Tampere Travel and Service Centre - Reconnecting Tampere – Survey of the Conditions for the Implementation of the Reconnecting Tampere

TAMPERE TRAVEL AND SERVICE CENTRE - RECONNECTING TAMPERE – SURVEY OF THE CONDITIONS FOR THE IMPLEMENTATION OF THE RECONNECTING TAMPERE

TAMPERE TRAVEL AND SERVICE CENTRE SURVEY OF THE CONDITIONS FOR THE IMPLEMENTATION OF THE RECONNECTING TAMPERE PROPOSAL

1 TAMPERE TRAVEL AND SERVICE CENTRE Survey of the conditions for the implementation of the Reconnecting Tampere proposal

AUTHORS

RAMBOLL

Jouni Lehtomaa, Engineer, traffi c planning

Riikka Salli, M.Sc. (Tech.), traffi c model

Riku Jalkanen, M.Sc. (Tech.), traffi c performance studies

Lauri Vesanen, M.Sc. (Tech.), pedestrian and cycling connections

Ilkka Vilonen, Lic.Sc. (Tech.), bridge and deck solutions

Outi Lehti, M.Sc. (Tech.), safety requirements and risk management

Eeva Rantanen, M.Sc. (Tech.), safety requirements and risk management

COBE

Ted Schauman, Architect, cityscape studies, deck solutions

LUNDEN ARCHITECTURE

Eero Lundén, Architect, cityscape studies

Translation by Translatinki Oy CONTENTS

1. STARTING POINTS 4

2. ASSESSMENT OF THE IMPLEMENTATION OF THE TRAM STOP ON ITSENÄISYYDENKATU STREET 5 2.1 Description of the task 5 2.2 Findings 6

3. STUDY OF THE ENTRANCE TO THE P-HÄMPPI CAR PARK FROM ITSENÄISYYDENKATU STREET 7 3.1 Description of the task 7 3.2 Findings 7

4. INTEGRATING THE COMPETITION PROPOSAL WITH THE TAMPERE CITY CENTRE TRAFFIC NETWORK PLAN 9 4.1 Description of the task 9 4.2 Findings 9

5. THE PEDESTRIAN & CYCLING NETWORK AND CONNECTIONS 12 5.1 Description of the task 12 5.2 Findings 12

6. STUDY OF THE DRIVING RAMPS FROM A CITYSCAPE PERSPECTIVE 14 6.1 Description of the task 14 6.2 Kaupunkikuvalliset tarkastelut 14

7. FEASIBILITY OF THE DECK STRUCTURE 19 7.1 Description of the task 19 7.2 Planning materials used 20 7.3 Assessments and the ﬁ ndings 20

8. SAFETY REQUIREMENTS AND RISK MANAGEMENT 24 8.1 Description of the task 24 8.2 Findings 24 TAMPERE TRAVEL AND SERVICE CENTRE - RECONNECTING TAMPERE – SURVEY OF THE CONDITIONS FOR THE IMPLEMENTATION OF THE RECONNECTING TAMPERE PROPOSAL

1. STARTING POINTS

This survey has been undertaken as a result of the design contest for the Travel and Service Centre area, which was held in order to ﬁ nd proposals for land-use solutions for the traffi c and operational concept. The competition was won by a team of consultants formed by COBE, Lundén Architecture, Ramboll, and Newsec, with a competition entry named ReConnecting Tampere.

The aim of this survey is to ensure that the appropriate conditions are in place to implement the basic ideas of the travel centre concept, the traffi c solutions, and the structural solutions presented in the ReConnecting Tampere entry.

Image 1.1 The proposal presented in the competition entry.

4 TAMPERE TRAVEL AND SERVICE CENTRE - RECONNECTING TAMPERE – SURVEY OF THE CONDITIONS FOR THE IMPLEMENTATION OF THE RECONNECTING TAMPERE

2. ASSESSMENT OF THE IMPLEMENTATION OF THE TRAM STOP ON ITSENÄISYYDENKATU STREET

2.1 Description of the task The ReConnecting Tampere proposal has placed a tram stop beneath the railway yard (under the bridge of the Itsenäisyydenkatu underpass), with the aim of seamlessly linking the various modes of travel to each other. This survey took a closer look at the space (length and width) required by the tram stop area as well as at the feasibility of the solution in terms of the requirements set for the Track 1 Track Track 7 Track Track 3 Track Track 2 Track Track 5 Track Track 4 Track Track 6 Track longitudinal geometry of the tramway and the tram stop. 8 Track

The alternative site proposed for the tram stops is the eastern end of Hämeenkatu PAVEMENT Street (this solution was presented in the master plan for Hämeenkatu Street). In PLATFORM AREA this alternative, the connection of the tram stops to the train platforms as well as to the long-distance transport terminal is signiﬁ cantly weaker, as motor traffi c on Rautatienkatu Street causes a barrier eff ect for pedestrians, which is emphasised by the busy crossroads area of Rautatienkatu Street / Hämeenkatu Street. PLATFORM AREA PAVEMENT This survey has also examined reducing the barrier eff ect caused by Rautatienkatu Street and off ers some solutions to overcome current traffi c issues.

SECTION A-A

+96.20

+91.50

+89.30 +89.30 +89.00 4,5 4 2 3,5 3,5 2 3 1,5 10 15 10 4

Image 2.1 Principle for the traffi c and spatial arrangements of the Itsenäisyydenkatu underpass.

5 TAMPERE TRAVEL AND SERVICE CENTRE - RECONNECTING TAMPERE – SURVEY OF THE CONDITIONS FOR THE IMPLEMENTATION OF THE RECONNECTING TAMPERE PROPOSAL

2.2 Tulokset The location of the tram stop to be built beneath the bridge (as presented in the competition entry) requires that the tramway runs through both spans of the

Airport bridge, in accordance with Image 2.1. A two-way cycling route will be implemented Escalator bagdrop to paltform along the northern span of the bridge. The cycling route will be 3 metres wide. & check-in Elevator to all levels There will be lifts and staircases from the southern span of the bridge to the + 91,5 station premises (these premises were presented in the competition entry), and from there to the railway tracks (Image 2.2). Initially, the lifts are to be located by + 90,0 the stairs, along the southern wall of the bridge over the underpass. Preliminary supporting structures and openings have been presented in Chapter 7. Pedestrian 2 m Bike lane 2m Tram platform 2,5 m Trame lane 3,5 m

It is proposed that escalators and lifts to the railway yard and to the deck be installed in the northern span of the bridge. These connections will improve links Image 2.2 Spatial arrangements in the southern span of the bridge. to the various modes of travel and they will reduce the need to cross the tram tracks when going to the tram stops along the northern side of the street.

The crossing points for pedestrians beneath the bridge will be placed at both Murtokatu Street ends of the tram stop areas. For safety reasons, it is proposed that the crossing

Rautatienkatu Street points be equipped with traffi c lights. Ratapihankatu Street

During the implementation of these changes, the tram stop can temporarily be located on Itsenäisyydenkatu Square (Image 2.3). This cannot be a permanent solution as this long tram stop will narrow the pedestrian and cycling connection running parallel with Rautatienkatu Street. The pedestrian and cycling route has been removed

Pakkahuoneenaukio Square

Image 2.3. Location of the tram stop for the duration of the alterations to be implemented in the area.

6 TAMPERE TRAVEL AND SERVICE CENTRE - RECONNECTING TAMPERE – SURVEY OF THE CONDITIONS FOR THE IMPLEMENTATION OF THE RECONNECTING TAMPERE

3. STUDY OF THE ENTRANCE TO THE P-HÄMPPI CAR PARK FROM ITSENÄISYYDENKATU STREET

3.1 Description of the task The competition entry has proposed a new entrance to the P-Hämppi car park The current P-Hämppi ramp connection from Ratapihankatu Street is located from Itsenäisyydenkatu Street and a new exit from the P-Hämppi car park onto beneath Itsenäisyydenkatu Street, by Murtokatu Street. In order to connect the Itsenäisyydenkatu Street. This solution will improve the accessibility of the new entrance and exit to this existing ramp, a maximum gradient of 12.5% must P-Hämppi car park particularly from the east. In accordance with the proposal, be used as the longitudinal gradient for the new ramp. This will also enable the only public transport, maintenance & logistics services traffi c, and the above- implementation of a maintenance & logistics services connection to the deck, at mentioned traffi c to the P-Hämppi car park will be allowed from the Yliopistonkatu the western end of Tullikamarinaukio Square. At the upper end of the ramp, at the Street junction to the west. According to the proposal, the driving connection to junction on Yliopistonkatu Street, a longitudinal gradient of about 3% has been the parking facility will be implemented by building a direct ramp from the middle used in order to allow for a large enough waiting area (at the junction, which has of Itsenäisyydenkatu Street downwards, linking this new ramp to the current ramp traffi c lights) for traffi c arriving from the parking facility. It is proposed that the connection starting at Ratapihankatu Street. shaft of the ramp be rooﬂ ess and equipped with a snowmelt system.

This survey presents more detailed principles for the entrance to the P-Hämppi At the mouth of the tunnel, the opening will be 6 metres high, thus enabling the car park, taking into account the latest tramway plans as well as the bicycle path use of ventilation in the tunnel ceiling. along Pinninkatu Street, which will be presented in conjunction with the Tulli district development plan. By Pinninkatu Street, a new transverse pedestrian and cycling connection will be built across Itsenäisyydenkatu Street. To enable this, a bridge structure for pedestrians and cyclists will be built across the driving connection for the parking 3.2 Findings facility. The vertical clearance of the driving connection will be 3.2 metres. The driving connection for the P-Hämppi car park is feasible in accordance with the principles presented in the competition entry. The assumption is that only The most recent tramway plans (June 2015) for Itsenäisyydenkatu Street (including public transport, vehicle traffi c regarding the P-Hämppi car park, and necessary the tram stops) have been taken into account in the solutions presented in this maintenance & logistics services traffi c will be allowed from the Yliopistonkatu survey. The waiting area at the Attila tram stop (for the trams running to the Street junction to the west. The driving connection to the parking facility will be city centre, as presented in the plan) will become about half a metre narrower, placed below the current street level, on the western side of the junction. The remaining slightly under three metres wide. upper part of the ramp will be implemented as a shaft using supporting walls with the lower part running under the deck (Images 3.1 - 3.3).

Pinninkatu Street Itsenäisyydenkatu Street Pinninkatu Street Street area Street Street area Street Itsenäisyydenkatu Street area Street Itsenäisyydenkatu Itsenäisyydenkatu Street area Street Itsenäisyydenkatu 3,20 Image 3.1 Cross section of Itsenäisyydenkatu Street Driving connection to the P-Hämppi car park 6 (by Pinninkatu Street).

7 TAMPERE TRAVEL AND SERVICE CENTRE - RECONNECTING TAMPERE – SURVEY OF THE CONDITIONS FOR THE IMPLEMENTATION OF THE RECONNECTING TAMPERE PROPOSAL

Tammelankatu Street Kaivokatu Street Murtokatu Street

pedestrian 3,90 m separation lane 0,25 m cycling 2,25 m separation lane 0,50 m driving lane 3,50 m New tunnel to the P-Hämppi driving lane 3,50 m car park from the waiting area 3,50 m Yliopistonkatu/Itsenäisyydenkatu tramway 6,10 m Street junction pedestrian / waiting area 6,00 m supporting wall 0,50 m Elevated crosswalk

Driving connection in the shaft 150 191

Ratapihankatu Street 100 0 50 Itsenäisyydenkatu Street 2100 1900 2000

Pedestrian and bicycle bridge, vertical clearance 3.2 m tramway The current driving connection for the P-Tullintori car park will be removed Supporting wall and railing between Making the Attila the street and the tramway Bicycle parking . The current driving connection 30 spaces supporting wall narrower for the P-Hämppi car park Yliopistonkatu Street Yliopistonkatu ITSENÄISYYDENKATU STREET

Tullikamarinaukio Square

Pakkahuoneenaukio Square Pedestrian/bicycle bridge Image 3.2 Connection from Itsenäisyydenkatu Street to the P-Hämppi car park. Vertical clearance 3.2 m 3.2 clearance Vertical Driving connection to the P-Hämppi car park Image 3.3 Longitudinal section of Itsenäisyydenkatu Street by the driving connection for the P-Hämppi car park.

8 TAMPERE TRAVEL AND SERVICE CENTRE - RECONNECTING TAMPERE – SURVEY OF THE CONDITIONS FOR THE IMPLEMENTATION OF THE RECONNECTING TAMPERE

4. INTEGRATING THE COMPETITION PROPOSAL WITH THE TAMPERE CITY CENTRE TRAFFIC NETWORK PLAN

4.1 Description of the task 4.2 Findings The competition entry has presented some traffi c network solutions that deviate The studies on the performance of the traffi c network were carried out by using from the Tampere City Centre Traffi c Network Plan (TAKLI) in order to reduce the the Paramics simulation model for the Tampere city centre, updated by WSP barrier eff ect caused by the railway yard as much as possible and create a uniform, on 22 May 2015. The following changes had been made to the traffi c network pedestrian-oriented area in the city centre as well as in the districts of Tammela presented in TAKLI: and Tulli. The present survey has examined how the competition proposal can be • Eteläpuisto has been added on the basis of the Seelake draft and the drafts by the City connected to the networks that conform to TAKLI as well as the performance of of Tampere. the street network in the competition entry compared with the performance of • The junction by the railway station (Itsenäisyydenkatu Street - Rautatienkatu Street) has the street network that adheres to TAKLI. been modifi ed into a T-junction (Hämeenkatu Street is a public transport street). • The alignment of the tramway has been moved from Pyynikintori Square, via Paasikiventie The study on the motor traffi c network has described the traffi c arrangements Road, to the Lielahti district. (which conform to the competition proposal) in the Paramics model (which • The traffi c forecast has been updated in accordance with the latest infi ll development conforms to TAKLI). Amongst these traffi c arrangements are, for example, the plans for the city centre (the variance on the previous population and job forecast for shifting of the eastern edge of the city centre ring route from Rautatienkatu 2030 is a total of +17,800 residents and +5,000 jobs). It has been forecast that the Street and Ratapihankatu Street to Yliopistonkatu Street as well as the closing of largest changes in population numbers will take place in Kaakinmaa and Nalkala (a total Itsenäisyydenkatu Street to motor traffi c. In addition, the forecasted generation of of +4,000 residents), in Tammela (+2,900), Amuri (+1,700), and in Tulli (+1,600). traffi c created by the traffi c model was adjusted. The above-mentioned adjusted simulation model of the TAKLI network has now This survey has studied the impacts of the changes taking place in the traffi c become the TRAVEL AND SERVICE CENTRE traffi c model as it was modifi ed by network and land use on the performance of the traffi c network and traffi c Ramboll in the following way: volumes in the Tammela district, for example. The connections to the parking • The Näsinkallio multi-level junction was removed from the Rantaväylä tunnel (no decision facilities have been taken into account. has been made on implementing this multi-level junction but it would make city centre traffi c smoother if implemented). • Private vehicle traffi c was removed from the Itsenäisyydenkatu underpass. • A new connection running from Itsenäisyydenkatu Street (from the east) to the P-Hämppi car park (the P-Kunkku car park) was modelled. • The throughput of traffi c on Ratapihankatu Street was altered by lowering the speed limit. • The cross section of Rautatienkatu Street was made narrower (from a 2+2 lane street to a 1+1 lane street) by turning the outer lanes into public transport lanes.

As regards both the TAKLI traffi c model and the TRAVEL AND SERVICE CENTRE traffi c model, the volumes in the traffi c forecasts were reduced by 25%, in order to ﬁ t the traffi c demand in the city centre’s traffi c network. Without carrying out the 25% decrease in the traffi c forecasts, the entrance routes to the city (particularly

9 TAMPERE TRAVEL AND SERVICE CENTRE - RECONNECTING TAMPERE – SURVEY OF THE CONDITIONS FOR THE IMPLEMENTATION OF THE RECONNECTING TAMPERE PROPOSAL

from the direction of Helsinki and Hatanpää) were very badly congested and there Both traffi c networks contain the same land-use model, and traffi c volumes were was also congestion in the other hubs of the traffi c network. reduced by 25% in both traffi c models. It was on this basis that the diff erences between these two traffi c networks and their characteristics were studied. Even after the reduction of the traffi c volumes in the traffi c forecast, the traffi c network is overloaded, which is why the location and duration of traffi c jams vary The traffi c volumes in both networks are an average of three simulation runs. signiﬁ cantly between the diff erent simulation runs. The performance of the traffi c network is at its capacity and in both networks, the diff erence between the diff erent simulation runs may be several hundreds of The performance studies investigated whether or not there is any diff erence vehicles. between the traffi c arrangements that conform to TAKLI and those that conform to the Travel and Service Centre concept, in terms of the smooth ﬂ ow of traffi c. As The image on the right represents the diff erences between the traffi c volumes the TAKLI traffi c network is not able to carry the forecasted traffi c, demand was in the TRAVEL AND SERVICE CENTRE network and those in the TAKLI network reduced by 25%. In this case, the performance of the traffi c network was suffi cient (peak hour traffi c, vehicles/h). during most of the peak hour.

Image 4.1 Peak hour traffi c in the TAKLI traffi c network (vehicles/h). Image 4.2 Peak hour traffi c in the TRAVEL AND SERVICE CENTRE traffi c network (vehicles/h).

10 TAMPERE TRAVEL AND SERVICE CENTRE - RECONNECTING TAMPERE – SURVEY OF THE CONDITIONS FOR THE IMPLEMENTATION OF THE RECONNECTING TAMPERE

Due to a high load on the traffi c networks, the above-mentioned ﬁ ndings and their conclusions are indicative of the magnitude of the changes. Consequently, the change in the traffi c volumes on an individual street can only be taken as an indicator.

When testing the TRAVEL AND SERVICE CENTRE traffi c network, it was not detected that the volume or duration of traffi c jams would have increased compared with the TAKLI traffi c network. On the basis of the simulations, it is possible to draw the following preliminar conclusions: • when driving around the city centre, vehicles will not move onto Yliopistonkatu Street, so Ratapihankatu Street will retain its role as the route that vehicles take through the city centre. • In addition, the traffi c on Rautatienkatu Street will not move onto Yliopistonkatu Street to a signiﬁ cant extent. • Instead of an individual city centre street, the performance of the traffi c network depends more on the performance of the main junctions at the city centre entrance routes, which deﬁ nes the number of cars that can be accommodated in the city centre. The likelihood of creating a simulation model that is able to cover the entire city centre as well as carry out traffi c forecasts over decades and beyond is poor, as the volume of motor traffi c in the city depends on the supply provided for motor traffi c (i.e. the street connections and the number of lanes). If the capacity of the traffi c network is reduced or it is not increased in accordance with the demand, the street network will start to congest in this expanding city.

Vehicles form queues and keep stopping in the city centre during rush hours, which is why some of the drivers: Image 4.3 The diff erence between the traffi c volumes in the TRAVEL AND SERVICE CENTRE • change the schedule of their trip network and the TAKLI network. • start using public transport, or start walking or cycling • reduce the number of trips by combining them together The following issues can be seen in Image 4.3: • abandon the trip • traffi c volumes grow particularly on Tampereen valtatie Road (especially at Ratina) • traffi c volumes increase, to some extent, on Viinikankatu Street and on its extension (i.e. In this scenario, there is a balance in the city centre’s traffi c network. However, Kalevan puistokatu Street), on Yliopistonkatu Street and on its extension (i.e. Tammelan this balance cannot be precisely forecasted by using trip-generation-based puistokatu Street), on Lapintie Road, and on Hämeenpuisto Esplanade traffi c forecasts, or peak-hour simulation models that are based on a standard • traffi c volumes slightly decrease on Ratapihankatu Street, Satakunnankatu Street, and demand. The simulations of and comparisons between these two traffi c networks on Rautatienkatu Street (the TAKLI network and the TRAVEL AND SERVICE CENTRE network) indicate • otherwise, the changes in traffi c volumes are small that the performance of the TRAVEL AND SERVICE CENTRE network is on par with the TAKLI network and consequently, the traffi c network presented in the competition proposal is feasible. 11 TAMPERE TRAVEL AND SERVICE CENTRE - RECONNECTING TAMPERE – SURVEY OF THE CONDITIONS FOR THE IMPLEMENTATION OF THE RECONNECTING TAMPERE PROPOSAL

5. THE PEDESTRIAN & CYCLING NETWORK AND CONNECTIONS

5.1 Description of the task The changes to be made to motor traffi c as a result of the competition proposal The Itsenäisyydenkatu main route and its connectivity to the deck will signifi cantly aff ect the pedestrian and cycling networks. The study of these • It is proposed that the connection to the deck be implemented via a ramp located on the pedestrian and cycling networks has been connected to the on-going master plan southern side of Itsenäisyydenkatu Street (please see Chapter 6). work for the Kyttälä and Tulli districts. This way, the central connections traversing • A direct connection from the east onto the Rautatienkatu main route will run via the the railway tracks can be taken into account. In addition, the creation of pedestrian Itsenäisyydenkatu underpass, on the northern side of the street. and cycling connections that are accessible to all has been investigated. The Erkkilänkatu main route • Connection to the deck from the eastern side of Erkkilänkatu Bridge (the more precise 5.2 Findings location will be defi ned in further planning). Cycling routes presented in the Tulli plan • In addition, a possible connection to the deck from the western side of the bridge must The master plan for the Tulli district has presented a new southnorth cycling be specifi ed in further planning. connection along Pinninkatu Street, which is connected to the existing cycling routes and replaces the previously suggested main route connection (i.e. The Kalevankatu/Vuolteenkatu main route Yliopistonkatu Street). This new cycling connection will also improve access to • Connection from the railway bridge, the location will be specifi ed in conjunction with the deck. further planning of the deck project. • Connection via the Kanslerinrinne ramp (the Arena maintenance & logistics services In addition, the master plan for the Tulli district also presents a new cycling connection). connection beneath the railway tracks (as an extension of Åkerlundinkatu Street). • Connection from Sorinkatu Street. It is proposed that it be implemented as a spiral ramp in front of the railway sheds. The exit on the western side of the railway tracks has not been precisely defi ned. Tullikatu Street: More detailed implementation opportunities and the costs of this connection can • Ramp connection from the western end of Tullikatu Street. be examined in further planning, during which the planning of the Central Park will • A possible ramp for walking a bicycle or another level-changing solution (e.g. a lift) become more detailed. Alternatively, the cycling connection beneath the railway on the western side of the deck (in front of the railway station). The location will be yard (presented in the Tulli plans) is also feasible via the deck (please see Chapter specifi ed in further planning. 4). • Bicycle parking will be located on the deck, which will particularly serve those cyclists approaching the city centre from the east. Cycling connections to the deck • Bicycle parking space in front of the railway station will be provided for cyclists The Rongankatu regional main route and its connectivity to the deck approaching from the west • It is proposed that the cycling connection to the deck be implemented from the eastern side of the deck, where the altitude diff erence between ground level and the deck is Åkerlundinkatu Street: smaller (please see Chapter 6). • Ramp connection from the east to the deck (please see Chapter 6). From the west, • The construction of a bicycle ramp (on the western side of the deck) running to the possibly an indirect ramp connection (will be specifi ed in further planning). railway yard and to the deck will be investigated in further planning. • Bicycle parking will be located close to the platform connections. • Bicycle parking will be located on the deck as well as at ground level (on the western • From the western side of the deck, a connection to the Rautatienkatu main route, side of the deck). Kalevantie Road, and Suvantokatu Street (this connection was presented in the master plan for the Kyttälä district).

12 TAMPERE TRAVEL AND SERVICE CENTRE - RECONNECTING TAMPERE – SURVEY OF THE CONDITIONS FOR THE IMPLEMENTATION OF THE RECONNECTING TAMPERE

Yliopistonkatu Street Tammelan puistokatu Street t e e r t S

Market place u t a k n a ih p a t a R

Kalevantie Road Kalevantie

Vellamonkatu Street Åkerlundinkatu

Kullervonkatu Street Kullervonkatu Itsenäisyydenkatu Street Itsenäisyydenkatu

P P P P

Regional main route Other main route Other signiﬁcant cycling connection The connection beneath the railway

tracks presented in the Tulli district plan Hämeenkatu Street Hämeenkatu Cycling connection to the deck P Area with bicycle parking A possible ramp for walking a bicycle or other level-changing solution

Image 5.1 The proposed cycling network and connections to the deck.

13 TAMPERE TRAVEL AND SERVICE CENTRE - RECONNECTING TAMPERE – SURVEY OF THE CONDITIONS FOR THE IMPLEMENTATION OF THE RECONNECTING TAMPERE PROPOSAL

6. STUDY OF THE DRIVING RAMPS FROM A CITYSCAPE PERSPECTIVE

6.1 Description of the task The aim is to deﬁ ne the connections presented in the competition entry (walking, cycling, and maintenance & logistics services traffi c), particularly on the eastern edge of the deck, where the competition entry has proposed the implementation of ramps. In addition to the gradients and the elevations, this survey also studies the impact of the driving ramps and the connecting points on the cityscape as well as the presentations on turning them into high-quality urban spaces that link the diff erent parts of the city to each other.

6.2 Cityscape studies Åkerlundinkatu Street Access to the deck will be achieved by building a long, gently sloping bicycle and Image 6.2 A direct ramp from Åkerlundinkatu Street to the deck, looking from the east pedestrian ramp. This extension of the existing city structure will guide people towards the city centre. from Åkerlundinkatu Street, across the railway tracks, to Suvantokatu Street.

Image 6.1 A direct ramp from Åkerlundinkatu Street to the deck. Image 6.3 A ramp (via a building) from Åkerlundinkatu Street to the deck.

Image 6.4 A ramp (via a building) from Åkerlundinkatu Street to the deck, looking from the east towards the city centre.

Tullikatu Street Tullikatu Street, which is an urban pedestrian route, is lined by a series of buildings that will house both commercial activities and apartments. The street will continue to the deck - the slanting slope will provide a pleasant pedestrian route. Cycling will also be allowed on this route. Image 6.6 From Tullikatu Street to the deck.

Image 6.5 The Tullikatu Street connection to the deck. Image 6.7 From the deck to Tullikatu Street. TAMPERE TRAVEL AND SERVICE CENTRE - RECONNECTING TAMPERE – SURVEY OF THE CONDITIONS FOR THE IMPLEMENTATION OF THE RECONNECTING TAMPERE PROPOSAL

Itsenäisyydenkatu Street Itsenäisyydenkatu Street will be the most important traffi c route that runs beneath the deck and connects the eastern and western sides of the city centre to each other. A smooth and open ramp will enable easy pedestrian access from the street to the deck.

Image 6.9 IFrom Itsenäisyydenkatu Street to the Image 6.10 From Itsenäisyydenkatu Street to deck.

Image 6.8 Connection from Itsenäisyydenkatu Street to the deck.

Kuva 6.10 Itsenäisyydenkadulta Tullille

16 TAMPERE TRAVEL AND SERVICE CENTRE - RECONNECTING TAMPERE – SURVEY OF THE CONDITIONS FOR THE IMPLEMENTATION OF THE RECONNECTING TAMPERE

Eastern side of the Rongankatu underpass (Vellamonkatu Street) There will be access to the deck and to the public park via a spacious ramp visible from Vellamonkatu Street. The ramp will also provide a connection to the current Rongankatu underpass for pedestrians and cyclists.

It is unlikely that the moving of VR’s freight building, as proposed in the competition entry, will be implemented. New solutions for this area will be considered in further planning.

Image 6.12 Connection using a less than 10% gradient.

Image 6.11 Connection from Vellamonkatu Street to the deck. Image 6.13 Connection using a 14% gradient. ent

17 TAMPERE TRAVEL AND SERVICE CENTRE - RECONNECTING TAMPERE – SURVEY OF THE CONDITIONS FOR THE IMPLEMENTATION OF THE RECONNECTING TAMPERE PROPOSAL

Connectivity of the Travel and Service Centre and the eastern end of who now think that the street only serves the needs of motor traffi c. The cycling Hämeenkatu Street route running along the street will change its role from the city centre’s main The competition entry proposes the construction of a new urban park connecting conveyor of motor traffi c to a city centre street that serves all modes of travel. the eastern and western parts of the city centre. Currently, the area concerned is a parking area for the railway station, and Rautatienkatu Street separates the As regards the pedestrian connection running to the end of Hämeenkatu Street, diff erent areas from each other. the urban park in front of the Travel and Service Centre can be developed into a route along which it is possible to locate services and functions that change Researchers have discovered that the attractiveness of walking is enhanced according to the season. There could, for example, be benches and a kiosk selling by the factors presented in the adjacent diagram on increasing the share of ice cream and coff ee in summer. An unbroken arcade will line the station side of short–distance walking (Kävelyosuuden lisääminen lyhyillä matkoilla, Ministry of the park, where various public and private functions will make the park vibrant Transport and Communications, Oulu, in Finnish). throughout the year. The arcade and the park will form a ﬁ ne urban space, which will be a pleasant route to travel through as well as a recreational space in which In the future, Rautatienkatu Street will continue to create a barrier eff ect with citizens can spend their leisure time. In winter, an ice skating rink and a place for regard to the connectivity of the Travel and Service Centre and Hämeenkatu ice sculptures can be created in the new park. In addition to the green areas and Street, despite the fact that traffi c volumes on the street will somewhat decrease. the trees, other important factors are decent and pleasant lighting, the separation A new cycling route will be located along Rautatienkatu Street, by the side of the of walking and cycling spaces, and a silent surface along which the pulling of Travel and Service Centre, in a south-north direction. This will help street users luggage does not create a loud noise.

Factors increasing interest in walking

Separate route for pedestrians and cyclists Good weather Maintaining one’s physical condition Pleasantness of the route Feeling safe on the route Lighting on the route The walking route has been paved The surface of the walking route is unbroken Cleanliness (removal of dust and sand) Snow ploughing Separate pedestrian and bicycle paths Anti-skid treatment Pedestrian and bicycle underpasses Possibility to sit down for a while Signposts for pedestrians and cyclists No elevation differences along the route

18 TAMPERE TRAVEL AND SERVICE CENTRE - RECONNECTING TAMPERE – SURVEY OF THE CONDITIONS FOR THE IMPLEMENTATION OF THE RECONNECTING TAMPERE

7. FEASIBILITY OF THE DECK STRUCTURE

7.1 Description of the task It is important for the functionality and architecture of the travel centre that a area has been made on the basis of the design drawings. It has been determined study of the modifi ability of the structures in the traffi c tunnel be carried out that the northern border of the planning area is formed by the deck structure from the perspective of the feasibility of construction and the functionality of the that is to be implemented in order to reach the number of gross fl oor square travel centre. The new traffi c tunnel on Itsenäisyydenkatu Street is regarded as a metres presented in the competition entry. The possible extension of the deck ”transit” terminal for the Travel and Service Centre where all modes of travel meet. structure to the vicinity of Erkkilänkatu Bridge will be carried out separately, and it is excluded from this study. The most visible part of the competition entry is the extensive construction on top of the railway area. Construction requires that a deck structure be implemented in This survey has carried out preliminary planning regarding the foundation of (and the area. It has been proposed that both open and roofed spaces and a signifi cant the foundation engineering structures for) the buildings to be implemented in number of multi-storey buildings be constructed on top of the deck structure. the areas that have bridge structures. The particular aim was to ascertain the conditions for the feasibility of construction when fi tting the new structures to The competition entry also proposes signifi cant functional improvements that the existing ones. Amongst these structures are the Asematunneli underpass, require structural changes to be made to the existing structures. Due to the the travel centre tunnel, and the structures that were implemented in the tunnel connections from the tram stop that has been proposed beneath the bridge of the extension carried out at the end of the 1980s. In addition, this survey has also Itsenäisyydenkatu underpass, signifi cant changes must be made to the structures taken into account those structures designed for the Tampere deck project that of the current Asematunneli underpass. The aim of this survey is to ensure the are linked (to the extent to which material is available) with the Travel and Service feasibility of the structural engineering solutions in the plan with respect to the Centre. existing structures. An inventory of the bridge structures existing in the planning

AREA WHERE STRUCTURES PLATFORM AT THE RAILWAY YARD’S 1ST ISLAND PLATFORM 2ND ISLAND PLATFORM 3RD ISLAND PLATFORM ARE ALLOWED (PILLARS, WESTERN EDGE FOUNDATIONS) AREA WHERE STRUCTURES AREA WHERE STRUCTURES AREA WHERE STRUCTURES ARE ALLOWED (PILLARS, ARE ALLOWED (PILLARS, ARE ALLOWED (PILLARS, FOUNDATIONS) FOUNDATIONS) FOUNDATIONS)

,& ,& ! ,& ,& -<96.

.6. .6. .6. .6.

Image 7.1 The proposed location of support structures in the planning area (the Finnish Transport Agency).

19 TAMPERE TRAVEL AND SERVICE CENTRE - RECONNECTING TAMPERE – SURVEY OF THE CONDITIONS FOR THE IMPLEMENTATION OF THE RECONNECTING TAMPERE PROPOSAL

7.2 Planning materials used Asematunneli underpass / Itsenäisyydenkatu Street underpass The data used in assessing the Asematunneli underpass include the original Initial data of the competition entry materials from around the 1930s, and sketches for modiﬁ cations that were The competition material included instructions on the placement of structures completed in 1988. The assessment covers only the tracks and the platforms. The and on the clearance requirements for the railway tracks. These requirements structure beneath the station building is expected to remain unchanged. were the initial data for the survey. The extension of Ratapihankatu Street will be located where the modiﬁ cations were made to the underpass in 1988.

Passenger traffi c tunnel The passenger traffi c tunnel is an extensive structure that will limit the location of other structures in the area. The eastern end of the tunnel is straightforward, since it is simply a circular structure with two entrances. Access points can be made to this structure from the platform areas. The tunnel is less homogeneous at the western end, where it incorporates various structures. These structures are linked to the old station building.

Travel centre tunnel The travel centre tunnel with its level-changing equipment was commenced in 2008, and the related initial data are complete.

7.3 Assessments and the ﬁ ndings Assessment of the deck structure in the track area For the deck structure, various options for the location of support structures were assessed. The central structural aim was to locate the support structures parallel to the tracks. Based on the competition criteria, there are ﬁ ve possible lines along which the support structures can be placed. All of these are about 17 metres apart.

In light of the available options, the decision was made to assess four alternative methods to determine the structural elevation above the railway tracks. • In Option 1, all support line options are used, i.e. the bearing distance of the deck is 17m+17m+17m+17m. • In Option 2, the two outermost and the middle support line options are used, i.e. the bearing distance of the deck is 34m+34m. • In Option 3, only the two outermost support line options are used, i.e. the bearing distance of the deck is 68 metres. Image 7.2 The structure gauge indicates the minimum clearance on both sides of the tracks.

20 TAMPERE TRAVEL AND SERVICE CENTRE - RECONNECTING TAMPERE – SURVEY OF THE CONDITIONS FOR THE IMPLEMENTATION OF THE RECONNECTING TAMPERE

• Option 4 was also assessed, in which all except the middle support line options is used. Based on the initial data used, the loading of the support lines will be signifi cant. The bearing distance would therefore be 17m+34m+17m. Because the buildings to be constructed on the deck will further increase the load, a 34-metre bearing distance is not feasible in areas that will contain structures or To assess the structure, preliminary calculations were done for each option in functions that cause signifi cant loading. order to verify structural elevation. The loading used was the unladen weight of the structure, combined with an estimated surface load of 25kN/m2. Of this, Deck level sketches surface structures and fi lling account for about 5kN/m2. The remaining 20kN/m2 Option 2A is eff ective loading, and is large enough to allow deck access to all vehicle types. The location of support structures of buildings that are planned for the deck near + 103,05 these support lines will reduce the load exerted on the deck by these secondary support structures.

For the options under consideration, the structural elevation above the tracks (assuming a consistent deck elevation) varies between L/15 and L/12, depending on the mutual relations between the adjacent bearing distances. The ﬁ rst assessment of the structural options was implemented based on this starting OPTION 2

+ 103.05 m point, and the results of the assessment are as follows: 1.00 Minimum clearance to structure: 6750 mm ATU = 6750 mm Structure gauge for trains (ATU): 6750 mm Deck Thickness: 1000 mm

Deck elevation: + 103.05 m

6.75 Bearing distance Structural thickness (m) + 95.9m + 95.3m Option1 17+17+17+17 1,0 Option2 34+34 2,0 Option3 68 4,0

Option4 17+34+17 1,8 Image 7.3 The selected deck structure when the deck thickness is consistent.

Option 3, which consists of a 68-metre long unsupported structure above the railway yard, was rejected due to the excessive structural thickness that this would require.

A number of calculations were next made to assess the remaining three options, and the structural elevation of each option was checked. The structural elevation of Option 1 is signiﬁ cantly lower than that of the other two remaining options, and this allows for easier implementation of the longitudinal gradients required by elevation diff erences along pedestrian and cycling routes. Option 1 was therefore deemed to be preferable to options 2 and 4, and so the support line bearing distance of 17m+17m+17m+17m will be used as the basic solution.

21 TAMPERE TRAVEL AND SERVICE CENTRE - RECONNECTING TAMPERE – SURVEY OF THE CONDITIONS FOR THE IMPLEMENTATION OF THE RECONNECTING TAMPERE PROPOSAL

Sloping the deck The foundation For the deck structure, a greater structural thickness can be used in the support Due to the heavy loading and long bearing distances, the foundation of the area parallel to the tracks than in the area above the tracks, because the clearance structure is also a limiting factor. The suggested foundation method is to use requirement of the structure gauge applies only to the tracks. When the sloping large-diameter bored piles of steel, which will be drilled into the rock. Due to the is extended to the edge of the area covered by the structure gauge requirement, very large loading, the bored piles must be grouped. For example, a group of four a structural thickness of 0.8 metres can be achieved above the railway tracks. D800 bore piles allows for a bearing distance of between 30m and 40m. A sloped structure can also be used in the beam that is parallel to the railway tracks, because in the platform area a clearance that is signiﬁ cantly lower than Asematunneli underpass and the passenger traffi c tunnel that required by the structure gauge can most likely be used.

Support structures parallel to the tracks When the support structures parallel to the railway tracks are located in the platform area, the clearance requirement below them is 3 metres. For this reason, the maximum structural elevation of the support beams is 4 metres, which depending on the loading facilitates a bearing distance of between 30m and 45m. Provided the selected support structure option is used, this feature of the competition entry can also be implemented.

Ilman kevyitä väliseiniä Kansilaatat ja ratarakenteet piilotettu Deck level sketches Image 7.5 The Asematunneli underpass and passenger traffi c tunnel. Option 2B - viistetty kansirakenne The Asematunneli underpass and the passenger traffi c tunnel are separate + 102,85 structures that have separate abutment structures. The Asematunneli underpass was built in the 1930s. The abutments are massive concrete structures containing fi ller rocks, with relatively little reinforcement. Minor amendments can be made to the existing abutments, but their fi nal design requires closer inspection of the structures. With these reservations in mind, the maximum width of the new access points on the abutments that can be implemented in accordance with the design proposal is fi ve metres. The access points must be between the tracks in OPTION 2b the current platform area. + 102.85 m

0.80 Minimum clearance to structure: 6750 mm ATU = 6750 mm Structure gauge for trains (ATU): 6750 mm Deck Thickness: 800 mm

Deck elevation: + 102.85 m 6.75 One pillar can be removed from the support structure between the driving lanes

+ 95.9m + 95.3m of the Asematunneli underpass, thereby forming a 3.4 metre wide access route. The access route has to be on the platform area, and must be reinforced.

Image 7.4 The chosen sloped deck structure

22 TAMPERE TRAVEL AND SERVICE CENTRE - RECONNECTING TAMPERE – SURVEY OF THE CONDITIONS FOR THE IMPLEMENTATION OF THE RECONNECTING TAMPERE

The travel centre tunnel The implementation of the extensive openings proposed in the competition entry The total width of the tunnel at the platform area covers the lift wells, tunnel, and requires that the old Asematunneli underpass be reconstructed, and that the escalators, and therefore, unless supports are placed on top of the tunnel, the northern abutment of the passenger traffi c tunnel be signiﬁ cantly altered. bearing distance between the support structures parallel to the tracks will be very long. The structure gauge for trains does not apply within the platform area, and therefore the structural elevation allows for the travel centre tunnel to be spanned without intermediate support.

Puoliksi läpinäkyvät rakenteet Matkakeskustunnelin kansilaatta ja maarakenteet piilotettuina Image 7.6 A level drawing of the Asematunneli underpass and passenger traffi c tunnel, layout drawing, tracks, and level-changing equipment. Figure 7.7 The travel centre tunnel viewed from the direction of the city centre in the west.

23 TAMPERE TRAVEL AND SERVICE CENTRE - RECONNECTING TAMPERE – SURVEY OF THE CONDITIONS FOR THE IMPLEMENTATION OF THE RECONNECTING TAMPERE PROPOSAL

8. SAFETY REQUIREMENTS AND RISK MANAGEMENT

8.1 Description of the task In defi ning the safety requirements, we have taken into account (with regard to Instructions for roads and railways: the building of the deck) the safety of the railway system as required by the - Maaväylien päällerakentaminen (“construction over roads and railways”), instructions by Finnish Transport Agency. We have also considered the construction of the bridge the Finnish Transport Agency, 20 August 2015, draft, in Finnish. over the Itsenäisyydenkatu underpass and the impacts of the operations to be - Instructions for use: Infrahankkeiden turvallisuusriskien tunnistusmenetelmä (“method implemented on the deck. The deck structure that is to be implemented may not for the identifi cation of safety risks in infrastructure projects”), (the Finnish Transport pose any risks to the functioning of the railway (in accordance with the Finnish Agency 3067/090/2012), in Finnish. Transport Agency’s requirements) or to personal and traffi c safety in the city (in - Ohje riskienhallinnan menetelmistä (“instructions for risk management methods”), accordance with the city’s requirements). (Finnish Transport Agency 4837/065/2011), in Finnish. - Turvallisuusselvityksen laadinta (“drawing up a safety report”), (the Finnish Transport In this survey, a preliminary identifi cation of hazards regarding the railway system Agency 4787/065/2011), in Finnish. and traffi c risks has been made (this identifi cation is part of the risk assessment - Turvallisuusasiakirjan laadinta (“drawing up a safety document”), (the Finnish Transport required by the Finnish Transport Agency). This survey does not include the risk Agency 4247/070/2014), in Finnish. The instructions concern the drawing up of an assessment in its entirety. From the perspective of residents, travellers, and the occupational safety document for the construction phase. urban environment, particular attention has been paid to the safety of personal, - Turvallisuusääntöjen, menettelyohjeiden ja turvallisuusohjeiden laadinta (“drawing up traffi c, and urban environments. It has been decided that the ensuring of the safety regulations, procedural guidelines, and safety instructions”), (the Finnish Transport operating conditions and the requirements of the rescue authorities are to be Agency 4248/070/2014), in Finnish. taken into account in further planning. - Ohje palveluntuottajan turvallisuussuunnitelman laatimisesta ja sisällöstä, (“instructions for the drawing up and contents of a safety plan by a service provider”), (the Finnish 8.2 Findings Transport Agency 4254/065/2011), in Finnish.

The planning of construction on top of structures and the corresponding risk Instructions for roads only (applicable): management activities conform to the EU directives on tunnels, the regulations, - Liikenneviraston tietunneliohje (luonnos lausunnolla elokuussa 2015, valmistuu and to risk management and safety instructions of the Finnish Transport Agency, alkuvuodesta 2016) unless otherwise agreed (the Finnish Transport Agency’s instructions for - Tietunnelin hallinnointi ja turvallisuutta koskevat määräykset ja ohjeet, Liikenneviraston construction over roads and railways, Maaväylien päällerakentaminen, 20 August ohjeita 14/2014 2015, draft, p. 23, in Finnish). The key instructions have been presented in the - Vaarallisten aineiden kuljetukset tietunnelissa, Riskianalyysit ja kuljetusrajoitukset, following documents. Tiehallinto, Suunnitteluvaiheen ohjaus, 2008 - Tietunnelien turvallisuusasiakirjojen laadinta, Liikenneviraston ohjeita xx/2015, luonnos - Tietunnelien vakavien vaaratilanteiden ja onnettomuuksien raportointi, Liikenneviraston ohjeita 17/2015.

Instructions for railways only: - RATO 18 (“railway track technical instructions 18”, in Finnish). - Riskienhallinta radan suunnittelussa, (“risk management in railway planning”), instructions by the Finnish Transport Agency 10/2010, in Finnish.

24 TAMPERE TRAVEL AND SERVICE CENTRE - RECONNECTING TAMPERE – SURVEY OF THE CONDITIONS FOR THE IMPLEMENTATION OF THE RECONNECTING TAMPERE

Other instructions: forms the basis of the road tunnel instructions produced by the Finnish Transport - LO 24/2014 Eurokoodien soveltamisohje, Siltojen kuormat ja suunnitteluperusteet NCCI1. Agency (Liikenneviraston tietunneliohje, in Finnish, the draft was at comment stage in August 2015 and will be completed in early 2016). The City of Helsinki Interviews with experts and interesed parties intends to complete the project in the early part of 2016 and their aim is to create In conjunction with the survey work, experts and representatives of various a city model for the application of the requirements that could eventually be interested parties were interviewed in order to fi nd out about the conditions for adopted (as such) by other cities. the implementation of the project. The requirements set for fi re proofi ng must be taken into account in planning. We interviewed Auri Halinen, Senior Inspector at Trafi , the Finnish Transport Safety For road tunnels, the Table on selecting the scope of fi re and explosion design Agency. According to Halinen’s view, the deck structure that has been founded on in Appendix 3 of the structural engineering instructions for road tunnels by the pillars on top of the railway tracks will not become a railway tunnel. Finnish Transport Agency (Tietunnelin rakennetekniset ohjeet, instructions by the Finnish Transport Agency 14/2015, in Finnish) defi nes requirement HCP180 Marko Järvinen, Regional Manager, Executive Fire Master of the Helsinki City for fi re design (concerning construction on top of structures) for this kind of Rescue Department, told us that they have a team that deals (from the Rescue structure. The Finnish Transport Agency’s project-specifi c design criteria have Services’ national perspective) with the requirements to be set for tunnel structures. often set stricter requirements (i.e. HCP240) for road tunnel structures and for The national Rescue Services may set requirements for traffi c management and other structures relating to construction over roads and railways. According to technical solutions (regarding fi re and rescue activities) for road traffi c tunnels. Timo O. Salmi, Head of Department, Fire Safety Engineering, Ramboll, it will not The requirements set by the Rescue Services must be taken into account in be problematic (as regards the railway tracks and the road) even though a more further planning. Finding out about and assessing these requirements will require stringent fi re proofi ng requirement would need to be met, as a suffi cient level a discussion of the plans with the rescue authorities. of fi re proofi ng can be achieved by thickening the fi re retardant layer by a few centimetres, at a maximum. According to Marketta Udelius, Head of the Tampere Road Traffi c Management Centre, the bridge over the Itsenäisyydenkatu underpass will at least require Preliminary risk and adverse factors in planning light telematics solutions (cameras, automation), as placing the tram stops in the During this survey, three workshops were held with the planners, in which underpass and the open connections to the station will increase pedestrian traffi c signifi cant risk and adverse factors caused by the deck structure for railway traffi c volumes from current numbers. With the help of telematics, it will be possible to and for the city’s street network were discussed. close the underpass to traffi c and ensure the access of the rescue department to the underpass in the event of an accident. During planning, the project may be prolonged and its implementation may be hindered, if the central actors do not have a shared view or the forming of a Marko Mäenpää, Traffi c Planning Manager of the City Planning Department for shared view is delayed. the City of Helsinki, told us that the City of Helsinki has started a project that determines the service level of the traffi c management activities in street tunnels The implementation of the project is aff ected by the decision on the construction (Katutunneleiden liikenteenhallinnan palvelutason määritys, in Finnish), in which of the tramway in Tampere. In the event of a negative decision, the plans must be they set requirements for the road tunnels that are located in street areas. This updated (either partly or completely), which will incur costs and take time. project will set the requirements that have been laid out by PIARC, which also

25 TAMPERE TRAVEL AND SERVICE CENTRE - RECONNECTING TAMPERE – SURVEY OF THE CONDITIONS FOR THE IMPLEMENTATION OF THE RECONNECTING TAMPERE PROPOSAL

There are no clear design instructions for this kind of a project. The instructions for the design of the deck structures (as regards construction on top of the railway construction over roads and railways (Maaväylien päällerakentaminen, in Finnish) tracks) is that the construction of the deck does not restrict the transport of is in the draft phase (draft 20 August 2015). The instructions set by the Finnish dangerous goods (the Finnish Transport Agency’s instructions for construction Transport Agency do not, to a suffi cient degree, take a stand on the requirements over roads and railways, Maaväylien päällerakentaminen, draft, 20 August 2015, p. for impact loads, fi re resistance, and the minimum distances as regards the pillar 24, in Finnish). and wall structures of the deck. The impact loads to be taken into account in the design of the pillar structures are defi ned in the following instructions: LO 24/2014 The planning must also take into account the durability of the structures, which Eurokoodien soveltamisohje, Siltojen kuormat ja suunnitteluperusteet – NCCI are the travel centre tunnel, the passenger traffi c tunnel, the old station, and the 1 (“application instructions for Eurocodes, the loads on and design criteria for railway bridge across Itsenäisyydenkatu Street. The space required by municipal bridges – NCCI 1”, Chapter F.4 Törmäyskuormat (“impact loads”), instructions by engineering and building service technology for the deck must also be taken into the Finnish Transport Agency 24/2014, in Finnish). At the very least, these impact account in planning. It was also stated that the construction and maintenance loads (F.4) must be taken into account. It is possible that these requirements will of municipal engineering is diffi cult to implement beneath the deck. There is a change in the construction phase. Confusion around the design criteria and the risk that working and occupational safety conditions will be less robust during design requirements may lead to a situation in which plans are made on the basis construction and during maintenance activities in the operation phase. of insuffi cient design criteria. This may pose a risk to the safety of the railway system and to the safety of the trains as well as prolong the planning schedule. Preliminary risk and adverse factors in construction and in the operation phase Some risk and adverse factors in construction and in the operation phase were If the same requirements are to be set for the deck structure as for the railway raised by participants in the workshop. These factors can, to a very large extent, be tunnels, it will mean conforming to SRT TSI. In this case, these specifi cations will managed by carrying out more precise planning. These risks have been recorded set safety requirements for, by way of example, emergency lighting, access to a in a Table (Appendix 1). safe area, conditions for moving from the safe area to ground level, and distances to emergency exits. Summary The condition for implementing the project is that it conforms to EU directives It is possible that in the design criteria for this site, more robust requirements (in and regulations as well as to the Finnish Transport Agency’s risk management and terms of collision, explosion, and fi re safety) will be set for the deck structure than safety instructions as agreed by the concerned parties. for normal bridge structures, and this will aff ect the design solutions. Construction on top of structures must take into account collision, explosion, and fi re safety From Trafi ’s perspective, a deck structure that has been founded on pillars on top risks for the entire site and for the route running beneath it. An accident may of railway tracks is not a railway tunnel. take place beneath the deck, causing a risk of damage or the collapse of the section that has been built on top of the route. A damaged building (due to fi re, Nevertheless, if the same requirements are set for the deck structure as for railway for example) on the deck may cause abnormal loads on the structure beneath it. tunnels, it means conforming to SRT TSI (including the safety requirements) as well This may lead to damage and to an increased risk of accidents on the route (the as to the requirements set out by RATO 18 (“railway track technical instructions Finnish Transport Agency’s instructions for construction over roads and railways, 18”, in Finnish). In addition, the requirements set by the fi re and rescue authorities Maaväylien päällerakentaminen, draft, 20 August 2015, p. 23, in Finnish). must be taken into account.

The transport of dangerous goods and oversized transport create requirements In the next work phase, the assessment of risks must be continued and extended for planning. Their routes and their alternative routes in abnormal situations must so that clients, the authorities, and the various interested parties participate in risk be taken into account. The Finnish Transport Agency’s basic requirement for assessment.

TAMPERE TRAVEL AND SERVICE CENTRE Survey of the conditions for the implementation of the Reconnecting Tampere proposal