European Commission Directorate General for Energy and Transport (DG TREN) 1994 TEN-T BUDGET LINE B94/2 Feasibility study Iron Rhine Ministerie van Verkeer en Infrastructuur, Belgium Bundesministerium für Verkehr, Bau-und Wohnungswesen, Germany Ministerie van Verkeer en Waterstaat, the Netherlands Comparative cross-border study on the Iron Rhine Draft Report 14th of May 2001 Colophon Report title: Comparative cross-border study on the Iron Rhine Report characteristic: IJ-Rijn1/WvS/46601 Version: 1.0 With funding of: European Commission Directorate General for Energy and Transport Ministerie van Verkeer en Infrastructuur, Belgium Bundesministerium für Verkehr, Bau-und Wohnungswesen, Germany Ministerie van Verkeer en Waterstaat, the Netherlands Principal: Nationale Maatschappij der Belgische Spoorwegen (SNCB/NMBS) Iron Rhine expert group: ir. D. Demuynck, Nationale Maatschappij der Belgische Spoorwegen ir. P. Van der Haegen, TUC Rail NV ir. J. Peeters, Ministerie van Verkeer en Infrastructuur L. De Ryck, Ministerie van de Vlaamse Gemeenschap ir. K. Heuts, Ministerie van de Vlaamse Gemeenschap ir. G.J.J. Schiphorst, Railinfrabeheer BV drs. D. van Bemmel, Railinfrabeheer BV A. Cardol, Railned BV K. Hohmann, Eisenbahn-Bundesamt ir. dr-ing. A. Hinzen, DB Netz AG Deutsche Bahn Gruppe Drafted by: ARCADIS Berkenweg 7 Postbus 220 3800 AE Amersfoort The Netherlands http://www.arcadis.nl drs.ing.M.B.A.G. Raessen, project manager ir. R.J. van Schie, project manager design ir. R.J. Zijlstra , project manager environment Contents 1 Introduction 11 1.1 The Iron Rhine: from disuse to use 11 1.2 The trilateral objective 12 1.3 Outline of the comparative cross-border study 12 2 Setting the scene for the Iron Rhine 17 2.1 Introduction 17 2.2 Historic context 17 2.3 Technical and geographical characteristics 19 2.4 Economic interest 21 2.5 The necessity for reactivation of the Iron Rhine 22 2.5.1 International and national policy on freight transport 23 2.5.2 International agreements 25 2.5.3 Prognoses on freight transport between Antwerp and Duisburg 26 2.5.4 Prognoses on freight transport on the Iron Rhine 28 2.6 Possible solutions 30 2.6.1 Road transport 30 2.6.2 Modal shift 32 2.6.3 Existing railways 33 2.7 International and national procedures 34 2.7.1 International 35 2.7.2 Belgium 36 2.7.3 The Netherlands 36 2.7.4 Germany 37 3 Scoping of alternatives 39 3.1 Introduction 39 3.2 The recent history of alternatives for the Iron Rhine 39 3.3 Scoping of alternatives 44 3.3.1 Scoping criteria 44 3.3.2 Included and excluded alternatives 46 3.4 Overview of results and selection process 51 4 Description of the alternatives 53 4.1 Introduction 53 4.2 Design process 54 4.2.1 Quality level of the Iron Rhine 54 4.2.2 Bottleneck analysis 54 4.3 Design method 57 4.3.1 Quality level 57 4.3.2 Optimisation 57 4.3.3 Designs of the Dutch EIA 58 4.3.4 Limiting conditions and basic principles 58 4.4 Route section 1: Port of Antwerp – Budel 59 4.5 Route section 2: Budel – Anrath 60 4.5.1 Introduction 60 4.5.2 Alternative A0 61 4.5.3 Alternative A1 64 4.5.4 Alternative A1north 66 4.5.5 Alternative A2 67 4.5.6 Alternative A3 69 4.5.7 Alternative A3/A2 71 4.5.8 Alternative B 73 4.5.9 Alternative D0 79 4.5.10 Alternative D1 82 4.5.11 Alternative D2 83 4.6 Route section 3: Anrath-Duisburg 84 5 Impact assessment 87 5.1 Introduction 87 5.2 Transport time 89 5.2.1 Introduction 89 5.2.2 Riding time without impact of waiting-tracks 92 5.2.3 Transport time including impact of waiting-tracks 92 5.3 Residual capacity 94 5.3.1 Introduction 94 5.3.2 Residual capacity effects 95 5.4 Reliability 96 5.4.1 Introduction 96 5.4.2 Reliability impacts 98 5.5 Positive side effects 99 5.5.1 Introduction 99 5.5.2 Positive side effects of freight transport 101 5.5.3 Positive side effects with respect to passenger transport 103 5.5.4 Total positive side effects 104 5.6 Noise 105 5.6.1 Introduction 105 5.6.2 Total noise-affected area 107 5.6.3 Noise-affected residential area 108 5.7 Vibrations 109 5.7.1 Introduction 109 5.7.2 Total vibration-affected area 111 5.7.3 Vibration-affected residential area 113 5.8 Risk assessment 114 5.8.1 Introduction 114 5.8.2 Individual Risk 116 5.8.3 Group Risk 118 5.9 Groundwater 119 5.9.1 Introduction 119 5.9.2 Affected groundwater protection areas 121 5.9.3 Intersection of areas with local apparent groundwater levels 123 5.10 Flora and fauna 125 5.10.1 Introduction 125 5.10.2 Bird and Habitat Directive areas 129 5.10.3 National status areas 136 5.11 Landscape and cultural heritage 143 5.11.1 Introduction 143 5.11.2 Land take on areas of landscape importance 146 5.11.3 Level of landscape integration 148 5.11.4 Intersection of cultural-historical monuments 150 5.12 Agriculture 150 5.12.1 Introduction 150 5.12.2 Land take on agricultural area 151 5.12.3 Restrictions in management 152 5.13 Recreation 153 5.13.1 Introduction 153 5.13.2 Intersection of recreational facilities 154 5.13.3 Degradation of recreational experience 154 5.14 Physical planning 156 5.14.1 Introduction 156 5.14.2 Land take on residential areas 157 5.14.3 Land take on industrial areas 158 5.14.4 Affected quality of the spatial structure 159 5.15 Social aspects 160 5.15.1 Introduction 160 5.15.2 Barrier effects 161 5.15.3 Visual nuisance 162 5.16 Costs 163 5.16.1 Introduction 163 5.16.2 Results 166 5.17 Phasing possibilities 168 5.17.1 Introduction 168 5.17.2 Building time 169 5.17.3 Growth of the number of trains 170 6 Mitigating and compensating measures 175 6.1 Introduction 175 6.2 Legislation on mitigating and compensating measures 176 6.2.1 Noise 176 6.2.2 Flora and Fauna 177 6.3 Mitigating measures 180 6.3.1 Noise 180 6.3.2 Flora and Fauna 185 6.3.3 Landscape 188 6.3.4 Groundwater 188 6.3.5 Agriculture 188 6.3.6 Recreation 189 6.3.7 Social aspects 189 6.4 Compensating measures 189 6.5 Costs of mitigating and compensating measures 191 6.5.1 Mitigating measures 191 6.5.2 Compensating measures 193 7 Comparison of the alternatives 195 7.1 Introduction 195 7.2 Methodology of the MCA 196 7.3 Overview of impacts 198 7.4 Allocation of weights 205 7.4.1 Transport aspects 205 7.4.2 Environmental aspects 205 7.4.3 Phasing 209 7.5 Comparison of alternatives 209 7.5.1 Transport aspects 209 7.5.2 Environmental aspects 210 7.5.3 Comparison of alternatives on environmental scenarios 220 7.5.4 Phasing 223 7.6 Sensitivity analysis 225 7.6.1 Transport aspects 225 7.6.2 Environmental aspects 226 7.6.3 Phasing 227 7.7 Costs 227 8 Evaluation and conclusions 231 8.1 Introduction 231 8.2 Average score per theme 232 8.3 Analysis 233 Annex 1 Literature 241 Annex 2 Terminology 247 Annex 3 List of design plans 253 Annex 4 Plan of the alternatives 255 7 List of tables Table 2.3-1: Technical characteristics of the original route of the Iron Rhine Table 2.5.3-1: Modal split of freight between Belgium and Germany in 1992 Table 2.5.3-2: Modal split (%) of freight between Belgium and Germany Table 2.5.3-3: Modal split (mio tons) of freight between Belgium and Germany Table 2.5.4-1: Prognoses for number of freight trains per working day in both directions for the Iron Rhine and the Montzen Line Table 2.5.4-2: Evolution on the prognoses for the Iron Rhine Table 3.4-1: Scores per alternative for the Iron Rhine Table 4.5.2-1: New infrastructure required and modified for alternative A0 (with or without tunnel) Table 4.5.3-1: New or modified infrastructure required for alternative A1 Table 4.5.4-1: New or modified infrastructure required for alternative A1north Table 4.5.5-1: New or modified infrastructure required for alternative A2 Table 4.5.6-1: New or modified infrastructure required for alternative A3 Table 4.5.7-1: New or modified infrastructure required for alternative A3/A2 Table 4.5.8-1: New or modified infrastructure required for alternative B Table 4.5.9-1: New or modified infrastructure required for alternative D0 Table 4.5.10-1: New or modified infrastructure required for alternative D1 Table 4.5.11-1: New or modified infrastructure required for alternative D2 Table 5.2.1-1: Resulting theoretical transport time (riding time and waiting time) Table 5.3.1-1: Results residual capacity in trains per hour per direction Table 5.4.1-1: Reliability results Table 5.5.1-1: Results positive side effects Table 5.6.1-1: Noise impacts compared to the autonomous situation Table 5.7.1-1 Vibration impacts compared to the autonomous situation Table 5.8.1-1 Risk assessment impacts compared to the autonomous situation Table 5.9.1-1: Impacts on groundwater compared to the autonomous situation Table 5.10.1-1: Impacts on flora and fauna compared to the autonomous situation Table 5.11.1-1: Impacts on landscape and cultural heritage compared to the autonomous situation Table 5.12.1-1: Impacts on agriculture compared to the autonomous situation Table 5.13.1-1: Impacts on recreation compared to the autonomous situation Table 5.14.1-1: Impacts on the physical planning compared to the autonomous situation Table 5.15.1-1: Impacts on social aspects compared to the autonomous situation Table 5.16.1-2: Unit prices land purchase (price level 2001) Table 5.16.1-2: Unit prices land earthworks (price level 2001) Table 5.16.1-3: Unit prices track (price level 2001) Table 5.16.1-4: Unit prices electrification (price level 2001) Table 5.16.1-5: Unit prices safety system (price level 2001) Table 5.16.1-6: Unit prices structures (price level 2001) Table 5.16.1-7: Unit prices stations (price level 2001) Table 5.16.1-8: Standard percentages (price level 2001) Table 5.16.2-1: Technical costs per alternative (price level 2001) Table 5.17.1-1: Qualitative