The ongoing saga of the long-delayed elevated expressway continues to unfold as the foundations for this ambitious project are now visible on Kaset-Nawamin Road. Yet, what stands out is the dramatic twist involving the third-phase expressway’s N2 section. This development is not merely about concrete and steel but a gripping tale of community resistance and bureaucratic maneuvers.
Imagine this: picture a room at a Bangkok hotel in the Chatuchak district, packed with over 50 residents. They’re not there for a social gathering but to voice their deep opposition to the Expressway Authority of Thailand’s (Exat) new proposal. The plan in question? An underground route set to replace a highly contentious section of the N1 Expressway.
Manawat Kamolsilp, a vocal critic and resident, was quick to assess the financial implications, “The underground route’s projected cost is a staggering 50 billion baht, whereas an elevated expressway would only set us back 17 billion baht. It doesn’t make sense to pour more money into the underground option,” he argued. For him, the economic benefits of an underpass—cheaper construction and maintenance, lower toll fees—were crystal clear.
Lt Gen Mahatthana Kamolsilp added another layer to the narrative. Years ago, locals had their land expropriated for the expressway’s construction, only to be told more land could be seized for this new underground route. Needless to say, the enthusiasm among residents wasn’t particularly high.
On the other side of the fence was Exat Governor Surachet Laophulsuk, who outlined the meticulous planning that had gone into this project. His main pitch? A 6.3-kilometer underpass that would be Thailand’s first expressway tunnel, carving its path along Ngarmwongwan Road and connecting with major intersections like Phongphet, Bang Khen, and Kaset—right before merging with the N2 Expressway.
Adding some architectural flair, Surachet described this tunnel as “over 40 meters tall, about the height of a 10-story building,” constructed using a cut-and-cover method, with entry and exit points spanning 1.75 kilometers, and elevated sections stretching 2.49 kilometers to link with N2.
So, where will the money come from? Governor Surachet had that covered too. The project is budgeted at an eye-watering 49 billion baht, with 44.5 billion allocated for construction, 3.6 billion for land expropriation, and 1.06 billion for construction supervision. Exat’s financial footing is strong, and they’re considering self-funding, possibly through bond issuance.
The clock is ticking, though. The timeline laid out involves an environmental impact assessment set for early next year, cabinet approval, and bidding slated for 2026, with construction projected to begin the following year. If everything goes according to plan, the construction phase would span five years, forecasting a traffic volume of 70,000 vehicles per day in its inaugural year—half the route’s total capacity.
Governor Surachet emphasized that this underpass would address many of the environmental concerns previously raised. He detailed that the northern segment of the three-phase expressway project is split into two stages. The first, dubbed N2, stretches from Prasertmanukit Road to the eastern Outer Ring Road, covering 11.3 kilometers with an estimated cost of 16.9 billion baht.
The second stage, N1, underwent a feasibility study to iron out kinks in the controversial section. After engaging with Kasetsart University and local communities, Exat finally settled on the underpass as the best alternative.
With drama, high stakes, and divided opinions, this expressway saga is anything but over. Residents and officials alike wait in anticipation, as the upcoming steps promise to be as exciting and contentious as those that led us here.
It’s ridiculous to spend 50 billion baht on an underground expressway when an elevated one would be so much cheaper! 17 billion baht seems more reasonable for an infrastructure project.
But have you considered the long-term benefits? An underground route may have higher initial costs but could reduce maintenance and land expropriation expenses in the future.
Sure, but the immediate financial burden on taxpayers is enormous. How can we justify spending more than necessary?
Underground routes can also mitigate environmental impact. Elevated roads often ruin city aesthetics and disrupt local ecosystems.
Exactly! The government should focus on what’s most cost-effective, especially with taxpayers’ money!
Are we really prioritizing a new expressway over essential services? Schools and hospitals need funding more than a new road.
True, but urban infrastructure is also critical. Better roads can improve the economy by reducing travel time and encouraging investment.
Yeah, it’s not a zero-sum game. We can invest in both infrastructure and essential services. They’re not mutually exclusive.
In an ideal world, yes, but funding is not unlimited. Prioritizing is essential.
The land expropriation is the real issue here. Residents are losing their homes for this expressway, and it’s unfair!
Why not just improve public transportation? Building more roads will never solve traffic problems in the long run.
Building an underground expressway can drastically reduce noise pollution in heavily populated areas. That sounds like a big win!
And let’s not forget about the environmental implications. An underground expressway would likely have a smaller carbon footprint.
Have any of you considered the toll fees? An underground option could mean higher tolls for drivers.
Better infrastructure usually translates to better services. The tolls are just a small price to pay for modernization.
Tolls are a necessary evil to recoup the investment. Plus, they can be adjusted based on peak and off-peak hours to manage traffic more effectively.
That still doesn’t make it affordable for everyone. High tolls could be a burden for low-income families.
There’s also the issue of safety. Are underground expressways really safer during natural disasters like earthquakes?
This new expressway will definitely boost local businesses by improving connectivity. I’m all for it!
But at what cost, Felicia? Displacing communities for business gains is morally questionable.
That’s a fair point, but economic growth often requires some sacrifices. The long-term benefits could outweigh the short-term disruptions.
It’s not just about economic growth. People’s lives and homes are at stake here. That’s a heavy price to pay.
Projects like this always face resistance. Most major developments do, but they push society forward in the end.
True, but we should ensure that such progress doesn’t come at the expense of vulnerable communities.
The government should hold more public consultations to address community concerns effectively.
The stress of living near construction zones for years is immense. Have we thought about the mental health effects?