Pan-European Corridor X: State of Play and Perspectives

M. Miltiadou, Surveyor & Transport Engineer MSc

Member of the Technical Secretariat of the Steering Committee for Pan-European Corridor X

Aristotle University of ThessalonikiEgnatia Str., 54124 Thessaloniki, Greece, tel.+30 2310 996154, fax +30 2310 996030, transp@edessa.topo.auth.gr

TechnicalSecretariatPan-EuropeanTransportCorridor X

Rail Investment South East Europe 2009 (RISEE09)Zagreb, 30 June – 01 July 2009

The Corridors concept

Prague Declaration on All-European Transport Policy, 1991 Foresaw the indication of the most important transport routes

Crete Declaration, 1994 Set of indicative guidelines covering the main infrastructure Corridors

for the various transport modes Definition of nine Corridors

Helsinki Declaration, 1997 Definition of Corridor X Definition of Transport Areas Overall objective: promote sustainable, efficient transport systems Sub-objective: promote rehabilitation or reconstruction of problematic

links, giving priority to measures, which better exploit existing infrastructures

Mean: collective and coordinated effort of all parties concerned in order to ensure appropriate investment schemes

Main Axis:

Salzburg – Ljubljana – Zagreb – Beograd – Nis – Skopje – Veles – Thessaloniki

Branch A:

Graz (Austria) – Maribor (Slovenia) – Zagreb (Croatia)

Branch B:

Budapest (Hungary) – Novi Sad (Serbia) – Beograd (Serbia)

Branch C:

Nis (Serbia) – Sofia (Bulgaria) and further via Corridor IV to Istanbul

Branch D:

Veles (F.Y.R.O.M.) – Bitola (F.Y.R.O.M.) – Florina (Greece) and further via Florina – Kozani (via Egnatia) to Igoumenitsa

Definition of Corridor X 2.300km roads 2.528km railways 12 airports 4 sea- & river- ports

Structures for the development of Corridor X Preparative meetings of delegations of countries concerned and

representatives of the European Commission and other International Organizations

15 March 2001: Signing of a Memorandum of Understanding (MoU) by the Ministers of Transport of the participating countries and the European Commission

MoU Aim: Cooperation for the development of Corridor X infrastructure,

operation and use Means for implementation of the MoU:

General rules on studies Exchange of information Agreement on technical standards providing interoperability Border crossings and customs cooperation Framework for the participation of private sector and International Financial

Institutions Definition of priorities, budgets, time-plans for specific measures

Coordination by the Steering Committee

Steering Committee for the implementation of the MoU Delegates of the eight countries participating in Corridor X

and representative of the European Commission + observers (International Organizations and third countries)

Meets at least once a year Chaired by Greek Ministry of Transport since 1999 until 2010 Supported by a Technical Secretariat (T.S.)

Assigned to the Department of Transportation and Hydraulic Engineering of the Faculty of Surveying Engineering of Aristotle University of Thessaloniki

The role of the Technical Secretariat of Corridor X (1/3)

Collection and evaluation of existing information and relevant studies with respect to Corridor X

Coordination and monitoring approach: Annual questionnaire based surveys in all countries of Corridor X Extended on-site visits for expertise and meetings with members of

the road and rail authorities and organizations in each country Collection of reports from various sources (international and

national organizations) about Corridor X International cooperation

European Commission – DG TREN, DG REGIO Other Corridors in the area UN/ECE Transport Division European Investment Bank, European Bank for Reconstruction and

Development, World Bank Infrastructure Steering Group of the Joint office for SEE of EC and WB

The role of the Technical Secretariat of Corridor X (2/3)

Data analysis – Development and maintenance of a Database and a relevant Geographic Information System (GIS)

Dissemination of results: Reports, papers, conferences, Website

Inventory of existing studies and evaluation and exploitation of their results

Suggestions for the terms of references for new studies Examination of conditions providing interoperability and

promoting intermodality Assistance to participating countries for the involvement of the

private sector and International Financial Institutions Traffic flows forecasting study for definition of priority needs

for projects

The role of the Technical Secretariat of Corridor X (3/3)

Contribution to the optimization of border crossing operations and procedures Questionnaire-based surveys On-site visits for expertise Constitution of a Working Group under the Steering Committee

for the improvement of border crossings along Corridor X Protocol for cooperation of all authorities involved in border

crossing procedures signed in Summer 2006 Exchange of information with South East Europe Transport

Observatory (SEETO) – Technical Secretariat for the implementation of the SEE Core Network

Exchange of information with “ARGE Korridor X” cooperation of the Railway Organizations of the countries of Corridor X

Total length: 2.299,6km

72,6% of the road network consists of motorways Main Axis: 1.451,4km [85,9% motorways] Branch A: 163,4km [73,7% motorways] Branch B: 352,9km [67,5% motorways] Branch C: 191,8km [7,5% motorways] Branch D: 140,1km

Permitted maximum speed along the road axis: 120km/h (in most of the parts)

By 2015 Road Corridor X shall be constructed and operate in motorway profile

State of play of Road Corridor X

PAN-EUROPEAN ROAD CORRIDOR X

Progress of motorway construction on Road Corridor X since 2001

Country Part of Corridor X Road Section Total Length (km)

Constructed Length(km)

Slovenia Main Axis Bic – Obrezje * 75,5 59,9

Slovenia Main Axis Vrba – Naklo 20,9 20,9

Slovenia Branch A Maribor – Gruskovje * 38,8 3,0

Croatia Main Axis Velika Kopanica – Lipovac * 53,56 53,56

Croatia Main Axis Zagreb – Bregana 13,0 13,0

Croatia Branch A Macelj – Krapina * 19,4 19,4

Hungary Branch B Kiskunfelegyhaza – Roszke * 60,0 60,0

Serbia Main Axis & Branch B

Belgrade bypass * (Phase I Two-way roads) 47,4 34,6

Serbia Branch B Batajnica – Belgrade * 10,11 10,11

Serbia Branch B Novi Sad – Batajnica * 61,15 61,15

Serbia Branch C Nis (Komren) – Dimitrovgrad * 104,1 9,7

Bulgaria Branch C Kalotina – Sofia * (2 lanes per direction with no separation)

48 48

F.Y.R.O.M. Main Axis Gradsko – Demir Kapija – Udovo – Gevgelija *

75,5 42,5

Total 627,42 435,82* Problematic section

Total length: 2.528,2km

89,3% electrified 63% single track alignment – 37% double track alignment

Main Axis: 1742,3km (55% single track alignment – Fully electrified) Branch A: 154,3km (70% double track alignment – Fully electrified) Branch B: 305,6km (96% single track alignment – Fully electrified) Branch C: 161,0km (95% single track alignment – 90% diesel) Branch D: 165,0km (100% single track alignment – Fully diesel)

Limited investments for the improvement of the railway infrastructure by 2015

Not doubling of tracks, except in Austria and Slovenia Priority in rehabilitation and upgrading projects

State of play of Rail Corridor X

#

#

#

##

#

#

#

##

#

#

#

#

#

#

#

#Y

#Y

#Y

#Y#Y

%[

%[

%[

%[

%[

%[

%[

%[

%[

ITALY

SLOVENIA

HUNGARY

CROATIA

BOSNIA-HERZEGOVINA

SERBIA- MONTENEGRO

ROMANIA

BULGARIA

F.Y.R.O.M.

GREECE

AUSTRIA

VIENNA

LJUBLJANA

BUDAPEST

ZAGREB

BELGRADE

SARAJEVOSOFIA

SKOPJE

TIRANE

SALZBURG

GRAZ

NIS

THESSALONIKIFLORINA

SUBOTICA

CZECH REPUBLIC

SLOVAKIA

UKRAINE

Î

Î

Î

Î

Î

Î

Î

MARIBOR

Î

SZEGED

NOVI SAD

VELES

ALBANIA

RAIL INFRASTRUCTURE

PANEUROPEAN TRANSPORT CORRIDOR XPANEUROPEAN TRANSPORT CORRIDOR X

MAP 2

THESSALONIKI, MARCH 2004

N

EW

S

DOUBLE TRACK ALIGNMENT (ACTUAL)

90 0 90 180 Kilometers

2. DOUBLE TRACK ALIGNMENT (ACTUAL - %)0% (100% single track)1 - 40%41 - 80%81 - 99%100% double trackNot applicableNo data

# START / END OF SECTION#Y MAIN CITY%[ CAPITAL

LEGEND

CORRIDOR X TECHNICAL SECRETARIAT

PAN-EUROPEAN RAIL CORRIDOR X

Effective investments on Corridor X since 1994 (excl. PPPs & concessions)Country Investments

(millions of euros)

Period Sector

Austria 622,8 1996 – 2002 and 2006 – 2008

Railways

Slovenia 1.607,61 1994 – 2006 Roads and Railways (data for roads only for 2003-06)

Croatia 204,27 2003 – 2006 Roads and Railways

Hungary 374,97 1994 – 2005 Roads and Railways

Serbia 454,3 1994 – 2007 Roads and Railways (data for roads only for 2003-07)

Bulgaria No data

F.Y.R.O.M. 31,98 1994 – 2007 Roads and Railways (data for roads only for 2005-07)

Greece 47,5 2003 – 2004 Railways

€ 3,343 billions

Practically only the Road Corridor X serves long international connections.

International traffic flows, despite the increasing trends, will not be, at least in the short-term, the main component of the rail traffic volumes.

Short-mid term: No saturation problems appear. Usually only 50% of the line capacity is used.

Mid-long term estimation: Some saturation problems will appear in Croatia (Zagreb – Dugo

Selo line) Some flows close to the capacity in Slovenia (Jesenice – Ljubljana

line), in Croatia (Sisak – Novska line) and in Bulgaria (Kalotina – Sofia line).

Low level of quality and service, in terms of speed, comfort and safety.

Traffic & Trends

Development Considerations The development priorities of the Corridor X’s infrastructure

experiences the infrastructure development criteria at Pan-European, and not only national, level.

Transport policy (EC/ DG TREN), is interpreted to the effort of the Pan-European and Trans-European Networks implementation. The national strategies should be adjusted to the same direction, which is the most appropriate way for securing international financing.

Priorities are not defined only by the demand-supply relation, but also by their involvement in development projects of strategic character, where, among their other aims, is also the arsis of the Western Balkans’ area isolation and the securing of the consecutiveness of the structural and operational characteristics of the infrastructures.

The eligibility of infrastructure projects to be financed, and their priority are pretty much depending on their financial feasibility.

That is why large scale road projects secure funds more rapidly.

For large scale railway projects the countries concerned will have to undertake the major part of the cost. National budget resources, borrowing in domestic financial markets, user charges and, where practical, realistic PPP schemes could be examined as alternative financing means.

Financing issues

Most realistic conclusion: The share of roads will remain at high levels in the years to come, until the railway organisations will be seriously capable to shift persons and goods in their favour. Railway traffic should in general at best remain stable or increase quite slowly in the coming 15 years.

Railways should face the challenge to overcome the general crisis of the sector especially in the Western Balkans.

Despite the progress made in adjusting the national legal frameworks to the requirements of trade and transport facilitation, their practical application remains unsatisfactory.

Reorganization, cost cutting policies, new rolling stock, double tracks and electrification of lines together with the strategy of the EU to promote railways could significantly increase the use of railways.

Conclusions (1/2)

Capacity should be retained or even be increased by: optimising the scheduling/ management systems low cost construction – addition of maneuver lines in small

subsections with poor geometry with systematic maintenance of the infrastructure, the equipment

and the rolling stock

Apart from the need to improve the current infrastructure, specific measures should be taken at cross border stations.

Schemes of joint performance of border procedures at the Serbian-Bulgarian frontiers (Corridor Xc), have very encouraging results and should be promoted for implementation as best practice to other borders along international routes.

Conclusions (2/2)

Thank you for your kind attention!

Corridor X Websitehttp://edessa.topo.auth.gr/X