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 26th, 2013, 11:18 AM   #1221
Nikolaj
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Posts: 289
Likes (Received): 78

Yes but not anything further north than Bredstedt on B5.

Extract from Interim Report (December 2012) from the Danish-German Transport Commission http://www.ft.dk/samling/20121/almde...9/1257335.pdf:

"There a several extension projects planned for the A 23 and B 5. The new bridge across the river Stör was finished in June 2010. The demolition work of the old bridge has been carried out since October 2011. The extension between Itzehoe-South and Itzehoe-North (a four lane-extension of the B 5 to the A 23) has been started. The completion of the entire segment including a newly built second bridge across the river Stör is planned for 2015.

In the area of the B 5 between Tönning and Husum the planning of a three-lane-traffic management system has begun. The objective is to raise road safety and to be able to manage additional seasonal traffic. At present, the detailed construction plans are being drawn up, with the beginning of the plan approval procedure being prepared for the first section. The following three sections will be carried out in such a way that a continuous and acceptable construction progress is possible. The project is financed outside the IRP.

To strengthen the competitiveness of the west coast area, the BVWP-project “B 5 bypass Hattstedt – Bredstedt” will additionally be realised. The plan approval procedure was decided on 30 March 2012, but is pending at court. The result of the legal proceedings needs to be awaited. The project is contained in the IRP.[27]

The state government is of the opinion that the current and the medium-term expected traffic volume on the B 5 north of Heide to the Danish border does not warrant an extension similar to a four-lane motorway like it is demanded by the region."



And the local proposal from Southern Jutland proposal for a new motorway in mid-south Jutland doesn't even end around B5, but somewhere between A7 and B5, where nothing is planned in Germany.
Nikolaj no está en línea   Reply With Quote

Sponsored Links
Old June 26th, 2013, 11:32 AM   #1222
ChrisZwolle
Road user
 
ChrisZwolle's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Zwolle
Posts: 43,632
Likes (Received): 19428

Quote:
Originally Posted by Nikolaj View Post
And the local proposal from Southern Jutland proposal for a new motorway in mid-south Jutland doesn't even end around B5, but somewhere between A7 and B5, where nothing is planned in Germany.
I thought that at first as well, but if you look closer, you see the motorway ends close to the B5 border crossing southeast of Tønder. The border crossing is located almost 20 kilometers inland.

Regardless of this planned motorway, it's a good thing that B5 will be improved and hopefully such signs won't be necessary

image hosted on flickr

IMG_7434 by Chriszwolle, on Flickr
ChrisZwolle está en línea ahora   Reply With Quote
Old June 26th, 2013, 12:59 PM   #1223
Nikolaj
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Posts: 289
Likes (Received): 78

Quote:
Originally Posted by MichiH View Post
Well, the German B5 will be upgraded to 2+1 up to Bredstedt, see project page and map! The 16.5km long bypass from Hattstedt to Bredstedt will be implemented in the next years (OSM; plan approval order was passed in March 2012). But there will still remain a 35km gap from Bredstedt to Tonder with through-roads.
I would like to think you were correct, as it would at least make some sense. However the proposed alignment is ending at least 10 km to east of the current Route 11/B5 border crossing, and in local medias the proponents of the proposal have stated that this is not an Route 11 alignment, but some something else. This is probably caused by the Route 11 report from Vejdirektoratet last year, that clearly stated that a motorway in the Route 11 corridor i not feasible. The problem is that this new proposal is even less feasible.
Nikolaj no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old June 27th, 2013, 07:06 PM   #1224
Fender56
Registered User
 
Fender56's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Esbjerg, Denmark
Posts: 1,376
Likes (Received): 528

Quote:
Originally Posted by ChrisZwolle View Post

If traffic volumes are really increasing that much in the area, widening E45 to 2x3 lanes makes much more sense.
Incorrect Chris, widening into a 2x3 highway in this country is more costly, than building a brand new 2x2 highway, thats proven. And thats why, a hærvejsmotorvej is more likely to be build, than widening E45 from Vejle and northover to Aarhus.

And should it happen, then it´s much better to expand the A11 route, instead of the new proposal, in the central Sønderjylland, where almost no people live.

__________________
Always look at the bright side of life....
Fender56 no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old June 27th, 2013, 10:15 PM   #1225
MichiH
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Location: Lower Franconia
Posts: 4,418
Likes (Received): 2083

Quote:
Originally Posted by Fender56 View Post
widening into a 2x3 highway in this country is more costly, than building a brand new 2x2 highway, thats proven.
What's the reason?
MichiH no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old June 27th, 2013, 10:21 PM   #1226
ChrisZwolle
Road user
 
ChrisZwolle's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Zwolle
Posts: 43,632
Likes (Received): 19428

I doubt that claim as well. Asphalt cost alone is three times higher with a new motorway than a widened motorway. That is in addition to the cost of acquiring an entirely new right-of-way.
ChrisZwolle está en línea ahora   Reply With Quote
Old June 27th, 2013, 10:30 PM   #1227
MichiH
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Location: Lower Franconia
Posts: 4,418
Likes (Received): 2083

I don't doubt it. I only want to know the actual reason. Upgrades in Germany are often similar complex such as building new roads. And Denmark is plain field...
MichiH no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old June 28th, 2013, 10:36 AM   #1228
MattiG
Registered User
 
MattiG's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Location: Espoo FI
Posts: 1,808
Likes (Received): 619

Quote:
Originally Posted by ChrisZwolle View Post
I doubt that claim as well. Asphalt cost alone is three times higher with a new motorway than a widened motorway. That is in addition to the cost of acquiring an entirely new right-of-way.
I believe the statement is true. It is not question about the cost of asphalt, which negligible.

Upgrading a road (or a building) usually involves massive changes to the existing infrastructure of the road, or located nearby. An upgrade of a 2+2 road to a 3+3 one may require rebuilding all the brigdes, for instance. In addition, there are often other infrastructure to be moved: houses, pipes, power lines, lower road network etc.

What comes to Denmark and any smaller country, the AADT is not the only driving factor in decicisions whether to build new roads or not. The areas of lower population density need an access, too. Hence, is not always question of capacity (like in the crowded countries like the Netherlands) but service level.

We must keep in the mind that one size does not fit all: The road standards and building criteria vary across countries, and there are significant differences because of differences in the population density. Example: The northernmost section of the road 4/E75 in Finland has an AADT of as low as 193. Still, the road has been built a normal 1+1 primary road technically cabable on carrying an AADT of 10000, and the road is kept open all year long days and nights.
MattiG no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old June 28th, 2013, 10:42 AM   #1229
javimix19
Registered User
 
javimix19's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: Donostia-San Sebastián
Posts: 749
Likes (Received): 1328

Why Oresund Bridge tolls are very expensive?
I've seen in internet that tolls cost more than 40 euros to one way trip. I know salaries in Scandinavia are very high but I think is very expensive for tourists or for the unhabitants of Copenhaguen and Malmo.
javimix19 no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old June 28th, 2013, 11:47 AM   #1230
MattiG
Registered User
 
MattiG's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Location: Espoo FI
Posts: 1,808
Likes (Received): 619

Quote:
Originally Posted by javimix19 View Post
Why Oresund Bridge tolls are very expensive?
I've seen in internet that tolls cost more than 40 euros to one way trip. I know salaries in Scandinavia are very high but I think is very expensive for tourists or for the unhabitants of Copenhaguen and Malmo.
There is not taxpayer money involved. The tolls must cover all the construction, maintenance, and financial costs. The loans are expected to be paid pack by 2030.

Frequent travellers receive significant discounts. The train ticket Malmö-Copenhagen costs about 12 euros only.
__________________

javimix19 liked this post
MattiG no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old June 28th, 2013, 11:54 AM   #1231
Nikolaj
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Posts: 289
Likes (Received): 78

Quote:
Originally Posted by ChrisZwolle View Post
I doubt that claim as well. Asphalt cost alone is three times higher with a new motorway than a widened motorway. That is in addition to the cost of acquiring an entirely new right-of-way.
In Denmark it is generally acknowledged that a new 2+2 motorway is cheaper to construct than widening a 2+2 to a 3+3. The average cost of a new 2+2 motorway in open land is around 50-60 mio. DKK (approx. 7 mio. Euro per kilometer) whereas a widening from 2+2 to 3+3 has a cost from around 90 mio. DKK per kilometer (12 mio. Euro) and upwards. Widening of E20 on western Funen has been one of the cheapest (if not cheapest) widening projects, with a cost of around 90 mio. DKK per kilometer, but is also entirely in open land.

That does not imply that a new parallel motorways necessarily is the best solution. It is only the case if the parallel motorway actually relieves the "old" motorway (if relief is needed) and if the new motorway serves population and business centers of significance. Neither is the case with the proposed motorway in southern Jutland, but could be the case of with the proposed motorway from Kolding via Silkeborg, Viborg to south of Aalborg
Nikolaj no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old June 28th, 2013, 01:48 PM   #1232
flierfy
Registered User
 
flierfy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Posts: 1,886
Likes (Received): 296

Quote:
Originally Posted by MattiG View Post
Upgrading a road (or a building) usually involves massive changes to the existing infrastructure of the road, or located nearby. An upgrade of a 2+2 road to a 3+3 one may require rebuilding all the brigdes, for instance. In addition, there are often other infrastructure to be moved: houses, pipes, power lines, lower road network etc.
A motorway must have been built to extremely poor standards if its widening requires the rebuild of all bridges and even the removal of houses. But streetviewing the subjects I must admit that Danish motorways are evidently sub-standard indeed.
__________________
Rippachtal.de
flierfy no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old June 28th, 2013, 03:09 PM   #1233
MattiG
Registered User
 
MattiG's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Location: Espoo FI
Posts: 1,808
Likes (Received): 619

Quote:
Originally Posted by flierfy View Post
A motorway must have been built to extremely poor standards if its widening requires the rebuild of all bridges and even the removal of houses. But streetviewing the subjects I must admit that Danish motorways are evidently sub-standard indeed.
Shit happens.

Typically, forecasting the future is more difficult than looking into the past. The motorway in question may be 40-50 years old, and may have been built in a completely different world. In this sort of situations, the road "upgrade" equal to re-building the road while the traffic is flowing. Expensive.

In addition, the road may have been built in onto an empty space, but later attracted homes or commercial functions nearby. Forecasting over decades is a mission impossible.

Example: Road 1 in Espoo, Finland:


The road was constructed during 1956-1962 mainly through rural areas


Same place in 2013

I would not start blaiming the people who made the plans in the 1950's about the lack of their ability tho know that the number of cars would explode during the next two decades. If they had planned longer bridges and underways, tle plans would have been rejected.
MattiG no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old June 28th, 2013, 03:44 PM   #1234
ChrisZwolle
Road user
 
ChrisZwolle's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Zwolle
Posts: 43,632
Likes (Received): 19428

E45 Kolding - German border opened between 1974 and 1984. Half of the route has a wide enough median to support the bulk of the widening, the other half requires an outside widening.

Widening costs go up significantly if you have to do an assymetric widening, where the median of the motorway moves sidewards. In many cases this requires a substantial right-of-way acquirement, utility relocation and bridge / overpass rebuilding.

A symmetric widening is less expensive. Costs go down even further if you leave out shoulders at key bridges that have a prohibitive replacement cost. Furthermore, a widening does not necessarily requires a complete rebuilding of the pavement including foundation (which you see often in Germany). Sometimes replacing the top layer across the motorway is sufficient. That depends on the condition of the foundation.

For now, E45 has sufficient spare capacity to absorb substantial traffic growth. The segment Kolding - Christiansfeld carries 54.000 vehicles per day but other segments are below 36.000 vehicles per day. The widening of E45 south of Kolding all the way to the German border is very long-term, if necessary at all.

I think the E20/E45 concurrency around Kolding is more in need of widening, however a parallel motorway south of Vejen does not help anything here (unless extended north, but even then I doubt how much it would really help, traffic that drives all the way from Hamburg to north of Århus is negligible in real terms).
ChrisZwolle está en línea ahora   Reply With Quote
Old June 28th, 2013, 05:18 PM   #1235
ChrisZwolle
Road user
 
ChrisZwolle's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Zwolle
Posts: 43,632
Likes (Received): 19428

Fehmarnbelt Tunnel

The EIS of the Fehmarnbelt Tunnel (18.2 km) has been published today. It's 1655 pages of documentation.

http://vvmdocumentation.femern.com/
__________________

my clinched highways / travel mapping • highway photography @ Flickr and Youtube

devo liked this post
ChrisZwolle está en línea ahora   Reply With Quote
Old June 29th, 2013, 02:21 PM   #1236
flierfy
Registered User
 
flierfy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Posts: 1,886
Likes (Received): 296

Quote:
Originally Posted by MattiG View Post
Typically, forecasting the future is more difficult than looking into the past. The motorway in question may be 40-50 years old, and may have been built in a completely different world. In this sort of situations, the road "upgrade" equal to re-building the road while the traffic is flowing. Expensive.
We had much older motorways here in Germany. And even their bridges were built with enough foresight to span one more than the original two lanes per carriageway. One doesn't necessarily need to predict the future precisely. All it takes are sensible decisions to leave sufficient space for additional lanes at crucial points.
__________________
Rippachtal.de
flierfy no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old June 30th, 2013, 12:48 PM   #1237
ADP
Registered User
 
ADP's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Vordingborg
Posts: 26
Likes (Received): 4

There is no need for a motorway to Tønder, as there is no traffic coverage enough .There more need for a motorway between Næstved and Rønnede (Næstvedmotorvejen) and an expressway between Næstved and Slagelse.

Last edited by ADP; June 30th, 2013 at 01:03 PM.
ADP no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old June 30th, 2013, 12:55 PM   #1238
ChrisZwolle
Road user
 
ChrisZwolle's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Zwolle
Posts: 43,632
Likes (Received): 19428

Traffic volumes on Primærrute 25 (Tønder - Kolding) are only 2.600 - 4.200 vehicles per day.
ChrisZwolle está en línea ahora   Reply With Quote
Old June 30th, 2013, 01:38 PM   #1239
ADP
Registered User
 
ADP's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Vordingborg
Posts: 26
Likes (Received): 4

Traffic volumes on Primærrute 54 (Næstved -Rønnede) are 14.000, and Primærrute 22 (Næstved -Slagelse) are in 9.000-14.000 vehicles per day.

Last edited by ADP; June 30th, 2013 at 01:44 PM.
ADP no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old June 30th, 2013, 05:55 PM   #1240
MichiH
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Location: Lower Franconia
Posts: 4,418
Likes (Received): 2083

Quote:
Originally Posted by ChrisZwolle View Post
Traffic volumes on Primærrute 25 (Tønder - Kolding) are only 2.600 - 4.200 vehicles per day.
How are the traffic volumes on the Primærrute 11 (Tønder bypass)?

AADT on the German B5:
BG Süderlügum (DK/D) – Süderlügum (L 301) 5800 / 215 (3,7%)
Süderlügum (L 301) – Klixbüll (B 199) 3800 / 281 (7,4%)
Klixbüll (B 199) – Niebüll-Nord (L 8) 8200 / 476 (5,8%)
Niebüll-Nord (L 8) – Niebüll-Süd (L 7) 10800 / 713 (6,6%)
Niebüll-Süd (L 7) – Enge-Sande (L 5) 10200 / 622 (6,1%)
Enge-Sande (L 5) – Bordelum (L 6) 8300 / 523 (6,3%)
Bordelum (L 6) – KVP Bredstedt (L 4) 11000 / 594 (5,4%)

As described afore the future B5 Bredstedt bypass and the southern extension will get 3 lanes. The AADT is about 10,000 vehicles per day, near Heide up to 13,000 (source).

I guess a continous upgrade to 3 lanes on the German B5 and on the Danish Primærrute 11 should be adequate for the transit traffic. The transit traffic could increase if the German A20 Elbtunnel will be completed, but until then the Fehmarnbelt tunnel will also be completed which will certainly reduce the traffic volumes on the E45!
MichiH no está en línea   Reply With Quote


Reply

Tags
legoland

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 02:14 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