The issue of demolitions and the location of the Gaia station was a key topic during the recent presentation of the AVAN Norte consortium, held at the Northern Region Engineers Association in Porto. Carlos Fernandes, addressing the press, highlighted that the environmental impact assessment is currently under review.
Fernandes emphasized that existing studies offer possible optimizations still being evaluated. He stated, “The report will be decisive in these matters. The Evaluation Commission will ultimately determine the actions taken.”
The AVAN Norte consortium signed a concession contract on July 29, which initially planned a station in Santo Ovídio, Gaia, linked to two metro lines. However, in October, an alternative proposal was made for a station in Vilar do Paraíso with two separate bridges instead of a combined road-rail bridge over the Douro.
The route adjustment reduced the tunnel component from 11.4 to 6.3 kilometers, causing surface impacts. This alteration led to the forecast of 136 demolitions in Vila Nova de Gaia and Porto, affecting 109 residences and 27 businesses according to reports.
When questioned about the pros and cons of the Gaia station locations—Santo Ovídio versus Vilar do Paraíso—Fernandes noted that the Preliminary Study by IP identified only one viable option: an underground station in Santo Ovídio.
He explained, “Under the contract provisions, the concessionaire optimized the route and presented an alternative surface station solution about two kilometers away.”
Fernandes detailed that Santo Ovídio is closer to the center and ensures metro connectivity, whereas Vilar do Paraíso is preferable for surface rail operations with four lines but lacks established metro connections as of now.
The proposed station by the consortium meets IP’s technical criteria, with the environmental response anticipated by year’s end. Fernandes elaborated, “The response could be approval or rejection, which will guide our subsequent actions. Approval will necessitate further technical and legal assessments, while rejection will require a new submission from the concessionaire.”
He acknowledged potential delays if approval is not granted but remained optimistic about a positive review enabling project commencement.
Confronted with the deviation in the consortium’s proposal from the initial requirements, Fernandes remarked, “Understanding it is not my role. The concessionaire is responsible for development, and their submission falls within their rights, assuming inherent risks.”
Beyond local concerns, Fernandes focused on the high-speed rail line’s broader objective, refuting any pressure felt by IP. He stated, “We would feel pressured only if the concessionaire’s global proposal did not fulfill the strategic objectives, which extend beyond mere station placement.” He confirmed these strategic objectives are met by the proposal.
The public consultation of the Execution Project’s Environmental Compliance Report (RECAPE) for the Porto-Oiã high-speed segment, which drew controversy over proposed changes, concluded with 259 submissions.
The European Investment Bank confirmed in September that it financed the high-speed line based on adherence to public tender specifications.
