 27,5 milliarder kroner, men leder for politikk og strategi, Vilrid Femoen, sier dette er høyst usikre tall. Høyst usikre er også konsekvensene av at fylkene overtar ansvaret.

–Hensikten med dette er i hvert fall ikke å gi innbyggerne bedre veier. Det handler mer om å gi fylkene meningsfylte oppgaver, sier Femoen. Hun sier det er avgjørende at det følger nok penger med, og at det etableres et minstekrav til veistandard. Det finnes ikke slike krav til eksisterende veier i dag.

I forslaget til Nasjonal transportplan kommenterte de fleste fylkeskommunene overføringen av veiene. Flere av fylkene mener det ikke er akseptabelt at Staten legger opp til overføring av øvrige riksveier til regionene uten at et blir kompensert for forfallet på det samme veinettet.

Sør-Trøndelag sier: Fylkestinget kan ikke akseptere at det skal kompenseres for vedlikeholdsetterslepet i de årlige statsbudsjettene. Da vil i realiteten de øvrige rammene til riksveier bli redusert.

Østfold sier: Vi forutsetter at staten sørger for at disse veiene er i god forfatning før overføring finner sted, og at det gis tilstrekkelige tilskudd til fremtidig vedlikehold og nyinvestering.

Vestfold sier: Staten legger opp til overføring av riksveier til fylkeskommunene fra 2010 uten at vedlikeholdsetterslepet kompenseres før overtagelsen.

Buskerud sier: En overføring av øvrig riksveinett til fylkeskommunene forutsetter videre at staten tar ansvar for å rette opp forfallet og bringe veiene i skikkelig stand i samsvar med veilovens krav. I motsatt fall ønsker ikke fylkestinget å overta dette ansvaret.

Nordland sier: Veiene og fergesambandene bør selvfølgelig ha en rimelig standard ved overleveringen, hvis ikke må fylkeskommunen få kompensasjon.

Troms sier: Regionene kan ikke ta imot et nedkjørt og forfalt veinett uten tilstrekkelig kompensasjon.

Finnmark sier: Finnmark fylkeskommune vil presisere at veiene ved overtagelsestidspunktet må ha en tilfredsstillende kvalitet. Fylkestinget forutsetter at ingen riksveier vedtas omklassifisert/overført til fylkeskommunen før veiene oppfyller alle tekniske krav i henhold til Veiloven.

Vest-Agder sier: Selv staten ser at det er husmannsvilkår de tilbyr de nye veieierne. Dette synes, ut fra prinsippet om rammeoverføring, å være helt galt.

Sogn og Fjordane sier: Vi krev at riksvegar som skal overføres til nytt forvaltningsnivå skal være i forsvarlig stand.

Hordaland sier: I forbindelse med overføring av ansvaret for øvrige riksveier... finner fylkestinget det uakseptabelt at dette blir gjort uten kompensasjon for standardheving på det samme veinettet.

–Ingen fare å bevilge for mye
Her er Samferdselsdepartementets svar på Aftenpostens spørsmål om fylkesveiene, ved statssekretær Geir Pollestad:

–Det heter seg at store økonomiske verdier overtas vederlagsfritt. Noe som gir assosiasjoner til en ny Mercedes man får levert på trappen. Men representerer ikke fylkesveiene i realiteten en rusten Datsun fra 1970-tallet, med fyldig mangellapp og små sjanser til å komme gjennom neste EU-kontroll?

–Det dreier seg om et mangfoldig veinett. Men veiene blir ikke dårligere av at fylkene overtar. Uavhengig av eier vil det være et behov for en betydelig innsats de neste årene for å få dem opp på et skikkelig nivå. Det er viljen til å satse penger som vil avgjøre standarden, sier Pollestad.

–Hva beregner dere etterslepet for fylkesveipakken til å være i dag?

–I desember anslo vi etterslepet for 27.000 km fylkesvei til å være 13 mrd., basert på en rapport fra 2005. Så har vi nettopp bestilt en ny gjennomgang for hele det norske veinettet.

–Men denne rapporten kommer lenge etter at dere har bestemt hvor mye penger fylkene skal få til utbedringer?

–Det er riktig at rapporten hverken kan eller skal være ferdig til mai. Men en ny gjennomgang vil bidra med mer kunnskap om hvor stort etterslepet er. Med den manglende satsingen på samferdsel som har vært over lang tid, er det ingen fare for å bevilge for mye de nærmeste årene.

–Flere fylkeskommuner og Opplysningsrådet for Veitrafikken mener at veiene må settes skikkelig i stand før overtagelsen, eller innen en definert overgangsperiode?

–Stortinget har lagt til grunn at de overleveres i den stand de er. Og at videre utbedring må skje over noe tid. Men det innebærer at man må få økonomiske rammer til å løse oppgaven. Alt koker ned til et spørsmål om økonomisk handlingsrom for fylkene. Det blir en stor oppgave å sikre store nok bevilgninger.
Aftenposten: http://www.aftenposten.no/nyheter/ir...cle2997979.ece
__________________
Oslo/Copenhagen - The True Capital of Scandinavia.


Take a look at my Photo Mess!

Last edited by IceCheese; March 26th, 2009 at 02:20 AM.
IceCheese no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old March 26th, 2009, 11:23 AM   #519
Ingenioren
Registered User
 
Ingenioren's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Oslo
Posts: 5,605
Likes (Received): 584

Does it really matter? Makes more sense to have the counties decide, since they are in charge of PT and the county-roads. Now they can decide where to spend the money, for example in Stavanger with Bybanen VS. Ryfast. Naturally they will get a heck of a lot more money accordingly on the budget... Often you can see shiny riksveier, while the fylkesveier are more important - but they are in different priority. This is a change for the better, right. Now counties can probably change numbers and delete numbers on the roads that are crap and serve no purpose except for 2 farmers living along it...
__________________
I want to see some construction!
Ingenioren no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old March 27th, 2009, 08:53 PM   #520
ElviS77
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Posts: 564
Likes (Received): 54

[QUOTE=IceCheese;34177594]"Would you want the responsibilty for this road?"


I think that road is fantastic! A national, numbered road in "the world's richest country"... Just amazing. Nonetheless, some counties think it's a good idea. Hedmark, for instance, does not want the rv 25 to become a national route, they believe it will deteriorate even further if if has to compete with other national roads. An interesting point, even though I disagree.
ElviS77 no está en línea   Reply With Quote


Reply

Tags
norway

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 04:45 AM.


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