Maritsa Highway Cost Benefit Analysis Report

Maritsa Highway Cost Benefit Analysis Report

Transportation May 2012 Gabrovo – Shipka Highway Project Cost Benefit Analysis Main Report Prepared by: .................... Checked by: Edmund Salt Graham Powell Consultant, Transportation Regional Director, Transportation Approved by: Martin Bright Director, Transportation Gabrovo – Shipka Highway Project, EU Cohesion Fund Application, Supporting Document Rev No Comments Checked by Approved Date by 1 Draft Report GCP MJB 13/10/2011 2 Revised Draft Report following comments from JASPERS GCP MJB 10/05/2012 Beaufort House, 94/96 Newhall Street, Birmingham, B3 1PB Telephone: 0121 262 1900 Website: http://www.aecom.com Job No: 60214559 Reference Date Created: May 2012 This document has been prepared by AECOM Limited for the sole use of our client (the “Client”) and in accordance with generally accepted consultancy principles, the budget for fees and the terms of reference agreed between AECOM Limited and the Client. Any information provided by third parties and referred to herein has not been checked or verified by AECOM Limited, unless otherwise expressly stated in the document. No third party may rely upon this document without the prior and express written agreement of AECOM Limited. f:\tp\proposal\bulgaria cba (birmingham)\12 - gabrovo - shipka\reports\cba report\version 2\gabrovo - shipka cba report_120510.doc Table of Contents 1 Introduction ....................................................................................................................................................................... 1 2 Policy Context of the Scheme .......................................................................................................................................... 2 3 Summary of Feasibility Study and Preferred Option Identification ............................................................................ 15 4 The Transport Models ..................................................................................................................................................... 42 5 Traffic Forecasts ............................................................................................................................................................. 75 6 Project Costs ................................................................................................................................................................. 110 7 Economic Cost Benefit Analysis ................................................................................................................................. 117 8 Financial Cost Benefit Analysis ................................................................................................................................... 133 9 Economic and Financial Cost Benefit Analysis Results ............................................................................................ 135 10 Risk Analysis on the Preferred Options ...................................................................................................................... 140 11 Summary and Conclusions .......................................................................................................................................... 157 Appendices The Appendices to this report are contained in a separate document entitled ‘Gabrovo-Shipka Highway Project, Cost Benefit Analysis, Appendices to Main Report’. AECOM Gabrovo – Shipka Highway Project Cost Benefit Analysis 1 1 Introduction 1.1 Introduction This report presents the Cost Benefit Analysis (CBA) for the Gabrovo-Shipka Highway Project, which involves the construction of a road bypass west of the town of Gabrovo and a tunnel under Shipka Peak. The report explains the background to the project, and its context within the Gabrovo-Shipka corridor, before describing the relevant scheme details and options, as drawn from the previous Feasibility Study. The report then provides information on the transport model and forecasting, before reporting the results from the Cost Benefit Analysis and identifying the Preferred Options. This report is structured as follows: Chapter 2 describes the objectives of the project and how it meets national and international transport policy objectives, in particular how the project contributes to the pan-European and TEN-T policy framework; Chapter 3 presents the details of the project, describing the scheme variants contained within the existing Feasibility Study and the process by which the Project Options have been assessed; Chapter 4 sets out the traffic forecasting methodology and key assumptions; Chapter 5 includes the traffic forecasts and traffic composition for the project; Chapter 6 provides the background information on the estimation of project costs; Chapters 7 and 8 describe the key inputs and methodology for the Economic and Financial CBA; Chapter 9 presents the results of the Financial and Economic CBA for the preferred option; Chapter 10 discusses the outcomes of sensitivity tests and the methodology and results of the risk analysis for the preferred option; and Chapter 11 contains the summary and conclusions. This report is principally concerned with the CBA for the Gabrovo-Shipka Highway Project, as this is the means through which the Preferred Options are indentified. The report does not include a Multi-Criteria Assessment or a review of environmental issues as these are outside the scope of this task. AECOM Gabrovo – Shipka Highway Project Cost Benefit Analysis 2 2 Policy Context of the Scheme 2.1 Project Objectives The proposed Gabrovo – Shipka Highway Project needs to be viewed within the context of the objectives of the Bulgarian Government and the regulatory framework of the EU. It is important that the scheme sits comfortably with, and satisfies, the appropriate policy drivers at a regional, national and international level to ensure the necessary approvals can be obtained to take the scheme through to implementation. An appreciation of the policy context is necessary to understand the justification for the scheme, in a strategic sense, complimenting the technical and financial assessments undertaken. 2.2 Scheme Location National Context As illustrated in Figure 2.1, Gabrovo is located in central Bulgaria to the northwest of the Central Balkan National Park. The national park itself is situated on the Balkan Mountain Range which spans the entire width of the country. The topography of central Bulgaria causes severance between northern conurbations, such as Gabrovo, and those in the south which results in poor transport connectivity for vehicular travel. Figure 2.1 Location of Gabrovo, Bulgarian National Context AECOM Gabrovo – Shipka Highway Project Cost Benefit Analysis 3 Figure 2.2 Gabrovo to Shipka Corridor As illustrated in Figure 2.2, the town of Shipka lies immediately to the south of the Balkan Mountain Range. For the purposes of this report, the Gabrovo-Shipka corridor is defined as the length of the route between the two conurbations. The First Class Road I-5 is the primary route through the corridor, and an important link between the north and south of the country, however the poor quality and challenging alignment of the road currently results in slow journey times and delays through the corridor. Poor weather conditions also result in the section of the road along the Shipka Pass being closed during the winter months due to heavy goods vehicles becoming stuck (in 2008, a ban on 10 tonne vehicles was introduced on the pass which has had the effect of reducing the frequency of enforced closures). AECOM Gabrovo – Shipka Highway Project Cost Benefit Analysis 4 Major Road Network in Bulgaria The existing major road network in Bulgaria is displayed in Figure 2.3. Figure 2.3 Motorway Network in Bulgaria In 2011, the total length of completed motorway in Bulgaria was 437 km, including the Lyulin Highway (20km) which was completed in 2011. By 2013, it is envisaged that the total motorway network of Bulgaria will be 619 km with the completion of the Maritsa Motorway, Trakia Motorway and Vidin Bridge crossing. The Gabrovo-Shipka corridor is not part of the motorway network; however, it has been identified as a link of interest in terms of expressway projects. Expressway projects contribute to providing major road connections across Bulgaria through improved 1st class roads. In 2011, the total length of 1st class roads in Bulgaria was 2,961 km, of which the 86 km within the Gabrovo municipality made up 3%. Upon completion of the Gabrovo-Shipka bypass and tunnel, the amount of 1st class road network in the region would increase to 117 km. AECOM Gabrovo – Shipka Highway Project Cost Benefit Analysis 5 Figure 2.4 Road Network within the Gabrovo-Shipka Corridor AECOM Gabrovo – Shipka Highway Project Cost Benefit Analysis 6 Figure 2.4 displays the road network within the Gabrovo-Shipka corridor, including the existing route of the I-5 between the two settlements. This illustrates the current role of the I-5 as the only direct connection between Gabrovo and Shipka which, as a result of its challenging alignment and periods of closure of the Shipka Pass, can cause severance along the north-south axis for transit traffic (as well as isolating residents of Shipka from Gabrovo and other conurbations to the north). International Context Bulgaria has a strategic geographical position within Europe, emphasised by the fact that five Pan European Corridors pass through the country: IV, VII, VIII, IX, and X. These Corridors are further described below and are shown on Figure 2.5. Corridor IV: Germany - Turkey:

View Full Text

Details

  • File Type
    pdf
  • Upload Time
    -
  • Content Languages
    English
  • Upload User
    Anonymous/Not logged-in
  • File Pages
    162 Page
  • File Size
    -

Download

Channel Download Status
Express Download Enable

Copyright

We respect the copyrights and intellectual property rights of all users. All uploaded documents are either original works of the uploader or authorized works of the rightful owners.

  • Not to be reproduced or distributed without explicit permission.
  • Not used for commercial purposes outside of approved use cases.
  • Not used to infringe on the rights of the original creators.
  • If you believe any content infringes your copyright, please contact us immediately.

Support

For help with questions, suggestions, or problems, please contact us