Skyscraper City Forum banner
1 - 20 of 144 Posts

·
Mod nye projekter
Joined
·
9,853 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 ·


The Harbour Tunnel
Sund & Bælt Partner has for Realdania, Copenhagen and Copenhagen Harbour conducted preliminary investigations of an harbour tunnel in Copenhagen.

The initial studies dealing with the possibility of combining a pacification of the City with the construction of a road link between North Harbour and Amager highway, east of downtown Copenhagen. In most of the line connection will be placed in tunnels under the Copenhagen harbor. The total length of the tunnels will be approx. 12 km.

The aim of the port tunnel is also to ensure access to development areas northeast and southeast of Copenhagen without burdening the existing road network further while reducing through traffic in downtown Copenhagen, which today passes Langebro and Knippelsbro.
Havnetunnel København


 

·
Mod nye projekter
Joined
·
9,853 Posts
Discussion Starter · #2 ·
Hope you guys thinks a thread about this subject has some relevance, even it's so far are on the theoritical plan.

Berlingske has an article in the daily one, about the pension company Sampension are willing to invest up to 10 billions dkr. in a Harbour tunnel, that has been discussed for many years.
The coorporation between a private and a public partnership (OPP) are something that will be more common the years ahead, especially in the bigger infrastructurel projects while the state having less money.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
6,134 Posts
Unfortunately the www.havnetunnel.dk has been shut down, and are now refferring to the Sund og Bælt web.
Maybe a new web is coming up soon ?
To round off the discussion for the time being, I believe the name "Havnetunnelen" has been replaced by "Østlige omfartsvej"

The reason being that the state contributes to bypasses (omfartsveje) while the harbour tunnel is a Copenhagen thing, which they will have to pay for themselves. :eek:hno:
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
750 Posts
Looks like Københavns Kommune has accepted the solution

http://politiken.dk/indland/ECE1803...til-transportministeriets-havnetunnel-planer/

Most of the route seems to be on Amager? Why did they choose to abandon the initial plan of a REAL havnetunnel? As far as I've understood it is a much more expensive solution to build it under ground than under the harbour so why did they change it?

EDIT: just read the explanation about the havnetunel vs. østlige omfartsvej. so in order to share the costs with the state they have decided to go for a much more expensive solution?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
6,134 Posts
I believe there were also 2 big problems with the REAL submerged harbour tunnel which resulted in the politicians deciding in favour of the East Amager solution.

1, There was not enough space between the supports of the 2 older bridges, Knippelsbro and Langebro.

2. the complex road spirals suggested to get traffic up to f.ex. H.C.Andersens Boulevard looked like something from Chicago and visually would never be accepted in the harbour area of the centre of Copenhagen.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
33 Posts
I finally found the time to dig into some of the planning about the Havnetunnel/Østre Omfartsvej. Maybe I read the wrong newspapers but so far I haven't found any mention of the actual proposed route through the city :)

So here goes, from the Ministry of Transportation ( link):

The majority in the city council has indicated that they prefer proposal B4 from Hans Knudsens Plads to Nordhavn, Margretheholm, under Kløvermarken, Amagerbro, Ørestad Nord, Amager Fælled and finally the existing highway at Vejlands Allé.

I can't find any proper mention of whether they are heading for the fully drilled tunnel or a tunnel where some parts of the tunnel are cut-and-cover.

"Hovedalternativ 1, linjeføring B4, boret tunnel under Amagerbro" seems to be the best possible solution

The route:



The modelled changes to traffic congestion show a clear relief in traffic in the city centre where polution is above acceptable levels a couple of places:


And here is a drawing indicating the limited "damage" to the Amager Fælled park area (tunnel is underground):



Now, let's see if the green parties wake up and agree to move some traffic out of the city center and into the tunnel. This is a tunnel that seems to reduce congestion drastically AND improves the route across the city for those of us living on Amager. I don't even have a car but can vividly imagine the relief a tunnel must be to those people living in the metro-free middle of Amager, Tårnby and Dragør and working in Lyngby, Ballerup, Bagsværd - all places drastically underserved by public transportation.

:righton:
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
272 Posts
It looks to me like they're focusing on getting heavy vehicles hidden away. Perhaps because this is the kind of traffic you can't move to public transport no matter how hard you try.

Regarding the connection to Ørestad Boulevard, it's probably not possible to have a connection so close to Artillerivej. Although why they picked Artillerivej over Ørestads Boulevard boggles the mind.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
7,293 Posts
A few quick remarks from that document.

A submerged tunnel under Knippelsbro is almost impossible because of a safety distance to the metro tunnel on around 11,5 metres that would make the sailing lane through Knippelsbro only 2 metres deep and that is of course hopeless.

They could also split up the tunnel just before the bridge to avoid the sailing lane but then they would have to reconstruct the pillars supporting the bridge and good look with closing Knippelsbro for several months. :-D

Another solution was to build a drilled tunnel but that tunnel would be located so deep underground that no exit ramps would be possible in the inner city.

The price tag of the preferred tunnel under Amagerbro is with a 50% buffer so the real price is around 18-19 billion DKK.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
187 Posts
The price tag of the preferred tunnel under Amagerbro is with a 50% buffer so the real price is around 18-19 billion DKK.
That is not correct. The 50 % added is not just for uncertainties, it is also because not everything is taken into account in the cost estimate. You might actually call it 50 % of additionally costs. This is standard in Danish cost estimates for infrastructure constructions in fase 1. In fase 2 you add 10 % to the cost estimate.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
6,134 Posts
There is no time scale or financial proposal for this project except for the first stage (Nordhavnsvej/UC) and perhaps the second to the development area in Nordhavn.

One very important thing in the decision that has been taken on where the "Eastern By-pass" should go, is the fact that it also decides all the places where it isn´t going to go.

There were quite a few proposals and variants of these proposals but now these uncertainties about whether you are going to be neighbour to the road, or if you can develop your building site, is over.
This results in planning blight and often means areas of the city look like bomb sites for years and years.
As regards the construction method there are quite a few areas which could be cut and cover or even open cuttings but that can be decided at a later stage.
 
1 - 20 of 144 Posts
Top