Troubles galore for the extension of Pentagon

SiÅs has been working on a plan to condense and renew the oldest parts of Pentagon student accommodation. Because of a new requirement from the municipality politicians, the plan now faces an uncertain future.

Journalist: Trygve Bø Kongsbakk
Translator: Eva Weston Szemes
Photographer: Nicolai Terland

The proposed zoning plan for the northern part of Pentagon was treated by the municipal council in December 2024. The politicians decided to add a new sequencing requirement to the proposed plan. The requirement is that an underpass for pedestrians and cyclists is to be built under Meierikrysset. If it passes the vote to become an official part of the plan, this has to be fulfilled before the new student accommodation can be used. The proposal has been discussed in a limited hearing to get feedback. It has been met with resistance. In their statement, SiÅs has made it clear that the requirement might mean that the Pentagon project must be scrapped.

Nothing new

The question regarding an underpass is nothing new. Last time it was discussed in combination with an expansion of the zoning plan for Campus Ås in 2014. Multiple alternatives for an underpass were discussed, but the conclusion was that an underpass was not an acceptable solution. There were multiple reasons for this, including that it would interfere with the protection of the soil and the preservation of the park areas. Because of the gentle terrain in the area, the negatives of the need for a long and curvy downward entrance by Herumveien. This is necessary to get an incline that meets the accessibility standards. The sharp turns were deemed suboptimal because they would increase the risk of accidents, reduce accessibility and increase the level of conflict between the bike riders and pedestrians. The danger of increased, uncontrolled crossing of the county road, and the consequences for the traffic outside of rush hour were also pointed out.

Today’s intersection solution ensures good accessibility for pedestrians and cyclists, because the cars are obliged to give way at the zebra crossings. Despite this, the proposal was made to ensure “smoother traffic for pedestrians and cyclists”. This wording was removed when the proposal was discussed. Kjetil Barfelt from Ås Frp tells Tuntréet openly that the driven traffic is the reason for the new requirement. He also points out that the bus suffers when the flow of traffic is not smooth. As Tuntréet has written before (TT09/2022), the vast majority of vehicles is cars with driver and no additional passengers. This contributes massively to the slow, space consuming traffic.

In their statement, the county says that an underpass is not the right solution to the problem. They say they will start a planning project to improve the bus situation in the intersection, but Barfelt makes it clear that he doesn’t believe they can come up with a solution that is doable.

Who is paying?

The sequencing requirement does not specify who will have to pay for the potential underpass under the road. If it is passed, a large chunk of the bill will likely be passed to SiÅs. Managing director of SiÅs, Pål Magnus Løken, makes it clear that such an extra expense will ruin the plans for a new and improved Pentagon. He points out that they will lose the important funding from the government if the price is too high. The subsidies work in a way that the building costs are kept low, so that the rent can stay (relatively) low. Because of the amount of work involved in building an underpass, the extra expenses will be relatively high. Løken says that even with humble student accommodation, there is no room in the budget for an underpass.

Barfelt from Frp says that the question about Meierikrysset has been a topic for more than 15 years. In spite of this, the politicians found no reason to add a similar requirement to the building projects in Vollskogen, even though this will contribute greatly to the traffic in the intersection. Barfelt admits that in retrospect, they should have added a requirement for Vollskogen as well. Because this was not done, the students now risk having to foot the bill all on their own. That is certainly no comfort in the view to Vollskogen.

Probably not possible to build an underpass

If an underpass is to be built, a new zoning plan will have to be made. Because of all the protected areas such a zoning plan would impact, it would certainly cause disagreements with different public administrations. If a solution is not found, the municipality needs the department to ignore these. They also need an exemption from The Directorate for Cultural Heritage. The county, responsible for the county road, say in their statement that “The county does not wish to carry out projects that will come into conflict with protected areas”. The politicians’ wish for an underpass seems difficult to fulfil, and this requirement might end up making the new student housing practically illegal to use.

The way forward is unclear

What will the municipality do if it is not possible to build an underpass? Barfelt says the politicians have wanted to emphasize that this is a serious problem, and they want to get SiÅs to deal with it. He says it is easy to make a regulation change to the sequencing requirement if you have another sensible solution than an underpass. For Barfelt, the only sensible solution seems to be a solution that reduces the traffic jam during rush hour. Such a solution that also takes care of the protected areas and traffic safety, has not been found yet. Barfelt tells Tuntréet that the politicians maybe should not have given up the battle concerning the underpass in the earlier planning processes. If you are hoping for new student accommodation and a safe way to university, you might have to put your trust in the municipality politicians, and that they will back down on their requirements once again. The result remains to be seen. The answer will be here in April at the earliest.