The city council in Bergen and the county administration in Vestland launched on 9 August 2024 a new proposal for how the Bybanen to Åsane can go in a tunnel behind Bryggen. The opposition party in Bergen city council then sent a total of 103 questions to the city council. On 21 August, urban development councilor Christine Kahrs (H) answered in writing all the questions from Raudt, SV, the Labor Party, Venstre/KrF and MDG respectively. A typical answer to a number of the questions was: “This will be assessed in the zoning plan work”, or “This must be clarified by the zoning plan work.” news has made an extract of some of the questions and answers: Timeline: Høgre took over the power of the city council in Bergen in the autumn of 2023. The original plan for the city council was to carry out a new tunnel analysis and then make the decision in 2025: to build the Bybanen to Åsane via a tunnel behind Bryggen , or retain the route along the front of Bryggen that Bergen City Council adopted in spring 2023. Construction of the Bryggen route could then start in 2026 if the tunnel alternative turned out to be more expensive. Instead, the city council has now put aside the work on tunneling, and is proposing together with the management of Vestland County Municipality (which will build and operate the Bybanen) to draw up a zoning plan for a new tunnel alternative behind the Bryggen: with parking space in the town hall quarter, a tunnel from Bergen Katedralskole to Sandviken, and further route in the open air through Sjøgaten and to Sandviken hospital. Venstre and KrF: “How much do the new plans delay compared to the original plan?” Answer from the city council: “If the tunnel alternative was chosen, regulation would have to start in 2026.” The Labor Party: “Can the city council explain the realism of the presented progress plan?” Answer: “A zoning plan will take at least two years to reach a final decision and given that government funding is in place, construction will be able to start in 2028 at the earliest, provided that planning is carried out in parallel with the planning work. If you succeed in securing government funding earlier than this, the work can be accelerated and you can start building the parts of the route that are not regulated again.” Venstre and KrF: “The new plans involve extensive and resource-intensive work over many years. How does this affect the pace of work on other zoning plans, area plans, the municipal plan’s area section (KPA) and community section (KPS), Dokken, Mindemyren and Laksevåg?” Answer: “We recognize that this is a real challenge, but the city council will prioritize work on the Bybanen til Åsane.” Where will the light rail stop be? If one walks away from the Bryggen route and the light rail stop there, it can be a long walk to the nearest stop for many residents in the area between the town hall and Sandviken hospital. The city council replies that it has not been determined how many light rail stops there will be: “However, efforts are being made to make room for at least two stops. One at Sverresborg and one at Sandvikstorget.” It is not certain whether or where it is technically and economically possible to get a light rail stop at Sverresborg near Bryggen. The city council replies: “The Sverresborg stop is not cost-calculated.” “The stop at Sverresborg is something that is being tried to be realised, as this will be able to serve densely populated areas in Sandviken. The Mule bus stop in Helgesens gate is the busiest stop in Sandviken, and it is highly desirable to have direct access to the Bybanen in this area. Previous investigations assume that it is possible to build a stop in this area. If, however, you have to look for other solutions, this will probably be due to financial considerations. If the stop has to be discontinued, the County Municipality assures that they will deploy supplementary buses to serve the area, and supplementary stops will be considered during the day in Sjøgaten. In order to obtain government permits for transport measures, Bergen has committed itself to the goal of zero growth in passenger car traffic. However, car traffic in the Bergen area increased by 1.1 per cent from 2022 to 2023. The city council writes that the Bybanen in the tunnel behind the Bryggen can affect traffic development in various ways: “A shorter journey time will have a positive effect, while somewhat lower coverage of the area around the Bryggen will have a negative effect .” How will the traffic conditions be? Will Bryggen become car-free? If Bybanen were to be built instead of building on Bryggen, most of today’s car and bus traffic there would have to disappear. If the Bybanen is instead put in a tunnel, the situation is different. The city council replies that their “ambition is to get the car-free Bryggen in place, and will work towards this (..), but for example, buses will still run across the square”. “It has not been concluded that either cars or buses will cross Bryggen, and if so, how many.” How the tunnel proposal will affect traffic flow in Sandviken and at the town hall/police station is unknown. In Sandviken, according to the city council, it is “not unnatural to consider” one-way driving. Regarding the area by the town hall, the city council writes that “it can become a tight situation (..). This must be worked on further in the regulatory plan (..). The main move is to direct as much of the traffic as possible outside the city centre, but at the same time ensure sufficient accessibility in the city centre.” How to choose a route – and what time? SV: “The city council has previously stated that it should be possible to compare the actual differences between a new tunnel alternative and the adopted route. When can the city council decide on the actual financial consequences of the proposed tunnel alternative?” Answer: “The cost assessments that will follow the development plan proposals will provide a good decision-making basis for assessing whether you want to adopt the new plan or not.” Ap asks whether the tunnel and Bryggen alternatives should be compared “on a full academic basis”: Answer: “Approximately the same methodology for weighting goal achievement and consequences has been proposed.” SV: “Will the city council and the county council put aside the tunnel option if it turns out to be too expensive or too difficult to build the underground stop in the area near Sverresborg/Koengen?” Liberals and KrF: “Does the promise from the city council leader that the “cheapest” track will be built when the plan is finished still apply?” The answer is apparently ‘no’: “The city council’s recommendation is that the light rail should be built in a tunnel. We will seek solutions that are financially sound to realize this.” “The costs, including distributional effects, will be strongly emphasized in the planning work. Efforts are being made to ensure that the new solution does not become more expensive than the adopted route.” A sticking point for the opposition party is whether the zoning plan for the Bybanen in front of Bryggen should be repealed, and possibly when, if a zoning plan is drawn up for the tunnel solution. Both county director Rune Haugsdal and the opposition party in the city council warn against canceling the Bryggen plan. The city council will take a position on the decision made by the city council on 9 August to “start changing the zoning plans for sub-sections parts 1 and 2, where the light rail route itself is removed from these plans. However, for the completion of this work, it is assumed that there is state funding or a completed zoning plan for a tunnel alternative”. Costs Building the Bybanen between the city center and Åsane via the front of Bryggen has previously been estimated at NOK 18 billion. The city council writes: “Work is being done to ensure that the new solution can be implemented within the same framework.” Only 10 of the 18 billion are linked to the track itself. If the state pays 70 per cent of this, then 3 billion in tolls are needed. The city council writes that it is too early to answer whether the tolls must be increased if the tunnel alternative will be more expensive than the Bryggen route: “It is not planned to make adjustments to the tolls beyond the assumed level.” Some other aspects Building the Bybanen along Bryggen would require – and give the opportunity to – upgrade and replace water and drainage pipes in the area at the same time as the development. The state would (only) contribute to paying for the upgrade that the light rail development makes necessary. It is not clear what it means economically and practically for the municipality to choose a tunnel solution instead. The cycle route along Bryggen was also planned as an integral part of the light rail development there. In order to avoid damage to the Bryggen in Bergen, it is important that the tunnel solution does not lead to a change in the groundwater conditions under and around the Bryggen. The city council writes: “The tunnel alternative itself is expected not to affect the groundwater at Bryggen.” The city council also replies that the tunnel solution makes it easier to coordinate the light rail construction with the construction of the extension of the Fløyfjellstunnel on the E39: “the operation of the facility will be easier (..) due to the fact that you will have the option of being able to open for traffic in the center when traffic in the Fløyfjellstunnel has to be closed periodically .”
ttn-69
Political agreement on light rail tunnel to Åsane in Bergen and Vestland – news Vestland
