SkyscraperCity banner

1 - 20 of 584 Posts

·
forumer #29
Joined
·
4,570 Posts
Discussion Starter #1 (Edited)
Finally, there's a dedicated thread!

Let's start of with a few links:
Official website for the project by the City
Official Twitter by the City
Youtube playlist by the City
Myth-debunking by YIMBY

What exists today:
Decided upon in 1931, completed in 1935.

source


What will be built (all buildings are placeholders, it's the sluice, the bridges, the streets and the park that's decided)
Final court approval in 2013 (and 2014 for the Vattendom), planned completion in 2020.

Three official pics from the City's website:







Source


pic of model, PREVIOUS iteration of the same plan.

source

Video showing the changes (part of the playlist linked above)


It is worth noting that some changes have been made to the plan since the model was built. Part of it is value-engineering: for example, the rounded corners between the footbridges and Södermalm and Gamla Stan seem to have been scrapped, which is a bit of a shame. On the other hand, the landscape architecture has been refined. On the render below, note that the park has been redesigned and that the grand staircase up to Södermalmstorg has mostly been replaced with green terraces. Design work is still ongoing, so even this might not be the final version.





Images by White Arkitekter.

Webcams!
both from http://www.webbkameror.se/webbkameror/gondolen/index.php



 

·
forumer #29
Joined
·
4,570 Posts
Discussion Starter #2 (Edited)
hm, maybe I should have named the thread:
STOCKHOLM | Slussen | Approved
?


Anyways the CURRENT STATUS is:

Nya Slussen:
APPROVED with no possibility of further appeals. Major demolition expected to begin this year.

The Bus Terminal in Katarinaberget:
Rejected on appeal due to sub-standard planning process.
Note: not rejected for being a bad idea! The City has stated that they are going to start the planning over for this part and we might end up with something different.
 

·
forumer #29
Joined
·
4,570 Posts
Discussion Starter #5
It's not like it was my idea, I've seen several post about the need for it in the main Stockholm thread.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
538 Posts
What will be built (all buildings are placeholders, it's the sluice, the bridges, the streets and the park that's decided)
It is worth noting that some changes have been made to the plan since the model was built. Part of it is value-engineering: for example, the rounded corners between the footbridges and Södermalm and Gamla Stan seem to have been scrapped, which is a bit of a shame. On the other hand, the landscape architecture has been refined. On the render below, note that the park has been redesigned and that the grand staircase up to Södermalmstorg has mostly been replaced with green terraces. Design work is still ongoing, so even this might not be the final version.





Images by White Arkitekter.
 

·
forumer #29
Joined
·
4,570 Posts
Discussion Starter #7
It is worth noting that some changes have been made to the plan since the model was built. Part of it is value-engineering: for example, the rounded corners between the footbridges and Södermalm and Gamla Stan seem to have been scrapped, which is a bit of a shame. On the other hand, the landscape architecture has been refined. On the render below, note that the park has been redesigned and that the grand staircase up to Södermalmstorg has mostly been replaced with green terraces. Design work is still ongoing, so even this might not be the final version.

http://s669.photobucket.com/user/c30_album/media/Park.jpg.html

http://s669.photobucket.com/user/c30_album/media/Slusstorget.jpg.html

Images by White Arkitekter.
Is there any good over-view pictures of the plan as it is right now? I'd be happy change the pics in the first post (both of the current and future Slussen)
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
422 Posts
Excellent initiative to start this thread, even though Slussen feels very depressing right now. I feel like "just stop bitching and build the damn thing". In my opinion the proposed design is pretty good (especially with the new green terraces). Not least because it opens up for more water between the two bridges, and it gives a more logical footpath from Gamla stan to Södermalm. Right now that is a very depressing walk across several zebra-crossings, Walking very Close to traffic and if you go the lower path you have to go through "Gula gången" which is one of the ugliest places in Stockholm right now.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
13,478 Posts
Slussen as it is today is a disgrace for the city. The design itself is already very car age like, pedestrians are forced into wet and dark tunnels, while car traffic strangles the whole place from all sides like a gordic knot. On top of that this whole place is falling apart, most spaces are closed or out of business ... The only excuse for its current state is its immanent redesign and reconstruction. Luckily that is exactly the case.

Slussen has been like an open wound for the city, for many decades now. As a pestrian coming from Gamla Stan, it was like a hellish barrier towards Södermalm. Centralbron is also ugly, but at least its not getting into the way of pedestrians that much.

I am more than delighted to see the current plans. That will address most of the issues of today's Slussen and will bring back a prime location of the city from a kafkaesque derilict traffic hellhole to a pedestrian friendly central place connecting places rather than being a big barrier between them.

It will take many years till we see the happy end though. What is the projected finishing date? 2021?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
538 Posts
If the current schedules hold and major works start at the beginning of next year, most of it, including the new main bridge, will be ready in 2019. By 2022, the lock and surrounding drainage channels should be fully operational. All buildings and the permanent bus terminal (if it gets built, and I think it eventually will be) should be finished a year or two after that.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
407 Posts
Lets face it. The old slussen is only existing because it kinda of a cultural landmark in sthlm. To people born in sthlm it has its charms, the concrete and the shape of it has its uniqueness. But if you really look at it, its ugly as h###. The new ones will be different, but modern, and in time people will love it. We need a stable and fresh version to connect the city instread of a concrete block.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
722 Posts
I've encountered a lot of older people who have really strong emotional attachments to the current version of Slussen. It was probably a lot fresher in say the 50's and 60's than today. Younger people tend to dislike it.

My grandfather remembered the previous version of Slussen (the one before the current one) and he never liked the new one, though he did concede that the older version was a disaster from a traffic standpoint. He was around 20 when they started building the current version.

Quite a lot of work on the new Slussen is already underway. They are moving massive amounts of services at the moment, and archaeological work has been going on for 10 months or so.
 

·
forumer #29
Joined
·
4,570 Posts
Discussion Starter #14
I look forward to the day they start tearing down the current eastern bridge. The new Slussen will be such a huge improvement of the place.

The ones against the Nya Slussen plan are generally older, care more about preserving something because it exists (and is thus Cultural History!) than having a place that works for humans - and aren't moved by facts. In fact, they tend to make up their own facts about Nya Slussen. And they tend to forget the today's Slussen was the first step in the re-modelling of the city for mass car use, step 1 in a process where Klararivningarna was step 2. They even think that le Cobusier liking it is a good thing.

I'm so very tired of the cultural sections of the newspapers publishing slanted counter-factual debate pieces about how horrible Nya Slussen is and how awesome and World-Heritage-worthy today's Slussen is. I'ts so absurd! They won't accept YIMBY's responses either, even when we were directly mentioned (and 100% made up things about us written) in one piece. Basically, the culture sections of DN and SvD have taken a very clear stance against any changes at Slussen, no matter what the facts are.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,584 Posts
As a non-Stockholmer I agree with everything Slartibastfas said. Mind you, I don't think I'll love New Slussen either, it still got spots and it still is pretty car-centric. However, given Slussen's location and functions compromises will have to be made, and New Slussen certainly has found better compromises than I have been able to, and better than the opponents have been able to.

The opponents have not been able to come up with a counter-proposal that keeps what they love about Slussen and remove what they hate. Either because they don't really agree with each other, or that they love everything about this horrid traffic machine to death, and can't bear changing anything.

Unless you want a car-free city there will be roads to enable smooth and efficient traffic, but if these roads are kept apart from the pedestrian areas the pedestrians won't notice (much), and the drivers can drive uninterrupted. In Slussen on the other hand everything is on top of each other. It is a bottleneck for car traffic, as well as a nexus for almost every mode of public transportation in Stockholm, as well as a functional sluice, and in principle it should be a place to linger and take in the city. In short Slussen is a design fault.

If we were to truly redesign Slussen we would have to redesign the transport system from scratch. The sluices can't move, and neither can the location, a scenic one next to the tourist centre of Stockholm. I happen to think that sluices can be a public attraction, some are and some aren't, but as is the sluices here are not very visible to the public.

Public transport in this crowded part of Stockholm makes good sense when hidden, as it mostly is today and fully would be with New Slussen. However concentrating all public transport at Slussen and T-Centralen is not a good idea, as discussed in the transport thread. The principle should be that (almost) every mode of transportation in Stockholm should have a convenient interchange with (almost) every other mode of transportation at some point that is neither Slussen nor T-Centralen.

If redesigned from scratch the motorways and cars would have to move. In particular, no car should be in Old Town that isn't destined for the old town. It could go in a tunnel under Old Town, but better move that to the west (probably) or to the east (possibly). Through traffic should be strongly discouraged, either by physically separating access from the north from access from the south, or limiting it to a 1+1 tunnel, with buses and taxis having a 1+1 above ground. The Old Town should no longer be separated from the water by traffic. There still would be significant traffic to Slussen, but as there would be no more through traffic the volume would be greatly reduced, and most of it would be in tunnels.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
919 Posts
Slussen as it is today is a disgrace for the city. The design itself is already very car age like, pedestrians are forced into wet and dark tunnels, while car traffic strangles the whole place from all sides like a gordic knot. On top of that this whole place is falling apart, most spaces are closed or out of business ... The only excuse for its current state is its immanent redesign and reconstruction. Luckily that is exactly the case.

Slussen has been like an open wound for the city, for many decades now. As a pestrian coming from Gamla Stan, it was like a hellish barrier towards Södermalm. Centralbron is also ugly, but at least its not getting into the way of pedestrians that much.

I am more than delighted to see the current plans. That will address most of the issues of today's Slussen and will bring back a prime location of the city from a kafkaesque derilict traffic hellhole to a pedestrian friendly central place connecting places rather than being a big barrier between them.

It will take many years till we see the happy end though. What is the projected finishing date? 2021?
While Slussen is a waste of urban space, I think Centralbron is more of a gash in Stockholm's cityscape. Isolating Riddarholmen from Stadsholmen and ruining an otherwise perfect view over Riddarfjärden (or Old Town depending on your POV).


Lets face it. The old slussen is only existing because it kinda of a cultural landmark in sthlm. To people born in sthlm it has its charms, the concrete and the shape of it has its uniqueness. But if you really look at it, its ugly as h###. The new ones will be different, but modern, and in time people will love it. We need a stable and fresh version to connect the city instread of a concrete block.
I have yet to meet a Stockholmer who doesn't regard Slussen as a urinal fit for demolition.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
13,478 Posts
If there are newspapers in Stockholm opposing the redevelopment of Slussen, the responsible authors should be forced to walk (yes, walk, not drive) through Slussen every day, until it is redeveloped.

Of course, if it were renovated and brought into shape, without major changes to the concept, it would be a much less terrible place as well. But the major design flaws would remain. And if critics like it or not, this whole place is in urgent need of reconstruction no matter what. The steel concrete structure is literally falling apart and only rebuilding from the scratch could repair it. But why rebuilding a deeply flawed structure in the same way? Just because some conservationists demand that the chance of a new construction is not used for repairing those flaws?
 
  • Like
Reactions: Swede

·
Super Moderator
Joined
·
16,266 Posts
While Slussen is a waste of urban space, I think Centralbron is more of a gash in Stockholm's cityscape. Isolating Riddarholmen from Stadsholmen and ruining an otherwise perfect view over Riddarfjärden (or Old Town depending on your POV).
Indeed. It's incredibly noisy in that area thanks to that stupid, ill-thought out motorway through the centre of one of the worlds beautiful cities. Hideous.

I have yet to meet a Stockholmer who doesn't regard Slussen as a urinal fit for demolition.
I think I have said in another thread - I have taken people on the tunnelbana between Gamla Stan and Slussen just to avoid having to walk them through that cesspit. It's hideous and I cannot believe it is taking so much effort to push through its redevelopment.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
722 Posts
Like I said, there seems to be a visceral gut feeling against changing Slussen among many older people. And I guess there's a lot of people who use Slussen as a public transportation node who worry that their commute is going to be a nightmare during construction. Most people simply aren't informed enough to know that doing nothing simply isn't an option.
 

·
forumer #29
Joined
·
4,570 Posts
Discussion Starter #20
While Slussen is a waste of urban space, I think Centralbron is more of a gash in Stockholm's cityscape. Isolating Riddarholmen from Stadsholmen and ruining an otherwise perfect view over Riddarfjärden (or Old Town depending on your POV).
Imagine getting rid of Centralbron! iirc the Citybanan tunnels leave space for this, but it would be a huge project and a deep tunnel that won't come cheap - with no real benefit for the traffic situation. Very unlikely to happen unless we somehow get all higher infra priorities built and have money left over.
If it did happen I'd push for replacing the rail and subway bridges with ones that look better. Surelly it'd be possible for them to be styled in a way that looks more in tune with Riddarholmen and Gamla Stan and less like value engineered concrete.


I have yet to meet a Stockholmer who doesn't regard Slussen as a urinal fit for demolition.
I have meet them. When debating Stockholm's urban planning and expecially when debating anything relating to Slussen.

Like I said, there seems to be a visceral gut feeling against changing Slussen among many older people. And I guess there's a lot of people who use Slussen as a public transportation node who worry that their commute is going to be a nightmare during construction. Most people simply aren't informed enough to know that doing nothing simply isn't an option.
Visceral is right. They go at you like you wouldn't believe. Claiming most things YIMBY has said is lies and give no credit to any critizism of Plan B.
As for most people not being informed enough.... It's been years of straight up mis-information by leading media and by the preservation/PlanB side. Even now in 2014 there was a survey by Opinion Stockholm where NyaSlussen did win slightly - over the option "Rusta Upp" (i.e. renovate). As if that was an option! It hasn't been for about two decades! When the opnion polls are slanted like that (renovating sounds much cheaper and quicker than a total re-build) and the media gladly publishes pieces that mostly contain arguments based on demonterable falsehoods... it's a sad situation.
And still Nya Slussen won that poll.
 
1 - 20 of 584 Posts
Top