A political battle is brewing in Trondheim over controversial plans to restructure downtown traffic. The city's ruling coalition wants to divide the city center into three separate driving zones, preventing motorists from crossing between sectors during single trips. The proposal aims to eliminate through traffic in central Trondheim.
Arild BendsÄs Svendsli of the Progress Party voices strong opposition to the plan. He says they experience enormous resistance from the public and local businesses. Over 80 official consultation responses have been submitted regarding the traffic proposal, with many coming from concerned business owners who fear the changes could force downtown establishments to close.
This week, the debate intensified when former Conservative Party leader Yngve Brox compared the zoning plan to the Berlin Wall. The comparison highlights the deep divisions the proposal has created in Norway's third-largest city.
The Progress Party is now pushing for a public referendum to decide the traffic plan's fate. Group leader Elin Marie Andreassen has formally proposed that the city council hold a vote, with the suggestion likely to be discussed in December. The party recommends timing the referendum with the 2027 local elections to reduce costs.
Svendsli defends the call for a public vote, noting that many residents didn't anticipate supporting the Conservative Party in the 2023 local elections would mean endorsing such radical traffic changes. He believes the plan's impact warrants direct democratic input from Trondheim's citizens.
Not all political parties support the referendum idea. JÞrn Arve FlÄtt of the Labour Party calls the Progress Party's position cowardly. He says they should simply declare their opposition to the traffic plan rather than demanding a costly public vote. FlÄtt acknowledges his party also opposes the current proposal but prefers clearer political positioning.
The Labour representative identifies several unanswered questions about the zoning plan. He questions how much through traffic actually exists downtown and what consequences the sector division would create. FlÄtt suggests alternative solutions like congestion charges might be worth considering, but emphasizes that the city must first clearly identify the specific problem they're trying to solve.
This traffic debate reflects broader tensions in Norwegian urban planning between environmental goals and practical mobility needs. Similar conflicts have emerged in Oslo and Bergen, where city centers are being redesigned to prioritize pedestrians and public transport over private vehicles. The Trondheim case demonstrates how local politics increasingly centers on balancing climate initiatives with economic practicalities and resident convenience.
The outcome could set important precedents for other Nordic cities considering similar traffic restrictions. Many urban centers across Scandinavia are watching how Trondheim handles this contentious issue, particularly the question of whether major urban planning decisions should go to public vote or remain with elected representatives.
What happens next depends on December's city council discussions. The referendum proposal faces uncertain prospects, but the intense public interest ensures the traffic plan will remain a dominant political issue in Trondheim for months to come.