Building High Speed Rail in democratic nations
High Speed Rail: Leveraging federal investment locally
Rudin Center for Transportation Policy & Management
New York, June 16, 2010 • Characteristics and cost of High Speed Lines
• Developing a high speed line
• Managing democratic processes
2 Basis is a study undertaken for High Speed Two
•• Study Study forfor HighHigh SpeedSpeed TwoTwo onon UK'sUK's nextnext highhigh speedspeed projectproject
•• Focus Focus onon capitalcapital expendituresexpenditures (investment(investment costs)costs)
•• Dedicated Dedicated highhigh speedspeed lineslines inin WesternWestern EuropeEurope
•• Comparison Comparison toto costcost structuresstructures ofof HS1HS1
•• Consideration Consideration ofof differentdifferent lineline characteristicscharacteristics
•• Breakdown Breakdown byby projectproject phases,phases, costcost elementselements andand assetsassets
•• Understanding Understanding keykey costcost driversdrivers andand theirtheir impactimpact
3 The comparison comprised a total of six European high speed lines
• Taken into service between 2001 and 2008
United Kingdom HS1 Germany • Germany: Erfurt-Leipzig Cologne still under construction Erfurt Leipzig
LGV Est Frankfurt Beaudre- • Route length: 109-620 km court France • All lines double track LGV Méditerranée • Mixed use: freight and Madrid Barcelona Italy Spain Rome passenger (one exception)
Naples • Mostly new lines starting and ending beyond city limits
Source: Comparison of High Speed Lines' CAPEX, DfT Speed Lines'Source: Comparison CAPEX, of High 4 In the course of the study we also encountered cost for "democratic processes"
100 Environment 95 Pre-Phase Land acquisition 90 Legal & political issues Substructure 85 Planning & Others 80 Design 75 70 65 Tunnels 60 55 Civil engineering works 50 45 Construction 40 Viaducts 35 Noise barriers 30 25 Track superstructure Equipment 20 Power supply 15 Signalling Stations, termini Telecommunication 10 Buildings Stations, termini 5 Commissioning Others 0 Total Investment Cost Asset Groups investment by phase positions
Source: Comparison of High Speed Lines' CAPEX, DfT Speed Lines'Source: Comparison CAPEX, of High 5 5 PPP-normalised investment cost per route-km vary by more than a factor of 5
[m GBP/route-km] 53
22 22 17 15 15 17 Total 10 4 Pre-Phase A B C D E F HS 1 Classic mainline
Source: Comparison of High Speed Lines' CAPEX, DfT Speed Lines'Source: Comparison CAPEX, of High 6 Different topographical situations influence design and construction
7 Theoretically high speed lines reach up to 350 km/h – the actual average speed often is significantly lower
Maximum design speed Average speed % Share of track allowed for [kph] maximum design speed 350 350 300 300 300 300 301 300
250 236 189 177 176 173
69% 88% 80% 100% 86% 94% 70%
High Speed 1 Rome-Naples Erfurt - Méditerranée Madrid- Est Cologne- Leipzig/Halle Barcelona européenne Rhine/Main
Distance [km] 109 205 123 250 621 301 219 Time [hh:mm] 00:35 01:10 00:39 1:00 02:38 01:00 01:16
Source: Comparison of High Speed Lines' CAPEX, DfT Speed Lines'Source: Comparison CAPEX, of High 8 • Characteristics and cost of High Speed Lines
• Developing a high speed line
• Managing democratic processes
9 How does the planning process work in a federal system?
Germany's top down planning process
Monetary evaluation Non-monetary evaluation
Environ- Regional Cost-Benefit- mental Federal effects impact government Analyses analyses analyses
Integrated federal transport plan State and regional governments Land use planning, Planning approval line routing
10 Building railway lines in general causes a lot of public resistance
Mannheim-Stuttgart (~100km) • 6,000 formal objections
• 130 legal claims by 200 petitioners
• More than 1,000 abutters forming an initiative
• Local politicians asking for kindergartens and swimming baths to compensate for political support
• Construction of line sections was partly completely interrupted
• Supreme court turned down one claim against the complete line
• Various changes in line design and routing
• Substantial compromises to cope with protests
11 As a consequence the process can take 30 years in total and be severely delayed Cologne-Frankfurt Public initiative One final section against the line Start of approved Federal Plan construction Final decision on large-scale End of planning Federal Plan Start of layout by approval Parliament operations Controversy about 5 large-scale routing line layouts Land use studied planning + and regional Maglev-option development planning
1973 1985 1989 1995 2000 2002
Scheduled start of Scheduled end of Scheduled end of operations land use planning planning approval
Scheduled start of construction 12 The key obstacles in a railway development and building process are manifold
Traffic Planning Finance • Insufficient benefit • Comparatively high • Travel speed too low • Driven by external factors • Poor interconnection • Exceeding planned costs • Ridership and ticket prices
Ecology Land use • Cutting landscapes • Loss of value • Cultural landscapes • Unwillingness to sell • Protected areas
Emissions Archeology • Noise • Archeological sites • Vibrations • Paleontological findings
13 • Characteristics and cost of High Speed Lines
• Developing a high speed line
• Managing democratic processes
14 A broad mix of measures is needed to achieve approval
Success factors and measures (1/2)
Traffic Planning Finance
• Integrated traffic • Cost Benefit Analyses planning • Risk allocation • Modal shift effects • Monitoring • Additional stations/stops • Consider extra-cost • Better living conditions • Clear responsibilities
Political Communication
• Robust concept • Proactive selling • Priority project • Early information • Shorter objection periods • Stakeholder • Planning management scenarios/routing • Public consultation
15 Further measures are needed to support the development of a line
Success factors and measures (2/2)
Ecology Land use • Environmental risk • Compensation analysis • Over market price • Reduce land use • Expropriation • Bundling of traffic routes • Upgrade existing lines • Compensating areas • Reforestation/-cultivation
Emissions Archeology • Noise protection • Temporary closure of the (walls, tunnels, slab track) construction site • Inspections/grinding • Sleeper pads, absorbers • Exceeding legal requirements
16 On average 10% of the budget has been dedicated to solve democratic issues – additional civil structures excluded Finance
Cost share Mio. GBP/km Spent on …
2% • Environmental studies 0,13 • Compensation areas Environment • Measures of landscaping 0,81 • Environmental measures and allowances
6% • Real estate to be bought 0,47 • Loss of value of real estates Land • Noise protection 3,40 • Legal costs due to disputes
2% • Fees to local administration 0,25 • Legal costs Legal & political • Non connected municipalities 1,30 • Archaeological issues • Safety measures
Source: Comparison of High Speed Lines' CAPEX, DfT Speed Lines'Source: Comparison CAPEX, of High 17 Continuous information and formal consultation are further means for public engagement Communication
Public Information Formal Consultation
• Dedicated websites • "This consultation will provide an opportunity for • Full documentation all interested parties to available express their view on HS2 • CD-ROMs …"
• Enquiry line • "engagement meetings in a number of key towns • Press releases and villages"
• Information sites along • Input for the government's line decision to commission •… HS2 to move on
18 In UK stakeholder consultation was launched six months ahead of any formal public consultation Communication
Stakeholder groups Stakeholders
Business & Environment • Councils, local and regional Geographically focused governments Rail Industry 12% 22% 7% • Development agencies • Chambers of Commerce
Regions 12% • Public transport organization
22% • Transport companies Long Term Strategy • Environmental trusts 25% • Political departments Line of Route
Regular newsletters provided by High Speed Two to 500 stakeholders
19 Conclusions
•• Significantly Significantly higherhigher costcost ofof HighHigh SpeedSpeed lines,lines, debatedebate aboutabout benefitsbenefits
•• Solid Solid businessbusiness casecase neededneeded
•• Heavy Heavy resistanceresistance fromfrom thethe publicpublic (directly(directly affected)affected) andand stakeholdersstakeholders
•• Long Long developmentdevelopment timestimes withwith variousvarious scenariosscenarios toto balancebalance outout differentdifferent interestsinterests
•• High High legallegal standards,standards, especiallyespecially environmentalenvironmental –– often often exceededexceeded
•• Requires Requires aa varietyvariety ofof mitigationmitigation measuresmeasures
•• Appropriate Appropriate fundingfunding levelslevels neededneeded
•• Intensive Intensive publicpublic engagementengagement andand stakeholderstakeholder managementmanagement
20 Thank you very much for your attention!
Frank Zschoche Partner
Civity Management Consultants GmbH & Co. KG Tesdorpfstrasse 11 · 22303 Hamburg Germany
Phone +49 171 77 11 790 [email protected] · www.civity.de
21