South Corridor: Drammen Stavanger Alignments and ... ... 1 South Corridor: Drammen ¢â‚¬â€œ Stavanger Alignments

  • View
    1

  • Download
    0

Embed Size (px)

Text of South Corridor: Drammen Stavanger Alignments and ... ... 1 South Corridor: Drammen...

  • 1

    South Corridor:

    Drammen – Stavanger

    Alignments and

    Environmental impacts

    High Speed Rail Assessment phase 3

    Conference 26th of January 2012

    Gunnar Bratheim, Project Manager

  • 2

    Quite a challenge….

    Modern High Speed Railway Common Norwegian

    single-track railway

  • 3

    Important basis for our study

     Intercity-study Vestfoldbanen (KVU)

     County master plan for Grenlandsbanen (Porsgrunn –

    Brokelandsheia)

     National and regional environmental databases, made

    available through the Avinet web map

     Corridor development plan for existing line,

    Sørlandsbanen (SUP) relevant for alternative B

  • 4

    All alignments studied for new high speed

    railway

  • 5

    Overview of proposed alignments

  • 6

    The B-alternative

    Section

    nr.

    From km To km

    Existing

    length, km

    New

    length, km

    Estimated

    time saving

    (s)

    Single/

    double track

    (S/D) Comments

    16 Kongsberg 100.2 Nedre Jerpetjønn 117.9 17,7 14,0 544 S Passing loop 1.5 km

    13 Lunde 178.2 Nakksjø 193.7 15,5 13,5 454 S Passing loop 1.5 km. (Proposal in SUP: passing loops km 170 and km 185

    15 Glitsjø 197.2 Drangedal 204.4 7,2 5,7 207 S Drd.st. km 205. Single track, one passing loop

    7 Skorstøl 249.0 Vegårshei 262 13,0 10,2 402 S/D Single track, one passing loop 1.5 km

    9 Heldalsmo 287.5 Skredfjell 294.7 7,2 5,7 206 D Double track. (Proposal in SUP: new single track along existing track)

    1 Nodeland

    Øygard 372.0 Breland 383.0 11,0 9,8 294 S

    11 km, with passing loop 1.5 km. A passing loop has recently been built at Nodeland. The SUP

    proposes to straighten the existing line at km 380 – 381

    2 North of Breland 388.6 Laudal 405.7 17,1 6,1 644 S Single track and passing loop 1.5 km. SUP-proposal: straightening of existing line km 403-407

    3 Øvre Laudal 409.4 Start of the

    Hægebostad tunnel 419.8 10,4 8,7 290 S Single track and passing loop 1.5 km. Existing passing loops km 402 and km 419

    4 After the

    Kvineshei tunnel 438.9 Storekvina 446.2 7,3 6,6 193 S Single track. Existing passing loop at Kvina, km 446

    11 Moi 478.2 Heskestad 490.5 12,3 11,6 345 D

    Tunnel, eliminates existing track through Drangsdalen. The SUP proposes double track. The

    table shows reduced running time. This section will also reduce delays caused by crossing

    trains, approx. 7 min.

    5 Helleland 516.8 sør for Smøråsen 521.3 4,5 4,0 106 S Single track. There will be a passing loop close to this section, at km 513, according to the

    SUP-proposal

    8 Egersund 525.6 Sandnes (old

    station) 583.5 57,9 56,5 480 D

    Partly new double track, partly new single track, parallell to existing track. (Length: between

    existing stations). Running time reduction depending on stopping pattern, may be higher

     12 new sections along existing line

     Focus on eliminating bottle-necks with low speed

     152 km new tracks, plus some passing loops

  • 7

    New high speed alignments

     Alternative 2* - 250 km/h with freight

     Alternative D1 - 330 km/h with freight

     Alternative D2 - 330 km/h without freight

  • 8

    Stavanger – Egersund, alternative 2*

  • 9

    Stavanger – Egersund, alternative D1

  • 10

    Stavanger – Egersund, alternative D2

  • 11

    Stavanger – Egersund, environmental issues

     Three different

    alignments with different

    conflicts

     2* has major conflicts

    with cultural heritage and

    agriculture

     D1 and D2 have conflicts

    with large natural

    environments/landscapes

  • 12

    Stavanger – Egersund, alignment issues

     2* alternative

    combines local/

    regional traffic and

    high speed traffic,

    D1/D2 separate traffic

     Relocation of several

    stations will be

    necessary in alt. 2*

  • 13

    Egersund – Kristiansand, alternative 2*

  • 14

    Egersund – Kristiansand, alternative D1

  • 15

    Egersund – Kristiansand, alternative D2

  • 16

    Egersund – Kristiansand, alignment issues

     Reduced speed

    through Egersund

     Very high tunnel

    share due to difficult

    terrain

     Long bridge

    crossings near

    Flekkefjord

  • 17

    Egersund – Kristiansand, environmental issues

     Low conflict level

    between Egersund and

    Mandal

     Some conflicts with

    nature areas, residential

    areas and recreational

    areas west of

    Kristiansand

  • 18

    Kristiansand – Brokelandsheia, alternative 2*

  • 19

    Kristiansand – Brokelandsheia, alternative D1

  • 20

    Kristiansand – Brokelandsheia, alternative D2

  • 21

    Kristiansand – Brokelandsheia,

    alignment issues

     New station in Kristiansand,

    proposed located at Eg

    (Krossen is an alternative)

     Bridge crossing at Kjevik

     Stations in Lillesand and

    Grimstad near residential

    areas

  • 22

    Kristiansand – Brokelandsheia,

    environmental issues

     In general many conflicts around the

    cities Kristiansand, Lillesand and

    Grimstad

     Justvik area east of Kristiansand

     Cultural landscapes and cultural

    heritage at Topdalselva, Fyresmoen

    and Dømmesmoen

     Conflict with several registered

    nature type locations

  • 23

    Brokelandsheia – Drammen, alternative 2*

  • 24

    Brokelandsheia – Drammen, alternative D1

  • 25

    Brokelandsheia – Drammen, alternative D2

  • 26

    Brokelandsheia – Drammen, alignment issues  Challenging alignment through

    Porsgrunn for all alternatives

     Very complicated fjord crossing south

    of Tønsberg in the chosen alternative

    2* (Intercity)

     Probably need for an underground

    station in Tønsberg.

     Layout and capacity issues at

    Drammen station should be studied

    further

  • 27

    Brokelandsheia – Drammen, alignment issues

     Alternative alignment in

    Porsgrunn studied, with

    station at Borgestad

     Left out because of

    complicated stage-by

    stage development

  • 28

    Brokelandsheia – Drammen, environmental issues

     The Grenlandsbanen section passes

    through recreational areas

     Alignment north of Porsgrunn station will

    affect built-up areas

     In general high conflict level along the

    Intercity corridor, moderate conflicts in

    D1/D2 corridor

     Large seizures of arable crop land in 2*

     2* conflicts with cultural heritage areas

    around Sandefjord and in Borre

     2* tunnel in Larvik has possible conflict

    with Farris mineral water source

  • 29

    Technical summary and conclusions Data Alternative D1 Alternative D2 Alternative 2* Alternative B

    Total length of line 452,5 km 456,1 km 495,5 km 518,0 km

    Use of existing line (excl. IC) 18,0 km 18,9 km 31,4 km 353,4 km

    Intercity line 0 0 118,0 km 0

    Tunnels

    Number of tunnels, total 152 188 162 45

    Tunnels, total length 257,5 km 222,1 km 241,0 km 70,4 km

    Tunnels, proportion (of new line) 56,9% 48,7% 48,6% 42,8%

    Number of tunnels >10 km 2 3 2 1

    Number of tunnels >5 km 16 9 12 4

    Number of tunnels 500 m 34 30 24 6

    Number of bridges > 1000 m 8 8 9 0

     All lines are technically possible to build

     Well-known technology

     Many tunnels, but moderate tunnel lengths

  • 30

    Collocation of impact assesments Section Theme B 2* D1 D2

    Section 1:

    Stavanger -

    Egersund

    Landscape 1 2 4 1

    Cultural heritage 4 3 1 2

    Natural environment 2 2 4 1

    Natural resources 3 3 1 2

    Community life and outdoor recreation 3 3 2 1

    Section 2:

    Egersund -

    Flekkefjord

    Landscape 1 2 3 4

    Cultural heritage 1 2 3 4

    Natural environment 1 2 3 4

    Natural resources 4 3 1 2

    Community life and outdoor recreation 1 2 3 4

    Section 3:

    Flekkefjord -

    Mandal

    Landscape 1 2 3 4

    Cultural heritage 1 2 3 3

    Natural environment 1 2 3 4

    Natural resources 4 1 3 1

    Community life and outdoor recreation 1 2 3 4

    Section 4: Mandal -

    Lillesand

    Landscape 1 2 2 2

    Cultural heritage 1 4 2 3

    Natural environment 1 2 2 2

    Natural resources 1