Which neighborhoods could gain most from the M5?

See what went wrong for property buyers in Copenhagen

Is Copenhagen’s M5 actually going ahead now?

Copenhagen’s M5 has moved far enough beyond the idea stage that we can seriously assess which neighborhoods could benefit, although construction risk is still very real.

The government and Copenhagen Municipality have agreed on the southern M5 route, with six stations in the first stage between København H and Kløverparken. That section is still expected to open in 2036. A later extension would continue through Refshaleøen to two stations on Lynetteholm, with the second stage expected around 2045. Copenhagen Municipality now describes this as the agreed M5 project rather than one option among several.

There has also been a useful reality check lately. Metroselskabet cancelled the procurement for M5’s main civil-works contract in August 2026 after feedback from potential bidders showed that the tender structure needed changing. The contract is being re-tendered with more dialogue around costs, risks and construction conditions. Metroselskabet still says this should not change the planned 2036 opening, while the construction law is expected to complete the political process later in 2026.

So this is a funded infrastructure project that has entered procurement, not a line someone has drawn on a future transport map. But buying property today on the assumption that every deadline lands perfectly would still be aggressive.

M5 area	What is planned	Current target	What changes locally
Bryggebroen	New station	2036	Better metro coverage in southern Islands Brygge
DR Byen	M1–M5 interchange	2036	More direct routes across Copenhagen
Sundbyøster Plads	New station	2036	Central Amager gains direct metro access
Lergravsparken	M2–M5 interchange	2036	Stronger network connections
Kløverparken	New station	2036	Metro supports major redevelopment
Refshaleøen	New station	Around 2045	Large accessibility jump
Lynetteholm	Two stations	Around 2045	Metro becomes part of a new district

What would actually make one M5 neighborhood gain more than another?

The biggest M5 winners should be the places where the metro changes everyday accessibility or makes much more development possible, rather than neighborhoods that simply receive another good transport option.

Copenhagen’s previous metro experience gives us a useful clue. Research by Ismir Mulalic and Jan Rouwendal found significant house-price increases near Copenhagen metro stations and estimated that the additional property value created around the system was roughly 40% of its construction cost. Their later estimates found an average price premium of about 3.7% within 300 metres of stations, rising to about 5.4% within 100 metres, while effects became much weaker farther away.

Those averages should not be pasted mechanically onto M5. The geography is more useful than the headline percentages. A home that goes from poor rail access to a five-minute metro walk can change meaningfully in buyers’ eyes. A home beside an existing metro station receives a smaller improvement.

Boligsiden’s historical Copenhagen work found the same broad pattern: properties that experienced a large reduction in distance to rapid transit tended to perform much better than areas where accessibility barely changed.

That puts Sundbyøster, Kløverparken and eventually Refshaleøen at the center of the M5 property story.

Is Sundbyøster the safest M5 property bet?

Sundbyøster is probably the cleanest M5 bet in Copenhagen today because an established residential neighborhood is gaining the one piece of infrastructure it conspicuously lacks: a metro station.

Central Amager already has dense housing, shops, schools and Amagerbrogade running through it, yet much of the Sundbyøster catchment sits awkwardly between the existing M1 and M2 lines. The new station at Sundbyøster Plads directly closes that gap. Copenhagen Municipality itself describes the M5 agreement as bringing metro service to central Amager, which currently lacks it.

Earlier Metroselskabet modelling estimated roughly 8,300 weekday boardings at the station proposed around southern Amagerbrogade. That is substantial enough to suggest that the station serves real existing demand rather than hoping future development eventually creates passengers.

For a homebuyer, Sundbyøster also has an advantage over Kløverparken and Refshaleøen: we can already judge the neighborhood. There are existing streets, shops, housing associations, traffic patterns and comparable transactions. The upside comes mostly from better accessibility rather than from betting that an unfinished district becomes attractive twenty years from now.

The strongest zone should be fairly tight around Sundbyøster Plads and the stretches of Amagerbrogade that are currently inconveniently far from both M1 and M2. Once the walk to the new station gets long, much of the M5 benefit disappears pretty quickly.

Factor	Sundbyøster today	After M5
Residential neighborhood	Already established	Still established
Direct metro access	Weak across much of the catchment	Strong
Dependence on future redevelopment	Low	Low
Execution risk beyond M5 itself	Relatively limited	Relatively limited
Likely property effect	Already partly anticipatory	Stronger close to station
Our assessment	Best risk-adjusted existing neighborhood	—

Could Kløverparken make more money than Sundbyøster?

Kløverparken has more upside than Sundbyøster if the redevelopment succeeds, because M5 can change the value of the land itself rather than simply making existing apartments easier to reach.

Copenhagen’s Kommuneplan 2024 makes that link unusually explicit. Kløverparken has been moved into the second part of the city’s development sequence, and a first stage can progress once the necessary infrastructure decisions are in place. Full development depends on a metro line and the eastern ring road being established.

That gives Kløverparken a much stronger infrastructure effect than we normally see around a future station. Industrial and former industrial land can gradually support a denser mixed urban district because the transport capacity becomes available.

The project is moving forward in more concrete ways too. Copenhagen is currently preparing the urban-development competition for Kløverparken and neighbouring Quintus, another sign that the discussion has moved from vague long-term zoning toward designing an actual district.

There is a price for that upside. Kløverparken still carries planning risk, construction risk, land-use uncertainty and years of neighborhood creation. Sundbyøster already works as a place to live.

We would therefore rank Kløverparken above Sundbyøster for raw development upside, but below it for a normal buyer who wants a relatively dependable apartment investment.

Is Refshaleøen the biggest long-term M5 winner?

Refshaleøen could experience the largest transformation of any recognizable Copenhagen neighborhood on the M5 route, but the payoff sits much farther away.

Few places in Copenhagen have such a strange mismatch between location and accessibility. Refshaleøen sits almost beside the historic center as the crow flies, yet reaching it still depends heavily on cycling, buses and harbor transport. A metro station would dramatically change that relationship.

The development potential is equally important. Copenhagen’s current kommuneplan still places Refshaleøen in the later “perspective” development period, whereas Kløverparken can move earlier.

That timing keeps us from ranking Refshaleøen first today. Its M5 station belongs to the later extension toward Lynetteholm, with the current target around 2045. A buyer is taking on a much longer period during which planning, financing conditions, infrastructure sequencing and the character of the neighborhood can all change.

Still, the eventual combination is unusually powerful: a large redevelopment site, very close to central Copenhagen, connected directly to the metro network. For patient investors willing to live with the uncertainty, Refshaleøen probably offers the greatest long-term M5 optionality.

Will southern Islands Brygge really get a big M5 boost?

Southern Islands Brygge should benefit noticeably around Bryggebroen, but the wider neighborhood is already too attractive and too well connected for M5 to transform it in the same way as Sundbyøster.

The new Bryggebroen station is planned around Axel Heides Gade. That matters because southern Islands Brygge has expanded well beyond the comfortable walking catchment of the existing Islands Brygge M1 station. Residents around the newer waterfront developments frequently rely more heavily on cycling, buses and connections across the harbor.

A station there removes a genuine local weakness.

The difference is that Islands Brygge already sells as a central Copenhagen neighborhood with strong cycling access, waterfront amenities and existing metro access farther north. Much of the neighborhood’s attractiveness is already reflected in housing prices.

We would therefore focus tightly on the apartments whose walking time to rapid transit changes substantially. An apartment near Axel Heides Gade could receive a meaningful accessibility upgrade. An apartment five minutes from the existing Islands Brygge station has much less to gain from M5.

This distinction is also consistent with Copenhagen metro research showing that the price effect falls sharply with distance and is strongest where the station meaningfully changes accessibility.

Could Amager Øst around Prags Boulevard become a surprise M5 winner?

The western edge of the Kløverparken station area could be one of the more interesting M5 opportunities because existing Amager Øst housing sits beside land that Copenhagen already expects to redevelop.

The municipality’s current planning documents identify a string of former industrial areas across Amager, including parts of Strandlodsvej, Ved Amagerbanen, Siljangade and Vermlandsgade. Kløverparken then adds a much larger redevelopment area immediately nearby.

That creates a different setup from Sundbyøster. Existing homes around Prags Boulevard and the eastern end of the established neighborhood can potentially benefit from a new station while also gaining from new shops, housing, public spaces and activity as Kløverparken changes.

We would still be selective. Some parts of Holmbladsgade are already reasonably close to Amagerbro or Lergravsparken, which limits the extra transport value. The more interesting properties are those close enough to the future Kløverparken station to benefit while remaining inside an existing, functioning residential area.

That boundary between old Amager Øst and new Kløverparken could ultimately prove more investable than buying directly into the redevelopment itself.

Will Lergravsparken apartments gain much from M5?

Lergravsparken should become more convenient with M5, but we would expect a modest property uplift because the neighborhood already has direct M2 service.

M5 turns Lergravsparken into an interchange between M2 and M5. Residents gain more route choices, while passengers arriving on M2 can transfer toward central Amager, København H and eventually the eastern harbor districts. Metroselskabet continues to describe Lergravsparken as the planned M2–M5 interchange in its current procurement material.

That improves the station’s importance in the network. It does much less to change the basic decision facing someone considering an apartment nearby today: Lergravsparken is already a metro neighborhood with quick access toward central Copenhagen and the airport.

We see M5 strengthening Lergravsparken rather than repricing it dramatically.

Does DR Byen have more M5 upside than people think?

DR Byen should benefit from becoming an M1–M5 interchange, but M5 is unlikely to create the kind of property jump we expect around a brand-new station catchment.

DR Byen already combines metro service with the university, DR, nearby housing and easy access into the center. The M5 adds another direction of travel and lets passengers switch directly between M1 and the new line. Metroselskabet recently reconfirmed that interchange configuration while preparing the first-stage construction programme.

That can make Ørestad Nord more convenient and strengthen the value of living close to the station. The neighborhood nevertheless starts from a strong transport baseline, which leaves less room for M5 to alter buyers’ perception.

For us, DR Byen belongs in the second tier of M5 beneficiaries: useful improvement, limited transformation.

Could M5 change the housing market farther across Sundby and Amager Øst?

M5 should help a broader slice of central Amager, although the strongest property effect will probably stay concentrated within a short walk of Sundbyøster and Kløverparken stations.

That is worth emphasizing because postal codes can hide the actual investment story. Someone buying in 2300 København S could be almost beside a future M5 station, already beside M1 or M2, or far enough from every station that M5 barely changes daily life.

Historical Copenhagen evidence supports a highly local effect. The latest published academic estimates found a roughly 5.4% metro-associated price premium within 100 metres, around 3.7% inside 300 metres, then much smaller and often statistically insignificant effects between 400 metres and one kilometre. Those numbers come from previous Copenhagen metro openings rather than a forecast for M5, but they tell us how quickly accessibility value can fade.

As seen above, the exact walking-distance improvement therefore matters much more than the neighborhood label.

Location type	Existing metro access	M5 improvement	Upside we would expect
Near Sundbyøster Plads	Weak	Very large	High
Existing Amager Øst near Prags Boulevard	Mixed	Large in selected streets	Moderate-high
Already close to Lergravsparken	Strong	Mainly interchange benefit	Moderate
Already close to DR Byen	Strong	Mainly interchange benefit	Moderate
Far from new and existing stations	Weak	Limited	Low

Will M5 construction hurt property prices before it helps them?

Homes immediately beside M5 construction sites could have a rough few years even if they eventually become some of the line’s beneficiaries.

The current environmental work confirms that M5 will bring major building sites, traffic changes, noise and heavy construction through several first-stage station areas. Copenhagen’s supplementary assessment says revised construction methods should reduce truck traffic by roughly 10–11% compared with the earlier design, while the first stage will still involve substantial works around the stations and tunnel infrastructure.

Kløverparken will also look different from earlier proposals. The station is now planned above ground, with an elevated connection toward the control and maintenance facility on Prøvestenen. Copenhagen’s environmental assessment says this increases the project’s physical and visual footprint around Kløverparken.

This makes micro-location important before opening. A flat a few hundred metres from a station can capture most of the eventual convenience while avoiding some of the worst construction disturbance. The apartment directly facing a worksite may have a less pleasant journey through the 2030s.

We would therefore separate “good M5 location” from “good M5 location at any price and on any street.”

Is the recent M5 tender reset a warning for property buyers?

The recent M5 tender reset is a real execution-risk warning, but so far it does not undermine the investment case around the first-stage stations.

Metroselskabet cancelled the civil-works procurement after contractors asked for clearer conditions around risk, pricing and the structure of the competition. The company plans a new tender using competitive dialogue and says the overall opening schedule should still hold.

The useful lesson for buyers is simple: 2036 remains a target rather than a guarantee.

Large infrastructure projects regularly face cost, procurement and construction problems. M5’s estimated infrastructure package already runs into tens of billions of Danish kroner, and Copenhagen Municipality carries part of the risk if M5 construction exceeds the reserve agreed for the project.

We would therefore discount property upside that depends on a precise opening year. Sundbyøster can tolerate that better because it already functions as an established neighborhood. A development-led bet at Kløverparken or a very long-duration Refshaleøen thesis has more moving pieces.

Is Lynetteholm really an M5 property opportunity?

Lynetteholm could create enormous land value around M5, but it is a future-city development story rather than a normal neighborhood investment today.

The agreed M5 ultimately includes two Lynetteholm stations. The broader infrastructure agreement ties those stations to the creation of a completely new part of Copenhagen, while proceeds from future development are themselves expected to help finance the infrastructure. Copenhagen Municipality says the first M5 and eastern-road package has estimated construction costs of DKK 33.1 billion, with long-term financing relying heavily on future urban development.

That relationship tells us how important the metro is expected to be for land values. Copenhagen has used this model before: academic work on the original metro found that the public sector captured a meaningful share of metro-created value by concentrating new construction on previously undeveloped land around stations.

But there is no mature Lynetteholm apartment market today that lets us buy an ordinary home and wait for a station premium. Comparing Lynetteholm directly with Sundbyøster therefore creates more confusion than insight.

For existing buyers, Refshaleøen is the more relevant long-term eastern-harbor question.

Which M5 neighborhoods look overhyped?

Christianshavn, København H and the parts of Islands Brygge already close to metro service look the easiest to overrate if someone simply assumes that every M5 station or nearby district will receive the same property premium.

Christianshavn should benefit from reduced pressure on the existing M1/M2 crossing, but residents already have excellent metro access. København H gains another metro route while already being Copenhagen’s main rail and transit hub. DR Byen and Lergravsparken receive useful interchanges, although both are already served by metro.

The M5 agreement itself makes clear why the line was chosen: Copenhagen wants extra capacity on the existing network, direct metro service for central Amager and infrastructure capable of supporting Østhavn’s development.

The neighborhoods already enjoying strong transport have less left to gain.

That does not mean prices there will perform badly. We simply would not pay a special M5 premium for them today.

Which Copenhagen neighborhoods could gain most from the M5?

Kløverparken, Sundbyøster and Refshaleøen have the strongest M5 upside, but we would choose Sundbyøster for the best risk-adjusted residential bet today and Kløverparken for the biggest first-stage transformation.

Sundbyøster has the simplest thesis. A dense, mature part of central Amager that currently sits awkwardly between metro lines gets its own station. We do not need a new neighborhood to succeed for that improvement to have value.

Kløverparken offers more upside because M5 is closely tied to whether the area can be developed at scale. Copenhagen has already moved it forward in the planning sequence and is currently working on the development competition. The uncertainty is higher, but so is the potential change in land value.

Refshaleøen sits third for us today and could ultimately become the largest winner. Its location close to central Copenhagen, weak rail access and huge redevelopment potential create an exceptional long-term setup. The problem is time: its M5 connection belongs to the later stage, so the investment thesis stretches much further into the future.

Southern Islands Brygge around Bryggebroen comes next. The new station fixes a genuine local accessibility weakness, but the wider neighborhood is already central, expensive and well connected. Lergravsparken and DR Byen should get better without being reinvented.

The pattern is clear enough for us to rank the M5 areas rather than simply saying that “property near the metro should rise.”

Rank	Neighborhood / area	M5 upside	Confidence today	Why we rank it here
1	Sundbyøster	High	High	New metro access in a mature, dense neighborhood
2	Kløverparken / Prags Boulevard	Very high	Medium-high	Metro directly supports large-scale redevelopment
3	Refshaleøen	Very high long term	Medium	Exceptional transformation potential, much later payoff
4	Southern Islands Brygge / Bryggebroen	Moderate-high	High	New station materially improves the weaker end of an established premium district
5	Amager Øst near Kløverparken	Moderate-high	Medium-high	Existing housing can benefit from both station access and nearby redevelopment
6	Lergravsparken	Moderate	High	Better interchange, but metro already exists
7	DR Byen / Ørestad Nord	Moderate	High	Useful M1–M5 interchange with limited accessibility shock
8	Christianshavn / central interchange areas	Low M5-specific upside	High	Already among Copenhagen’s best-connected locations

For someone buying an ordinary Copenhagen apartment today, Sundbyøster is the M5 area we find hardest to dismiss. Kløverparken could produce the bigger transformation, while Refshaleøen carries the most intriguing long-term upside. Those three places capture three very different versions of the M5 story: an established neighborhood gaining the access it has been missing, a new district becoming buildable, and a future district becoming genuinely connected.

Who is the author of this content?

INVESTROPA

A team researching how property purchases actually go wrong across Europe

We are a team of real estate researchers and local specialists focused on helping people avoid expensive mistakes when buying property abroad, particularly in Copenhagen. If you’d like to learn more about us, you can check our presentation page.