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 June 10th, 2009, 01:16 PM   #721
Ŝróndeimr
Adventurous!
 
Ŝróndeimr's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Trondheim, Norway
Posts: 12,216
Likes (Received): 2267

B3 would be the best, shortest, and the only rout with 80km/h all the way. It will satisfy everyone on Fosen exept a small part of Rissa and those in Ĝrlandet who is working with the vision of putting the road along the coast to Fevċg with a huge suspension bridge across Stjĝrnfjorden to Ĝrlandet...

Bridge across Trondheimsfjorden would be a waste of money, since such a project would costs like 50 billion kr! Why not build a tunnel instead?

Ŝróndeimr no está en línea   Reply With Quote

Sponsored Links
Old June 10th, 2009, 01:29 PM   #722
ChrisZwolle
Road user
 
ChrisZwolle's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Zwolle
Posts: 43,563
Likes (Received): 19353

Quote:
Why not build a tunnel instead?
Probably because that Fjord is over 200 meters deep.
ChrisZwolle está en línea ahora   Reply With Quote
Old June 10th, 2009, 04:48 PM   #723
Ŝróndeimr
Adventurous!
 
Ŝróndeimr's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Trondheim, Norway
Posts: 12,216
Likes (Received): 2267

As you can see on that map the deepest part of the fjord after that suggested tunnel line is -278m.

Eiksundtunnelen which was opened in 2008 goes down to -287m.

So i would not consider the depth to be too problematic since we already have tunnels down to almost -300m. Its more about the the bedrock which we don't know too much about yet.

Current planns for the area is a tunnel, though they want the tunnel to go much deeper than what i suggested on that little map.
Ŝróndeimr no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old June 10th, 2009, 04:58 PM   #724
ChrisZwolle
Road user
 
ChrisZwolle's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Zwolle
Posts: 43,563
Likes (Received): 19353

Depth might not be a problem, but the steep ascent/drop may be a problem. It's like having an underground mountain pass. Or you need huge approaches which make the tunnel even longer (thus expensive).
ChrisZwolle está en línea ahora   Reply With Quote
Old June 10th, 2009, 05:03 PM   #725
Ŝróndeimr
Adventurous!
 
Ŝróndeimr's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Trondheim, Norway
Posts: 12,216
Likes (Received): 2267

well the option is a 12-15km undersea tunnel vs. a 8-10km long suspension bridge (where the main span needs to be 8km) so with todays technologies i believe a tunnel is more of a possibility.

Anyway, neither won't happend withinn the next 40 years anyway!
Ŝróndeimr no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old June 10th, 2009, 05:08 PM   #726
ChrisZwolle
Road user
 
ChrisZwolle's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Zwolle
Posts: 43,563
Likes (Received): 19353

How about a floating bridge with a smaller high span for ships near shallower shores?
ChrisZwolle está en línea ahora   Reply With Quote
Old June 10th, 2009, 05:42 PM   #727
Ŝróndeimr
Adventurous!
 
Ŝróndeimr's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Trondheim, Norway
Posts: 12,216
Likes (Received): 2267

i don't like the idea with bridge at all. It would look extremly impressive with a supergigantic suspension bridge, but it would destroy the scenery completly.

And we have Aker Verdal, where they make platforms and suchs, so a bridge much be extremly tall, or it can have to be opened from now and then. Just yesterday they shipped a 70m tall platform foot out the fjord.

So in my mind a tunnel is still the easiest and best solution.
Ŝróndeimr no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old June 10th, 2009, 07:00 PM   #728
Kjello0
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Trondheim
Posts: 394
Likes (Received): 70

If we are going to build a bridge it should be build at the current Flakk - Rĝrvik ferry connection. The fjord is "only" 6,6 km wide there. However, it's also over 500 meters deep. But as you say, a bridge has to be very tall making a tunnel the best option.
Kjello0 no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old June 10th, 2009, 07:02 PM   #729
ChrisZwolle
Road user
 
ChrisZwolle's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Zwolle
Posts: 43,563
Likes (Received): 19353

I was in Switzerland last week, and they have some tunnels that run in 360 degrees. This might be an idea for those fjord-tunnels, to reduce the approach length. Otherwise you have to start descending way before the actual fjord.
ChrisZwolle está en línea ahora   Reply With Quote
Old June 10th, 2009, 07:08 PM   #730
Ŝróndeimr
Adventurous!
 
Ŝróndeimr's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Trondheim, Norway
Posts: 12,216
Likes (Received): 2267

there are several of those here too, so steep ascent isn't much of a problem. And for the Trondheimsfjorden issue you can just start a bit inland in that case. The possible tunnel across isn't any different than the other undersea tunnels in Norway, they are all 6-8km long and with a steep fjord. So the only "new" thing about Trondheimsfjorden is that they might have to make it 10m deeper or something + a much longer tunnel.
Ŝróndeimr no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old June 10th, 2009, 11:45 PM   #731
IceCheese
Scandi-friendly
 
IceCheese's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Canada is my city
Posts: 7,223
Likes (Received): 919

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ŝróndeimr View Post
i don't like the idea with bridge at all. It would look extremly impressive with a supergigantic suspension bridge, but it would destroy the scenery completly.
NIMBY To me a bridge doesn't destroy an impressive landscape, it only adds to it. The people of Drĝbak used your arguement back in the days. IMO function, safety and price should be rated FAR higher.
__________________
Oslo/Copenhagen - The True Capital of Scandinavia.


Take a look at my Photo Mess!
IceCheese no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old June 11th, 2009, 12:41 AM   #732
Ŝróndeimr
Adventurous!
 
Ŝróndeimr's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Trondheim, Norway
Posts: 12,216
Likes (Received): 2267

of course, but with todays technology, building a bridge with a 6-7km span require 600m tall towers! If we Norwegians made nicer bridges i would be very positive! P
Ŝróndeimr no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old June 11th, 2009, 12:42 AM   #733
ChrisZwolle
Road user
 
ChrisZwolle's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Zwolle
Posts: 43,563
Likes (Received): 19353

Well, 600m is really massive, that's not about fitting in the landscape, but dwarfing the landscape. I won't be like the Golden Gate Bridge, but more monstrous.
ChrisZwolle está en línea ahora   Reply With Quote
Old June 11th, 2009, 01:28 AM   #734
54°26′S 3°24′E
Registered User
 
54°26′S 3°24′E's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 811
Likes (Received): 155

600 m would be around the same height as the hills close to the Trondheim landing of such a project. I am sure Ŝróndeimr knows the height of the mountains at the other side....

In any case, a suspension bridge across the Trondheim fjord will have an astronomic costs and a meaningless waste of materials (i.e. energy)
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ŝróndeimr View Post
Bridge across Trondheimsfjorden would be a waste of money, since such a project would costs like 50 billion kr! Why not build a tunnel instead?
My guess is that you will have to add a zero. By a handwaving argument, and not pretending at all to be an expert on this, the cost of the bridge is probably proportional to the main span length to the third order. The new Sicily bridge is estimated to cost 6.1 billion Euro, with a main span length of 3.3 km. Hence, a Trondheim fjord suspension bridge with a span of 6 km probably will costs 8 times as much, or close to 50 billion Euro, or 450 billion NOK. (Of course a Trondheim fjord bridge does not have to have the same capacity, but the bridge probably has to be quite wide anyway to get proper torsional stiffness).

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ŝróndeimr View Post
there are several of those here too, so steep ascent isn't much of a problem. And for the Trondheimsfjorden issue you can just start a bit inland in that case. The possible tunnel across isn't any different than the other undersea tunnels in Norway, they are all 6-8km long and with a steep fjord. So the only "new" thing about Trondheimsfjorden is that they might have to make it 10m deeper or something + a much longer tunnel.
A tunnel can probably be built within 1 billion euro, i.e. 2 % of the cost of a suspension bridge according to my very rough estimate. In my opinion, this is the large tunnel proposal with the largest traffic potential, if it gets an arm towards Frosta and hence redirect the E6. Remember that Rogfast, a 25 km quite similar tunnel is already in the national transport plan NTP (although in the uncommitting latter period without any financing, which might mean that nothing will happen).

However, it will take some commitment from the local politicians to get something like this through, which currently seems quite absent.

At this point I feel inclined to quote a very wise guy a few pages back....:

Quote:
Originally Posted by 54°26′S 3°24′E View Post
It is true that a tunnel straight over across from Trondheim would have to be a floating tunnel because the fjord is too deep here. The problem is however that the cost of such a project is an unknown, as not even a small scale tunnel of this type has been attempted yet, and I believe the Trondheim fjord would be quite demanding, as the current is quite strong and you probably cannot anchor the bridge at the bottom very well since there is a thick layer of gravel/sand/clay at the bottom.

What I was referring to was however the two projects that have been proposed recently. One is a tunnel at the mouth of the Trondheim fjord (Agdenes-(possibly Bjugn)-Brekstad), that seems to be supported by the local politicians of those places. I do not believe much in this project, as the traffic would probably be quite low, but still the tunnel would be quite long (15 km?) and record deep (500 m).

The other suggestion is from the conservatives in Trondheim (Brox), to pick up a plan from 1988 for a Trondheim-Frosta-Fosen-tunnel, with a landing somewhere between Leksvik and Vanvikan. I got the following crappy copy from a newspaper from a friend:

The drawing is not very accurate because:
1. The fjord depths (but not the tunnel depths) have probably been multiplied by a factor of two.
2. The costs are just a guess. A 2+2 project with similar length (around 25 km) and depth in south-western Norway (Rogfast) has been estimated to 4,8-6,8 billion NOK. The Fosen tunnel probably won't have to be built with four lanes all the way, though.

Now, why is this project worthwhile even thinking about? Because, this tunnel will potentially have higher traffic than any other long tunnel in Norway. Firstly, the southern leg (Trondheim-Frosta) can be a part of a rerouting of the E6, shortening the distance between Trondheim and the towns of northern Trĝndelag (central Norway) with 20 km. Even with the road authorities' moderate plan shown above, the E6 between Trondheim to Steinkjer is to be expanded to a 4 lane motorway, which surely will cost billions anyway. The tunnel continuing to Fosen will not have that much traffic, but despite Fosen's low population, the Flakk-Rĝrvik-ferry which this tunnel may substitute, already is the third busiest ferry in Norway, and there is a great push to substitute the two busiest ferry routes (Oslofjorden Moss-Horten and Boknafjord MORTAVIKA-ARSVĊGEN), as well as some significantly less trafficated ferries (Rygfast, for instance) with similar huge tunnel projects.

For reference, here is the 2006 traffic numbers for the busiest ferries routes in Norway:
1. MOSS-HORTEN (Oslofjorden) 10.5 km AADT: 3598
2. MORTAVIKA-ARSVĊGEN (Boknafjorden) 8.0 km AADT: 2588
3. FLAKK-RĜRVIK (Trondheimsfjorden) 7.2 km AADT: 1982
(in addition the high speed passenger ferries of the Fjord have several hundred thousand passengers each year)
..
..
yy. BRURAVIK - BRIMNES (being eliminated by the 2 billion NOK Hardanger bridge) 2.4 km AADT: 1001
..
..
xx. BOGNES-SKARBERGET (Tyssfjord) 8.3 AADT: 386 (as I said, eliminating the ferry here would largely be a symbolic task)

Relevant AADT:
E6 Ċsen (relevant for (3 billion NOK?) Trondheim-Frosta-tunnel): > 7000
E6 Rombakfjorden (relevant for 2 billion NOK Hċlogaland bridge): < 2000
E16 Lĉrdalstunnelen (longest road tunnel in the world, 24.5 km): AADT: 1600

If you just add the AADT of today (all of which increases by 6-10 % each year), the Fosen tunnel will have a traffic of 9 000 AADT (i.e. 6 times the traffic of Lĉrdal) on the 15 km Trondheim-Frosta leg, and roughly 2 000 (a bit mor than Lĉrdal) on the 10 km Frosta-Fosen leg, not including the transfer of traffic from today's high speed passanger ferries, and possibly transfer of traffic from other routes across the fjord. There is no chance that any other long submarine tunnel project in Norway will come close to such traffic numbers as the Trondheim-Frosta tunnel, and this will help finance as well as possibly getting political support for the project.

However, I think a tunnel will open up the eyes of the roughly 250 000 people living in Trondheim and surrounding municipalities for the potential of Fosen as a weekend/holiday home destination as well. In addition, the attractive and sunny areas around tunnel openings both in Frosta and Fosen will become popular "suburbs" of Trondheim, which surely will boost the traffic a lot.

BTW: I have lived in Trondheim several years in the past, and I still visit the city a couple of times each year. However, like for most "Trondhjemmers", Fosen makes a nice view from the city, but is otherwise a largely unknown territory. A tunnel will probably change that.
Oh, BTW, I just moved back


Quote:
Originally Posted by Ŝróndeimr View Post
B3 would be the best, shortest, and the only rout with 80km/h all the way. It will satisfy everyone on Fosen exept a small part of Rissa and those in Ĝrlandet who is working with the vision of putting the road along the coast to Fevċg with a huge suspension bridge across Stjĝrnfjorden to Ĝrlandet...
Well, does not the majority in Fosen live in Rissa, Ĝrlandet and neighboring Bjugn?


Quote:
Originally Posted by Kjello0 View Post
You won't believe this. The stretch between Klett and Orkanger is 26,9 km, including 10,4 km in tunnels. Klett - Ĝysand 4,5 km is planed as 4 lane motorway. They also plan new 2 lane tunnels. This leaves 12 km which they plan as 3 lane roads.

If they actually does it like this it will give
Start Orkanger
5,42 km 3 lane
3,65 km 4 lane
630 m 3 lane
2,71 km 4 lane
1,59 km 3 lane
278 m 4 lane
540 m 3 lane
722 m 4 lane
550 m 3 lane
1,73 km 4 lane
3,38 km 3 lane
5,7 km 4 lane
End Klett interchange
Could such madness be proposed in any country but Norway? Anyway, before anything happens I guess the traffic is beyond motorway level.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kjello0 View Post
No, it's going to be a narrow 4 lane motorway. Traffic is already 9700 on the stretch south of Melhus. However, Melhus - Stĝren wasn't a part of NTP. Guessing it will be in when the next NTP comes in four years. It won't cost 2,5 billion NOK if it's not Motorway.
I heard the reason it was not in the NTP was that the planning was not finnished?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Red-Lion View Post
We might see the motorway prolonged past Ċlgċrd and perhaps even eiganestunnellen and rogfast connnected with a motorway.

And wow, didn't know that ryfast was gonna be a 4-liner! Sweet!
I would be a bit surprised if Rogfast actually materialize as the NTP predicts. Remember that the 6 last year of the plan is not committing at all, and my guess was unfortunately that the government just wanted some cheap Rogaland votes....
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ingenioren View Post
I think that maybe if Mĝreaksen is built, we wouldn't need airports for Ċlesund and Kristiansund, Molde could serve as an all Mĝre Airport. What do you think about this?
http://www.moreaksen.no/
You have to admire the determination of that area, I think this is a great project.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ingenioren View Post
And who owns Avinor? We do! So it is every interrest that it is as profitable as possible surpluss goes right back to us. Narvik airport will be closed when Rombaksbroen is built. Sogn og Fjordane and Finnmark has many airports located very close to eachother, they can close down aswell
Norway never closes down airports in Northern and western Norway, many of them are already very close, for instance the distance between Kristiansund and Molde is only an hour....
Quote:
Originally Posted by Red-Lion View Post
Will be funny the next years to see if there will be any political movement to put money into Rv3 instead of E6. when the projects moves north. (if they ever)
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kjello0 View Post
I doubt since they already are planing the new E 6 all the way up to Otta. The plans on Rv 3 barely goes north of Elverum.
Earlier in this thread I discussed to a great length abouth Rv3 vs E6. In reality, these two roads serve completely different markets, with Rv 3 taking almost all the transit traffic Oslo-Trondheim and E6 serving inland and western Norway. This will probably continue to be the case regardless. Actually the funding for rv 3 was much higher in this NTP than in for a very long time, also sections north of Elverum will be fixed (Atna is first, I believe). However, the funding is not anywhere close to what it should be in order to get motorway standard which in my view is required in order to reduce air traffic on this route.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kjello0 View Post
They do get an green arrow. Cars turning right often got green light at the same time as the walking line in the street they go into.
No, you have to differ between green light and green arrow. Green arrow means no crossing pedestrians have green "man". I don't remember wheter there is a green arrow in that particular intersection, however. (On interesection in Trondheim is quite irritating, btw, it has a green light, where there should have been a green left arrow, as the cars in the opposit direction has a red light. It has been like that as long as can remember, but crossing pedestrians may be the reason. (For locals: intersection between Fjordgata and traffic from Jernbanebrua).

Perhaps we should rename this thread to "Highways and FUTURE motorways of Trĝndelag
__________________
Norway needs a new transport infrastructure network, let's start now!

Last edited by 54°26′S 3°24′E; June 13th, 2009 at 01:49 AM.
54°26′S 3°24′E no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old June 11th, 2009, 10:22 AM   #735
Ingenioren
Registered User
 
Ingenioren's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Oslo
Posts: 5,604
Likes (Received): 584

We are definatly the nation of great non-motorway road-projects in the middle of nowhere! 600 meter tall bridge in Trondheimsfjorden? You can NOT seriously be against that Christian?!?!


I love those Midtbyen intersections where there is an all-pedestrian green instead, maybe that could be a solution elsewhere aswell? (We don't have them in Oslo.)

Looks like there are being changes made to the definitions of "Motortrafikkveg", i see new signs on E18:
__________________
I want to see some construction!

Last edited by Ingenioren; June 11th, 2009 at 10:28 AM.
Ingenioren no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old June 11th, 2009, 11:14 AM   #736
Ŝróndeimr
Adventurous!
 
Ŝróndeimr's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Trondheim, Norway
Posts: 12,216
Likes (Received): 2267

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ingenioren View Post
600 meter tall bridge in Trondheimsfjorden? You can NOT seriously be against that Christian?!?!
Of course not, it would be an insane bridge! Its just impossible, so if i am to think realistic id prefere they think about a tunnel instead of a bridge! :P
Ŝróndeimr no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old June 11th, 2009, 11:21 AM   #737
Ŝróndeimr
Adventurous!
 
Ŝróndeimr's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Trondheim, Norway
Posts: 12,216
Likes (Received): 2267

Quote:
Originally Posted by 54°26′S 3°24′E View Post
600 m would be around the same height as the hills close to the Trondheim landing of such a project. I am sure Ŝróndeimr knows the height of the mountains at the other side....

In any case, a suspension bridge across the Trondheim fjord will have an astronomic costs and a meaningless waste of materials (i.e. energy)

My guess is that you will have to add a zero. By a handwaving argument, and not pretending at all to be an expert on this, the cost of the bridge is probably proportional to the main span length to the third order. The new Sicily bridge is estimated to cost 6.1 billion Euro, with a main span length of 3.3 km. Hence, a Trondheim fjord suspension bridge with a span of 6 km probably will costs 8 times as much, or close to 50 billion Euro, or 450 billion NOK. (Of course a Trondheim fjord bridge does not have to have the same capacity, but the bridge probably has to be quite wide anyway to get proper torsional stiffness).

A tunnel can probably be built within 1 billion euro, i.e. 2 % of the cost of a suspension bridge according to my very rough estimate. In my opinion, this is the large tunnel proposal with the largest traffic potential, if it gets an arm towards Frosta and hence redirect the E6. Remember that Rogfast, a 25 km quite similar tunnel is already in the national transport plan NTP (although in the uncommitting latter period without any financing, which might mean that nothing will happen).

However, it will take some commitment from the local politicians to get something like this through, which currently seems quite absent.

Oh, BTW, I just moved back
Grċkallen is 550m something, while those hills at Rĝrvik is some 450m. Btw, welcome back to the right place of living! :P

And by your reply its easy to see that a bridge is unthinkable (remember they think HSR is too expencive, that bridge would cost both HSR Oslo-Trondheim and Oslo-Bergen).
Ŝróndeimr no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old June 11th, 2009, 11:28 AM   #738
Kjello0
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Trondheim
Posts: 394
Likes (Received): 70

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ingenioren View Post
Looks like there are being changes made to the definitions of "Motortrafikkveg", i see new signs on E18:
It means that the E 18 stretch ahead has motortrafikkvei standard. You may see them up to 15 km before the road gets signposted. Atleast that's the way it's in Trondheim.
Kjello0 no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old June 11th, 2009, 11:30 AM   #739
metasmurf
Registered User
 
metasmurf's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Umeċ, Sweden
Posts: 374
Likes (Received): 555

Are there any plans on building bridges/tunnels making it possible to drive from Haugesund to Bergen?
metasmurf no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old June 11th, 2009, 11:35 AM   #740
Ingenioren
Registered User
 
Ingenioren's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Oslo
Posts: 5,604
Likes (Received): 584

Quote:
Originally Posted by Kjello0 View Post
It means that the E 18 stretch ahead has motortrafikkvei standard. You may see them up to 15 km before the road gets signposted. Atleast that's the way it's in Trondheim.
There are being changes made and all Motortrafikkveg is given yellow signs like this.

Approval has been given to Jondalstunnelen, that will boost E134 as an alternative for Oslo - Bergen travel:

Is E134 the east-west road that should be given the most i priority? I think yes. Besides of giving a connection to both Bergen and Haugesund to Oslo and having the potential to be the fastest Oslo - Bergen, it also is the best connection to Grenland and Vestfold. A new 25 km tunnel can make the highest point lowered to 840 meters.
http://www.bt.no/meninger/kommentar/...mage&myStart=0
I wonder why Jondalstunnelen is given fylkesveg-status, is this a shift towards the reform, or did the government never see the benefit of this tunnel?

Quote:
Originally Posted by metasmurf View Post
Are there any plans on building bridges/tunnels making it possible to drive from Haugesund to Bergen?
Yes there are, check out: http://no.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hordfast
__________________
I want to see some construction!

Last edited by Ingenioren; June 11th, 2009 at 12:12 PM.
Ingenioren 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 12:21 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