The specific park is under threat again. “Seven” is delayed Meanwhile, the current general plan has already excluded from the park the area along the railway where the route was originally planned to be built, which means that nothing prevents it from being designed and laid there,
During public hearings on amendments to the Land Use and Development Rules, which took place today in the administration of the Vyborg district, the topic of construction of highway No. 7, or “seven”, which in current urban planning documentation “passes” through Udelny Park, was raised.
“Multiple promises that the authorities will find an option to preserve the park suddenly turn out to be empty words,” said one of the residents of the area, adding that the highway has already begun to be designed.
“The G7 issue is not a matter of the near future. The question of the possibility of its construction will actually be considered in 2019 with a comprehensive update of the General Plan for the long term,” said Alexander Mulberg, head of the General Plan department of the Urban Development Policy Department of the KGA. - There is no talk of any design, even approximately. A comprehensive transport scheme involves resolving the G7 issue around 2048 and not earlier. Until this moment, even project documentation will not be developed. Therefore, talking now about the destruction of Udelny Park for the sake of construction is simply pointless. We have enough time to work through this issue." Mr. Mühlberg also recalled that last year, Vice-Governor Igor Albin expressed the idea of “descent” the highway underground. True, he did not present a full-fledged tunnel project.
Let us recall that the plan to lay highway No. 7 with a route through Udelny Park appeared back in the 60s of the last century. Presumably, the highway will be radial, will pass from the future bridge across the Neva at the Arsenalnaya Street alignment and will end in the area of the Ring Road interchange and Engels Avenue, creating an additional exit to Priozerskoye Highway. In recent years, a protest campaign against this road has periodically intensified in the city. Citizens are demanding that its trajectory be reconsidered or the project be abandoned altogether (with the introduction of the Ring Road and the WHSD, the need for the highway has disappeared, some citizens believe). At the same time, there are not many objective reasons for people to worry. It is obvious that the city is now unable to handle such a serious project - both from a financial point of view and in terms of confrontation with the public.
In accordance with the schedule, on May 28, public hearings on the draft amendments to the General Plan of St. Petersburg were held in the building of the Administration of the Primorsky District of St. Petersburg. Residents who came to the public hearing were especially excited about the presence of the so-called Highway No. 7 in the General Plan. Here it is on a fragment of a map of St. Petersburg (orange line from the north to Arsenalnaya embankment).
Highway No. 7 is planned as a highway of continuous traffic. If you look at the map of St. Petersburg, it runs mainly along the Vyborg direction of the Oktyabrskaya Railway and then through the industrial zone it goes to Arsenalnaya Embankment. Those. in fact, it is a radial road of continuous movement. In this way, it is reminiscent of Moscow outbound highways, which are excellent in traffic jams, despite the width of the roadway (this is especially true for the traffic-lightless Leningradka). But that's not so bad. The main problem is that this highway, the origins of which lie in the middle of the 20th century, cuts the long-suffering Udelny Park and runs dangerously close to the Suzdal Lakes complex. This is what worries city residents most. Udelny Park is already one of the few green corners of the Primorsky district of the city. And so it was “pinched” by shopping centers and residential complexes. The road will finally kill him. Moreover, this road will not solve the transport problem, and moreover, it will cut off the Vyborg and Primorsky districts from each other, most likely complicating pedestrian communication.
At the Master Plan hearings, I expressed my opinion on this matter. Moreover, Yuri Konstantinovich Bakei said that the road is needed so that people can drive along it. Clinging to this phrase, I proposed to intensify the use of public transport in the direction formed by Vyborg Highway, Engels Avenue, Bolshoy Sampsonievsky Avenue, Lesnoy Avenue and Academician Lebedev Street. There is already a tram infrastructure along these streets, and even more so a bus infrastructure. Since the task is primarily to transport people, excellent public transport can be made. The logical answer followed that we have a Transport Planning Center and that based on the results of the analysis of the General Plan, an Integrated Transport Scheme will be created. I understand everything, but transport specialists have long come to the conclusion that we must first learn to make maximum use of the existing road network, and its development is secondary, albeit important.
The described transport corridor is complex; transport specialists are needed to carry out the relevant work. I didn’t want to speak out along this corridor now, but I had to and, perhaps, I will have to in the future. The corridor looks promising, is almost not duplicated by the metro, and traffic jams at least during rush hour show high transport demand. So there is something to think about.
What to do now?
It is necessary to remove Highway No. 7 from the General Plan. However, Buckeye said that they couldn’t just suggest removing it. Okay, I'll rephrase the proposal: "Exclude Highway No. 7 in the existing alignment from the General Plan of St. Petersburg."
As a result, I decided to send an appeal to the Primorsky District Administration, as was discussed at public hearings.
Head of the Primorsky District Administration
Tsed Nikolai Grigorievich
From a resident of the Primorsky district of St. Petersburg
Smirnov Dmitry Vyacheslavovich
E-mail address: [email protected]
About Highway No. 7
Dear Nikolai Grigorievich!
On May 28, 2014, in the building of the Primorsky District Administration of St. Petersburg, public hearings were held on the draft amendments to the General Plan of St. Petersburg, which I attended. As part of the public hearings, a discussion was raised about the construction of Highway No. 7 according to the alignment proposed by the General Plan. City residents present at the public hearing expressed a negative opinion about the proposed alignment of Highway No. 7.
The main reason for this is the expected deterioration of the ecological situation and urban environment in the Udelny Park and in the Suzdal Lakes region - and these are areas that are used by citizens for recreation. In addition, it is noted that Highway No. 7 will not solve the problem of traffic jams, and will itself become a source of congestion due to the radial routing and the corresponding high demand for car travel in this direction.
Additionally, I would like to note that in a direction close to the direction of Highway No. 7, it is possible to organize transportation by public transport:
1. Along the Vyborg direction of the Oktyabrskaya Railway. Transportation can be carried out by suburban rail transport. A number of organizational measures will help increase the attractiveness of rail travel along this section and improve transport services for the population living nearby.
2. Along Vyborgskoye Highway, Engels Avenue, Bolshoy Sampsonievsky Avenue, Lesnoy Avenue, Academician Lebedev Street. Transportation can be carried out by trams and buses; the corresponding infrastructure already exists, but it is necessary to separate the movement of public urban passenger transport from the automobile flow and intensify its use.
The above proposals will help improve transport services for the population in this direction, without causing harm to the ecology and urban environment.
In connection with the above, I request:
1. Exclude Highway No. 7 in the existing alignment from the General Plan of St. Petersburg.
2. Zone U, allocated for the construction of Highway No. 7 and passing through the territory of Udelny Park, should be replaced with zone P4.
3. Bring for discussion by responsible persons the possibility of organizing passenger transportation by public urban passenger transport in accordance with the above proposals.
I ask you to include my proposals and comments in the protocol and conclusion following the public hearings, and please send me a copy of the protocol and conclusion following the hearings to the email address: [email protected]
Application on 1 sheet.
If you want to help, write a request too, at least to the electronic reception. Those interested can bring applications in writing to the address: St. Petersburg, st. Savushkina, 83. Bring two copies: give one, keep the other with a mark of transfer as proof of sending the appeal.
Now the main task is to prevent the highway from passing through recreational areas. Transport will be dealt with after the amendments to the General Plan are approved, so you don’t have to write about it if you don’t want to. Our opinion is taken into account within four working days after the end of the hearing. You can write not to the Administration at your place of residence, but to any other district administration of St. Petersburg, but it is highly advisable to meet the four-day deadline. If you were a participant in the hearings, please indicate this in your letter.
Tell your friends. Let them become familiar with the intentions of the authorities. They might want to join.
UPD 06/01/2014: I ask concerned citizens to sign the petition. It's simple.
Alexey Erkov, chief economist of the Institute of Territorial Development, in an interview with a correspondent of the Stroitelnyi Zhenedelnik newspaper, spoke about the transport and economic prerequisites for creating the M-7 continuous traffic highway from the center of St. Petersburg to the northern regions of the city.
– What, in your opinion, is the situation with transport support for the border of the territories of two districts - Vyborg and Primorsky, where, according to the General Plan of St. Petersburg, the M-7 should pass? Is a new continuous traffic road necessary in this location?
– The development of the road network (RDN) within the boundaries of the territory under consideration is uneven. This is due to the fact that the small network of narrow roads in the dacha areas of the early twentieth century borders on the areas of Soviet standard development with its wide streets and avenues. As a result, a situation arises when intense flows from wide avenues pass through a historically developed road network that was not intended for them. The situation is complicated by the presence of a railway line with heavy train traffic separating the Primorsky and Vyborg regions.
Against this background, Engels Ave. is the most direct route for traffic in the northwestern and northern direction. In the area of the Ozerki metro station, very intense flows from the Vyborg and Novopriozerskoe highways converge, creating a concentration of transport in the Poklonnaya Gora area. At the same time, there are almost no direct transport connections in the west-east direction.
Thus, we can say that on the border of the Vyborg and Primorsky districts the main problem is the unevenness of the road network. The construction of the Suzdal Highway with an overpass across the railway line and the construction of an overpass on Poklonnogorskaya Street are intended to improve the situation. In accordance with the General Plan in the version of 2005, it was planned to connect Parachutnaya Street. and Manchester st. through Udelny Ave. However, later the western part of Udelny Ave. was completely built up with residential buildings, and changes were made to the General Plan.
In principle, duplicating Engels Avenue with a highway with continuous traffic should relieve it. It is worth noting that the currently planned M-7 highway starts in the central part of the city, from Arsenalnaya embankment, where the level of road traffic congestion is high, and ends on the Vyborg highway, in the Osinovaya Roshcha area, where there are busy junctions with traffic light intersections, but these undoubted difficulties cannot neutralize the feasibility of building the M-7 even in its current form.
As for the overpass part of the M-7 along the Finnish Railway, this can only be part of a highway similar to the WHSD, with access to the Ring Road. To solve the problem of traffic concentration, measures should be taken to more evenly distribute flows by increasing the density of the network of city and regional streets and a general reduction in the intensity of pendulum automobile traffic (to and from work) through the development of public transport and interceptor parking.
– Is there an option when it is possible to build a new M-7 highway in another place, for example, there was a concept to build it on the second floor above Piskarevsky Prospect?
– For the construction of off-street highways with continuous traffic, undeveloped areas and railroad right-of-way are most suitable. At the same time, attempts to organize continuous traffic on city streets are controversial. Piskarevsky Ave. itself cannot in any way be an alternative to M-7, since it serves other directions.
– Does Udelny Park really suffer greatly when this road is created? Is it possible to build highway No. 7, when the park is preserved and at the same time a road appears, for example, on the second floor above an existing railway line or in a tunnel under the base of the park?
– In my opinion, the damage to the Udelny Park can be minimized by constructing an overpass over the railway track, however, the width of the railway track is less than the width of the overpass, and therefore, most likely, the cutting down of green spaces is inevitable, but the percentage of cut down trees in relation to the total area of the park will be insignificant.
At the same time, the construction of an overpass over the railway is quite expensive and will require numerous approvals from JSC Russian Railways. It is, of course, possible to build a two-story overpass with a smaller width, but this is even more expensive.
– According to your estimates, how much money will be required to implement such an object as M-7? Is it possible to build a road through a public-private partnership?
– Construction costs depend on the extent to which the project is planned to be implemented and within what parameters. Obviously, the overpass part in the railway right-of-way will approximately correspond to the cost of similar sections of the WHSD. As experience shows, it is possible to attract investor funds only when the project is already underway and the risks of stopping it are minimal, and provided that the road is tolled, which is unlikely. In the early stages, financing inevitably falls on the shoulders of the city budget.
– On the one hand, territories that attract the attention of investors become key points of city development. On the other hand, these are areas of potential risks. Spontaneous development leads to the formation of areas that are uncomfortable for life and creates a number of other intractable problems. How do you think this situation can be avoided in the future?
– I believe that in order to avoid this, the city must have a unified development strategy, based not on the desire to implement individual projects, but on the need to create an urban environment comfortable for people within the framework of an integrated approach that includes all urban planning aspects. It is fair to say that an attempt to solve one problem leads to the emergence of several others.
With an integrated approach and correct prioritization, it is possible to create a comfortable, balanced environment that is attractive for life. Thus, investment attractiveness will gradually increase. Individual investors cannot provide this on their territory; the strategy must work at the level of the city government, ahead of spontaneous development.
Reference:
According to the 2005 General Plan of St. Petersburg, the M-7 expressway should run from the Arsenalny Bridge to the Vyborg Highway and thus connect the center of St. Petersburg and the northern district (Vyborgsky, Primorsky) of the city, crossing Udelny Park. The latter fact caused dissatisfaction among the townspeople, and a public movement was organized in defense of the green zone. In 2014, it was proposed to exclude the route from the General Plan, but this did not happen. Vice-Governor of St. Petersburg Marat Oganesyan, reporting to deputies of the Legislative Assembly on the implementation of the General Plan of the city, noted that the M-7 highway could be turned into an overpass or a tunnel in the part where it crosses Udelny Park. The official promised that the opinions of residents would be taken into account.
05/09/2016
City authorities reported two pieces of news about the half-forgotten topic of highway No. 7. First, Smolny said that this fall a route would be selected and a financial model for construction would be prepared for investors, and then it was announced that until 2020 it does not plan to include the costs of designing the route in the city budget.
TO No matter how paradoxical it may seem at first glance, there is no contradiction in these two messages of power, if we take them literally.
First, let's remember what we're talking about. The highway of continuous urban traffic No. 7 is the road that starts from the intersection of the Ring Road and the Vyborg Highway, passes through the Udelny Park, cut into two unequal parts, goes along overpasses through the Lanskaya station, then along the railway tracks and not far from the Kushelevka station exits onto Polyustrovsky Prospekt. Then, at the point of maximum approach to Arsenalnaya Street, it turns onto it, passes over the Neva through the Arsenalny Bridge and ends at Smolnaya Embankment. “Seventh” is conceived as part of a citywide route of continuous traffic to connect the northern districts of St. Petersburg with a bypass of the historical center along the embankments of the Neva, starting from Smolnaya Embankment and further to the southeast.
In Soviet times, urbanists dreamed of continuing it into the center itself, but after the collapse of the directive economy and the return of the institution of private ownership of land, they no longer remember this.
Highway No. 7 was included in the General Plan of St. Petersburg in 2005 (and was conceived much earlier), and a 70-meter wide corridor was cut out of Udelny Park to the west of the railway.
As you might guess, today there is nothing except Polyustrovsky Prospekt and Arsenalnaya Street.
According to Alexey Efremov, a recent employee of the Petersburg NIPIgrad Institute, who has been involved in transport infrastructure issues for more than 40 years, the problem of highway No. 7 has two most important aspects. The first, and in it Efremov sees the main meaning of urban planning activities, is the reservation of territories. The corridor along Udelny Park is not set aside in order to start design tomorrow, which is still very far away, but in order to preserve the possibility of construction in any distant future. Before designing highway No. 7, we still need to figure out how it will pass Lanskaya station.
For those who do not travel by train to Sestroretsk or Vyborg, let us inform you that the railway is actually located on an overpass. Therefore, it is necessary to look for options for building a new overpass or two on opposite sides of the railway track.
As examples of urban planning reservation of territories, Efremov named interchanges with highway No. 7, which are included in the projects of the overpass on Poklonnaya Hill (it is currently under construction), and the continuation of Suzdal Avenue (traffic along the new section was opened in December 2015).
An earlier, but very significant example is the Alexander Nevsky Bridge, opened in 1965. Even before the war, plots of land were reserved on both banks of the Neva for the construction of this bridge and interchanges.
The second aspect is the sequence of construction of highway No. 7. Efremov is convinced that the key topic is not transit, but strengthening transport connections between Citizens and the areas around Suvorovsky Prospekt, unloading existing highways.
Therefore, the first priority is to connect Polyustrovsky Prospekt with Arsenalnaya Street (LOMO lands are located there), especially since housing is being actively built nearby, the construction of a bridge across the Neva, and the construction of an interchange on Smolnaya Embankment. The reverse order - conditionally, first the passage of the highway through Udelny Park, and someday then the bridge over the Neva - does not make sense.
But the first part of the highway must also have a fundamental addition. Smolnaya Embankment must certainly connect with Tavricheskaya Street. There are only 440 meters, according to Efremov, it will be necessary to free up 4.6 hectares of territory.
But this tiny “breakthrough” on the scale of St. Petersburg is not included in the 2005 General Plan. Of course, not due to the forgetfulness of the designers. The required territory belongs to Vodokanal, more specifically, the Main Water Station is located there. However, the expert recalls that the laying of this link was laid down in the General Plan of 1986.
Alexey Zhukovsky, another master of designing transport networks in St. Petersburg, is convinced that highway No. 7 makes sense only as a single route from Zelenogorsk to Kolpin. In some places, existing highways and streets can be used; in others, they need to be built. It is important that a stable connection be created between the northwestern and southeastern regions of St. Petersburg. The CAD did not solve this problem. The ring road is much longer, and highway No. 7 is almost straight.
Can this highway bypass Udelny Park, about the fate of which public activists are worried? Zhukovsky believes that this is possible, but then all sections of the route that are located south of the park must be routed and re-calculated.
Dmitry Baranov, a blogger and transport engineer, believes that it makes sense to discuss only the southern section of the highway - from Arsenalnaya Embankment to Karbysheva Street. It is better to replace the northern section - from Udelny Avenue to Vyborg Highway - with the reconstruction and construction of district streets. Moreover, laying the “seven” will require the demolition of houses and the purchase of land.
As for the central section - from Karbysheva Street to Udelny Prospekt, which includes Udelny Park - in addition to technical and environmental difficulties, this part of the route, being cut off from city highways, will become only a corridor for transit. What the emergence of such corridors leads to is known - an increase in the number of cars in the city, especially in its central part.
And then the poetic construction “outbound highway,” which officials like to use in conversations “about the seven,” will in fact result in the “inbound” of no less oncoming traffic. Baranov is confident that only reducing the number of private cars can radically solve transport problems in the metropolis.
To sum up the opinions of experts: the routing of highway No. 7 can be discussed, but it is premature to design it.
Another question is why Smolny reminded about the highway right before the start of the election campaign, giving its opponents a reason to criticize the authorities for wanting to destroy Udelny Park?
Observers find one explanation: people in Smolny do not think too much about elections. But they think about something else. A new General Plan for St. Petersburg for 2019-2043 is to be developed. And the LSR group was interested in outbound routes and transport corridors along the railways. Highway No. 7, according to current estimates, costs 120 billion rubles. The city budget alone is unlikely to begin to deal with this. But together with an influential business - maybe.
By the way
Answering the question of what other large transport infrastructure projects he considers a priority, Alexey Zhukovsky named two. The first is the “Southern Mainline”, it begins approximately where the WHSD and the existing freight railway line cross Stachek Avenue. It goes east along this branch, then at the alignment of Fayansovaya and Zolnaya streets and further to the Ring Road.
The second project is the Orlovsky tunnel. The expert is convinced that the city needs an underground transport connection between Smolnaya Embankment and the intersection of Piskarevsky Prospekt and Revolution Highway .
