SEETO Comprehensive Network Development · PDF fileSEETO Comprehensive Network Development Plan ... determination on the SEETO Comprehensive Network development ... current state of

SEETO Comprehensive Network Development Plan

Five Year Multi Annual Plan 2013Common problems - Shared solutionsDecember 2012

SEETO Regional ParticipantsAlbania, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Croatia, the former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia, Montenegro, Serbia and Kosovo*

1

Five Year Multi‐Annual Plan 2013Common problems – Shared solutionsDecember 2012

SEETO COMPREHENSIVE NETWORK DEVELOPMENT PLAN

2

SEETO Comprehensive Network Development Plan 2013

FOREWORD

3

Angelina Zivkovic,Steering Committee Chairlady

The endorsement of the SEETO Comprehensive Network Development Plan 2013 represents another building block in the regional transport cooperation in the South East Europe. Evidently shorter, sharper and streamlined in the presentation of the transport data analysis, project fiches and policy information, the MAP 2013 is our strongest tool for regional transport planning and consequently, for attracting transport investments.

Following the revision of the TEN-T Guidelines, we continued to work devotedly together to confirm that is not just by case that the SEETO Comprehensive Network is included into the TEN-T Comprehensive Network maps. The new Methodology for rating SEETO priority projects is the uppermost result achieved in that process, on the basis of which the latest SEETO priority project list has advanced into a genuinely credible and reliable reference when the regional infrastructure is concerned.

I take the opportunity of this occasion to express our gratitude to the European Commission and IFIs, which have supported and contributed towards the introduction of the new rating system. In that respect, the SEETO network intends to put even stronger efforts to increase the quality of the project fiches and proposals.

If one looks at the reforms made by the region in implementing the transport policy measures, a modest, but steady progress can be noted. More importantly, we are able to realise that investing in soft measures and enabling transfer of best practices through SEETO, has brought benefits to all. However, a lot needs to be done more, in order to catch up with the EU standards and level of services in the transport area, to improve the operations and to make the market more efficient. Therefore, we are committed to meeting the objectives of the SEETO Strategic Work Programme’s Project Tasks. Investing more today, will narrow the gaps of tomorrow.

Finally, I expect that the update of the Regional Transport Study (REBIS) in 2013 should give us the basis for further investments in removal of physical and non-physical barriers.

In the period of stringent economic measures, we must be smart in gaining more with investing less. That is possible only with effective coordination and intensified cooperation that extends beyond the borders of the region. As Croatia is entering the EU as of next year, we remain with the ultimate challenge and perspective - to fully integrate and become part of the common European transport system.

4


EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

5

SEETO Regional Cooperation plays a vital role in the process of transport system development in the South East Europe focusing not only on infrastructure development but on horizontal measures as an integrated part of the system as well. Development of the SEETO Comprehensive Network up to the TEN-T standards and further integration of the South East European Transport System in the European remains a prevailing goal of the cooperation. Thus, the SEETO Comprehensive Network Development Plan 2013 is made based on the requirements stated in the MoU as well as on the main needs addressed by the Regional Participants, the European Commission and the Financial Institutions that jointly participate in the SEETO Cooperation.

The focus of MAP 2013 is put on the analyses of the overall transport system reflecting to date achievements of the SEETO Cooperation together with the evaluation and presentation of main priority projects on the SEETO Comprehensive Network. As stated in the first chapter, it provides strong basis for further determination on the SEETO Comprehensive Network development at regional level, approaching the standards established at European level.

The MAP 2013 second chapter provides a detailed analysis of the SEETO Comprehensive Network developments that occurred in the previous year. Each transport mode is elaborated separately throughout main aspects occurred in regulatory regimes, new infrastructure developments and traffic trends. Analyses of the current state of the SEETO Comprehensive Network together with identification of less developed segments which require additional focus are presented.

The third chapter presents an overall assessment of investment trends in the South East European region in the 2007-2011 period showing positive trends in mentioned period reaching €10.8 billion implemented and ongoing/finance secured investments. In the 2001-2011 period, 66% of investments in completed projects and 67% in finance secured/ongoing projects were financed from budgets and IFI loans. However, bearing in mind current financial crisis and limited potential to increase taxes to service more debt, the same sources of funding for the Network development might not be available in the same volume in the forthcoming period. Accordingly, the importance of focusing on those key investment projects that can deliver the most value in terms of their potential to ensure socio-economic development and greater integration into the EU transport network is becoming even more important. The main regional infrastructure priorities, evaluated based on the `SEETO Priority Projects Rating Methodology`, are presented in the fourth chapter of the document. The MAP 2013 priority projects list reflects the highest priorities for the future investments in the SEETO Comprehensive Network and provides objective and consistent view on the quality of the projects nominated. High maturity of regional priorities is detected based on the fact that 72% of total required investments (€8.2 billion) are foreseen for implementation in priority projects eligible for funding.

Horizontal measures analysed in correlation with proposed SEETO strategic projects are addressed in the final chapter of the document together with proposals for overall improvement of the transport system in the South East Europe.

6


TABLE OF CONTENT1. Introduction

2. Assessment of the SEETO Comprehensive Network

2.1 SEETO Comprehensive Road Network .................................................................................................................................................................... 10

2.2 SEETO Comprehensive Rail Network ....................................................................................................................................................................... 12

2.3 SEETO Comprehensive Network Airports .............................................................................................................................................................. 15

2.4 SEETO Comprehensive Inland Waterway Network ............................................................................................................................................. 17

2.5 SEETO Comprehensive Network Seaports ............................................................................................................................................................. 18

3. SEETO Comprehensive Network investments

3.1 Assessment of completed and finance secured/ongoing projects investments .................................................................................... 19

3.2 Assessment of completed and finance secured/ongoing priority projects .............................................................................................. 20

3.3. Investment needs on the SEETO Comprehensive Network ........................................................................................................................... 21

4. MAP 2013 Priority Projects

4.1 Priority projects for implementation ....................................................................................................................................................................... 23

4.2 Priority projects for preparation ................................................................................................................................................................................ 26

4.3 Presentation of road network projects by corridor/route ................................................................................................................................ 28

4.3.1 Road Corridor Vc ...................................................................................................................................................................................................... 28

4.3.2 Road Corridor VIII .................................................................................................................................................................................................... 30

4.3.3 Road Corridor X ........................................................................................................................................................................................................ 31

4.3.4 Road Route 1 ............................................................................................................................................................................................................. 33

4.3.5 Road Route 2a .......................................................................................................................................................................................................... 34

4.3.6 Road Route 2b .......................................................................................................................................................................................................... 35

4.3.7 Road Route 2c .......................................................................................................................................................................................................... 36

4.3.8 Road Route 3 ............................................................................................................................................................................................................. 37

4.3.9 Road Route 4 ............................................................................................................................................................................................................. 38

4.3.10 Road Route 6a ........................................................................................................................................................................................................ 39

4.3.11 Road Route 7 .......................................................................................................................................................................................................... 40

4.4 Presentation of rail network projects by corridor/route ................................................................................................................................... 41

4.4.1 Rail Corridor Vb ........................................................................................................................................................................................................ 41

4.4.2 Rail Corridor VIII ....................................................................................................................................................................................................... 42

4.4.3 Rail Corridor X ........................................................................................................................................................................................................... 43

4.4.4 Rail Corridor Xb ........................................................................................................................................................................................................ 45

4.4.5 Rail Corridor Xd ........................................................................................................................................................................................................ 46

4.4.6 Rail Route 4 ................................................................................................................................................................................................................ 47

4.4.7 Rail Route 10 ............................................................................................................................................................................................................. 49

4.5 Airports ............................................................................................................................................................................................................................... 50

4.6 Inland waterways and river ports ............................................................................................................................................................................. 52

4.7 Seaports ............................................................................................................................................................................................................................. 53

5. Transport policy outlook

5.1 Overview of the progress in the SEETO transport horizontal measures with regional added value ............................................... 55

5.1.1 Railway reform ......................................................................................................................................................................................................... 55

5.1.2 Border-crossing facilitation ................................................................................................................................................................................. 55

7

5.1.3 Road safety auditing .............................................................................................................................................................................................. 56

5.2 Regional Transport Study ............................................................................................................................................................................................. 56

5.3 Regional transport policy monitoring mechanism ............................................................................................................................................ 56

5.3.1 Institutional and Regulatory framework monitoring ................................................................................................................................. 56

5.3.2 Model of trans-national policy cooperation along the main transport axes .................................................................................. 57

Annex 1 - SEETO Comprehensive Network description ................................................................................................................................................ 58

Annex 2 - Fiches for Priority projects for implementation ........................................................................................................................................... 62

Annex 3 - List of completed and finance secured/ongoing priority projects (on CD)

Annex 4 - SEETO Comprehensive Road Network (on CD)

Annex 5 - SEETO Comprehensive Rail Network (on CD)

Annex 6 - SEETO Comprehensive Network Airports (on CD)

Annex 7 - SEETO Comprehensive Inland Waterway Network (on CD)

Annex 8 - SEETO Comprehensive Network Seaports (on CD)

List of Tables

Table 2- 1: SEETO Comprehensive Road Network length by Regional Participant ............................................................................................. 11

Table 2- 2: Condition of the SEETO Comprehensive Road Network (2006, 2009 and 2011) ............................................................................ 12

Table 2- 3: SEETO Comprehensive Rail Network length by Regional Participants............................................................................................... 13

Table 2- 4: The SEETO Comprehensive Rail Network condition (2005-2011) ........................................................................................................ 14

Table 2- 5: SEETO Comprehensive Network airport concessions .............................................................................................................................. 16

Table 3- 1: Status of priority projects by MAP priority lists (2007-2011) .................................................................................................................. 20

Table 4- 1: Rating of priority projects for implementation ........................................................................................................................................... 24

Table 4- 2: Priority projects for preparation ....................................................................................................................................................................... 26

Table 4- 3: Priority projects on the Road Corridor Vc from the MAP 2013 priority projects list ...................................................................... 28

Table 4- 4: Completed and finance secured/ongoing projects on the Road Corridor Vc .................................................................................. 28

Table 4- 5: Priority projects on the Road Corridor VIII from the MAP 2013 priority projects list ..................................................................... 30

Table 4- 6: Completed and finance secured/ongoing projects on the Road Corridor VIII ................................................................................ 30

Table 4- 7: Priority projects on the Road Corridor X from the MAP 2013 priority projects list ........................................................................ 31

Table 4- 8: Completed and finance secured/ongoing projects on the Road Corridor X ................................................................................... 31

Table 4- 9: Priority projects on the Road Route 1 from the MAP 2013 priority projects list ............................................................................. 33

Table 4- 10: Completed and ongoing projects on the Road Route 1 ....................................................................................................................... 33

Table 4- 11: Priority projects on the Road Route 2a from the MAP 2013 priority projects list ........................................................................ 34

Table 4- 12: Completed and finance secured/ongoing projects on the Road Route 2a .................................................................................... 34

Table 4- 13: Priority projects on the Road Route 2b from the MAP 2013 priority projects list ........................................................................ 35

Table 4- 14: Completed and finance secured/ongoing projects on the Road Route 2b ................................................................................... 35

Table 4- 15: Priority projects on the Road Route 2c from the MAP 2013 priority projects list ........................................................................ 36

Table 4- 16: Completed and finance secured/ongoing projects on the Road Route 2c .................................................................................... 36

Table 4- 17: Priority projects on the Road Route 3 from the MAP 2013 priority projects list........................................................................... 37

Table 4- 18: Completed and finance secured/ongoing projects on the Road Route 3 ...................................................................................... 37



Table 4- 21: Priority projects on the Road Route 6a from the MAP 2013 priority projects list ........................................................................ 39

Table 4- 22: Completed and finance secured/ongoing projects on the Road Route 6a .................................................................................... 39



Table 4- 25: Priority projects on the Corridor Vb from the MAP 2013 priority projects list .............................................................................. 41

Table 4- 26: Completed and finance secured/ongoing projects on the Corridor Vb .......................................................................................... 41

8


Table 4- 27: Priority projects on the Corridor VIII from the MAP 2013 priority projects list .............................................................................. 42

Table 4- 28: Priority projects on the Corridor X from the MAP 2013 priority projects list ................................................................................. 43

Table 4- 29: Completed and finance secured/ongoing projects on the Corridor X ............................................................................................ 43

Table 4- 30: Priority projects on the Corridor Xb from the MAP 2013 priority projects list .............................................................................. 45

Table 4- 31: Completed and finance secured/ongoing projects on the Corridor Xb ......................................................................................... 45

Table 4- 32: Priority projects on the Corridor Xd from the MAP 2013 priority projects list .............................................................................. 46

Table 4- 33: Priority projects on the Route 4 from the MAP 2013 priority projects list ...................................................................................... 47

Table 4- 34: Completed and finance secured/ongoing projects on the Rail Route 4 ......................................................................................... 47

Table 4- 35: Priority projects on the Route 10 from the MAP 2013 priority projects list ................................................................................... 49

Table 4- 36: Completed and finance secured/ongoing projects on the Rail Route 10....................................................................................... 49

Table 4- 37: Priority projects on the airports from the MAP 2013 priority projects list ...................................................................................... 50

Table 4- 38: Completed and finance secured/ongoing projects on airports ......................................................................................................... 50

Table 4- 39: Priority projects on the inland waterways and river ports from the MAP 2013 priority projects list .................................... 52

Table 4- 40: Completed and finance secured/ongoing projects on inland waterways and river ports ....................................................... 52

Table 4- 41: Priority projects on the seaports from the MAP 2013 priority projects list .................................................................................... 53

Table 4- 42: Completed and finance secured/ongoing projects on seaports ....................................................................................................... 53

List of Figures

Figure 2- 1: SEETO Comprehensive Road Network ......................................................................................................................................................... 11

Figure 2-2: SEETO Comprehensive Rail Network ............................................................................................................................................................. 14

Figure 3- 1: Completed and finance secured/ongoing projects investments per source of funding........................................................... 19

Figure 3- 2: Completed and finance secured/ongoing projects investments per transport mode (2007-2011) ..................................... 20

Figure 3-3: SEETO Comprehensive Road Network - Investment requirements .................................................................................................... 21

Figure 3- 4: SEETO Comprehensive Rail Network - Investment requirements ...................................................................................................... 22

Figure 4-1: Road priority projects eligible for funding................................................................................................................................................... 23

Figure 4- 2: Rail projects eligible for funding .................................................................................................................................................................... 25

Figure 4- 3: Overview of all projects on the Road Corridor Vc .................................................................................................................................... 28

Figure 4- 4: Overview of all projects on the Road Corridor VIII ................................................................................................................................... 30

Figure 4- 5: Overview of all projects on the Road Corridor X ...................................................................................................................................... 31

Figure 4- 6: Overview of all projects on the Road Route 1 ........................................................................................................................................... 33

Figure 4- 7: Overview of all projects on the Road Route 2a ......................................................................................................................................... 34

Figure 4- 8: Overview of all projects on the Road Route 2b......................................................................................................................................... 35

Figure 4- 9: Overview of all projects on the Road Route 2c ......................................................................................................................................... 36

Figure 4- 10: Overview of all projects on the Road Route 3 ......................................................................................................................................... 37

Figure 4- 11: Overview of all projects on the Road Route 4 ......................................................................................................................................... 38

Figure 4- 12: Overview of all projects on the Road Route 6a ...................................................................................................................................... 39

Figure 4- 13 : Overview of all projects on the Road Route 7 ........................................................................................................................................ 40

Figure 4- 14: Overview of all projects on the Rail Corridor Vb .................................................................................................................................... 41

Figure 4- 15: Overview of all projects on the Rail Corridor VIII .................................................................................................................................... 42

Figure 4- 16: Overview of all projects on the Rail Corridor X ....................................................................................................................................... 43

Figure 4- 17: Overview of all projects on the Rail Corridor Xb .................................................................................................................................... 45

Figure 4- 18: Overview of all projects on the Rail Corridor Xd .................................................................................................................................... 46

Figure 4- 19: Overview of all projects on the Rail Route 4 ............................................................................................................................................ 47

Figure 4- 20: Overview of all projects on the Rail Route 10 ......................................................................................................................................... 49

Figure 4- 21: Overview of all projects on airports ............................................................................................................................................................ 50

Figure 4- 22: Overview of all projects on the inland waterways and river ports .................................................................................................. 52

Figure 4- 23: Overview of all projects on seaports .......................................................................................................................................................... 53

9

AADT Average Annual Daily Traffic

AMM Annual Meeting of Ministers

BCA Border Crossing Agreement

BCP Border Crossing Points

CEFTA Central European Free Trade Agreement

CAA Civil Aviation Authority

DAHAR Danube Inland Harbor Development

DG MOVE Directorate General for Mobility and Transport

EBRD European Bank of Reconstruction and Development

EC European Commission

ECAA European Common Aviation Area

EDI Electronic Data Interchange

EIA Environmental Impact Assessment

EIB European Investment Bank

ERTMS European Rail Traffic Management System

ETCS European Train Control System

EU European Union

FAB Functional Airspace Block

GIS Geographical Information System

GDP Gross Domestic Product

HCM Highway Capacity Manual

HGV Heavy Goods Vehicle

IDB Islamic Development Bank

IRI International Roughness Index

IFC International Finance Corporation

IFI International Financial Institution

ILS Instrument Landing System

IM Infrastructure Manager

IPA Instrument for Pre-accession assistance

IPF Infrastructure Project Facility

ITS Intelligent transportation system

IWW Inland waterway

KfW Kreditanstalt für Wiederaufbau

MAP Multi Annual Plan

MoU Memorandum of Understanding

NAPA North Adriatic Port Association

NEWADA Network of Danube Waterway Administrations)

NIPAC National IPA (Instrument for Pre-Accession) Coordinator

NC National Coordinator(s)

NRSS National Road Safety Strategy

NS Network Statement

OPEC Organization of the Petroleum Exporting Countries

OSS One Stop Shop

PMoU The Paris Memorandum of Understanding on Port State Control

RB Regulatory Body

REBIS Regional Balkan Infrastructure Study

RIS River Information Services

RSA/RSI Road Safety Auditing/Road Safety Inspection

SC Steering Committee

SEE South East Europe

SEETO South East Europe Transport Observatory

SEETIS South East Europe Transport Information System

TEN-T Trans-European Transport Network

TAV Tepe Akfen Ventures

TAIEX Technical Assistance and Information Exchange

TIA Tirana International Airport

UIC International Union of Railways

UNECE United Nations Economic Commission for Europe

VTMIS Vessel Traffic Monitoring Information System

WANDA Waste management for inland Navigation on the Danube

WATERMODE Transnational Network for the Promotion of the Wa-ter-ground Multimodal Transport

WB World Bank

WBIF Western Balkan Investment Framework

WG Working Group

ZAIC Zagreb Airport International Company

ABBREVIATIONS

10


1. INTRODUCTION

Seven Regional Participants and the European Commission signed the Memorandum of Understanding1 (MoU) for the Development of the Core Regional Transport Network in 2004. The main objective of the MoU is to stimulate development of the regional high level transport network (SEETO Comprehensive Network) fostering the most efficient and environmentally friendly transport modes, and to promote and enhance common transport policies to facilitate infrastructure development. The South East Europe Transport Observatory (SEETO) has been established in 2005 to facilitate the implementation of the MoU. The Multi Annual Plan (MAP) which is the main regional transport planning document is used as one of the instruments by the SEETO in supporting the infrastructural development in the South East Europe.

Development of transport infrastructure in the Western Balkans is fundamental for regional development and furthermore, it encourages regional interconnection and integration into the Trans-European Transport Network (TEN-T). This is an explicit point of attention of the Regional Participants which would enable them to strengthen their economic and social cohesion as well as to reduce disparities in levels of transport infrastructure development in the Western Balkans region.

Therefore, the main purpose of the MAP is to give an overview of the SEETO Comprehensive Network as well as to provide guidelines for future transport development of the region. Correspondingly, the main goal of the MAP is to depict the SEETO Comprehensive Network together with key regional priority projects as well as to encourage further reforms in the transport sector. The purpose of such presentation is to promote and stimulate regional transport development in a most effective and efficient way.

A recent paper prepared for the stakeholders within the Western Balkan Investment Framework (WBIF)2 concluded that the growth prospects for the Western Balkans regions have significantly deteriorated over the last three years, while public debt which is comparably low in the Western Balkans in comparison to EU countries has increased rapidly in the last few years. Accordingly, the importance of strategic transport planning by identifying main regional priorities became even more important considering worsening economic situation in the Europe and Western Balkans region. Taking previously said into account, a `SEETO Priority Projects Rating Methodology` document was adopted in July 2012 in order to provide Regional Participants and potential external financiers with an objective and consistent view on the quality of the projects nominated as relevant for the implementation of the SEETO Comprehensive Network.

In order to provide necessary analyses and information on transport activities, the SEETO developed a data management system - South East Europe Information System (SEETIS) 3. The SEETIS 3 is an internet based GIS application which provides access and tools to geographical and textual information held by the SEETO. The application allows remote users to use the benefits of the SEETO Information System. It is embedded in the SEETO web site and acts as a portal for remote users and public to submit and obtain information about the SEETO Comprehensive Network, infrastructure condition, traffic performances and investment projects.

2. ASSESSMENT OF THE SEETO COMPREHENSIVE NETWORKImprovements of the SEETO Comprehensive Network in the year 2011 are presented in the following chapter. Each transport mode is elaborated separately throughout the following topics: a) regulatory changes; b) new infrastructure developments and traffic trends; for roads and railways c) maintenance; d) border crossing.

2.1 SEETO Comprehensive Road NetworkRegulatory changesCategorisation of roads in the Western Balkans region was the main topic regarding road infrastructure legislation development in last years as the application of a road hierarchy provides basis for competency in road planning and designing as well as responsibilities for road operation, funding, maintenance and liability. As a result, new laws on road categorisation together with accompanying decrees were adopted in Bosnia and Herzegovina, Croatia, Serbia and Kosovo*. In Albania, categorisation of roads was included in the newly adopted ’Strategy of the development of road transport‘ and in Montenegro study for the re-categorisation of local and regional roads has been finished and will serve as a basis for future legislative acts.

Improvement of road safety was another topic of great importance to the Regional Participants as the road safety indicators are still high in the Western Balkans region comparing to the best performing EU countries3. The first step towards the improvements marked the adoption of road safety laws, establishment of road safety management institutions and basis for road safety strategy and action plans development in majority of Regional Participants. The purpose of road safety management bodies is to analyse, monitor and improve the road traffic safety system through preventive and promotional activities and establish cooperation with international and national institutions.

1www.seetoint.org/wp-content/uploads/downloads/2012/11/16_memorandum-of-understanding-on-the-development-of-the-south-east-europe-core-regional-transport-network.pdf* This designation is without prejudice to positions on status, and is in line with UNSCR 1244 and ICJ Advisory opinion on the Kosovo declaration of independence. 2Outlook for Macro-Economic Development in the Western Balkans and Implications for the WBIF, IFI Coordination Office, May 2012 3More information can be found in Chapter 5 and Annex 4 (available on CD)

11

Table 2- 1: SEETO Comprehensive Road Network length by Regional Participant

Regional Participant Total km

Albania 729

Bosnia and Herzegovina 870

Croatia 1,606

the former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia

708

Montenegro 640

Serbia 1,622

Kosovo 354

Total 6,529Source: SEETIS III

Figure 2- 1: SEETO Comprehensive Road Network

Infrastructure and traffic development of the SEETO Comprehensive Road Network

When comparing to 2010, difference in the SEETO Comprehensive road network length in 2011 could be noticed (6,554 km in 2010) due to the minor alignment modification (Route 7 in Albania, Corridor VIII in the former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia and Route 1 in Montenegro).

Development of the SEETO Comprehensive Road Network infrastructure in 2011 was marked by the large construction works on Corridor X, Corridor VIII and Route 7 and additional smaller scale works on other corridors and routes (all projects are presented by corridor/route in Chapter 4 and Annex 2).

Positive output of high investments in the road network is perceivable in 36% increase of roads in motorway or dual carriageway standards from 2006 to 2011. In 2011, 244 km of motorways were opened for traffic upon the completion of road network projects, what makes 4% of the total SEETO Comprehensive Road Network.

Level of Service (LoS) D to F was recorded on 703km (11% of the network) which indicates 26% decrease of congested sections on the SEETO Comprehensive Road Network comparing to the previous year (2010) primarily as a result of newly constructed motorway sections.

12


The Highway Capacity Manual describes the LOS levels as follows:Level of Service A: Free flow,Level of Service B: Stable flow,Level of Service C: Stable flow,Level of Service D: Unstable flow,Level of Service E: Operating conditions are at or near thecapacity level,Level of Service F: Forced or breakdown flow, formation ofqueues.

Foreseen finalisation of Belgrade By-pass construction (Serbia) in 2012/2013 marks one step forward in bottleneck mitigation on the SEETO Comprehensive Road Network. The project is expected to facilitate the most congested part of the Network (LoS F), with the highest traffic recorded in 2011 (127,842 AADT) as well as to remove all transit traffic from the city centre.

Table 2- 2: Condition of the SEETO Comprehensive Road Network (2006, 2009 and 2011)

SEETO Class. 2006 (%) 2009 (%) 2011 (%)

Very Good 26 21 20

Good 20 37 40

Medium 39 35 33

Poor 6 3 5

Very Poor 9 4 2Source: SEETIS III

Road maintenance

In order to modernise road maintenance practices, the project Road infrastructure and safety financed by the World Bank (`WB`) is ongoing in Bosnia and Herzegovina (Republic of Srpska)4, while in Albania introduction of performance-based contract and improvement of road safety is foreseen to be developed as a part of planned WB financed project. Total Regional Participants expenditures in SEETO Comprehensive Road Network maintenance amounted €131.855 million in 2011. However, the amount invested in the SEETO Comprehensive road network maintenance among Regional Participants differs significantly from €1.7 million in Albania to €65.3 million in Croatia

Border-crossings on the SEETO Road Comprehensive Network

Unlike the standard performance indicators for network conditions, traffic flows etc. on the basis of which the SEETO Comprehensive Network is being assessed annually, there is a lack of data (and unified methodology) for determining the waiting times on border-crossing points along the SEETO Comprehensive Network, which surely represent one of the most important indicators for the performance of the entire SEETO Comprehensive Road Network. The SEETO is striving year by year to invigorate the data collection related to border-crossings, in order to be able to better identify the bottlenecks on the entire Network and to monitor the improvements.

In addition to 14 external BCPs with EU member States, there are 38 in ternal BCPs along the SEETO Road Comprehensive Network.

From the data available6, the biggest delays on road border crossings in 2011 occurred at the BCPs Kapshtice and Kakvije between Albania and Greece on the Corridor VIII and Route 2c, accordingly, where the average entry delay for trucks was 80 minutes, followed by the BCP Morine (Route 7) and BCP Gradina (Route 5) with average of 60 minutes recorded waiting time delays.

Compared to the previous year, no changes can be reported in the waiting time for all previously mentioned BCPs, while for a relatively unchanged traffic flow for heavy good vehicles, the situation has aggravated at the BCP Batrovci (Corridor X) and Horgos (Corridor Xb), which recorded delays of respectively 27 and 39 minutes in 2010, but 55 and 57 minutes in 2011, accordingly.

Despite the general trend of shortening the waiting times at borders in the South East Europe compared to the last decade, further reducing of excessive delays and cutting the cumbersome procedures, in particular for freight transport, is still an issue that urges for attention, as it can be concluded from the data presented. More details about the further plans of SEETO in this area can be found in Chapter 5 and the SEETO Report on Border-crossing facilitation7.

2.2 SEETO Comprehensive Rail NetworkRegulatory changes

Following the EU initiative to create integrated railway area and concomitant reforming process, South East Europe Regional Participants embarked on this tendency in order to make railways more competitive, primarily by improving railway transport services8.

In regard to the Addendum and aiming to determine exact status of the implemented reforms as well as to enable opening of the rail market in SEE, the SEETO prepared South East Europe Rail Reform Progress Report9 which provides an overview of the current state of play and guidelines for future actions.

Regional Participants were active in preparation of the new railway laws which would enable open market and increase competitiveness of railways. To this end, Albania, Montenegro and Serbia prepared new draft laws on railways which are expected to be adopted by the end of 2012. Kosovo adopted the new law on railways in 2011 that further regulates restructuring of the railway sector, focusing on rail interoperability and safety system improvement as well as non-discriminatory access to operators. In parallel, Montenegro and Serbia prepared new laws on railway safety to ensure development and improvement of safety and interoperability, encircling rail transport policy.

Croatia, the former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia and Montenegro have previously separated their integrated railway companies while in 2011 the process continued in

4Source - Western Balkans Investment Framework 5Data missing from the former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia and Montenegro6Data is missing from Croatia and the former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia7The Report is available on www.seetoint.org8Addendum to the Memorandum of Understanding on the Development of the South East Europe Core Regional Transport Network for a South East European Railway Transport Area9The Report is available on www.seetoint.org

13

Kosovo by separation of integrated rail company into two companies (infrastructure manager - INFRAKOS and train operations - TRAINKOS) and in Serbia with transformation of integrated company ’Serbian Railways‘ into a joint stock company, comprised of one coordinating company and four daughter companies (passenger, freight, infrastructure manager and asset management).

Regarding the institutional setup of the rail authorities necessary for regulating an open rail market, most of the Regional Participants have established regulatory bodies (except Albania). Bosnia and Herzegovina, Montenegro, Serbia and Kosovo incorporated safety, licensing and regulatory function into one authority while Croatia and the former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia have established completely separate bodies.

Croatia’s new Safety Authority which will implement procedures related to safety certificates of railway undertakings began with operations in May 2011. This Authority is responsible for the approval of safety management systems, vehicle authorisation, train driver licenses and registers, the inventory of national safety rules and their reporting to the NOTIFID databank of the European Railway Agency10.

Further on, the former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia focused on the establishment of the Committee for rail accident and incident investigation (Accident Investigation Body). In order to further fortify the role of the Montenegrin Railway Directorate, Technical Assistance for the elaboration of five year strategic programme has been secured through IPA.

Even though the progress in the implementation of the Addendum is evident, especially in the legislative field and the institutional setup, complete operational establishment is still lagging behind.

Infrastructure and traffic development of the SEETO Comprehensive Rail Network

The SEETO Comprehensive Rail Network length differs in comparison to the MAP 2012 (4,807km) due to the update of the data on the alignment.

Table 2- 3: SEETO Comprehensive Rail Network length by Regional ParticipantsRegional Participant Total kmAlbania 392Bosnia and Herzegovina 652Croatia 1,422the former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia 531Montenegro 184Serbia 1,445Kosovo 151Total 4,777

Source: SEETIS 2 (2011)

The SEETO Comprehensive Rail Network improvement in 2011 was characterised by rehabilitation and overhaul works on the Corridor X and Vc and several smaller scale works on other sections. Reconstruction of section Vinkovci-Tovarnik (33.9 km) in Croatia, financed from ISPA, presents one of the flagship projects of enhancing infrastructure parameters along the Corridor X. Alongside condition improvement, projected speed has been upgraded to 160km/h and ERTMS equipment have been initially introduced on Croatian railways.

On the Serbian side, reconstruction and modernisation of section Batajnica-Golubinci (24 km) was completed as the first part of a larger EIB programme `Reconstruction and upgrading of Corridor X in Serbia`. Final output of the project was to increase speed parameters up to 160 km/h and construction of the double track, setting the double track traffic on the entire railway line between Belgrade and Sid (Croatian border).

The completed projects have contributed to the infrastructure condition improvement, where 19% increase of sections in Very Good to Medium condition11 in comparison to 2005 level was recorded.

On the Corridor Vc in Bosnia and Herzegovina, overhaul and signalisation instalment on section Konjic-Capljina was completed, improving safety and environmental standards. Introduced upgrade will enable more efficient transport of the freight (94.2 % of total traffic in 200912) from Port of Ploce, the largest entry point of goods for Bosnia and Herzegovina.

Development of interoperable, environmentally friendly rail network is a focal point of the EU infrastructure policy. To this purpose, harmonisation of electrification system (to 25 kV/50Hz) on Corridor Vb (Croatia) is currently being conducted. Upon completion of the project, the whole SEETO Comprehensive Rail Network will have one electrification standard (25 kV/50Hz).

Considering that the SEETO Comprehensive rail network is electrified in its largest part (52%), future integration of railways into transport system and improving competitiveness of railways is a priority. It will positively influence on reduction of road congestions actualising more balanced modal share.

The SEETO Comprehensive Rail Network freight and passenger traffic volume followed the same pattern, experiencing steady decline (passenger 19%, freight 2%) in 2011 from 201013. The Corridor X, with 42% of freight and 67% of passenger traffic volume in 2011, was the main artery for transportation and mobility in the region.

Bottlenecks on the SEETO Comprehensive Rail Network were recorded mostly on the Corridor X in the wider area of capitals (Croatia and Serbia), on 60 km of double track sections and 195 km single track sections. Currently under preparation is the project documentation for upgrading Croatian Corridor`s X section Dugo Selo-Novska from one to two tracks (financed by IPA). Project addresses one of the bottlenecks and will facilitate traffic on one of the most frequent parts of the SEETO Comprehensive Network.

10South East Europe Rail Reform Progress Report, SEETO, 201211Missing links have not been taken into calculation12Railway Reform in South East Europe and Turkey, World Bank , 201113Additional information can be found in Annex 5 (available on CD)

14


After a long period of under investing in the rail infrastructure, current ongoing and planned projects indicate that the revitalisation of the main rail lines has commenced. However, stronger commitment of the Regional Participants is necessary in order to increase attractiveness of railway transport and to achieve more balanced modal share.

Table 2- 4: The SEETO Comprehensive Rail Network condition (2005-2011)

SEETO Class. 2005 (%) 2011 (%)

Very Good 0 1

Good 9 20

Medium 53 61

Poor 30 11

Very Poor 1 3

No information 7 4

Total 100 100

Source: SEETIS 2 (2011)

Rail Maintenance

Total maintenance expenditures in the SEETO Comprehensive Rail Network were approximately €97 million (2011)14. The largest part (54%) was placed in infrastructural maintenance and other part was divided on maintenance of signalling and telecommunication systems and electrification systems.

Segmentation of the SEETO Comprehensive Rail Network maintenance expenditures by Regional Participants indicates large differences, where Croatia (67.7 M€) and Bosnia and Herzegovina (21.3 M€) allocate the most in maintenance expenditure.

Border-crossings on the SEETO Rail Comprehensive Network

As already mentioned in the road border crossing section, main issue of calculating waiting times at the border-crossing points along the SEETO Comprehensive Network is a lack of data and unified methodology. Nevertheless the SEETO strives to stimulate data collection related to border-crossings and to provide sustainable data regarding the current status.According to the received data15, the biggest delay on rail border crossing points in 2011 was on BCP Dimitrovgrad

Figure 2-2: SEETO Comprehensive Rail Network

14Data missing for Montenegro 15Data is missing from Croatia, the former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia and Montenegro

15

(Corridor Xc), where the average entry delay for freight trains was 300 minutes. It is followed by the BCP Vrsac (Route 4) with average entry delay of 120 minutes for freight trains and BCP Hani i Hotit (Route 2).

The greatest changes were recorded on the BCPs with the largest delays in 2010 (BCP Dimitrovgrad) where the delay for freight trains was reduced from 603 to 300 minutes (50%) in 2011. However, the situation aggravated at the BCP Vrsac, from 103 to 120 minutes.

Several Regional Participants signed border crossing agreements (the former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia – Kosovo; Montenegro – Serbia; Serbia – Bulgaria) on the establishing one joint border station, while current negotiations are ongoing between Montenegro and Albania. Implementation of the agreements would significantly reduce the border waiting times, but the implementation has not yet started and is expected in the forthcoming years.

Excessive waiting times and cumbersome procedures present one of the largest impediments to transport in the region. Due to the large number of BCPs in relatively small area, railways in the Western Balkan are losing market to other rail lines (EU) and to other modes as well. Hence, regional cooperation and reduction of waiting times are of the largest significance for establishing free undisturbed transport flow and for the future prosperity of railways.

2.3 SEETO Comprehensive Network Airports

Regulatory changes

Establishment of air transport organisational and institutional regulations in the Western Balkans is carried out by the implementation of European Common Aviation Area (ECAA) agreement. Even though deadline for ECAA Agreements First Phase implementation was the year 2010, only Croatia fully completed the process in 2011, while the other Regional Participants are still in the implementation phase with significant progresses recorded in the last year16.

In the recent years, all Regional Participants established Civil Aviation Authority together with other centres responsible for air transport safety, while in Serbia in 2011, the Centre for Investigation of Accidents and Serious Incidents as a separate and independent institution was established. Inspection oversight functions and activities from the Ministry of Infrastructure to the Civil Aviation Directorate were transferred. On the other hand, full functionality of Albanian Civil Aviation Authority (CAA) has been approved in 2011 by evocating Albanian Airlines license together with one Belle Air`s aircraft in order to prevent its appearance on EU banned carriers list. Aiming towards mentioned situation resolvement, Albanian CAA contracted an external expert to assist in the issue on the establishment of adequate safety oversight and improve the performance of air transport in Albania.

As for airport privatisations in the Western Balkans, Croatia has adopted amendments to the Air Law related to concessions (2011) in order to establish a legal basis for Zagreb Airport concession contract signing (2012). A 30 years concession contract was signed with ZAIC17 consortium which foresees €236 million investments for the design and construction of the new terminal and €88 million for operation of all airport infrastructures for the entire period of the concession.

Prevailing problem regarding the air transport in the Western Balkans is the development of the route network as well as lack of intraregional connectivity. Different approaches in resolving are used, such as adoption of Decree on granting financial support to domestic and foreign airlines in the former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia in 2012 where procedure for granting financial support to the domestic and foreign airlines is finished, and Agreement for Financial support was signed between the Government of the former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia (trough the Ministry of Transport and communications) and Wizz Air Hungary.

In 2012, the agreement on bilateral cooperation in the field of air traffic management between Serbia and Montenegro has been signed. The cooperation agreement presents postulate for further cooperation between the Regional Participants Aviation Authorities that should strengthen their position towards the Single European Sky agreement on the Functional Airspace Blocks (FAB) implementation. The second agreement relates to the signing of Memorandum of Understanding between United Arab Emirates (UEA) and Albania which enables a number of designated airlines the right to fly between signatories.

It can be concluded that the air transport in the Western Balkans is evolving from year to year by application of EU legislation. However, the problem of intraregional connectivity prevails, where majority of destinations from and to the SEETO Comprehensive Network airports are in the Western Europe and only 10% of all air transport operations in the region are made within the SEETO Comprehensive network. Underdeveloped connections between the SEE capitals and major cities represent a barrier for fast and convenient travel within the region. New air links within the SEE region could considerably improve mobility and accelerate economic integration and cooperation processes. In that respect, this new mobility potential should be further considered and analysed to determine whether a new optimised air transport network could be established.

Infrastructure and traffic development of the SEETO Comprehensive Network Airports

Infrastructure projects on the expansion and reconstruction of airport terminal buildings marked previous year’s development of the SEETO Comprehensive Network Airports even though their maximum capacities still meet current demand.

16European Commission – Enlargement – Enlargement strategy and Progress reports 201117ZAIC – Zagreb Airport International Company - France’s Aéroports de Paris Management (a subsidiary of Aéroports de Paris), Bouygues Bâtiment International (a subsidiary of Bouygues Construction) and Viadukt (a Croatian construction company)

16


Airport Belgrade and Zagreb that recorded the highest passenger and cargo traffic in 2011 operate with the capacity utilisation at respectively 62% and 84%. Nevertheless, reconstruction of the airport of Belgrade that recorded the highest passenger traffic in 2011 (3.1 million passengers) began at the end of 2011, while the airport of Zagreb was given under concession (2012) for the construction and operation as mentioned in the previous subchapter18.

In the year 2011 the total number of passengers carried in the SEETO Comprehensive Network airports increased by 17% comparing to 2010, reaching to 14.8 million passengers.

Beside Zagreb airport construction, Croatian airports Split and Dubrovnik have prepared projects for the reconstruction and development in the forthcoming period, as well. Difficulties in securing finances for Dubrovnik and Split airports reconstruction are evident due to the high seasonal variations (peaks) in a number of flights and passengers that undermine possibilities for further infrastructure investments.

Private sector investments under the concession agreements in airport sector are highly represented as an alternative possibility for securing necessary funding in the process of the SEETO Comprehensive Network airports development.

Successful implementation of project through a public private partnership portfolio may be seen in the airport Tirana example, where EBRD granted a loan (2008) to a concessionaire Tirana International Airport (TIA) for the second phase construction. Indisputable positive outputs of first applied concession agreement on the SEETO Comprehensive Network airports are reflected in doubling of passenger traffic on Tirana Airport in 2011 from 2006.

Additional reason for Tirana`s airport significant increase can be found in visa liberalisation with the EU countries, entered into force on December 2010 and completion of Air Traffic Control modernisation project.

In the former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia successful completion of Airport of Skopje and Ohrid construction and reconstruction were completed in 2011 as a part of concession agreement signed in 2008 with Turkish company Tepe Akfen Ventures (TAV). Airport Skopje currently operates on a largest apron terminal area (40,000 m2) area in the region and has highest maximum capacity of 4.2 million passengers in the region. Positive outputs of the project implementation are perceivable in 13.3% passenger air traffic volume increase in 2011 from 2010.

Construction and rehabilitation of airports Skopje and Ohrid that were given under concession to Turkish company Tepe Akfen Ventures (TAV) in 2008 were completed in 2011.

On the other hand, private sector investments seem unlikely to be made in the airports such as airport Banja Luka (Bosnia and Herzegovina), Rijeka, Osijek (Croatia) and Nis (Serbia) that have very low traffic volumes (less than 100 000 passengers). Additional focus should be placed towards its development in a view of applying different mechanisms for the attraction of airlines or reorienting airport development strategies towards general aviation.

From foregoing information it can be concluded that even though capacity of the SEETO Comprehensive Network airports meet current demand, plans for their further infrastructure and operational development are in place. Upon the finalisation of previously stated projects and further opening of the air transport market in the SEE, the SEETO Comprehensive Network airports might find their possibility to increase their operation volumes and at the same time facilitate existing congestion problems on major European airports.

Table 2- 5: SEETO Comprehensive Network airport concessions

Airport Concessionaire Agreement signed (year)

Concession duration

Investments as foreseen in the concession agreement

Tirana TIA - Hochtief Airport GmbH, Deutsche Investitions und Entwicklungsgesells-chaft (DEG) and the Albanian-American Enterprise Fund (AAEF).

2004 20 years €21 million concession fees to the Government; €82 million in construction - COMPLETED

Ohrid TAV - Tepe Akfen Ventures 2008 20 years €100 million in construction - All construction works for airport Skopje and Ohrid are COMPLETED

Skopje

Zagreb ZAIC - France’s Aéroports de Paris Man-agement, Bouygues Bâtiment Interna-tional and Viadukt

2012 30 years €236 million design and construction of the new terminal €88 million for operation – AGREEMENT SIGNED

Pristina Turkish-French Consortium ‘Limak & Airports de Lyon”

2010 20 years €100 million in construction - ONGOING

Source: SEETO

18Additional information can be found in Annex 6 (available on CD)

17

2.4 SEETO Comprehensive Inland Waterway Network

Regulatory changes

Considering the inland waterway sector, the Regional Participants are further developing and aligning their legislation with the EU acquis. In Croatia the bylaws for the River Information Services have been changed and updated while in Serbia, the application of RIS, based on the Law on Navigation and Ports on Inland Waterways, which will improve navigation and transport on the SEETO Comprehensive Inland Waterway Network, will be mandatory from 2013.

Furthermore, Serbia has established Agency for Management of the Ports, in order to secure better management and plan future development of the state-owned river ports. After the official endorsement of the European Union Strategy for Danube Region by the European Council on 24 June 2011, implementation of the Strategy has started. Regional Participants, albeit not the EU members, are actively taking part in the implementation and contributing to the harmonised development of the Danube region connectivity. As a first step, priority projects for 1st priority area (Mobility) were proposed in 2012.

Alongside infrastructure development and transposition of the EU legislation, several transnational projects have been conducted with the aim of cross border cooperation enhancement. NEWADA19 (Network of Danube Waterway Administrations) aspired at increasing the efficiency of the Danube by intensifying the cooperation between Waterway Administrations. Project WANDA20 related to protection of the Danube and its ecosystem from pollution, aimed to establish cross-border coordinated ship waste management system along the Danube. Furthermore, WATERMODE21 project (Transnational Network for the promotion of the Water-Ground Multimodal Transport) intended to promote the coordination between the actors dealing with logistics for a better management of the multi-modal logistics cooperation, especially exploiting the ground/water connections.

Infrastructure and traffic development of the SEETO Comprehensive Inland Waterway Network

On the SEETO Comprehensive Inland Waterway Network, activities were focused on the instalment of the River Information Services on the river Danube in Croatia and Serbia, where 15 Automatic Identification Base Stations were put into operation. Implementation of RIS on Danube in Serbia was extended on the River Sava, where three Automatic Identification Base stations are planned to be installed. Development of control centre for River Information Services (RIS) in Sisak (Croatia) is ongoing, while full introduction of RIS on River Sava is planned by the beginning of 2015.

Introduction of RIS on the SEETO Comprehensive Network inland waterways is expected to significantly improve navigability and contribute to increase in currently marginal transport flows on the River Danube and the River Sava.

Due to the heavy winter, navigation on the Danube was completely stopped in one period, resulting in decrease (by 14%) of freight traffic flows in Serbia. Several measures are being conducted with the objective of increasing reliability of IWW transport. Removal of UXO is ongoing on the Danube in Serbia in order to protect the environment and ensure safe navigation conditions in those parts of Corridor VII. The action is a part of an EU-funded project.

Additionally, from IPA 2010, funding was secured for preparation of tender and project documentation for regulation and dredging works on the Danube in Serbia, with the main goal of critical section removal and enhancing navigability and ensuring stable transport flows.

Bosnia and Herzegovina, Croatia and Serbia have concluded agreements on the improvement of Sava River waterway navigation and technical maintenance. The project of restoration and development of the waterway and navigation on the Sava River waterway entered the final phase of planning, which will result in final design of the waterway and other technical documentation necessary for the execution of works22.

River ports of the SEETO Comprehensive Network have substantial capacity but the equipment and infrastructure in most of the ports require reinvestment, which affects the utilisation of inland waterway ports as multimodal connecting points and logistical centres.

In 2011, the Port of Novi Sad had the highest freight traffic23 on the SEETO Comprehensive Network (608 Kt of loaded and unloaded units) with the decline of 4% in comparison to 2010. The port of Novi Sad is included in the DAHAR24 project, which aims on integration of waterway cargo transport into the logistic network and development of logistical and multi-modal capacities of their ports and port areas.

The SEETO Comprehensive Inland Waterway Network is predominantly used for the freight transport, while passenger transport is largely limited to tourist and leisure activities along the River Danube. The largest passenger frequency was recorded in the Port of Belgrade, as the one of the largest touristic city centres along the Danube accounting 445 passenger vessels and 57,817 passengers.

The port of Brcko25 (River Sava) experienced the sharpest freight traffic decline (77%) in 2011. Due to the low water levels navigation was entirely halted from July to December. Low water levels influence reliability on the River Sava and on some parts of the Danube present a large obstacle to stable transport flows. Hence, rapid rehabilitation of the Sava and Danube waterway and ensuring sustainable transport flows are of utmost importance, in order to establish effective inland waterway network.

19www.newada.eu/20www.wandaproject.eu/21www.watermode.eu/22Official bulletin of the ISRBC, International Sava River Basin Commission, 2012

23Additional information can be found in Annex 7 (available on CD)24www.dahar.eu/25Data missing for Croatian ports: Slavonski Brod, Osijek, Vukovar

18


2.5 SEETO Comprehensive Network SeaportsRegulatory changes

Significant progress in terms of maritime sector development is evident in all three Regional Participants (Albania, Croatia and Montenegro) where the SEETO Comprehensive network seaports are situated. Albania’s Parliamentary Committee approved amendments to Maritime Code that will bring Albanian maritime legislation closer to the EU standards and reflect changes that have occurred over the years in the respective sector. Speaking in operational terms, the code expanded the right to provide cabotage services to the EU flag-carriers and abolished the requirement that ships’ captains must be Albanian nationals.

As Croatia has fully implemented the majority of EU legislation regarding maritime transport, it made another step forward marked completion of Vessel Traffic Monitoring Information System (VTMIS) physical implementation. Similar actions were taken in Montenegro through ongoing EU funded project Èstablishment of VTMIS and improvement of authority’s response to marine pollution incident`.

The Rijeka Gateway Project began in 2003 aiming to increase market competitiveness and efficiency of the Port of Rijeka and its traffic route. The project comprises additional component of private capital introduction into port operations done in coordination with the World Bank. Accordingly, renewal of contract on Brajdica Container and Ro-Ro Terminal concession, which has been signed with the Container Terminal of the Port of Rijeka (Adriatic Gate j.s.c.) for the period of 30 years in 2009, came into force in November 2011.

Based on significant progress in the EU laws implementation, the Paris Memorandum of Understanding on Port State Control (PMoU) Committee agreed that Montenegro can be granted cooperating member status in the framework of the PMoU. Montenegrin Government placed their attention towards improvements in the fields of pollution from vessels and handling of waste, with the adoption of a new Law on protection of the sea from pollution by vessels in 2011.

Infrastructure and traffic development of the SEETO Comprehensive Network Seaports

On majority seaports certain infrastructure works took place during the last year out of which the most significant ones regarding cargo transport occurred on the ports of Durres, Rijeka and Ploce. It is interesting to observe that on almost all SEETO Comprehensive Network seaports decrease in freight traffic volumes (total drop of 11%) and increase in passenger traffic volumes (total increase of 7%) are recorded26.

The port terminal building in Durres was upgraded during the last year (rehabilitation of port building, construction of ferry terminal) and in the forthcoming period extending of the wharfs is planned. It will bring additional possibilities for future development in traffic volumes of the second largest SEETO Comprehensive Network seaport.

Among SEETO Comprehensive Network ports, the port of Rijeka is the largest (9.39 million tonnes) and accordingly due to its great importance for the Western Balkans, European and world maritime traffic its development is the Croatians Government priority. Its importance is also confirmed by inclusion in the North Adriatic Port Association (NAPA). The Adriatic Gate (port of Rijeka) has developed partnerships with all leading global ship owners so that the Port is now connected by regular direct ship lines with the biggest ports in Asia and by daily ship feeder lines it is included in the Mediterranean container system. Port infrastructure is currently being improved and expanded, notwithstanding that ports freight capacity utilisation is at 28%. In spite mentioned improvements in international trade relations and the certain progress done in the ports infrastructure development, a constant yearly decrease around 9% in cargo traffic volumes since the year 2007 is evident due to the global economic crisis.

The same pattern can be observed on the port of Ploce that recorded highest freight traffic drop (44%) from 2010, in spite of the highest investments in seaport sector implemented in its development (€269 million). Reason for such a high drop can be found in reduction of bulk cargo traffic due to difficulties in the operations of major customers in Bosnia and Herzegovina and Italy.

Certain encouragement of the Western Balkans market development potentiated from the Regional Participants or private sector, such as opening a new manufactures and intensification of production in the Regional Participants could significantly increase the SEETO Comprehensive Network seaports turnover.

Guided by the mentioned fact, the Port of Bar, which is planned to be given under the concession, established cooperation with railways of Montenegro and Fiat for the transfer of automobiles which will certainly improve ports traffic performance in the forthcoming period. In order to establish solid ground for mentioned operations, port invested €5.5 million in capacity expansion of transhipment equipment while expected procurement and instalment of all equipment will be completed by the end of 2012.

26Additional information can be found in Annex 8 (available on CD)

19

3. SEETO COMPREHENSIVE NETWORK INVESTMENTS Since the establishment of the SEETO Comprehensive Network significant investments were directed into its development, thereby setting the foundations for regional integration and economic development. Total investments in completed and finance secured/ongoing27 priority and non-priority projects28 on the SEETO Comprehensive Network amounted €10.8 billion in 2007-2011 period.

3.1 Assessment of completed and finance secured/ongoing projects investmentsInvestments in completed projects amount €6.7 billion (63% of total investments) while investments in finance secured/ongoing projects are significantly lower (€3.9 billion) as the financing agreements for its implementation were concluded in a more recent period (2007-2011) when the influence of economic crisis was largely present.

The reduction of the total investments in finance secured/ongoing projects has led to decrease of investments from each source of funding, out of which the highest decrease was recorded in budget investments. On the other hand, the share of IFI loans has grown significantly reaching almost 50% of all investments in finance secured/ongoing projects. Despite increase in its share, it should be also noted that the IFI loans in the Western Balkans are still highly underused as large amount of funding is secured but still not implemented in the projects29.

Large funds were recorded from Òther sources` which are consisted of banks (KfW30 and IDB31), OPEC fund and other bilateral loans. The most important reason for such a high share of Òther sources`, especially in completed projects, could be found in their large presence on the Western Balkans market in 2002-2007 period and their favourable lending conditions in that period of time.

In the observed period, the general trend of very low EU grants utilisation is noticeable in all Regional Participants in accordance to their accessible funds. However, the share of EU funds in finance secured/ongoing projects is significantly higher (7%) than in completed investments (2%) which show positive upwards trend. Lack of absorption capacities is identified stumbling block within the process that precludes full exploitations of the available funds.

Regional Participants should forehand start with the building of adequate absorption capacities in order to achieve greater utilisation of available EU funds in a timely manner, especially taking into account opening additional EU funds to some Regional Participants in the future.

Trend of high investments in the road infrastructure in the Western Balkans (82% of total investments) continued in the 2007-2011 period with noticeable outputs in the road network improvements apparent in 50% decrease of sections in `poor` and `very poor` condition from 2006 to 2010.

Very low investments in environmentally friendly transport modes, namely railways and inland waterways, are persistent in both completed and finance secured/ongoing projects. Accordingly, it is apparent that infrastructure development in the region should be more driven by the national and EU transport development strategies in which environmentally friendly transport modes play a leading role.

27Completed project – implementation of the project completed; Ongoing project – finances secured for project implementation, regardless of whether the implementation of the project has began. Investments in both type of projects refers to rehabilitation, upgrade and construction of transport infrastructure while maintenance is not included.28Priority projects – projects on the SEETO Comprehensive Network that were listed on the SEETO Comprehensive Network Development Plan (MAP) priority project list Non-priority projects – projects on the SEETO Comprehensive Network that were never listed on MAP priority project list292 billion of total allocated funds (all sectors) in Serbia are still not implemented, source European Investment Bank (EIB)30KfW - Kreditanstalt für Wiederaufbau31IDB – Islamic Development Bank

Figure 3- 1: Completed and finance secured/ongoing projects investments per source of funding (2007-2011)

Completed project investments per source of funding

2% 23%7%

43%

25%

IFI loans Budget Other Concessions EU Funds

8%7%

Finance secured/Ongoing project investments per source of funding

18%

19%

48%

IFI loans Budget Other Concessions EU Funds


20

3.2 Assessment of completed and finance secured/ongoing priority projects

Implementation of priority projects on the SEETO Comprehensive Network is of utmost importance for efficient and effective transport system establishment, stimulating regional development in all aspects. Since the establishment of the SEETO Comprehensive Network, 82 projects in total were presented on MAP priority project lists, while the majority were present on more than one list. Since 2007, 29 priority projects have secured finances for its implementation in amount of €4.6 billion which

makes 44% of total completed and allocated funds (€10.8 billion) on the SEETO Comprehensive Network (detailed list of priority projects presented in Annex 3 on CD). Out of other 53 projects, 7 were dropped out of list (postponed) while 46 projects still require financing for its implementation (as presented in table 3-1).

Total of €1.5 billion was invested in 11 priority projects that were completed, while 18 priority projects have secured the financing (€3.1 billion) but due to their larger scale are still in the process of implementation. The implementation of mentioned priority projects will bring the SEETO Comprehensive Network on a higher operational level as well as improve economic efficiency of the South East European and European transport system34.

Figure 3- 2: Completed and finance secured/ongoing projects investments per transport mode (2007-2011)

Table 3- 1: Status of priority projects per MAP priority lists (2007-2011)MAP Priority List

Completed Projects

Finance secured/ ongoing Projects

Postponed Projects32

Planed Projects33

All Priority Projects

Investments Projects Investments Projects Investments Projects Investments Projects Investments ProjectsM € % No % M € % No % M € % No % M € % No % M € % No %

MAP 2007-2011

463 28 5 15 438 27 3 9 23 1 1 3 708 43 24 73 1,632 100 33 100

MAP 2008-2012

995 33 2 6 0 - 0 0 84 3 1 3 1,898 64 33 92 2,977 100 36 100

MAP 2009-2013

20 0 1 2 1,476 31 5 12 650 14 2 5 2,599 55 34 81 4,745 100 42 100

MAP 2010-2014

31 1 2 5 773 22 5 14 207 6 2 5 2,515 71 28 76 3,526 100 37 100

MAP 2011-2015

27 1 1 3 400 11 4 13 4 0 1 3 3,176 88 26 81 3,607 100 32 100

MAP 2012-2016

0 - 0 0 9 0 1 2 0 - 0 0 8,394 100 46 98 8,403 100 47 100

Source: SEETIS III

32Postponed project - priority project that were dropped out of MAP priority project list33Planned project - priority project that was presented on the list as requires financing for the implementation 34More information can be found in the SEETO Comprehensive Network Investment report available on the SEETO web page-www.seetoint.org

4% 0% 3%

Completed project investments per transport mode

Road Rail IWWAirport Seaport

11%

82%

5%

4%0%

Finance secured/Ongoing projects investmentsper transport mode

Road Rail IWWAirport Seaport

9%

82%

2135SEETO project data base (SEETIS III) and IFI projects information36Investment need estimation was prepared with the technical assistance from the IFI Coordination Office, funded by the EC

3.3. Investment needs on the SEETO Comprehensive NetworkHigh priority investment areas of the SEETO Comprehensive Network will be elaborated in this subchapter based on an analysis of the current transport systems weaknesses. The analysis of investment needs has been done on the basis of road and rail network condition and level of service (bottlenecks) on the SEETO Comprehensive Road and Rail Network.

Calculation of the investment requirements was done separately for road and rail sections. Two main factors: a) network condition (very poor and poor sections) and b) bottleneck sections (LoS D, E, F for road and UIC capacity bottlenecks for rail) were considered as a basis for calculation.

After identification of the investment requirement sections35 rough figures for the rehabilitation, upgrade and new construction were determined based on which immediate investment needs were estimated36. Missing sections of the SEETO Comprehensive Network were not taken into consideration.

Very poor and poor road network sections exist on 499 km of network (8% of the network) where rehabilitation is urgently needed with total investment requirements amounting approximately €400 million. On the other hand, capacity limitations causing bottlenecks are evident on 703 km (11% of the network) where upgrade of the road network is needed in the amount of approximately €1.406 billion. Even though investment requirements for rehabilitation of road network are significantly lower, both types of network improvement are highly needed.

Analysis of the most deteriorated road sections showed that 18% (1,202 km) of the SEETO Comprehensive Road Network requires immediate rehabilitation or upgrade. Total investment requirements for rehabilitation and upgrade of the SEETO Comprehensive Road Network are estimated at more than €1.804 billion.

On two sections, Route 4 (Pozega-Uzice) and Corridor VIII (Fier-Vlore), both limitation factors (bottleneck and poor/very poor condition) are apparent. Hence, according to the used analysis and described parameters (bottleneck and condition) these sections require urgent intervention.

Figure 3-3: SEETO Comprehensive Road Network - Investment requirements

22


Figure 3- 4: SEETO Comprehensive Rail Network - Investment requirements

From 1,202 km investment requirement sections, 240km (4% of the SEETO comprehensive road network) is foreseen to be upgraded through implementation of MAP 2013 priority projects, which implementation would lead to 20% decrease of bottlenecks and less developed sections on the SEETO comprehensive road network (figure 3-3).

As for the SEETO Comprehensive rail network, to improve 690 km of rail sections in very poor and poor condition approximately €625 million is needed. Whereas approximately €1.1 billion is required for the removal of rail bottlenecks on single and double track sections (255km). According to the used parameters, three rail sections on

Corridor X (Zapresic-Zagreb, Zagreb-Dugo Selo, Dugo Selo-Novska), require immediate attention due to their current condition and high traffic volumes (bottleneck sections). Total investment requirement of the SEETO Comprehensive Rail Network are estimated around 1.7 €billion.

This year’s MAP Priority List foresees construction and rehabilitation of 118.4 km of total 945 km estimated investment requirement sections on the SEETO Comprehensive Rail Network, as presented on the Figure 3-4. Implementation of the MAP 2013 rail projects would to contribute to 13% decrease of bottleneck and less developed segments (poor and very poor sections).

23

Figure 4-1: Road priority projects

4. MAP 2013 PRIORITY PROJECTSThe following chapter distinguishes two types of priority projects which are presented on two separate lists:

i) Priority projects eligible for funding – mature projects for which a comprehensive evaluation is available based on a completed feasibility study and, if available, additional full set of project documentation, in accordance with EU procedures for Programming and Procurement Rules.

ii) Priority projects for preparation – projects which require full project preparation and project evaluation to determine their feasibility. These projects are not ready for implementation but funding is required to carry out the necessary preparatory work.

SEETO priority projects rating methodology37 was adopted by the SEETO Steering Committee in July 2012 in order to provide Regional Participants and potential external financiers with an objective and consistent view on the quality of the projects nominated as relevant for the implementation of the SEETO Comprehensive Network.

37Document can be found at SEETO webpage - www.seetoint.org

Accordingly, the objective of the project rating is to present the strengths and weaknesses of the individual investment projects according to the agreed criteria.

The rating mechanism is applied on 22 submitted priority projects eligible for funding that do have Feasibility Study completed and are mature enough to start with the implementation process. Additionally, 20 priority projects that require preparatory activities are not rated but are included in the MAP 2013 in a separate list indicating that resources for project preparation are required.

High maturity of regional priorities is detected based on the fact that 72% of total required investments (€8.2 billion) are foreseen for implementation in priority projects eligible for funding.

Average score of all rated priority projects is 72%. By observing evaluation results by transport modes it can be seen that environmentally friendly transport modes projects - railways and inland waterways - have significantly higher average score (both 88%) than road projects (65%) which clearly shows their utmost importance in the SEE region. Investment cost enlisted in the priority projects list illustrates the amount of non secured funds needed for implementation of the project.

4.1 Priority projects eligible for funding

24


Table 4- 1: Rating of priority projects eligible for funding

Corridor/ Route/ Node

Regional Participant

Project name Total cost

40% 40% 10% 10% Total

Road projects Scoring

Corridor Vc BIH Completion of motorway section Vukosavlje-Karuse

356 40 12 10 5 84%

BIH Completion of motorway section Karuse-Banlozi

889 40 12 10 5 84%

BIH Mostar bypass construction 36 40 12 10 5 84%

Coridor VIII ALB Upgrading of Qukes- Qafe Plloce road 100 40 12 -10 5 59%

Coridor X SER Completion of Belgrade by pass, Sector 6: Strazevica-Bubanj Potok

97 40 16 5 5 83%

Route 1 CRO Road connection to interchange Vucevica on Route 1 motorway

148 40 20 2.5 5 84%

Route 2a CRO Expressway: Hungary Border- Virovitica- Okucani- Bosnia and Herzegovina border BIH

55 12 40 2.5 5 60%

Route 2b BIH Upgrade of Brod na Drini (Foca) - Hum (Scepan Polje)

62 0 40 10 5 55%

Route 2c ALB Construction of Central East Corridor and Central South Corridor (Berat to Teplene)

210 20 12 5 5 53%

ALB New construction of By-pass of Rrogozhina

6 0 12 -10 5 9%

Route 4 MON Road Route 4, section Podgorica- Matesevo

502 0 20 10 5 44%

SER Construction of motorway Belgrade-South Adriatic, section Belgrade- Pozega

768 20 16 5 5 58%

Route 6 KOS Construction of Route 6, Section: Pristina- Hani i Elezit

378 40 40 10 2.5 93%

Route 7 KOS Construction section Pristina- Merdare 750 12 40 10 2.5 65%

Coridor X MAC Rehabilitation of road section Brezica- Miladinovci and Veles- Bezica

16 Rehabilitation project Detail Design completed

Rail projects Scoring

Corridor Vb CRO Railway reconstruction of section Dugo Selo- Krizevci

198 40 20 0 10 90%

Corridor VIII

MAC Construction of the railway section Kumanovo- Beljakovice- Kriva Palanka

591 40 40 7.5 5 95%

MAC Construction of new railway section Kicevo- border with Albania

470 20 40 7.5 10 79%

Route 10 KOS Railway Route 10 from central station Fushe Kosove/Kosovo Polje up to the Border Station with the former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia (Hani i Elezit/Djeneral Jankovic)

140 40 34 0 10 86%

Econ

omic

crite

riaRe

gion

al cr

iteria

Regu

lato

ry/

Tehn

ical

crite

riaEn

viro

men

tal

crite

ria

25

Figure 4- 2: Rail priority projects

Table 4- 1: Rating of priority projects eligible for funding




40% 40% 10% 10% Total

Road projects Scoring

Corridor Vc BIH Completion of motorway section Vukosavlje-Karuse

356 40 12 10 5 84%

BIH Completion of motorway section Karuse-Banlozi

889 40 12 10 5 84%

BIH Mostar bypass construction 36 40 12 10 5 84%

Coridor VIII ALB Upgrading of Qukes- Qafe Plloce road 100 40 12 -10 5 59%

Coridor X SER Completion of Belgrade by pass, Sector 6: Strazevica-Bubanj Potok

97 40 16 5 5 83%

Route 1 CRO Road connection to interchange Vucevica on Route 1 motorway

148 40 20 2.5 5 84%

Route 2a CRO Expressway: Hungary Border- Virovitica- Okucani- Bosnia and Herzegovina border BIH

55 12 40 2.5 5 60%

Route 2b BIH Upgrade of Brod na Drini (Foca) - Hum (Scepan Polje)

62 0 40 10 5 55%

Route 2c ALB Construction of Central East Corridor and Central South Corridor (Berat to Teplene)

210 20 12 5 5 53%

ALB New construction of By-pass of Rrogozhina

6 0 12 -10 5 9%

Route 4 MON Road Route 4, section Podgorica- Matesevo

502 0 20 10 5 44%

SER Construction of motorway Belgrade-South Adriatic, section Belgrade- Pozega

768 20 16 5 5 58%

Route 6 KOS Construction of Route 6, Section: Pristina- Hani i Elezit

378 40 40 10 2.5 93%

Route 7 KOS Construction section Pristina- Merdare 750 12 40 10 2.5 65%

Coridor X MAC Rehabilitation of road section Brezica- Miladinovci and Veles- Bezica

16 Rehabilitation project Detail Design completed

Rail projects Scoring

Corridor Vb CRO Railway reconstruction of section Dugo Selo- Krizevci

198 40 20 0 10 90%

Corridor VIII

MAC Construction of the railway section Kumanovo- Beljakovice- Kriva Palanka

591 40 40 7.5 5 95%

MAC Construction of new railway section Kicevo- border with Albania

470 20 40 7.5 10 79%

Route 10 KOS Railway Route 10 from central station Fushe Kosove/Kosovo Polje up to the Border Station with the former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia (Hani i Elezit/Djeneral Jankovic)

140 40 34 0 10 86%




40% 40% 10% 10% Total

IWW projects Scoring

River Sava BIH Recostruction and modernization of River Port of Brcko

7 40 16 NA -5 64%

River Sava BIH Rehabilitation and improvment of the Sava river waterway

21 40 30 NA 10 100%

River Sava CRO Rehabilitation and improvment of the Sava river waterway

55 40 22 NA 10 90%

River Sava SER Rehabilitation and improvment of Sava river from Belgrade to Bosnia and Herzegovina border

30 40 30 NA 10 100%

Source: SEETO Ec

onom

ic cr

iteria

Regi

onal

crite

riaRe

gula

tory

/ Te

hnic

al cr

iteria

Envi

rom

enta

l

crite

ria

Continuation of table 4- 1: Rating of priority projects eligible for funding

26


Table 4- 2: Priority projects for preparationCorridor/Route/Node


Name of the project Length (km)

Foreseen source of funding (M€)

Total estimated cost for project implementation (M€)

Road projectsCorridor VIII ALB Construction of Elbasan By-pass 13 45

ALB Construction of Tirana By-pass 17 Budget (6.5 M€)IFI loans (32.5M€)EU funds (1 M€)

40

Corridor X MAC Rehabilitation of the road section Gradsko-Negotino

18 EU funds(4 M€) 4

Route 1 MON Road rehabilitation and widening on the section Debeli brijeg-Petrovac-Bar

8

Route 3 BIH Completion of By-pass East Sarajevo on a sections Mesici-Praca-Pale-Sarajevo Airport

87 391

Total estimated cost for project implementation (M€) 488Railway projectsCorridor X CRO Upgrade and reconstruction of railway

line Dugo Selo-Novska83.4 255

MAC Rehabilitation of Railway sections Kumanovo-Deljadrovce, Dracevo-Veles

49 175

SER Modernisation of the Nis-Presevo railway line

148 265

SER Reconstruction, modernisation and construction of the second track on the section Stalac-Djunis of the railway line Beograd-Nis

19 106

Corridor Xb SER Reconstruction and Modernisation of the railway line Belgrade-Novi Sad-Subotica-border with Hungary

148 665

Corridor Xd MAC Renewal with Reconstruction of the Railway Section Bitola-Kremenica,

16 Budget (8.6M€)EU funds (0.4M€)

9

Route 4 MON Rehabilitation of railway line Vrbnica-Bar (Kos-Trebjesica-Lutovo-Bratonozici-Bioce-Podgorica)

14

Total estimated cost for project implementation (M€) 1,489Airport projectsDubrovnik CRO Construction and modernisation of

Dubrovnik AirportIFI (22.1M€)EU funds(124.9M€)

147

Nis SER Technical and navigation modernisation of Airport Nis

10

Total estimated cost for project implementation (M€) 157IWW projectsRiver Sava - Port of Slavonski Brod

CRO Dangerous Goods Terminal Construc-tion in the area of Slavonski Brod Inland Port

Budget (0.9M€)EU funds (3.02M€)

4

River Danube- Port of Vukovar

CRO Reconstruction of Port of Vukovar-New Port East-phase 1

Budget (9.3M€)EU funds (14.9M€)

24

River Danube SER Training and dredging works on select-ed locations along the Danube River

Budget (2M€)EU funds (10M€)

12

Total estimated cost for project implementation (M€) 40

4.2 Priority projects for preparation

27

Corridor/Route/Node


Name of the project Length (km)

Foreseen source of funding (M€)

Total estimated cost for project implementation (M€)

Seaport projectsPort of Zadar CRO Construction of new container terminal

- Port of ZadarBudget (6.3 M€)IFI loans (35.7M€)

42

Port of Rijeka CRO Constructions of container Terminal Krk 300Port of Sibenik CRO Connection coast Dobrika-Rogac in the

port of Sibenik4

Port of Split CRO Reconstruction of the rail tracks and switches in the North Port of Split

EU funds (3 M€) 3

Total estimated cost for project implementation (M€) 349

Continuation of table 4- 2: Priority projects for preparation

28


4.3 Presentation of road network projects by corridor/route4.3.1 Road Corridor Vc

Figure 4- 3: Overview of all projects on the Road Corridor Vc

Regional Participants:Bosnia and Herzegovina, Croatia

Total completed investments until 2011:€892 million

Total finance secured/ongoing investments until 2011: €421.2 million

Percentage of motorways or four lane roads: 13%

Traffic flows:6,254 AADT

Table 4- 3: Priority projects on the Road Corridor Vc from the MAP 2013 priority projects list

No Regional Participant

Name of the project (section) Priority project type Rating Points

EIRR Total cost (M€)

1 BIH Mostar By-pass construction Eligible for funding 84% 13.19 36.00

2 BIH Completion of motorway section Vukosavlje-Karuse

Eligible for funding 84% 13.19 356.00

3 BIH Completion of motorway section Karuse-Banlozi


Total cost 1,281.00

Table 4- 4: Completed and finance secured/ongoing projects on the Road Corridor Vc


Section Project status

Total length

Type of works Total cost (M€)

4 BIH Dobrinje-Visoko Completed 7.6 New construction

15.00

5 BIH Josanica-Podlugovi-Visoko-Kakanj*Completed

45 New construction

195.00

6 BIH Seslije-Samac*Completed

13 Rehabilitation 17.00

7 BIH Maglaj-Zepce-Zenica Completed Rehabilitation 0.66

8 BIH Jablanica-Potoci and Dracevo- bor-der BIH/CRO

Completed 24.04 Rehabilitation 2.10

9 BIH Nemila–Zenica-Lasva Completed 20.89 Rehabilitation 2.70

10 BIH Jablanica– Jablanica Completed 19.2 Rehabilitation 1.40

11 BIH Zepce-Nemila and Bradina-Ostrozac Completed 44.8 Rehabilitation 5.80

12 BIH Kakanj-Drivusa* Ongoing 17 New construction

135.00

29



Total length


13 BIH Bijaca-Zvirovici* Ongoing 10 New construction

215.00

14 BIH Tarcin-Suhodol* Ongoing 5 New construction

15 BIH Josanica-Butila, Lot 1* Ongoing 35 New construction

16 BIH Zenica By-pass* Ongoing New construction

17 CRO Osijek-Sredanci Completed 56 New construction

487.40

18 CRO Interchange Ploce-Ploce PortCompleted

8 New construction

165.00

19 CRO Interstate Bridge across the Sava River at Svilaj

Agreement signed

21.00

20 CRO Beli Manastir-Osijek-Sredanci - Svilaj Works ongo-ing

25.20

Total cost 1,288.26*Priority project

Continuation of table 4- 4: Completed and finance secured/ongoing projects on the Road Corridor Vc

30


4.3.2 Road Corridor VIII

Figure 4- 4: Overview of all projects on the Road Corridor VIII

Regional Participants:Albania, the former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia

Total completed investments until 2011:€303 million

Total finance secured/ongoing investments until 2011: €377 million

Percentage of motorwaysor four lane roads: 33%

Traffic flows: 8,533 AADT AADT

Table 4- 5: Priority projects on the Road Corridor VIII from the MAP 2013 priority projects list




1 ALB Upgrading of Qukes - Qafe Plloce road Eligible for funding 59% 17.4 100.00

2 ALB New construction of By-pass of Rrogozhina

Eligible for funding 9% 6.40

3 ALB Construction of Elbasan By-pass For preparation 45.00

4 ALB Construction of Tirana By-pass For preparation 40.00

Total cost 191.40

Table 4- 6: Completed and finance secured/ongoing projects on the Road Corridor VIII


Name of the project (Sec-tion)

Project status Total length


5 MAC Skopje By-pass Completed 27 New construction 120.36

6 ALB Lushnje-Fier-Vlore Completed 65 New construction 125.50

7 ALB Elbasan-Librazhd Completed 25 New construction 20.80

8 ALB Qafe Thane-Pogradec Completed 24 Rehabilitation 16.00

9 ALB Q.Plloce-Korce Completed 29 New construction 20.00

10 ALB Levan-Vlore Works ongoing 24

11 ALB Tirana-Elbasan Works ongoing 32 New construction 300.00

12 ALB Fier and Vlore by-passes Agreement signed

58.95

13 ALB Qafe Thane-Pogradec (up-grading) *

Works ongoing 32 New construction 17.90

Total cost 679.50*Priority project

31

4.3.3 Road Corridor X

Figure 4- 5: Overview of all projects on the Road Corridor X

Regional Participants:Croatia, Serbia, the former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia

Total completed investments until 2011:€625.3 million

Total finance secured/ongoing investments until 2011: €1.1 billion

Percentage of motorways or four lane roads: 85% Traffic flows:14,040 AADT

Table 4- 7: Priority projects on the Road Corridor X from the MAP 2013 priority projects list


Name of the project (section) Priority project type

Rating Points


1 SER Completion of Belgrade By-pass, (Strazevica-Bubanj Potok)

Eligible for funding

83% 14.4 96.50

2 MAC Rehabilitation of road section Veles-Bezica and Brezica-Miladinovci

REHABILITATION PROJECT -Eligi-ble for funding

16.00

3 MAC Rehabilitation of sections Gradsko-Negotino For preparation 4.00

Total cost 116.50

Table 4- 8: Completed and finance secured/ongoing projects on the Road Corridor X


Section Project status Total length

Type of works

Total cost (M€)

4 MAC Negotino-Demir Kapija Completed 6.5 New construction

11.94

5 MAC Demir Kapija-Gevgelija Completed 17.3 Bridges 15.91

6 MAC Katlanovo-Veles Completed 23.63 Bridges 16.70

7 MAC Tabanovce-Kumanovo Completed 7.5 New construction

11.70

8 MAC Demir Kapija-Smokvica* Finance secured 28.2 Upgrading 265.00

9 MAC Katlanovo-Veles Works on-going 27.6 Rehabilitation na

10 MAC Miladinovci-Skopje Finance secured Rehabilitation of bridges

na

11 SER Belgrade By-pass, Sectors 1-4* Completed 25 New construction

218.00

12 SER Batrovci-Batajnica Completed 105 Upgrade 33.70

13 SER Pozarevac-Pecenjevce Completed 201 Rehabilitation 20.52

14 SER Belgrade-Nis Completed Rehabilitation 20.48

32




Type of works

Total cost (M€)

15 SER Leskovac-Bujanovac* Completed 21.8 New construction

92.80

16 SER Pecenjevce-Grdelica-Predejane -Dzep-Presevo*


17 SER Gazela bridge Reconstruction Completed Rehabilitation 33.00

18 SER Belgrade By-pass (Batajnica inter-change) under construction

Works ongoing 60.00

19 SER Belgrade By-pass-Dovanovci inter-change and Surcin-Bubanj Potok rehabilitation

Works ongoing 80.00

20 SER Belgrade By-pass-Orlovaca inter-change-tunnels Strazevica and bridges

Works ongoing 40.00

21 SER Grabovnica-Levosoje * Works ongoing 89.9 New construction

596.70

22 SER Bujanovac-Presevo* Works ongoing 21.00 na

23 SER Belgrade By-pass, Sectors 5-6: Orlovaca-Bubanj Potok*

Finance secured 120.00

24 CRO Zupanja-Lipovac Completed 30 New construction

114.82

Total cost 1,787.00 *Priority project

Continuation of table 4- 8: Completed and finance secured/ongoing projects on the Road Corridor X

33

4.3.4 Road Route 1

Figure 4- 6: Overview of all projects on the Road Route 1

Regional Participants:Bosnia and Herzegovina, Croatia, Montenegro

Total completed investments until 2011:€1.1 billion

Total finance secured/ongoing investments until 2011: -



Table 4- 9: Priority projects on the Road Route 1 from the MAP 2013 priority projects list



Rating Points


1 CRO Road connection to interchange Vucevica on Route 1 motorway


2 MON Road rehabilitation and widening on the section Debeli brijeg-Petrovac-Bar

For preparation 8.00

Total cost 156.16

Table 4- 10: Completed and ongoing projects on the Road Route 1



Total length


3 MON Pcinja bridge Completed 0.2 Upgrade 0.86

4 MON Jaz-Zuta Greda Completed 0.5 Upgrade 0.50

5 MON Budva-Petrovac Completed 1.34 Upgrade 3.75

6 MON Kufin and Becici-Rafailovici-Kamenovo Completed 8.3 Upgrade 10.97

7 MON Sutomore-Bar Completed 1.35 Upgrade 2.00

8 MON Jok Megdan-junction Meljine Completed 1.4 Upgrade 2.60

9 MON Lepetani Completed 0.55 Upgrade 1.10

10 MON Kamenari Completed 0.6 Upgrade 3.20

11 MON Debeli Brijeg-Herceg Novi– Kotor Completed 1.02 Rehabilitation 0.66

12 MON Reconstruction of intersection Tivat-Radovići and section Budva - Kotor -Lepetani-Petrovac

Completed 4.902 Upgrade/Rehabilitation

1.60

13 MON Tivat-Radanovići-Budva-Kotor-Krtolska Completed New construction 1.00

14 CRO Ostarije-Split Completed 326 Rehabilitation 323.69

15 CRO Ravca-Vrgorac Completed 9.8 New construction 124.80

16 CRO Split-Ploce Completed 77 New construction 616.41

17 BIH Passage through Neum Completed 12.27 Upgrade 0.28

Total cost 1,093.00

34


4.3.5 Road Route 2a

Figure 4- 7: Overview of all projects on the Road Route 2a

Regional Participants:Bosnia and Herzegovina, Croatia

Total completed investments until 2011:€169.3 million




Table 4- 11: Priority projects on the Road Route 2a from the MAP 2013 priority projects list




1 CRO Expressway construction of Okucani -border BiH


Total cost 55.00

Table 4- 12: Completed and finance secured/ongoing projects on the Road Route 2a



Total length Type of works Total cost

2 BIH By-pass Banja Luka Completed 1.2 Rehabilitation 1.34

3 BIH D. Vakuf-Travnik-Lasva Completed Rehabilitation 1.43

4 BIH Turbe-Travnik-Dolac Completed 8.48 Rehabilitation 0.69

5 BIH Podmilacje –Jajce- Donji Vakuf and D.Vakuf-Turbe-Travnik

Completed Rehabilitation 1.85

6 BIH Gradiska-Mahovljani-Banja Luka Completed 53 New construction

164.00

Total cost 169.31

35

4.3.6 Road Route 2b

Figure 4- 8: Overview of all projects on the Road Route 2b

Regional Participants:Albania, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Montenegro

Total completed investments until 2011:€ 49.4 million

Total finance secured/ongoing investments until 2011: € 32.2 million

Percentage of motorways

or four lane roads: 0


Table 4- 13: Priority projects on the Road Route 2b from the MAP 2013 priority projects list




1 BIH Upgrade of Brod na Drini (Foca)-Hum (Scepan Polje)


Total cost 62.00

Table 4- 14: Completed and finance secured/ongoing projects on the Road Route 2b




2 MON Podgorica-Bozaj Completed 4.6 Upgrade 0.86

3 MON Scepan Polje bridge Completed 0.1 Rehabilitation 0.36

4 MON Modernisation of route 2b Completed 24 Upgrade 3.46

5 MON Border crossings Debeli Brijeg and Scepan Polje

Completed 1 Rehabilitation 0.40

6 MON Niksic By-pass Completed 5 7.36

7 MON Niksic- Podgorica Completed 4.4 Upgrade 9.64

8 MON Crossroad Danilovgrad Completed New construction 3.48

9 MON Lanslide Goransko Completed 0.03 Rehabilitation 0.14

10 ALB Fushe Kruje-Vore Completed 13 Rehabilitation 11.00

11 ALB Buna bridge Completed 0.5 New construction 9.36

12 ALB Hani Hotit-Shkoder* Works ongoing

39 Upgrading 32.20

13 BIH Dobrinja-Bogatic Completed 17.6 0.73

14 BIH Dobrinja-Bogatic Completed 44.1 Rehabilitation 1.20

15 BIH Trnovo-Dobro Polje Completed 45.3 1.41


36


4.3.7 Road Route 2c

Figure 4- 9: Overview of all projects on the Road Route 2c

Regional Participants:Albania


Total finance secured/ongoing investments until 2011: € 44 million


Traffic flows: 3,217 AADT

Table 4- 15: Priority projects on the Road Route 2c from the MAP 2013 priority projects list



Rating Points


1 ALB Construction of Central East Corridor and Central South Corridor (Berat to Tepelene)


Total cost 210.00

Table 4- 16: Completed and finance secured/ ongoing projects on the Road Route 2c



Total length

Type of works Total cost

2 ALB Tepelene-Gjirokaster Completed 23 Rehabilitation 19.50

3 ALB Tepelene and Gjirokaster By-pass* Finance secured

23.50 New construction

44.00

Total cost 63.50 *Priority project

37

4.3.8 Road Route 3


Regional Participants:Bosnia and Herzegovina



Percentage of motorwaysor four lane roads: 0





Rating Points


1 BIH Completion of By-pass East Sarajevo,(Mesici-Praca-Pale-Sarajevo Airport)


Total cost 391.00

Table 4- 18: Completed and finance secured/ ongoing projects on the Road Route 3



Total length Type of works

Total cost (M€)

2 BIH Reconstruction of tunnel Celjigovici


Total cost 1.30

38


4.3.9 Road Route 4


Regional Participants:Montenegro, Serbia








Rating Points


1 MON Road Route 4, section Podgorica-Matesevo


2 SER Construction of motorway section Belgrade-Pozega


Total cost 1,287.60

Table 4- 20: Completed and finance secured/ ongoing projects on the Road Route 4



Total length


3 MON Eastern mini by-pass Podgorica* Completed 6.5 New construction 20.00

4 MON Podgorica airport junction and Gol-ubovci By-pass

Completed 12.8 Upgrade 73.54

5 MON Rehabilitation of sections on Route 4 Completed 48.4 Rehabilitation 136.35

6 SER Vladimirovac – Vrsac Completed 36 Rehabilitation 10.14

7 SER Pancevo-Vliadimirci Completed 24 Rehabilitation 5.20

8 SER Beograd –Pancevo Completed 11 Rehabilitation 2.80

9 SER Stopanja –Nevade Completed 11.85 Rehabilitation 3.30

10 SER Borova Glava - Kokin Brod- Kolovrat- Gostun Montenegro border


11 SER Ljig-Preljina* Works ongoing

40.36 New construction 308.00


39

4.3.10 Road Route 6a

Figure 4- 12: Overview of all projects on the Road Route 6a

Regional Participants:The former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia, Montenegro, Kosovo, Serbia

Total completed investments until 2011: €157.44 million




Table 4- 21: Priority projects on the Road Route 6a from the MAP 2013 priority projects list



Rating Points


1 KOS Construction of Route 6a, Section: Pristina-Hani i Elezit/Djeneral Jankovic

Eligible for funding 93% 12 378.00

Total cost 378.00

Table 4- 22: Completed and finance secured/ ongoing projects on the Road Route 6a



Total length


2 MON Ibar 2 bridge Completed 0.2 Upgrade 0.90

3 MON Rozaje-Spiljani Completed 0.3 Upgrade 0.50

4 MON Rozaje-Spiljane Completed 26 Rehabilitation 3.76

5 MON Rozaje By-pass I phase Completed 3.41 Upgrade 7.50

6 MON Bac 1, Bac 2 and Ibar 3 bridges Completed 0.4 Upgrade 2.16

7 MON Berane- Completed 3.11 New construction 7.36

8 MON Bridge Bijela crkva 2 Completed 0.06 Rehabilitation 0.42

9 MON Bridge Ajkunici Completed 0.09 Rehabilitation 0.64

10 SER Spiljani-Ribaric Completed Rehabilitation 13.50

11 KOS Pristina-Lipljan Completed 8.6 12.70

12 KOS Pristina-Shkabaj Completed 3.3 11.60

13 KOS Bridges on the existing road section Kaqanik/Kacanik-Hani I Elezi/Djeneral Jankovic

Completed 7.40

14 KOS Pristina-Peje/Pec-Montenegro Completed 8 Upgrade 78.00

15 KOS Pristina-Mitrovice Completed 3 Upgrade 11.00

Total cost 157.44

40


4.3.11 Road Route 7

Figure 4- 13 : Overview of all projects on the Road Route 7

Regional Participants:Montenegro, Serbia

Total completed investments until 2011:€ 1,313 billion







Rating Points


1 KOS Construction of Route 7, Pristina-Merdare


Total cost 750.00

Table 4- 24: Completed and finance secured/ ongoing projects on Road Route 7


Project Section/Name of the Project Project status

Total length

Type of works Total cost

2 SER Doljevac-Zitoradja-Prokuplje Completed 13 Rehabilitation 5.50

3 ALB Milot-Rreshen* Completed 26 New construction

30.00

4 ALB Rreshen-Kalimash* Completed 61 New construction

825.00

5 ALB Kalimash-Morine* Completed 5 New construction

122.70

6 KOS Motorway Morine-Suha reka* Completed 38 New construction

330.00

7 KOS Construction of motorway (Suha Reka-Pristina)*

Ongoing 43.3 330.00

Total cost 1,643.20*Priority project

41

4.4 Presentation of rail network projects by corridor/route4.4.1 Rail Corridor Vb

Figure 4- 14: Overview of all projects on the Rail Corridor Vb

Regional Participants: Total completed investments until 2011: -


Percentage of double track sections and traction: -electrified

Traffic flows:177 million pkm717 million tkm

Table 4- 25: Priority projects on the Corridor Vb from the MAP 2013 priority projects list



Rating Points


1 CRO Upgrade and construction of second track on railway line section Dugo Selo-Krizevci


Total cost 198.03

Table 4- 26: Completed and finance secured/ongoing projects on the Corridor Vb


Section Status Total length


2 CRO Krizevci-Koprivnica Works ongoing Rehabilitation 31.00

Total cost 31.00

42


4.4.2 Rail Corridor VIII

Figure 4- 15: Overview of all projects on the Rail Corridor VIII

Regional Participants:Albania, the former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia

Total completed investments until 2011: -Total finance secured/ongoing investments until 2011: -Percentage of double track sections and traction: -dieselTraffic flows:34 million pkm81 million tkm

Table 4- 27: Priority projects on the Corridor VIII from the MAP 2013 priority projects list



Rating Points


1 MAC Construction of new railway section Kicevo – border with Albania


2 MAC Constuction of the railway section Kumanovo-Beljakovce-Kriva Palanka


Total cost 1,061.00

43

4.4.3 Rail Corridor X

Figure 4- 16: Overview of all projects on the Rail Corridor X

Regional Participants: Total completed investments until 2011:€ 203.1 million


Percentage of double track sections and traction: 28%electrified

Traffic flows:1,352 million pkm3,093 million tkm

Table 4- 28: Priority projects on the Corridor X from the MAP 2013 priority projects list



Rating Points


1 CRO Upgrade and reconstruction of railway line Dugo Selo-Novska


2 MAC Rehabilitation sections Kumanovo-Deljadrovce, and Dracevo-Veles


3 SER Modernisation and construction of the second track on the section Stalac-Djunis


4 SER Modernisation of the Nis-Presevo railway line For preparation 265.00

Total cost 800.55

Table 4- 29: Completed and finance secured/ongoing projects on the Corridor X



Total length

Type of works Total cost(M€)

5 CRO Rail track overhaul on Vinkovci-Tovarnik section

Completed 33.9 Rehabilitation/ Upgrade

75.76

6 CRO Equipment for maintenance, modernisation and construction

Completed Rehabilitation /New construction

19.57

7 CRO Remote rail control traffic system Savski Marof-Zagreb-Tovarnik*

Completed 23.43

8 CRO Okucani to Novska railway rehabilitation*

Works ongo-ing

19.50 Rehabilitation 40.10

9 CRO Zagreb Main Station Signalling and Interlocking System*

Works ongo-ing

_ Rehabilitation 11.64

10 MAC Station-Tabanovci Completed 0.617 New construction 0.79

11 MAC Station Skopje Jug and Madzari Skopje Jug section

Completed 2.3 Upgrade 0.69

44




Total length

Type of works Total cost(M€)

12 MAC Station Kadina Reka Completed 0.5 Rehabilitation 0.88

13 MAC Gradsko-Sivec Completed 2.5 Rehabilitation 0.20

14 MAC Pcinja-Rajko Zinzifov-Veles Completed 4.5 Rehabilitation 0.52

15 MAC Crossrail A- Ilinden Completed 4.2 Rehabilitation 0.46

16 MAC Negotino -Dubrovo-Demir Kapija Completed 9.6 Rehabilitation 1.89

17 MAC Klisura-Gevgelija Completed 37 Upgrade 0.78

18 MAC Telecomanding regulation of traffic on section Tabanovci -Gevgelija and optic-fiber cable, including common control system center Trubarevo


19 MAC Rail signalling and telecommunica-tions*

Finances allocated

215 Upgrading 6.00

20 MAC Tabanovce-Kumanovo and Miravci-Smokvica *

Finance secured

Rehabilitation

21 MAC Negotino-Nogaevci* Finance secured

Rehabilitation

22 SER Kusadak - Velika Plana Completed 22.9 Rehabilitation 16.40

23 SER Nova Pazova - Stara Pazova Completed 8 Rehabilitation 3.00

24 SER Batajnica - Golubinci Completed 24 Rehabilitation 30.00

25 SER Jovac – Cuprija Completed 10.5 Rehabilitation 27.60

26 SER Gilje - Cuprija- Paracin Finance secured

10.5 Upgrade /New construction

41.00

27 SER Gilje - Cuprija- Paracin, bridge over Velika Morava

Finance secured

New construction 8.88

Total cost 310.72 *Priority project

Continuation of table 4- 29: Completed and finance secured/ongoing projects on the Corridor X

45

4.4.4 Rail Corridor Xb

Figure 4- 17: Overview of all projects on the Rail Corridor Xb

Regional Participants: Total completed investments until 2011:€13.4 million

Total finance secured/ongoing investments until 2011: Percentage of double track sections and traction: -99% electrified


Table 4- 30: Priority projects on the Corridor Xb from the MAP 2013 priority projects list



Rating Points


1 SER Reconstruction and Modernisation of the railway line Belgrade-Novi Sad-Subotica- border with Hungary


Total cost 665.00

Table 4- 31: Completed and finance secured/ongoing projects on the Corridor Xb


Section Status Total length Type of works Total cost (M€)

2 SER Cortanovci-Petrovaradin Completed 15 Rehabilitation 13.40

Total cost 13.40

46


4.4.5 Rail Corridor Xd

Figure 4- 18: Overview of all projects on the Rail Corridor Xd

Regional Participants: Total completed investments until 2011:

Total finance secured/ongoing investments until 2011:

Percentage of double track sections and traction: -diesel

Traffic flows:62 million pkm1.3 million tkm

Table 4- 32: Priority projects on the Corridor Xd from the MAP 2013 priority projects list



Rating Points


1 MAC Rehabilitation of sections Bitola-Kremenica


Total cost 9.00

47

4.4.6 Rail Route 4

Figure 4- 19: Overview of all projects on the Rail Route 4

Regional Participants: Total completed investments until 2011: €99.17 million

Total finance secured/ongoing investments until 2011: €40.95 million

Percentage of double track sections and traction: 4% 31% electrified


Table 4- 33: Priority projects on the Route 4 from the MAP 2013 priority projects list



Rating Points


1 MON Rehabilitation of the rail line Vrbnica-Bar (Kos-Trebjesica-Lutovo-Bratonozici-Bioce-Podgorica)


Total cost 14.00

Table 4- 34: Completed and finance secured/ongoing projects on the Rail Route 4



Total length


2 MON Trebesnica-Lutovo-Bratonozic Completed 0.3 Rehabilitation 2.24

3 MON Mojkovac and siding Trebaljevo Completed 12.0 Rehabilitation 3.60

4 MON „Mojkovac“ Completed 3.5 tunnels 3.52

5 MON Vrbnica-Bijelo polje and 3 track in station Bijelo Polje


6 MON Bridges at line Vrbnica-Bar Completed 1.8 2.00

7 MON Station Bar Completed Rehabilitation 0.60

8 MON station Bijelo Polje and siding Krusevo Completed 2.4 New construc-tion

0.90

9 MON landslide at Podgorica-Bar, section Virpazar-Sutomore and Sutomore-Bar


10 MON Trebaljevo-Kolasin, Kos and Trebesica Completed 2.1 Tunnels 5.86

11 MON Sanation of slope at 6 locations and bulding 3 protective planes

Completed 0.5 6.86

12 MON Trebesica and siding Bratonozic Completed 0.5 Rehabilitation 1.80

48




Total length


13 MON Bijelo Polje-Krusevo-Mijatovo kolo Completed 18.5 Rehabilitation 15.60

14 MON Railway line Trebaljevo-Kolasin Completed 10.3 Rehabilitation 5.00

15 MON Railway line Bijelo polje-Krusevo-Mijatovo kolo


16 MON Sanation of 4 slopes and three protection galleries on section Trebesica-Lutovo


17 MON Superstructure works of the railway line Vrbnica-Bar section Kolasin-Podgorica-Bar

Completed 114.5 New construc-tion

0.99

18 SER Belgrade - Bar section Resnik - Vreoci – Valjevo


19 MON Sanation of tunnel no.175 section Trebaljevo-Kos and no.185 section Kos-Trebesica


20 MON Sanation of tunnel no.171 and no. 173 Completed Rehabilitation 1.77

21 MON Sanation of two slopes (Lutovski potok anf Bratonozici)


22 MON Sanation of tunnel Ostrovica (no.182) Completed Rehabilitation 2.16

23 MON Rehabilitation of Vrbnica-Podgorica-Bar railway line*

Works ongoing

159.0 14.1

24 MON Rehabilitation of Kolasin-Trebaljevo section in progress

Works ongoing

11.4 5.00

25 MON Rehabilitation of line Kolasin-Kos with run-ning line in st. Kos and secondary station tracks

In preparation

12.1 Rehabilitation 5.00

26 MON Reconstruction of tunnels no. 187,190,193,205,206

In preparation

1.9 Reconstruction 4.00

27 MON Hydrotechnical works on the culverts and bridges

In preparation

0.1 Works 0.50

28 MON Regulation of streams in the area of rein-forced - concrete bridges and culverts repair

In preparation

Works 0.35

29 MON Electrification of tracks VI I VII in st. Bijelo Polje

Completed tender

Rehabilitation

Total cost 128.12

Continuation of table 4- 34: Completed and finance secured/ongoing projects on the Rail Route 4

49

4.4.7 Rail Route 10

Figure 4- 20: Overview of all projects on the Rail Route 10

Regional Participants: Total completed investments until 2011: €6.22 million

Total finance secured/ongoing investments until 2011: -Percentage of double track sections and traction: -dieselTraffic flows:53 million pkm109 million tkm

Table 4- 35: Priority projects on the Route 10 from the MAP 2013 priority projects list



Rating Points


1 KOS Reconstruction of section - central sta-tion Fushe Kosove/Kosovo Polje up to the Border Station Hani i Elezit/Djeneral Jankovic


Total cost 141.85

Table 4- 36: Completed and finance secured/ongoing projects on the Rail Route 10



Total length


2 KOS Centralised Traffic Control System - CTC Completed 0.96

3 KOS Level Crossings Completed 0.62

4 KOS Centralized Traffic Control System, Active Transmission System, 4 railway crossing and fibre optic cables


5 KOS Interface Interlocking, axel counters and rails type S49

Completed 1.38

6 KOS Supply with track materials, signalling and telecomm. and CTC Interlocking


Total cost 6.22

50


4.5 Airports

Figure 4- 21: Overview of all projects on airports

Regional Participants:All



Table 4- 37: Priority projects on the airports from the MAP 2013 priority projects list



Rating Points


1 CRO Construction of airport Dubrovnik For preparation 147.00

2 SER Technical and navigation modernisation of Airport Nis


Total cost 157.00

Table 4- 38: Completed and finance secured/ongoing projects on airports


Node Name of the Project Project status

Total length


3 MON Podgorica Passenger terminal at Podgorica Completed New construction

26.00

4 MON Podgorica Podgorica Airports Completed Upgrade 11.36

5 MON Podgorica Podgorica Airport Completed Upgrade 26.02

6 MON Tivat Tivat Airport Completed Upgrade 10.00

7 MON Tivat Apron extension at Tivat Airport Completed Upgrade 5.40

8 CRO Zagreb Zagreb Airport Completed New construction

22.17

9 CRO Dubrovnik Dubrovnik Airport Completed New construction

29.60

10 CRO Split Split Completed New construction

12.00

11 CRO Zadar Zadar Completed Upgrade 1.17

12 CRO Zagreb Concession for Zagreb Airport to ZAIC consortium to build a new passenger terminal at Zagreb Airport

Agreement signed

51



Total length


13 MAC Skopje Modernising Skopje Airport Completed New construction

110.00

14 MAC Ohrid Modernising Ohrid Airport Completed Rehabilitation 10.00

15 SER Belgrade Belgrade Airport Completed Rehabilitation 6.80

16 SER Belgrade Belgrade Airport * Completed Upgrade 26.80

17 SER Belgrade Belgrade Completed 4 Rehabilitation 0.23

18 BIH Sarajevo Sarajevo Airport Completed Upgrade 2.27

19 BIH Banja Luka Banja Luka Airport Completed 2.5 Upgrade 3.50

20 BIH Sarajevo Expansion of the passanger termi-nal, construction of a new rapid runway and aircraft parking apron expansion

Finances alocated

25.00

21 KOS Pristina Pristina Airport* Completed Rehabilitation 15.50

22 KOS Airport Rehabilitation of Pristina Airport Ongoing 100


Continuation of table 4- 38: Completed and finance secured/ongoing projects on airports

52


4.6 Inland waterways and river ports

Figure 4- 22: Overview of all projects on the inland waterways and river ports

Regional Participants: All

Total completed investments until 2011: € 23.74 million


Table 4- 39: Priority projects on the inland waterways and river ports from the MAP 2013 priority projects list



Rating Points


1 BIH Reconstruction and modernisation of River Port of Brcko


2 BIH Rehabilitation and improvement of the Sava river waterway


3 CRO Rehabilitation and Improvement of the Sava river Waterway


4 CRO Dangerous Goods Terminal Construc-tion in the area of Slavonski Brod Inland Port


5 CRO Reconstruction of Port of Vukovar - New Port East - phase 1


6 SER Rehabilitation and improvement of Sava River


7 SER Training and dredging works on select-ed locations along the Danube River


Total cost 154.27

Table 4- 40: Completed and finance secured/ongoing projects on inland waterways and river ports


Section Project Status Total length

Type of works

Total cost (M€)

8 CRO Danube river Completed Upgrade 5.75

9 CRO Sava river Completed Upgrade 6.99

10 SER Danube river RIS Completed Upgrade 11.00

Total cost 23.74

53

4.7 Seaports

Figure 4- 23: Overview of all projects on seaports

Regional Participants:All



Table 4- 41: Priority projects on the seaports from the MAP 2013 priority projects list



Rating Points


1 CRO Construction of new container terminal - Port of Zadar

For preparation 9.8 42.00

2 CRO Container Terminal KRK (Rijeka Seaport) For preparation 300.00

3 CRO Connection coast Dobrika-Rogac in the port of Sibenik


4 CRO Reconstruction of the rail tracks and switches in the North Port of Split


Total cost 349.20

Table 4- 42: Completed and finance secured/ ongoing projects on seaports



Total length


5 CRO Rijeka Rijeka port Completed New construction

15.31

6 CRO Split Split port Completed New construction

11.79

7 CRO Ploce Ploce port Completed Rehabilitation 43.00

8 CRO Dubrovnik Docking shore Completed Rehabilitation 31.00

9 CRO Dubrovnik Construction and development of berths 10-16


10 CRO Split Split port Completed 3.78

11 CRO Ploce Ploce port Completed 0.9 New construction

0.96

54




Total length


12 CRO Ploce New container terminal of 60,000 container units capacity

Completed New construction

33.60

13 CRO Dubrovnik International passenger termi-nal*

Completed New construction

26.50

14 CRO Sibenik Maritime passenger terminal expansion of the pier up to 260 metres length

Works ongoing

12.00

15 CRO Rijeka Construction of 330 meters dock, annual capacity increase of the container turnover to 600,000 TEU

Finances allocated

New construction

70.00

16 CRO Ploce Container terminal and bulk cargo terminal

Works ongoing

New construction

50.00

17 CRO Seaport Transport and Trade Integration (TTI), Port Ploce*

Works ongoing

Rehabilitation 141.00

18 ALB Durres Durres passenger terminal and rehabilitation of berth 7 and 8 are in process

Works ongoing

New construction

20.00

19 ALB Durres Berth 10 in eastern part under construction

Works ongoing

8.50

20 ALB Vlora Ro-Ro ships berth and berth of cargo operation

Works ongoing

15.30

21 ALB Durres Rehabilitation of Port of Durres/ Ferry Terminal Building and Yard in Port of Durres*

Concession Contract signed

Rehabilitation 40.00


Continuation of table 4- 42: Completed and finance secured/ ongoing projects on seaports

55

5. TRANSPORT POLICY OUTLOOK

The evolving political context in which Croatia is basically fully integrated with the TEN-T network and EU Common Transport Market and Policy, while Montenegro has opened accession negotiations, gives even a greater impulse for the entire region to further enhance the regional transport planning, to address the outstanding issues in the complex reform process in many transport sectors and, by that, to reach satisfactory level of regional and EU integration in the field of transport.

5.1 Overview of the progress in the SEETO transport horizontal measures with regional added valueDuring 2011-2012, the SEETO focused on a few targeted areas of interventions which were identified in the SEETO Strategic Work Programme 2012-201438 as the SEETO Project Tasks for which continuous efforts and external support is needed. The objectives of these horizontal measures, the undertaken steps in relatively short period and the possible steps forward, are outlined as it follows.

5.1.1 Railway reform

With a purpose to map the progress achieved in implementation of the railway reform process regarding the Addendum to the MoU for creation of a South East European Railway Transport Area, the SEETO has prepared an analytical Report on South East Europe Railway Reform Progress 39 , released in July 2012. It intends to assist SEETO Regional Participants in further planning of the reforms and to seek support for the following particular priority measures proposed and elaborated within the Report, in consultations with the SEETO Railway Working Group, under the auspices of which, those measures are expected to be further addressed:

• Transparent and non-discriminatory access to rail terminal and terminal service, in particular in sea and inland ports and challenges of (private) sidings

• Concessioning of rail infrastructure maintenance and management

• Calculation of railway infrastructure track access charge with special accent on direct costs

• Performance scheme, framework contracts and authorised applicants

• Train driver licensing and certification, examiners and training facilities

• Cross acceptance of rolling stock

These endorsed regional railway priorities are concomitant to the major institutional and regulatory measures envisaged by the Addendum. The implementation of the latter should be underpinned at national level if the creation of the integrated railway area and common railway market in the region is not to remain only a far-fetched goal, but a reality for the businesses and passengers.

5.1.2 Border-crossing facilitation

Assuming the complexity and the cross-cutting nature of this area of intervention, the SEETO engaged in establishing cooperation with the CEFTA Secretariat and current IFC Trade Logistic Project in order to identify the possible priorities and measures in this field.

Following the general recommendations from the EC supported Workshop on border-crossing facilitation held in March 2012 in Podgorica, the SEETO produced a Report on border crossing facilitation40, endorsed in July 2012, which gives an extensive overview of the current projects, systems, and initiatives designed to address the existing non-physical transport barriers in the Western Balkans region, as well as the possible role that SEETO, by interfacing with relevant organisations, can play in transport and trade facilitation.

Apart from the knowledge-experience-best practise transferring through joint technical meetings of relevant stakeholders in the region, the Report comes up with other recommendations, too, which can broadly be described as follows:

• identification of genuine cross border priority investment projects on the SEETO Comprehensive Network that will have impact on improving the services on the BC points and quality of infrastructure, on reducing the border crossing waiting times and ease the trade for particular products in the supply chain,

• monitoring and advising on the implementation of the transport acquis related to the access to market of the transport hauliers, liberalisation of services, improving the operations, etc.

• stimulating the dialogue with the transport operators, forwarding and logistic companies and trade unions,

• developing a set of technical, policy and political actions, tailored to a specific transport axis, whereby all measures to be undertaken for reducing travel times and transport costs are going to be identified and pinpointed accompanied with appropriate physical and non-physical investment plan (see more in Chapter 5.3.2).

In the past years, the SEETO observed a positive trend of harmonisation of the segmented national transport policies and steady efforts towards coordinated regional transport policy. With the EU Common Transport policy seen as a major driving force for integration of the Western Balkans transport market and contributor to the future economic growth of the region, the SEETO platform plays a crucial role in bridging the gaps between the Regional Participants’ transport strategies coordinated at regional level and the EU Common Transport Policy, the integration to which, remains their ultimate goal.

38 The Strategic Work Programme 2012-2014 is available on www.seetoint.org39 The Report is available on www.seetoint.org 40 The Report is available on www.seetoint.org

56


5.1.3 Road safety auditing

The SEETO Secretariat continued to exercise expert and technical support to the Road Safety working group by elaborating a detailed questionnaire to the Regional Participants on the Implementation of Directive EC 2008/96 on road infrastructure safety management, on the basis of which a Road Safety Audit Implementation Report is being prepared41, assessing the particular needs for road safety training programmes.

The SEETO is currently negotiating with possible partner institutions which can develop training curricula in road safety auditing and afterwards, deliver regional trainings for auditors’ trainers.

5.2 Regional Transport StudyThe MAP 2012 proposed conducting a Regional Transport Study, highlighting it as an important milestone for supporting and maintaining a coherent regional transport policy. In the course of the year 2012, the SEETO Secretariat made a significant contribution in preparation of the WBIF application for Regional Transport Study (update of REBIS) to be carried out by the World Bank, which was supported by NIPAC offices from the Regional Participants, and subsequently approved by the WBIF Steering Committee for financing in June 2012.

This confirms the value and benefits of sound policy planning at regional level done through the MAP, as well as the ownership of the SEETO Regional Participants over the Study and regional transport planning process in general.

The Study is expected to deliver the following outcomes:

• Review the existing forecasting model developed under the 2003 REBIS which was based on population and GDP growth assumptions, with some correction factors, including trade flows; upgrade the traffic forecasts and scenarios, in order to assess existing and projected transport needs on the SEETO Comprehensive Network

• Determine the priority routes/corridors within the SEETO Comprehensive Network, as a sort of predecessor of the future SEETO Core Network

• Analysis of identified main routes/corridors - based on the priority corridors within the SEETO Comprehensive Network emerging from the strategy update, identify both physical and non-physical bottlenecks in these corridors

• Develop a Priority Action Plan - identifying priorities in the SEETO Comprehensive network for removal of both physical and non-physical barriers

The results from the Regional Transport Study update, should give an impetus for new or revised approach in the national transport strategies which should eventually lead to more accurately defined and well harmonised regional strategic objectives in the area of transport.

5.3 Regional transport policy monitoring mechanism

5.3.1 Institutional and Regulatory framework monitoring

In the course of designing and implementing the SEETO soft measures in the previous years, it had become clear that harmonisation at regional level of the implementation of the acquis communautiare in transport field is vital to ensure regional coherence, generate potential synergies, as well as to give right signals to the international community and investors. Not only this is directly linked to the European integration process of the SEE Partners, but is also a condition for improving transport operations, increasing quality of transport services and overall enhancing of efficiency performance of the transport system as a whole.

The role of SEETO in this process is fully understood by the relevant structures and since the scope and extent of the acquis is large and quite substantial, creating a mechanism for monitoring of compliance and implementation of EU transport acquis, will certainly provide a common ground for better quality assessment of the institutional and regulatory framework, as well as for identifying and instigating future measures and activities for harmonisation, restructuring and reforming the sector. This mechanism will pave the way for early implementation of the Transport Community Treaty.

The core elements of the monitoring mechanism in broad sense will be:

• creation of a matrix of most pertinent principles and provisions from the EU transport policy and EU Regulations and Directives, notably the ones enclosed in the Annexes of the draft Transport Community Treaty,

• information sharing and reporting on the actions undertaken by the respective transport authorities in the Regional Participants for the specific heading from the matrix, through submission of relevant legal acts with tables of concordance as well as other relevant information related to strengthening of the institutional capacities, track records and implementation of bilateral or international agreements (SEETO has already started gathering different strategic and legislative documents in the efforts to create a comprehensive library),

• regional data base supported by information software which will feed the monitoring mechanism by recording and updating the progress made in implementation and enforcement of the transport legislation and standards, on the basis of designed questionnaires,

• advising the Regional Participants with regard to the compliance of specific acts with the general EU policy or legislation in that particular field, using the networking potential with the relevant services of the EC and different national, regional and international institutions

41 The Report is available on www.seetoint.org

57

• participation/observation to different EC - Regional Participants dialogue forums, under the Stabilisation and Association Agreements, accession negotiations and specific peer/assessment missions

• identification of gaps emerging from the lack or delayed transposition and enforcement of legislation, aiming to develop action plan and soft measures to address them in certain sub-sectors, using also the SEETO Working Groups, EC supported regional workshops and TAIEX regional trainings.

The monitoring mechanism is expected to be beneficial both for the Regional Participants and the European Commission, as it will assist the EC to measure the real progress of the region in alignment with the EU Transport policy and to target its assistance in the areas that need further interventions, as well as it will provide a competition ground among the Regional Participants in efforts to harmonise their national policies, thereby ensuring effective coordination of the regional transport policy.

Ensuring regional harmonisation of regulatory framework is extremely important for creating common market conditions and homogenous rules among the Regional Participants which will have significant impact to the transport operations and quality of services. For instance, in the road sector, if different rules are applicable regarding the EU requirements for good reputation, professional competence and financial standing to be satisfied by operators wishing to engage in road transport42 , it can produce certain inconsistencies and moreover, these heterogeneous rules do not allow for a level playing field and lead to a higher propensity of transport carriers which poorly comply with road safety and social rules.

The institutional and regulatory monitoring has been performed to a certain extent in the railway sector and in the area of road safety auditing. Nevertheless, the new SEETO mechanism aims to include all transport sectors, excluding the air transport where different competent structures are already in place.

It is worthy to extent the scope of the monitoring mechanism for the SEE partners also over the main EU policy and strategy documents, such as the 2011 White Paper for Transport43 and sector specific EU/regional strategies44. Given the aim of the Regional Participants to integrate into the EU common transport area, the monitoring mechanism will stimulate them in formulation of steps and more sustainable actions whose objectives would be directed toward more efficient, cleaner, safer and more reliable transport system. This will undoubtedly bring these ambitious goals of the EU common transport policy down to a technical level.

5.3.2 Model of trans-national policy cooperation along the main transport axes

Following the conclusions of the Ministerial Conference held on May 22nd, 2012 in Athens within the SEETAC -South East Europe Transport Axis- Project (to which SEETO is a Project Partner), according to which EU institutions are encouraged to consider the extension of the EU Core Network and the possibility to extend the

mandate of the Ten-T Coordinators through a Corridor approach to the Western Balkans, an innovative cross-border and transnational model should be introduced in managing transport axis crossing the region of Western Balkans.

On the basis of the Ministerial conclusions45 and the SEE Spatial Planning and Transport Operative Strategy(SPaTO)45 , as well as the expected results from the Regional Transport Study update and the border-crossing facilitation initiative to be developed through the established cooperation with CEFTA, both described in Chapter 5.1, the SEETO can develop the model of cross-border policy cooperation, whereby all measures to be undertaken for reducing travel times and transport costs are going to be pinpointed with accompanying investment plan for removal of physical and non-physical barriers on a particular transnational transport axis (corridor/route) selected from the SEETO Comprehensive Network that could go beyond the Western Balkans region.

This sort of ’flagship‘ project should address in holistic manner all bottlenecks and bilateral issues that hamper the smooth traffic flows across the border, not neglecting the ongoing implementation of Integrated Border Management and CEFTA Agreement, try to deliver some innovative solutions and to propose financial means for accomplishing the concrete objectives. It will use the transnational approach exercised in the SEETAC due to the large number of countries and actors involved in axis management. Having on board all stakeholders, they should potentially include a facilitator/European coordinator, who will drive politically the project closer to the national and international authorities to obtain their support and commitment along the implementation phase. Certainly, a multimodal corridor should be launched as a pilot project (e.g. Corridor X) which can bring impetus for further replication on the other axes too, if successful.

Since removal of bottlenecks and facilitation of transport along a corridor in general, is an extremely complex process that goes well beyond the mere transport sector, the project might focus at, although not limit to: interoperability, advanced information exchange systems and compliance with the procedures prescribed by the EU and international conventions for transport, as well as bilateral agreements. In addition, it should look at strengthening the surveillance and inspection functions of the state inspectorates of the Regional Participants, control bodies, licensing authorities and implementing border agencies along the corridor, given their capacity to equally apply and enforce homogeneous rules is crucial for an integrated market. Failure to do so, hinders the competition, increases the mistrust of the end-users vis-à-vis the operators and in general, hampers the possibility of the transport users and the economy to reap the full benefits of a seamless and uninterrupted multimodal transport.

It is expected that the project will have large added value to the infrastructure investments and in addition it will put high political weight to the process of regional transport planning. The involvement of the EU Member States authorities will also add to this exercise in terms of technical cooperation, transfer of know-how in management of corridor-approach projects according to the best practices from TEN-T Core Network projects and moreover, it will strengthen the political cooperation and build trust in the wider region.

42Council Directive 96/26/EC of 29.04. 1996 on admission to the occupation of road haulage operator and road passenger operator and mutual recognition of diplomas, certificates and other evidence of formal qualifications intended to facilitate for these operators the right to freedom of establishment in national and international transport operations, amended by Directive 98/76/EC43White Paper, Roadmap to a Single European Transport Area- Towards a competitive and resource efficient transport system, Brussels, 28.03.2011 COM (2011) 144 final44The sector specific EU documents include, though are not limited to the following:• Greening Transport package- a strategy to introduce more efficient and greener road tolls for lorries and reducing noise pollution from rail freight• Keep Freight Moving- a strategy to promote freight transport logistics, deploy ERTMS along international freight-oriented “corridors and to modernise European ports• EU Maritime Strategy 2018- key areas for developing Motorways of the Sea• NAIADES Action Programme – a policy to promote inland waterway transport in Europe• Action Plan for deployment of ITS in Europe – programme for ITS deployment projects in road transport aiming to establish interconnections and interoperability45Available on www.seetac.eu

58


Annex 1 - SEETO Comprehensive Network DescriptionSEETO Comprehensive Road NetworkCorridor V B (274 km): Slovenian border/ Rupa (Croatia) – Zagreb (Croatia) – Gorican (Croatia) /(Hungarian border)Corridor V C (541 km): Hungarian border/ Dubosevica (Croatia) – Osijek (Croatia) – Sarajevo (Bosnia and Herzegovina) – Ploce (Croatia)Corridor VIII (657 km): Tirane/ Durres/ Vlore (Albania) – Skopje (the former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia) – Deve Bair (the former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia) / (Bulgarian border)Corridor X (1,031 km): Slovenian border / Bregana (Croatia) – Zagreb (Croatia) – Belgrade (Serbia) – Skopje (the former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia) – Bogorodica (the former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia) / (Greek border)Corridor X A (63 km): Slovenian border/ Donji Macelj (Croatia) – Zagreb (Croatia)Corridor X B (185 km): Hungarian border/ Horgos (Serbia) —Novi Belgrade (Serbia) Corridor X C (110 km): Nis (Serbia) —Gradina (Serbia )/(Bulgarian border) Corridor X D (117 km): Veles (the former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia) —Medzitlija (the former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia)/ (Greek border) Route 1 (712km): Bosiljevo 2 (Croatia) – Split (Croatia) – Ploce (Croatia) – Neum (Bosnia and Herzegovina) – Dubrovnik (Croatia) – Bar (Montenegro)Route 2 A (239 km): Okucani (Croatia) – Banja Luka (Bosnia and Herzegovina) – Lasva (Bosnia and Herzegovina)Route 2 B (395 km): Sarajevo (Bosnia and Herzegovina) – Podgorica (Montenegro) – Vore (Albania)Route 2 C (125 km): Fier (Albania) —Kakavija (Albania)/(Greek border)Route 3 (185 km): Sarajevo (Bosnia and Herzegovina) —Uzice (Serbia)Route 4 (601 km): Vatin (Romanian border) – Belgrade (Serbia) – Podgorica (Montenegro) – Bar (Montenegro)Route 5 (213 km): Cacak (Serbia) – Krusevac (Serbia) – Paracin (Serbia) – Vrska Cuka (Serbia)/ (Bulgarian border)Route 6 A (259 km): Ribarevina (Montenegro) – Ribarice (Serbia) – Pristina (Kosovo) – Skopje (the former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia)Route 6 B (205 km): Pristina (Kosovo) –Peje/Pec (Kosovo) – Skopje (the former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia)Route 7 (314 km): Lezhe (Albania) – Pristina (Kosovo)– Doljevac (Serbia)Route 8 (78 km): Podmolje (the former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia) – Bitola (the former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia)Route 9 (43 km): Vukovar (Croatia) –Zupanja (Croatia)Route 10 (183 km): Pula (Croatia) – Rijeka (Croatia) – Zuta Lokva (Croatia)

Figure A1- 1: SEETO Comprehensive Road Network

59

SEETO Comprehensive Rail NetworkCorridor V B (338 km): Slovenian border/ Sapjane (Croatia) – Zagreb (Croatia) – Botovo (Croatia)/ (Hungarian border)

Corridor V C (554 km): Hungarian border/ Beli Manastir (Croatia) – Osijek (Croatia) – Sarajevo (Bosnia and Herzegovina) – Ploce (Croatia)

Corridor VIII (426 km): Tirana/ Durres/ Vlore (Albania) – Lin/Pogradec (Albania)-Kicevo (the former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia) – Skopje – Kumanovo (the former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia) – Beljakovci (the former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia)/ Bulgarian border

Corridor X (1,177 km): Slovenian border/ Savski Marof (Croatia) – Zagreb (Croatia) – Belgrade (Serbia) – Skopje (the former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia) – Gevgelija (the former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia) / (Greek border)

Corridor X B (151 km): Hungarian border / Kelebija (Serbia) – Stara Pazova (Serbia)

Corridor X C (104 km): Nis (Serbia) – Dimitrovgrad (Serbia) / (Bulgarian border)

Corridor X D (145 km): Veles (the former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia) – Kremenica (the former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia) / (Greek border)

Route 1 (442 km): Ostarije (Croatia) — Split (Croatia)

Route 2 (144 km): Podgorica (Montenegro) — Vlore (Albania)

Route 4 (580 km): Vrsac (Romanian border) — Belgrade (Serbia) — Bar (Montenegro)

Route 9 A (224 km): Banja Luka (Bosnia and Herzegovina) – Doboj (Bosnia and Herzegovina) – Tuzla (Bosnia and Herzegovina) – Brcko (Bosnia and Herzegovina)

Route 9 B (18 km): Vinkovci (Croatia) – Vukovar (Croatia)

Route 10 (256 km): Kraljevo (Serbia) — Pristina (Kosovo) — Gorce Petrov (the former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia)

Route 11 (138 km): Pozega (Serbia) — Stalac (Serbia).

Route 12 (51 km): Slovenian border/ Cakovec (Croatia) – Kotoriba (Croatia) /(Hungarian border)

Route 13 (28 km): Hungarian border / Horgos (Serbia) – Subotica (Serbia)

Figure A1- 2: SEETO Comprehensive Rail Network

60


SEETO Comprehensive Network AirportsRegional Participant Airport

Albania Tirane (TIA/LATI)

Bosnia and Herzegovina Banja Luka (BNX/LQBK)

Bosnia and Herzegovina Sarajevo (SJJ/LQSA)

Croatia Zagreb (ZAG/LDZA)

Croatia Split (SPU/LDSP)

Croatia Dubrovnik (DBV/LDDU)

Croatia Pula (PUY/LDPL)

Croatia Rijeka (RJK/LDRI)

Croatia Zadar (ZAD/LDZD)

Croatia Osijek (OSI/LDOS)

The former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia Skopje (SKP/LWSK)

The former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia Ohrid (LWOH/OHD)

Montenegro Podgorica (TGD/LYPG)

Montenegro Tivat (LYTV/TIV)

Serbia Belgrade (BEG/LYBE)

Serbia Nis (INI/LYNI)

Kosovo Pristina (PRN/LYPR))

SEETO Comprehensive Network SeaportsRegional Participant Seaport

Albania Durres

Albania Vlore

Croatia Rijeka

Croatia Split

Croatia Ploce

Croatia Dubrovnik

Croatia Sibenik

Croatia Zadar

Croatia Pula

Montenegro Bar

SEETO Comprehensive Network IWW portsRegional Participant IWW Port

Bosnia and Herzegovina Brcko

Bosnia and Herzegovina Samac

Croatia Sisak

Croatia Slavonski Brod

Croatia Vukovar

Croatia Osijek

Serbia Belgrade

Serbia Novi Sad

61

SEETO Comprehensive Inland Waterway NetworkCorridor VII Danube Inland Waterway Length (km)

Croatia/Serbia Batina/Bezdan – Ilok/Backa Palanka 137.5

Serbia Backa Palanka – Ram/Nera river 220.5

Serbia /Romania Ram/ Nera river – Timok river/Pristol 230.0

Total: 588.0

Sava River Inland Waterway Length (km)

Croatia/Serbia/ Bosnia and Herzegovina Belgrade – Sisak 593

Total: 593

Tisa River Inland Waterway Length (km)

Serbia Hungarian border – Danube river 164

Total: 164

Drava River Inland Waterway Length (km)

Croatia Osijek (Nemetin) – Ajmas 14

Total: 14

Figure A1- 3: SEETO Comprehensive Network Airports, Seaports, IWW and IWW Ports

62


Ann

ex 2

- Fi

ches

for P

riorit

y pr

ojec

ts e

ligib

le fo

r fun

ding

Road

Prio

rity

proj

ects

elig

ible

for f

undi

ngRo

ad C

orrid

or V

c Pr

iorit

y pr

ojec

ts e

ligib

le fo

r fun

ding

PRO

JECT

FI

CHE

Proj

ect n

ame

(leng

th):

Com

plet

ion

of m

otor

way

on

Road

Cor

rido

r Vc,

Sec

tion

Vuko

savl

je-K

arus

e (5

0 km

)

Corr

idor

/ Rou

te:

Corr

idor

Vc

(roa

d)

Tota

l cos

t (m

illio

n Eu

ros)

: 35

6

Regi

onal

Par

ticip

ant

Bosn

ia a

nd H

erze

govi

na

FEA

SIBI

LITY

ST

UD

YTi

tle o

f stu

dyM

otor

way

in th

e Co

rrid

or V

c - F

easib

ility

Stu

dy

Prep

ared

by

IPSA

Inst

itute

, Sar

ajev

oCi

vil E

ngin

eerin

g In

stitu

te o

f Cro

atia

, Zag

reb

Supe

rvis

ed b

yM

inist

ry o

f Tra

nspo

rt a

nd C

omm

unic

atio

ns, B

osni

a an

d H

erze

govi

na

Whi

ch b

enefi

ts h

ave

been

co

nsid

ered

Savi

ngs i

n ve

hicl

es o

pera

tion

cost

s; sa

ving

s in

trav

el ti

me

of p

asse

nger

s; sa

ving

s in

acci

dent

s cos

ts, a

nd S

avin

gs in

infra

stru

c-tu

re m

aint

enan

ce c

osts

.

Ass

umed

val

ues o

f tim

e fo

r th

e di

ffere

nt u

ser g

roup

sBu

sines

s rel

ated

trip

s: 5,

58€/

h (1

0,91

BAM

/h)

Non

-bus

ines

s rel

ated

trip

s: 0,

981€

/h (1

,92

BAM

/h)

Ass

umed

traffi

c gr

owth

pe

r yea

r5,

8%-3

,2%

(yea

r200

4-20

42) n

etw

ork

with

inve

stm

ents

5,7%

-3,1

% (y

ear2

004-

2042

) with

out i

nves

tmen

ts

Ove

rall

proj

ect o

bjec

tive

Obj

ectiv

ely

veri

fiabl

e in

dica

tors

The

Proj

ect a

ims a

t enh

anci

ng th

e ec

onom

ic a

nd so

cial

dev

elop

men

t of B

osni

a an

d H

erze

govi

na th

roug

h sa

tisfy

ing

the

incr

easin

g de

man

d fo

r loc

al tr

ansp

ort,

and

the

prom

otio

n of

regi

onal

trad

e w

ith N

orth

Eas

t Eur

ope.

EI

RR 1

3.19

%N

PV 1

.626

.789

.366

,00€

(disc

ount

rate

8%

)N

PV

787.

924.

335,

00€

(disc

ount

rate

10%

)N

PV

236.

533.

742,

00€

(disc

ount

rate

12%

)Fo

reca

sted

pax

vol

ume

•Yea

r 204

7: 2

6.00

0 ve

hicl

es p

er y

ear

Fore

cast

ed c

argo

vol

ume

•Yea

r 204

7: 1

1.00

0 tr

ucks

per

yea

r D

istan

ce sa

ving

s: 25

kmTi

me

savi

ngs:

120

min

Ope

ratin

g co

st sa

ving

s: 4

mill

ion

€ Ac

cide

nt c

ost s

avin

gs:

11.2

81 €

Proj

ect b

enefi

ts

Expe

cted

ben

efits

incl

ude

savi

ngs i

n tra

vel t

ime

and

in v

ehic

le o

pera

tion

cost

s for

all

type

s of v

ehic

les;

bette

r roa

d sa

fety

and

de-

crea

sed

envi

ronm

enta

l im

pact

s. D

ispla

cem

ent o

f tra

ffic

from

the

dens

e po

pula

ted

urba

n zo

nes a

long

the

exist

ing

mai

n ro

ad M

17/M

5.

Envi

ronm

enta

l effe

cts

Tabl

e: P

lann

ed p

roje

ct im

plem

enta

tion

char

tYe

ar20

0720

0820

0920

1020

1120

1220

1320

1420

1520

1620

1720

18Q

uart

er1

23

41

23

41

23

41

23

41

23

41

23

41

23

41

23

41

23

41

23

41

23

41

23

4

Act

ion

DD

DD

DD

DD

Act

ion

II

II

II

II

II

II

II

II

FS =

Fea

sibili

ty st

udy

E

IA =

Env

ironm

enta

l Im

pact

Ass

essm

ent

D =

Des

ign/

Tend

er p

repa

ratio

n

C =

Con

trac

ting

I =

Impl

emen

tatio

n

R =

Rev

iew

/Eva

luat

e

63

Ann

ex 2

- Fi

ches

for P

riorit

y pr

ojec

ts e

ligib

le fo

r fun

ding

Road

Prio

rity

proj

ects

elig

ible

for f

undi

ngRo

ad C

orrid

or V

c Pr

iorit

y pr

ojec

ts e

ligib

le fo

r fun

ding

PRO

JECT

FI

CHE

Proj

ect n

ame

(leng

th):

Com

plet

ion

of m

otor

way

on

Road

Cor

rido

r Vc,

Sec

tion

Vuko

savl

je-K

arus

e (5

0 km

)

Corr

idor

/ Rou

te:

Corr

idor

Vc

(roa

d)

Tota

l cos

t (m

illio

n Eu

ros)

: 35

6

Regi

onal

Par

ticip

ant

Bosn

ia a

nd H

erze

govi

na

FEA

SIBI

LITY

ST

UD

YTi

tle o

f stu

dyM

otor

way

in th

e Co

rrid

or V

c - F

easib

ility

Stu

dy

Prep

ared

by

IPSA

Inst

itute

, Sar

ajev

oCi

vil E

ngin

eerin

g In

stitu

te o

f Cro

atia

, Zag

reb

Supe

rvis

ed b

yM

inist

ry o

f Tra

nspo

rt a

nd C

omm

unic

atio

ns, B

osni

a an

d H

erze

govi

na

Whi

ch b

enefi

ts h

ave

been

co

nsid

ered

Savi

ngs i

n ve

hicl

es o

pera

tion

cost

s; sa

ving

s in

trav

el ti

me

of p

asse

nger

s; sa

ving

s in

acci

dent

s cos

ts, a

nd S

avin

gs in

infra

stru

c-tu

re m

aint

enan

ce c

osts

.

Ass

umed

val

ues o

f tim

e fo

r th

e di

ffere

nt u

ser g

roup

sBu

sines

s rel

ated

trip

s: 5,

58€/

h (1

0,91

BAM

/h)

Non

-bus

ines

s rel

ated

trip

s: 0,

981€

/h (1

,92

BAM

/h)

Ass

umed

traffi

c gr

owth

pe

r yea

r5,

8%-3

,2%

(yea

r200

4-20

42) n

etw

ork

with

inve

stm

ents

5,7%

-3,1

% (y

ear2

004-

2042

) with

out i

nves

tmen

ts

Ove

rall

proj

ect o

bjec

tive

Obj

ectiv

ely

veri

fiabl

e in

dica

tors

The

Proj

ect a

ims a

t enh

anci

ng th

e ec

onom

ic a

nd so

cial

dev

elop

men

t of B

osni

a an

d H

erze

govi

na th

roug

h sa

tisfy

ing

the

incr

easin

g de

man

d fo

r loc

al tr

ansp

ort,

and

the

prom

otio

n of

regi

onal

trad

e w

ith N

orth

Eas

t Eur

ope.

EI

RR 1

3.19

%N

PV 1

.626

.789

.366

,00€

(disc

ount

rate

8%

)N

PV

787.

924.

335,

00€

(disc

ount

rate

10%

)N

PV

236.

533.

742,

00€

(disc

ount

rate

12%

)Fo

reca

sted

pax

vol

ume

•Yea

r 204

7: 2

6.00

0 ve

hicl

es p

er y

ear

Fore

cast

ed c

argo

vol

ume

•Yea

r 204

7: 1

1.00

0 tr

ucks

per

yea

r D

istan

ce sa

ving

s: 25

kmTi

me

savi

ngs:

120

min

Ope

ratin

g co

st sa

ving

s: 4

mill

ion

€ Ac

cide

nt c

ost s

avin

gs:

11.2

81 €

Proj

ect b

enefi

ts

Expe

cted

ben

efits

incl

ude

savi

ngs i

n tra

vel t

ime

and

in v

ehic

le o

pera

tion

cost

s for

all

type

s of v

ehic

les;

bette

r roa

d sa

fety

and

de-

crea

sed

envi

ronm

enta

l im

pact

s. D

ispla

cem

ent o

f tra

ffic

from

the

dens

e po

pula

ted

urba

n zo

nes a

long

the

exist

ing

mai

n ro

ad M

17/M

5.

Envi

ronm

enta

l effe

cts

Tabl

e: P

lann

ed p

roje

ct im

plem

enta

tion

char

tYe

ar20

0720

0820

0920

1020

1120

1220

1320

1420

1520

1620

1720

18Q

uart

er1

23

41

23

41

23

41

23

41

23

41

23

41

23

41

23

41

23

41

23

41

23

41

23

4

Act

ion

DD

DD

DD

DD

Act

ion

II

II

II

II

II

II

II

II

FS =

Fea

sibili

ty st

udy

E

IA =

Env

ironm

enta

l Im

pact

Ass

essm

ent

D =

Des

ign/

Tend

er p

repa

ratio

n

C =

Con

trac

ting

I =

Impl

emen

tatio

n

R =

Rev

iew

/Eva

luat

e

PRO

JECT

FI

CHE

Proj

ect n

ame

(leng

th):

Com

plet

ion

of m

otor

way

on

Road

Cor

rido

r Vc,

Sec

tion

Karu

se-B

anlo

zi (5

0 km

)

Corr

idor

/ Rou

te:

Corr

idor

Vc

(roa

d)

Tota

l cos

t (m

illio

n Eu

ros)

: 88

9

Regi

onal

Par

ticip

ant

Bosn

ia a

nd H

erze

govi

na

FEA

SIBI

LITY

ST

UD

YTi

tle o

f stu

dyM

otor

way

in th

e Co

rrid

or V

c - F

easib

ility

Stu

dy

Prep

ared

by

IPSA

Inst

itute

, Sar

ajev

oCi

vil E

ngin

eerin

g In

stitu

te o

f Cro

atia

, Zag

reb

Supe

rvis

ed b

yM

inist

ry o

f Tra

nspo

rt a

nd C

omm

unic

atio

ns, B

osni

a an

d H

erze

govi

na

Whi

ch b

enefi

ts h

ave

been

co

nsid

ered

Savi

ngs i

n ve

hicl

es o

pera

tion

cost

s; sa

ving

s in

trav

el ti

me

of p

asse

nger

s; sa

ving

s in

acci

dent

s cos

ts, a

ndSa

ving

s in

infra

stru

ctur

e m

aint

enan

ce c

osts

.

Ass

umed

val

ues

of ti

me

for

the

diffe

rent

use

r gro

ups

Busin

ess r

elat

ed tr

ips:

5,58

€/h

(10,

91 B

AM/h

)N

on-b

usin

ess r

elat

ed tr

ips:

0,98

1€/h

(1,9

2 BA

M/h

)

Ass

umed

traffi

c gr

owth

pe

r yea

r5,

8%-3

,2%

(yea

r200

4-20

42) n

etw

ork

with

inve

stm

ents

5,7%

-3,1

% (y

ear2

004-

2042

) with

out i

nves

tmen

ts

Ove

rall

proj

ect o

bjec

tive

Obj

ectiv

ely

veri

fiabl

e in

dica

tors

The

Proj

ect a

ims a

t enh

anci

ng th

e ec

onom

ic a

nd so

cial

dev

elop

men

t of B

osni

a an

d H

erze

govi

na th

roug

h sa

tisfy

ing

the

incr

easin

g de

man

d fo

r loc

al tr

ansp

ort,

and

the

prom

otio

n of

regi

onal

trad

e w

ith N

orth

Eas

t Eur

ope.

EI

RR 1

3.19

%N

PV 1

.626

.789

.366

,00€

(disc

ount

rate

8%

)N

PV

787.

924.

335,

00€

(disc

ount

rate

10%

)N

PV

236.

533.

742,

00€

(disc

ount

rate

12%

)

Fore

cast

ed p

ax v

olum

e •Y

ear 2

047:

26.

000

vehi

cles

per

yea

r Fo

reca

sted

car

go v

olum

e•Y

ear 2

047:

11.

000

truc

ks p

er y

ear

Dist

ance

savi

ngs:

25km

Tim

e sa

ving

s: 12

0 m

inO

pera

ting

cost

savi

ngs:

4 m

illio

n €

Acci

dent

cos

t sav

ings

: 11

.281

€

Proj

ect b

enefi

ts

Expe

cted

ben

efits

incl

ude

savi

ngs i

n tr

avel

tim

e an

d in

veh

icle

ope

ratio

n co

sts f

or a

ll ty

pes o

f veh

icle

s; be

tter

road

safe

ty a

nd d

e-cr

ease

d en

viro

nmen

tal i

mpa

cts.

Disp

lace

men

t of t

raffi

c fro

m th

e de

nse

popu

late

d ur

ban

zone

s alo

ng th

e ex

istin

g m

ain

road

M17

/M

5.

Envi

ronm

enta

l effe

cts

Tabl

e: P

lann

ed p

roje

ct im

plem

enta

tion

char

tYe

ar20

0720

0820

0920

1020

1120

1220

1320

1420

1520

1620

1720

18Q

uart

er1

23

41

23

41

23

41

23

41

23

41

23

41

23

41

23

41

23

41

23

41

23

41

23

4A

ctio

nD

DD

DD

DD

DA

ctio

nI

II

II

II

II

II

II

II

IFS

= F

easib

ility

stud

y

EIA

= E

nviro

nmen

tal I

mpa

ct A

sses

smen

t D

= D

esig

n/Te

nder

pre

para

tion

C

= C

ontr

actin

g

I = Im

plem

enta

tion

R

= R

evie

w/E

valu

ate

64


PRO

JECT

FI

CHE

Proj

ect n

ame

(leng

th):

Com

plet

ion

of m

otor

way

on

Road

Cor

rido

r Vc,

Mos

tar B

y-pa

ss (1

3 km

)

Corr

idor

/ Rou

te:

Corr

idor

Vc

(roa

d)

Tota

l cos

t (m

illio

n Eu

ros)

: 36

Regi

onal

Par

ticip

ant

Bosn

ia a

nd H

erze

govi

na

FEA

SIBI

LITY

ST

UD

YTi

tle o

f stu

dyM

otor

way

in th

e Co

rrid

or V

c-Fe

asib

ility

Stu

dy

Prep

ared

by

IPSA

Inst

itute

, Sar

ajev

oCi

vil E

ngin

eerin

g In

stitu

te o

f Cro

atia

, Zag

reb

Supe

rvis

ed b

yM

inist

ry o

f Tra

nspo

rt a

nd C

omm

unic

atio

ns, B

osni

a an

d H

erze

govi

na

Whi

ch b

enefi

ts h

ave

been

con

sid-

ered

Savi

ngs i

n ve

hicl

es o

pera

tion

cost

s; sa

ving

s in

trav

el ti

me

of p

asse

nger

s; sa

ving

s in

acci

dent

s cos

ts, a

ndSa

ving

s in

infra

stru

ctur

e m

aint

enan

ce c

osts

.

Ass

umed

val

ues

of ti

me

for t

he d

if-fe

rent

use

r gro

ups

Busin

ess r

elat

ed tr

ips:

5,58

€/h

(10,

91 B

AM/h

)N

on-b

usin

ess r

elat

ed tr

ips:

0,98

1€/h

(1,9

2 BA

M/h

)

Ass

umed

traffi

c gr

owth

per

yea

r5,

8%-3

,2%

(yea

r200

4-20

42) n

etw

ork

with

inve

stm

ents

5,7%

-3,1

% (y

ear2

004-

2042

) with

out i

nves

tmen

ts

Ove

rall

proj

ect o

bjec

tive

Obj

ectiv

ely

veri

fiabl

e in

dica

tors

Mos

tar B

y-pa

ss p

roje

ct o

bjec

tives

are

elim

inat

ion

of b

ottle

neck

in u

rban

are

a M

osta

r, re

duct

ion

of tr

avel

tim

e an

d di

stan

ce fo

r peo

-pl

e an

d co

mm

oditi

es, r

educ

tion

of g

ener

alise

d tr

ansp

ort c

osts

for p

eopl

e an

d co

mm

oditi

es.

EIRR

13.

19%

NPV

1.6

26.7

89.3

66,0

0€ (d

iscou

nt ra

te 8

%)

NPV

78

7.92

4.33

5,00

€ (d

iscou

nt ra

te 1

0%)

NPV

23

6.53

3.74

2,00

€ (d

iscou

nt ra

te 1

2%)

Fore

cast

ed p

ax v

olum

e •Y

ear 2

047:

26.

000

vehi

cles

per

yea

r Fo

reca

sted

car

go v

olum

e•Y

ear 2

047:

11.

000

truck

s per

yea

r D

istan

ce sa

ving

s: 25

kmTi

me

savi

ngs:

120

min

Ope

ratin

g co

st sa

ving

s: 4

milli

on €

Ac

cide

nt c

ost s

avin

gs: 1

1.28

1 €

Proj

ect b

enefi

ts

Expe

cted

ben

efits

incl

ude

savi

ngs i

n tr

avel

tim

e an

d in

veh

icle

ope

ratio

n co

sts f

or a

ll ty

pes o

f veh

icle

s; be

tter

road

safe

ty a

nd d

e-cr

ease

d en

viro

nmen

tal i

mpa

cts.

Disp

lace

men

t of t

raffi

c fro

m th

e de

nse

popu

late

d ur

ban

zone

s alo

ng th

e ex

istin

g m

ain

road

M17

/M

5.

Envi

ronm

enta

l effe

cts

Tabl

e: P

lann

ed p

roje

ct im

plem

enta

tion

char

tYe

ar20

0720

0820

0920

1020

1120

1220

1320

1420

1520

1620

1720

18Q

uart

er1

23

41

23

41

23

41

23

41

23

41

23

41

23

41

23

41

23

41

23

41

23

41

23

4A

ctio

nD

DD

DD

DD

DA

ctio

nI

II

II

II

II

II

II

II

IFS

= F

easib

ility

stud

y

EIA

= E

nviro

nmen

tal I

mpa

ct A

sses

smen

t D

= D

esig

n/Te

nder

pre

para

tion

C

= C

ontr

actin

g

I = Im

plem

enta

tion

R

= R

evie

w/E

valu

ate

65

Road

Cor

ridor

VIII

Prio

rity

proj

ects

elig

ible

for f

undi

ng

PRO

JECT

FI

CHE

Proj

ect n

ame

(leng

th):

Upg

radi

ng o

f Quk

es -

Qaf

e Pl

loce

Corr

idor

/ Rou

te:

Corr

idor

VIII

(roa

d)

Tota

l cos

t (m

illio

n Eu

ros)

: 10

0

Regi

onal

Par

ticip

ant

Alb

ania

FEA

SIBI

LITY

ST

UD

YTi

tle o

f stu

dyFe

asib

ility

Stu

dy o

f Upg

radi

ng Q

ukes

- Q

afe

Pllo

ce ro

ad

Prep

ared

by

Min

istry

of T

rans

port

/ARA

Supe

rvis

ed b

y

Whi

ch b

enefi

ts h

ave

been

co

nsid

ered

Redu

ces t

he d

istan

ce fr

om th

e ro

ad a

xis p

assin

g th

roug

h th

e bo

rder

cro

ssin

g po

int o

f Kap

shtic

a.

Ass

umed

val

ues

of ti

me

for t

he d

iffer

ent u

ser

grou

ps

Wor

king

tim

e va

lue=

1.52

Eur

o/ho

ur; N

ot w

orki

ng ti

me

valu

e=0.

508E

uro/

hour

(AN

TP 2

)

Ass

umed

traffi

c gr

owth

pe

r yea

r

Ove

rall

proj

ect o

bjec

tive

Obj

ectiv

ely

veri

fiabl

e in

dica

tors

Impr

ove

the

mov

emen

t of v

ehic

les a

nd th

e ro

ad sa

fety

on

this

sect

ion.

Lin

k Al

bani

a w

ith G

reec

e th

roug

h th

e bo

rder

cro

ssin

g po

int

of K

apsh

tica.

EI

RR: 1

7.4

NPV

/cos

t=7.

4 (A

NTP

2)

Proj

ect b

enefi

ts

Tim

e Sa

ving

, Ope

ratio

n Co

st S

avin

g, V

OC

Envi

ronm

enta

l effe

cts

Tabl

e: P

lann

ed p

roje

ct im

plem

enta

tion

char

tYe

ar20

0720

0820

0920

1020

1120

1220

1320

1420

1520

1620

1720

18Q

uart

er1

23

41

23

41

23

41

23

41

23

41

23

41

23

41

23

41

23

41

23

41

23

41

23

4A

ctio

nA

ctio

nFS

= F

easib

ility

stud

y

EIA

= E

nviro

nmen

tal I

mpa

ct A

sses

smen

t D

= D

esig

n/Te

nder

pre

para

tion

C

= C

ontr

actin

g

I = Im

plem

enta

tion

R

= R

evie

w/E

valu

ate

66


Road

Cor

ridor

X P

riorit

y pr

ojec

ts e

ligib

le fo

r fun

ding

PRO

JECT

FI

CHE

Proj

ect n

ame

(leng

th):

Com

plet

ion

of B

elgr

ade

By-p

ass,

Sec

tor 6

: Str

azev

ica-

Buba

nj P

otok

Corr

idor

/ Rou

te:

Corr

idor

X (r

oad)

Tota

l cos

t (m

illio

n Eu

ros)

: 96

.5

Regi

onal

Par

ticip

ant

Serb

ia

FEA

SIBI

LITY

ST

UD

YTi

tle o

f stu

dyFe

asib

ility

Stu

dy fo

r Bel

grad

e Ci

ty R

oad

By-p

ass

Prep

ared

by

Serb

ian

Road

Dire

ctor

ate

appo

inte

d Sc

ott W

ilson

and

its s

ub-c

onsu

ltant

s, th

e H

ighw

ay In

stitu

te a

nd th

e Tr

ansp

orta

tion

Inst

itute

. The

stud

y, w

hich

incl

udes

eng

inee

ring,

env

ironm

enta

l and

eco

nom

ic st

udie

s, is

finan

ced

by th

e Eu

rope

an A

genc

y fo

r Rec

onst

ruct

ion

(EAR

).

Supe

rvis

ed b

yEu

rope

an A

genc

y fo

r Rec

onst

ruct

ion

(EAR

), M

inist

ry o

f Tra

nspo

rt

Whi

ch b

enefi

ts h

ave

been

co

nsid

ered

Bene

fits a

re la

rgel

y a

resu

lt of

trav

el ti

me

savi

ngs.

Ass

umed

val

ues

of ti

me

for

the

diffe

rent

use

r gro

ups

An e

cono

mic

eva

luat

ion

mod

el b

ased

on

norm

al c

ost b

enefi

t tec

hniq

ues w

as se

t up

usin

g hi

ghly

stru

ctur

ed sp

read

shee

ts.

The

proc

edur

es u

sed

are

cons

isten

t with

gui

delin

es se

t out

in re

leva

nt E

U d

ocum

enta

tion

incl

udin

g TI

NA.

The

eva

luat

ion

prod

uces

key

eco

nom

ic in

dica

tors

incl

udin

g ec

onom

ic in

tern

al ra

te o

f ret

urn

(EIR

R), n

et p

rese

nt v

alue

(NPV

) and

ben

efit

cost

ratio

(B/C

). It

also

inco

rpor

ates

a se

ries o

f sen

sitiv

ity te

sts.

Each

pro

ject

scen

ario

test

ed w

as b

ased

on

traffi

c vo

lum

es

outp

ut fr

om th

e tr

affic

mod

el fo

r the

yea

rs 2

003,

201

0, 2

015

and

2021

for t

he si

tuat

ions

with

out t

he p

roje

ct a

nd w

ith th

e pr

ojec

t. Be

nefit

cat

egor

ies i

nclu

ded

vehi

cle

oper

atin

g co

st (V

OC)

savi

ngs,

valu

e of

tim

e (V

OT)

savi

ngs a

nd a

ccid

ent c

ost

savi

ngs.

Ass

umed

traffi

c gr

owth

pe

r yea

rTr

affic

fore

cast

s for

car

s, lig

ht g

oods

veh

icle

s and

hea

vy g

oods

veh

icle

s wer

e ba

sed

on fo

reca

sts o

f gro

wth

in G

DP

per

capi

ta, p

opul

atio

n an

d em

ploy

men

t, al

l diff

eren

tiate

d by

regi

on, a

nd a

ssum

ptio

ns re

latin

g to

ela

stic

ity o

f tra

nspo

rt d

eman

d,

truc

k fle

et st

ruct

ure

and

inte

rnat

iona

l tra

nsit

traffi

c. T

wo

scen

ario

s wer

e de

velo

ped,

one

refe

rred

to a

s an

’opt

imist

ic‘sc

enar

io

and

the

othe

r as a

’pes

simist

ic‘sc

enar

io. R

esul

ting

over

all t

raffi

c gr

owth

was

6.0

per

cent

per

yea

r in

the

optim

istic

scen

ario

an

d 4.

5 pe

rcen

t per

yea

r in

the

pess

imist

ic sc

enar

io.

Ove

rall

proj

ect o

bjec

tive

Obj

ectiv

ely

veri

fiabl

e in

dica

tors

Traffi

c on

the

Corr

idor

X p

asse

s rig

ht th

roug

h th

e ce

ntre

of B

elgr

ade

and

it cr

eate

s pro

blem

s with

con

gest

ions

and

env

ironm

enta

l an

d ro

ad sa

fety

pro

blem

s. EI

RR: 1

4.4

OCK

: 10%

Proj

ect b

enefi

ts

E K-

and

acc

iden

t cos

t sav

ings

.xp

ecte

d be

nefit

s are

sign

ifica

ntly

redu

ced

vehi

cle

trav

el ti

me

(inte

rnat

iona

l and

cro

ss B

elgr

ade

jour

neys

), be

tter

leve

l of s

ervi

ce

and

less

con

gest

ions

in B

elgr

ade

city

cen

tre.

It w

ill h

ave

a gr

eat s

ocia

l and

eco

nom

ic im

pact

on

the

wid

er B

elgr

ade

area

thro

ugh

impr

oved

acc

essib

ility

and

con

sider

ably

impr

ove

the

elem

ents

of r

oad

safe

ty. T

he b

y-pa

ss p

asse

s thr

ough

env

ironm

enta

lly se

nsi-

tive

area

whi

ch w

ell l

eads

to b

ette

r env

ironm

enta

l pro

tect

ion.

Envi

ronm

enta

l effe

cts

Dec

reas

ing

the

traffi

c ja

ms i

n th

e co

untr

y of

the

Belg

rade

, les

s em

issio

n in

the

air,

soil,

surfa

ce a

nd g

roun

d w

ither

, dec

reas

ing

noise

le

vels

in th

e ci

ty a

rea.

67

Tabl

e: P

lann

ed p

roje

ct im

plem

enta

tion

char

tYe

ar20

0320

0420

0520

0620

0720

0820

0920

1020

1120

1220

1320

14Q

uart

er1

23

41

23

41

23

41

23

41

23

41

23

41

23

41

23

41

23

41

23

41

23

41

23

4

Act

ion

F SF S

F SF S

F SF S

F SF S

F SF S

F SF S

FS =

Fea

sibili

ty st

udy

E

IA =

Env

ironm

enta

l Im

pact

Ass

essm

ent

D =

Des

ign/

Tend

er p

repa

ratio

n

C =

Con

trac

ting

I =

Impl

emen

tatio

n

R =

Rev

iew

/Eva

luat

e

68


Road

Rou

te 1

Prio

rity

proj

ects

elig

ible

for f

undi

ng

PRO

JECT

FI

CHE

Proj

ect n

ame

(leng

th):

Road

con

nect

ion

to in

terc

hang

e Vu

cevi

ca o

n m

otor

way

A1

Corr

idor

/ Rou

te:

Rout

e 1

(roa

d)

Tota

l cos

t (m

illio

n Eu

ros)

: 14

8.16

Regi

onal

Par

ticip

ant

Croa

tia

FEA

SIBI

LITY

ST

UD

YTi

tle o

f stu

dyFe

asib

ility

stud

y of

bui

ldin

g th

e Sp

lit a

gglo

mer

atio

n-ro

ad c

onec

tion

of D

8 to

inte

rcha

nge

Vuce

vica

on

mot

orw

ay A

1

Prep

ared

by

Inst

itut I

GH

d.d

., Zag

reb

Supe

rvis

ed b

yH

rvat

ske

cest

e (C

roat

ian

Road

s) d

.o.o

., Zag

reb

Whi

ch b

enefi

ts h

ave

been

co

nsid

ered

Redu

ctio

n of

trav

el ti

me

Redu

ctio

n of

veh

icle

ope

ratin

g co

sts (

VOCs

)Re

sidua

l val

ue o

f inf

rast

ruct

ure

Savi

ngs o

n ye

arly

mai

nten

ance

and

low

er o

pera

ting

cost

s Re

duct

ion

of c

onge

stio

n on

the

exist

ing

road

net

wor

k

Ass

umed

val

ues

of ti

me

for

the

diffe

rent

use

r gro

ups

Busin

ess t

rave

ller -

5,9

9 €/

hour

N

on b

usin

ess t

rave

ller -

1,8

4 €/

hour

Ass

umed

traffi

c gr

owth

pe

r yea

rAs

sum

ed tr

affic

grow

th w

ill b

e 40

% in

nex

t 10

year

s afte

r com

plet

ion

Ove

rall

proj

ect o

bjec

tive

Obj

ectiv

ely

veri

fiabl

e in

dica

tors

The

prop

osed

Lin

k Ro

ad w

ill h

ave

thre

e fu

nctio

ns: c

onne

ctio

n be

twee

n th

e M

otor

way

A1

and

the

Hig

hway

D8

(futu

re E

xpre

ssw

ay)

to p

rovi

de fo

r a d

irect

link

with

the

Split

agg

lom

erat

ion;

shor

tcut

the

exist

ing

Link

Roa

d D

1 to

from

Dug

opol

je v

ia K

lis to

Spl

it of

ab

out 1

2 km

; dire

ct a

cces

s to

the

futu

re R

egio

nal W

aste

Man

agem

ent C

entr

e.

EIRR

: 18.

63%

NPV

: (5%

app

lied

disc

ount

rate

)=25

4,39

M€

Pass

enge

r Tra

ffic

Dem

and:

201

98 A

ADT

Carg

o Tr

affic

Dem

and

: 200

0 to

ns

Fore

cast

ed G

row

th o

f Pas

seng

er Tr

affic:

4.6%

Fore

cast

ed G

row

th o

f Car

go Tr

affic:

4.5%

Dist

ance

savi

ngs:

12km

Proj

ect b

enefi

ts

Rem

ovin

g tr

affic

from

urb

an a

reas

; hig

h le

vel o

f tra

ffic

serv

ice;

incr

ease

d sa

fety

of t

raffi

c flo

w.

Envi

ronm

enta

l effe

cts

Tabl

e: P

lann

ed p

roje

ct im

plem

enta

tion

char

tYe

ar20

0720

0820

0920

1020

1120

1220

1320

1420

1520

1620

1720

18Q

uart

er1

23

41

23

41

23

41

23

41

23

41

23

41

23

41

23

41

23

41

23

41

23

41

23

4

Act

ion

F SF S

F S

FS =

Fea

sibili

ty st

udy

E

IA =

Env

ironm

enta

l Im

pact

Ass

essm

ent

D =

Des

ign/

Tend

er p

repa

ratio

n

C =

Con

trac

ting

I =

Impl

emen

tatio

n

R =

Rev

iew

/Eva

luat

e

69

Road

Rou

te 2

a Pr

iorit

y pr

ojec

ts e

ligib

le fo

r fun

ding

PRO

JECT

FI

CHE

Proj

ect n

ame

(leng

th):

Expr

essw

ay :

Hun

gary

Bor

der-

Viro

vitic

a-O

kuca

ni-B

osni

a an

d H

erze

govi

na b

orde

rSe

ctio

n: O

kuca

ni-b

orde

r BiH

Corr

idor

/ Rou

te:

Rout

e 2a

(roa

d)

Tota

l cos

t (m

illio

n Eu

ros)

: 55

Regi

onal

Par

ticip

ant

Croa

tiaFE

ASI

BILI

TY

STU

DY

Title

of s

tudy

Feas

ibili

ty st

udy

of b

uild

ing

the

Expr

essw

ay: H

unga

ry B

orde

r-Viro

vitic

a-O

kuca

ni-B

osni

a an

d H

erze

govi

na b

orde

r, Se

ctio

n:

Oku

cani

-bor

der B

iHPr

epar

ed b

yIn

stitu

te IG

H d

.d., Z

agre

bSu

perv

ised

by

Hrv

atsk

e ce

ste,

d.o.

o., Z

agre

bW

hich

ben

efits

hav

e be

en

cons

ider

edRe

duct

ion

of tr

avel

tim

e Lo

wer

ope

ratin

g co

sts

Redu

cing

the

acci

dent

s risk

Re

duct

ion

of c

onge

stio

n on

the

exist

ing

road

net

wor

kA

ssum

ed v

alue

s of

tim

e fo

r th

e di

ffere

nt u

ser g

roup

sBu

sines

s tra

vele

r - 6

,13

€/ho

ur

Non

bus

ines

s tra

velle

r - 1

,84

€/ho

ur

Ass

umed

traffi

c gr

owth

per

ye

arAs

sum

ed tr

affic

grow

th fo

r per

iod

2013

-201

4 am

ount

s 6%

Ove

rall

proj

ect o

bjec

tive

Obj

ectiv

ely

veri

fiabl

e in

dica

tors

Cons

truc

tion

of th

e E

netw

ork

– Co

rrid

or V

c w

hich

will

faci

litat

e co

nnec

tion

to th

e Co

rrid

or X

. To

con

nect

cen

tral

and

eas

tern

par

t of t

he R

egio

nal P

artic

ipan

t with

the

road

net

wor

k an

d to

ena

ble

regi

onal

dev

elop

men

t by

impr

oved

acc

essib

ility

, to

incr

ease

the

road

safe

ty a

nd m

obili

ty.

Faci

litat

es c

onne

ctio

n to

the

neig

hbou

ring

Regi

onal

Par

ticip

ant B

osni

a an

d H

erze

govi

na

EIRR

: 9.2

0%N

PV:

(5%

app

lied

disc

ount

rate

)=44

,94

M€

Pass

enge

r Tra

ffic

Dem

and:

15.

000

AAD

TCa

rgo

Traffi

c D

eman

d : 1

3.26

0 to

ns

Fore

cast

ed G

row

th o

f Pas

seng

er Tr

affic:

5%Fo

reca

sted

Gro

wth

of C

argo

Traffi

c: 8%

Dist

ance

savi

ngs:

9km

Tim

e sa

ving

s: 2h

Proj

ect b

enefi

tsTh

e pr

ojec

t/ro

ad w

ill a

djus

t the

qua

lity

of re

gion

al tr

affic

to in

tern

atio

nal s

tand

ards

. Add

ition

al b

enefi

ts a

re v

isibl

e in

: rem

ovin

g tr

affic

from

urb

an a

reas

; hi

gh le

vel o

f tra

ffic

serv

ice;

incr

ease

d sa

fety

of t

raffi

c flo

w; m

ore

effec

tive

conn

ectio

n be

twee

n Cr

oatia

and

Bo

snia

and

Her

zego

vina

in tr

affic

and

econ

omic

sens

e.

Envi

ronm

enta

l effe

cts

Tabl

e: P

lann

ed p

roje

ct im

plem

enta

tion

char

tYe

ar20

0520

0620

0720

0820

0920

1020

1120

1220

1320

1420

1520

16Q

uart

er1

23

41

23

41

23

41

23

41

23

41

23

41

23

41

23

41

23

41

23

41

23

41

23

4

Act

ion

F SF S

F SF S

F SF S

II

II

II

II

II

II

II

II

FS =

Fea

sibili

ty st

udy

E

IA =

Env

ironm

enta

l Im

pact

Ass

essm

ent

D =

Des

ign/

Tend

er p

repa

ratio

n

C =

Con

trac

ting

I =

Impl

emen

tatio

n

R =

Rev

iew

/Eva

luat

e

70


Road

Rou

te 2

b Pr

iorit

y pr

ojec

ts e

ligib

le fo

r fun

ding

PRO

JECT

FI

CHE

Proj

ect n

ame

(leng

th):

Cons

truc

tion

of B

rod

na D

rini

(Foc

a) -

Hum

(Sce

pan

Polje

) (23

.35

km)

Corr

idor

/ Rou

te:

Rout

e 2b

(roa

d)

Tota

l cos

t (m

illio

n Eu

ros)

: 62

Regi

onal

Par

ticip

ant

Bosn

ia a

nd H

erze

govi

na

FEA

SIBI

LITY

ST

UD

YTi

tle o

f stu

dyIm

prov

emen

t of t

he F

oca-

Hum

mai

n ro

ad-F

easib

ility

Stu

dy

Prep

ared

by

WYG

Inte

rnat

iona

l Ltd

, UK

Gro

up o

f Sub

con

sulta

nts -

IPSA

Inst

itute

, Sar

ajev

o, B

&H; P

roje

kt, a

.d.B

anja

Luk

a, B

&H; T

rans

port

atio

n En

gine

erin

g Fa

culty

, BU

, Se

rbia

Supe

rvis

ed b

yM

inist

ry o

f Tra

nspo

rt a

nd C

omm

unic

atio

ns, B

osni

a an

d H

erze

govi

na

Whi

ch b

enefi

ts h

ave

been

co

nsid

ered

Ass

umed

val

ues

of ti

me

for

the

diffe

rent

use

r gro

ups

busin

ess r

elat

ed tr

ips:

for P

A 3,

78€/

h (7

,4 B

AM/h

), fo

r BU

S 3,

4€/h

(6,6

BAM

/h)

non-

busin

ess r

elat

ed tr

ips:

for P

A 1,

13€/

h (2

,2 B

AM/h

), fo

r BU

S 1,

01€/

h (2

,0 B

AM/h

)

Ass

umed

traffi

c gr

owth

pe

r yea

r3.

6%-2

.4%

(ye

ar20

10-2

035)

for c

omm

erci

al v

ehic

les

3.9%

-1.2

% (

year

2010

-203

5) fo

r pas

seng

er c

ars

Ove

rall

proj

ect o

bjec

tive

Obj

ectiv

ely

veri

fiabl

e in

dica

tors

The

road

from

Bro

d na

Drin

i (Fo

ca) t

o H

um a

nd in

to M

onte

negr

o (S

cepa

n Po

lje-P

luzi

ne) p

rovi

des a

dire

ct c

onne

ctio

n be

twee

n Bo

snia

and

Her

zego

vina

and

Mon

tene

gro

and

is th

e sh

orte

st ro

ute

from

Alb

ania

via

Mon

tene

gro

and

Bosn

ia a

nd H

erze

govi

na to

Ce

ntra

l Eur

ope

via

Corr

idor

Vc.

The

mai

n tr

affic

prob

lem

s on

exist

ing

road

, due

to e

xist

ing

traffi

c flo

ws a

re: b

ottle

neck

s, lo

w ro

ad

safe

ty le

vel,

low

ave

rage

veh

icle

spee

ds, w

ith lo

wer

than

spee

d lim

its d

ue to

poo

r roa

d el

emen

ts a

nd c

ondi

tions

, inc

reas

ed V

ehic

le

Ope

ratin

g Co

st (V

OC)

and

trav

el ti

me

cost

for t

he p

asse

nger

s and

goo

ds d

ue to

ver

y lo

w sp

eeds

, env

ironm

enta

l end

ange

rmen

t ca

used

by

incr

ease

d po

llutio

n, e

spec

ially

em

issio

ns a

nd n

oise

.In

crea

se o

f the

loca

l eco

nom

y co

mpe

titiv

enes

s with

in th

e ro

ad g

ravi

ty a

rea

and

indi

rect

impa

ct o

n ge

nera

tion

of n

ew p

roje

cts a

nd

inve

stm

ents

in th

e ec

onom

y of

the

regi

on a

re fo

rese

en a

nd d

istan

ce fo

r peo

ple

and

com

mod

ities

, red

uctio

n of

gen

eral

ised

tran

s-po

rt c

osts

for p

eopl

e an

d co

mm

oditi

es.

EIRR

8.4

6% (s

cena

rio I –

opt

imist

ic)

EIRR

7.9

0% (s

cena

rio II

– m

ediu

m)

EIRR

7.5

1% (s

cena

rio III

– p

essim

istic

)

ENPV

scen

ario

I

10.4

69.3

74,0

0€

(d

iscou

nt ra

te 6

%)

1.

644.

835,

00€

(d

iscou

nt ra

te 8

%)

ENPV

scen

ario

II

7.9

33.3

53,0

0€

(d

iscou

nt ra

te 6

%)

-3

62.9

75,0

0€

(d

iscou

nt ra

te 8

%)

ENPV

scen

ario

III

6.28

7.58

5,00

€

(

disc

ount

rate

6%

)

-1.7

21.9

74,0

0€

(di

scou

nt ra

te 8

%)

Proj

ect b

enefi

ts

Mai

n be

nefit

s will

be

repr

esen

ted

thro

ugh

redu

ced

vehi

cle

oper

atin

g co

sts a

nd ti

me

savi

ngs o

n ne

w ro

ad, i

mpr

oved

safe

ty a

nd

high

er e

nviro

nmen

tal c

once

rns.

In a

dditi

on, r

educ

tion

of tr

avel

tim

e an

d di

stan

ce a

s wel

l as r

educ

tion

of g

ener

alise

d tr

ansp

ort

cost

s are

exp

ecte

d.

Envi

ronm

enta

l effe

cts

Dur

ing

the

expl

oita

tion

of th

e ro

ad, w

ith re

gard

to th

e m

oder

nisa

tion

of v

ehic

les i

n th

e fu

ture

and

sign

ifica

nt re

stric

tions

on

the

exha

ust g

ases

qua

lity,

redu

ctio

n of

pol

luta

nts i

n fu

nctio

n of

traffi

c vo

lum

es in

crea

se is

to b

e ex

pect

ed.

M

ain

nega

tive

envi

ronm

enta

l effe

cts a

re e

xpec

ted

durin

g co

nstr

uctio

n. M

achi

ne w

orks

(noi

se, v

ibra

tions

, etc

.) an

d oc

cupa

tion

of

cert

ain

land

are

as w

ill c

erta

inly

but

not

sign

ifica

ntly

hav

e a

nega

tive

envi

ronm

enta

l im

pact

on

the

plan

ts a

nd w

ildlif

e al

ong

the

alig

nmen

t.Th

e Pr

elim

inar

y En

viro

nmen

tal I

mpa

ct A

sses

smen

t doc

umen

t sug

gest

ed a

ir pr

otec

tion,

wat

er p

rote

ctio

n, so

il pr

otec

tion,

noi

se a

nd

prot

ectio

n m

easu

res,

was

te m

anag

emen

t, an

d hu

man

hea

lth p

rote

ctin

g m

easu

res a

s wel

l as fl

ora

and

faun

a m

itiga

tion

mea

sure

s.

71

Tabl

e: P

lann

ed p

roje

ct im

plem

enta

tion

char

tYe

ar20

0720

0820

0920

1020

1120

1220

1320

1420

1520

1620

1720

18

Qua

rter

12

34

12

34

12

34

12

34

12

34

12

34

12

34

12

34

12

34

12

34

12

34

12

34

Act

ion

F SF S

F SF S

F SFS

= F

easib

ility

stud

y

EIA

= E

nviro

nmen

tal I

mpa

ct A

sses

smen

t D

= D

esig

n/Te

nder

pre

para

tion

C

= C

ontr

actin

g

I = Im

plem

enta

tion

R

= R

evie

w/E

valu

ate

72


Road

Rou

te 2

c Pr

iorit

y pr

ojec

ts e

ligib

le fo

r fun

ding

PRO

JECT

FI

CHE

Proj

ect n

ame

(leng

th):

Cons

truc

tion

of C

entr

al E

ast C

orri

dor a

nd C

entr

al S

outh

Cor

rido

r (Be

rat t

o Te

pele

ne) (

44km

)

Corr

idor

/ Rou

te:

Rout

e 2c

(roa

d)

Tota

l cos

t (m

illio

n Eu

ros)

: 21

0

Regi

onal

Par

ticip

ant

Alb

ania

FEA

SIBI

LITY

ST

UD

YTi

tle o

f stu

dyPr

e-Fe

asib

ility

stud

y fo

r the

Cen

tral

-Sou

th C

orrid

or

Prep

ared

by

Scot

Wils

on K

Pat

rick,

UK

Supe

rvis

ed b

yM

inist

ry o

f Tra

nspo

rt

Whi

ch b

enefi

ts h

ave

been

co

nsid

ered

Tim

e Sa

ving

, Ope

ratio

n Co

st S

avin

g, M

aint

enan

ce c

ost s

avin

g, V

OC,

Mod

erat

e po

sitiv

e en

viro

nmen

tal e

ffect

s

Ass

umed

val

ues

of ti

me

for t

he d

iffer

ent u

ser

grou

ps

Wor

king

tim

e va

lue=

1.52

Eur

o/ho

ur; N

ot w

orki

ng ti

me

valu

e=0.

508

Euro

/hou

r (AN

TP 2

)

Ass

umed

traffi

c gr

owth

pe

r yea

r7%

Ove

rall

proj

ect o

bjec

tive

Obj

ectiv

ely

veri

fiabl

e in

dica

tors

The

tota

l len

gth

of th

e Ce

ntra

l Sou

th C

orrid

or is

abo

ut 1

80 k

m, o

ut o

f whi

ch a

bout

10

% re

late

s to

the

exist

ing

road

s req

uirin

g no

im

prov

emen

ts so

no

new

eco

logi

cal r

isks w

ill o

ccur

. U

pgra

ding

is p

lann

ed o

n 15

% o

f the

sect

ion

and

on 7

5% n

ew c

onst

ruct

ion

will

take

pla

ce.

EIRR

= 1

0.67

%

NPV

=13

8.04

(ml E

uro)

Fore

cast

ed T

raffi

c G

row

th R

ate:

7%

Proj

ect b

enefi

ts

Tim

e Sa

ving

, Ope

ratio

n Co

st S

avin

g, M

aint

enan

ce c

ost s

avin

g, V

OC.

Soc

ial e

cono

mic

dev

elop

men

ts o

f zon

es n

ear t

he ro

ad. S

hort

-in

g th

e tr

avel

dist

ance

from

Tira

na to

Sou

th o

f Alb

ania

.

Envi

ronm

enta

l effe

cts

Cultu

ral l

ands

cape

are

as a

re a

ffect

ed m

ost (

50%

), ec

olog

ical

risk

s ass

esse

d as

low

Tabl

e: P

lann

ed p

roje

ct im

plem

enta

tion

char

tYe

ar20

0720

0820

0920

1020

1120

1220

1320

1420

1520

1620

1720

18Q

uart

er1

23

41

23

41

23

41

23

41

23

41

23

41

23

41

23

41

23

41

23

41

23

41

23

4A

ctio

nF S

F SF S

F SA

ctio

nFS

= F

easib

ility

stud

y

EIA

= E

nviro

nmen

tal I

mpa

ct A

sses

smen

t D

= D

esig

n/Te

nder

pre

para

tion

C

= C

ontr

actin

g

I = Im

plem

enta

tion

R

= R

evie

w/E

valu

ate

73

PRO

JECT

FI

CHE

Proj

ect n

ame

(leng

th):

New

con

stru

ctio

n of

By-

pass

of R

rogo

zhin

a (4

.5km

)

Corr

idor

/ Rou

te:

Corr

idor

VIII

(roa

d)

Tota

l cos

t (m

illio

n Eu

ros)

: 6.

4

Regi

onal

Par

ticip

ant

Alb

ania

FEA

SIBI

LITY

ST

UD

YTi

tle o

f stu

dyFe

asib

ility

Stu

dy fo

r By-

pass

of R

rogo

zhin

a

Prep

ared

by

MPW

T/AR

A

Supe

rvis

ed b

yAl

bani

an G

over

nmen

t

Whi

ch b

enefi

ts h

ave

been

co

nsid

ered

Link

s the

Cor

ridor

VIII

and

Nor

th-S

outh

Cor

ridor

road

segm

ents

, red

uce

the

trav

el ti

me

and

dist

ance

s to

and

from

por

t of

Dur

res,

road

safe

ty g

row

th.

Ass

umed

val

ues

of ti

me

for t

he d

iffer

ent u

ser

grou

ps

Wor

king

tim

e va

lue=

1.52

Eur

o/ho

ur; N

ot w

orki

ng ti

me

valu

e=0.

508

Euro

/hou

r (AN

TP 2

)

Ass

umed

traffi

c gr

owth

pe

r yea

r

Ove

rall

proj

ect o

bjec

tive

Obj

ectiv

ely

veri

fiabl

e in

dica

tors

Rrog

ozhi

na b

ypas

s is t

arge

ting

traffi

c fa

cilit

atio

n in

Rro

gozh

ina

tow

n w

hile

in th

e fu

ture

it is

exp

ecte

d to

be

one

of th

e m

ost i

m-

port

ant k

nots

of F

ushe

-Kru

je-R

rogo

zhin

ë hi

ghw

ay, a

ver

y im

port

ant a

rter

y fo

r the

circ

ulat

ion

with

in th

e co

untr

y as

wel

l as r

egio

nal

conn

ectiv

ity.

Proj

ect b

enefi

ts

Impl

emen

tatio

n of

pro

ject

is c

onsid

ered

hig

hly

impo

rtan

t not

onl

y in

term

s of t

raffi

c, b

ut a

lso fo

r the

impr

ovem

ent o

f env

ironm

ent

and

road

safe

ty.

Envi

ronm

enta

l effe

cts

Tabl

e: P

lann

ed p

roje

ct im

plem

enta

tion

char

tYe

ar20

0720

0820

0920

1020

1120

1220

1320

1420

1520

1620

1720

18Q

uart

er1

23

41

23

41

23

41

23

41

23

41

23

41

23

41

23

41

23

41

23

41

23

41

23

4

Act

ion

Act

ion

FS =

Fea

sibili

ty st

udy

E

IA =

Env

ironm

enta

l Im

pact

Ass

essm

ent

D =

Des

ign/

Tend

er p

repa

ratio

n

C =

Con

trac

ting

I =

Impl

emen

tatio

n

R =

Rev

iew

/Eva

luat

e

74


Road

Rou

te 4

Prio

rity

proj

ects

elig

ible

for f

undi

ng

PRO

JECT

FIC

HE

Proj

ect n

ame

(leng

th):

Road

Rou

te 4

con

stru

ctio

n - S

ectio

n Po

dgor

ica-

Mat

esev

o

Corr

idor

/ Rou

te:

Rout

e 4

(roa

d)

Tota

l cos

t (m

illio

n Eu

ros)

: 50

1.6

Regi

onal

Par

ticip

ant

Mon

tene

gro

FEA

SIBI

LITY

STU

DY

Title

of s

tudy

SEET

O R

oad

Rout

e 4

Inve

stm

ent P

lan

Prep

ared

by

URS

Env

ironm

enta

l and

Infra

stru

ctur

e U

K Li

mite

d (fo

rmer

SCO

TT –

WIL

SON

) (CO

NSO

RTIU

M: S

YTAS

S.A

. (G

reec

e), T

TA S

.A. (

Gre

ece)

and

OM

IKRO

N K

APPA

Con

sulti

ng S

.A. (

Gre

ece)

Supe

rvis

ed b

yM

inist

ry o

f Tra

nspo

rt a

nd M

ariti

me

Affai

rs a

nd M

inist

ry o

f Fin

ance

Whi

ch b

enefi

ts h

ave

been

con

sid-

ered

Follo

win

g pr

imar

y ec

onom

ic b

enefi

ts a

re c

onsid

ered

: sav

ings

in ro

ad v

ehic

le o

pera

ting

and

mai

nten

ance

co

sts;

valu

e of

tim

e sa

ving

s of p

asse

nger

s; va

lue

of to

ne /

hour

savi

ngs o

f fre

ight

; sav

ings

in ro

ad a

ccid

ent

cost

s; va

lue

of b

enefi

ts to

gen

erat

ed tr

affic.

In a

dditi

on, s

ome

seco

ndar

y ec

onom

ic b

enefi

ts a

re c

onsid

ered

. Th

e ex

tern

al c

osts

con

sider

ed in

clud

e: n

oise

cos

ts; p

ollu

tion

cost

s; cl

imat

e ch

ange

cos

ts

Ass

umed

val

ues

of ti

me

for t

he d

if-fe

rent

use

r gro

ups

Vehi

cle

type

O

ccup

ancy

/load

ing

EU

R

E

UR

/ veh

icle

Car

2.1

4 pe

rson

s

1.

55 /

pers

on

3.3

3LC

V

3

.6 to

nnes

0.02

662

/ ton

ne

0.

096

HCV

12.

5 to

nnes

0

.026

62 /

tonn

e

0.3

33

VOTs

for f

utur

e ye

ars w

ere

incr

ease

d by

app

lyin

g th

e VO

T el

astic

ity to

fore

cast

gro

wth

in G

DP/

capi

ta.

Assu

med

gro

wth

in G

DP

with

an

elas

ticity

of 0

.7 a

pplie

d, is

show

n in

the

follo

win

g ta

ble.

VOT

grow

th fa

ctor

s 201

2 - 2

050

(per

cent

per

yea

r)Ye

ar

G

DP/

capi

ta

VO

T20

12 –

202

0

2.

0%

1

.4%

2021

- 20

35

2

.5%

1.7

5%20

36 -

2050

2.5

%

1

.75%

Ass

umed

traffi

c gr

owth

per

yea

r

Ove

rall

proj

ect o

bjec

tive

Obj

ectiv

ely

veri

fiabl

e in

dica

tors

EIRR

: 4.5

%N

PV:

4.5

(in E

UR

mill

ion)

Disc

ount

ed b

enefi

ts p

er k

m -

158,

61 (i

n EU

R m

illio

n)

Proj

ect b

enefi

ts

Key

gene

rato

rs o

f int

erna

tiona

l tra

ffic

in M

onte

negr

o ar

e Al

bani

a an

d Se

rbia

with

Alb

ania

dom

inat

ing

for c

ars.

For H

GVs

how

ever

, Se

rbia

is a

mai

n ge

nera

tor w

ith 4

0% o

f int

erna

tiona

l HG

V tr

affic

bein

g fro

m/t

o Se

rbia

. Whi

lst th

is re

pres

ents

a la

rge

perc

enta

ge o

f th

e H

GV

dem

and,

it in

fact

repr

esen

ts le

ss th

an 0

.6%

of t

he o

vera

ll in

ter-m

unic

ipal

mov

emen

ts fo

r all

vehi

cles

and

onl

y fe

w tr

ips i

n ab

solu

te te

rms (

369

trip

s). E

ven

thou

gh th

ese

HG

Vs w

ould

hig

hly

profi

t fro

m th

e im

prov

emen

ts to

the

SEET

O R

oute

4 C

orrid

or, t

he

‘eco

nom

ic b

enefi

ts’ li

nked

to th

ese

will

be

min

or w

ithin

the

wid

er e

cono

mic

con

text

.

Envi

ronm

enta

l effe

cts

Obj

ects

on

the

sect

ion

have

bee

n de

scrib

ed in

det

ail,

as w

ell a

s noi

se le

vels

and

emiss

ions

to a

ir du

ring

cons

truc

tion

wor

ks o

f br

idge

s, vi

aduc

ts a

nd tu

nnel

s. Al

l sub

-var

iant

s of t

he p

roje

ct h

ave

been

des

crib

ed in

det

ail a

s wel

l. Er

osio

n, la

ndsli

de a

nd se

ismol

-og

y ar

e al

so in

clud

ed in

the

Stud

y.

75

Tabl

e: P

lann

ed p

roje

ct im

plem

enta

tion

char

tYe

ar20

0720

0820

0920

1020

1120

1220

1320

1420

1520

1620

1720

18Q

uart

er1

23

41

23

41

23

41

23

41

23

41

23

41

23

41

23

41

23

41

23

41

23

41

23

4A

ctio

nA

ctio

n

FS =

Fea

sibili

ty st

udy

E

IA =

Env

ironm

enta

l Im

pact

Ass

essm

ent

D =

Des

ign/

Tend

er p

repa

ratio

n

C =

Con

trac

ting

I =

Impl

emen

tatio

n

R =

Rev

iew

/Eva

luat

e

76


PRO

JECT

FI

CHE

Proj

ect n

ame

(leng

th):

Cons

truc

tion

of M

otor

way

sec

tion

Belg

rade

-Poz

ega

(133

.5 k

m)

Corr

idor

/ Rou

te:

Rout

e 4

(roa

d)

Tota

l cos

t (m

illio

n Eu

ros)

: 78

6

Regi

onal

Par

ticip

ant

Serb

ia

FEA

SIBI

LITY

ST

UD

YTi

tle o

f stu

dyFe

asib

ility

Stu

dy n

ew c

onst

rictio

n Be

lgra

de-S

outh

Adr

iatic

, Sec

tion

Belg

rade

-Poz

ega

Prep

ared

by

Hig

hway

Inst

itute

from

Bel

grad

e, 2

007,

Fin

ance

d fro

m P

E Ro

ads o

f Ser

bia

Supe

rvis

ed b

yM

inist

ry o

f Tra

nspo

rt

Whi

ch b

enefi

ts h

ave

been

co

nsid

ered

Ass

umed

val

ues

of ti

me

for

the

diffe

rent

use

r gro

ups

Ass

umed

traffi

c gr

owth

pe

r yea

r

Ove

rall

proj

ect o

bjec

tive

Obj

ectiv

ely

veri

fiabl

e in

dica

tors

The

proj

ect a

ims a

t im

prov

ing

the

leve

l of s

ervi

ce a

nd tr

affic

safe

ty b

y up

grad

ing

the

exist

ing

road

to m

otor

way

stan

dard

and

co

nstr

uctio

n of

new

hig

hway

sect

ion

with

all

serv

ice

faci

litie

s. It

mea

ns th

at th

e ne

w ro

ute

will

take

ove

r the

role

of t

he a

dequ

ate

cate

goris

atio

n of

the

Euro

pean

net

wor

k. M

inist

ry o

f Inf

rast

ruct

ure

star

ted

with

fina

ncin

g ot

her R

oad

Rout

e 4

sect

ions

- U

b-La

jko-

vac

leng

th 1

2,5k

km, b

udge

t inv

estm

ent o

f 64

mil

Euro

s (w

ill b

e fin

ished

od

the

end

of th

e 20

12) a

nd th

e se

ctio

n Li

g-Pr

eljin

a le

ngth

40

,36k

m b

y in

vest

men

t cos

t of 3

08 m

il Eu

ros (

Aze

rbed

zan

Gov

ernm

ent c

ontr

act).

EIRR

: 10.

89O

CK: 8

%EN

PV/E

URO

: 279

.822

.384

,00

Proj

ect b

enefi

ts

Expe

cted

ben

efits

are

redu

ced

VOC,

trav

el ti

mes

and

acc

iden

t cos

t.

Envi

ronm

enta

l effe

cts

Envi

ronm

enta

l iss

ues r

evie

wed

in th

e re

port

are

: geo

logy

and

soils

, sur

face

and

gro

undw

ater

, air

qual

ity, n

oise

, flor

a an

d fa

una,

la

ndsc

ape

and

visu

al im

pact

, cul

tura

l her

itage

, pop

ulat

ion

and

econ

omy.

Env

ironm

enta

lly se

nsiti

ve a

reas

(gro

undw

ater

pro

tec-

tion

zone

; sur

face

dra

inag

e; re

siden

tial a

reas

; arc

haeo

logi

cal s

ites;

agric

ultu

ral l

and,

shru

b- a

nd w

oodl

and)

alo

ng th

e ro

ute

have

be

en id

entifi

ed. N

o bi

odiv

ersit

y ar

eas p

rote

cted

und

er n

atio

nal o

r int

erna

tiona

l leg

islat

ion

have

bee

n id

entifi

ed. T

he u

se o

f nat

ural

re

sour

ces –

wat

er re

sour

ces,

agric

ultu

ral l

and

and

fore

sts –

has

bee

n re

view

ed.

Tabl

e: P

lann

ed p

roje

ct im

plem

enta

tion

char

tYe

ar20

0320

0420

0520

0620

0720

0820

0920

1020

1120

1220

1320

14Q

uart

er1

23

41

23

41

23

41

23

41

23

41

23

41

23

41

23

41

23

41

23

41

23

41

23

4

Act

ion

F SF S

F SF S

F SF S

F SF S

F SF S

F SF S

Act

ion

E I A

E I A

E I A

E I A

E I A

E I A

E I A

E I A

E I A

E I A

E I A

E I AFS

= F

easib

ility

stud

y

EIA

= E

nviro

nmen

tal I

mpa

ct A

sses

smen

t D

= D

esig

n/Te

nder

pre

para

tion

C

= C

ontr

actin

g

I = Im

plem

enta

tion

R

= R

evie

w/E

valu

ate

77

Road

Rou

te 6

a Pr

iorit

y pr

ojec

ts e

ligib

le fo

r fun

ding

PRO

JECT

FI

CHE

Proj

ect n

ame

(leng

th):

Cons

truc

tion

of m

otor

way

, Sec

tion

Pris

tina-

Han

i I E

lezi

t/D

jene

ral J

anko

vic

(56k

m)

Corr

idor

/ Rou

te:

Rout

e 6a

(roa

d)

Tota

l cos

t (m

illio

n Eu

ros)

: 37

8

Regi

onal

Par

ticip

ant

Koso

vo

FEA

SIBI

LITY

ST

UD

YTi

tle o

f stu

dyFe

asib

ility

Stu

dy a

nd E

nviro

nmen

tal A

sses

smen

t for

Tw

o M

ain

Road

Axe

s in

Koso

vo

Prep

ared

by

COW

I

Supe

rvis

ed b

yM

inist

ry o

f Inf

rast

ruct

ure

Whi

ch b

enefi

ts h

ave

been

co

nsid

ered

Ass

umed

val

ues

of ti

me

for

the

diffe

rent

use

r gro

ups

Ass

umed

traffi

c gr

owth

pe

r yea

r4

%

Ove

rall

proj

ect o

bjec

tive

Obj

ectiv

ely

veri

fiabl

e in

dica

tors

The

Rout

e 6a

con

nect

s the

Rou

te 4

and

the

Rout

e 7

with

the

Corr

idor

VIII

and

has

a v

ital r

ole

in e

cono

mic

and

soci

al d

evel

opm

ent

of K

osov

o. T

he o

bjec

tive

is to

bui

ld fu

ll m

otor

way

pro

file

from

Pris

tina

to b

orde

r with

the

form

er Y

ugos

lav

Repu

blic

of M

aced

onia

, im

prov

ing

the

leve

l of s

ervi

ce a

nd tr

affic

safe

ty a

s wel

l as e

nhan

cing

con

nect

ivity

of t

his r

egio

n.EI

RR:

12 %

NPV

: 10

2.58

Impo

rtan

ce o

f Int

erna

tiona

l Dem

and

- Pa

ssen

ger T

raffi

c: 2

0%Pa

ssen

ger T

raffi

c: 4

0%

Proj

ect b

enefi

ts

The

bene

fits o

f the

pro

ject

will

resu

lt in

redu

ced

jour

ney

times

and

del

ays,

and

impr

oved

road

surfa

ce c

ondi

tions

whi

ch w

ill re

sult

in v

ehic

le o

pera

ting

cost

savi

ngs,

acci

dent

cos

t sav

ings

and

trav

el ti

me

cost

savi

ngs.

Envi

ronm

enta

l effe

cts

Tabl

e: P

lann

ed p

roje

ct im

plem

enta

tion

char

tYe

ar20

0320

0420

0520

0620

0720

0820

0920

1020

1120

1220

1320

14Q

uart

er1

23

41

23

41

23

41

23

41

23

41

23

41

23

41

23

41

23

41

23

41

23

41

23

4

Act

ion

F SF S

F SF S

F SF S

F SF S

DD

DD

DD

DD

Act

ion

E I A

E I A

E I A

E I A

E I A

E I A

E I A

E I A

FS =

Fea

sibili

ty st

udy

E

IA =

Env

ironm

enta

l Im

pact

Ass

essm

ent

D =

Des

ign/

Tend

er p

repa

ratio

n

C =

Con

trac

ting

I =

Impl

emen

tatio

n

R =

Rev

iew

/Eva

luat

e

78


Road

Rou

te 7

Prio

rity

proj

ects

elig

ible

for f

undi

ng

PRO

JECT

FI

CHE

Proj

ect n

ame

(leng

th):

Cons

truc

tion

of s

ectio

n Pr

istin

a-M

erda

re

Corr

idor

/ Rou

te:

Rout

e 7

(roa

d)

Tota

l cos

t (m

illio

n Eu

ros)

: 75

0

Regi

onal

Par

ticip

ant

Koso

vo

FEA

SIBI

LITY

ST

UD

YTi

tle o

f stu

dyFe

asib

ility

Stu

dy a

nd E

nviro

nmen

tal A

sses

smen

t for

Tw

o M

ain

Road

Axe

s in

Koso

vo

Prep

ared

by

COW

I

Supe

rvis

ed b

yM

inist

ry o

f Inf

rast

ruct

ure

Whi

ch b

enefi

ts h

ave

been

co

nsid

ered

Ass

umed

val

ues

of ti

me

for

the

diffe

rent

use

r gro

ups

Ass

umed

traffi

c gr

owth

pe

r yea

r4

%

Ove

rall

proj

ect o

bjec

tive

Obj

ectiv

ely

veri

fiabl

e in

dica

tors

The

Hig

hway

Mer

dare

- Pr

istin

a –

Kuke

s - D

urre

s (Ro

ute

- 7),

crea

tes t

he sh

orte

st c

onne

ctio

n be

twee

n Ko

sovo

and

Alb

ania

with

the

Euro

pean

net

wor

k of

inte

rnat

iona

l roa

ds. I

t is o

f a g

reat

eco

nom

ical

impo

rtan

ce if

look

ed a

t fro

m th

e as

pect

of t

he tr

ansp

orta

tion

of g

oods

and

pas

seng

ers w

ithin

SEE

Cou

ntrie

s as w

ell a

s the

ir sh

orte

st li

nk w

ith E

urop

ean

and

Med

iterr

anea

n co

untr

ies.

The

proj

ect s

uppo

rts t

he a

ctiv

atio

n of

nat

ural

and

hum

an re

sour

ces a

nd h

elps

surp

assin

g po

litic

al a

nd c

ivili

zatio

n pr

oble

ms,

offer

-in

g th

e ec

onom

ical

, pol

itica

l and

cul

tura

l coo

pera

tion

amon

gst R

egio

nal P

artic

ipan

ts.

EIRR

: 8.

25 %

NPV

: 33

9.85

Impo

rtan

ce o

f Int

erna

tiona

l Dem

and

- Pa

ssen

ger T

raffi

c: 2

0%Pa

ssen

ger T

raffi

c: 4

0%Pr

ojec

t ben

efits

The

mai

n ar

gum

ent o

r rea

soni

ng b

ehin

d Ro

ute

– 7

was

bas

ed e

xact

ly o

n ad

vant

ages

, suc

h as

: red

uctio

n of

trav

el ti

me

and

expe

n-di

ture

s as w

ell a

s mor

e se

cure

trav

el. T

his c

hang

e ca

used

the

disc

ontin

uatio

n of

the

trac

k of

Rou

te –

7, h

avin

g its

impa

ct o

n th

e eff

ectiv

e fu

nctio

n of

the

netw

ork

whe

n fu

lly c

ompl

eted

.

Envi

ronm

enta

l effe

cts

Tabl

e: P

lann

ed p

roje

ct im

plem

enta

tion

char

tYe

ar20

0320

0420

0520

0620

0720

0820

0920

1020

1120

1220

1320

14Q

uart

er1

23

41

23

41

23

41

23

41

23

41

23

41

23

41

23

41

23

41

23

41

23

41

23

4A

ctio

nF S

F SF S

F SF S

F SF S

F SD

DD

DD

DD

D

Act

ion

E I A

E I A

E I A

E I A

E I A

E I A

E I A

E I A

FS =

Fea

sibili

ty st

udy

E

IA =

Env

ironm

enta

l Im

pact

Ass

essm

ent

D =

Des

ign/

Tend

er p

repa

ratio

n

C =

Con

trac

ting

I =

Impl

emen

tatio

n

R =

Rev

iew

/Eva

luat

e

79

Road

Cor

ridor

X P

riorit

y pr

ojec

ts e

ligib

le fo

r fun

ding

Reha

bilit

atio

n pr

ojec

t

PRO

JECT

FIC

HE

Proj

ect n

ame

(leng

th):

Reha

bilit

atio

n of

Roa

d se

ctio

ns o

n Ro

ad C

orri

dor X

, se

ctio

ns B

rezi

ca-M

iladi

novc

i and

Vel

es-B

rezi

ca

(57.

5 km

)

Corr

idor

/ Rou

te:

Corr

idor

X (r

oad)

Tota

l cos

t (m

illio

n Eu

ros)

: 16

Regi

onal

Par

ticip

ant

the

form

er Y

ugos

lav

Repu

blic

of M

aced

onia

Ove

rall

proj

ect o

bjec

tive

Obj

ectiv

ely

veri

fiabl

e in

dica

tors

Corr

idor

X is

the

mos

t im

port

ant e

lem

ent o

f the

cor

e tr

ansp

ort n

etw

ork,

link

ing

from

Gre

ece

to A

ustr

ia. W

ithin

the

natio

nal t

er-

ritor

y, th

e re

leva

nt p

art o

f the

Cor

ridor

X is

in c

onco

rdan

ce w

ith N

atio

nal r

oad

M-1

(int

erna

tiona

l mar

k E-

75),

whi

ch c

ross

es th

e te

rrito

ry in

dire

ctio

n N

orth

-Sou

th. T

he st

rate

gica

l im

port

ance

of t

he C

orrid

or is

in th

e fa

ct th

at w

ill c

ontr

ibut

e fo

r a fa

ster

and

safe

r co

mm

on c

omm

unic

atio

n an

d tr

ansp

ort o

f pas

seng

ers a

nd g

oods

that

lead

s to

econ

omic

secu

rity

and

stab

ility

.

Proj

ect b

enefi

ts

With

the

reha

bilit

atio

n of

the

prev

ious

ly m

entio

ned

sect

ions

the

capa

city

and

the

over

all e

ffica

cy o

f the

mot

orw

ay E

-75

nort

h-so

uth

will

be

impr

oved

, as w

ell a

s red

uctio

n of

the

noise

and

the

pollu

tion,

bet

ter c

ondi

tions

for t

he tr

ansit

tran

spor

t, su

ppor

t an

d st

imul

atio

n of

the

econ

omic

dev

elop

men

t. T

hese

sect

ions

hav

e th

e hi

ghes

t tra

ffic

on th

e Co

rrid

or X

in te

rrito

ry o

f the

form

er

Yugo

slav

Repu

blic

of M

aced

onia

and

thei

r im

port

ance

and

ben

efits

in sh

ort p

erio

d is

muc

h va

luab

le.

Envi

ronm

enta

l effe

cts

Tabl

e: P

lann

ed p

roje

ct im

plem

enta

tion

char

tYe

ar20

0720

0820

0920

1020

1120

1220

1320

1420

1520

1620

1720

18Q

uart

er1

23

41

23

41

23

41

23

41

23

41

23

41

23

41

23

41

23

41

23

41

23

41

23

4A

ctio

nD

DD

DFS

= F

easib

ility

stud

y

EIA

= E

nviro

nmen

tal I

mpa

ct A

sses

smen

t D

= D

esig

n/Te

nder

pre

para

tion

C

= C

ontr

actin

g

I = Im

plem

enta

tion

R

= R

evie

w/E

valu

ate

80


Rail

Prio

rity

proj

ects

elig

ible

for f

undi

ngRa

il Co

rrid

or V

b Pr

iorit

y pr

ojec

ts e

ligib

le fo

r fun

ding

PRO

JECT

FI

CHE

Proj

ect n

ame

(leng

th):

Upg

rade

and

con

stru

ctio

n of

sec

ond

trac

k on

railw

ay li

ne s

ectio

n D

ugo

Selo

-Kri

zevc

i (38

km

)Co

rrid

or/ R

oute

:Co

rrid

or V

b (r

ail)

Tota

l cos

t (m

illio

n Eu

ros)

: 19

8.03

Fo

rese

en: 2

9.7

mil

€ N

atio

nal B

udge

t; 1

68.3

3 m

il €

Cohe

sion

Fun

dRe

gion

al P

artic

ipan

tCr

oatia

FEA

SIBI

LITY

ST

UD

YTi

tle o

f stu

dyFe

asib

ility

Stu

dy fo

r Dug

o Se

lo-K

rizev

ci ra

ilway

sect

ion

Prep

ared

by

Carlo

s Her

nand

ez U

rtia

ga; K

runo

slav

Peric

; Val

entin

a Sm

it-N

ovos

elec

Supe

rvis

ed b

yCo

nsor

tium

SAF

EGE-

PM-E

PTIS

A-RA

MBO

LL-R

AZBO

RW

hich

ben

efits

hav

e be

en

cons

ider

edSa

ving

s on

year

ly m

aint

enan

ce; R

even

ue fr

om a

dditi

onal

pas

seng

er a

nd fr

eigh

t tra

ffic;

The

resid

ual v

alue

of t

he in

vest

men

t; St

reng

then

the

Regi

onal

pat

icip

ants

infra

stru

ctur

al b

ase;

Red

uce

the

deve

lopm

ent i

mba

lanc

es, i

n pa

rtic

ular

pro

mot

ing

the

pros

pect

s for

sust

aina

ble

deve

lopm

ent o

f reg

ions

lagg

ing

behi

nd a

nd o

f bor

der a

reas

; ben

efits

from

the

trav

el ti

me

redu

c-tio

n as

a re

sult

of im

prov

ed ra

il se

rvic

e. O

pera

ting

bene

fits w

ere

also

gen

erat

ed b

y th

e tr

ansf

er o

f pas

seng

ers f

rom

car

to th

e ra

il tr

ansp

ort m

ode

as a

resu

lt of

low

er u

nit o

pera

ting

cost

of r

ail c

ompa

red

to c

ar tr

avel

.A

ssum

ed v

alue

s of

tim

e fo

r th

e di

ffere

nt u

ser g

roup

s€8

.09

per h

our;

€0.8

0eur

o/ho

ur/t

onne

Ass

umed

traffi

c gr

owth

per

ye

ar3.

61%

Ove

rall

proj

ect o

bjec

tive

Obj

ectiv

ely

veri

fiabl

e in

dica

tors

To e

limin

ate

the

obst

acle

s to

the

inte

rope

rabi

lity

of th

e ra

il sy

stem

in a

ccor

danc

e w

ith th

e D

irect

ive

2008

/57/

EC a

nd to

impr

ove

its

tech

nica

l sta

ndar

ds to

mee

t tho

se o

f a T

EN ra

ilway

cor

ridor

in li

ne w

ith E

U re

quire

men

t.To

brin

g th

e lin

e up

to th

e te

chni

cal s

tand

ards

est

ablis

hed

unde

r AG

C an

d AG

TC a

gree

men

ts a

nd o

pera

ting

para

met

ers a

llow

ing

for a

pas

seng

er tr

ain

spee

d up

to 1

60 k

m/h

, fre

ight

trai

ns u

p to

120

km/h

and

the

min

imum

sidi

ng le

ngth

to 7

50 m

.To

mod

erni

se si

gnal

ling

and

tele

com

mun

icat

ion

syst

ems i

n or

der t

o en

able

inst

alla

tion

of E

TCS

and

cent

ralis

ed tr

affic

cont

rol

equi

pmen

t and

to fa

cilit

ate

the

inte

grat

ion

of th

e Cr

oatia

n ra

ilway

net

wor

k w

ith in

tern

atio

nal a

nd E

U st

anda

rds.

To p

rovi

de b

ette

r acc

ess t

o ra

il se

rvic

es fo

r the

loca

l pop

ulat

ion.

EIRR

: 10.

91%

Inte

rnat

iona

l Pas

seng

er T

raffi

c D

eman

d: 9

%In

tern

atio

nal C

argo

Tra

ffic

Dem

and:

80%

Fore

cast

ed T

raffi

c G

row

th ra

te:

3.61

% (n

ext 5

yea

rs)

Tim

e sa

ving

s: 0.

13h

Proj

ect b

enefi

tsSa

ving

s on

year

ly m

aint

enan

ce in

com

paris

on w

ith th

e sit

uatio

n ’w

ithou

t pro

ject

‘; Rev

enue

from

add

ition

al p

asse

nger

and

frei

ght

traffi

c. T

he re

sidua

l val

ue o

f the

inve

stm

ent.

Stre

ngth

en th

e co

untr

y’s in

frast

ruct

ural

bas

e. R

educ

e th

e de

velo

pmen

t im

bala

nces

, in

par

ticul

ar p

rom

otin

g th

e pr

ospe

cts f

or su

stai

nabl

e de

velo

pmen

t of r

egio

ns la

ggin

g be

hind

and

of b

orde

r are

as; d

ecen

tral

ise,

reor

gani

se te

rrito

rially

and

stre

ngth

en lo

cal a

utho

ritie

s. Th

e ec

onom

ic a

naly

sis sh

ows t

he b

enefi

ts fr

om th

e tr

avel

tim

e re

duct

ion

as

a re

sult

of im

prov

ed ra

il se

rvic

e. O

pera

ting

bene

fits w

ere

also

gen

erat

ed b

y th

e tr

ansf

er o

f pas

seng

ers f

rom

car

to th

e ra

il tr

ansp

ort

mod

e as

a re

sult

of lo

wer

uni

t ope

ratin

g co

st o

f rai

l com

pare

d to

car

trav

el. A

dditi

onal

ben

efits

wer

e ge

nera

ted

thro

ugh

redu

c-tio

n of

ext

erna

litie

s due

to lo

wer

uni

t cos

t of r

ail t

rans

port

com

pare

d to

car

tran

spor

t. Fr

eigh

t tra

nspo

rt a

lso e

xper

ienc

ed b

enefi

ts

thro

ugh

impr

oved

rail

serv

ice

and

trav

el ti

me

redu

ctio

n.En

viro

nmen

tal e

ffect

sTh

e ad

vant

ages

of r

ail t

rans

port

are

ass

ocia

ted

with

low

er e

miss

ion

leve

ls w

hen

com

pare

d to

oth

er m

odes

of t

rans

port

, the

ad-

vant

age

of ra

ilway

s is a

low

con

sum

ptio

n of

spac

e an

d ra

il tr

ansp

ort c

reat

es le

ss n

oise

than

road

or a

ir tr

affic.

For

the

sam

e fre

ight

vo

lum

es a

nd sa

me

pass

enge

r flow

s rai

l pro

duce

s 25

to 5

0% le

ss n

oise

. Rai

lway

s hav

e th

e sm

alle

st e

miss

ion

of h

arm

ful g

ases

; co

nsum

ptio

n of

ene

rgy

per t

rans

port

uni

t is s

mal

lest

on

railw

ays a

nd in

wat

er tr

ansp

ort.

Railw

ays o

ccup

y ca

thre

e tim

es le

ss la

nd

surfa

ce c

ompa

red

to ro

ads,

safe

ty o

f tra

nspo

rt is

gre

ater

, the

impa

ct o

f noi

se is

smal

ler,

etc.

Maj

or p

roje

ct a

pplic

atio

n fo

r the

Dug

o Se

lo-K

rizev

ci ra

ilway

sect

ion

Upg

rade

and

Con

stru

ctio

n of

Sec

ond

Trac

k w

as su

bmitt

ed to

EC

DG

Reg

io in

Feb

ruar

y, 20

11.

81

Tabl

e: P

lann

ed p

roje

ct im

plem

enta

tion

char

tYe

ar20

0720

0820

0920

1020

1120

1220

1320

1420

0520

1620

1720

18Q

uart

er1

23

41

23

41

23

41

23

41

23

41

23

41

23

41

23

41

23

41

23

41

23

41

23

4A

ctio

nF S

F SF S

F SA

ctio

nD

DD

DD

DD

DD

DD

DD

DD

DA

ctio

nI

II

II

II

II

II

IFS

= F

easib

ility

stud

y

EIA

= E

nviro

nmen

tal I

mpa

ct A

sses

smen

t D

= D

esig

n/Te

nder

pre

para

tion

C

= C

ontr

actin

g

I = Im

plem

enta

tion

R

= R

evie

w/E

valu

ate

82


Rail

Corr

idor

VIII

Prio

rity

proj

ects

elig

ible

for f

undi

ng

PRO

JECT

FI

CHE

Proj

ect n

ame

(leng

th):

Cons

truc

tion

of n

ew ra

ilway

line

Kum

anov

o-Be

ljako

vce-

Kriv

a Pa

lank

a

Corr

idor

/ Rou

te:

Corr

idor

VIII

(rai

l)

Tota

l cos

t (m

illio

n Eu

ros)

: 59

1

Regi

onal

Par

ticip

ant

The

form

er Y

ugos

lav

Repu

blic

of M

aced

onia

FEAS

IBIL

ITY

STU

DY

Title

of s

tudy

Feas

ibili

ty S

tudy

for C

orrid

or V

III E

aste

rn S

ectio

n an

d ES

IA

Prep

ared

by

Eptis

a in

ass

ocia

tion

with

DB

Mob

ility

Net

wor

ks L

ogist

ics

Supe

rvise

d by

Facu

lty fo

r Civ

il En

gine

erin

g - S

kopj

e, th

e fo

rmer

Yug

osla

v Re

publ

ic o

f Mac

edon

ia

Whi

ch b

enefi

ts h

ave

been

co

nsid

ered

Trav

el ti

me

savi

ngs d

ue to

shift

from

road

to ra

il, Re

venu

e of

infra

stru

ctur

e ow

ner f

rom

ope

ratio

n of

the

proj

ect l

ine

be-

twee

n Ku

man

ovo

and

BG b

orde

r (Tr

ack

Acce

ss C

harg

es),

gove

rnm

ent’s

surp

lus a

nd lo

sses

, ben

efits

from

add

ition

al e

mpl

oy-

men

t dur

ing

the

railw

ay c

onst

ruct

ion

perio

d, b

enefi

ts fr

om a

dditi

onal

em

ploy

men

t due

to ra

ilway

ope

ratio

ns a

long

the

new

line

, ext

erna

litie

s

Assu

med

val

ues o

f tim

e fo

r th

e di

ffere

nt u

ser g

roup

sBu

sines

s EU

R 9.

50 p

er h

our,

Non

-bus

ines

s EU

R 3.

51 p

er h

our.

Assu

med

traffi

c gr

owth

per

ye

arAn

nual

Gro

wth

Rat

e in

the

next

five

yea

rs p

erio

d is

57.1

4% (y

ears

201

5-20

19)

Ove

rall

proj

ect o

bjec

tive

Obj

ectiv

ely

veri

fiabl

e in

dica

tors

The

proj

ect i

s foc

used

on

reha

bilit

atio

n of

railw

ay se

ctio

ns a

long

the

Corr

idor

VIII

: Ku

man

ovo-

Belja

kovc

e-Kr

iva

Pala

nka.

Con

stru

c-tio

n on

this

sect

ion

bega

n in

the

end

of 9

0’s b

ut w

as a

band

oned

due

to la

ck o

f fina

ncia

l res

ourc

es.

EIRR

: 11,

84 %

NPV

: 383

(in

EUR

milli

on)

Inte

rnat

iona

l Pas

seng

er Tr

affic

Dem

and:

56.

5% (2

019)

Inte

rnat

iona

l Car

go Tr

affic

Dem

and

: 86%

(201

9)

Fore

cast

ed G

row

th ra

te:

57.1

4% (2

015-

2019

)

Cut o

pera

tion

and

mai

nten

ance

cos

t: 73

7 82

6 Eu

ros

Tim

e sa

ving

s: •S

kopj

e - K

uman

ovo

- Bej

lako

vce:

Year

201

5 - 1

1,93

5 ho

urs

•Sko

pje

-Kum

anov

o - B

G b

orde

r:

Year

201

9 - 5

2,43

6 ho

urs

Proj

ect b

enefi

ts

The

new

railw

ay li

ne w

ill g

ener

ate

bene

fits f

or th

e us

ers (

cons

umer

’s su

rplu

s) in

pas

seng

er a

nd fr

eigh

t tra

ffic.

Use

r ben

efits

cou

ld b

e ge

nera

ted

in p

artic

ular

in te

rms o

f: sa

ving

s of u

ser c

osts

for m

odal

shift

ers i

n pa

ssen

ger t

raffi

c (ro

ad‐r

ail);

sa

ving

s of u

ser c

osts

for t

he sh

ift o

f fre

ight

tran

spor

t fro

m ro

ad to

rail;

savi

ngs o

f use

r cos

ts fo

r the

tran

sfer

of f

reig

ht tr

affic

from

ot

her r

ailw

ay ro

utes

to th

e pr

ojec

t lin

e du

e to

the

shor

teni

ng o

f tra

nspo

rt d

istan

ces;

savi

ngs o

f tra

vel t

ime

for p

asse

nger

s;sav

ings

of

tran

spor

t tim

e fo

r fre

ight

tran

spor

tatio

n.

Envi

ronm

enta

l effe

cts

Pote

ntia

l pos

itive

effe

cts o

f the

pro

ject

s fro

m th

e po

int o

f vie

w o

f env

ironm

enta

l im

pact

s, ev

en th

ough

ther

e w

ill b

e a

few

resid

ual

impa

cts w

hich

will

hav

e a

mod

erat

e ad

vers

e sig

nific

ance

dur

ing

the

cons

truc

tion

phas

e (d

estr

uctio

n of

top

soil

and

impa

irmen

t of

noise

qua

lity)

and

the

oper

atio

nal p

hase

(im

pairm

ent o

f lan

dsca

pe q

ualit

y, ha

bita

t fra

gmen

tatio

n an

d de

crea

se o

f ani

mal

pop

ula-

tions

), it

is co

nclu

ded

that

if th

e m

itiga

tion

mea

sure

s tha

t hav

e be

en p

ropo

sed

in th

is ES

IA a

re im

plem

ente

d, th

e sig

nific

ance

of

the

over

all r

esid

ual i

mpa

ct o

f Pro

ject

Rai

lway

Cor

ridor

VIII

‐Eas

tern

Sec

tion

shou

ld b

e of

a sl

ight

adv

erse

nat

ure,

with

no

maj

or d

am-

ages

cau

sed

to th

e en

viro

nmen

tal r

esou

rces

pre

sent

alo

ng th

e ra

ilway

cor

ridor

83

Tabl

e: P

lann

ed p

roje

ct im

plem

enta

tion

char

tYe

ar20

0720

0820

0920

1020

1120

1220

1320

1420

1520

1620

1720

18Q

uart

er1

23

41

23

41

23

41

23

41

23

41

23

41

23

41

23

41

23

41

23

41

23

41

23

4A

ctio

nF S

F SF S

F SA

ctio

nE I A

E I A

E I A

E I A

E I A

E I A

E I A

E I AI

II

II

II

II

II

II

II

II

II

IFS

= F

easib

ility

stud

y

EIA

= E

nviro

nmen

tal I

mpa

ct A

sses

smen

t D

= D

esig

n/Te

nder

pre

para

tion

C

= C

ontr

actin

g

I = Im

plem

enta

tion

R

= R

evie

w/E

valu

ate

84


PRO

JECT

FI

CHE

Proj

ect n

ame

(leng

th):

Cons

truc

tion

of n

ew ra

ilway

sec

tion

Kice

vo-b

orde

r with

Alb

ania

Corr

idor

/ Rou

te:

Corr

idor

VIII

(rai

l)To

tal c

ost (

mill

ion

Euro

s):

470

Regi

onal

Par

ticip

ant

The

form

er Y

ugos

lav

Repu

blic

of M

aced

onia

FEA

SIBI

LITY

ST

UD

YTi

tle o

f stu

dyTe

chni

cal d

ocum

enta

tion

on st

udy

leve

l and

Pre

limin

ary

desig

n of

Rai

lway

line

for C

orrid

or V

III –

Kic

evo

– bo

r-de

r, Re

publ

ic o

f Alb

ania

Prep

ared

by

EURO

TRAN

SPRO

JEC

T LT

D S

ofia

1202

, 108

’Tza

r Sam

uil‘

str.

Supe

rvis

ed b

yFa

culty

for C

ivil

Engi

neer

ing

- Sko

pje,

the

form

er Y

ugos

lav

Repu

blic

of M

aced

onia

Whi

ch b

enefi

ts h

ave

been

con

side

red

Bene

fits f

rom

tim

e sa

ving

s, Be

nefit

s fro

m re

duct

ion

of v

ehic

le o

pera

tion

cost

s, Be

nefit

s of r

educ

ed tr

affic

ac-

cide

nts,

Exte

rnal

ben

efits

Ass

umed

val

ues

of ti

me

for t

he d

iffer

ent

user

gro

ups

Valu

e of

tim

e fo

r the

bas

e ye

ar in

the

form

er Y

ugos

lav

Repu

blic

of M

aced

onia

Valu

e of

tim

e fo

r bus

ines

s trip

s - lu

e of

tim

e fo

r bus

ines

s trip

sMac

edon

ia7.

34 (€

/pas

seng

er/h

our)

Valu

e of

tim

e fo

r oth

er tr

ips p

urpo

ses -

2.6

2 (€

/pas

seng

er/h

our)

Ass

umed

traffi

c gr

owth

per

yea

rAn

nual

Gro

wth

Rat

e in

the

next

five

yea

rs p

erio

d is

8.80

% fr

om y

ear 2

015-

2020

Ove

rall

proj

ect o

bjec

tive

Obj

ectiv

ely

veri

fiabl

e in

dica

tors

Cons

truc

tion

of n

ew ra

ilway

sect

ion

Kice

vo –

bor

der w

ith A

lban

ia w

ith to

tal l

engt

h of

62.

6 km

. The

Pro

ject

is fu

lly in

com

plia

nce

and

cohe

renc

e w

ith N

atio

nal P

olic

y, re

flect

ed in

the

Nat

iona

l Tra

nspo

rt S

trat

egy

2007

-201

7 an

d w

ith th

e re

com

men

datio

ns o

f the

St

udy

’Inve

stm

ent O

ptio

ns in

the

Tran

spor

t Sec

tor‘

prep

ared

by

Loui

s Ber

ger i

n 20

02 (M

A971

0) fi

nanc

ed b

y PH

ARE

prog

ram

me.

EIRR

6.6

7 %

ENPV

7 5

98 1

86 €

Pass

enge

r Tra

ffic

Dem

and:

15.

000

AAD

TCa

rgo

Traffi

c D

eman

d : 1

3.26

0 to

ns

Fore

cast

ed G

row

th ra

te: 8

.8%

(nex

t 5 y

ears

)

Cut o

pera

tion

and

mai

nten

ance

cos

t: 73

7 82

6 Eu

ros

Tim

e sa

ving

s: 5

4861

hou

rs (

year

201

6)

Proj

ect b

enefi

tsIm

prov

ing

the

rail

infra

stru

ctur

e al

ong

the

East

-Wes

t Eur

ope

core

regi

onal

Net

wor

k by

est

ablis

hing

an

oper

atio

nal c

ontin

uity

of

Rail

Corr

idor

VIII

. The

com

plet

ion

of R

ail C

orrid

or V

III b

etw

een

the

form

er Y

ugos

lav

Repu

blic

of M

aced

onia

and

Alb

ania

will

ope

n ne

w o

ppor

tuni

ties f

or e

cono

mic

and

soci

al d

evel

opm

ent o

f the

regi

on.

Envi

ronm

enta

l effe

cts

From

env

ironm

enta

l poi

nt o

f vie

w, t

he li

near

pro

ject

- co

nstr

uctio

n of

railw

ay li

ne K

icev

o-Li

n (b

orde

r with

the

Repu

blic

of A

lban

ia)

does

not

pos

e an

y pa

rtic

ular

thre

at to

env

ironm

ent a

nd n

atur

e an

d th

e ro

ute

is ac

cept

able

in it

s ent

irety

. If t

he p

ropo

sed

mea

sure

s fo

r pos

sible

env

ironm

enta

l im

pact

s red

uctio

n an

d m

itiga

tion

are

adop

ted,

it w

ill b

e su

stai

nabl

e in

long

-run

, bot

h fro

m fi

nanc

ial

and

envi

ronm

enta

l and

qua

lity

of li

ving

poi

nts o

f vie

w.

Tabl

e: P

lann

ed p

roje

ct im

plem

enta

tion

char

tYe

ar20

0720

0820

0920

1020

1120

1220

1320

1420

1520

1620

1720

18Q

uart

er1

23

41

23

41

23

41

23

41

23

41

23

41

23

41

23

41

23

41

23

41

23

41

23

4A

ctio

nF S

F SF S

F SF S

F SF S

F SA

ctio

nE I A

E I A

E I A

E I A

E I A

E I A

E I A

E I A

DD

DD

DD

DD

DD

DD

II

II

II

II

II

II

FS =

Fea

sibili

ty st

udy

E

IA =

Env

ironm

enta

l Im

pact

Ass

essm

ent

D =

Des

ign/

Tend

er p

repa

ratio

n

C =

Con

trac

ting

I =

Impl

emen

tatio

n

R =

Rev

iew

/Eva

luat

e

85

Rail

Rout

e 10

Prio

rity

proj

ects

elig

ible

for f

undi

ng

PRO

JECT

FI

CHE

Proj

ect n

ame

(leng

th):

Reha

bilit

atio

n of

Rai

l Rou

te 1

0 (F

ushe

Kos

ove/

Koso

vo P

olje

‐Han

i i E

lezi

t/ D

jene

ral J

anko

vic)

Corr

idor

/ Rou

te:

Rout

e 10

(rai

l)

Tota

l cos

t (m

illio

n Eu

ros)

: 14

1.85

Regi

onal

Par

ticip

ant

Koso

vo

FEA

SIBI

LITY

ST

UD

YTi

tle o

f stu

dySt

udy

for R

ehab

ilita

tion

of R

ail R

oute

10

(Les

hak‐

Fush

e Ko

sove

/Kos

ovo

Polje

‐Han

i i E

lezi

t/ D

jene

ral J

anko

vic)

(64

km)

Prep

ared

by

COW

I-IPF

Con

sort

ium

Supe

rvis

ed b

yKo

sovo

Rai

lway

s JSC

Whi

ch b

enefi

ts h

ave

been

co

nsid

ered

Ass

umed

val

ues

of ti

me

for

the

diffe

rent

use

r gro

ups

Ass

umed

traffi

c gr

owth

pe

r yea

r

Ove

rall

proj

ect o

bjec

tive

Obj

ectiv

ely

veri

fiabl

e in

dica

tors

Dev

elop

ing

this

proj

ect,

Koso

vo w

ill h

ave

an in

tero

pera

ble

railw

ay in

frast

ruct

ure

thro

ugh

whi

ch d

omes

tic a

nd re

gion

al ra

ilway

op

erat

ors w

ill o

pera

te.

EIRR

: 9.

17 %

Fore

cast

ed tr

affic

grow

th ra

te: 2

0%

Impo

rtan

ce o

f Int

erna

tiona

l Dem

and

- Pa

ssen

ger T

raffi

c: 5

0%Fr

eigh

t Tra

ffic:

90%

Proj

ect b

enefi

ts

This

will

hel

p de

velo

pmen

t of t

he K

osov

o an

d re

gion

al e

cono

my

prov

idin

g to

all

inte

rest

ed p

artie

s saf

e, c

orre

ct a

nd n

ondi

scre

tion-

ary

serv

ices

.

Envi

ronm

enta

l effe

cts

Tabl

e: P

lann

ed p

roje

ct im

plem

enta

tion

char

tYe

ar20

0320

0420

0520

0620

0720

0820

0920

1020

1120

1220

1320

14Q

uart

er1

23

41

23

41

23

41

23

41

23

41

23

41

23

41

23

41

23

41

23

41

23

41

23

4A

ctio

nF S

F SF S

F SD

DD

D

Act

ion

E I A

E I A

E I A

E I A

II

II

II

II

FS =

Fea

sibili

ty st

udy

E

IA =

Env

ironm

enta

l Im

pact

Ass

essm

ent

D =

Des

ign/

Tend

er p

repa

ratio

n

C =

Con

trac

ting

I =

Impl

emen

tatio

n

R =

Rev

iew

/Eva

luat

e

86


Inla

nd W

ater

way

Prio

rity

proj

ect e

ligib

le fo

r fun

ding

Rive

rpor

t Prio

rity

proj

ects

elig

ible

for f

undi

ng

PRO

JECT

FI

CHE

Proj

ect n

ame

(leng

th):

Reco

nstr

uctio

n an

d m

oder

nisa

tion

of R

iver

Por

t of B

rcko

Rive

r por

t:Br

cko

Tota

l cos

t (m

illio

n Eu

ros)

: 6.

5

Regi

onal

Par

ticip

ant

Bosn

ia a

nd H

erze

govi

na

FEA

SIBI

LITY

ST

UD

YTi

tle o

f stu

dyRe

form

ing

of th

e m

anag

emen

t of t

he p

ort o

f Brc

ko

Prep

ared

by

MTB

S (M

ariti

me

and

Tarn

spor

t Bus

ines

s Sol

utio

ns),

The

Net

herla

nds

Supe

rvis

ed b

yAs

sem

bly

of B

rcko

Dist

rict o

f Bos

nia

and

Her

zego

vina

Whi

ch b

enefi

ts h

ave

been

co

nsid

ered

Impr

ovem

ent o

f por

t effi

cien

cy a

nd o

pera

tiona

l per

form

ance

, enh

ance

men

t of t

he e

cono

mic

func

tion

of th

e po

rt, m

aint

ain

the

open

acc

ess f

unct

iona

lity

of th

e po

rt, d

edic

ated

to th

e m

ulti-

clie

nt p

urpo

se.

Ass

umed

val

ues

of ti

me

for

the

diffe

rent

use

r gro

ups

Ass

umed

traffi

c gr

owth

pe

r yea

rEs

timat

ed p

ort t

hrou

ghpu

t gro

wth

: 150

,000

tons

for t

he 5

yea

rs p

erio

d

Ove

rall

proj

ect o

bjec

tive

Obj

ectiv

ely

veri

fiabl

e in

dica

tors

In o

rder

to im

prov

e ov

eral

l con

ditio

n of

Por

t of B

rcko

reha

bilit

atio

n of

por

t fac

ilitie

s, ha

ndlin

g eq

uipm

ent,

impr

ovem

ent o

f rai

lway

co

nnec

tion

and

stor

age

capa

citie

s are

requ

ired.

EI

RR: 1

2%

NPV

(KM

) in

2010

: 2,9

56,4

95Pr

ojec

t ben

efits

Port

Brc

ko c

ould

pla

y a

capi

tal r

ole

in p

rovi

ding

inte

rcon

nect

ivity

with

the

land

bas

ed tr

ansp

ort m

odes

(roa

d, ra

il) a

nd is

an

esse

n-tia

l tra

nsit

poin

t for

car

go tr

affic

flow

s to

and

from

the

heav

y in

dust

ries i

n Bo

snia

and

Her

zego

vina

. With

exp

ecte

d in

crea

se in

car

go

volu

me

afte

r Por

t of B

rcko

reha

bilit

atio

n, th

e Pr

ojec

t will

hav

e a

signi

fican

t pos

itive

influ

ence

on

regi

onal

eco

nom

ic g

row

th.

Envi

ronm

enta

l effe

cts

No

envi

ronm

enta

l im

pact

ass

essm

ent h

as b

een

carr

ied

out.

It is

plan

ned

to c

arry

out

an

EIA

in th

e fu

ture

.

Tabl

e: P

lann

ed p

roje

ct im

plem

enta

tion

char

tYe

ar20

0720

0820

0920

1020

1120

1220

1320

1420

1520

1620

1720

18Q

uart

er1

23

41

23

41

23

41

23

41

23

41

23

41

23

41

23

41

23

41

23

41

23

41

23

4A

ctio

nF S

F SF S

F SF S

F SF S

F SFS

= F

easib

ility

stud

y

EIA

= E

nviro

nmen

tal I

mpa

ct A

sses

smen

t D

= D

esig

n/Te

nder

pre

para

tion

C

= C

ontr

actin

g

I = Im

plem

enta

tion

R

= R

evie

w/E

valu

ate

87

Rive

r Sav

a Pr

iorit

y pr

ojec

ts e

ligib

le fo

r fun

ding

PRO

JECT

FI

CHE

Proj

ect n

ame

(leng

th):

Reha

bilit

atio

n an

d im

prov

emen

t of t

he S

ava

Rive

r wat

erw

ay

Inla

nd w

ater

way

:Sa

va

Tota

l cos

t (m

illio

n Eu

ros)

: 22

.6

Regi

onal

Par

ticip

ant

Bosn

ia a

nd H

erze

govi

na

FEA

SIBI

LITY

ST

UD

YTi

tle o

f stu

dyFe

asib

ility

stud

y an

d pr

ojec

t doc

umen

tatio

n fo

r the

reha

bilit

atio

n an

d de

velo

pmen

t of t

rans

port

and

nav

igat

ion

on th

e Sa

va ri

ver w

ater

way

Prep

ared

by

Paci

fic C

onsu

ltant

s Int

erna

tiona

l, Ja

pan

Supe

rvis

ed b

yIn

tern

atio

nal S

ava

Rive

r Bas

in C

omm

issio

n

Whi

ch b

enefi

ts h

ave

been

co

nsid

ered

Ass

umed

val

ues

of ti

me

for

the

diffe

rent

use

r gro

ups

Dev

elop

men

t of t

he S

ava

Rive

r wat

erw

ay a

nd o

rgan

isatio

n of

an

appr

opria

te e

cono

mic

and

org

anisa

tiona

l fra

mew

ork

for

rest

orin

g tr

ade

and

navi

gatio

n (c

argo

and

pas

seng

ers)

on

the

Sava

Riv

er.

Ass

umed

traffi

c gr

owth

pe

r yea

rIn

ave

rage

1 m

illio

n to

nnes

for t

he 5

yea

r-per

iod

for t

he w

hole

stre

tch

of th

e Sa

va R

iver

Ove

rall

proj

ect o

bjec

tive

Obj

ectiv

ely

veri

fiabl

e in

dica

tors

At th

is m

omen

t the

Sav

a Ri

ver d

oes n

ot m

eet t

he re

quire

d na

viga

tion

para

met

ers,

set b

y th

e Sa

va C

omm

issio

n, fo

r int

erna

tiona

l w

ater

way

Cla

ss IV

and

Cla

ss V

a, w

hich

wou

ld e

nsur

e m

inim

um d

epth

of 2

.5 m

for 3

00 d

ays p

er y

ear (

inte

rnat

iona

l wat

erw

ay c

lass

IV

), an

d m

inim

um d

epth

km

586

(Sisa

k). F

easib

ility

Stu

dy sh

owed

that

the

Sava

Riv

er o

ffers

val

uabl

e de

velo

pmen

t and

com

mer

-ci

alisa

tion

oppo

rtun

ities

.

Gro

win

g ex

pect

atio

ns re

gard

ing

the

pote

ntia

l of S

ava

Rive

r mot

ivat

es p

ublic

aut

horit

ies t

o re

habi

litat

e th

e riv

er, a

com

mitm

ent

mad

e ex

plic

it w

ith th

e ‘L

ette

r of I

nten

t con

cern

ing

the

Inte

rnat

iona

l Sav

a Ri

ver B

asin

Com

miss

ion

Initi

ativ

e‘, k

now

n as

the

’Sav

a In

i-tia

tive‘,

sign

ed in

Sar

ajev

o on

29

Nov

embe

r 200

1 by

the

Min

ister

s of F

orei

gn A

ffairs

of R

epub

lic o

f Cro

atia

, the

Rep

ublic

of S

love

nia,

th

e Fe

dera

l Rep

ublic

of Y

ugos

lavi

a, a

nd b

y th

e M

inist

er fo

r Civ

il Aff

airs

and

Com

mun

icat

ions

of t

he R

epub

lic o

f Bos

nia

and

Her

ze-

govi

na. T

he fo

ur ri

paria

n co

untr

ies n

ext s

igne

d in

Kra

njsk

a G

ora

(Slo

veni

a) o

n 3

Dec

embe

r 200

2 th

e ’F

ram

ewor

k Ag

reem

ent o

n th

e Sa

va R

iver

Bas

in‘ (

FASR

B), b

y w

hich

the

Inte

rnat

iona

l Sav

a Ri

ver B

asin

Com

miss

ion

(Sav

a Co

mm

issio

n) w

as fo

rmal

ly e

stab

lishe

d. T

he

FASR

B en

tere

d in

to fo

rce

on 2

9 D

ecem

ber 2

004

and

the

Cons

titut

iona

l Ses

sion

of th

e Sa

va C

omm

issio

n w

as h

eld

on 2

7-29

June

20

05 in

Zag

reb.

EIRR

(for

the

Va C

lass

of w

ater

way

, me-

dium

vol

ume

scen

ario

): 20

,2%

NPV

(for

the

Va C

lass

of w

ater

way

, me-

dium

vol

ume

scen

ario

): 15

7,9

mill

ion

Euro

s at 6

% d

iscou

nt ra

te

Prop

ortio

n of

inte

rnat

iona

l tra

ffic

≥10

%

Proj

ect b

enefi

ts

The

mai

n be

nefit

will

be

upgr

ade

of S

ava

Rive

r Wat

erw

ay to

a m

inim

um n

avig

abili

ty C

lass

IV a

nd c

lass

Va,

by

ensu

ring

a m

inim

um

dept

h of

2.5

m. F

urth

erm

ore,

the

proj

ect i

nclu

des i

mpl

emen

tatio

n of

Riv

er In

form

atio

n Se

rvic

e-RI

S on

ove

rall

leng

th o

f Sav

a Ri

ver.

This

will

impr

ove

conn

ectiv

ity a

nd c

omm

unic

atio

n sy

stem

for t

he n

avig

atio

n, th

us im

prov

ing

safe

ty o

f inl

and

wat

erw

ays,

vess

els.

Envi

ronm

enta

l effe

cts

An e

nviro

nmen

tal i

mpa

ct a

sses

smen

t has

bee

n ca

rrie

d ou

t for

the

sect

ion

Sisa

k-Ra

cino

vci a

nd is

in p

repa

ratio

n ph

ase

for B

rcko

-Be

lgra

de se

ctio

n. T

he F

easib

ility

stud

y ha

s ant

icip

ated

som

e en

viro

nmen

tal i

mpa

cts t

hat w

ill b

e fu

rthe

r ela

bora

ted

in th

e En

viro

n-m

enta

l and

Soc

ial I

mpa

ct A

sses

smen

t Stu

dy.

88


Tabl

e: P

lann

ed p

roje

ct im

plem

enta

tion

char

tYe

ar20

0720

0820

0920

1020

1120

1220

1320

1420

1520

1620

1720

18Q

uart

er1

23

41

23

41

23

41

23

41

23

41

23

41

23

41

23

41

23

41

23

41

23

41

23

4A

ctio

nF S

F SF S

F SF S

F SF S

F S

Act

ion

E I A

E I A

E I A

E I A

E I A

E I A

E I A

E I A

E I A

E I A

E I A

E I A

Act

ion

DD

DD

DI

II

II

II

II

II

II

II

IFS

= F

easib

ility

stud

y

EIA

= E

nviro

nmen

tal I

mpa

ct A

sses

smen

t D

= D

esig

n/Te

nder

pre

para

tion

C

= C

ontr

actin

g

I = Im

plem

enta

tion

R

= R

evie

w/E

valu

ate

89

PRO

JECT

FI

CHE

Proj

ect n

ame

(leng

th):

Reha

bilit

atio

n an

d im

prov

emen

t of t

he S

ava

Rive

r Wat

erw

ay (3

60 k

m)

Inla

nd w

ater

way

:Sa

va

Tota

l cos

t (m

illio

n Eu

ros)

: 55

Fo

rese

en: 1

3,75

Mil.

€ N

atio

nal b

udge

t; 41

,25

Mil.

€ E

U fu

nd

Regi

onal

Par

ticip

ant

Croa

tia

FEA

SIBI

LITY

ST

UD

YTi

tle o

f stu

dyFe

asib

ility

Stu

dy a

nd P

roje

ct D

ocum

enta

tion

for t

he R

ehab

ilita

tion

and

Dev

elop

men

t of T

rans

port

and

Nav

igat

ion

on th

e Sa

va R

iver

Wat

erw

ay

Prep

ared

by

Paci

fic C

onsu

ltant

s In

tern

atio

nal

Supe

rvis

ed b

yIn

tern

atio

nal S

ava

Rive

r Com

miss

ion

Whi

ch b

enefi

ts h

ave

been

co

nsid

ered

Impr

ove

publ

ic a

nd p

rivat

e in

vest

men

ts in

to tr

ansp

ort o

n th

e Sa

va R

iver

, in

acco

rdan

ce w

ith a

dequ

ate

econ

omic

and

fina

n-ci

al a

naly

sis;

Obt

ain

an in

tegr

ated

app

roac

h co

nsid

erin

g w

ater

man

agem

ent,

ener

gy p

rodu

ctio

n, fl

ood

cont

rol a

nd e

nviro

nmen

tal

aspe

cts i

n th

e Sa

va R

iver

bas

in.

Ass

umed

val

ues

of ti

me

for

the

diffe

rent

use

r gro

ups

Ass

umed

traffi

c gr

owth

pe

r yea

r

Ove

rall

proj

ect o

bjec

tive

Obj

ectiv

ely

veri

fiabl

e in

dica

tors

To re

habi

litat

e th

e Cr

oatia

’s pa

rt o

f Cor

ridor

VII

in o

rder

to a

chie

ve th

e re

quire

men

ts o

f the

inte

rnat

iona

l cla

ssifi

catio

n, c

ateg

ory

IV.

This

proj

ect w

ill c

over

the

area

of S

ava

Rive

r fro

m B

rcko

(rkm

234

) to

Sisa

k (rk

m 5

94).

Gro

win

g ex

pect

atio

ns re

gard

ing

the

pote

ntia

l of

Sav

a Ri

ver m

otiv

ates

pub

lic a

utho

ritie

s to

reha

bilit

ate

the

river

, a c

omm

itmen

t mad

e ex

plic

it w

ith th

e ‘L

ette

r of I

nten

t con

cern

-in

g th

e In

tern

atio

nal S

ava

Rive

r Bas

in C

omm

issio

n In

itiat

ive‘,

kno

wn

as th

e ’S

ava

Initi

ativ

e‘, si

gned

in S

araj

evo

on 2

9 N

ovem

ber 2

001

by th

e M

inist

ers o

f For

eign

Affa

irs o

f Rep

ublic

of C

roat

ia, t

he R

epub

lic o

f Slo

veni

a, th

e Fe

dera

l Rep

ublic

of Y

ugos

lavi

a, a

nd b

y th

e M

inist

er fo

r Civ

il Aff

airs

and

Com

mun

icat

ions

of t

he R

epub

lic o

f Bos

nia

and

Her

zego

vina

. The

four

ripa

rian

coun

trie

s nex

t sig

ned

in

Kran

jska

Gor

a (S

love

nia)

on

3 D

ecem

ber 2

002

the

’Fra

mew

ork

Agre

emen

t on

the

Sava

Riv

er B

asin

‘ (FA

SRB)

, by

whi

ch th

e In

tern

a-tio

nal S

ava

Rive

r Bas

in C

omm

issio

n (S

ava

Com

miss

ion)

was

form

ally

est

ablis

hed.

The

FAS

RB e

nter

ed in

to fo

rce

on 2

9 D

ecem

ber

2004

and

the

Cons

titut

iona

l Ses

sion

of th

e Sa

va C

omm

issio

n w

as h

eld

on 2

7-29

June

200

5 in

Zag

reb.

Rega

rdin

g th

e na

viga

tion

regi

me,

the

FASR

B st

ipul

ated

that

nav

igat

ion

on th

e Sa

va R

iver

is fr

ee fo

r tra

de v

esse

ls of

all

Stat

es a

nd

iden

tical

to th

e re

gula

tion

for t

he D

anub

e Ri

ver.

Trad

e ve

ssel

s hav

e a

right

to fr

ee e

ntra

nce

into

por

ts o

n th

e pa

rt o

f the

Sav

a Ri

ver

wat

erw

ay fr

om S

isak

to it

s est

uary

into

the

Dan

ube

Rive

r as w

ell a

s on

all n

avig

able

par

ts o

f the

Sav

a Ri

ver t

ribut

arie

s, an

d th

is fo

r pu

rpos

e of

load

ing,

disc

harg

ing,

supp

ly, a

nd si

mila

r act

ions

. Sig

nato

ry p

artie

s of t

he A

gree

men

t agr

eed

to u

nder

take

ther

efor

e al

l ne

cess

ary

mea

sure

s for

mai

nten

ance

of t

he w

ater

way

s in

thei

r ter

ritor

y to

gua

rant

ee a

nav

igab

le st

ate-

of-c

ondi

tion

as w

ell a

s to

unde

rtak

e m

easu

res o

n im

prov

emen

t of t

he n

avig

atio

n co

nditi

ons,

and

will

not

pre

vent

or c

ause

any

obs

tacl

es to

nav

igat

ion.

The

Pa

rtie

s also

agr

eed

to re

gula

te b

y a

sepa

rate

Pro

toco

l on

the

Regi

me

of N

avig

atio

n al

l iss

ues r

egar

ding

nav

igat

ion,

such

as i

nstit

u-tio

nal a

rran

gem

ents

(rul

es o

f nav

igat

ion,

tech

nica

l rul

es fo

r ves

sels,

mar

king

of n

avig

able

wat

erw

ays e

tc.)

and

expe

nses

rela

ting

to

the

mai

nten

ance

of t

he n

avig

able

wat

erw

ays a

nd th

e re

gim

e of

nav

igat

ion.

EIRR

hig

h vo

lum

e sc

enar

io: 2

6%

EIRR

med

ium

vol

ume

scen

ario

: 19%

EIRR

low

vol

ume

scen

ario

: 9%

90


Proj

ect b

enefi

ts

Popu

latio

n in

the

Sava

Riv

er B

asin

is a

ppro

xim

ated

to 8

,176

,000

, whi

ch re

pres

ents

46%

of t

he to

tal p

opul

atio

n of

all

coun

trie

s (ex

-cl

udin

g AL

B an

d M

ON

). Pa

rtic

ular

ly, t

he p

opul

atio

n of

the

Sava

Riv

er B

asin

in C

RO 5

0%, i

n BI

H is

75%

of t

he to

tal p

opul

atio

n in

that

Re

gion

al P

artic

ipan

t. Ec

onom

ic a

ctiv

ities

dev

elop

ed in

the

Sava

Riv

er B

asin

, gen

erat

e m

ore

than

2,3

79,0

00 e

mpl

oyed

peo

ple.

Tha

t is

29%

of a

ll in

habi

tant

s in

the

Sava

Riv

er B

asin

and

45%

of a

ll em

ploy

ed p

eopl

e in

the

Regi

onal

Par

ticip

ants

. As

for e

mpl

oym

ent,

the

indu

stry

and

oth

er a

ctiv

ities

sect

or (c

onst

ruct

ion,

who

lesa

le a

nd re

tail

trad

e, h

otel

s and

rest

aura

nts,

tran

spor

t, st

orag

e an

d co

mm

unic

atio

n, fi

nanc

ial i

nter

med

iatio

n, re

al e

stat

e, re

ntin

g an

d bu

sines

s act

iviti

es) r

emai

n th

e gr

eate

st

prod

ucer

s of j

obs.

31%

of a

ll em

ploy

ed p

eopl

e in

the

Sava

Riv

er B

asin

wor

k in

the

othe

r act

iviti

es se

ctor

, 27%

wor

k in

the

indu

stry

se

ctor

, 29%

wor

k in

the

publ

ic se

ctor

, 12%

wor

k in

the

agric

ultu

re a

nd 1

% w

ork

in th

e en

ergy

sect

or.

Shar

e of

the

gros

s dom

estic

pro

duct

(GD

P) in

the

Sava

Riv

er B

asin

reac

hes a

ver

y sig

nific

ant 5

3% o

f the

GD

P of

all

Regi

onal

Par

tici-

pant

s.

Envi

ronm

enta

l effe

cts

As a

resu

lt, a

sign

ifica

nt m

odal

shift

effe

cts a

re e

xpec

ted

afte

r the

reha

bilit

atio

n/up

grad

e of

rive

r Sav

a. T

rans

port

s will

shift

from

road

to in

land

nav

igat

ion

in o

rder

to p

rofit

fro

m lo

wer

tran

spor

t cos

ts.

Tabl

e: P

lann

ed p

roje

ct im

plem

enta

tion

char

tYe

ar20

0720

0820

0920

1020

1120

1220

1320

1420

1520

1620

1720

18Q

uart

er1

23

41

23

41

23

41

23

41

23

41

23

41

23

41

23

41

23

41

23

41

23

41

23

4A

ctio

nF S

F SF S

F SF S

F SF S

F SE I A

E I A

E I A

E I A

E I A

E I A

E I A

E I AA

ctio

nD

DD

DD

DD

DFS

= F

easib

ility

stud

y

EIA

= E

nviro

nmen

tal I

mpa

ct A

sses

smen

t D

= D

esig

n/Te

nder

pre

para

tion

C

= C

ontr

actin

g

I = Im

plem

enta

tion

R

= R

evie

w/E

valu

ate

91

PRO

JECT

FI

CHE

Proj

ect n

ame

(leng

th):

Reha

bilit

atio

n an

d im

prov

emen

t of S

ava

Rive

r fro

m B

elgr

ade

to B

osni

a an

d H

erze

govi

na b

orde

r (23

4km

)

Inla

nd w

ater

way

:Sa

va

Tota

l cos

t (m

illio

n Eu

ros)

: 30

Regi

onal

Par

ticip

ant

Serb

ia

FEA

SIBI

LITY

ST

UD

YTi

tle o

f stu

dyFe

asib

ility

Stu

dy a

nd P

roje

ct D

ocum

enta

tion

for t

he R

ehab

ilita

tion

and

Dev

elop

men

t of T

rans

port

and

Nav

igat

ion

on th

e Sa

va R

iver

Wat

erw

ay

Prep

ared

by

Inte

rnat

iona

l Sav

a Ri

ver B

asin

Com

miss

ion

– Fr

amew

ork

Agre

emen

t on

the

Sava

Riv

er B

asin

(200

4)

Supe

rvis

ed b

yM

inist

ries r

espo

nsib

le fo

r tra

nspo

rt in

ripa

rian

stat

es, S

teer

ing

Com

mitt

ee

Whi

ch b

enefi

ts h

ave

been

co

nsid

ered

Prov

ide

guid

elin

es fo

r Sav

a Co

mm

issio

n fo

r the

shor

t-te

rm, m

id-t

erm

, and

long

-ter

m p

olic

y fo

r the

dev

elop

men

t of t

he

Sava

Riv

er;

Impr

ovem

ent a

nd d

evel

opm

ent o

f tra

nspo

rt a

nd n

avig

atio

n on

the

Sava

rive

r wat

erw

ay (R

iver

bed

dred

ging

to p

rovi

de n

ec-

essa

ry d

ept,

reha

bilit

atio

n of

the

exist

ing

river

bank

con

stru

ctio

ns a

nd b

uild

ing

in n

ew ri

verb

ank

cons

truc

tions

, new

ban

k pr

otec

tions

, riv

erba

nd im

prov

emen

t.

Ass

umed

val

ues

of ti

me

for

the

diffe

rent

use

r gro

ups

Ass

umed

traffi

c gr

owth

pe

r yea

r

Ove

rall

proj

ect o

bjec

tive

Obj

ectiv

ely

veri

fiabl

e in

dica

tors

Mai

n ob

ject

ives

of t

he p

roje

ct a

re e

limin

atio

n of

nav

igat

ion

bott

lene

cks o

n cr

itica

l sec

tions

of t

he S

ava

Rive

r in

the

Repu

blic

of

Ser

bia.

It w

ill b

e do

ne b

y riv

er tr

aini

ng w

orks

and

dre

dgin

g ac

tiviti

es w

hich

will

pro

vide

nec

essa

ry d

ept,

reha

bilit

atio

n of

the

exist

ing

river

bank

con

stru

ctio

ns a

nd b

uild

ing

in n

ew ri

verb

ank

cons

truc

tions

, new

ban

k pr

otec

tions

, riv

erba

nd im

prov

emen

t, et

c.

Gro

win

g ex

pect

atio

ns re

gard

ing

the

pote

ntia

l of S

ava

Rive

r mot

ivat

es p

ublic

aut

horit

ies t

o re

habi

litat

e th

e riv

er, a

com

mitm

ent

mad

e ex

plic

it w

ith th

e ‘L

ette

r of I

nten

t con

cern

ing

the

Inte

rnat

iona

l Sav

a Ri

ver B

asin

Com

miss

ion

Initi

ativ

e‘, k

now

n as

the

’Sav

a In

itiat

ive‘,

sign

ed in

Sar

ajev

o on

29

Nov

embe

r 200

1 by

the

Min

ister

s of F

orei

gn A

ffairs

of R

epub

lic o

f Cro

atia

, the

Rep

ublic

of

Slov

enia

, the

Fed

eral

Rep

ublic

of Y

ugos

lavi

a, a

nd b

y th

e M

inist

er fo

r Civ

il Aff

airs

and

Com

mun

icat

ions

of t

he R

epub

lic o

f Bos

nia

and

Her

zego

vina

. The

four

ripa

rian

coun

trie

s nex

t sig

ned

in K

ranj

ska

Gor

a (S

love

nia)

on

3 D

ecem

ber 2

002

the

’Fra

mew

ork

Agre

emen

t on

the

Sava

Riv

er B

asin

‘ (FA

SRB)

, by

whi

ch th

e In

tern

atio

nal S

ava

Rive

r Bas

in C

omm

issio

n (S

ava

Com

miss

ion)

was

fo

rmal

ly e

stab

lishe

d. T

he F

ASRB

ent

ered

into

forc

e on

29

Dec

embe

r 200

4 an

d th

e Co

nstit

utio

nal S

essio

n of

the

Sava

Com

miss

ion

was

hel

d on

27-

29 Ju

ne 2

005

in Z

agre

b.

EIRR

: 20%

Proj

ect b

enefi

ts

The

over

all r

esul

t will

be

upgr

ade

of S

ava

Rive

r Wat

erw

ay to

a m

inim

um n

avig

abili

ty C

lass

IV. T

he n

et p

rese

nt v

alue

of e

xter

nal

cost

s sav

ings

will

be

82.4

mill

ion

Euro

s for

the

high

vol

ume

scen

ario

, 54.

5 m

illio

n Eu

ros f

or th

e m

ediu

m v

olum

e sc

enar

io a

nd 2

9.4

mill

ion

Euro

s for

the

low

vol

ume

scen

ario

. The

inve

stm

ent w

ill p

rovi

de p

ositi

ve c

ash

flow

from

yea

r 201

9 an

d re

sult

in a

tota

l Net

Pr

esen

t Val

ue o

f 157

.9 m

illio

n Eu

ros o

ver t

he 2

0 ye

ar a

ppra

isal p

erio

d.

Envi

ronm

enta

l effe

cts

92

Tabl

e: P

lann

ed p

roje

ct im

plem

enta

tion

char

tYe

ar20

0520

0620

0720

0820

0920

1020

1120

1220

1320

1420

1520

16Q

uart

er1

23

41

23

41

23

41

23

41

23

41

23

41

23

41

23

41

23

41

23

41

23

41

23

4A

ctio

nF S

F SF S

F SF S

F SF S

F SD

DD

DD

DD

D

Act

ion

E I A

E I A

E I A

E I A

E I A

E I A

E I A

E I A

II

II

II

II

II

II

II

II

FS =

Fea

sibili

ty st

udy

E

IA =

Env

ironm

enta

l Im

pact

Ass

essm

ent

D =

Des

ign/

Tend

er p

repa

ratio

n

C =

Con

trac

ting

I =

Impl

emen

tatio

n

R =

Rev

iew

/Eva

luat

e

93


Annex 3 - List of completed and finance secured/ongoing priority projectsMAP Transport

modeCorridor/ Route/Node

Regional participant

Name of the project Status Total cost M€

2007-2011 Road Corridor Vc BIH Completion of motorway, Section Kakanj-Vlakovo (Sarajevo by-pass)

Finished 195

2007-2011 Road Corridor X MAC Upgrading of road section Demir Kapija-Udovo-Smokvice

Ongoing 265

2007-2011 Road Corridor X SER Completion of Belgrade By-pass, Sector 1-3: Dobanovci-Ostruznica;

Finished 157

2007-2011 Road Corridor X SER Completion of Belgrade By-pass, Sector 4: Ostružnica-Orlovaca

Finished 61

2007-2011 Road Route 2b ALB Upgrading Hani Hotit-Shkoder road Ongoing 322007-2011 Rail Corridor X CRO Remote rail control traffic system Savski

Marof-Zagreb-TovarnikFinished 23

2007-2011 Seaport Ploce CRO Transport and Trade Integration (TTI), Port Ploce

Ongoing 141

2007-2011 Seaport Dubrovnik CRO Port of Dubrovnik: Construction of international passenger terminal

Finished 27

2008-2012 Road Corridor Vc BIH Reconstruction of Seslije-Samac section Finished 172008-2012 Road Route 7 ALB Upgrading Milot-Morine road Finished 9782009-2013 Road Corridor Vc BIH Completion of motorway on Vc Ongoing 6892009-2013 Road Corridor VIII ALB Construction of Rogozhine By-pass on

Corridor VIIIOngoing 8

2009-2013 Road Corridor VIII ALB Upgrading of Qafe Thane-Pogradec road Ongoing 182009-2013 Road Corridor X SER Completion of motorway Leskovac-Presevo Ongoing 721

2009-2013 Road Route 4 MNG Eastern mini by-pass Podgorica Finished 202009-2013 Seaport Durres ALB Rehabilitation of Port of Durres/ Ferry

Terminal Building and Yard in Port of DurresOngoing 40

2010-2014 Road Route 2c ALB Construction of Tepelene and Gjirokaster By-pass

Ongoing 44

2010-2014 Road Route 7 KOS Kosovo - Section of Route 7 Branch Morina-Merdare

Ongoing 660

2010-2014 Rail Corridor X CRO Okucani to Novska railway rehabilitation Ongoing 402010-2014 Rail Corridor X CRO Zagreb Main Station Signalling and

Interlocking SystemOngoing 12

2010-2014 Rail Corridor X MAC Rehabilitation of the rail line Tabanovci - Gevgelija (Corridor X) Sections: Veles-Zgropolci and Zgropolci-Demir Kapija

Ongoing 18

2010-2014 Airport Split CRO Split Airport: New aircraft platform i.e. apron

Finished 15

2010-2014 Airport Pristina KOS Rehabilitation of Pristina Airport Finished 162011-2015 Road Corridor X SER Completion of Belgrade By-pass, Sectors

5-6: Orlovaca-Bubanj PotokOngoing 120

2011-2015 Road Corridor X SER Completion of motorway Nis – border with Republic of Bulgaria

Ongoing 260

2011-2015 Rail Corridor X MAC Upgrading rail signalling and telecommunications along Corridor X

Ongoing 6

2011-2015 Rail Route 4 MNG Rehabilitation of Vrbnica–Podgorica-Bar railway line

Ongoing 14

2011-2015 Airport Belgrade SER Functional improvements of airside at Belgrade airport

Finished 27

2012-2016 Rail Corridor Xd MAC Railway rehabilitation, Section Bitola-Kremenica

Ongoing 9

94

Annex 4 - SEETO Comprehensive Road NetworkTable 4a: Traffic flows in the SEETO Comprehensive Road Network in 2011

Traffic range vehicle/day Total

Km %

< 999 141 2.16

1000 - 1999 183 2.8

2000 - 4999 2060.4 31.55

5000 - 9999 2281.7 34.94

10000 - 15000 1112.6 17.04

> 15000 752 11.51

Total: 6530.7 100

Table 4b: SEETO Comprehensive Road Network traffic indicators 2010 and 2011

Corridor or Route

2010 2011 Length

HGV traffic (%) AADT average HGV traffic (%) AADT average

Corridor Vb 27.64 15033.7 28.15 15725.0 274

Corridor Vc 43.79 3740.5 56.38 6254.1 541

Corridor VIII 79.56 8281.5 90.36 8533.5 657

Corridor X 158.71 13602.3 160.27 14040.1 1030

Corridor Xa 6.11 11498.0 5.95 11415.2 63

Corridor Xb 31.78 9390.0 28.65 10039.3 185

Corridor Xc 32.6 4393.0 23.88 5139.9 110

Corridor Xd 9.27 3697.0 9.84 3518.8 117

Route 1 48.17 8746.2 44.72 7832.9 713

Route 10 15.19 7004.7 16.71 6622.0 183

Route 2a 10.71 3506.6 24.04 4189.5 239

Route 2b 36.25 4379.4 29.59 3927.3 395

Route 2c 37.15 3231.5 37.99 3217.6 125

Route 3 5.16 548.1 6.69 2114.8 185

Route 4 103.69 8088.2 57.76 5825.5 601

Route 5 43.87 5417.0 26.8 5460.2 211

Route 6a 20.25 8613.2 17.82 5074.3 259

Route 6b 16.62 8069.7 10.64 7882.4 205

Route 7 27.52 3672.4 26.16 3820.8 314

Route 8 3.52 3523.1 3.81 3584.9 78

Route 9b 3.9 7204.5 4.18 7036.8 43

95


Table 4c: SEETO Comprehensive Road Network Poor and Very Poor sections (2011)

SEETO Comprehensive Network element Length (km) Very poor (km) Poor (km)

Corridor Vc 9 9

Corridor VIII 39 39

Route 2b 47 47 46

Route 2c 71 71

Route 3 85 85

Route 4 22 22

Route 6a 49 49

Route 6b 70 33 37

Route 7 61 61

Table 4d: SEETO Comprehensive Road Network bottlenecks (2011)

SEETO_Code Level of service Length (km)

Corridor Vb D 4

Corridor Vc F 51

Corridor Vc D 21

Corridor VIII F 39

Corridor X F 46

Corridor X E 7

Corridor X D 28

Route 1 F 8

Route 1 D 78.5

Route 2a F 33

Route 2b D 42

R2b.13 F 54

R4.06 F 44

R4.07 E 25

R4.09 D 53

R4.10 F 37

R5.07 D 31

R5.08 F 5.5

R6a F 35

R6b.01 F 12

R7.09 D 25

R7.11 F 17

R8.01 D 7

96

Annex 5 - SEETO Comprehensive Rail NetworkTable 5a: The SEETO Comprehensive Rail Network passenger traffic (2009-2011)

Corridor or Route Passenger traffic volume (mil pkm) Index 2011/2010

2009 2010 2011

Corridor Vb 262.153 245.636 176.859 0.72

Corridor Vc 118.2 117.72 53.002 0.45

Corridor VIII 41.528 33.683 34.067 1.01

Corridor X 1689.822 1555.683 1352.455 0.87

Corridor Xb 86.11 81.954 71.123 0.87

Corridor Xc 1.305 1.374 1.315 0.96

Corridor Xd 35.514 60.966 61.92 1.02

Route 1 75.26 70.518 38.599 0.55

Route 10 60.908 61.134 53.117 0.87

Route 11 2.729 6.198 5.517 0.89

Route 12 20.966 19.645 14.144 0.72

Route 13 - - 0.855 -

Route 2 18.342 9.02 10.958 1.22

Route 4 191.254 213.335 111.383 0.52

Route 9a 20.09 14.371 37.521 2.61

Route 9b 0.678 0.635 0.457 0.72

Total: 2624.859 2491.872 2023.292 0.81

Table 5b: The SEETO Comprehensive Rail Network freight traffic (2009-2011)

Corridor or Route Freight traffic volume (million tkm) Index 2011/2010

2009 2010 2011

Corridor Vb 1003.512 657.222 717.723 1.09

Corridor Vc 1197.162 1155.88 886.697 0.77

Corridor VIII 21.54 34.309 81.032 2.36

Corridor X 3038.898 2933.731 3092.79 1.05

Corridor Xb 497.809 583.92 648.289 1.11

Corridor Xc 212.475 218.383 264.114 1.21

Corridor Xd 2.335 1.156 1.332 1.15

Route 1 493.139 414.36 290.777 0.70

Route 10 136.36 208.01 109.475 0.52

Route 11 47.603 52.492 50.793 0.97

Route 12 27.402 29.836 24.549 0.82

Route 2 29.094 43.59 31.794 0.73

Route 4 485.605 687.107 697.986 1.01

Route 9a 411.554 421.325 410.194 0.97

Route 9b 4.29 2.532 3.49 1.38

Total: 7608.778 7443.853 7311.04 0.98

97


Table 5c: List of the SEETO Comprehensive Rail Network bottlenecks in 2011(single track)

Description Start node End node Length (km)

Number of tracks

Passenger trains (number)

Freight trains (number)

Total trains (number)

Corridor X Dugo Selo Novska 84 1 46 21 67

Corridor X Stara Pazova Novi Beograd 30 1 42 23 65

Corridor X Beograd Novi Beograd 5 1 42 23 65

Corridor X Beograd Resnik 76 1 42 23 65

Table 5d: List of the SEETO Comprehensive Rail Network bottlenecks in 2011(double tracks)

Description Start node End node Length (km)

Number of tracks

Passenger trains (number)

Freight trains (number)

Total trains (number)

Corridor X Savski Marof Zapresic 12 2 136 72 208

Corridor X Zapresic Zagreb 15 2 136 27 163

Corridor X Zagreb Dugo Selo 33 2 171 37 208

Table 5e: SEETO Comprehensive Rail Network maintenance expenditures (2011)

Regional Participant Total cost (M€)

Infrastructure cost (M€)

Signalling and telecommunication system (M€)

Electrification system(M€)

Cost per kilometre (€)

Albania 2.57 2.52 0.05 0 5397.37

Bosnia and Herzegovina 21.34 14.24 2.1 5 32730.06

Croatia 67.7 31.9 16.5 19.3 47609

the former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia

4.8 3.4 0.5 0.9 7717.04

Serbia 0.04 0.02 0.01 0 24.68

Kosovo 0.8 0.46 0.34 - 5311.61

Total: 97.25 52.54 19.5 25.2 -*Data missing for Montenegro

98

Annex 6 - SEETO Comprehensive Network AirportsTable 6a: SEETO Comprehensive Network Airports infrastructure data (2011)SEETO CN Airport

IATA level Number of runways

Main runway length (m)

Number of passenger terminals

Passenger terminal area (m2)

Apron area (m2)

Tirana Level 2 1 2750 1 - -Banja Luka Level 1 1 2400 1 500 21600Sarajevo Level 2 1 2600 1 778 700Dubrovnik Level 1 1 3300 1 24138 126000Osijek Level 1 1 2500 1 1500 27000Pula Level 1 1 2946 1 12500 64200Rijeka Level 1 1 2500 1 1000 33600Split Level 2 1 2550 1 10800 88000Zadar Level 1 2 2500 2 7000 46000Zagreb Level 1 1 3252 1 15000 168000Ohrid Level 1 1 2548 1 3000 38700Skopje Level 2 1 2950 1 40000 74000Podgorica Level 1 1 2500 1 5500 33220Tivat Level 2 1 2500 1 4050 46212Belgrade Level 1 1 3400 2 40000 163349Nis Level 1 1 2500 1 2000 27500Pristina Level 2 1 2501 2 6390 51220

Table 6b: SEETO Comprehensive Network airports performance data (2009 - 2011)

Airport Passengers Cargo (t) Passengers Cargo (t) Passengers Cargo (t)

2009 2010 2011

Tirana 1253682 1687 1536840 1944 1817073 2290

Banja Luka 25000 - 4798 - 8367 -

Sarajevo 533900 - 563266 1620 599978 1607

Dubrovnik 1122355 516 1270062 406 1350000 420

Osijek 20438 188 20827 - 22104 -

Pula 318838 13 332399 9 358320 9

Rijeka 113567 - 61855 - 84713 -

Split 1115099 750 1219737 600 1300381 600

Zadar 215839 33 260030 14 284980 19

Zagreb 2062242 11231 2071561 9386 2319098 9450

Ohrid 36652 8 44392 1 74345 4472

Skopje 599519 2414 681080 2379 759928 2610

Podgorica 450508 1460 651608 2138 611651 1052

Tivat 532148 23 541836 22 647184 22

Belgrade 2384077 6690 2698730 7427 3124633 8025

Nis 17159 390 23654 1555 25130 705

Pristina 1191978 1564 1305532 1383 1422302 1168

Total: 11993001 26967 13288207 28884 14810187 32449

99


Annex 7 - SEETO Comprehensive Inland Waterway NetworkTable 7a: SEETO Comprehensive Network river ports cargo volume (2011)

Regional Participant River port River Total turnover (t) Passengers

Bosnia and Herzegovina Brcko Sava 36177 150

Bosnia and Herzegovina Samac Sava 151000 0

Croatia Sisak Sava 83000 1877

Serbia Beograd Danube 261185 57817

Serbia Novi Sad Danube 608400 11429

Total: 1139762 71273 *Data missing for ports Slavonski Brod, Vukovar, Osijek.

100

Annex 8 - SEETO Comprehensive Network SeaportsTable 8a: Seaports infrastructure data (2011)

Seaport Min draught (m)

Max draught (m)

Apron area (ha)

Condition Container terminal

Ro-Ro facilities

Transshipment center

Durres 7 12 1467000 Good Yes Yes Yes

Vlore 4 8 53025 Medium No No No

Pula 5 7 6890000 Medium Yes Yes Yes

Zadar 3 12 1470793 Medium Yes Yes Yes

Sibenik 5 10 171000 Good No Yes Yes

Rijeka 6 28 2000000 Good Yes Yes Yes

Split 4 11 130000 Good --- --- ---

Dubrovnik 4 11 130000 Good No Yes No

Ploce 2 10 81679 Good Yes Yes Yes

Bar 5 14 2000000 Good Yes No No

Table 8b: SEETO Comprehensive Network seaports traffic performance data (2009 - 2011)

Seaport Freight (million tons) Passengers (thousands)

2009 2010 2011 2009 2010 2011

Durres 2.37 3.41 3.48 876.03 834.04 853.75

Vlore 0.62 0.41 0.26 175.17 165.23 190.23

Pula 0.43 0.71 0.57 33.14 39.06 56

Zadar 0.47 0.61 0.33 2408.57 2435.93 2410.69

Sibenik 0.45 0.64 0 0.33 0.32 0.31

Rijeka 11.24 10.18 9.39 203.95 186.76 178.96

Split 2.47 2.99 2.55 3955.85 4109.88 4085.53

Dubrovnik 0 0 0 1082 1136.53 1660.54

Ploce 2.87 4.53 2.55 142.56 164.1 188

Bar 1.44 - 1.65 73.44 - 60.14

Total: 22.36 23.48 20.78 8951.04 9071.85 9684.15

SEETO Comprehensive Network Development · PDF fileSEETO Comprehensive Network Development Plan ... determination on the SEETO Comprehensive Network development ... current state of

Documents