financing roads in poland – present status and … · goods vehicles (hgvs) on the poland's...

FINANCING ROADS IN POLAND – PRESENT STATUS AND FUTURE OPTIONS

FINAL REPORT JUNE 2002

comments added in October 2002 The views and interpretations herein are those of the authors and should not be attributed to the World Bank or to any individual acting on its behalf

Pub

lic D

iscl

osur

e A

utho

rized

Pub

lic D

iscl

osur

e A

utho

rized

Pub

lic D

iscl

osur

e A

utho

rized

Pub

lic D

iscl

osur

e A

utho

rized

Pub

lic D

iscl

osur

e A

utho

rized

Pub

lic D

iscl

osur

e A

utho

rized

Pub

lic D

iscl

osur

e A

utho

rized

Pub

lic D

iscl

osur

e A

utho

rized

Administrator

27036

Financing Roads in Poland...

LIST OF CONTENTS Introduction PART A: EXECUTIVE SUMMARY PART B: FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS 1 Study findings...................................................................................................... B/1

1.1 Roads and traffic - present state................................................................ B/1

1.2 Ongoing investments ................................................................................ B/6

1.3 Road financing .......................................................................................... B/8

1.4 Sector approach and European context..................................................... B/11

1.5 New programs........................................................................................... B/15

1.6 Other problems ......................................................................................... B/16

2 Recommendations............................................................................................... B/19 PART C: BACKGROUND REPORT 1 Organization and development of public roads – assessment ........................ C/1

1.1 Organizational responsibility for each category of roads ......................... C/1

1.2 Basic characteristics of public road network ............................................ C/4

1.3 Financing of Public Roads ........................................................................ C/4

1.4 National road network............................................................................... C/6

1.5 Major ongoing investments....................................................................... C/7

1.6 Present road construction costs................................................................. C/8

1.7 Overview of replacement value of the existing national road network based on present construction costs .......................................................... C/9

1.8 Assessment of voivodship, powiat , gmina and urban roads situation .... C/10

1.9 Reorganization of the road sector and existing bottlenecks.................... C/13


2. The impact of increased axle load of heavy goods vehicles (HGVs) on the Poland's road network ...........................................................................C/19 2.1 Adapting technical road construction standards to modern heavy

vehicle traffic (EU's 11.5t/exle standards).................................................C/19

2.2 Quantifying road deterioration caused by heavy vehicles ........................C/20

2.3 Evaluation of the existing legislation for over-weight vehicles ................C/23

2.4 Protecting a national road network for heavy vehicles .............................C/24

2.5 Cost estimates road improvements due to increased axle loads ...............C/28

3. Increased Motorization and mobility in Poland..............................................C/31 3.1 Goods and passenger vehicles in relation to GDP ....................................C/31

3.2 Traffic volumes..........................................................................................C/32

3.3 Vehicle population.....................................................................................C/37

3.4 Mobility assessment ..................................................................................C/39

4. Internal Road Financing ...................................................................................C/41 4.1 Projected vignette revenues .......................................................................C/41

4.2 Fuel taxes ...................................................................................................C/43

4.3 Vehicle taxation..........................................................................................C/45

4.4 Import and registration fees........................................................................C/47

4.5 Road user charges revenues .......................................................................C/48

4.6 Annual road expenditures...........................................................................C/50

4.7 Channeling the road revenues – budgeting process ...................................C/55

5. External Road Projects and Road Sector Financing .....................................C/59 5.1 Individual projects vs. long term sector approach....................................C/59

5.2 Road corridors vs. road networks .............................................................C/60

5.3 Standard loan conditions of donors ..........................................................C/61

5.4 The EU accessions requirements and assistance program........................C/63

5.5 Private Investments (concessions) in Road Transport .............................C/66 APPENDICES


Introduction i

INTRODUCTION General Objective The study prepared by Andrzej Brzezinski, Wojciech Suchorzewski and Piotr Szagala was intended to serve as a background research for the future World Bank involvement in the Polish road sector.

Main Tasks 5 main tasks were executed:

(i) Assessment of present and future needs for road investments.

(ii) The impact of increased axle load of heavy goods vehicles on the Poland’s road network.

(iii) Increased motorization and mobility in Poland.

(iv) Internal road financing.

(v) External road projects and road sector financing.

The work wasdivided into three phases:

• the first lasting up to the end of March, and closed by the Inception Report;

• the second lasting up to the end of April, and closed by the Interim Report;

• the third lasting up to the end of May, and closed by the Final Report. • The report was prepared in the period (from March to May 2002) when different options of financing and restructuring of the road sector were considered by the Polish Government. Some comments and opinion formulated in parts A and B concerned options, which have been later rejected by the Government. New solutions have been proposed. In this situation, in October 2002, parts A and B of the final report were reviewed and comments added in footnotes which are printed in italics. Content of the Final Report The Final Report is composed of 3 main parts:

• PART A: containing executive summary of the report,

• PART B: containing findings from the study as well as author’s recommendations concerning Polish road sector,

• PART C containing a detail report concerning 5 main tasks based on the study Terms of Reference plus annexes with detail tables.


ii Introduction

Data Providers The information and data from the following institutions were collected and used:

Name of Organization Abbreviation Address 1 Ministry of Infrastructure MI Warsaw, ul. Chałubinskiego 4/6 2 Ministry of Finance MoF Warsaw, ul. Swietokrzyska 12 3 General Directorate of National

Roads and Motorways GDDP

(GDDKiA) Warsaw, ul. Wspolna 1/3

4 Motorway Agency ABiEA Warsaw, ul. Chalubinskiego 4/6 5 Bureau of Road Network Studies BSSD

(former BPRSD)Warsaw, ul. Goledzinowska 10

6 The Motor Transport Institute ITS Warsaw, ul. Jagiellonska 80 7 Main Statistical Office GUS Warsaw, Al. Niepodleglosci 208 8 Research Institute of Roads and

Bridges IBDiM Warsaw, ul. Jagiellonska 80


EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

The study1 was intended to serve as a background research for the future World Bank involvement in the Polish road sector. The report consists of three parts: Executive Summary, Findings and Recommendations (Part B) and Background Report (Part C).

The Background Report is composed of 5 chapters. Chapter 1 contains basic characteristics of public road network, with emphasis on ongoing investments, organizational and financial responsibility for each category of roads and identification of bottlenecks in the road sector. In Chapter 2 the impact of increased axle load of heavy goods vehicles (HGVs) on the Poland's road network is discussed. Growth of motorization, mobility and traffic volumes in Poland is dealt with in Chapter 3. Chapter 4 is devoted to internal road financing: projected vignette revenues, fuel and vehicle taxes, road user charges, road expenditures and channeling the road revenues. In Chapter 5 questions of external road projects and the road sector financing are covered, including standard loan conditions, the EU accessions requirements and assistance program and private investments (concessions).

The report was prepared in the period (from March to May 2002) when different options of financing and restructuring of the road sector were considered by the Polish Government. Some comments and opinion formulated in parts A and B concerned options, which have been later rejected by the Government. New solutions have been proposed. In this situation, in October 2002, parts A and B of the final report were reviewed and comments added in footnotes (in italics). Roads and their financing - the present state

(i) There is 371 thousand km of public roads in Poland, 67% with hard pavement. In 1999, due to state administration reform, the road administration structure has been adjusted to the new 3-tier territorial administrative layout: voivodship (province, region), powiat (county) and gmina (city, town, commune). There are 16 voivodships, 308 powiats and 2 489 gminas (of them 65 cities of powiat status). Metropolitan areas are formed of independent cities (of powiat status) and gminas and there is no formal administrative arrangement for their governing. Four categories of roads have been introduced: national (18,1 thousand km), voivodship (28,3 thousand km), powiat (128,0 thousand km) and gmina (196,3 thousand km). Total replacement value of the national road network amounts to 74 568 MPLN (20 713 MEUR). This constitutes 10,9% of Gross Domestic Product. Management of the other roads has been handed over to the appropriate local governments. Dividing the remaining roads into 3 categories (instead of earlier 2) led to partitioning of networks. Co-operation at local levels is still rather rare what reduces road management effectiveness and efficiency.

(ii) In the past, pavements were designed and built for axle loads of 6, 8 and 10 tons, depending on the road category. Consequently, majority of the road network is not adjusted to heavy traffic. Only 28,5% of the length of national roads is in a good condition. Growing use of heavy vehicles brings about deterioration of roads. Some attempts are

1 Authors: Andrzej Brzezinski, Wojciech Suchorzewski, Piotr Szagala

A/2 Executive Summary

made to reduce this impact and/or accumulate extra resources to speed up the process of strengthening (vignettes, penalties etc.) but they are not sufficient.

(iii) Motorization is growing faster than incomes. At the end of the year 2000 there were 259 cars per one thousand inhabitants. However, the real number of cars in use is probably lower than shown in official statistics (about 16 % lower in case of cars and 25-27 % in case of goods vehicles and buses). For passenger vehicles 11 thousand km per year (for vehicles really in use) seems to be a good estimate. The average traffic volume on national roads is at the level of 7 000 AADT and on international roads 11 450 AADT. Cars constitute 70-79%, depending on road category. In the period 1995-2000 traffic on the national road network increased by 31%. In the same period GDP (in constant prices) have increased by 28.4% (elasticity factor to GDP equal to 0,92). In the recent 2 years there was almost no increase in traffic.

(iv) Introducing excise tax on fuel which was intended to accumulate funds for road maintenance and development was, in principle, right solution (use related charging). However, relatively small portion of revenues from the road sector (excise tax on fuels, annual truck tax, licenses and permits for international transport excise and customs duty on vehicles) is allocated to roads. Only 30% of revenues from excise tax on fuel is presently allocated to national, voivodship and powiat roads and roads within cities of powiat status. This is the minimum percentage required by the parliamentary act. The Parliament idea was to increase the percentage every year, but because of the budgetary problems, only in the fiscal year 1999 this percent was equal to 31.5%, in 2000 - 30.6% and then, instead of increasing it, was reduced back to 30%. Another 10,5% is allocated to gminas but there is no earmarking for road financing. Method of allocating resources between jurisdictions is questioned by local governments.

(v) Financial means are generally not sufficient to eliminate backlogs in maintenance, what does not leave much for modernization and development of networks. At the beginning of transition period expenditures on roads (in real terms) sharply decreased, in the period 1996-1998 were growing, then stabilized at the level approximately 200% of average expenditures in years 1991-1995.

(vi) Polish road sector takes advantage of loans given by three international financial institutions: the European Investment Bank (EIB), the International Bank of Reconstruction and Development (World Bank) and the European Bank of Reconstruction and Development (EBRD). In the borrowers opinion, the best conditions of loans are offered by EIB (lower costs and flexibility). EIB is more interested in financial aspects of the project such as risk and guarantees while the World Bank pays greater attention to project selection (viability, social aspects, sustainability).

Investment programs

(vii) Toll motorway construction program in Poland is implemented since 1994, but the progress is very slow. The total length of motorways in use is 394 km, of which only 157 km was constructed after the year 1990. A progress of the first 3 concessions is different in each case but generally not as successful as it was expected. In case of A4 motorway toll collecting started in April 2000. The concession for A2 motorway had to be amended because the concessionaire was not able to collect financial means and

The World Bank Financing Roads in Poland... Poland, Warsaw Office

Executive Summary A/3

construction started with delay. In case of the third concession (A1 motorway) “financial closure” is still lacking. Slow implementation of the program was caused by: overestimated traffic forecasts and potential revenues which reduced interest of the private sector, complicated procedures and lack of experience of road administration in preparing and conducting of concession process, as well as inflexible involvement of the State in the financial construction strategy.

(viii) On the national road network there are 33 main ongoing investment projects identified. They are financed from the State budget supported by loans or grants. The total budget allocated for these investments (some of them scheduled till the year 2005) is approx. 2 040 MEUR2 including, more than half of it (1 097 MEUR), assigned to motorway network (171,5 km).

(ix) New plan was announced by the Government in January 2002 in the document Infrastructure – a key to development. with radical acceleration of new motorways construction (250 km of motorways per year instead of 60 km per year at present; 1 460 km in total), expressway road network improvement and development (60 km of expressways per year instead of 20 km per year at present; 1 635 km in total) and road strengthening (approx. 1 400 km). This program requires enormous financial resources. For example 2003 budget necessary for the new plan implementation is 5 400 MPLN what is more than 2,5 times higher than foreseen in 2002.

Reorganization of road administration and management

(x) Ambitious plans are accompanied with reorganization at all levels. The Ministry of Infrastructure has been created as a fusion of Ministry of Transport and Maritime Economy, Ministry of Telecommunication and Ministry of Regional Development and Buildings. In March 2002, the General Directorate of Public Roads (GDDP) has been merged with the Agency for Motorway Construction and Operation (ABiEA) into one institution – the General Directorate of National Roads and Motorways (GDDKiA) with the role limited to the management of national roads.

(xi) The ongoing road sector reorganization started off under time pressure, before evaluating of new concepts of financing motorway and expressway development program. The number of regular posts in GDDKiA has been reduced and many experienced employees of GDDP and ABiEA left. Earnings of civil servants are still not satisfactory and much lower than in private sector. This may reduce effectiveness of road administration in the period when radical growth of GDDKiA capacity is conditioning appropriate and quick preparation of the increased number of investment projects. There is some danger that reorganization may slow down implementation of motorway development program instead of accelerating it. Increasing attractiveness of work (mainly by market based salaries) in GDDKiA is one of urgent tasks. Otherwise it won't be possible to maintain and employ staff with qualifications needed.

(xii) In the authors’ opinion the present system of national road management is generally sound. However, dividing remaining roads into 3 categories have led to network fragmentation and disintegration. Co-operation between local governments of different

2 This does not include the A2 section constructed by the concessionaire.



level is rare and arranged on case to case basis. Consequently, there are needs for further improvements of the system. It is recommended that: (1) assignment of roads to national road category is reconsidered; taking into consideration lessons learnt in the last years it seems that the national road network length might be increased from the present 18 thousand km to approx. 25 thousand km; (2) liquidation of voivodship road category is considered as a desirable simplification of road sector management; these roads would be divided into national and powiat categories; (3) cooperation of regional and local governments in management of lower classes of roads is encouraged and promoted by the central government; in particular, ways of coordinated road management in metropolitan areas (agglomerations) have to be sought for.

Financing of the road sector

(xiii) Limited financial resources are the main problem in public roads maintenance and development. Annual budgeting and lack of long-term financing plans hinders efficient work programming and execution. The government intends to improve the situation through innovative ways of fund accumulation and use. Expanding the vignette system (to include all road user categories) and creation of an off-budget fund or a joint-stock company are two main moves3.

(xiv) Introducing vignettes, which will have to be bought by all users of “premium” roads would possibly require abandoning cash tolls on A4 and A2 motorways4 and applying shadow toll system. This requires difficult re-negotiating of two concession agreements (A2 and A4 motorways) 5 and reconsidering agreement concerning A1 motorway (not finalized yet). It is almost certain that revenues from the vignette system will be considerably lower than expected at the beginning. As it was shown in the PriceWaterhouseCoopers report, similar financial effect could be achieved increasing fuel excise tax by 0.1 PLN per liter. This is not significant taking into account fuel price fluctuation observed in last years. It is, therefore recommended that the increase of excise tax be considered as an option to the vignette system. It would also be budget neutral but increasing fuel excise tax is more use related measure.

(xv) Both options (vignette and excise tax increase) should be treated as temporary solution having in mind perspective of introducing electronic toll collection. In fact, this perspective makes continuation of building motorways with toll collecting gates obviously not viable. On the other hand redesign of junctions and repeating land acquisition is needed for sections where preparatory work has been completed. In many cases it will reduce the construction costs but the process of project preparation will be lengthened. In conclusion, it is recommended that the final decision concerning vignettes is postponed till the results of negotiations with concessionaires are known and resulting cost of shadow tolls estimated. In addition, issue of serving plots and areas with no alternative access is a very

3 After completion of the report, the Government decided to resign from a Fund option and create the National Road Authority - a joint stock company. 4 Taking into account UE regulations, it is very unlikely that double charging will be accepted in case of Polish motorways. 5 According to the act on the construction and operation of national roads presented to the Parliament this problem is to be solved through maintaining the present toll collection system on sections of the A2 and A4 motorways and allowing using of these sections without vignettes.



difficult problem and has to be carefully analyzed6. The same concerns problem of lack of route choice when premium road section has no alternative. This will bring about protests and legal claims and requires further analysis and taking into account in amending the law.

(xvi) In addition it is recommended to consider raising a share of the revenue from the excise duty on fuels allocated to roads (other than gmina) above present 30%, to ensure funds for proper maintenance and development of the whole public road network. While this would not be a budget neutral step, it has to be stressed again that in time of introducing fuel levy it was assumed (and stipulated in legislation) that at least 30% of revenues would be allocated to national, voivodship and powiat roads. As it was stated in point (iv) only in the years 1999 and 2000 more than 30% minimum (31.5% and, respectively, 30.6%) was allocated to roads of these categories.

(xvii) The government is considering road administration reform. One of the options is creation of the National Fund for Roads and Motorways7. The role of the Fund would be limited to financing and executing of investment projects selected and shaped by the GDDKiA. The Fund would be also responsible for accumulation of financial resources (including revenues from vignettes) and - what is not clearly stated - for operating of “paid roads”. It means that the role of the Fund would be limited to facilitating implementation of governmental plan to speed up premium road development program. In contrary to, for example the Latvian Road Fund, it will not assist in solving no less urgent problems of roads of other categories.

(xviii) In the Fund option it is envisaged that GDDKiA would be responsible for the planning and programming (selection of projects) as well as investment preparation (preliminary design, land acquisition and obtaining construction permits). Preparatory works are the most difficult and time consuming. Yet, GDDKiA would be responsible for the success of the whole road investment program. All revenues from the expanded vignette system would go to the Fund immediately after it starts operating, what would happen in the beginning of the year 2003. However, there is not enough investments ready to be taken by the Fund and, at the same time, the GDDKiA would be cut of revenues from truck vignettes. This would affect already started projects (due to reduction of GDDKiA budget), unless some of them are shifted to the new Fund. If not, these projects would have to be stopped or slowed down and the motorway construction program, instead of being accelerated would be delayed.

(xix) Taking the above points into account, reconsidering of the Fund concept is recommended in the following direction: (1) reducing the GDDKiA responsibility for project preparation: the Fund should be responsible for the whole investment process (turnkey projects including design and obtaining building permit); (2) all the ongoing investments should be reviewed to allow the Fund to take over the duties in those cases which are related to its scope of activity; (3) in case that no enough investments will be prepared for the Fund for the year 2003, a temporary (one year) share of revenues from the vignette system between the GDDKiA and the Fund should be considered; a careful plan of

6 This problem will be partially solved because vignettes will not be required for the use of "premium roads" within the border of the commune (gmina) where the vehicle has been registered. The case of the vehicle registered in the commune of permanent residence and used in other commune where the owner is temporarily living/working/learning is still to be resolved. 7 As it was mentioned in footnote 3, this option has been abandoned by the Government. In present situation it makes the opinions expressed in points xvii-xix less valid.



which projects are to be transferred to the Fund should be prepared to avoid slowing the overall program.

(xx) Other options include commercialization of GDDKiA8. The main benefit of that would be classifying debt drawn by the company as off-budgetary debt. Another important benefit would be a possibility of market based salaries to the company staff which could allow employing highly skilled specialists. However, there are some threads related to that idea like:

• considerable increase of the scope of the Ministry of Infrastructure duties, requiring the significant growth of its staff potential both in terms of quantity and qualifications,

• exclusion of administrative decisions from road administration, • unclear responsibility for road planning, investment selection, priorities, etc., • bias towards investment in setting priorities (maintenance could suffer).

(xxi) Whatever options is chosen, the selected one should be extremely well prepared. The experience of the last years has shown that even the best ideas can be discredited if reforms are not well prepared. It happened with 4 basic reforms in Poland: social security, health, education and administrative system. In principle, they were sensible, but implementation was poor and the whole concept has been considered by general public as ineffective. With these lessons in view, it is strongly recommended that final decision about reshaping of GDDKiA is made only after preparing drafts of all legal acts. Implementation should be scheduled in such a way that almost everything is decided before the "zero hour". This includes all legal acts (both at the parliament and the ministry levels), internal structure of the new entity, decision on personnel, location of offices etc.

Planning, programming, design and execution of road projects

(xxii) Inefficient planning, programming, design and execution of road projects often leads to wastage of resources. Selection of projects is rarely based on the results of technical and economic appraisals. Only a limited number of projects have the EIRR calculated. Alternatives are seldom considered. Some projects are over-scaled, not well prepared and mismanaged in the execution phase. At the same time, present legal framework is full of weaknesses and slows down the process of project preparation and sometimes increases the costs of the project more than it is justified. Governmental plans to amend several legal acts and regulations should be supported and implemented as soon as possible. It is recommended that the planning process of road investment is modified. Multi-year plans should take into account financial constraints. Project selection has to be based on their economic efficiency. Full range of options should be evaluated including comparison of new investments vs. improving existing infrastructure. The GDDKiA instruction on project preparation should be reviewed to adjust the procedures to international standards (introducing stages of pre-feasibility and feasibility studies with obligatory economic analysis before the final design). There is also a need to review and modify approach to traffic forecasting which constitutes a basis for economic analysis.

(xxiii) At present, designing of all road categories is consistent with standards of such EU countries as France, Germany or the Netherlands. This is specified by legal provisions, 8 This option has finally been chosen.



pursuant to Regulation of the Minister of Transport and Maritime Economy of 2 March 1999 on the technical conditions to be fulfilled by public roads and their location. In particular, designing of road pavements (in each road category) takes into account modern heavy vehicle axle loads.

(xxiv) Securing road network against heavy goods vehicles should be done through: setting up an accession transition period (as long as possible) with regard to over-weight vehicles; intensification of the traffic inspection of over-weight vehicles; execution of pavement strengthening program.

(xxv) Poor condition of roads in confrontation with growing traffic and share of heavy vehicles justifies giving priority to maintenance, rehabilitation and modernization of roads and bridges. However, at all governmental levels there is tendency to plan construction of new roads with some bias towards investing in roads of international importance. It is recommended to keep the balance in allocating resources between investing in new infrastructure and maintenance, upgrading and operating existing facilities. In addition to looking at the international context of a road project, it is necessary to be sure that the project is economically viable and fits into national and regional development strategies.

(xxvi) As regards road maintenance of lower categories (voivodship, powiat, gmina), standards are not specified by legal acts. However, there are guidelines and recommendations formulated by the former General Directorate of Public Roads which are used in practice. This depends on policy of local government and capacity of road administration.

Traffic management and safety; law enforcement

(xxvii) Imbalance in expenditures concerns also traffic management and safety. Backlog in traffic control systems can be reduced at the cost which is very low in comparison to the cost of heavy investment projects. Concentration of responsibilities for transport and communication in one ministry (Ministry of Infrastructure) gives a great chance to promote application of Intelligent Transport Systems (ITS) methods, measures and techniques in the road sector. The scope of traffic management (as set up in formal documents) has to be reviewed and expanded to include dynamic traffic monitoring and management. In the development of motorways and expressways advanced systems of traffic management should be installed in the first phase of construction. Development of advanced traffic management systems in cities should be promoted and stimulated as well.

(xxviii)Very low level of traffic safety (one of the highest accident rates in EU accession countries) caused that in recent years central and local governments started giving higher priority to safety programs. The present efforts of the central and local governments are still insufficient. There is still lack of understanding that allocating resources to traffic safety belongs to the most efficient and effective ways of spending public resources, also in economic sense. The present involvement of the central government in traffic safety monitoring and improvement should be continued with special attention placed on assisting local governments. It is essential that at all levels equal weight is assigned to all four categories of methods of traffic safety improvement: engineering, enforcement,



education and emergency. The special role can be played by the World Bank through proper shaping present and future of the Bank road projects (traffic safety component).

(xxix) At present, not enough attention is directed to law enforcement on the roads. The problem concerns, first of all: speed control, vehicle condition, overweight vehicles and vignette system control. The experience of the first 4 months of the heavy vehicles vignette system functioning shows that large number of road users do not buy vignettes. Situation may change with the activation of Road Transport Inspection (ITD) – planned for late 20029. The importance of effective law enforcement increases together with establishment of new road fund, which budget will be based on the vignette revenues.

The role of the government

(xxx) Most of public roads are under jurisdiction of voivodship, powiat and gmina governments. There is an urgent need to strengthen capacity of local governments to manage public roads under their jurisdiction. At present the assistance of the central government is small. This should be changed. It is recommended that, in addition to financial support, the central government provides technical assistance and guidance to local governments of all levels through legislative initiatives, policy guidance, issuing instructions and manuals (including making obligatory preparation of feasibility studies with calculation of economic efficiency), promotion of innovative solutions, financing of research and development oriented to the needs of roads of lower categories, dissemination of knowledge, training etc. Particular role is to be played by the Department of Public Roads in the Ministry of Infrastructure, which should be strengthened. Better co-operation of different road authorities should also be promoted and stimulated. The GDDKiA staff should also be used to provide technical assistance to units managing roads under local governments jurisdiction.

(xxxi) Human resources at all levels of road administration (including GDDKiA) are not sufficient to efficiently manage roads under their jurisdiction. Continuous education of personnel to prepare it to new tasks and increase effectiveness is another important role of the central and local governments.

(xxxii) Low quality of data on roads, traffic, vehicles etc. reduces effectiveness of planning and programming and day-to-day management of roads. First of all this concerns roads administered by local governments. It is necessary that higher priority is assigned to data collection at all levels. The role of the central government is to promote development of road, vehicles and traffic inventory systems, as well as maintenance systems (such as SUN/SOSN), at all levels of road management and assist in this development through providing guidance, advise and training.

9 As planned, ITD started its operation in October 2002.


Findings and Recommendations B/1

1 STUDY FINDINGS 1.1 ROADS AND TRAFFIC - PRESENT STATE Road sector organization The road sector in Poland has been reorganized several times during the last decade. Until late 1980's, the road system was managed in a highly centralized way. National and voivodship roads were administrated by the General Directorate of Public Roads (through 17 Regional Directorates of Public Roads). National roads were financed from the central budget and voivodship (province) roads by the voivod offices, which were also a part of the state government. Only gmina (commune) roads and roads in cities were financed from local budgets.

At the beginning of transition, the process of separating management from maintenance/ construction started. It was the beginning of commercialization and privatization of direct labor units and publicly owned companies. Creation of new enterprises dealing with transport infrastructure design, consulting engineering, quality control, material supply, construction and maintenance was enhanced. Many of them were Small and Medium Size Enterprises (SME-s).

In 1999, due to state administration reform, The road administration structure has been adjusted to the new 3-tier territorial administrative layout: voivodship (province), powiat (county) and gmina (commune). In total, there are 16 voivodships, 308 powiats and 2 489 gminas (of them 65 cities of powiat status). Metropolitan areas are formed of independent cities (of powiat status) and gminas and there is no formal administrative arrangement for their governing.

The new reorganization is going on and is related to central government reorganization, which started in October 2001, after the last election. The Ministry of Infrastructure has been created as a fusion of Ministry of Transport and Maritime Economy, Ministry of Telecommunication and Ministry of Regional Development and Buildings. Furthermore, in March 2002 the General Directorate of Public Roads (GDDP) has been merged with the Agency for Motorway Construction and Operation (ABiEA) into one institution – the General Directorate of National Roads and Motorways (GDDKiA).

The scale of reorganizations done in the past, as well as the recent one, is significant and greatly influences the road sector. The results are mixed, with several good and bad consequences.

The 1999 reform has made the road sector management and financing more clear and generally could be regarded as successful. However, it also caused some difficulties in efficient management of the public road system as a whole.

The national road network has been reduced to the most important international and national road corridors. This resulted in lower national road density. Dividing the remaining roads into 3 categories (instead of earlier 2) led to partitioning of networks. All this increased road administration costs and reduced work efficiency (higher maintenance costs because of longer distances for service vehicles, vehicle empty courses, not efficient winter maintenance, etc). Also, it complicated organizing roadwork’s requiring detours (a detour using roads of other category requires agreements with appropriate road authorities and sometimes involves high cost compensations).


B/2 Findings and Recommendations

The problem of road network dispersion was not solved through introduction of co-operation in maintaining roads administered by different entities. This appeared to be difficult, not only because of administrative and legal issues, but also because of lack of willingness to co-operate.

Finally, two different opinions identified within this study can be reported: there are too many levels of road management and the road classification (assignment to different categories) is inappropriate and should be corrected.

Road network The total length of public road network in Poland is approx. 371 thousand km, including 67% of hard pavement roads. Almost 84% of roads are non-urban. The total number of bridge structures exceeds 31 thousand (total length approx. 639 km).

As it was mentioned earlier, on 1 January 1999 the organizational structure of the public road network has been adjusted to a new 3-tier territorial structure of the country. The following categories of public roads have been introduced: national roads (18,1 thousand ), voivodship roads (28,3 thousand km), powiat roads (128,0 thousand km) and gmina roads (196,3thousand km). National roads are a property of the State Treasury whereas voivodship, powiat and gmina roads are a property of local governments of a given level

92% of national roads (16 597 of 18 033 km) is under GDDKiA administration. The rest (1 436 km of roads) is under municipal administration (cities at powiat status). 65% of the network is of “Main road” (G) category, with single carriageway 6-7 m width, and without paved shoulders. 32% of the network are “Trunk roads” with higher roadway standard1 (usually with carriageway 7m wide and paved shoulders). The length of motorways and expressways (some of them with one carriageway) is significantly low - 3%.

Total replacement value of the national road network amounts to 74 568 MPLN (20 713 MEUR). This constitutes 10,9% of Gross Domestic Product.

Vehicles and their mobility In Poland, as in other transitional economies, strong tendency to own and use private cars is observed, in spite of a relatively low income level. Consequently, the number of private automobiles is rapidly increasing and rates of car ownership per unit of GDP per capita is much higher than in more developed countries. However, sharp reduction of car purchasing observed in last two years (drop from 640 thousand in 1999 to 327 thousand in 2001) give a good reason to state that the period of "irrational" consumption pattern has come to the end.

In addition, closer look at statistical data lead to the conclusion that the real number of vehicles in use is considerably lower than the one shown in official statistics (approximately 16% lower in case of cars and 25-27% in case of goods vehicles and buses). It means that in all predictions concerning, for example, likely revenues from vignettes, the number of vehicles in use should be estimated as considerably lower than the numbers derived from official statistics.

1 The length of dual carriageway sections (under GDDKiA supervision) is equal to 1 286 km.



Data on the use of vehicles (annual mileage) are even less variable. For passenger vehicles 11 thousand kilometers per year (for vehicles really in use) seems to be a good estimate, what is considerably less than in EU countries.

Traffic volumes The average traffic volume on national roads is at the level of 7 000 AADT2. The level of traffic depends on functional significance of the road. Highest traffic is observed on international roads (average approx. 11 450 AADT), lowest on other national roads (average approx. 5 110 AADT), voivodship roads (average approx. 2 360 AADT), and powiat roads (average approx. 1 000 AADT).

On national roads, traffic up to 10 000 AADT dominates (on almost 81% of sections). The share of sections with traffic higher than 10 000 AADT is rather small - almost 8%. On international roads the numbers differ significantly. On more than 50% of sections traffic is higher than 10 000 AADT (on almost 10% is higher than 20 000 AADT). As it concerns voivodship roads, on almost 85% of the network traffic volumes are lower than 4 000 AADT, and only on 1% of the network (approx. 250 km) traffic volumes are higher than 10 000 AADT. The highest traffic is observed near large agglomerations or within the cities.

Significant differences can be observed comparing traffic volumes in different country regions. The highest average traffic is observed in Silesia region, high in Krakow, Lodz, Poznan and Warsaw regions. The lowest traffic volumes are observed in the east and north-east regions such as Podlasie, Warmia and Mazury.

As it concerns road corridors the highest average traffic is observed in A1 corridor (16 180 AADT), high traffic (approx. 12 000 AADT) is observed in A2, A4 and S7 corridors. However, along corridors traffic volumes vary with the highest volumes observed in densely populated areas.

Structure of traffic Structure of traffic (by vehicle category) depends on functional category of road. Supremacy of cars is visible (more than 70% of vehicles on national roads and 79% on voivodship roads). On international roads a share of vans and trucks in total traffic is a little higher (international: almost 30%, other national roads: almost 25%, voivodship roads: almost 17%).

Among goods vehicles, the average traffic composition on national roads is following: vans (41%), trucks (22%), heavy trucks (36%).

Taking into consideration traffic volumes and vehicle structure it can be said that at majority of national road sections (80% of the network length) traffic is medium heavy (from the pavement construction point of view category 3 and 4 in 6 level scale). Heavy traffic (levels 5 and 6) is observed on approx. 12% of the network.

2 AADT – Annual Average Daily Traffic



Traffic growth Within the period 1995-2000 traffic on the national road network increased by 31%. In the same period GDP (in constant prices) have increased by 28.4% (elasticity factor to GDP equal to 0,92). The dynamics of the increase was lower than between 1990 and 1995, and has been reduced gradually. Between 1995-1998 yearly traffic increase was at the level of 7%, while in the last years (1999, 2000) the increase was at the level of 2%. As it concerns voivodship roads the increase in the period of 1995 – 2000 was similar to national roads - 32%. The highest was observed on voivodship roads in: Mazowsze (52%) and Wielkopolska (37%).

On national roads, the highest traffic increase was observed among heavy vehicles category (44% on an average) but only 17% increase for normal trucks, and up to 68% as it concerns heavy trucks. The increase was significant especially in comparison to the period 1990-1995 (with 5% increase). This variation can be explained by the transformation of the road transport sector. To increase productivity, operators replaced smaller trucks with heavy ones.

On voivodship roads the highest traffic increase was observed for cars (41% on an average) and vans (21%). In contrary to national roads, an increase of heavy vehicles traffic practically was not observed (only 2% increase).

From the most recent analysis of the traffic data in selected points of national road network it can be indicated that, there was no traffic increase between the years 2000 and 2001!

Road design standards At present, designing of all road categories is consistent with standards of such EU countries as France, Germany or the Netherlands. This is specified by legal provisions, pursuant to Regulation of the Minister of Transport and Maritime Economy of 2 March 1999 on the technical conditions to be fulfilled by public roads and their location. In particular, designing of road pavements (in each road category) takes into account modern heavy vehicle axle loads. Construction and conditions of the road pavement On the public road network, sections with hard pavement make up 67% of the network length. The remaining 33% are unpaved (soil) roads. In the past, road pavements were designed and built according to the standards allowing permissible axle load not higher than 60, 80 and 100 kN (6, 8 and 10t/axle), depending on the category. Consequently, majority of the road network is not adjusted to heavy traffic.

The technical condition of national non-urban roads with bituminous pavement is monitored with the so-called System for Assessment of Road Pavement Condition (SOSN). Under this system, condition of road pavement is assessed through the following parameters: fracturing, rutting, skid resistance, longitudinal roughness, and surface condition. The overall estimation of road condition leads to the conclusion that only 28,5% of national roads are in a good condition (4 620 km). It means that over 70% of roads require intervention among which almost a half requires immediate actions and more than a half requires actions to be taken not later than within 3-4 years.

Condition of national roads is different in different regions of Poland. The worst situation is in two regions: swietokrzyskie and malopolskie, where a share of road length in poor



condition is about twice higher than in the rest of the country (in comparison to the administrated road network).

Due to maintenance effort, the process of road deterioration within last 4 years slowed down. However, in relation to grading and strengthening, the needs are increasing systematically (increase from 18,5% in 1998 do to 26,5% of the network in 2001). The worst situation is observed in relation to pavement rutting. The identified number of roads classified as bad or unsatisfactory increases every year. Furthermore, on almost 16% of the national road network ruts are deeper than 30 mm.

As regards road of lower categories (voivodship, powiat, gmina), maintenance standards are not specified by legal acts. However, there are guidelines and recommendations formulated by the former General Directorate of Public Roads which are used in practice. This depends on policy of local government and capacity of road administration.

Technical condition of these roads is not monitored in a systematic way and in most cases is limited to visual inspection. What is worse, in 1999 monitoring of voivodship roads was excluded from the SOSN system. Only limited number of road management units make an assessment of pavement condition using advanced methods. The quality of assessment depends on the awareness of particular organization of the necessity to have a good pavement condition database which would serve as a basis for works programming.

Particularly bad situation is observed in cities, where intensive traffic causes accelerated deterioration of pavements and the scope of maintenance works is inadequate to the needs. To cope with this problem, advanced pavement management systems are developed in some cities.

Also the data concerning bridge structures (from 2000) indicates a continuing worsening of their technical condition. On national and voivodship roads there are almost 1,9 thousand bridge structures in critical condition. There are also structures that can end up in construction collapse. They are closed to traffic or limits on single-axle load are introduced.

The reasons for the poor road conditions are the same since many years. The most important are:

increasing traffic volumes, especially of heavy trucks; •

•

•

•

pavements not adjusted to the increased truck loads;

inappropriate (to allow reduction of the backlog) budgets allocated for road maintenance;

lack of effective enforcement system to eliminate overloaded trucks.

Influence of these factors on deterioration of road pavements and bridges is multiplied by their interconnection.

Impact of heavy goods vehicles Modal shift from railways to road transport causes a rapid increase of heavy goods vehicle traffic on the national road network. This was observed in the whole transition period, but especially in the last years (1995-2000). The highest increase happened among the heaviest trucks, which are often overloaded (over single-axle load of 115 kN). These trucks have the greatest impact on traffic conditions and pavement deterioration (only 3% of national roads have satisfactory carrying capacity).



Since 1999, there is a legal basis for demanding that pavement construction is adjusted to heavy loads. Due to legal provisions, designing of public road pavements (of each category) must take into account traffic forecasts including share of heavy vehicle (with single axle loads of 115 kN).

To limit the impact to the pavement, at present, movement of each over-weight vehicle requires permission with route specification and is charged. There are several bodies responsible for the decisions concerning movement permissions. The responsibility depends on the origin and destination points and the route. The level of charges depends on the scale of weight excess and route length.

Movement of over-weight vehicles is a subject to several restrictions. The main ones concern periodical limitations during holidays and days with high temperature.

In case that over-weight vehicle has not the permit, the carrier suffer a financial penalty, and vehicle can be arrested until the relevant permit is provided. However this measure is not consistently utilized.

Traffic management and safety Generally, low priority is given to traffic management which potentials are not fully used. Complicated division of responsibilities and narrow scope of traffic management in legal acts and regulations cause that its methods and measures are not adequately used. Their use is limited to simple designing of signs and marking, traffic control at intersections and temporary traffic arrangements. It does not include dynamic traffic monitoring and management and advanced information systems.

Very low level of traffic safety (ones of the highest accident rates in Europe) caused that in recent years central and local governments started giving higher and higher priority to safety. Following the central government efforts (GAMBIT 1995 and 2000 projects) in growing number of voivodships and larger cities local comprehensive programs for traffic safety improvement are prepared and adopted. However, there is still lack of understanding that allocating resources to all 4 types of activities aimed at improving traffic safety (engineering, education, enforcement, emergency) belongs to the most efficient and effective ways of spending public resources, also in economic sense.

1.2 ONGOING INVESTMENTS Ongoing road investments The are 33 main ongoing investments identified on national road network. They encompass: motorways construction, expressways improvement and construction, pavement/bridges strengthening, by-passes construction and border crossings improvements. Most of ongoing investments is co-financed from the State budget resources together with loans or grants from international financial institutions (WB, EIB) and UE (Phare and ISPA programs). However, some projects are financed only from Poland’s state budget.



The total budget allocated for major ongoing investments (some of them scheduled till the year 2005) is approx. 2 038 MEUR3 including:

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

approx. 1 097 MEUR assigned for motorway network (171,5 km),

approx. 385 MEUR assigned for expressway roads (77 km),

approx. 556 MEUR assigned for other national roads (232,6 km).

Motorways construction program Toll motorway construction program in Poland is being implemented since 1994, but high quality road network growth is very slow. At present, the total length of motorways is approx. 394 km, of which 237 km (60%) have been constructed before the year 1990. Motorway program was very ambitious (approx. 1 940km) but organizational, legal and financial problems to be solved were enormous.

The most important causes of slow implementation of the program seem to be the following:

Too optimistic assumptions at the beginning of the program, in particular as it concerns future traffic volumes, what resulted in overestimation of potential revenues and underestimation of private investors risk. These assumptions were quickly verified by private banks, not interested in the program financing without clear State budget guarantees.

To small experience of road administration personnel as well as on the side of private investors in preparing and conducting of concession process.

Not flexible (at the beginning of the program) involvement of the State in the financial construction strategy. It was assumed that the input of the State would be limited to preparatory works and land acquisition. It took time before it was understood that the State input (or guarantees) should be differentiated, taking into account future traffic and revenue forecasts and other conditions.

Too high requirements concerning procedures and preparatory works as well as technical parameters of the motorway, involving high construction costs. In particular, legal framework slows down the whole project preparation and execution process.

Private investments in motorways The main assumption was that motorways would be constructed by private investors (concessionaires) on the basis of issued concessions and with minimum financial involvement of the State budget. Furthermore, it was assumed that revenues from the road users (depending on traffic level, users’ willingness to pay and toll levels) will cover all costs: construction, operation, repairs, financial (interests) and other. Implementation of the program led to the selection of 3 private concessionaires (two of them acting in the field of motorway construction and operation, one acting in a limited way only as a motorway operator). At present the situation of consortia, as well as progress in concessions realization is diverse in each case.

3 This does not include the section Nowy Tomysl-Konin constructed by the concessionaire investor



The concession for the motorway A4 section Katowice-Krakow (61 km) was issued to the Stalexport. Concessionaire has improved and adjusted motorway to tolling system, finalizing all the works at the beginning of 2000. The tolling system started its operation in April 2000. The present tolls (agreed between the Concessionaire and ABiEA) are 10 PLN/2,8 EUR for cars and 22 PLN/6,1 EUR4 for heavy goods vehicles. Incomes from the tolls are assigned to financing of construction costs, operational costs, motorway repairs, servicing of EBRD loan, servicing Concessionaire obligations to the institutions financing the investment. At present the Concessionaire is obliged to continue investments in the corridor of the motorway within so called Phase II, which was to include among others: maintenance of infrastructure, environment protection, passenger service areas, and bridges repairs. According to the planed schedule, Concessionaire has to present structure of financing (there is a delay and the date is prolonged) and then to carry out Phase II works between the third quarter of the year 2003 and the end of year 2010. The foreseen costs are at the level of 102 MEUR.

The concession for the motorway A2, section Swiecko-Nowy Tomysl (255 km) was issued to Autostrada Wielkopolska S.A. The concession period is 40 years. Investment is divided into two phases. Phase I concerns period of 2001-2005 and construction of 150 km section Nowy Tomysl-Konin was started. Phase II concerns period of 2005-2009 and construction of section Swiecko (German border)-Nowy Tomysl (length 104,9 km). The construction cost (designing + construction) of the Phase I (excluding costs of Poznan bypass construction) is estimated to 638 MEUR, while the total cost including cost of financing is estimated to 875 MEUR. This does not include costs of preparatory works (at the preliminary State involvement) such as land acquisition, preliminary design, archaeological works, etc. Relevant detail calculations are not available, but according to raw estimations, additional cost of 10-15% of the total investment cost can be assumed. It is estimated that the construction costs of the Phase II will be 775 MEURO.

The concession for the A1motorway, section Gdansk-Torun (152 km) was issued to GTC S.A. The period of the concession is 35 years. The concessionaire is obliged to present “financial closure” for the first phase of the investment (section Gdansk-Nowe Marzy, 90 km long) till the end of the third quarter 2002. According to the preliminary estimation, construction cost will be 600 million EURO. Taking into consideration the present state, construction of the motorway can be started not earlier than in the second half of the year 2003.

Another concession for the operation of the section of A4 motorway Gliwice-Wroclaw was in the process of preparation. The concessionaire was expected to adjust to toll road standards and to operate the motorway built by the former GDDP using public funds (and loans). The 1st stage of the tender was completed in 2001. Planned changes of road financing system caused that the process has been practically stopped.

4 approx 6 cents per km as it concerns cars and approx. 10 cents as is concerns heavy vehicles.



1.3 ROAD FINANCING Channeling road revenues Main revenues from the road sector are:

• excise duty on fuels – 12 577 MPLN in 2000;

• annual heavy goods vehicle tax – 387 MPLN in 2000;

• licenses and permits for international transport – 270 MPLN in 2000;

• excise and customs duty on vehicles.

Relatively small portion of revenues from the road sector is allocated to roads – this mainly concerns a share of excise duty on fuels. According to law, at least 30% of this revenue should be allocated to national, voivodship and powiat roads and roads within cities of powiat status (40% of this must be spent on national roads managed by GDDKiA). In time when the law was adopted it was envisaged that the share of revenues allocated to roads would be increased every year. In practice, only in years 1999 and 2000 this share was higher than 30% (31.5% and 30.6%). Then, because of the budgetary problems, instead of increasing, it was reduced back to minimum, i.e. 30%.

Another 10,5% of the total excise duty income is allocated to gminas but not earmarked for roads.

Resources allocated to local governments can be spent on other purposes, not connected to roads. The exact percent of revenues from excise duty on fuels spent on roads is hard to be estimated because of unknown portion of the revenues spent on roads by gminas. Powiats spend on roads some 80% of the subvention and voivodships over 100%.

It is a good practice that the road sector revenues are related – through the excise duty on fuels – to traffic. The more roads are used, the more money is allocated to roads. However, the system has some weaknesses and is questioned by road administration and groups of territorial entities. The weaknesses mainly concern:

• method of allocating the revenues to local levels; whereas the first level of money division – to GDDP/local government is clear, further division to various types of local administration is complicated which makes the whole system unclear;

• algorithm of the funds division to particular voivodships, powiats and cities of powiat status; it is based mainly on the road infrastructure replacement value and traffic, which in principle is a good idea, but it requires reliable input data; current experience shows that local governments try to get more money showing higher traffic volumes than the true ones; there is no mechanism of verifying the reported values which makes the procedure very weak;

• revenue from excise duty allocated to local governments is not earmarked for roads and can be spent on other purposes; local governments tend to spend more and more money on roads but this is their political decision rather than a result of the system; the only mechanism of forcing local governments to spend the money from excise duty on roads is allocation of the 10% reserve, money from which could be given provided that last year at least 80% of the sum received under this title was spent on roads.



As it regards other road sector revenues, apart from revenue from tolls on A4 motorway, only revenue from international transport and vignette revenue are allocated to GDDKiA special fund, to be spent on national roads. Revenue from truck annual tax, which comes in gmina budgets, can be spent on non-road related purposes. It is the Consultants’ opinion that money from this source should particularly be spent on roads because trucks cause the most of road damages.

Regarding the A4 concession agreement, revenue from tolls on A4 motorway should be spent, among others, on the improvement of the section. This will be done within planned Phase II of the investment, which is being negotiated but not agreed yet.

Road expenditures The data concerning GDDP/GDDKiA road expenditures are not fully reliable because within last 12 years the statistics are not complete and:

different cost elements were classified into different budget items, •

• road administration was reorganized more than once what resulted in changes in statistics, for example because of changes in the networks administrated.

At present, expenditures are divided into current expenditures (main repairs, maintenance and administrative costs) and real estate expenditures (investments). In the past a great part of investments were considered as modernization (improvements) and belonged to current expenditures. The substantial increase of expenditures in the last years is due to bank loans and grants used for main investment financing.

Comparing road GDDP budget within last 12 years it is evident that the real budget (in constant 2001 prices) was relatively high in 1990 (approx. 3 600 MPLN) and was decreasing up to the year 1994. Then an increase of expenditures took place in 1994 and lasted to 1998. In the period 1999-2001 expenditures were lower, at the level of 3 000 MPLN, however the length of national road network was significantly decreased.

As it concerns investment expenditures, at the beginning of 1990-ties the budget was very low. However, as it was mentioned above, at that time some of investment projects were financed form current expenditures – as modernization. Then investment budget was increasing till 1998 (from 230 to 1 065 MPLN in constant prices). Another decrease (to 835 MPLN) happened in the period 1999-2001, however the length of the national road network was reduced.

As it concerns repairs, renewal and modernization expenditures, after a decrease in the period 1991-1997 (up to 85 MPLN), an increase of expenditures took place in the year 1998 (500 MPLN) and then in 2000 (1 000 MPLN). However this data are the most unreliable due to investments which in many cases were classified or not as repairs or renewals.

As it concerns current maintenance expenditures, they were decreasing between 1990-1995. Since 1996 an increase was observed up to the year 1999 (1130 MPLN). During last two years the level of expenditures was lower (820-850 MPLN) than in 1998 and 1999.

The level of administration expenditures in the period 1992-1998 was very high (350 – 422 MPLN in 2001 prices) in comparison to current maintenance expenditures (567 – 850 MPLN in 2001 prices). In last years it decreased to approx. 230 MPLN (10-11% of total annual expenditures). This decrease was mainly a consequence of national road network reduction.



As regards expenditures per 1 km of national road network, a significant increase (more than 2-times) can be observed in the last 3 years (from 68 000 PLN/km in 1998 to 176 000 PLN/km in 2001, in 2001 prices). This increase can be explained by the reduction of the length of national road network. As the result of changes in road categorization, only the most important and carrying heavy traffic roads belong to the national road network and it is clear that they require more costly investments.

Financial means are generally insufficient to eliminate backlogs in maintenance, what does not leave much for modernization and development of networks. Annual budgeting and lack of long-term financing plans unable efficient work programming and execution.

Vignette revenue Starting the 1st January 2002 the vignette system has been introduced but only for trucks above 3,5 tons. The system covers the whole network of national roads. The government policy paper “Infrastructure – a key to development” assumes annual truck vignette revenue of 500 MPLN (140 MEUR) in 2002. Analyzing revenue of first four months, total annual revenue of about 230 million PLN (63 MEUR) can be expected in the whole year. This is much less than the value assumed in the Government’s paper. It should also be noticed, that these are gross revenues. Assuming the system operation costs (which are not known), based on other countries experience, as equal to about 5-8%, it gives net revenue of about 215 million PLN (60 MEUR).

According to unofficial data, about 60% of truck drivers do not buy the vignette. Thus, there would be a potential for the system tightening, provided that strict enforcement is executed. However, in any case the revenues assumed by the Government seem to be unrealistic.

It is the government intention to extend the system to all vehicles, including motorcycles, starting from 20035. At the beginning the expected revenue from the whole system was 2 000 MPLN (555 MEUR) in 2003. PriceWaterhouseCoopers has prepared a study estimating revenues from the vignette system extended to cars and vans (light trucks). The study results show that the following revenues could be expected from the system according to the road network being under vignette system:

•

•

•

•

the whole road network – ca. 1 600 MPLN / 440 MEUR;

national roads – ca. 1100 MPLN / 300 MEUR;

international roads – 1 000 MPLN / 280 MEUR;

dual carriageway roads – 900 MPLN / 250 MEUR.

However, the study assumed truck revenues of 314 million PLN (only January and February data were available at that time), which – as discussed earlier – is too optimistic.

If the system is imposed only on higher standard roads – international or dual carriageway ones (otherwise it could be regarded as a tax), the total gross annual revenue of some 0,8 – 0,9 billion PLN could be expected then. After deducting the system operation cost of some 5% it gives 705 – 850 MPLN (210 – 240 MEUR) of annual net revenue. This is almost three times less than the value assumed in the Government’s paper.

5 Legal basis is to be formed by the act on the construction and operation of national roads which is discussed in the Parliament.



The revenue calculated above is possible to be collected only in case of strict enforcement, which takes into account quite high level of corruption in Poland, would be very difficult. Moreover, the system operating and enforcement cost is expected to be significant.

Financial assistance Potential financial assistance (grants, loans) is still not fully used by local governments. The following reasons are often mentioned: (a) limited capacity of local government to prepare proposals and implement the project (human resources and high costs of consulting); (b) scarce financial resources limiting participation in the project (matching funds); (c) long and complicated procedures and delays in transferring funds; (d) discrepancy between local and donors/IFI's priorities and policies.

Standard loan conditions Polish road sector takes advantage of loans given by three international financial institutions: the European Investment Bank (EIB), the International Bank of Reconstruction and Development (World Bank) and the European Bank of Reconstruction and Development (EBRD). In the borrowers’ opinion, the best conditions of loans are offered by EIB. It concerns mainly interest, grace and repayment period and fees but also flexibility in adjusting loan conditions to particular projects. It is possible that higher attractiveness of EIB loans is mostly because of this flexibility. In contrary to the World Bank, which pays a great attention to project selection (viability), and refuses to assist in implementing projects of lower social and economic value, EIB is more interested in financial aspects of the project such as risk and guarantees. In any case the value of loans taken out by the Polish road sector from EIB is higher than loans taken from other banks. This happens in spite of the fact that the World Bank offers the widest range of project type to be financed.

The borrowers complain about too bureaucratic procedures when applying for a loan. In case of the World Bank all documents have to be sent to the central office in Washington what lengthens the process considerably. A solution for this problem would be setting up Regional (Central Europe) Procurement Office, possibly located in Warsaw. This would reduce time needed for procurement procedures.

Also, a closer co-operation of the institutions would be beneficial. Each of the institutions could finance specific project type it is mostly interested in. This would eliminate a kind of competition among the institutions, resulting in less efficient financing.

1.4 SECTOR APPROACH AND EUROPEAN CONTEXT Planning, programming and project selection At the national level, overall transport policy has never been adopted by the Polish Parliament and all recent attempts (in the period of transition) to form such a policy have ended at level of the Ministry of Transport or the Council of Ministers.

Several medium and long-term road development programs have been prepared during the last decades. Among other, in the period of transition comprehensive studies were carried



out on motorway and expressway network. They served as a basis for the Motorway Development Program formulated in 1993 (toll motorways). This program was amended number of times, because it appeared to be over-optimistic especially as regards readiness of the private sector to finance motorway construction (BOT scheme).

The TINA study was intended as a planning and programming exercise which was to help building long-term road system upgrading and development program. In practice, financing issues have not been treated so deeply as traffic forecasts and drawing a network to be upgraded/developed.

Only some projects are selected taking into account their efficiency (for example, by comparing EIRR), as well as decisions on allocation of funds between road maintenance, rehabilitation and development. As a result, programs of road network development are composed of individual projects rather than forming a consistent program of inter-linked actions and projects.

At lower levels (voivodships. powiats/cities, gminas) situation is even worse. Some local governments formulated their transport policies. This happened first of all in large cities (Krakow, Warsaw, Lodz, Bialystok, Poznan and other). However, as in case of the central government, long-term programs are formulated either only in general terms or not confronted with financial means. Consequently, as a rule, programs are over-optimistic and decisions on implementation of investment projects are made in case-to-case manner without considering costs and benefits.

It is also typical that local governments give higher priority to heavy investment road projects than to highly efficient and effective traffic management projects such as advanced urban traffic management systems (UTMS). In spite of rapidly growing congestion, such systems are planned only in a few cities and their implementation is very slow. This way a chance of area-wide effects is lost.

However, weaknesses of long-term planning and programming are not limited to road and transport sector. It was only recently that, after the last administrative reform, at the voivodship level formulation of development strategy has become obligatory. Such strategies have been elaborated in the last years in all voivodships. Unfortunately, in most of them transport sector was not properly covered and, again, emphasis was usually put on specific, isolated projects and not on the network as a whole.

Road corridors versus road networks With scarce financial resources there is competition between projects aiming at the improvement of roads serving main international and national corridors and projects meeting the most urgent needs of serving the network of human settlements through improving the whole network of national, regional and local roads.

At the general transport policy level, both the European Commission and the Polish government declare commitment to upgrading and the development of the transport infrastructure within defined Pan-European corridors and networks (TINA) to stimulate the development of the TEN concept.

In several cases this focus is justified by the intensity of both international and national traffic. However, there are areas and parts of the networks not belonging to trans-European corridors or the TINA network where the volumes of regional/national traffic may be much higher than in these corridors.



Allocation of large amount of money (through EIB, PHARE/ISPA etc.) to road projects in Pan-European corridors may, to some extent, reduce investments into other national or regional roads in spite of the fact that their importance for the whole network in many cases may be comparable, or even higher than links belonging to the international corridors. Draining resources (matching funds) through "corridor projects" causes that backlog in road maintenance and rehabilitation of secondary networks may be growing. This problem seems difficult to overcome as the road funds made available or generated from the national sources are far below actual needs.

Consequently, it is essential that in addition to looking at the international context of a road project, it is necessary to be sure that the project is economically viable, fits into national and regional development priorities. With this approach, it will often happen that modernization and maintenance activities on secondary roads forming the network are much more justified than investing in international corridors. In this matter the two main conclusions should be pointed:

• the needs of international and long-distance national traffic alone not always justify costly investment in transport infrastructure in international corridors; the most viable projects are those which serve both medium/short (national/regional/local)- and long-distance movements;

• in the situation of limited resources, the necessity for the government to participate in covering costs of main projects of international importance (matching funds) may lead to neglecting other competing construction, upgrading and maintenance projects which, in many instances, may be more economically viable.

Project preparation and execution Resources which were and are available to maintain, develop and operate roads in Poland are limited. National programs and plans assume a radical growth of the financial means from various sources in the nearest future and in longer term. It is expected that assistance from external sources such as EU funds and IFI's loans will represent considerable part of the road budget. These expectations are probably too optimistic. In this situation an efficient use of limited resources is of an extreme importance. Unfortunately, inefficient planning, programming, design and execution of road project have often led to wastage of resources. Instead of ranking projects according to their efficiency, selection of projects is often based on political premises. Examples of unjustified expensive bridge constructions have been recently a subject of strong criticism by professionals.6 Some projects are over-scaled, not well prepared and mismanaged in the execution phase.

Many projects did not go through a standard project preparation process, starting with preliminary and feasibility studies. Alternatives are seldom considered and there is still a tendency to over-scaling and ignoring options of economically viable phasing. High marginal costs of too high standards are seldom taken into consideration. In many cases old practices of ignoring legal requirements and regulations (building law, physical planning law requiring consultation with the public, environmental protection regulations, law on public finances and procurement etc.) continue. While present legal framework is full of weaknesses, attempts to accelerate the process of project preparation often leads to lengthening the process.

6 In Warsaw and Krakow expensive suspension bridges were recently built in places where conventional construction would cost much less. Choices have been based exclusively on esthetic reasons.



EU requirements Despite acceptance by Poland acquis communautaire in the field of “Transport Policy”, 6 areas are still not agreed upon7. Among them one concerns road vehicles moving within the EU, and the maximum permitted weights in international traffic. EU requirement is to eliminate distortions of competition between transport undertakings in the Member States. This means both harmonization of levy systems and establishment of fair mechanisms for charging infrastructure costs to hauliers. In relation to Poland this requirement can be specified in the two points:

•

•

EU requires admission, on a specified part of TINA network, of vehicles with single axis load of 115 kN in international road transport and of three-axle motor vehicle and two-axle semi-trailer carrying 40” ISO containers with the total weight of 44 tons in international combined road transport to and from terminals located on the territory of Poland.

EU requires that tolls and user charges (as it concerns heavy good vehicles) shouldn’t be imposed at the same time for the use of a single road section.

In relation to heavy vehicles (single axle load of 115kN) the problem concerns Polish main road network, which is not adjusted to the increased axle loads and can be damaged by heavy vehicles. Polish government proposes to introduce a transitional period for heavy vehicles – till 31.12.2010. During this period heavy goods vehicles will be admitted to international road sections under requirement of obtaining an authorization of administrative character for transit on unadjusted road sections. The authorization will be issued after paying an additional charge proportional to excess of load admitted on a given road section and to a length of transit on an unadjusted section of road network. The same rules would be applied to all EU operators (including Polish). At the same time Poland would take an obligation that the remaining network of international roads will be upgraded, so the length of sections additionally charged will decrease every year, and furthermore no additional fee for excess of permitted axle load will be charged for transit on those roads after the year 2010.

In relation to tolls and user charges for heavy goods vehicles the problem concerns two systems which are in force in Poland: vignettes for all heavy vehicles (system was started from the 1st of January 2002), and tolls at the existing motorway A4 (section Krakow-Katowice) and planned motorways A1 and A2.

While EU Directive 1999/62 provides basis for some exceptions from the principle of single charging (such as tolls for tunnels and Alp passes), it is very unlikely that double charging will be accepted in case of Polish motorways. Possible ways of solving the problem are described in recommendations. 1.5 NEW PROGRAMS Road investment program EU expects that Poland will adapt main road network (selected corridors) to EU standards as soon as possible. European assistance program is directed to road infrastructure

7 In the meantime, negotiations have been completed.



development and is remitted through several programs, such as: before accession – ISPA, after accession – cohesion and structural funds.

The former Polish Government has announced a program of Polish road network adjustment to the EU standards (including pavement strengthening). The program concerned an expanded road network of approx. 15 000 km and should be treated as feasible only in a very long period. Taking into consideration Poland’s accession negotiations and the necessity for urgent roads strengthening, the new government announced a new plan aiming at concentration of the efforts on selected road corridors, based on TINA network. The new plan has been announced in January 2002 in the document “Infrastructure – a key to development”. The plan has the following main goals:

•

•

•

•

•

•

radical acceleration of new motorways construction (250 km of motorways per year instead of 60 km per year at present; 1 460 km in total),

acceleration of expressway road network improvement and development (60 km of expressways per year instead of 20 km per year at present; 1 635 km in total),

strengthening of other national roads within TINA corridors (500 km of national road improvements per year instead of 200 km at present; 1 412 km in total),

improvement of other national roads,

and is divided into 3 phases: 2002-2005 and 2005-2010 and after 2010.

Road improvement program includes plan of roads strengthening divided into 2 phases:

2002-2005: cost approx. 617 MEUR,

2005-2010: cost approx. 893 MEUR.

Road Administration Reform Following strategic decision about merging former GDDP and ABiEA into GDDKiA and limiting the role of GDDKiA to the management of national roads, the government is considering creation of an off-budget fund. The fund would be responsible for mobilizing the funds required to finance completion of the 1 500 km of motorways and expressways. The full scope of responsibilities of the fund would differ in different options8.

According to one of the last proposals9, the National Fund for Roads and Motorways (NFDiA) - a joint stock company - would be legally empowered to:

• deliver "turnkey" projects of motorways and expressways, hired by the Ministry of Infrastructure (on general contracting basis);

• manage the network of expressways, motorways and potentially other national roads entrusted to NFDiA (outsource maintenance and rehabilitation works);

• deliver concession contracts and make payments to concessionaires under such contracts."

According to a draft act on organization and financing the development of road infrastructure10, the scope of responsibility of the NFDiA would be limited to "paid" roads,

8 This option has been abandoned. It makes the opinions concerning NFDiA expressed in the following paragraphs less important. 9 Tools to Implement the Goals of the Road Infrastructure Development Program. MoI working document. May 2002.



it means roads which can be used by the road user only after paying a charge (toll or vignette). With respect to investment projects, the GDDKiA would be obliged for doing all preparatory works including obtaining location decisions, land acquisition and obtaining building permit.

This solution would leave with the GDDKiA the whole responsibility for:

• with respect to motorways and other roads to be financed by NFDiA:

planning and programming, including selecting projects,

project preparations up to the stage of building permit and land purchasing;

• with respect to the remaining national roads: the whole responsibility, including maintenance.

Week points of this arrangement include:

• the role of the NFDiA supervisory board is limited; it would not have any impact on project selection and their scope;

• time consuming tasks such as preliminary design and land acquisition are left with the GDDKiA which, as a civil service institution would not have capacity to carry out operational tasks efficiently.

In addition, there is a danger that remaining national roads would not be adequately maintained and developed. Priority assigned by the government to the development of motorways and expressways may lead to draining resources which should be allocated to maintaining and rehabilitating of remaining roads.

At the time of study preparation, other options of restructuring GDDKiA, for example in the direction suggested by the World Bank mission11, were mentioned, but concepts were not precise enough13. Comments concerning this option are formulated in recommendations.

1.6 OTHER PROBLEMS Ongoing reorganization of the road sector The ongoing road sector reorganization was started before new concepts of financing ambitious motorway and expressway development program were evaluated from various points of view (financial feasibility, legal aspects, preparation of projects which implementation would be accelerated etc.) and all necessary draft legal documents, programs and organizational structures were ready. The imposed time pressure does not favor correct and careful decisions. Confusion is visible at all levels of road administration. The scope of responsibilities at particular posts is not clear, what makes current activities 10 Wardynski i Wspolnicy. Draft 20 May 2002. 11 Republic of Poland, World Bank Missions: (i) Aide Memoire 17-19 April, 2002; (ii) Aide Memoir May 20-24, 2002 13 Finally, an option of creation of the National Road Authority as a joint stock company has been chosen by the Government.



difficult. There is some danger that reorganization of ABiEA (merged with GDDP) without beforehand prepared new structure may slow down implementation of motorway development program instead of accelerating it.

Road administration personnel Road administration personnel could be seen as one of the most important problems and possible bottlenecks of the road system reorganization. In the process of reorganization the number of regular posts in GDDKiA has been reduced and many experienced employees of GDDP and ABiEA left or have been dismissed without taking care of handing over their responsibilities to others. Taking into consideration the role of the reorganized institution in effective road management as well as in implementation of road investment program, which was announced as a national priority, it is the Consultants’ belief that such a staff replacement should be done gradually, giving time for taking over the responsibilities by others and allowing new people to become acquainted with new duties.

Another related problem concerns earnings of civil servants which are still not satisfactory and much lower than in private sector. This will generate serious problems in a short time because it can be expected that gaining people with adequate qualification to replace the dismissed staff as well as keeping young personnel will not be easy. This may reduce the efficiency of road administration in the period when successful implementation of the motorway development program requires radical growth of capacity of GDDKiA to prepare in the short time the increased number of investment projects.

It has to be stressed that in all governmental plans and discussions, the issue of public roads managed by local governments has rarely been mentioned. While in the Ministry of Infrastructure, the Department of Public Roads has been created, this department is still in an early stage of development and its capacity is very limited. Urgent task of assistance to local government units responsible for public roads requires strengthening of this department, specially as it concerns employed personnel (Department seems to be understaffed now – it consist only of 5 people, whereas the responsibilities are numerous and complex).

Plans to expand the system of vignettes As it was mentioned earlier, in January 2002 the Government introduced charges for heavy goods vehicles and is planning to expand the system to include other categories of vehicles. Taking into account UE regulations, it was assumed that double charging will not be accepted in case of Polish motorways. Therefore at the beginning it was declared that introducing vignettes will be connected with withdrawal from the toll systems - presently used on the section of A4 motorway and on sections of A1 and A2 motorways for which concession agreements have been signed or close to finalizing. This would mean that concession agreements would have to be re-negotiated with private motorway concessionaires. Shadow toll system is one of available solutions of the problem.

It is obvious, that re-negotiating contracts would put the government in unfavorable position and could lead to financial losses14. In addition, abandoning cash tolling has serious consequences on geometric design of junctions and installation. Vignette charging 14 In the act on construction and operation of national roads discussed in the Parliament this problem would be solved through leaving the present toll collection system on sections of the A2 and A4 motorways and allowing using these sections without vignettes.



systems do not require junctions with gates (toll plaza), which are presently designed for all motorways. Changing the type of junctions will require redesigning of many junctions and repeating the process of approvals and land acquisition. In many cases it could reduce the construction costs but the process of project preparation will be lengthened. Law enforcement At present, not enough attention is directed to law enforcement on the roads. The problem concerns, first of all: speed control, vehicle technical conditions, overweight vehicles and vignette system control.

The road pavements are deteriorated by the overweight vehicles. The government estimations show that every year cost of deterioration exceeds the foreseen revenues from the vignette system. Traffic inspection of overweight vehicles is not efficient and has many defects.

On national roads the inspections were started in 1992. Between 1992 and 1998 the number of recognized overweight vehicles decreased from 15% to 9%. The situation got worse in 1999 due to the verdict of Constitutional Tribunal which acknowledge that system of additional charges for overweight vehicles is inconsistent with The Constitution and with Public Roads Act. This resulted in paralysis of overweight vehicles inspections (in 2000 14,5% of over-weight vehicles).

The situation should be normalized in 2002 due to new legislation, allowing more effective inspection and better protection against opposition of operators. It is estimated that at present a share of over-weight vehicles is at the level of 10%, but significant number of drivers refuse to unload vehicle and to pay an extra charge (in 2001 – 73%). No reliable reports in this matter are available.

The experience of the first 4 months of functioning of the heavy vehicles vignette system shows that almost 60% of the road users did not buy vignettes. Better situation is observed in relation to international traffic. In 2001 2% of the international traffic vehicles were recognized as overloaded and paid special charges. However, only 13 custom offices are equipped with wheel load scales.

The most important defects of road protection system through vehicle inspections are:

•

•

•

too small number of scales working and number of measurement locations,

weak cooperation between national road administration and local road administrators; this results in undesirable damages of voivodship, powiat and gmina roads,

not sufficiently effective cooperation between the police and road administration personnel having no enough competencies to safely stop and control vehicles and to force drivers to unload vehicle.

The government foresees that situation will be changed together with the activation of Road Transport Inspection (ITD) - probably in October 200215. ITD will have authorization for wide range of vehicle inspections. However, there is no guaranty that planned introduction of Road Transport Inspection will solve the problem, because ITD will be controlled by the voivods and their budgets will not be connected with work effectiveness.

15 This has been done as planned.



The importance of effective law enforcement increases together with establishment of new road fund, which budget (and further obligations) will be based on the vignette revenues.



2 RECOMMENDATIONS

Following the formulation of the Infrastructure Development Program, the government started reorganization of the road management and financing system. In the course of process, advice of IFI, particularly the World Bank16, was taken into account. In the period of the Consultants work on this report several proposals were made and draft legal act on motorway fund prepared17. On the basis of analysis of the present situation and plans concerning the road sector, the authors formulated their recommendations concerning the direction of ongoing institutional changes and proposals for public roads financing.

Road management system In the Consultants’ opinion the present road management system is generally sound because:

• management is related to financing;

• road owner is responsible for road management.

However, there are needs for system further improvements, among which reviewing and modification of the road assignment to different categories is one of the most important. Administrative reform and consequent changes in categorization of public roads (on 1 January 1999) have brought about fragmentation of roads (4 levels of management instead of 3) and increase in the number of road management units. At the intermediate levels (voivodship, and especially powiat) road networks are composed of separated sections. This makes management and maintenance difficult and sometimes leads to inefficiency, for example in winter maintenance.

It is recommended that: (1) assignment of roads to national road category is reconsidered; taking into consideration lessons learnt in the last years it seems that the optimum size of national road network might be approx. 25 thousand km; this would ameliorate road management allowing network-type management; (2) liquidation of voivodship road category should be considered as a desirable simplification of road sector management; these roads could be divided into national and powiat categories.

Support for local governments in road management There is an urgent need to improve public roads under local governments jurisdiction. While these roads are managed by independent organizations, there is a need for support and assistance from the central level. At the lower levels there is a variety of solutions as regards location and legal form. They can be classified in 4 groups: (1) road authority as a unit of city/powiat office; (2) performing road management function by selected departments of the local government office; (3) road authority or road and transport authority (mostly in cities) as a budgetary unit; (4) road authority as a joint stock company. There is not enough knowledge to find out which of these forms is the most effective and

16 Republic of Poland, World Bank Missions: (i) Aide Memoire 17-19 April, 2002; (ii) Aide Memoir May 20-24, 2002. 17 In the meantime the concept of road fund has been rejected by the Government and commercialization of GDDKiA through creation of the National Roads Authority chosen. The governmental proposal is at the Parliament.



efficient. It is recommended that systematic assessment of all options is made and the best solutions chosen.

Better co-operation of different road authorities should be promoted and stimulated, for example using financial incentives. Institutional arrangements of road management unit should be a subject of special care.

The Consultants recommend that the central government, in addition to financial support, should provide assistance and guidance to local governments of all levels, to stimulate better management of road systems. The assistance should concerns: legislative initiatives, policy guidance, issuing instructions, manuals etc., promoting of innovative solutions, financing of research and development works oriented to the needs of roads of lower categories, dissemination of knowledge, training etc. Particular role is to be played by the Department of Public Roads in the Ministry of Infrastructure which should be strengthened. Issue of data collection and processing is discussed in the following point.

General Directorate of National Roads and Motorways should be involved also to this assistance taking advantage of its experience in road management, prepared manuals and trained personnel.

Vignette system and motorway tolls The idea of a vignette, which will have to be bought by all users of "premium" roads, has been initially thought as parallel to the system of cash tolls used on the section of A4 motorway and to be used by concessionaires of A2 and A1 motorways. It would mean double payment for vignette buyers. This possibility was questioned on the ground of the EU regulations which do not allow such a double charging18. Consequently, it was decided that the present system of cash tolls will be abandoned. This would require re-negotiating of the existing concessions and applying, for example, shadow toll system.

Closer look at this issue leads the authors to the following conclusions19:

• the EU regulations not allowing double charging so far concern only heavy vehicles; therefore, it is possible to apply both forms of charging for other categories of vehicles;

• progress in payment systems makes possible that in 5-10 years electronic toll collection system can be easily installed on all "premium" roads.

Taking into account the present state, EU regulations, the Consultants's analysis and the results of other studies such as PriceWaterhouseCoopers, two options were considered by the authors as deserving attention:

Option I: Introducing vignettes and abandoning cash tolls on sections of A4 and A2 motorways where concessions have been signed and plans for cash tolls on A1 motorway.

Option II: Giving up the concept of vignettes, maintaining the cash tolls on sections of A4 and A2 motorways where concessions have been signed. Case of A1 motorway requires further analyses with an option of the concession canceling. Additional financial means (at the level of revenues from vignettes) could be generated

18 EU Directive 99/62 19 Submission of the legal act introducing vignette system to the Parliament made the following points only partially valid. The issue of "double charging" is to be solved through leaving the present toll collection system on sections of the A2 and A4 motorways and allowing using these sections without vignettes.



from increased fuel excise tax. According to the PriceWaterhouseCoopers estimates increasing of tax by 0.1 PLN per liter of motor fuel would bring about the same revenue as vignettes. In comparison to fuel price fluctuations observed in the last years this increase can be considered as relatively low. Advantage of increasing fuel excise tax is that being also budget neutral solution it is more use-related measure than vignettes.

The first option requires re-negotiating of 2 concession agreements (A2 and A4 motorways) and canceling agreement concerning A1 motorway (not finalized yet).

In each case it should be planned that electronic toll collection will replace traditional systems as soon as it is introduced in EU countries. Strengths and weaknesses of both options are listed below. Option I – Introduction of vignette system:

Strengths Weaknesses

• transparency of the Fund revenues • related to premium roads • heavy vehicles pay higher price for

deterioration of pavements • simple junctions • no need of toll gates • possibility of staged development

(single carriageway)

• not usage related pricing • re-negotiation of concession agreements

would put the government in unfavorable position

• shadow tolls difficult to set up • uncertain revenues (risk) • enforcement problems • additional traffic generation*) • problems of access to properties served by

premium road **) • problems caused by lack of alternative

roads on large part of the network • possible slowing down of motorway

program in first 2 years *) negative impact on travel behavior - trip generation and choice of destination and route. Some of impacts

cannot be considered as desirable from sustainability point of view.

**) difficulty to solve issue of treatment the case of users forced to the use "premium road" because of the location of their plot which is served exclusively by such a road



Option II - cash toll on A2 and A4 sections remained plus additional fuel excise tax:

Strengths Weaknesses

• no need to re-negotiate concessions • stable revenues • increase of revenues proportional to

traffic growth • no enforcement costs and problems • simple junctions *) • no need of toll gates *) • possibility of staged development

(single carriageway) • impact on travel behavior (mobility)

• only partially usage related pricing • not associated with premium roads • heavy vehicles do not pay higher price for

deterioration of pavements • opposition (additional general tax) • need to compensate non-road users • inflation • problem of truck double charging

*) on new sections of motorways

Comparison of the two options leads to following conclusions:

• option II would bring the same financial effect with much less risk;

• both options are budget neutral; they should be treated as temporary solution having in mind perspective of introducing electronic toll collection; in fact, this perspective makes continuation of building motorways with toll collecting gates obviously shortsighted.

In conclusion, it is recommended that the final decision concerning vignettes is postponed till the results of negotiations with concessionaires are known and the cost of shadow tolls estimated. The same concerns problem of lack of route choice when premium road section has no alternative. This will bring about protests and legal claims.

In the meantime it is also necessary to prepare a detailed analysis on the expected revenue from the vignette system. The PriceWaterhouseCoopers study looks correctly however was done in very short time, thus based on very limited input data. The analysis should contain an attempt to optimize the charges and sensitivity analysis. The traffic database taken into consideration should be enlarged and additional traffic surveys should be conducted (users’ willingness to pay, border traffic). Furthermore, in traffic forecast vignette charges should be considered as additional travel cost what was not taken into account in PriceWaterhouseCoopers estimations.

Road Administration Reform The government is considering road administration reform. One of the options if a creation of the National Fund for Roads and Motorways. The final form and arrangement of the Fund have yet not been determined but it is almost certain that the role of Fund would be limited to financing, execution of investment projects selected and shaped by the GDDKiA. The Fund would be also responsible for accumulation of financial resources (including revenues from vignettes) and - what is not clearly stated - for operating of “paid



roads”. All this will be done through contracting and concessions. The Consultants’ comments are presented in the main part of the Report (part C) as well as in Findings20.

The Consultants recommend reconsidering of the Fund concept in the following direction:

exclusion from the GDDKiA responsibility for full preparation of projects to be financed by the Fund, which should be responsible for the whole investment process (including design and obtaining building permit); all the ongoing investments should be reviewed to allow the Fund to take over the duties in those cases which are related to the Fund scope of activity;

•

• in case that no enough projects will be prepared for the Fund for the year 2003, a temporary (one year) dividing revenues from the vignette system between the GDDKiA and the Fund with a proportion allowing continuation of the already started projects by GDDKiA should be considered.

Other options include commercialization of GDDKiA. The main benefit of that would be classifying debt drawn by the company as off-budgetary debt. Another important benefit would be a possibility of market based salaries to the company staff which could allow employing highly skilled specialists. However, there are some threads related to that idea like:

• undesirable increase of the scope of the Ministry of Infrastructure duties, • exclusion of administrative decisions from road administration, • unclear responsibility for road planning, investment selection, priorities, etc., • bias towards investment in setting priorities (maintenance could suffer).

Both options should be considered, and the selected one should be extremely well prepared. The experience of the last years has shown that even the best ideas can be discredited if reforms are not well prepared. It happened with 4 basic reforms in Poland: social security, health, education and administrative system. In principle, they were sensible, but implementation was poor and the whole concept has been considered by general public as ineffective. With these lessons in view, it is strongly recommended that final decision about reshaping of GDDKiA is made only after preparing drafts of all legal acts. Implementation should be scheduled in such a way that almost everything is decided before the "zero hour". This includes all legal acts (both at the parliament and the ministry levels), internal structure of the new entity, decision on personnel, location of offices etc.

The role of fuel excise tax in roads financing It is the Consultants’ opinion that relating the road budget - through the excise duty on fuels - to traffic should be maintained. There are plans of replacing the system of earmarking the excise duty on fuels revenues to local roads by different type of funds allocation. This would make local road budgets independent from road traffic and then could be a step backward.

Furthermore, an option of allocating the revenue from annual truck tax to roads should also be considered. Now it constitutes a part of gmina general revenues and is not earmarked to roads, particularly those of high truck traffic. The Consultants recommend to earmark revenue from annual truck tax to roads together with its re-allocation from gminas to

20 As it was stated earlier, Government’s decision concerning creation of the National Road Authority as a joint stock company made comments and recommendations concerning the fund option less relevant.



national road budget. This would require that an appropriate compensation of gminas loss of revenue is ensured.

The Consultants recommend also to raise a share of the revenue from the excise duty on fuels allocated to roads (other than gmina) above present 30%, as it was primarily intended by the Parliament, to ensure funds for proper road network maintenance. This should be done on year-by-year basis up to a level allowing elimination of maintenance backlog. After eliminating the backlog the share could be reduced to a level ensuring proper current maintenance of the road network.

An analysis of the government investment plan leads to the conclusion that foreseen speeding up of motorways and expressways construction (altogether 310 km per year) is unrealistic due to:

• lack of prepared projects,

• insufficient financial resources,

• low economic efficiency of some projects,

• limited human resources.

It is the Consultants’ recommendation to concentrate efforts on:

• carefully selected motorway and expressway sections (a review of the existing program is necessary, focusing on the most important and efficient sections),

road strengthening program (mainly located within TINA network), •

•

•

•

current road maintenance with backlog elimination,

improvement of other national roads with emphasis on traffic safety and management (e.g. traffic calming in built up areas), pavement improvement, rather than on increasing capacity and speed,

improvement of through and origin and destination traffic conditions in large agglomerations.

Concentrating efforts on the above mentioned tasks in coming few years would allow allocating more resources to road network maintenance.

Investment Planning and Programming Funds available to maintain, operate and develop roads in Poland are and will be limited. Thus, inefficient planning, programming, design and execution of road projects is undesirable because often leads to wastage of resources.

The Consultants recommend radical modification of the planning process of road investments. Project selection has to be based on their economic efficiency, which should form a basis for project ranking.

It is essential that all investment projects are selected in a better way. They should be defined in the process of multi-year planning taking into account financial constraints. An evaluation of the full range of options should include comparing potential benefits of new investments with benefits of improving existing infrastructure. Economic appraisal should be an essential part of planning and design at all stages. Last but not least it has to be assured that adequate finance will be available to maintain infrastructure.



Projects preparation and execution The Consultants recommend that GDDKiA instruction on project preparation be reviewed to adjust the procedures to the international standards (introducing stages of pre-feasibility and feasibility studies with obligatory economic analysis before the final design).

There is also a strong need to review and modify approach to traffic forecasting which constitute a basis for economic analysis. Framework traffic forecasts issued by the former GDDP for national roads were based on the Traffic Census, analysis of traffic growth trends and simple extrapolation. Such forecast may be sufficient for projects concerning existing roads, where traffic diversion from other roads is limited. In practice, these forecasts are used for most projects (even new roads), what makes the economic analysis results unreliable. In case of projects for which an appropriate traffic forecasting is done, using traffic modeling, no “common platform” is establish by setting up basic forecasting factors, such as GDP growth, elasticity factors, etc., to be used in all projects. This makes the results of the analyses incomparable.

Finally, much more attention should be addressed to good project management. It has been proved that solutions such as contract management, turnkey project contracts, design and built etc. with private sector involvement can bring about tangible effects.

Priorities and need to balance development and operation Poor conditions of roads in confrontation with growing traffic and share of heavy vehicles justify giving priority to maintenance, rehabilitation and modernization of roads and bridges. However, at all governmental levels there is tendency to plan construction of new roads. Limited resources (financial and human) make these plans unrealistic but in many cases investment projects are initiated even with very limited resources and lack of perspectives for stable financing.

In addition, there is some bias towards investing in roads of international importance. In the situation of limited resources, the necessity for the government to participate in covering costs of main projects of international importance (matching funds) may lead to neglecting other competing construction, upgrading and maintenance projects which, in many instances, may be more economically and socially viable.

It is recommended that in allocating resources in the road sector the balance be kept between investing in new infrastructure and maintenance, upgrading and operating existing facilities.

It is essential that in addition to looking at the international context of a road project, it is necessary to be sure that the project is economically viable and fits into national and regional development strategies. In other words it means that priority should be given to projects which serve both international, national and regional movements.

It is recommended that central road administration give more attention to co-operation with local and municipal governments in project implementation. Taking into consideration that the highest traffic volumes are observed on roads near and within large agglomerations, road investments improving not only through but also origin-destination traffic should be considered as the most important. Yet, there are bad examples (Warsaw case21) of 21 The problem of Motorway A2 location in Warsaw, as well as planned Warsaw expressway ring-road: NS -Trasa Siekierkowska - Trasa Olszynki Grochowskiej – Trasa AK.



divergences between local government/municipal plans and expectations and national road administration intentions.

Securing road network against heavy goods vehicles Taking into consideration a negative impact of heavy goods vehicles on the network and poor condition of road pavements it is Consultants’ opinion that setting up an accession transition period (as long as possible) with regard to overweight vehicles is justified.

Furthermore, the Consultants recommend that following actions be undertaken:

• traffic inspection of over-weight vehicles should be intensified (systematic weighing program, more scales and more weighing locations, better low enforcement including relating Road Transport Inspection budget to inspections effectiveness);

acceleration of road strengthening program for national road network also at the cost of motorway and expressway construction;

•

• promotion of intermodal and multimodal transport; this depends on the increase of competitiveness of rail freight transport.

Traffic management and safety Present imbalance between interest of governments (at all levels) mostly in new infrastructure (often with preference to spectacular projects) and in better use of existing infrastructure should be reduced. This concerns not only maintenance and rehabilitation of existing roads but also traffic management and safety. Backlog in traffic control systems which in most cases are obsolete should be reduced at the cost which is very low in comparison to the cost of heavy investment projects.

Concentration of responsibilities for transport and communication in one ministry (Ministry of Infrastructure) gives a great chance to promote application of Intelligent Transport Systems (ITS) methods, measures and techniques in the road sector.

The Consultants recommend that the scope of traffic management (as set up in formal documents) be reviewed and expanded to include dynamic traffic monitoring and management. In the development of motorways and expressways advanced systems of traffic management should be installed in the first phase of construction. Development of advanced traffic management systems in cities should be promoted and stimulated. The Ministry should promote applications of advanced ITS solutions in road and traffic management at all levels.

As regards traffic safety, the present efforts of the central and local governments are still insufficient. It starts with the legislation. For example, in the period of transition, all governments were proposing amendment of traffic law through reduction of general speed limit in built up areas from 60 to 50 km/h (as it is in all EU countries). In all cases the Parliament rejected this notion. At the same time speed limit on rural roads of higher categories has been raised to the level exceeding most of EU countries. Generally, at allocation of resources there is a bias toward improving infrastructure as a main mean of traffic safety improvement.

The Consultants recommend that present involvement of the central government in traffic safety monitoring and improvement should be continued with special attention placed on assisting local governments. It is essential that at all levels equal weight is assigned to all



four categories of methods of traffic safety improvement: engineering, enforcement, education and emergency. The special role can be played by the World Bank through proper shaping present and future of the World Bank road projects (traffic safety component).

Human resources Human resources at all levels of road administration (including GDDKiA) are not sufficient to efficiently manage roads under their jurisdiction as well as conduct investment activities. Continuous education of personnel to prepare it to new tasks and to increase effectiveness and efficiency is one of the most important tasks of the central and local governments. New skills such as procurement, market-type economic analysis, supervision of works with quality control etc. have to be acquired and developed on a large scale.

For example concrete recommendations concerning the programs and forms of training have been formulated in the World Bank report22 in 1994. An institutional set-up was proposed for training and organizations as well as proposals for training programs for the road administration and for the construction industry. The following elements were specified: training objectives, target groups, content o training, training methods, suppliers of training services, implementation schedule and costs Data problems In the last years a great effort was made by the road administration to strengthen and develop data collection and processing system. Among others, reference system and pavement and bridge management systems (SOSN and SGM) were built for national roads. Permanent traffic counts are carried out in selected points and Traffic Census (according to agreed international standards) is executed every fifth year.

As regards roads under local governments jurisdiction, situation is much worse. There is lack of uniform procedures and rules of road and traffic inventories and quality of data collection depends on preferences of the local government and road authority as well as on qualifications of the personnel. Generally low quality of traffic counts caused that it was necessary to exclude traffic volumes provided by the local governments from a formula used to divide the road subvention. In addition, other data needed for effective planning and programming are of low quality or not existent. This concerns, for example, data on vehicle population and use.

Low quality of data on roads, traffic, vehicles etc. reduce effectiveness of planning and programming and day-to-day management of roads. First of all this concerns roads administered by local governments. It is necessary that higher priority is assigned to data collection at all levels. The role of the central government should be to promote development of roads, vehicles and traffic inventory systems at all levels of road management and assist in this development through providing guidance, advise and training.

22 “Establishment of a training system for the road administration and road enterprises in Poland”. Institute for Highway and Maritime Education and Warsaw University of Technology, Institute of Roads and Bridges.


Background Report C/1

1 ORGANIZATION AND DEVELOPMENT OF PUBLIC ROADS -

ASSESSMENT

1.1 ORGANIZATIONAL RESPONSIBILITY FOR EACH CATEGORY OF ROADS

The Administrative Framework of the Road Sector The administrative framework of the road sector in Poland is in process of changes. These changes, to a high degree, have been caused by political and economic reforms, including fundamental changes in territorial structure of the country.

Until late 1980's, the road system was managed in a highly centralized way. National and voivodship roads were administrated by the GDDP - General Directorate of Public Roads (through 17 Regional Directorates of Public Roads). National roads were financed from the central budget and voivodship roads by the voivode offices, which were also a part of the state government. Only gmina roads (and roads in cities) were financed from local budgets. In addition to the role of road authority, regional directorates had road laboratories, design units and own road maintenance and construction units.

At the beginning of transition, the process of separating management and maintenance/construction started. In 1991, 171 road management units were created, employing 10,5 thousand people. This was a reduction from over 70 thousand employees before the reform (but this number included maintenance/construction units). At the same time 214 state owned companies and 9 semi-private companies were created. It was the beginning of commercialization and privatization of publicly owned companies. Creation of new enterprises dealing with transport infrastructure design, consulting engineering, quality control, material supply, construction and maintenance was enhanced. Many of them were Small and Medium Size Enterprises (SME-s).

In the first years of transition, financial resources allocated to the road sector have been drastically reduced, to approximately 50% of the 1990 level1 (in real terms). The first World Bank loans helped in meeting the most urgent needs of road maintenance and modernization of the main national road network.

In 1993, the government announced the toll motorway development program which envisaged construction of approximately 2500 km of new roads. Consequently, in October 1994 the parliament adopted act on toll motorways which, among others:

• established the Agency for Motorway Construction and Operation (ABiEA);

• set up procedures and rules for decisions on motorway alignment, land acquisition and issuing concessions for the construction and operation of toll motorways.

In view of critical situation in road financing in mid-1990's it was decided that a special law is needed. On 27 August 1997 an act on public road financing was adopted which provided that at least 30% of excise fuel tax would have to be allocated to national and voivodship roads (financed from the state budget). At the same time there was an increase of resources received from loans and assistance of the EU. In the period 1996-2000, approx. 1 370 million EUR has been received from these sources. They were spent mainly 1 See Chapter 4


C/2 Background Report

on co-financing of 180 km of motorways, 12 by-passes and modernization of 40 km of main roads.

The recent administrative reform of the country became operational on 1 January 1999. Former 2-tier system of local governments (voivodship, gmina) has been replaced with 3-tier system (voivodship, powiat, gmina). In the new system there are 16 voivodships, 373 powiats, (among them 65 cities with powiat status and 2 489 gminas (urban and rural).

On 1 January 1999 formal structure of public road network has been adjusted to the above described territorial structure of the country. The following categories of public roads have been introduced:

• national roads; • voivodship roads; • powiat roads; • gmina roads.

National roads are a property of the State Treasury and voivodship, powiat and gmina roads are a property of local governments of a given level. The length of roads of different categories is presented in paragraph 1.8.

As in other sectors, reforms have radically reduced the role of the state. Before 1999, the state (through the central and voivodship organs) managed 45% of kilometers of roads. At present, the state remained an owner of only 4.5% of the whole road network. Obviously, these roads are playing crucial role and currently carry over 33% of the total traffic (vehicle-kilometers).

Among national roads motorways have been distinguished by a special legislation. Till 30 March 2002 the implementation of the national toll motorways development program was a task of the Agency for Motorway Construction and Operation (ABiEA). The Agency was responsible for tender preparing and executing, negotiations with concessionaires and coordinating all actions relating to toll motorways. In the process of restructuring of the government on 1 April 2002 the Agency has been merged with the General Directorate of Public Roads (GDDP) into the General Directorate of National Roads and Motorways (GDDKiA).

Management of Public Roads Act on public roads defines the scope of responsibilities for different public entities. The minister responsible for the transport sector (at present the Minister of Infrastructure) has been assigned the following duties: • defining directions of the development of the road system;

• issuing technical specifications concerning roads and bridges;

• co-ordination of activities aimed at the adjustment of roads to defense needs;

• supervision over the General Director of National Roads and Motorways (till 30 March over 2 institutions - GDDP and ABiEA).

Public roads of different categories are under jurisdiction of the following entities (road administrators):

• national roads (except sections of national roads in cities with powiat status and the city of Warsaw) - General Director of National Roads and Motorways;



• national and voivodship roads in cities with powiat status - city authority;

• voivodship roads– voivodship authority;

• powiat roads – powiat authority;

• remaining – gmina authority.

Road administrator supervises road authority (at specific level) which deals with planning, construction, modernization and maintenance of roads. Most of work is done by contracted companies using standard competitive procurement rules for transport infrastructure planning, design, quality control, construction, maintenance and operation related works and services.

Within the borders of cities with powiat status (65 cities) roads of all categories (except motorways and expressways) are managed by city authority. In case of Warsaw (which has a special status) national roads (except motorways and expressways) are managed by the Authority of the Capital City of Warsaw.

Motorways and expressways are under jurisdiction of the General Director of National Roads and Motorways. However, after signing the concession contract, the concessionaire takes a function of management.

Comments on the system of road management The new system of road categorization and administration that came in force in 1999 is a subject of discussion by professional associations, at conferences and in professional magazines. The following merits and limitations are pointed out:

Merits:

• direct responsibility of local governments for roads serving the area; this allows to formulate development plans and programs meeting the local needs;

• road management and financing in one hands.

Demerits:

• voivodship, powiat and gmina road systems are too much fragmented; in many cases they are composed of separated road sections and do not create networks which would be easy to maintain; this is particularly true with respect to winter maintenance which often became very inefficient (unproductive moves between sections not connected);

• need to create and finance a large number of often small road management units; lack of experience at the local government level and qualified personnel for the management units; lack of access to knowledge;

• opportunity of diverting resources (subventions) from the road sector to other uses;

• the central government has withdrawn too far from dealing with roads of lower categories; there is need for data collection, policy guidance, training, financing research and development works, promotion of "best practices" etc.

To reduce impact of road fragmentation, in some regions governments of various levels agreed to co-operate2. For example, there are cases of delegating the whole management functions (and resources) from gmina to powiat and opposite. By delegating government

2 Ordega W. “Powiat management units – after 2.5 years of activity”. Polskie Drogi, No.9/2001.



reduces its functions to defining program and resources and controlling their use. This topic is discussed later in paragraph 1.8.

1.2 BASIC CHARACTERISTICS OF PUBLIC ROAD NETWORK

The total length of public road network in Poland is equal to 370 753 km including:

• 249 828 km of roads with hard pavements – 67% and

• 122 099 km of unpaved roads – 33%.

Of the total number of road kilometers, 4,9% are national roads (see Table 1.1).

Table 1.1 Public roads vs. national roads - network length Length of road network (data 31.12.2000) [in km]

Length of public roads of which: 370 753 hard pavement roads 249 828 roads with improved pavement 205 637 national roads 18 132

Source: Public roads – statistical information. IBDiM.

The structure of public roads by jurisdiction and pavement type is presented in the Appendix 1.

The total number of bridge structures3 on public road network in Poland is 31 054 with the total length of approx. 639 km (Data: 31 of December 2000). 15% (4 649 structures) of this structures is located on the national road network (33,4% of the total length of bridge structures). The number of bridge structures varies in different country regions. The details are presented in Appendix 1. Four voivodships (Mazowieckie, Slaskie, Dolnoslaskie and Wielkopolskie) concentrate on their territory 53% of bridge structures.

1.3 FINANCING OF PUBLIC ROADS

National roads are financed with:

• part of excise fuel taxes; the proportion of revenues allocated to national roads is decided by the parliament and is changing from year to year; in addition, part of revenues allocated to roads is further split between national roads administered by the GDDKiA (40%) and remaining roads (except gmina roads); algorithm applied to divide 60% between voivodships and powiats takes into consideration factors such as length of road network and traffic volumes; in addition, gminas receive 10.5% of excise tax revenues as a part of general subvention;

3 Bridges, viaducts, overpasses and underpasses.



• state budget, including reserve resources for the integration with European Union;

• revenues from heavy goods vehicles vignette system

• revenues from international transport licenses and permits;

• loans of IFI's: - World bank; - European Investment Bank (EBI); - EBRD;

• European Union: - PHARE; - ISPA;

• participation of local governments and other entities (for example for building and operation sidewalks etc.)

Cost of administration and road maintenance (point a) are covered by the State budget (fuel excise tax). Improvement/reconstruction of roads and bridges (point b) and liquidation of destruction of the 1997-1998 floods was financed by loans from IFI's, EU grants and revenues from international freight transport. Share of national resources was in each case negotiated with the bank or EU.

Share of the Polish resources in case of projects co-financed by the WB and EBRD loans is equal to 55-60%. In ISPA projects approximately 25% of the costs of construction is covered by the Polish side.

Loans from IFI's and EU grants are taken by the Ministry of Finance and the Ministry of Infrastructure (former Ministry of Transport and Maritime Economy). The General Directorate of National Roads and Motorways (former GDDP and ABiEA) is a beneficiary.

As it was stressed earlier, according to the present legislation, the Ministry of Infrastructure does not finance voivodship, powiat and gmina roads as well as section of national roads in cities with powiat status and Warsaw.

Voivodships and powiats are financing road maintenance and development partially from the subsidies from the Ministry of Finance (part of revenues from fuel tax) and partially from own resources.

Gminas, besides own resources, are eligible to receive assistance as compensation for reduction of revenues after abandoning taxation of vehicles.

In addition, powiats and gminas are eligible to receive resources for roads from the Agency of Restructuring and Modernization of Agriculture. Since 2001 the budget of the Agency is supplemented by the EC grant (Program SAPARD which will be operational till 2006).

Finally, there is growing number of cases in which different entities (commercial centers, logistic centers, industrial complexes etc.) participate in the costs of modernization and development of roads of different categories.



1.4 NATIONAL ROAD NETWORK

Table 1.2 and Fig. 1.1 present division of national roads between urban and non-urban sections. Among the whole national roads, 92% are under GDDKiA supervision. 8% of the network (1 439 km of roads) is under municipal supervision (cities at powiat status).

Table 1.2 National road network length – road administrators length [km]

Total length of national roads 18 036 including: Length of non urban national roads (GDDKiA supervision) 13 704 Length of urban national roads (GDDKiA supervision) 2 893 Length of urban national roads (city at powiat status supervision) 1 439

Source:GDDKiA/BS

Fig. 1.1 Structure of national roads in Poland

76%

16%8%

Non urban roads (GDDKiA supervision)

Urban roads (GDDKiA supervision)

Urban roads (city at powiat status supervision)

Table 1.3 and Fig. 1.2 presents national roads structure by categories. Within national road network road, category classified as “Main road” dominates, with 65% participation in the network. A standard of that category varies, but usually they are of single carriageway, with 6-7 m roadway and rather without paved shoulders.

32% of the network are main roads of better roadway standard (usually with roadway 7 m wide and paved shoulders). The length of motorways and expressways (some of them with single carriageway) is significantly low - they constitute only 3% of the network. The length of dual carriageway sections (under GDDKiA supervision) is equal to 1 286 km (7,7%).



Table 1.3 Length of national roads by categories (state 31.12.2001) Road category Road symbol in Poland Length in [km]

Motorways A 398,83 Expressways S 206,22 Trunk road GP 5 279,91 Main road G 10 771,62 TOTAL LENGTH OF NATIONAL ROADS4 18 035,87 Source:GDDKiA/BS

Fig. 1.2 Categories of national roads in Poland

2% 1%

32%

65%

Motorways Expressways Trunk road Main road

The longest national road network is in voivodships: Mazowieckie, Wielkopolskie, Warminsko-Mazurskie and Dolnośląskie. The details concerning regional structure of national roads and length of motorways and expressways in regions are presented in Appendix 1.

1.5 MAJOR ONGOING INVESTMENTS

Information concerning major ongoing road projects was prepared on the basis of state budget documents (which specifie ongoing investments) and GDDKiA data. Altogether 33 investment projects were identified, divided into 3 groups:

•

•

•

ongoing motorway projects,

ongoing expressway roads projects,

ongoing investments on other national roads.

As it concerns type of investment, selected projects can be divided into the following categories:

4 In 2001 the national roads network was reduced by 96 km (from 18132 to 18036 km).



construction of new road sections (motorways, expressways, national roads, by-passes);

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

renewal/rebuilding of existing roads (often called modernization);

pavement strengthening on existing roads;

border crossings improvement.

Most of selected investments are co-financed from the State budget resources together with loans or grants from international financial institutions (WB, EIB) and UE (Phare and ISPA programs). However, some projects are financed only from the Poland’s state budget. A detailed list of ongoing investments is attached in the Appendix 1.

The total budget allocated for major ongoing investments presented in this chapter (some of them scheduled till the year 2005) is approx. 7 335 MPLN5 (2 038 MEUR), including:

approx. 3 948 MPLN (1 097 MEUR) assigned for motorway network (171,5 km),

approx. 1 387 MPLN (385 MEUR) assigned for expressway roads (77 km),

approx. 2 000 MPLN (556 MEUR) assigned for other national roads (232,6 km).

The national budget is involved at the level of 845 MEUR. The structure of the involvement is shown on Fig. 1.3.

Fig. 1.3 Ongoing road projects - structure of State budget involvement

46%

11%

43%

Motorways Expressways Other narional roads

1.6 PRESENT ROAD CONSTRUCTION COSTS

The paragraph describes present road infrastructure construction costs. The data have been provided to the Consultants by the General Directorate of National Roads and Motorways (GDDKiA). Estimations were based on the investor cost calculations of the relevant projects and on the unit prices published by "BISTYP Consulting", "Promocja" (Ośrodek

5 This number does include the cost of section of A2 motorway Nowy Tomysl-Konin constructed by private investor



Wdrożeń Ekonomiczno-Organizacyjnych Budownictwa) and "WACETOB" (Warszawskie Centrum Postępu Techniczno-Organizacyjnego Budownictwa). The data refer to the year 2000.

The national road network has been divided into representative infrastructure types specified in the Appendix 1. The selected unit costs are presented in the Table 1.4, and the details in the Appendix 1.

Table 1.4. Road infrastructure unit costs

Road type national non-urban roads national urban roads

[PLN/m2] [EUR/m2] [PLN/m2] [EUR/m2] motorway 817 226,9 - dual carriageway expressway 536 148,9 695 193,1 single carriageway expressway 536 148,9 590 163,9 dual carriageway with paved shoulders 454 126,1

single carriageway with paved shoulders 330 91,7 429 119,2

single carriageway without paved shoulders 330 91,7 429 119,2

1.7 OVERVIEW OF REPLACEMENT VALUE OF THE EXISTING NATIONAL ROAD NETWORK BASED ON PRESENT CONSTRUCTION COSTS

The paragraph includes calculation of the replacement value of the existing national road network. The calculation is based on the present unit construction costs presented in paragraph 1.6, and road network specification provided by GDDKiA for the year 2000 (see Appendix 1).

The total replacement value of the national road network amounts to 74 568 million PLN (approx. 20 713 MEUR). The summary of the existing road network replacement value calculation is presented in the Tables 1.5 and 1.6. The details are attached in the Appendix 1.

Table 1.5 Total replacement value of national roads

Specification Replacement value [thousand PLN]

National roads of which: 63 943 596 motorways 4 480 292 expressways 2 682 286 other dual carriageway roads 11 562 660 other single carriageway roads 44 126 694 pedestrian sidewalks and bicycle paths 1 091 664



Table 1.6 Total replacement value of the structures on the national road network


Total of which: 10 624 048 Bridges, viaducts, flyovers, pedestrian overpasses 10 251 884 Other structures. 372 165

1.8 ASSESSMENT OF VOIVODSHIP, POWIAT, GMINA AND URBAN ROADS SITUATION

Voivodship roads situation Most of roads which since 1 January 1999 are classified as voivodship roads till 31 December 1998 belonged to the network of national roads administered by the former GDDP. Roads of this category are presently administered by the voivodship self-government.

The length and pavement characteristics of voivodship roads are shown in Table 1.7. Urban sections of these roads constitute almost 20 percent of the total length. While the share of sections with substandard pavements is negligible, the condition of large part of sections with improved hard surface is not worse than in case of national roads. According to the results of diagnostic survey completed in 1998 only 26,2% of the network was in good condition, 45,3% in insufficient condition and remaining 28,5% in critical condition. For the national road network these numbers were equal to respectively: 20,7%; 40,6% and 38,7%.

Table 1.7 Voivodship roads - length and pavements [km] hard surface category

improved remaining total

soil

total rural 23 991 70 24 061 82 24 143 urban I6 3 221 8 3 229 3 3 232 urban II 902 5 907 32 939 total 28 114 83 28 197 117 28 314

In spite of great maintenance and modernization needs, in most voivodships not all road subvention has been allocated to the road sector. In 2000, only 4 of 16 voivodships used 100 percent of subsidy. In remaining voivodships 4 to 35 percent of subvention (average 15 percent) have been spent in another way.

In 2001, one of the voivodships (wielkopolskie) made decision to emit communal bonds to finance most urgent road repair and modernization projects. This was the first case of using this form of acquiring resources by local government at this level. Issuing 8 series of bonds (3-10 years) of the total value of 54 MPLN (15 MEUR) enabled to speed up

6 In all tables presented in this chapter, term urban I was used with regard to roads in cities/towns within a rural powiat, term urban II for cities with a powiat status (65 cities) and Warsaw.



implementation of several projects such as construction of by-passes and reconstruction of selected road sections. These projects were implemented in co-operation with gminas, which were responsible for the design, formal procedures and land acquisition.

Powiat roads Powiat roads as category appeared on 1 January 1999 when powiats were introduced as the second level of local governments. The length and pavement characteristics of powiat roads are shown in Table 1.8.

Table 1.8 Powiat roads - length and pavements [km] hard surface category


soil

total rural 92062 6284 98346 15246 113592 urban I 8648 163 8811 478 9289 urban II 4800 70 4870 204 5074 total 105510 6517 112027 15928 127955

Overall assessment of powiat roads is systematically carried out by the Association of Polish Powiats (ZPP)7. Willingness of local governments to participate in systematic analysis of the situation has been demonstrated by the response to a questionnaire which was distributed in early 2001. 246 powiats (81% of the total number) responded. The total length of roads administered by these powiats was equal to 87 872 kilometers (of 128 thousand km). Together with other sources of information this allowed elaboration of a comprehensive report concerning years 1999 and 2000.

In most powiats (87%) a Powiat Road Authority has been established. Maintenance works are often performed by own units (direct labour) and major repair and investment projects are done by contracted entities. Some powiats co-operate with other local governments (gminas, powiats and even voivodship). Most often agreements provide for delegation of road management and maintenance.

Assessment of technical road conditions has shown that almost 50% of the network requires new layers and 25% modernization (widening, strengthening, sidewalks in built-up areas etc). Ineffective drainage systems and critical conditions of bridges have been identified on considerable part of the network. According to ZPP estimates, improving powiat roads to desirable conditions in the period of 10-15 years would require subsidies 2,5-3 times higher than obtained by powiats in the last years.

In this situation it is surprising that in many powiats only a part of road subvention (from the state budget) is allocated to the road sector. For example, in 1999, 18% of powiats allocated to roads less than 80% of subsidies. In 2000 percentage of powiats was reduced to 9%. There are cases of using for other purposes 50% and more of road subvention.

In 2000, expenditures on powiat roads were divided as follows: • maintenance - 40%; • major repair and investment - 41%; • administration - 19%. 7 Zwiazek Powiatow Polskich



In the first 2 years of existence, almost 40 percent of powiats formulated long-term road development strategy. As a rule, such a strategy contains simplified assessment of the road system and proposals of the long-, medium- and short-term maintenance/investment programs. One of tasks which remains to be completed is detail inventory of roads and bridges. It is stipulated that such inventory has to be finalized till 31 December 2003.

Generally, since the creation of powiats, local governments became involved in administering roads. In three years, with little support from the state level, they were able to organize system of road management and maintenance, which perhaps is not perfect but allows meeting the most urgent needs. Several proposals of improvement of the present legal system and road classification have been collected by ZPP and presented to the central government.

Gmina roads The length and pavement characteristics of gmina roads are shown in Table 1.9. 55% of the length of this network has soil pavement.

Table 1.9 Gmina roads - pavements [km] hard surface category


soil

total rural 36270 28147 64417 94846 159263 urban I 13622 2941 16563 7311 23874 urban II 8663 655 9318 3893 13211 total 58555 31743 90298 106050 196348

Urban roads Concentration of growing traffic on urban sections of the public road system causes that urban roads are most prone to deterioration and congestion than rural roads. In some cities critical state of roads has recently moved to the first places on the list of problems and needs.

The situation in various cities differs, but most common problems include:

• lack of separation of roads serving through and local traffic; in spite of great efforts of the national road authorities to build by-passes, in majority of cities long-distance and regional traffic is served by roads crossing densely populated areas;

• deterioration of pavements and bridges due to inadequate maintenance;

• growing congestion and parking problems, especially in central areas;

• outdated traffic management systems and low priority assigned to this way of improving traffic conditions.

The situation is worsened by the low quality of public transport which, combined with growing motorization, causes modal shift from public to private transport.

Overall assessment of urban road systems conditions is very difficult and, in many cases, practically impossible because of the complex system of jurisdictions over national, voivodship, powiat and gmina roads. There are three typical situations: (i) cities/towns



within a rural powiat; (ii) cities with a powiat status (65 cities); (iii) Warsaw with a special status (city divided into 11 gminas with part of functions allocated to the City Council).

The length of urban roads of different categories is shown in Tables 1.10 and 1.11. It is worth noting that almost 40% of the total network of urban roads is under jurisdiction of powiat, voivodship and central government.

Table 1.10 Roads in urban areas - jurisdiction [km] national voivodship powiat gmina total

urban I 2893 3232 9289 23874 39288 urban II 1439 939 5074 13211 20663 total urban 4332 4171 14363 37085 59951

Table 1.11 Urban roads - pavement [km] hard surface category


soil

total urban I 28384 3112 31496 7792 39288 urban II 15794 740 16534 4129 20663 total 44178 3852 48030 11921 59951

Pavement conditions of urban roads are similar to other categories. In 1997, only 20% of the length were in good condition, 50% in insufficient and remaining 30% in critical state, requiring reconstruction.

In cities with powiat status (Urban roads II) it is common that expenditures on roads are greater than road subventions. In 2000, in number of cities these expenditures were 2-5 times higher than subventions.

1.9 REORGANIZATION OF THE ROAD SECTOR AND EXISTING BOTTLENECKS

As it was mentioned earlier, the road sector in Poland has been reorganized several times in the last decade (1991, 1999, and 2002). The latest process of reorganization goes on, and is planned to be finalized till the end of June 2002.

The appropriate assessment of ongoing road sector reorganization is difficult because official documents specifying details of new structure of the national road administration are not available. For this reason the assessment was done on the basis of the Consultants' knowledge of the Polish road sector, draft documents prepared in the last period as well as information collected during meetings with officials and specialists of the Ministries of Infrastructure and Finance and road administration.

The scale of reorganizations done in the past, as well as of the new one, is significant and greatly influences the road sector. The results are mixed, with several good and bad aspects. Main bottlenecks of the ongoing reorganization are subject of the following paragraph.



The method of reorganization - time pressure Reorganization of the road sector started before all necessary legal documents, programs, organizational structures were ready. It seems that there is no clear vision of the final effect of reorganization. The imposed time pressure does not favor correct and careful decisions. There is a visible confusing at all levels of road administration. Responsibilities on particular posts are not clear what makes current activity difficult. Violent reorganization of ABiEA should be considered as disadvantageous in relation to the development of the motorway program. The situation requires simultaneous actions connected with current road management, significant organizational and legal changes as well as realization of ambitious government road investment program.

Road administration personnel Road administration personnel could be seen as one of the most important problems and possible bottlenecks of the road system reorganization. A method of introducing the reorganization (for example insufficient number of regular posts in GDDKiA) as well as short time assigned for the changes caused an effect that many experienced employees of GDDP and ABiEA left or have been fired without taking care of handing over their responsibilities to others. Taking into consideration importance of the reorganized institution in effective road management as well as its significance in road investment program, which was announced as a national priority, it is the Consultants’ belief that such a staff replacement should be done gradually, giving time for taking over the responsibilities by others and allowing new people to become skilled.

Another related problem concerns earnings of civil servants, which are still not satisfactory and much lower than in private sector. This will generate serious problems in a short time because it can be expected that employing people of adequate qualifications to replace the fired staff as well as keeping young personnel is not easy. The problem will remain also after reorganization and may influence the future of road administration.

Roads categorization

In the Consultants’ opinion the present road administration system is basically adequate because management is related to financing and road owners are responsible for roads management. The reform has made financing more clear and generally this could be regarded as successful. However, there is a need for several system improvements, among which one of the most important is reviewing of the road categorization.

After the reform (1999), national road network consists of the most important international and national roads. Reduction of the network length resulted in lower national road density. As a consequence this increased road administration costs and reduced work efficiency (longer distances for service vehicles, vehicle empty courses, inefficient winter maintenance, etc.). Also, it complicated roadworks requiring detours. In case of temporary national road closing, a detour using voivodship roads requires an agreement with voivodship or powiat road management and sometimes involves high compensations.

According to the road administration experience from last years, the optimum size of national road network would be about 25 thousand km, instead of present 18 thousand kilometers. Such network size would allow more efficient road management i.e. network-type management.



Also, road network management system could be simplified by eliminating voivodship category of roads, and dividing roads between national and powiat levels.

The problem of road network dispersion could be solved by co-operation in maintaining national and voivodship roads. However, this appears to be difficult because of administrative and legal issues. Similar problem concerns other types of roads – powiat and gmina. In the process of this study two different opinions of road sector officials and professionals have been identified:

• there are too many levels of road management and

• the road classification (assignment to different categories) is inappropriate.

Road fund After strategic decision of merging former GDDP and ABiEA into GDDKiA and limiting the role of GDDKiA to the management of national roads, it has been tentatively decided that the Off-Budget Fund would be created. The Fund would be responsible for mobilizing funds required to finance completion of the 1500 km of motorways and expressways and, if appropriate, other roads of major importance. The full scope of responsibilities of the Fund would differ in different options.

According to one of the last concepts8, the National Fund for Roads and Motorways (NFDiA) - a joint stock company - “will be legally empowered to:

• deliver "turnkey" projects of motorways and expressways, hired by the Ministry of Infrastructure (on general contracting basis),

• manage the network of expressways, motorways and potentially other national roads entrusted to NFDiA (outsource maintenance and rehabilitation works),

• deliver concession contracts and make payments to concessionaires under such contracts.”

In the most recent draft of a new act on organization and financing the development of road infrastructure9, the scope of responsibility of the NFDiA is limited to "paid" roads, it means roads which can be used by the road users only after paying the price (toll or vignette). With respect to investment projects, the GDDKiA is obliged for all preparatory works including obtaining location decisions, land acquisition and obtaining building permit. So far, there are no concrete plans concerning further restructuring of GDDKiA, for example in the direction suggested by the World Bank Missions10.

Although the final form and arrangement of the Fund is still not determined, analysis of draft documents mentioned earlier leads to the following comments:

• Proposed division of responsibilities between the new Fund and GDDKiA seems to be inappropriate. With respect to motorways and other roads to be financed by NFDKiA, the GDDKiA is to be responsible for: (i) planning and programing, including selecting projects; (ii) project preparations up to the stage of building permit and land acquisition. With respect to the remaining national roads the GDDKiA takes the whole

8 Tools to Implement the Goals of the Road Infrastructure Development Program. MoI working document. May 2002. 9 Wardynski i Wspolnicy. Draft 20 May 2002. 10 Republic of Poland, World Bank Missions: (i) Aide Memoire 17-19 April, 2002; (ii) Aide Memoir May 20-24, 2002.



responsibility, including maintenance. Taking into consideration that of all project stages, preparatory stage is the most difficult one, GDDKiA will be in fact responsible for the success of the whole road investment program. Time consuming tasks such as preliminary design and land acquisition are left with the GDDKiA which, as a civil service institution won't have capacity to carry out operational tasks efficiently.

• On the other hand, a scope of responsibilities of the new Fund seems to be significantly narrower, and limited to accumulation of financial resources and punctual investment completion. The role of the NFDiA supervisory board is limited; it won't have any impact on project selection and scope. No mechanism is foreseen to force the new Fund to gather financial resources in an active way (the Fund budget will depend mainly on vignette system revenues, grants, bank loans and even state budget subsidies).

The investment process organized by the two institutions: GDDKiA and the Fund seems to be exposed to a risk of obstructions at the stage of transferring a prepared project from GDDKiA to the Fund as well as finalized project from the Fund to GDDKiA.

•

•

•

•

GDDKiA will finance a preparatory phase of all the investments.

It is planed to allocate all revenues from the vignette system (from heavy goods vehicles, cars and vans) to the Fund once it starts operating. This could disorganize GDDKiA investment plans based on vignette revenues. Especially, it concerns already started projects, which probably are not planned to be taken over by the new Fund. As a result of that, some projects could be stopped and the motorway construction program, instead of accelerating would be slowed down.

A start of Fund operation is planned for the beginning of 2003. According to the information obtained, there is no enough projects ready to be taken over by the fund. The only one is 18 km stretch of A2 motorway between Emilia and Strykow junctions.

Lack of law enforcement

The existing system of law enforcement (which is based on the road administration and police cooperation) is not effective. There is no guaranty that planned introduction of the Road Transport Inspection (ITD) will change this situation because ITD will be controlled by the voivods and their budgets will not be connected with work effectiveness.

The problem is crucial because of poor road network condition as well as foreseen future vignette system revenues. The scale of the problem grows together with the new Fund establishment, which budget (and further obligations) will be based on the vignette revenues.

Local roads management Reorganization of the road sector done in the last decade created 4 levels of road management. There is a great need to assist local governments, which are responsible for 95% of the whole public road network. The assistance of the central level should include, among others: disseminating knowledge, preparing policy and technical guidelines and standards, common initiatives, methodological support, quality control, collecting data on the entire network of public roads, including its length, standard, condition, traffic etc.



In all governmental plans and discussions, the issue of public roads managed by local governments has rarely been mentioned. While, in the Ministry of Infrastructure, the Department of Public Roads has been created, this department is still in an early stage of development and its capacity is very limited.11 Coordination based on the MI Department of Public Roads requires its strengthening, especially as it concerns employed personnel.

Road sector financing priorities There is no clear vision of future subdivision of resources foreseen for investment and maintenance. Concentration of overall financing in the same GDDKiA road budget does not guarantee spending enough money for present road maintenance. Furthermore, very ambitious investment program creates an anxiety that some sources foreseen for maintenance can be easily shifted to investment financing. The risk increases in case that GDDKiA will be responsible for motorway and expressway project preparations up to the stage of building permit and land acquisition.

11 Department seems to be understaffed now – it employs only 5 people, whereas the responsibilities are numerous and complex



2 THE IMPACT OF INCREASED AXLE LOAD OF HEAVY GOODS VEHICLES (HGVS) ON THE POLAND'S ROAD NETWORK

2.1 ADAPTING TECHNICAL ROAD CONSTRUCTION STANDARDS TO MODERN HEAVY

VEHICLE TRAFFIC

According to the UE directive 96/53, dated July 1996, vehicle permissible axle loads (in UE) cannot exceed 115 kN (11,5t/axle). In Poland most of road pavements were designed and built before this date, and according to different standard, which allowed permissible axle load not higher than 100 kN (10t/axle)! This rises a problem of road network, which is adjusted to the lower axle loads i.e.:

on national roads – mostly single-axle load of up to 100 kN, • •

• • •

on voivodship, powiat and gmina roads – mostly single-axle load of up to 80 kN.

An increase of single-axle load may result in multi-fold multiplication of damage done to road pavement.

Since 1999 in Poland there is a basis for necessary change of this situation. At present, designing of road pavements (in each road category) can be adjusted to modern heavy vehicle axle loads. The adjustment is specified by legal provisions (single-axle loads), pursuant to Regulation of the Minister of Transport and Maritime Economy of 2 March 1999 on the technical conditions to be fulfilled by public roads and their location.

According to this regulation pavement design should be based on the traffic forecast expressed in AADT (Annual Average Daily Traffic) and volumes of vehicles should be recalculated to the forecast number of axles (so called “computational axles”) taking into account:

volume of trucks without trailers; volume of heavy trucks (with trailers) and semi-trailers; volume of busses.

In the calculation, impact of vehicles to the road pavement is differentiated through special coefficients (see Table 2.2).

Table 2.2 Axles recalculation coefficients. Vehicle type Coefficient Remark

Truck without trailer 0,109 Truck with trailer or

semi-trailer 1,245 when the share of vehicles with single-axle

load of 115 kN < 8% Truck with trailer or

semi-trailer 1,950 when the share of vehicles with single-axle

load of 115 kN is between 8% and 20%. Bus 0,594

Source: Regulation of the Minister of Transport and Maritime Economy of 2 March 1999 on the technical conditions to be fulfilled by public roads and their location.



As it can be seen in the Table 2.2, in the standard pavement designing, vehicles with single axle loads of 115 kN are taken into account, but only up to the level of 20% of the traffic. In case that share of such vehicles exceeds 20% of the traffic, construction standard requires individual computation of coefficient, however the method is not specified.

2.2 QUANTIFYING ROAD DETERIORATION CAUSED BY HEAVY VEHICLES

In Poland the technical condition of roads is monitored within the national non-urban road network (only with bituminous pavements) under the so-called System for Assessment of Road Pavement Condition (SOSN). Under this system, condition of road pavement is assessed through the following parameters:

• Fracturing; visual evaluation based on single and reticular cracking, patches and potholes.

• Rutting depth; automatic evaluation based on maximum depth measurement.

• Skid resistance; automatic evaluation based on vehicle blocked wheel resistance.

• Longitudinal roughness, automatic evaluation recalculated to international index IRI.

• Surface condition, visual evaluation based on surface cracks.

Data collected are processed and presented using a four-class scale:

A: pavement in good condition;

B: pavement in satisfactory condition;

C: pavement in unsatisfactory condition and;

D: pavement in poor condition.

Classes A and B represent desirable road conditions with new or renewed pavements not demanding repairs. Class C represents warning level and roads with damaged pavements demanding repairs. Class D represents critical road situation with pavements demanding immediate repair.

Technical condition of other roads (voivodship, powiat, gmina/urban) is not monitored within any centralized system. Furthermore in 1999 monitoring of voivodship roads was excluded from the SOSN system. All organizations make (or not) the assessment of pavement condition on their own. The quality of this assessment depends on the awareness of particular organizations of the necessity of having a good pavement condition database. Bad situation can be observed in the cities, where intensive traffic causes accelerated deterioration of pavements and the scope of maintenance works is inadequate. To cope with this problem, advanced pavement management systems are developed in some cities.

Condition of national roads Technical condition of national road pavements at the end of the year 2001 is presented in the Appendix 2. The presented data shows that:

• as it concerns fracturing, 26,2% of national road network require repairs, and approx. 1 400 km require immediate repair;



• as it concerns roughness, 21,4% of national road network require repairs, and approx. 875 km require immediate repair;

• as it concerns rutting, 42,2% of national road network require repairs, and approx. 2 600 km require immediate repair;

• as it concerns surface condition 11,2% of national road network require repairs, and approx. 315 km require immediate repair;

• as it concerns skid resistance 23,3% of national road network require repairs, and approx. 1 700 km require immediate repair.

The worst situation is observed in relation to pavement rutting. The identified number of roads in poor and unsatisfactory condition increases every year (see Table 2.2). Furthermore, on almost 16% of the national road network ruts are deeper than 30mm.

Table 2.2 Rutting on national roads – data comparison Road condition

category Year 2000

[data in km]Year 2001

[data in km]Growth index

A 3632,9 3280,0 0,90 B 6032,2 6175,4 1,02 C 3939,2 4297,0 1,09 D 2572,5 2593,6 1,01

TOTAL 16 176,7 16346,0 Source: Pavement condition of national roads in 2000 and 2001. GDDP/BSSD Reports

Aggregation of all parameters describing pavement condition leads to the following result: 28,5% of national roads are in a good condition (4 620 km); •

• •

• •

37,5% of national roads are in unsatisfactory condition (6 087 km); 34% of national roads are in a poor condition (5 516 km).

It means that over 70% of roads require different repairs among which: almost a half requires immediate actions; more than a half requires actions to be taken not later than within 3-4 years.

Condition of national roads is different in different regions of Poland. The worst situation is in two regions: swietokrzyskie and malopolskie, where the number of kilometers of roads in poor condition is about twice higher than in the rest of the country (in comparison to the administrated road network).

An analysis of GDDKiA reports leads to a conclusion, that within the last 4 years condition of national road network worsened less than it is often thought (see Table 2.3). However, it is evident that in relation to strengthening, the needs are increasing systematically: - in 1999 – 1,7% of the network, - in 2000 – 0,4% of the network, - in 2001 – 2,7% km of the network.



Table 2.3 Pavement improvement needs on national road network Share of national non-urban road network Action: 1998 1999 2000 2001 Not needed 68,5% 61,8% 64,9% 65,8% Surface treatment 13,0% 14,5% 9,3% 7,7% Grading 14,7% 18,2% 19,8% 17,9% Strengthening 3,8% 5,5% 5,9% 8,6%

The aggregated growth of grading and strengthening needs in the period 1998-2001 is approx. 8% of the network (increase from 18,5% to 26,5%.)

Condition of bridge structures

The data concerning bridge structures (from 2000) indicates a continuing worsening of their technical condition. To deal with that problem in a systematic way, a system similar to SOSN has been created in GDDP/ GDDKiA – Bridge Management System (System Gospodarki Mostowej). The assessment of construction elements and the whole object is done using a six-grade scale, between „0” and „5” points (where „5” denotes ideal - best construction condition and „0” denotes emergency condition).

Assessment of bridge structures is presented in Table 2.4 (including non-standard objects and viaducts over roads and railway lines, which constitute as much as 38.3% of the total). The assessment concerns national and voivodship roads.

Table 2.4 Assessment of the technical condition of bridge structures

Bridge construction Number Assessment of technical condition [in points]

Steel 810 3,24 Reinforced concrete 4 621 3,30 Pre-stressed 907 3,08 Stone, concrete and brick 459 3,11 Timber 6 2,62 Total 6 803 3,25

Source: Modification of Poland’s position paper under the chapter of “Transport Policy”, Annexe No. 2

Technical condition of bridge constructions is unsatisfactory. An object given grade of 3.00 points (alarming condition) has damage which – if not repaired in due time – will shorten the period of safe use. On national and voivodship roads there are almost 1,9 thousand bridge structures which average grade does not exceed 2.99 points. There are also structures given less than 1 point, which can end up in construction collapse. In such extreme cases they are closed to traffic, or limits on single-axle load are introduced.



Causes of poor condition of roads and bridges The causes are the same since many years. For the poor road conditions the most important are: • • • •

•

•

•

pavements carrying capacity not adjusted to the increased truck loads; inappropriate (compared to the needs) budgets allocated to road maintenance12, increasing traffic, increasing road freight transport successfully competing with railways and combined transport, lack of effective enforcement system to eliminate overloaded trucks.

Influence of these factors on deterioration of road pavements and bridges is multiplied by their interconnection.

Pavements prevailingly designed in the 1970’s are not prepared to carry growing traffic of heavy trucks. This problem is intensified by maintenance backlog13 accumulating year by year.

Heavy or overloaded trucks cause deterioration of pavements. When pavement bearing capacity is enough or condition of pavement is good, this impact can be minimal or low. But when pavement is designed to carry lower truck traffic or pavement condition is poor, the damages can be potentially very significant.

Within the period of 1995-2000 the observed increase of number of trucks on the road network was high, as well as their share in total traffic (see details in Chapter 3). The highest increase happened among the heaviest trucks, which are often overloaded even above single-axle load of 115 kN. These trucks have the greatest impact to the traffic conditions and pavement deterioration, especially that only 3% of national roads has satisfactory bearing capacity.

2.3 EVALUATION OF THE EXISTING LEGISLATION FOR OVER-WEIGHT VEHICLES

The Poland’s definition of over-weight vehicles and list of related legislation is attached in Appendix 2.

Movement of each over-weight vehicle requires permit and route specification. There are several bodies responsible for the decisions concerning admittance for the movement (permission). The responsibility depends on the starting and destination points of vehicle route. The bodies are following:

President of a city/powiat leader – when origin and destination points are located in a city, in Warsaw or in powiat,

Voivodship Marshal - when origin and destination points are located in different powiats in the same voivodship,

12 In the year 2001 around 500 km of national roads were repaired, while urgent repairs at the and of the year 2000 were estimated at the level of 5600 km. 13 According to GDDKiA reports the backlog at the end of the year 2001, was equal to 7 800 MPLN (approx. 2 167 MEUR)



General Director of National Roads and Motorways or nominated State institution - when origin and destination points are located in different voivodships or require crossing the country border.

•

•

•

•

To receive the permit, a carrier has to apply for the permit not later than 2 weeks before the planned drive. The detail rules and procedures are specified in the Minister of Infrastructure Regulation, dated 12 December 2001.

Movement of over-weight vehicle is charged. The charges are collected taking into consideration scale of excess and route length [in km]. In case that over-weight vehicle has not the permit, the carrier suffer a financial penalty, specified in the Regulation. What is more, the vehicle can be arrested until the relevant permit is provided.

Movement of over-weight vehicles is subject to several restrictions. The main are connected with:

periodical limitations during holidays,

periodical limitations during summer time,

limitations concerning days with high temperature.

The restrictions in movement are introduced by the Minister of Transport Regulation of 30 May 2000 concerning over-weight vehicles. The details are presented in Appendix 2.

Summarizing it can be said that legislation concerning over-weight vehicles is correct, however regulations following as well as law enforcement (traffic inspections) leaves a lot to be desired. This issue is discussed in the next paragraph.

2.4 PROTECTING NATIONAL ROAD NETWORK FOR HEAVY VEHICLES

At present protecting of the Poland’s national road network against destructive impact of heavy vehicles can be done through:

1. modification of the technical road construction standards;

2. setting up an accession transition period with regard to selected heavy vehicles of EU (as well as Polish) transport operators;

3. intensification of the traffic inspection of over-weight vehicles;

4. execution of strengthening program for national road network;

5. development of combined transport (better use of other than trucks means of freight transport);

6. increase of competitiveness of rail freight transport.

The problem of adapting technical road construction standards to modern heavy vehicle traffic was described in paragraph 2.1. The situation concerning EU requirements and Poland’s position concerning heavy vehicles is discussed in Chapter 5.

Problems of combined transport development in Poland and railways competitiveness were not investigated and analyzed as not being a subject of the report.



Traffic inspection of over-weight vehicles In EU countries inspections of over-weight vehicles are performed by the police or special transport inspections. The rules applied are effective because they are clear and restrictive. In case that weight of vehicle exceeds the limits the vehicle is “arrested” till the relevant penalty charge is paid and vehicle is unloaded.

Situation in Poland is much more complicated. On national roads inspections of over-weight vehicles started in 1992. They were done by the road administration personnel with the police assistance. Thanks to that, the recognized number of over-weight vehicles on the road network decreased from 15% in 1995 to 9% in 1998. Owners of identified over-weight vehicles were obliged to pay additional road charge. However, the scale of inspections wasn’t big (in 1998 only 23 470 of vehicles were inspected and 2 150 were identified as over-weight) and integrity of the system was rather low, allowing easy avoidance of inspections.

The situation got worse in 1999 due to the verdict of Constitutional Tribunal which acknowledged that functioning system of additional charges for over-weight vehicles collected: - on the basis of administrative decision, and - not as a penalty, but an additional road charge,

is inconsistent with The Constitution and with the Public Roads Act. On that basis, Administrative High Court (Naczelny Sad Administracyjny - NSA) revoked many administrative decisions concerning additional charges for over-weight vehicles as too high and restrictive. This resulted in paralysis of over-weight vehicles inspections, not supported by penalty instruments and in costs increase due to incurred additional administrative work. The problem concerned period between October 1996 and December 2001 and not only national roads and GDDP/GDDKiA but the whole public road network and relevant institutions.

A result of the described situation is depreciation of law respecting. Significant number of drivers refuse to unload over-weight vehicle and to pay an extra charge. According to GDDKiA data for 2001, among the total number of 35 055 vehicles inspected, 3 525 were over-weight (10%). Immediate reloading was ordered in relation to 1 843 of vehicles but 1 348 of them (73%) refused! At the same time, results of weighing showed significant exceeding of axle loads (the highest observed 16,5t/axle).

The situation has improved since January 2002, due to new legislation. In the new Road Traffic Act the records concerning additional charges for over-weight vehicles were changed to penalty charges. This allows more effective inspection and protects against carrier complaints. According to the information obtained in GDDKiA weighing based on the new law started, however any reliable data on its effectiveness is not available.

Summarizing, it can be stated that system existing in Poland has many weaknesses. The following are the most important:

The number of scales working and the number of measurement locations is to small compared to a level which can ensure efficient traffic inspection and efficient road protecting against over-weight vehicles. At present, there are 35 stationary and 6 mobile wheel load scales (in Poland altogether there are 100 points selected and prepared for vehicles weighing). It is planned to extend the list of points to 150.

•



Cooperation of GDDP and now GDDKiA with other road supervisors practically doesn’t exist. This results in damages of voivodship, powiat and gmina roads not protected against over-weight vehicles14.

•

• The practice shows that road administration personnel does not have enough competencies to safely stop and control vehicles (and to force drivers to unload the vehicle). So far, cooperation with the police shows that join actions are not sufficiently effective. The practice shows also that many drivers refuse to inspect their vehicles, preferring police fines or affairs in Local Courts with much lower financial consequences. This situation may change together with activation (probably in October 2002) of the new formation – Road Transport Inspection (ITD). ITD will have authorization for wide range of vehicle inspections, including using force against resistant drivers. However, some anxiety concerns ITD willingness to deal with the over-weight vehicles problem, because no motivation mechanism is foreseen to combine ITD budget with work effectiveness.

Better situation is observed in relation to international traffic. Some border crossings (however, only 13 of them) are equipped with wheel load scales15. Within the period of 1.01.2001-28.02.2002, Customs Offices inspected 764 704 vehicles and issued 14 644 (2% of the traffic) transport permits (see Table 2.5).

Table 2.5 Number of permits issued at the borders for over-weight vehicles Number of vehicles

inspected Number of over-weight vehicles

– permits issued South Border 88 052 996 West Border 566 262 9 687 East Border 110 390 3 961 Total 764 704 14 644

Source: GDDKiA database

Program of strengthening the national road network The former Polish Government has announced a plan of Polish road network adjustment to the EU standards. This plan contained:

•

•

•

•

construction of motorway system in main international corridors;

improvement of existing and construction of new expressway roads within TINA16 corridors;

improvement (strengthening) of other national roads being a part of TINA network;

improvement of other national roads (beyond TINA network).

14 From the data obtained in GDDKiA only Warsaw have their own wheel load scales. Weighing actions on other then national roads are very occasional. Furthermore, during weighing on national roads, over-weight vehicles use voivodship, powiat or even gmina roads to avoid inspections. 15 at German border: Gubinek, Olszyna and Świecko, at South border: Kudowa, Łysa Polana, Barwinek, at East border: Medyka, Korczowa, Dorohusk, Koroszczyn, Bobrowniki, Budziko and Bezledy. 16 Transport Infrastructure Needs Assessment (TINA); network containing Transeuropean Transport Corridors and other main international or national corridors.



The plan concerned an expanded road network of approx. 15 000 km and should be treated as feasible only in a very long period.

Taking into consideration Poland’s accession negotiations and the necessity of as fast as possible roads strengthening, the new government announced a new program assuming concentration of the efforts on selected road corridors, based on TINA network, with the following main goals:

radical acceleration of new motorways construction, •

•

•

•

•

•

•

acceleration of expressway road network improvement and development,

strengthening of other national roads within TINA corridors,

improvement of other national roads.

The program has three improvement phases:

Phase I: 2002-2005, realization of ongoing investments and projects ready to be started;

Phase II: 2005-201017, realization of investments which are feasible in (being negotiated) transitional period18;

Phase III: after 2010, investments to be done after the end of transitional period.

Table 2.6 summarizes road improvement program19, the details are presented in Appendix 2.

Table 2.6 Main roads improvement program - summary Investment Network length

Period 2002-2005 Motorways construction 222,9 km Expressways improvement and construction 228,1 km Other main roads strengthening 419,4 km

Total in 2002-2005: 870,4 km Period 2005-2010

Motorways construction 1 033,2 km Expressways improvement and construction 1 372,0 km Other main roads strengthening 900, 0 km

Total in 2005-2010: 3 305,2 km Source: Authors’ estimation

The summary of the program (Table 2.6) was based on GDDKiA data specified in the report “Road Reconstruction Program 2002-2005-2010”. The overall program designed for the period 2002-2010, concerns: - almost 1 256 km of motorways (A1, A2, A4, A18); - 88 investments on expressways; - 20 investments related to main roads strengthening.

17 Overlap of two phases is caused by excluding new projects starting in 2005 from the Phase I list 18 Transitional period described in Chapter 6 19 Table 2.6 does not include major ongoing investments specified in the Appendix 1



Analyzing the method of selection of particular investments it should be said, that the Road Administration often selects investments on the basis of knowledge about the investment readiness for implementation. Normally GDDP/GDDKiA pre-selects road investments on the basis of volume of traffic analysis, investment importance for the national and international traffic or according to the local needs and demands. Then, for selected investments the preliminary and conceptual studies are performed, sometimes resulting in further detail technical designing.

GDDP/GDDKiA does not have a clear system of comparative analysis of pre-selected projects (with the use of standard assessment methods, including economic efficiency analysis), resulting in creation of ranking list of the most effective projects. Without such a system, pre- and feasibility studies are not considered as important (sometimes being a part of a detail technical study!). This resulted and still results in lack of information (at GDDP/GDDKiA level) concerning economic efficiency of particular projects. Furthermore, the studies (including feasibility analysis) are done by different contractors using different methods, parameters and traffic forecasts.

A list of some investment projects, for which the Consultants identified IRR values, is specified in Appendix 2. However, taking into consideration the above comment, a comparison of the results seems to be unreliable.

2.5 COST ESTIMATES OF ROAD IMPROVEMENT DUE TO INCREASED AXLE LOADS

The estimation of total costs arising from the movement of heavy vehicles and especially due to increased axle loads is not easy. For the purpose of the Polish Government negotiations with EU, the Research Institute of Roads and Bridges (IBDiM) has made relevant calculations. The analysis was based on:

- the results of the Traffic Census 2000 (the average traffic volume on national roads and the share of trucks),

- the results of vehicle weighing (percent of over-weight trucks),

- unit costs of road deterioration.

Unit costs were calculated taking into consideration:

- typical representative road pavements for single-axle load of 80 kN and 100 kN,

- stresses and deformations in selected constructions resulting from standard and excessive loads, with designation of carrying capacity estimated with the use of fatigue criteria developed in the Asphalt Institute in the USA,

- cost estimates of the construction of inter-regional and regional roads.

Results of the performed calculations indicate that if a vehicle with single-axle load of 115 kN moves on a road of permitted load of 100 kN per axle, the cost of overload increases by approximately 1,59 PLN/km. If the same vehicle enters upon a road of permitted single-axle load of 80 kN, the cost increases up to approximately 14,32 PLN/km.

On the basis of IBDiM calculations GDDKiA presents the following costs of road deterioration:



- in 1999 the cost of negative effect of 12% over-weight vehicles on national roads was at the level of 1 675 MPLN (approx. 465 MEUR),

- in 2000 the cost of negative effect of 14,5%20 over-weight vehicles on national roads was at the level of 2 025 MPLN21 (approx. 563 MEUR).

Apart from the evaluation of the real cost of road deterioration the necessity of roads improvement and roads protection against further deterioration due to foreseen increase of heavy vehicles requires implementation of road improvement program.

The cost of program implementation cannot be treated as a cost of road network strengthening. However, it can be assumed that construction of motorways and expressways will ensure also high quality pavements appropriate for heavy vehicles. According to the data obtained in GDDKiA the construction cost foreseen for the period of 2002-2005 is estimated to 13 96522 MPLN (3 880 MEUR).

The government program specifies also a set of investments directly connected with road improvement, due to the foreseen increased axle loads. In selection of the investments the rest of main roads located within TINA corridors was taken into account, not included in the motorways and expressways construction program. The cost of road improvement can be estimated on the basis of GDDKiA data and divided into two phases (ongoing investments not included):

•

•

•

•

• • •

Phase I, investments to be realized between 2002-2005, concerning approx. 419 km of national roads;

Phase II, investments to be realized between 2005-2010, concerning approx. 900 km of national roads.

The total cost of the strengthening program between 2002-2010 was estimated as approx. 5 436 MPLN (1 510 MEUR) with:

cost of Phase I equal to approx. 2 220 MPLN (617 MEUR),

cost of Phase II equal to 3 216 MPLN (893 MEUR).

The government program assumes also that 75% of these expenditures will be covered by the loans and grants from international financing institutions.

The motorway and expressway construction program as well as improvement schedule of national roads located within TINA network, foreseen for the period 2002-2010, does not cover the whole TINA network. Strengthening of the rest of roads (approx. 960 km) has to be done after the year 2010 with the approx. cost of 4 000 MPLN (1 110 MEUR)23.

The government plans also to improve other national roads, which are not included in the TINA network. In these cases road strengthening will be usually associated with:

construction of city by-passes, elimination of black spots, increasing of capacity.

20 In the year 2001 the share of over-weight vehicles decreased to 10%, see paragraph 2.4. 21 In 2000 incomes from over-weight vehicles were approx. 118 000 PLN (33 000 EUR) and repays because of Main Administrative Court verdicts (for the period 1996-98) were approx. 6,4 MPLN (1,8 MEUR). 22 Plus approx. 5 335 MPLN of ongoing motorway and expressway investments 23 The author’s estimation.



The total cost foreseen for the by-pass construction program24 (ongoing projects are not included) is estimated as approx. 6 487 MPLN (1 800 MEUR) with:

cost of Phase I, between 2002-2005 (170 km) equal to approx. 1 327 MPLN (369 MEUR),

•

• cost of Phase II, between 2005-2010 (428 km) equal to 5 160 MPLN (1 433 MEUR).

Table 2.7 summarizes costs foreseen for the road strengthening program (without motorways and expressways construction).

Table 2.7 National road network improvement – summary of costs 2002-2005 2005-2010 TOTAL

MPLN MEUR MPLN MEUR MPLN MEUR National roads strengthening – TINA network

2 220 617 3 216 893 5 436 1 510

Other national roads – bypasses with pavement adjusted to heavy vehicles

1 327 369 5 160 1 433 6 487 1 802

TOTAL 3 547 986 8 376 2 327 11 923 3 312

The estimated cost (based on data obtained in GDDKiA) differs from the cost specified in the document “Infrastructure – a key to development”, where:

•

•

for road strengthening the amount of 6 000 MPLN (1 667 MEUR) was foreseen for the period 2002-2005,

for national road reconstruction the amount of 5 000 MPLN (1 389 MEUR) was foreseen for the period 2002-2005,

The details of estimations concerning costs of national roads improvement program are presented in Appendix 2.

24 It is foreseen that almost all investments will have pavements adjusted to the increased axle loads)



3. INCREASED MOTORIZATION AND MOBILITY IN POLAND

3.1 GOODS AND PASSENGER VEHICLES IN RELATION TO GDP

Passenger cars

In Poland, as in other transitional economies, strong tendency to own and use private cars is observed, in spite of a relatively low income level. Consequently, the number of private automobiles is rapidly increasing and rates of car ownership per unit of GDP per capita has become much higher than in much more developed countries.

The present situation is well illustrated by comparing the present car ownership rate with the rates in other countries. For example, in Poland, in 1997, with GDP per capita equal to 3 700 US$, there were 220 cars per one thousand inhabitants. This level was reached in Germany in 1970 when GDP per capita was equal to 11 400 US$, in Spain in 1985 (GDP = 9 700 US$) and in Ireland in 1990 (GDP = 7 470 US$). Because this comparison does not take into account differences between countries as regards purchasing power, in Table 3.1 the results of another comparative analysis were presented in which car ownership was compared with GNI per capita converted to U.S. dollars by the purchasing power parity.

Table 3.1 Growth of national income (US$) and car ownership (1999) Country No. of ars per

1000 inh. GNI *) per car Ratio

Poland =1 Turkey 63 102 222 2,92 Korea, Rep. 167 92 994 2,66 Argentina 140 85 286 2,44 Denmark 352 72 727 2,08 UK 373 59 571 1,70 Portugal 310 51 161 1,46 Hungary 238 46 429 1,33 Germany 508 46 280 1,32 Spain 389 45 887 1,31 Czech Rep. 335 38 328 1,10 Poland 240 34 958 1,00 Ukraine 104 32 308 0,92

*) GNI converted to U.S. dollars by the purchasing power parity (PPP) exchange rate Source: [World Bank, 2001].

Numbers in the last two columns of Table 3.1 confirm that car ownership in countries such as the Czech Republic, Poland and Hungary is much higher than it could be explained by the income level (purchasing power): up to 2 times higher than in highly developed country - Denmark and 2,5-2,9 times higher than in the Republic of Korea and than in Turkey.



Obviously, this comparison has 3 weak points. First, it does not take into account the real value of vehicle, which in lower income countries is considerable lower. Second, cars in Poland are used in a less intensive way (lower annual mileage). These 2 factors may explain part of difference. However, it has to be stressed that formula of calculations presented above does not take into account that in transitional economies, with a low income, disposable income is much lower than in wealthy countries. If one relates the number of cars purchased and used to this income it becomes obvious that the level of car ownership is much higher than it may be explained by the wealth of people.

In fact, changes in car purchasing observed in the last 2 years (see Table 3.2) give a good reason to state that the period of "irrational" consumption pattern has come to the end. However, it has to be remembered that in addition to new vehicles, used vehicles are imported in large numbers from EU countries (1999- 114 thousand, 2000 - 203 thousand, 2001 - over 216 thousand).

Table 3.2 New vehicles purchased in the period 1995-2001 new vehicles purchased in year [thousands]

1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 I -III 2002Cars 242 250 265 374 478 515 640 478 327 73

Source: SAMAR

Goods vehicles

Analysis of the number of goods vehicles registered in various countries related to GDP led to the conclusion that there is no relation similar to the one identified in case of passenger cars. This is probably due to lack of consistency in classifications used in statistics.

3.2 TRAFFIC VOLUMES

The complex information about traffic volumes on national and voivodship road network can be derived from the Traffic Census25 performed every 5-year (since the year 1965) by Road Administration. Last Traffic Census was done in the year 2000.

Additionally to the Traffic Census, there are some points located on the road network, equipped with automatic counters. However, this sort of data has a limited value due to small number of points, not continuos and sometimes poor quality measurements.

National roads - traffic volumes in 2000 The average traffic volume on national roads is at the level of 7 000 AADT26, but distribution of the traffic volumes is not uniform. Generally, the level of traffic depends on functional significance of the road i.e.: 25 Traffic Census covers: non urban road sections, big agglomeration outlets, sections within built up areas and bypasses. Surveys are carried out during 9 days in different seasons, time periods, etc. The following traffic characteristics can be obtained: AADT, and traffic structure, distribution and increase



• average traffic volumes on international roads – approx. 11 450 AADT;

• average traffic volumes on other national roads – approx. 5 110 AADT.

Quite significant difference can be observed comparing traffic volumes in different country regions. The highest average traffic is observed in Silesia region (12 000 AADT), high traffic (8 000 AADT) is observed also in Krakow, Lodz, Poznan and Warsaw regions. The lowest (5 000 AADT) traffic volumes occur in the eastern and north-eastern regions, such as Podlasie, Warmia and Mazury.

As it concerns road corridors, the highest traffic is observed on E7527 road (Gdansk-Lodz-Czestochowa-Katowice-Cieszyn) – 16 180 AADT. High traffic (approx. 12 000 AADT) is observed also on:

E30 road (Swiecko-Poznan-Warsaw-Terespol), especially on western and central sections;

•

•

•

E40 road (Zgorzelec-Wroclaw-Katowice-Krakow-Korczowa) and

E77 road (Gdansk-Warszawa-Krakow-Chyzne).

However, it must be said that the above data represent corridor averages. In practice, traffic volumes vary a lot along the section, especially in the corridor of E75. For example, from 8 000-10 000 AADT in the northern part (section Tczew-Grudziadz) up to 33 000 in the south, (section Czestochowa-Dabrowa Gornicza).

The details presenting length of the national roads in different traffic volume ranges are showed in Appendix 3.

Figures 3.1 and 3.2 present a comparison between traffic volumes on international and other national roads. On national roads traffic up to 10 000 AADT dominates (on almost 81% of sections), and the share of sections with traffic higher than 10 000 AADT is rather small - almost 8%. On international roads the numbers vary significantly. On more than 50% of sections traffic is higher than 10 000 AADT (on almost 10% is higher than 20 000 AADT).

Fig 3.1 Length of international roads by traffic volume ranges

<1 000 1 000-1 999 2 000-9 99910 000-14 999 15 000-19 999 >20 000

26 AADT – Annual Average Daily Traffic. 27 E75 – future A1 motorway corridor, E30 – A2 corridor, E40 – A4 corridor, E77 – S7 corridor.



Fig 3.2 Length of national roads by traffic volume ranges

<1 000 1 000-1 999 2 000-9 99910 000-14 999 15 000-19 999 >20 000

National roads – structure of vehicles Table 3.3 presents structure of vehicles on national roads.

Table 3.3 Structure of vehicles [in %] – national roads Vehicle category International road Other national road Total – average

Motorcycle 0,1 0,3 0,2 Passenger car 68,4 72,4 70,3 Van 11,5 11,3 11,4 Truck 6,4 5,8 6,1 Heavy truck 12,0 8,0 10,0 Bus 1,5 1,8 1,7 Tractors 0,1 0,4 0,3 Source: Traffic Census 2002 – report

Traffic Census results confirm supremacy of cars (more than 70% of the vehicles). Among goods vehicles the average traffic composition is following: • vans – 41%; • trucks – 22%; • heavy trucks – 36%.

Structure of vehicles depends on functional category of road. On international roads (in comparison to other national roads) the share of vans and trucks in total traffic is bigger: • international roads: almost 30%, • other national roads: almost 25%.

National roads – traffic categories for pavement design Based on the Traffic Census results and instruction for road pavement designing (“Catalogue of typical flexible and semi-rigid pavement constructions“) the traffic



categories for pavement design can be computed. These categories allow evaluating whether road pavements are adjusted to the road traffic expressed in number of standard vehicle axles per day and per traffic lane. The results of such evaluation done for Poland’s national road network are presented in the Table 3.4.

Table 3.4 National roads by traffic categories Traffic category Network length [in km] Share:

level 1 (KR1 - light traffic) 50 0,00 level 2 (KR 2) 1 334 0,08 level 3 (KR-3) 7 016 0,42 level 4 (KR-4) 6 242 0,38 level 5 (KR-5) 1 752 0,11 level 6 (KR-6 very heavy traffic) 229 0,01

Structure of traffic categories shows that traffic at levels 3 and 4 are dominant (80% of the national road network). Heavy traffic (levels 5 and 6) is observed on approx. 12% of the network.

National roads – traffic growth Table 3.5 presents general traffic growth indexes on national roads for the period of 1990-2000. For comparison, only those national roads were taken into account, which have been included in the limited network of national roads (as from 1.01.1999). The same applies to voivodship road network.

Table 3.5. Traffic growth indexes – national roads Roads category Traffic increase index

1990-1995 1995-2000 international roads 1,44 1,34 other national roads 1,41 1,28 total 1,42 1,31

Within the period of 1995-2000, a general traffic growth on national roads was at the level of 31%. The dynamics of the increase was lower than between 1990 and 1995, and fell gradually. Between 1995 and 1998, yearly traffic growth was at the level of 7%, while in the last years (1999, 2000) the increase was at the level of 2%. The traffic growth was different for different vehicle categories. The details are presented in Appendix 3.

The highest traffic increase was observed among heavy vehicles (44% on average) but only 17% increase among normal trucks, and up to 68% as it concerns heavy trucks. The increase was significant especially in comparison to the period 1990-1995 (with 5% increase). This variation can be explained by the transition process within vehicle fleet, i.e. elimination of smaller trucks replaced by heavy ones.

From the most recent analysis of the traffic data from automatic counters located in selected points of national road network it could be seen that, there was no traffic increase between 2000 and 2001!



Voivodship roads – traffic volumes in 2000 The average traffic volume on voivodship roads was at the level of 2 360 AADT. In comparison to the year 1995, a 32% increase was observed (similar as for national roads). Distribution of traffic volumes was also not uniform. Significant differences were observed comparing traffic volumes in different country regions. The highest traffic was observed in Silesia region (3 870 AADT), high traffic (2 800 – 3 500 AADT) was observed also in Malopolska, Wielkopolska and Mazowsze regions. The lowest (1 300 – 1 600 AADT) traffic volumes occurred in voivodships: Kujawsko-Pomorskie, Lubuskie, Podlaskie, and Warminsko-Mazurskie.

As it concerns traffic increase (comparison to 1995), the highest growth was observed on voivodship roads in:

Mazowsze – 52% and • • Wielkopolska – 37%.

Voivodship roads – structure of vehicles Table 3.6 presents structure of vehicles observed on voivodship roads

Table 3.6 Structure of vehicles [in %]– voivodship roads Vehicle category Voivodship roads National roads Motorcycles 0,8 0,2 Passenger car 79,4 70,3 Van 8,7 11,4 Truck 4,4 6,1 Heavy truck 3,5 10,0 Bus 2,1 1,7 Tractors 1,1 0,3

The results confirm supremacy of passenger vehicles on voivodship roads (more than 79%) and much lower (in comparison to national roads) share of trucks – 7.9%. The biggest difference concerns heavy trucks – 10% on national roads and only 3,5% on voivodship roads.

In the year 2000 on almost 85% of the length of voivodship roads traffic volumes were lower than 4 000 AADT, and only on 1% of the network (approx. 250 km) traffic volumes were higher than 10 000 AADT. The highest traffic was observed near large agglomerations or within the cities. The most occupied were following radial roads in Warsaw agglomeration:

road 719 (Warsaw-Pruszkow) – more than 37 000 AADT, •

•

•

road 631 (Warsaw-Zabki) – almost 26 000 AADT,

road 719 (Otrebusy-Grodzisk Maz.) – almost 25 000 AADT.

The details with length of the voivodship roads in different traffic volume ranges are presented in Appendix 3.



Voivodship roads – traffic growth by vehicle category Within the period 1995-2000 a general traffic increase on voivodship road network was at the level of 32%. The highest traffic increase was observed among cars (41% on an average) and vans (21%). In contrary to national roads, an increase of heavy vehicles traffic practically was not observed (only 2% increase). The details are shown in Appendix 3.

Powiat roads (non urban) – traffic volumes The average traffic volume on powiat roads is estimated at the level of 1 000 AADT. Distribution of traffic volumes is not uniform. Significant differences are observed comparing traffic volumes in different country regions. The highest traffic is observed in Silesia region (2 330 AADT), high traffic (1 000 – 1 500 AADT) is observed also in Malopolska, Wielkopolska, Mazowsze, Lublin and Pomorze regions. The lowest (500 - 700 AADT) traffic volumes occur in voivodships: Podlaskie, and Zachodnio-Pomorskie.

3.3 VEHICLE POPULATION

Official data28 on the growth of motorization in the period 1985-2000 are presented in Table 3.7. All data are for 31 December of a given year.

Table 3.7 Registered road vehicles and tractors (in thousand units) Type of vehicle 1985 1990 1995 1998 1999 2000 Passenger cars 3 671 5261 7 517 8 891 9 283 9 991Buses 83 92 85 81 79 82Lorries and road tractors29) 780 1045 1 354 1 563 1 683 1 879Ballast and agriculture tractors 919 1192 1 212 1 261 1 225 1 253Motorcycles and scooters 1 547 1351 929 820 804 803Total 7089 9 041 11 186 12 709 13 169 14 008

Source: [Statistical Yearbooks... ]

As it can be seen from Table 3.7, a very rapid growth in the number of passenger cars and trucks was observed in the last 15 years. The number of buses and vehicles of remaining categories was stable. Age of registered vehicles, as for 31 December 2000, is shown in Table 3.8.

28 Source: Statistical Yearbooks of the Republic of Poland issued by the Central Statistical Office. 29 including vans



Table 3.8 Age of vehicles (2000) Years of production

Vehicle category till 1985 1981-1985 1986-1990 1991-1995 1996-2000 Total Passenger cars 1 879 894 1 644 357 1 877 287 2 178 415 2 411 307 9 991 260Buses 19 396 20 117 26 530 8 452 7 861 82 356Lorries 523 580 260 364 311 736 256 041 431 283 1 783 004Road tractors 16 032 10 045 27 143 26 995 15 845 96 060Total 2 438 902 19 34 883 2 242 696 2 469 903 2 866 296 11 952 680

Source: Waskiewicz J. "Estimation of car, truck, bus and road tractor number by voivodship as for 31.12.2000”. ITS Warszawa 2001.

However, data on vehicle population presented in official statistics are questioned by several researchers and analysts, in particular by the World Bank, Motor Transport Institute (ITS) and the Samar company which for years collects and analyzes data on motorization. Samar, co-operating with producers, dealers and companies dealing with marketing and banking, is considered as reliable source of data. Since 2000 it issues a Yearbook on the Polish Motorization Market30 which is sponsored by the Ministry of Economy.

Car ownership rates have been questioned by the authors of the World Bank report “Poland - Strategic Priorities for the Transport sector” (No. 19450 POL, June 1999) which suggested that the numbers of vehicles in use are probably 20-30% lower than shown in official statistics. This conclusion was based on rough calculations taking into account numbers of new cars bought and used cars imported to the country in the last years.

Another type of analysis was made by ITS31 which considered age of registered vehicles (see Table 3.9). Conclusion was that the numbers of vehicles in use are considerably lower than shown in official statistics: • for passenger cars - by 16%, • for trucks - by 25%, • for buses - by 27%, • for motorcycles and scooters - by 67% and 60%.

Table 3.9 Age of registered vehicles - thousands (1999) Year of production Total Vehicle category before 1985 1986-1990 1991-1999 registered in use Passenger cars 3 230 1 712 4 341 9 283 7 813 Trucks – total of which: • LGV • HGV

759 454 305

326 200 126

598 509 89

1 683 1 163

520

1 266 931 335

Buses 35,3 27,1 16,4 78,8 57,4 Special 38,0 23,7 33,3 95,0 76,0 Motorcycles and scooters 1 504 545

30 Yearbook for Polish Market of Vehicles. 31 E.g., Social and Economic Implications of Various Scenaria of the Development of the Polish Road Transport. ITS Warsaw, December 2000.



Analysis carried out by Samar32 led to similar results. The amount of passenger cars in use at the end of 1999 was estimated as equal to 7,5 million vehicles what is close to 7,81 million shown in Table 3.9.

Additional arguments for questioning official statistics have been provided by:

• results of comprehensive travel surveys carried out in several cities; for example in Lodz car ownership rate in interviewed households was about 25% lower than in official city statistics;

• results of surveys of mileage per car per year; the total number of vehicle-kilometers calculated by multiplication of the "official" number of vehicles by average distances was much higher than the number of vehicle-kilometers assessed from traffic counts on the road network.

Finally, overestimation of vehicle numbers in Poland is one of the reasons of astonishingly high car ownership rates in comparison to the income level. This topic is discussed in separate point.

All these leads to conclusion that for all predictions concerning, for example, likely revenues from vignettes, the number of vehicles in use should be estimated as considerable lower than the numbers derived from official statistics.

3.4 MOBILITY ASSESSMENT

Similar as in case of statistics on vehicle population (paragraph 3.3) data on the use of vehicles are not precise. The most reliable estimates have been made by the Motor Transport Institute (ITS)33 [1]. They were verified by comparing results with the total fuel consumption. Results are presented in Table 3.10

Table 3.10 Mobility of vehicles (1999) Vehicle category Number

of vehicles (thousands)

Kilometers per

veh/year

Million of vehkm/year

Percent

Passenger vehicles (PCV) 7 813 11 746 91 771 73,1 Trucks- total 1 266 21 987 27 831 22,2 delivery (up to 3,5 tons) 931 15 495 14 426 11,5 heavy vehicles – incl. trailers 335 40 039 13 405 10,7 Buses - incl. minibuses 57,4 44 282 2 542 2,0 Special vehicles 76 14 264 1 084 0,9 Motorcycles 255 5 275 1 345 1,1 Mopeds 290 3 034 880 0,7 Total 9 757,4 125 453 100,0

32 Yearbook on the Polish Motorization Market 1999. Samar, Warsaw 2000. 33 op.cit.



Numbers on annual mileage per vehicle given in Table 3.10 are higher than in other estimates, but the total number of vehicle-kilometers is similar because higher mobility is compensated by a lower vehicle population. For example, in traffic forecasts prepared as an input to draft national transport policy 2000 [42]34 8750 kilometers per vehicle per year were assumed with the number of cars equal to 9 283 thousands (from official statistics). This gave the total number of vehicle-kilometers per year equal to 81 226 million, i.e. 11% lower than estimated by ITS.

34 With methodology entirely different from applied by ITS



4 INTERNAL ROAD FINANCING 4.1 PROJECTED VIGNETTE REVENUES

The new government strategy for road sector is described in a recently issued paper called “Infrastructure – a key to development”. The document presents the proposed sources of road financing and the expected revenues. One of the most important source of money for roads assumed there is revenue from the proposed vignette system. Table 4.1 shows the foreseen revenues from that system in the period of 2002 – 2005.

Table 4.1 Assumed revenues from vignettes

Year 2002 2003 2004 2005 Assumed revenues million PLN

500

2 000

2 100

2 200

million EUR 139 556 583 611 Source: Government policy paper: “Infrastructure – a key to development”

It was not disclosed to the Consultants how these numbers were calculated. However, a new, detailed estimation of the revenues has been prepared by PriceWaterhouseCoopers. The study assumptions and results are discussed later on in this Chapter.

Starting the 1st January 2002 the vignette system has been introduced but only for heavy goods vehicles (trucks above 3,5 tons). The system covers the whole network of national roads. The vignette price depends on truck type, level of exhaust fumes emission and validity period. It ranges from 5 PLN (1,4 EUR) for light truck 24 hours vignette to 2 200 PLN (611 EUR) for heaviest truck yearly vignette. Table A4.1 in the Appendix 4 presents the detailed tariff.

As could be seen from Table 4.1, the Government expected revenue from truck vignette system in 2002 was 500 million PLN (139 MEUR). Information on the vignette sales in the first four months show that the total monthly revenue was dropping gradually from about 8 million EUR in January to some 4,7 million EUR in April – this is illustrated on Figure 4.1. A number of vignettes sold (by type) together with the revenue received from the system until April is shown in the Table A4.2 in the Appendix 4.



Truck vignette revenue 2002

012

3456

789

January February March April

mill

ion

EUR

Figure 4.1. Truck vignette revenue 2002

It could be seen from the revenue data, that the sharpest drop concerns long-time vignettes (those valid half-year and a year), what is understandable because these types of vignette should be bought at the beginning of a year. As a result of that, the revenues in subsequent months were decreasing. It is also expected than in next months the revenue will be even lower. Optimistically assuming next monthly revenues equal to this of April, a total annual revenue of about 230 million PLN (63 MEUR) can be expected. This is much less than half of the value assumed in the Government’s paper. It should also be noticed, that these are gross revenues. Assuming the system operation costs (which are not know), based on other countries experience, of about 5-8%, it gives net revenue of about 215 million PLN (60 MEUR).

According to unofficial data, about 60% of truck operators do not buy the vignette. Thus, there would be a potential for at least doubling revenues after the system tightening through strict enforcement. However, with limited capacity of the traffic police which has other priorities (such as traffic safety) this does not seem to be feasible. It means that the revenues envisaged by the Government seem to be unrealistic.

As mentioned before, PriceWaterhouseCoopers has prepared a study estimating revenues from the vignette system extended to cars and vans (light trucks). The study has been done in a short time and has been based on very limited data. There was no time for origin-destination and stated preference surveys or for research on border crossing traffic. However, even with such a shortage of input data, the estimation assumptions seem to be sound and the results reasonable.

The study has taken into consideration four possible road networks on which vignette would be made obligatory: • the whole public road network; • national road network; • international (TINA) road network; • dual carriageway roads.

and four types of vignette validity: • 10-day; • one month; • half year;



• one year.

The proposed prices of the vignettes are shown in Table 4.2

Table 4.2 Proposed vignette prices. Vignette type Vignette price – cars Vignette price – vans (light trucks)

PLN EUR PLN EUR 10-day 40 11 60 17 one month 90 25 135 38 half year 130 36 195 54 one year 180 50 270 75

Source: PriceWaterhouseCoopers

The study results show that the following annual revenues could be expected from the system according to the road network being under vignette system:

• the whole public road network – ca. 1,6 billion PLN / 440 million EUR;

• national roads – ca. 1,1 billion PLN / 300 million EUR;

• international roads – 1,0 billion PLN / 280 million EUR;

• dual carriageway roads – 0,9 billion PLN / 250 million EUR.

However, the study assumed truck revenues of 314 million PLN (only January and February data were available at that time), which – as discussed earlier – is too optimistic.

If the system is imposed only on higher standard roads – international or dual carriageway ones (otherwise it could be regarded as a tax), the total gross annual revenue of some 0,8 – 0,9 billion PLN could be expected then. After deducting the system operation cost of some 5% it gives 0,75 – 0,85 billion PLN (210 – 240 MEUR) of annual net revenue. This is almost three times less than the value assumed in the Government’s program.

4.2 FUEL TAXES

The taxes imposed on fuels consist of: • excise duty and • VAT.

The present excise duty rates imposed on domestic and imported fuels (from 1 January 2002) are:

• leaded petrol: 1 629 PLN/1000 liter (453 EUR);

• unleaded petrol: 1 464 PLN/1000 liter (407 EUR);

• diesel fuel (with sulfur content less than 0,005%): 980 PLN/1000 liter (272 EUR);

• liquid petroleum gas (LPG): 390 PLN/1000 kg (108 EUR).



The detailed rates imposed from 1 January 2000 are shown in Table A4.3 in the Appendix 4. Figure 4.2 illustrates change of the excise duty on unleaded fuel in the period of 1993 – 2000.

Excise duty - unleaded petrol[PLN/litre]

0,35

0,35

0,35

0,35 0,

420,

420,

420,

420,

420,

42 0,50

0,50 0,51

0,51 0,

590,

590,

590,

59 0,62

0,62

0,78 0,

82 0,84 0,87 0,

92 0,97 1,

021,

13 1,18 1,

221,

22 1,28

1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000

Figure 4.2 Excise duty on unleaded petrol in the period of 1993 - 2000

As could be seen from the figure the excise duty has been raised gradually to reach the EU recommended level. Table 4.3 compares present rates with the ones recommended by the EU.

Table 4.3. Comparison of Polish and EU recommended values of excise duty on fuels Fuel type Excise duty rate [EUR/1000 liter] Polish recommended by EU leaded petrol 453 467 unleaded petrol 407 417 diesel fuel 272 310 LPG [EUR/1000 kg] 108 141

As could be seen from the Table 4.3, in case of petrol, the rates almost satisfy the EU recommendation, whereas those of diesel fuel and LPG are significantly lower.

The total revenue from the excise duty on motor fuels in the period of 1995 – 2000 is shown in Table 4.4. The data are also illustrated on Figure 4.3.



Table 4.4 Total revenue from excise duty on fuels Year Revenue

[million PLN] [million EUR] 1995 4 061,2 1 128 1996 5 576,4 1 549 1997 6 556,5 1 821 1998 8 762,5 2 434 1999 11 571,7 3 214 2000 12 577,2 3 494

Source: Statistical Yearbook

0

2

4

6

8

10

12

14

1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000

billi

on P

LN

Figure 4.3 Total revenue from excise duty on fuels

General VAT rate of 22% is imposed on fuels, to the purchase value increased by the appropriate excise duty.

4.3. VEHICLE TAXATION

There are following taxes applied on vehicles: • annual vehicle tax (trucks only); • excise duty (cars only); • customs duty; • VAT.

Annual vehicle tax

The annual vehicle tax applies only to trucks of gross vehicle weight more than 3,5 tons. The tax rates are decided by gminas but they cannot exceed values listed in Table 4.5.



Table 4.5. Maximum allowed annual vehicle tax rates Vehicle type Tax rate [PLN] [EUR] truck of gross vehicle weight (GVW): 3,5t < < 5,5t 600 167 5,5t < < 9t 1 000 278 9t < < 12t 1 200 333 > 12t 2 290 636 truck-tractor (truck+trailer GVW): 3,5t < < 12t 1 400 389 12t < < 36t 1 770 492 > 36t 2 290 636 trailer (truck+trailer GVW): 7t < < 12t 1 200 333 12t < < 36t 1 400 389 > 36t 1 770 492 bus with No. of seats: < 30 1 400 389 > 30 1 770 492

Total revenues from annual vehicle tax are summarized in Table 4.6. Starting from 1998 annual vehicle tax on cars has been included in the excise duty on fuels – this explains a drop of the total revenue from this tax in 1998. Because of a change of administrative system and introduction of powiats, starting from 1999 the tax has been collected by gminas and cities with powiat status.

Table 4.6. Total revenues from annual vehicle tax Revenue Total Gminas Cities with powiat status

Year million PLN

million EUR

million PLN

million EUR

million PLN

million EUR

1995 603 168 603 168 1996 824 229 824 229 1997 1 129 314 1 129 314 1998 346 96 346 96 1999 360 100 243 67 117 33 2000 387 107 260 72 127 35

Source: Statistical Yearbook

Excise duty

The excise duty is imposed only on imported cars and new cars bought in Poland (before first registration). Table 4.7 summarizes the excise duty rates on imported cars depending on vehicle age and engine size. The rates are in force from March 2002.



Table 4.7. Present excise duty on cars engine size vehicle age

up to 2000 cm3 above 2000 cm3 up to 2 years 3,1% 13,6% 3 years 15,1% 25,6% 4 years 27,1% 37,6% 5 years 39,1% 49,6% 6 years 51,1% 61,6% 7 years 63,1% 65,0% 8 years or more 65,0% 65,0%

The excise duty on new cars bought in Poland is:

• for cars with engines up to 2000 cm3: 3%;

• for cars with engines above 2000 cm3: 12%.

The previous rates of the excise duty on cars, in force from January 2001until March 2002 are presented in Table 4.8.

Table 4.8 Excise duty on cars in force from January 2001 until March 2002.

Engine size

up to 2000 cm3 above 2000 cm3

imported cars 6,4% 17,6%

new cars bought in Poland 6,0% 15,0%

Customs duty

Starting from January 2002 there is no customs duty for vehicles imported from countries of EU, CEFTA, EFTA and Lithuania, Latvia, Estonia, Israel, Turkey, Croatia (from April 2002). For vehicles imported from other countries the customs duty rate is 35% (9% for motorcycles).

VAT

General VAT rate of 22% is imposed on all vehicles. It applies to vehicle purchase price increased firstly by the appropriate customs duty and secondly by relevant excise duty.

4.4 IMPORT AND REGISTRATION FEES

Each imported vehicle to be registered must have a so-called „Vehicle Card”. A cost of this card is 500 PLN - 1000 PLN.

There is an obligation of temporary registration of vehicle (up to 30 days) which precedes the permanent registration. This is due to a fact that there is no centralized vehicle data



base and each time vehicle data have to be verified manually which is a time consuming process. The vehicle owners incur costs of many years negligence in this matter. Temporary and permanent registration fees are summarized in Tables 4.9 and 4.10.

Table 4.9. Temporary registration costs Item cost [PLN]registration plates 30,0 temporary permit 16,5 labels on registration plates 11,0 treasury fee 5,0

Total 62,5

Table 4.10. Permanent registration costs Item cost [PLN]registration plates 80,0 vehicle identity card 33,0 legalization signs 11,0 control label 16,5 treasury fee 5,0

Total 145,5

4.5 ROAD USER CHARGES REVENUES

At present, there are the following categories of road user charges:

• motorway tolls;

• heavy goods vehicles vignette system;

• charges to non-standard vehicles;

• charges to international transport.

Motorway tolls Starting the 3rd of April 2000 tolls are collected on A4 motorway, 61 km section between Krakow and Katowice. This is the first and so far the only one toll motorway in Poland. It is based on an open system with two plazas located on both ends of the section. Table 4.11 presents the toll rates on one plaza – the tolls on both plazas are equal. It means that users using the whole section pay twice the rate shown in this table.

Table 4.11 Toll rates on Krakow – Katowice motorway [PLN]. from 03.04.2000 from 01.01.2001

cars and vans 4,00 5,00 trucks 10,00 12,00



The toll revenues35 are estimated to some 48 million PLN in 2000 and 60 million PLN in 2001.

The future of the toll motorways in Poland is not clear now. If the government plans to introduce vignette system are implemented, it may be necessary to convert the cash toll system into a kind of shadow tolling system. The details are not known yet. The problem concerns the A4 motorway section described earlier and the A2 motorway section Nowy Tomysl - Konin which is to be open as a toll motorway till the end of 2004 (partly even in 2003). This issue is discussed in Chapter 5.

Heavy goods vehicles vignette system The system has been described in paragraph 4.1.

Charges to non-standard vehicles

All vehicles of non-standard characteristics, wanting to move on Polish road network is obliged to have special permit and to pay the relevant fee for each trip36. A tariff set up by the Council of Ministers specifies fees per kilometer per type of excess. The charge varies from 0,10 to 6,30 PLN (0,03 – 1,75 EUR) per kilometer for single trip. International hauliers (trucks crossing Polish border) pay a lump-sum fee per trip:

exceeding maximum permissible vehicle length of not more than 2 m: 150 PLN; •

•

•

exceeding maximum permissible vehicle width up to 3 m: 150 PLN;

exceeding maximum permissible axle load of not more than 15%: 450 PLN.

The permit could also be given for specified period (fee of 5 to 10 PLN per day) or without time limit.

Total revenue from non-standard vehicles was equal to 4,75 million PLN (1,32 MEUR) in 2000 and 6,38 million PLN (1,77 MEUR) in 2001.

Charges to international transport The charges are imposed on international hauliers, on trucks above 3,5 tons GVW. There are the following types of charges for:

• license – given for a period of 2 to 50 years;

• permit – given for specified period – see Table A4.4.

There are two types of license: for one country bordering Poland and for more than one country. The fees depend on validity period – they range from 1 500 PLN (417 EUR) for 2-15 years car license for one country to 15 000 PLN (3 890 EUR) in case of multi-country heavy truck license (for details see Table A4.4 in the Appendix 4).

Permits for regular international passenger transport are given for a period from 6 months to 5 years with a fee from 400 to 4 000 PLN (from 111 to 1 111 EUR) – see Appendix 4, Table A4.5 for the details. For oscillatory bus transport the fees are:

• up to 6 months – 100 PLN (28 EUR); 35 According to the Consultant’s estimation 36 The Cabinet Regulation for Road Charges from 15 January 2002 (Dz. U. 02.8.60)



• up to 1 year – 200 PLN (56 EUR).

And for occasional transport – 20 PLN (5,6 EUR) per trip.

A fee for permit for foreign entrepreneur for cabotage transport is 3 000 PLN (830 EUR). Other permit fees are summarized in Table 4.12.

Table 4.12 Fees on permits for international transport Permit type Fee [PLN] [EUR] single haulage: passenger 20 5,6 goods 50 13,9 annual 1 200 333,3 annual ECMT 1 800 500,0

In case of non-licensed hauliers the permit fees from Table 4.12 are increased by:

• 100% in case of single haulage;

• 50% for annual permissions.

Total annual revenues from international licenses were equal:

• 29,9 million PLN (8,3MEUR) in 2000 and

• 31,7 million PLN (8,8 MEUR) in 2001.

Total annual revenues from permits and other fees was:

• 241,3 million PLN (67,0 MEUR) in 2000 and

• 247,3 million PLN (68,7 MEUR) in 2001.

The whole revenue is accumulated on a special GDDKiA account and spent on construction and maintenance of national roads.

Charges to domestic transport As in case of international transport there are two types of charges: licenses and permits. Licenses fees depend on the validity area and period and range from 200 PLN (55,6 EUR) to 1 100 PLN (305,6 EUR). Appendix 4, Table A4.6 contains the detailed tariff.

Permits are obligatory in case of passenger transport and the fee ranges from 100 PLN (27,8 EUR) to 700 PLN (194,4 EUR) – see Appendix 4, Table A4.7 for the details.

4.6 ANNUAL ROAD EXPENDITURES Road expenditures are presented for the period of 1990-2001. It has to be stressed that the data analysis was difficult because within the considered period GDDP/GDDKiA statistics are not complete and:

different cost elements were classified into different budget items, •



road administration was reorganized more than once what resulted in changes in statistics, for example because of changes of the networks administrated.

•

Due to the above mentioned problems, a comparison of expenditures, in particular for investments and maintenance, seems to be not reliable.

Figure 4.4 presents road expenditures for national and voivodship roads in the period of 1990-2001.

Fig. 4.4 Road expenditures in current prices

0

500

1000

1500

2000

2500

3000

3500

4000

1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001

[MPL

N]

National roads Voivodship roads

At present, expenditures are divided into current expenditures (main repairs, maintenance and administrative costs) and property expenditures (investments). In the past, a great part of investments were considered as modernizations (improvements) and belonged to current expenditures. The substantial increase of expenditures in the last years is due to bank loans and grants used for main investment financing.

Figure 4.5 shows expenditures expressed in current prices against the expenditures expressed in constant prices (the year 2001 prices).



1990

1991

1992

1993

1994

1995

1996

1997

1998

1999

2000

2001

0500

10001500

20002500

3000

3500

4000

[MPL

N]

Fig 4.5 National roads expenditures

current prices constant 2001 prices

The comparison presented on Fig 4.5 shows that:

• the real budget of road administration in 1990 was relatively high and was decreasing up to the year 1994; the high difference between 1990 and 1991 can be explained by excluding constructing companies from GDDP structures, which was done in 1991

• an increase of expenditures started from 1994 and lasted to the year 1998,

• in the period of 1999-2001 expenditures were almost at the same level, however the length of the national road network was significantly lower.

Fig. 4.6 presents annual current expenditures divided into 3 groups: main repairs, maintenance, and administrative costs. The data are presented in constant 2001 prices.

Fig. 4.6 Current road expenditures

0,00

500,00

1000,00

1500,00

2000,00

2500,00

3000,00

3500,00

1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001

[MPL

N]

Main repairs/modernizations Current maintenance Administration



A group of expenditures named “Main repairs” contained different types of activities in different years, including main repairs, road rehabilitation, modernization, etc. The highest modernization budget (in real prices) was in the year 1990. After a decrease in the period of 1991-1997, a substantial increase of expenditures in this group took place in the year 1998 and then in 2000.

As it concerns maintenance expenditures, a decrease was observed between 1990 and 1995. Since 1996 an increase was observed up to the year 2000. During the last 2 years the level of expenditures was lower than in 1998 and 1999, however the network administrated was smaller.

The share of administration costs was very high (approx. 30%) in the period 1992-1997. In last years it decreased to approx. 10-11% of current expenditures.

Fig. 4.7 presents investment expenditures including motorway and expressway construction. The data are presented as a comparison between expenditures expressed in current prices against the expenditures expressed in constant prices of 2001.

1990

1992

1994

1996

1998

2000

0

200

400

600

800

1 000

1 200

[MPL

N]

Fig 4.7 National roads investment expenditures

current prices constant 2001 prices

At the beginning of 1990-ties the investment budget was very low. However, at that time some of investment projects were financed form current expenditures – modernizations. The investment budget was increasing till 1998. The decrease was observed in the period of 1999-2001, however the length of the national road network was reduced.

Fig. 4.8 presents expenditures on national roads per 1 km of road network. A significant increase (more than 2-times) can be observed in the last 3 years (from 68 000 PLN/km in 1998 to 176 000 PLN/km in 2001, in 2001 prices). This increase can be explained by the reduction of the length of the national road network. As a result of changes in road categorization, only the most important and carrying heavy traffic roads belong to the national roads network and it is clear that they require more costly investments.



020000400006000080000

100000120000140000160000180000200000

PLN

/km

1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001

Fig 4.8 Expenditures on national roads - per km of the network (constant prices)

Fig. 4.9 presents expenditures on voivodship roads recalculated per 1 km of road network. Similar to national roads significant increase (more than 7-times) can be observed in last 3 years (from 4 000 PLN/km in 1998 to almost 30 000 PLN/km in 2001, in 2001 year prices).

0

5000

10000

15000

20000

25000

30000

PLN

/km

1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001

Fig 4.9 Expenditures on voivodship roads - per km of the network (constant prices)

The detail data are presented in the Appendix 4, Table A4.8.



4.7 CHANNELING THE ROAD REVENUES - BUDGETING PROCESS

A part of the revenues described in the preceding chapters form the road budget. Below, channeling of each element of road revenues has been described.

Excise duty on fuels The revenues from excise duty on fuels are collected – through the oil companies – by the Ministry of Finance. According to the law (Road Financing Act), a specified percentage (however not lower than 30%) of total planned revenues from excise duty on fuels (revenues planned in the Budget Law, not actual revenues) is allocated to national, voivodship and powiat roads. The Parliament idea was to increase the percentage every year, but because of the budgetary problems, instead of increasing it was reduced back to 30% (see Table 4.13).

According to the Local Government Revenues Act, another 10,5% of total revenues from excise duty are transferred to gminas as so-called “compensating subvention”. This is a subvention compensating loss of revenues from the former annual vehicle tax on cars, which was cancelled in 1998, and included in fuel price as increased excise duty. The subvention is not dedicated to roads and can be spent also on general purposes. Table 4.13 shows the total planned revenues from excise duty on fuels and amounts which were transferred to national roads, voivodships, powiats and gminas in subsequent years.

Table 4.13 Allocation of revenues from excise duty on fuels. 1999 2000 2001 2002

Planned revenues from excise duty on fuels37: - million PLN 10 988 12 615 15 342 14 728 - million EUR 3 052 3 504 4 262 4 091

Share allocated to national, voivodship and powiat roads: - % 31,5% 30,6% 30,0% 30,0% - million PLN 3 462 3 860 4 603 4 418 - million EUR 962 1 072 1 279 1 227

Share assigned to gmina roads: - % 10,5% 10,5% 10,5% 10,5% - million PLN 1 154 1 325 1 611 1 546 - million EUR 320 368 447 430 Source: Ministry of Finance

The money allocated to public roads other than gmina is further divided with following proportion:

• 40% for national roads managed by GDDKiA;

• 60% for roads managed by voivodships and powiats as so-called “road subvention”. 37 Shares allocated to roads are based on the excise duty revenues planned in the Budget Law, not actual revenues



10% of the latter amount is kept as a subvention reserve to finance some continued investments (pointed out in the Budget Law) and ferries. Starting 2001, another 3,15% of that sum is excluded from the road subvention, to finance national, voivodship and powiat roads in the city of Warsaw. Table 4.14 summarizes the amounts for the period of 1999 – 2002). The remaining amount is divided, according to the Minister of Transportation regulation, to particular roads of three administrative levels:

• voivodship – for voivodship roads;

• powiat – for powiat roads;

• cities of powiat status – for national, voivodship and powiat roads within the cities.

Table 4.14 Allocation of the road subvention 1999 2000 2001 2002 GDDP/GDDKiA national roads (40%)

- million PLN 3 462 3 860 4 603 4 418 - million EUR 962 1 072 1 279 1 227

Other public roads except gmina roads (60%) - million PLN 2 077 2 316 2 762 2 651 - million EUR 577 643 767 736

The subvention reserve (10%) - million PLN 208 231 276 265 - million EUR 58 64 77 74

Subvention for roads in Warsaw (3,15%) - million PLN - - 87 83 - million EUR - - 24 23

Source: Ministry of Finance

The algorithm of division takes into account the following factors:

• replacement value of voivodship roads, powiat roads and roads in cities of powiat status (50% weight);

• total vehicle-kilometers on the above road network (45% weight);

• border crossing traffic (5% weight) on voivodship roads.

Within each group (voivodshiop, powiat, cities of powiat status) resources are further divided into particular voivodships, powiats and cities of powiat status according to the following algorithm:

1. In case of voivodship roads: • replacement value of voivodship roads (50% weight); • total vehicle-kilometers on voivodship roads (45% weight); • border crossing traffic (5% weight) on voivodship roads.

2. In case of powiat roads: • replacement value of powiat roads (50% weight); • total vehicle-kilometers on powiat roads (50% weight).

3. In case of roads in cities of powiat status:



• replacement value of public roads (other than gmina) in a city of powiat status (50% weight);

• total vehicle-kilometers on the above road network (50% weight).

The division is being done by GDDKiA. It is planned that this duty will be taken over by the Department of Public Roads of the Ministry of Infrastructure.

According to the information obtained in the Ministry of Finance, on average powiats spend about 80% of the subvention on roads, and this proportion grows every year. In case of voivodships this proportion amounted to 86,7% in 2000 and 103,7% in 2001 – see Table 4.15 for the details. Then, it is clear that powiats and especially voivodships tend to spend more money on roads every year. In case of voivodships, on average they spend even more than they receive as a road subvention.

Table 4.15 Part of road subvention spent on roads by powiats and voivodships % of subvention Number of powiats Number of voivodships spent on roads 2000 2001 2000 2001 less than 80% 118 123 3 6 80% - 100% 142 108 13 5 more than 100% 48 76 - 5 Source: Ministry of Finance

One of the criteria of dividing the subvention reserve is how much of the last year subvention was spent on roads by powiats – if it was less than 80% of the received subvention, then powiat is given no money from the reserve. This system encourages powiats to spend more money on roads.

Vehicle taxation

Annual vehicle tax, imposed only on trucks, is being collected by gminas and cities with powiats status and could be spent for their general purposes. Revenues from the excise duty and customs duty on vehicles come to the Ministry of Finance and are spent for the State general purposes.

Import and registration fees Revenues from the import duties on vehicles are collected by the Ministry of Finance and are spent for the State general purposes. Vehicle registration fees are collected by gminas and spent for their general purposes.

Motorway tolls According to the concession agreement, the concessionaire should spend the revenues from tolls on A4 motorway section Krakow – Katowice – apart from operation, maintenance and loan servicing – on the section improvement. No inspection is possible in this matter (due to concession agreement defects), so the current practice could be that the concessionaire, because of bad financial situation, uses the motorway revenues to cover its losses in other activities.



Heavy goods vehicles vignettes Total revenues from heavy goods vehicle vignette system come to a special GDDP/GDDKiA fund earmarked for national roads. It is planned that in future (probably from 2003) all revenues from vignettes (extended to cars) will be allocated to the new Motorway Fund and spent on motorways and expressways.

Non-standard vehicles charges As in case of heavy goods vehicle vignette, all revenues come to GDDKiA “special fund” and is spent on national roads.

Charges to international transport As above.

Apart from the above mentioned revenues, there are some additional State budget resources allocated to roads. These are: • subsidies for reconstruction of flood damages; • State budget reserve resources for integration with EU; • regional funds.



5 EXTERNAL ROAD PROJECTS AND ROAD SECTOR FINANCING

5.1 INDIVIDUAL PROJECTS VERSUS LONG TERM SECTOR APPROACH

At the national level, overall transport policy has never been adopted by the Polish Parliament and all recent attempts (in the period of transition) to form such a policy have ended at level of the Ministry of Transport or the Council of Ministers.

Several medium and long-term road development programs have been prepared during the last decades. Among other, in the period of transition comprehensive studies were carried out on motorway and expressway network. They served as a basis for the Motorway Development Program formulated in 1993 (toll motorways). This program was amended number of times.

The TINA study was intended as a planning and programming exercise which was to help to build long-term road system upgrading and development program. In practice, financing issues have not be treated so deeply as traffic forecasts and drawing a network to be upgraded/developed.

All recent road development programs appeared to be over-optimistic especially as regards readiness of the private sector to finance motorway construction (BOT scheme). This has led to another concept formulated by the present government. As in the past, emphasis is on motorways and expressways. Remaining national roads are included through listing detail tasks (projects) to be completed in the nearest 5-10 years.

Only some projects are selected taking into account their efficiency (for example, by comparing EIRR). While guidelines on project preparation include point requiring economic analysis, the results of this analysis are rarely used as a criterion for projects ranking and selection. Often selecting the project has a character of political decision. In fact, this concerns not only the selection of investment projects but also decisions on allocation of funds between road maintenance, rehabilitation and development. As a result, programs of road network development are composed of individual projects rather than forming a consistent program of inter-linked actions and projects.

At lower levels (voivodships. powiats/cities, gminas) situation is even worse. Some local governments formulated transport policy. This has been happening first of all in large cities (Krakow, Warsaw, Lodz, Bialystok, Poznan and other). However, as in case of the national government, long-term programs either were formulated only in general terms or not confronted with financial means. Consequently, as a rule, programs are over-optimistic and decisions on implementation of investment projects are made in case-to-case manner without considering costs and benefits. Instead of ranking projects according to their efficiency (for example, by comparing EIRR) selection of the project is often purely political decision. In addition, it is sometimes observed that the projects are not optimized from economic point of view. For example, several recently built new bridges were designed as suspension bridges, without any consideration given to the costs, which in some cases are twice as high as in case of standard structures. Decision about the type of construction is often taken by policy-makers and the procedures of public procurement are



applied only to select the construction company which will implement the earlier decided design. This practice is not limited to bridges and the same happens with other road projects.

It is also typical that local governments give higher priority to heavy investment road projects rather than to highly efficient and effective traffic management projects such as advanced urban traffic management systems (UTMS). In spite of rapidly growing congestion, such systems are planned only in a few cities and their implementation is very slow. This way, a chance of area-wide effects is lost.

However, weaknesses of long-term planning and programming are not limited to road and transport sector. It was only recently that, after the last administrative reform, at the voivodship level formulating development strategy has become obligatory. Such strategies have been elaborated in the last years in all voivodships. Unfortunately, in most of them transport sector was not properly covered and, again, emphasis was usually put on specific, isolated projects and not on the network as a whole.

5.2 ROAD CORRIDORS VERSUS ROAD NETWORKS

With scarce financial resources there is competition between projects aiming at the improvement of roads serving main international and national corridors and projects meeting the most urgent needs of serving the network of human settlements through improving the whole network of national, regional and local roads.

At the general transport policy level, both the European Commission and the Polish government declare commitment to upgrading and the development of the transport infrastructure within defined Pan-European corridors and networks (TINA) to stimulate the development of the TEN concept.

In several cases this focus is justified by the intensity of both international and national traffic. However, there are areas and parts of the networks not belonging to trans-European corridors or the TINA network where the volumes of regional/national traffic may be much higher than in these corridors.

Allocation of large amount of money (through EIB, PHARE/ISPA etc.) to road projects in Pan-European corridors may, to some extent, reduce investments in other national or regional roads, in spite of the fact that their importance for the whole network in many cases may be comparable or even higher than links belonging to the international corridors. Draining resources (matching funds) through "corridor projects" causes that backlog in road maintenance and rehabilitation of secondary networks may be growing. This problem seems difficult to overcome as the road funds made available or generated from the national sources are far below actual needs.

Consequently, it is essential that in addition to looking at the international context of a road project, it is necessary to be sure that the project is economically viable, fits into national and regional development priorities. With this approach, it will often happen that modernization and maintenance activities on secondary roads forming the network are much more justified than investing in international corridors. In this matter the two main conclusions should be pointed:



• the needs of international and long-distance national traffic alone not always justify costly investment in transport infrastructure in international corridors; the most viable projects are those which serve both medium/short (national/regional/local) and long-distance movements;

• in the situation of limited resources, the necessity for the government to participate in covering costs of main projects of international importance (matching funds) may lead to neglecting other competing construction, upgrading and maintenance projects which, in many instances, may be more economically viable.

5.3 STANDARD LOAN CONDITIONS OF DONORS

Since the beginning of 90-ties, Polish road sector takes advantage of loans given by international financial institutions. The loans have been given by three institutions: • the European Investment Bank (EIB); • the International Bank of Reconstruction and Development (World Bank) and • the European Bank of Reconstruction and Development (EBRD).

The institutions propose different loan conditions. The standard conditions of the three institutions are compared in Table 5.1

Table 5.1 Standard loan conditions of donors EIB World Bank EBRD

stand by fee - 0,8% to the end of grace period,

afterwards 0,75%

0,5%

front-end fee - 1,0% 1,0% grace period 5 – 7 years 5 years 5 years repayment period maximum maturity

period of 20 years, 25 years in special cases (e.g. flood projects)

10 years 10 years

interest rate on which it can borrow money on the market plus 0,125%

six months LIBOR plus 0,5%

six months LIBOR plus 1,0%

local currency (PLN) loan

yes no no

maximum participation in total project cost

50-80%, recently 75%, calculated to the

final project cost

60%, 80% in special cases (e.g. flood

projects), calculated to each invoice

50%, calculated to each invoice

project type only infrastructure wide range: infrastructure,

restructuring, road safety, training etc.

mainly infrastructure

Source: Ministry of Infrastructure



Table 5.2 summarizes number and total amount of loans given by different institutions to the road sector in Poland. As could be seen from the table, the largest number of loans has been given by EIB. This is a result of the best conditions offered by this bank and its greatest flexibility in adjusting the conditions to particular projects. It mainly concerns:

• possible longer grace and repayment periods;

• usually lower interest rates;

• lack of stand by and front-end fees;

• possibility of giving a loan in local currency (PLN); this allows reducing exchange rate risk;

• participation in total project cost calculated to the final project cost, which allows borrower covering all intermediate expenses from the loan.

EBI is also flexible in terms of grace period starting date. Whereas other banks this is a moment of approval by the board of directors, EBI gives two more possibilities:

• from date of payment of the first loan portion;

• separately for each loan portion as a date of its payment.

This allows significant postponing of the repayment period.

Summarizing, the EBI offers the best and the most flexible conditions of loans which results in greatest number of loans taken out by Polish road sector. However, the World Bank offers the widest range of project type to be financed.

Table 5.2 Number and amount of loans given by IFI to the Polish road sector. Loan status EBI World bank EBRD

No. of loans

Total loan amount

[MEUR]

No. of loans

Total loan amount

[MUSD]

No. of loans

Total loan amount

[MEUR] disbursement finished

3 500 2 154,75 1 45

active 7 703 1 300,00 - - signed but not in effect

2 220 - - - -

under preparation

1 80 - - - -

under identification

3 750 1 430 - -

grand total 13 2 173 4 884,75 1 45 Source: Ministry of Infrastructure

The borrowers complain for the institutions too bureaucratic procedures when applying for a loan. In case of the World Bank all documents should be sent to the central office in Washington what lengthens the process considerably. A solution for this problem would be setting up Regional (Central Europe) Procurement Office, possibly located in Warsaw. This would reduce time needed for procurement procedures.



Also, a closer co-operation of the institutions would be beneficial. Each of the institutions could finance specific project type it is mostly interested in. This would eliminate a kind of competition among the institutions, resulting in less efficient financing.

5.4 THE EU ACCESSIONS REQUIREMENTS AND ASSISTANCE PROGRAM

As it concerns accession process to EU in the field “Transport Policy”, Poland accepted the whole acquis communautaire, however 6 areas are still not agreed upon. Among them:

• 2 concern air transport;

• 2 concern railways;

• one concerns road mass passenger transport;

• one concerns road vehicles moving within the EU, the maximum authorized dimensions in national and international traffic and the maximum permitted weights in international traffic.

In road sector, the general EU requirement concerns elimination of distortions of competition between transport undertakings in the Member States i.e. the harmonization of levy systems and the establishment of fair mechanisms for charging infrastructure costs to hauliers. In this requirement the two points can be specified:

1. EU requires admission, on a specified part of TINA network, of vehicles with single axis load of 115 kN in international road transport and of three-axle motor vehicle and two-axle semi-trailer carrying 40” ISO containers with the total weight of 44 tons in international combined road transport to and from terminals located on the territory of Poland. The requirement concerns EU directive 96/53/EC from 25 of July 1996.

2. EU requires that tolls and user charges (as it concerns heavy good vehicles) shouldn’t be imposed at the same time for the use of a single road section. The requirement concerns EU directive 1999/62/EC from 17 of July 1999.

In relation to vehicles with single axle load of 115kN it should be mentioned that problem concerns Polish main road network which isn’t adjusted to the increased axle loads (see Chapter 2) and can be damaged by heavy vehicles. The Polish Government position is that Poland needs a transitional period necessary for relevant road adjustments.

In relation to tolls and user charges38 for heavy goods vehicle the problem concerns two systems which are in force in Poland: vignettes for all heavy vehicles (system was started from the 1st of January 2002), and tolls at the existing motorway A4 (section Krakow-Katowice) and planned motorways A1 and A2.

The Consultants have not identified any EU regulation not allowing double charging for the use of road by vehicles other than trucks.

38 According to EU directive the "toll" means payment of a specified amount for a vehicle travelling the distance between two points on the infrastructures and the amount shall be based on the distance travelled and the type of the vehicle; "user charge" means payment of a specified amount conferring the right for a vehicle to use for a given period the infrastructures.



Poland’s position concerning heavy goods vehicles The issues of vehicles circulating within the EU, the maximum permitted dimensions in national and international traffic and the maximum permitted weights in international traffic were specified in Poland’s “position papers” which was recently modified.

After the analysis of the technical aspects of the problem concerning access of heavy vehicles to the Polish road infrastructure, in accession negotiations with EU Poland requests a transitional period with regard to selected heavy goods vehicles, such as:

• a combination of three-axle motor vehicle and two-axle semi-trailer carrying 40” ISO containers with the total weight of 44 tons in international combined road transport to and from terminals located on the territory of Poland;

• vehicles with single-axle load exceeding load admitted up to 115 kN.

The Poland’s proposal (text based on “Modification of Poland’s position paper under the chapter of ”Transport Policy”) contains:

• Introduction of a transitional period for heavy vehicles – till 31.12.2010.

• Within duration of the transitional period (starting from 1 January 2004), vehicles with single-axle load not exceeding 115 kN would be admitted to international road sections under requirement of obtaining each time an authorization of administrative character (issued automatically to all applicants) for transit on unadjusted road sections.

• The authorizations will be issued after payment of an additional charge proportional to excess of load admitted on a given road section and to length of transit on an unadjusted section of road network.

• The same rules would be applied to all EU operators (including Polish).

• Poland takes an obligation that the remaining network of international roads will be upgraded, so the length of sections additionally charged will decrease every year.

• No additional fee for excess of admissible axle load will be charged for transit on those roads after the year 2010.

At the same time Poland confirmed that from the 1st January 2004 will be ready to admit39 vehicles with single axis load of 115 kN in 6 following international road corridors being a part of TINA network:

1. Road No 2 – section: state border (Swiecko) – Poznan – Warszawa – state border (Terespol),

2. Road No 18 and Road No 4 – section: state border (Olszyna) – Wroclaw – Katowice – Rzeszow – state border (Korczowa),

3. Road No 1 – section: Gdansk – Lodz – Katowice – state border (Cieszyn),

4. Road No 8 – section: Wroclaw – Piotrkow Trybunalski – Warszawa – Bialystok – state border (Budzisko),

5. Road No 3 – section: Swinoujscie – Szczecin – Gorzow Wielkopolski – Zielona Gora – Legnica – state border (Jakuszyce),

6. Road No 6 – section: state border (Kolbaskowo) – Szczecin. 39 In this corridors transit without any additional charges but on road sections adjusted to sustain the aforementioned loads and with authorizations and additional charges on unadjusted road sections.



Poland’s position concerning tolls and vignettes The Polish Government position concerning tolls and vignettes is not clear. No official document(s) were identified concerning this issue. In January 2002, the government introduced charges for heavy goods vehicles (in national and international transport) for the rights to use the road infrastructures for a given period. In the economic strategy “A key to development” the government has announced that on February 2003 also charges for cars and vans will be introduced, however the network which will be covered has not been defined yet.

This indicates that in coming years, Poland will apply a system of charging for the right to use infrastructure (vignettes) with probable simultaneous withdrawal from toll systems. The decision about the method of withdrawal is not taken however negotiations with private motorway concessionaires were started.

Potential risks related to the necessary re-negotiation of concession agreements are discussed in paragraph 5.5.

Adjustment program EU expects adaptation of Polish road network (in main, selected corridors) to EU standards (among others defined in directive 96/53) as soon as possible. European assistance program is directed to road infrastructure development and is remitted through several programs among which following are the most important:

before accession – ISPA, •

• after accession – cohesion and structural funds.

Basically resources will be allocated to the international road network defined within TINA program (5 500 km of roads, almost 30% of national road network). The TINA road network is presented on the attached map.

In the document “Infrastructure a key to development”, the new government has announced investment program assuming:

• construction of motorways (400 km of new and 150 km improvements of existing sections up to 2005),

• construction of expressways (200 km of new and improved plus another 200 km new constructions started till 2005),

• radical acceleration of investment program: 250 km of motorways per year (today 60 km per year), 60 km of expressways per year (today 20 km per year), 500 km of national road improvements per year (today 200 km),

• construction of 40 city by-passes on national roads,

• strengthening of 1 500 km of main roads (to meet EU standards),

• improvement of 1 000km of other roads and bridges.

Generally it is planned that up to 2010 the basic network of 1 750 km of motorways will be ready (at present - 394 km)

The costs of the government program was summarized only for the period 2002-2005, as equal to 37 400 MPLN (approx. 10 400 MEUR). The total cost (with ongoing investments) includes:



• construction of motorways: 16 400 MPLN (4 556 MEUR),

• construction of expressways: 3 740 MPLN (1 039 MEUR),

• pavement strengthening: 5 820 MPLN (1 617MEUR),

• improvement of national roads: 5 000 MPLN (1 389MEUR),

• maintenance and rehabilitation of national roads: 6 500 PLN (1 806MEUR).

Fig 5.1 Expected expenditures by type

44%

10%16%

13%

17%

Motorways ExpresswaysStrengthening Other national roads improvementMaintenance

The details concerning road strengthening program are presented in Chapter 2. They concern specific investments and costs of road network improvement in longer period – up to 2010. It should be underlined that details based on GDDKiA investment plans are not fully consistent with the government (Ministry of Infrastructure) “Key to development” program.

5.5 PRIVATE INVESTMENTS (CONCESSIONS) IN ROAD TRANSPORT

Motorway construction program, which was announced in 1993 and is being implemented since 1994 has not brought about a significant increase of high quality road network in Poland. At present the total length of motorways is approx. 394 km among which 237 km (60%) were constructed before the year 1990.

Motorway construction program was based on the Act of 27 October 1994 on toll motorways. The main assumption was that motorways will be constructed by private investors (concessionaires) on the basis of issued concessions and with minimum financial involvement of the State budget, mostly limited to preparatory work, including the land purchasing (B.O.T - built-operate-transfer system of motorway construction). It was assumed that private concessionaire is involved to cumulate financial resources (his own and loans) to construct motorway and to collect tolls during specified period. Furthermore,



it was assumed that revenues from the road users (depending on traffic level, users willingness to pay and toll levels) will cover all costs: construction, operation, repairs, financial (interests) and other.

First years of motorways construction led to the conclusion that some revision of the program is necessary (and it was done in September 2000) particularly in order to make the concession process more flexible. The changes concerned:

possible higher financial involvement of the State budget; •

•

•

modification of approach to loan guaranties and

more precisely defined shares of risks between the State and private consortia.

Implementation of the motorway program in Poland resulted in selection of 3 private concessionaires:

• two of them acting in the field of motorway construction and operation;

• one acting in a limited way only as a motorway operator.

Basic characteristic of this private investment is described below.

Concessionaires responsible for motorway construction and operation

The two private concessionaires have been selected to construct and operate motorways:

one on A1motorway, Gdansk-Torun section and, •

• one on A2motorway, Swiecko-Konin section.

At present, the situation of both consortia is different as well as an advancement in concessions realization. Both cases are described below.

A2 Motorway

On the A2 motorway, procedure aiming to appoint private investors responsible for motorway construction was started in the year 1995. In September 1995 ABiEA has announced a bid for the construction and operation of Swiecko-Strykow40 section of A2 motorway (total length 362 km).

At the beginning there were seven private consortia interested, but finally three consortia were qualified to the second stage of the tender: Euroute Polska S.A., Autostrada Wielkopolska S.A and Autostrady S.A41. The biding procedure was finalized in February 1997 and the offer of Autostrada Wielkopolska S.A. was selected as the best. However, none of the offers fulfilled all biding requirements.

The concession for the A2 motorway construction and operation (for section Swiecko-Strykow) was issued to Autostrada Wielkopolska S.A on the 10th of March 1997, with the 30 years period of the concession.

On 12 September 1997 a Concession Agreement was signed for the motorway construction and operation, however execution of the agreement appeared to be impossible. Difficulties appeared because of imprecise terms and conditions of the agreement, mainly concerning:

•

not clear enough share of risk of both parties of the agreement;

40 Preliminary this section was divided into 3 subsections: Swiecko-Poznan, Poznan-Konin and Konin-Strykow. 41 Finally Autostrady S.A. decided to withdraw the offer and to join Autostrada Wielkopolska S.A.



not strong enough protection of the State Treasury interests; •

• financial matters, especially the possible State support to the private Concessionaire.

Defects of the Concession Agreement caused a refusal of financial institutions to participate in financing investments. As a consequence, the Concessionaire wasn’t able to accumulate necessary financial resources and to start the construction. Furthermore, at this stage of works, the Concessionaire revealed that there is a problem in securing necessary budget for the whole investment (for all three motorway sections).

In the meantime at the end of 1997 UE expressed readiness to co-finance, within the PHARE fund, a part of A2 motorway – Poznan bypass (section Komorniki-Krzesiny - 13,3 km long). In July 1998 an annex to the Concession Agreement was signed according to which construction of Poznan bypass was excluded from the agreement with the Concessionaire42.

On the 5th of May 1999 the Minister of Transport, in response to the Concessionaire proposal, decided to revoke a concession for the section Konin-Strykow, limiting the concession range to the sections: Swiecko-Poznan and Poznan-Konin. On the 29th of October 1999, a second annex to the agreement was signed with changes in agreement records concerning:

period of the concession; •

•

•

•

•

•

financial structure of the concession with more detail specification concerning shares of risks connected with the investment.

On the 11th of January 2000, Minister of Transport issued two decisions changing concession in the following way:

new concession sections were defined i.e.: Swiecko-Nowy Tomysl and Nowy Tomysl-Konin;

the concession period was extended from 30 to 40 years;

a new point was added allowing further extension of concession period in case of “unavoidable delays”;

construction43 of Poznan bypass was excluded from the concession.

On the 28th of July 2000, the third annex to the agreement was signed extending the necessary period for financial closure of the Investment. Very extended procedure of negotiations with the institutions interested in the investment financing (EIB, COMMERZBANK and CREDIT LYONNAIS) was the reason of this delay.

Another (fourth) annex to the Concession Agreement was signed in October 2001, adjusting the agreement to the final financial proposal. Also other financial documents were signed, among which a State Treasury guarantee for the loans from EIB.

After all these changes, private investment on the A2 motorway Swiecko-Konin can be divided into II phases:

Phase I, construction of the following motorway sections:

42 Poznan bypass motorway construction was started at the end of year 2000 and it is planned to be closed till the end of the year 2003. The estimated construction cost is 963 MPLN (72,4MPLN per km) composed of: 324 MPLN from central budget (34%), 475 MPLN from EIB loan (49%), 164 MPLN from PHARE grant (17%) 43 Only construction, operation and maintenance is still in “hands” of private concessionaire.



• Nowy Tomysl-Poznan (50,2 km). It is planned to start construction in the third quarter of the year 2003 and to finish it in the third quarter of the year 2005.

• Poznan bypass (13,3 km). Construction is excluded from Concessionaire obligations, however with transfer of operation and maintenance to the Concessionaire after completing the construction. According to the Concession Agreement, the State is obliged to finalize motorway construction till November 2003.

• Poznan-Wrzesnia (38,0 km). Construction was started at the end of 2001 and is planned to be finalized till November 2003.

• Wrzesnia-Konin (48,9 km). Renewal and adjustment to the toll system of the existing motorway section was started in July 2001 and it is planned to be finalized till the 22nd of December 2002.

The whole construction cost (designing + construction) of the Phase I (excluding costs of Poznan bypass construction) is estimated at the level of 638 million EUR. The total cost including costs of financing is estimated at the level of 875 million EUR. The necessary resources are composed of:

235 million EUR (26%) from the Concessionaire own resources; •

•

•

•

•

•

•

275 million EUR (31%) from EIB loan fully guaranteed by the State;

235 million EUR (26%) from private banks loan44;

130 million EUR (17%) from concession incomes and interests.

Presented costs do not include costs of preparatory works such as land acquisition, preliminary design, archaeological works, etc. Relevant detail calculations are not available, however according to row estimations, additional cost at the level of 10-15% of the total investment cost can be assumed.

Phase II, construction of section Swiecko (German border)-Nowy Tomysl (length 104,9 km). It is planned that construction will be started at the end of the year 2005 and finalized in the third quarter of the year 2009. Concessionaire is obliged to present financing of the investment till the end of the year 2004. Estimated construction costs are at the level of 2 791 million PLN (26,6 million PLN/km)45 and probably will be composed of:

274 -548 million PLN (76-152 MEUR) of concessionaire own resources (10-20%),

1370-2191 million PLN (380-608 MEUR) of loans (50-80%),

0-1370 million PLN (0-380 MEUR) of EU grants (0-50%).

A1 Motorway

In December 1995, the former ABiEA has announced a bid for the construction and operation of the Gdansk-Torun section of A1 motorway (151,9 km). Subject of the investment covered construction of the motorway in the new corridor plus adding second carriageway to the existing single carriageway motorway section of Torun by-pass (10,7 km).

At the beginning of the bid there were three private consortia competing. Finally, to the main level of the competition the two consortia were qualified: Euroute Polska S.A. and

44 Loan issued by the consortium of 20 private international banks 45 Approx. 775 MEUR (7,4 MEUR/km)



Gdansk Transport Company S.A. (GTC S.A.). The biding procedure was finalized on the 16th of July 1997 and the offer of GTC S.A was selected as the very best.

The concession for the A1 motorway construction and operation (section Gdansk-Torun) was issued to GTC S.A46 on the 25th of August 1997. The period of concession is 35 years.

Concessionaire is obliged to present “financial closure” for the first phase of the investment (section Gdansk-Nowe Marzy, 90 km long) till the end of the third quarter 2002. According to the preliminary estimation, construction cost will be at the level of 600 million EUR. Taking into consideration the present state of concession implementation, construction of the motorway can be started not earlier than in the second half of the year 2003.

Concessionaires responsible only for motorway operation There is one concession issued for the operation of motorway, and concerns A4motorway, section Katowice-Krakow. The biding procedure aiming to appoint concessionaire for another A4 motorway section Wroclaw-Gliwice was started but not finalized and probably will be cancelled.

Procedure for the A4 motorway section Katowice-Krakow (60,9 km long) aiming to appoint private consortium responsible for motorway adjustment to the toll system and further operation was started on the 19th of June 1995.

At the beginning, there were three private consortia competing in this bid (GTM ENTREPOSE, Autostrada Konsorcjum Drogowo-Mostowe S.A. and Stalexport S.A.). Of them one consortium was qualified to the final stage of the tender: Stalexport S.A.

The concession for the motorway A4 (at section Katowice-Krakow) was issued to the Stalexport S.A. on the 19th of September 1997.

Concessionaire started phase I of motorway adjustment works on the 23rd of October 1998. The adjustment covered construction of tolling system (among others two toll plazas in Balice and Brzeczkowice have been constructed) and emergency communication system. All the works were finalized till the beginning of the year 2000, and the tolling system started its operation on the 3rd of April 2000. The preliminary toll (agreed between the concessionaire and ABiEA) was 8 PLN/2,2 EUR (for the whole section Katowice-Krakow) for cars and 20 PLN/5,6 EUR for heavy goods vehicles (with gross vehicle weight higher than 1,5 t). Since the first of January 2001 new rates are obligatory: 10 PLN/2,8 EUR for passenger cars and 22 PLN/6,1 EUR for heavy goods vehicles. According to the concession agreement, revenues from the tolls47 are spend on covering:

•

•

•

•

•

financing of construction costs,

operational costs,

motorway repairs,

servicing of EBRD loan48,

servicing Concessionaire obligations to the institutions financing the investment.

46 Main shareholders: Bechtel (USA), Gdanskie Przedsiebiorstwo Robot Drogowych S.A,. BGZ, Intertol (RPA).

47 Incomes are not monitored by GDDKiA. 48 EBRD loan for motorway renewal and pavement improvement, signed on 22.10.93, amount: 45 million

EUR.



At present the Concessionaire is obliged to continue investment in the corridor of the motorway within so called Phase II, which includes:

construction of infrastructure necessary for the personnel responsible for maintenance services,

•

•

•

•

•

extension of infrastructure protecting environment (specially as it concerns water protection),

extension of the Passenger Service Areas,

bridge structure repairs,

closing some motorway junctions.

The schedule of works was agreed between the Concessionaire and the Minister of Transport and specified in the Annex No. 4 to the Concession Agreement which was signed on the 20th of September 2001. According to the planned schedule, Concessionaire has to present structure of financing (there is a delay and the date is prolonged) and then to carry out Phase II works between the third quarter of the year 2003 and the end of year 2010. As it was mentioned above there is no final financial decisions, however according to former ABiEA estimations, expenditures to be beard are at the level of 368 million PLN (102 MEUR) and financing will be shared between:

• Concessionaire own sources (21% - 70 million PLN/ 19,5 MEUR),

• commercial banks loans (57% - 190 million PLN/ 53 MEUR),

• income from the tolls and interests (22%).

Conclusions As it was mentioned at the beginning of this chapter, implementation of the motorway program in Poland moves forward very slow. Assuming that year 1994 was a starting point for its realization, after almost 8 years there are no new sections built and operated by private investors. The most important reasons of this negative result seem to be the following:

Too optimistic assumptions at the beginning of the program in particular as it concerns future level of traffic, what resulted in overestimation of potential incomes and underestimation of private investors risk. These assumptions were quickly verified by private banks not interested in financing the program without clear State budget guarantees.

•

•

•

•

Lack of experience of road administration personnel and private investors in preparing and conducting concession process.

Inflexible (at the beginning of the program) involvement of the State in the financial strategies (the State guarantees should be different and relevant to particular project needs).

Too high requirements concerning preparatory works procedures and technical parameters of the motorway entailing high construction costs.

On the other hand, motorway program was very ambitious. The scale of the network covered by the program (1941 km) and the scale of organizational, legal and technical problems to be solved was enormous. On the basis of 3 private concession cases Road



Administration acquired important experiences in concession preparation, in negotiations with investors and financial institutions, and in preparation of legal documents. These experiences can be utilized as standard procedures for the future program acceleration. As it concerns the full process including construction and operation, the model cases are as follows:

Case 1: Swiecko-Konin Case 2: Gdansk-Torun Motorway section attractive not very attractive Foreseen level of

traffic promising not very promising

Financial efficiency possible not possible Concession issued issued Concession Agreement

signed not signed yet

Financing guaranteed not finalized Risk of private

investors low high, has to be minimized

Construction works started not started International

institution engaged EIB, EU, private banks not engaged

State budget engagement

low - only guarantees high – necessary State guarantee of the traffic level and possible

additional State payments to the concessionaire after motorway

opening

State budget protection

high – in case of investment collapse

motorway passes to the State

low

Level of tolls after optimization and negotiations between the State and Concessionaire

based on income and traffic level maximization (social toll)

As it was mentioned earlier, in January 2002 the government introduced charges for heavy good vehicles (in national and international transport) for the right to use the road infrastructure for a given period. In the economic strategy “A key to development” the government has announced that on February 2003 the system will be extended, covering cars and vans.

At the beginning it was understood as declaration that in coming years Poland will apply a system of charging for the right to use infrastructure with probable simultaneous withdrawal from the toll systems. This would mean that concession agreements would have to be re-negotiated with private motorway concessionaires. Shadow toll system is one of available solutions of the problem. It is obvious, that re-negotiating would put the government in unfavorable position and could lead to financial losses.

Closer look at this issue lead the authors to the following conclusions:



• analysis of the EU regulations has disclosed that restrictions concerning double charging concern only heavy vehicles; therefore, it is possible to apply both forms of charging for other categories of vehicles;

• progress in payment systems allows to envisage that in 5-10 years electronic tool collection system can be easily installed on all "premium" roads;

• selection of the charging system has serious impact on geometric design of junctions; both vignette and electronic charging systems do not require junctions with gates, which are presently planned for all motorways; resignation from junctions types needed for cash tolling would in most cases reduce the cost of construction but would also require redesigning of many junctions and repeating the process of approvals and land acquisition..

In this situation final decisions concerning the system of charging should be based on more thorough analysis of options. Some of the options are discussed in Chapter B - Findings and Recommendations.



Sources:

1. Archutowski E. Drogi publiczne i ich finansowanie (Public Roads and their Financing). Drogownictow No.11/2001

2. Bauer R., Kaczor G. Dostosowanie polskiej infrastruktury drogowej do standardow; koszty i wybrane efekty (Adaptation of ther Polish Road Infrastructure to UE Standards; Costs and Selected Effects). Proceedings of the 4th Road Conference. Lubin, 15-17 May 2002.

3. BSSD/GDDP Database and statistics.

4. Catalogue of typical flexible and semi-rigid pavement constructions. Research Institute of Roads and Bridges, 1997.

5. Directive 1999/62/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 17 June 1999 on the charging of heavy goods vehicles for the use of certain infrastructures.

6. Directive 96/53/EC of 25 July 1996 laying down for certain road vehicles circulating within the Community the maximum authorized dimensions in national and international traffic and the maximum authorized weights in international traffic.

7. Duda J. Zarzadzanie drogami w miastach... (Road management in Cities). Proceedings of the 4th Road Conference. Lubin, 15-17 May 2002.

8. Information about ongoing investments co-financed from Phare Program. GDDP, November 2001.

9. Information concerning special permission issued by Custom Offices in Poland. GDDKiA

10. Information concerning vehicles weighing in 2001. GDDKiA

11. Infrastructure – a key to development”. Government Economical Strategy. Warsaw, January 2002.

12. ISPA – Transport for Poland, program of long obligations according to signed financial memoranda. Data source ABiEA, Warsaw, March 2002.

13. Kowalski. K and others: Traffic Census 2000 on national road network – summary of results. Polskie Drogi, 4/2001.

14. Kul S. Heavy vehicles inspection. Bezpieczne drogi, February 2001.

15. Modification of Poland’s position paper under the chapter of “Transport Policy”, Annexe no 2

16. Modification of Poland’s position paper under the chapter of ”Transport Policy”. Ministry of Infrastructure. Warsaw, March 2002.

17. Motorway construction program 2002-2010, investment records. Data source ABiEA, Warsaw, March 2002.

18. Motorway Construction Program sources of financing. Data source: ABiEA, Warsaw, April 2002.

19. National ISPA strategy – transport sector. Ministry of Infrastructure, October 2001.



20. Nowak B. Czy samorzady sa przygotowane do wykorzystania szansy wynikajacej z procesu stowarzyszeniowego z UE? (Are Local Governments Prepared to Use Chance Stemming for Polish Roads from the Accession to UE Process ?) Proceedings of the 4th Road Conference. Lubin, 15-17 May 2002.

21. Opoczyński K., Kowalski K.: Results of traffic counts on voivodship roads in the year 2000. Drogownictwo, 11/2001.

22. Ordega W. Powiatowe zarzady po dwoch i pol roku dzialalnosci. Polskie Drogi, No.9/2001

23. Pavement conditions of national roads in 2000 and 2001. GDDP/BSSD Reports

24. Poland’s position paper under the chapter of “Transport Policy”. MTiGM, July 1999

25. Preparation, processing and analysis of the automatic traffic measurement in the year 2001. Transprojekt Warszawa, Warszawa, March 2002.

26. Program of Poland’s road network adjustment do EU standards up to the year 2015. MTiGM, 2001.

27. Public Road Traffic Act”, 20 of June 1997 with further modifications.

28. Public roads – statistical information. Instytut Badawczy Drog i Mostow. Warsaw, November 2001.

29. Public Roads Act”, 21 of March 1985 with further modifications.

30. Realization of Motorway Construction Program – Report. ABiEA, June 2000.

31. Regulation of the Minister of Transport and Maritime Economy of 2 March 1999 on the technical conditions to be fulfilled by public roads and their location

32. Road reconstruction program 2002-2005-2010. GDDP/BSSD. Warsaw, March 2002.

33. Road Traffic 2000 – Transprojekt Warszawa, Warszawa 2001.

34. Road Transport Act”, 6 of September 2001.

35. Serbenska A. Powiatowe zarządy dróg po dwoch i pol roku dzialalnosci (Powiat Road Authorities after Two and a Half Years of Their Activities). Polskie Drogi, No.9/2001.

36. Serbenska A. Samorzadowe budzety drogowe (Road Budget of Local Governments). Polskie Drogi, No. 1-2/2002.

37. Spoleczno-ekonomiczne implikacje roznych scenariuszy rozwoju polskiego transportu samochodowego" (Social and Economic Implications of Various Scenaria of the Development of the Polish Road Transport). Warsaw, December 2000.

38. Statistical Yearbooks of the Republic of Poland

39. Technical pavements condition on national roads in the year 2001 – report. GDDP/BSSD, Warsaw, march 2002.

40. The Minister of Transport Regulations on:

• vehicle technical conditions, 1 of April 1999,

• permits for movement of non-standard vehicles, 12 of December 2001,

• road use fares, 15 of January 2002,

• institutions responsible, procedures of costs assessing and roads adjustment for over-weight vehicles, 28 of June 1986,



• traffic inspections, 25 of May 1999

• temporary traffic bans for heavy vehicles, 30 of May 2000

41. TINA, Transport Infrastructure Needs Assessment. Executive Summary, October 1999.

42. Warsaw University of Technology. Institute of Roads and Bridges. Traffic forecasts for national transport policy. Warsaw 2000.

43. Wojcik M. Zarzadzanie drogami powiatowymi - aspekty finansowe i organizacyjne (Governing of Powiat Roads; Organization and Financing). Polskie Drogi, No. 10/2001.

44. World Bank (2001). World Development Indicators 2001

45. Yearbook on the Polish Motorization Market 1999. Samar, Warsaw 2000



A P P E N D I C I E S



A P P E N D I X 1



Table A1.1 Public roads - jurisdiction [km] national voivodship powiat gmina Total

non-urban 13 804 24 143 11 3592 15 9263 310 802urban (except Warsaw and cities of powiat status)

2 893 3 232 9 289 23 874 39 288

urban (Warsaw and cities of powiat status)

1 439 939 5 074 13 211 20 663

Total urban 4 332 4 171 14 363 37 085 59 951Grand total 18136 28 314 12 7955 196 348 370 753Source: Public roads – statistical information. Research Institute of Roads and Bridges.

Table A1.2 Public roads – pavement type [km] hard surface category

improved other total

unpaved

Total national 18 120 12 18 132 4 18 136voivodship 28 114 83 28 197 117 28 314powiat 105 510 6 517 112 027 15 928 127 955gmina 58 555 31 743 90 298 106 050 196 348Total 210 299 38 355 248 654 122 099 370 753Source: Public roads – statistical information. Research Institute of Roads and Bridges.

Table A1.3 Bridge structures on national road network (by voivodships) Voivodship Number of bridge

structures % of Total

Length [m] % of Total

Poland 4649 100% 213714 100% Dolnoslaskie 623 13% 21422 10%

Kujawsko-Pomorskie 144 3% 11808 6% Lubelskie 198 4% 6298 3% Lubuskie 159 3% 8156 4% Lodzkie 265 6% 9873 5%

Malopolskie 476 10% 19045 9% Mazowieckie 530 11% 38974 18%

Opolskie 233 5% 9450 4% Podkarpackie 153 3% 5722 3%

Podlaskie 193 4% 4148 2% Pomorskie 165 4% 9856 5%

Slaskie 692 15% 31366 15% Świetokrzyskie 149 3% 5881 3%

Warminsko-Mazurskie 196 4% 5453 3% Wielkopolskie 318 7% 20376 10%

Zach.-Pomorskie 155 3% 5885 3% Source:GDDKiA/BS



Table A1.4 Length of national roads by categories and voivodships, state: 31.12.2001

No Voivodship Motorways Expressway Trunk roads Main roads

Powiat roads

Length of national road

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8

1 Dolnosląskie 149,98 0,00 653,90 394,84 113,63 1312,352 Kujawsko-

Pomorskie 0,00 22,95 656,73 231,90 117,63 1029,21

3 Lubelskie 0,00 0,00 582,42 404,26 62,63 1049,314 Lubuskie 0,00 17,78 726,03 63,93 33,52 841,255 Lodzkie 17,50 0,00 778,45 410,60 82,05 1288,616 Malopolskie 51,89 0,00 713,33 135,77 93,08 994,077 Mazowieckie 0,00 21,28 1416,48 748,05 167,94 2353,758 Opolskie 85,09 0,00 351,31 324,34 28,01 788,759 Podkarpackie 0,00 0,00 467,06 252,25 48,87 768,1910 Podlaskie 0,00 0,00 554,04 379,67 39,93 973,6411 Pomorskie 0,00 38,65 410,41 313,95 52,53 815,5312 Slaskie 24,81 44,47 610,93 93,91 292,54 1066,6513 Swietokrzyskie 0,00 23,67 476,49 231,72 23,12 754,9914 Warminsko-

Mazurskie 0,00 9,13 631,15 647,31 36,64 1324,23

15 Wielkopolskie 47,96 0,00 1133,91 276,61 117,56 1576,0316 Zach.-

Pomorskie 21,61 28,29 608,99 370,81 69,63 1099,32

Total 18035,88



Fig A1.1 Regional structure of national roads

0

500

1000

1500

2000

2500

Dolnos

laskie

Kujawsk

o-Pom

orskie

Lube

lskie

Lubu

skie

Lodz

kie

Malopo

lskie

Mazow

ieckie

Opolsk

ie

Podka

rpack

ie

Podlas

kie

Pomors

kie

Slaskie

Swietok

rzysk

ie

Warmins

ko-M

azurs

kie

Wielko

polsk

ie

Zacho

dnio-

Pomors

kie

netw

ork

leng

th [k

m]

Fig A1.2 Length of motorways and expressways by regions

020406080

100120140160

Dolnos

laskie

Kujawsk

o-Pom

orskie

Lube

lskie

Lubu

skie

Lodz

kie

Malopo

lskie

Mazow

ieckie

Opolsk

ie

Podka

rpack

ie

Podlas

kie

Pomors

kie

Slaskie

Swietok

rzysk

ie

Warmins

ko-M

azurs

kie

Wielko

polsk

ie

Zacho

dnio-

Pomors

kie

netw

ork

leng

th [k

m]



ROAD NETWORK REPLACEMENT VALUE CALCULATION

For the purpose of replacement value calculation, the national road network has been divided into the following representative infrastructure types 1) National non urban roads:

a) motorway: - road crown width 27,50 m, - pavement width (0,50 + 7,50 + 3,00) × 2 = 22,00 m, - pavement construction type KR649;

b) expressway: - dual carriageway – road crown width 24,0 m,

pavement width (0,50 + 7,00 + 2,50) × 2 = 20 m, - single carriageway – road crown width 14,5 m,

pavement width 7,00 + 2 × 2,50 = 12 m, pavement construction type KR5;

c) dual carriageway road: - with paved shoulders – road crown width 22,00 m,

pavement width (7,00 + 2,00) × 2 = 18,00 m, - without paved shoulders – road crown width 20,00 m,

pavement width 7,00×2 = 14,00 m, pavement construction type KR4;

d) single carriageway road: - with paved shoulders – road crown width 12,00 m,

pavement width 7,00 + 2,00 × 2 = 11,00 m, pavement construction type KR4;

- without paved shoulders – road crown width 12,00 m, pavement width 7,00 m, pavement construction type KR4;

e) compacted aggregate or stone road – road crown width 7,00 m, pavement width 6,00 m;

f) compacted gravel or slag road – road crown width 6,00 m, pavement width 5,50 m,

g) compacted earth road – road crown width 5,50 m, pavement width 5,50 m;

2) National urban roads:

a) expressway – road crown width 24,0 m, pavement width (0,50 + 7,00 + 2,50) × 2 = 20 m, pavement construction type KR5;

b) dual carriageway road – road crown width 15,00 m, pavement width 7,00 × 2 = 14,00 m, two-sided pedestrian sidewalks, pavement construction type KR4;

c) single carriageway road – road crown width 8,00 m, pavement width 7,00 m,

49 Pavement construction type according to the “Catalogue of typical pavement construction”, see also chapter 2



two-sided pedestrian sidewalks, pavement construction type KR3;

d) compacted aggregate or stone road – road crown width 6,00 m, pavement width 6,00 m.

3) Bridges, tunnels and culverts:

a) bridge structures: bridges, viaducts, flyovers, pedestrian overpasses of the following types:

(1) steel, (2) reinforced concrete, (3) prestressed concrete, (4) concrete, stone, brick, (5) wooden,

b) tunnels – for vehicles and pedestrians, c) culverts – for water-courses or for animals.

Table A1.8 Road infrastructure unit costs width [m]

Road type crown pavement roadway

national non-urban roads

[PLN/m2]

national urban roads

[PLN/m2] motorway 27,50 22,00 15,00 817,00 - dual carriageway expressway 24,00 20,00 14,00 536,00 695,00 single carriageway expressway 14,50 12,50 7,00 536,00 590,00 dual carriageway with paved shoulders 22,00 18,00 14,00 454,00

dual carriageway without paved shoulders 20,00 14,00 14,00 454,00 590,00

single carriageway with paved shoulders 12,00 11,00 7,00 330,00 429,00

single carriageway without paved shoulders 12,00 7,00 7,00 330,00 429,00

compacted aggregate or stone road 7,00 6,00 6,00 65,00 65,00

compacted gravel or slag road 6,00 5,50 5,50 19,00 19,00 compacted earth road 5,50 5,50 5,50 5,00 5,00



Table A1.9 Unit costs of structures

Infrastructure Type Unit on national non-urban roads [thousand PLN]

on national urban roads [thousand PLN]

Bridges, viaducts, flyovers, pedestrian overpasses multi-span 5 115,00 6 138,00single-span 5 627,00 6 751,00steel temporary 3 900,00 3 900,00multi-span 4 015,00 4 818,00reinforced

concrete single-span 4 417,00 5 299,00multi-span 4 873,00 5 878,00prestressed

concrete single-span 5 360,00 6 466,00multi-span 3 531,00 4 237,00concrete, stone,

brick single-span 3 884,00 4 661,00multi-span 1 826,00 2 191,00single-span 2 008,00 2 410,00wooden temporary 1 826,00 1 826,00

pedestrian overpasses

m2

1 605,00 1 480,00Other structures

tunnels and underground structures m2 3 500,00 3 500,00

culverts m 960,00 960,00 The calculation of the replacement value of the existing national road network is based on the present unit construction costs estimated in paragraph 1.6, and national road network from the year 2000 as provided by the General Directorate of National Roads and Motorways (GDDKiA). The data used for the calculations are presented below.

Table A1.10 Length of national road network

Infrastructure non-urban

under GDDP management

urban under GDDP

management

cities with powiat status

National roads of which: 14 222,2 2 520,7 1 315,3Paved roads of which: 14 193,8 2 515,8 1 314,6

motorways 289,8 expressways of which: 251,2 44,3

dual carriageway 121,3 44,3 single carriageway 129,9

other dual carriageway roads of which: 540,5 283,7 444,6roads with paved shoulders > 1,50 m 494,0 151,3 145,8roads without paved shoulders 46,5 132,4 298,8

other single carriageway roads of which: 13 112,4 2 187,8 870,0roads with paved shoulders > 1,50 m 3 343,3 424,5 182,0roads without paved shoulders 9 769,1 1 763,3 688,0

Compacted aggregate or stone road 22,0 4,9 0,3Other roads: 6,4 0,0 0,4

compacted gravel or slag road 0,0 0,1compacted earth road 6,4 0,3

Pedestrian sidewalks and bicycle paths 1 227,6 1 966,71) 40,01) Including Warsaw powiat



Table A1.11 Area/ length of structures on national roads

national roads non urban under

GDDP managementurban under GDDP

management cities with powiat

status Infrastructure

No. Area or length No. Area or

length No. Area or length

Bridges: steel 169 187 391 96 99 561 42 63 307 reinforced concrete 1 609 410 349 568 225 596 235 226 690 prestressed concrete 446 358 867 162 169 789 95 193 489 concrete, stone, brick 83 9 074 37 12 254 12 2 849 wooden 3 421 2 309 0 0 pedestrian overpasses 45 3 802 54 3 285 57 13 082 Tunnels and underpasses 24 3 801 32 6 161 74 33 653 Culverts 11 974 177 564 2 316 41 728 419 9 184 Tables A1.12-A1.15 contains detail results of the national road network replacement value calculation.

Table A1.12 National road network replacement value Replacement value of national roads

[thousand PLN] Specification non-urban urban cities with

powiat status National roads value of which: 44 912 754 10 786 985 8 243 857

motorways 4 480 292 expressways of which: 2 058 644 623 642

dual carriageway 1 346 458 623 642 single carriageway 712 186

other dual carriageway roads1) of which: 4 581 687 2 968 779 4 012 194 roads with paved shoulders > 1,50 m 4 250 256 1 540 663 1 510 531 roads without paved shoulders 331 430 1 428 116 2 501 663

other single carriageway roads of which: 33 395 550 6 757 027 3 974 117 roads with paved shoulders > 1,50 m 11 729 602 1 928 926 879 496 roads without paved shoulders 21 658 671 4 826 508 3 094 509

compacted aggregate or stone road 7 150 1 592 97 other roads: 128 14

compacted gravel or slag road 8 compacted earth road 128 6

pedestrian sidewalks and bicycle paths1) 396 581 437 538 257 546 1) Including Warsaw county



Table A1.13 Replacement value of the structures on national roads

Replacement value of structures [thousand PLN]Specification non-urban urban cities with powiat

status Total of which: 4 654 132 2 851 562 3 118 353 Bridges, viaducts, flyovers, pedestrian overpasses: steel 963 381 616 182 704 608 reinforced concrete 1 762 247 1 110 433 1 108 973 prestressed concrete 1 703 627 1 004 812 1 146 179 concrete, stone, brick 33 988 52 944 12 633 wooden 845 708 pedestrian overpasses 6 101 4 862 19 361 Other structures: tunnels and underpasses 13 481 21 563 117 784 culverts 170 462 40 059 8 817

Table A1.14 Total replacement value of national roads


National roads of which: 63 943 596 motorways 4 480 292 expressways of which: 2 682 286

dual carriageway 1 970 100 single carriageway 712 186

other dual carriageway roads1) of which: 11 562 660 roads with paved shoulders > 1,50 m 7 301 450 roads without paved shoulders 4 261 210

other single carriageway roads of which: 44 126 694 roads with paved shoulders > 1,50 m 14 538 024 roads without paved shoulders 29 579 688

compacted aggregate or stone road 8 840 other roads: 142

compacted gravel or slag road 8 compacted earth road 134

pedestrian sidewalks and bicycle paths1) 1 091 664



Table A1.15 Total replacement value of the structures on the national road network


Total of which: 10 624 048 Bridges, viaducts, flyovers, pedestrian overpasses: steel 2 284 171 reinforced concrete 3 923 033 prestressed concrete 3 913 238 concrete, stone, brick 99 564 wooden 1 554 pedestrian overpasses 30 324 Other structures: tunnels and underpasses 152 828 culverts 219 337



A P P E N D I X 2



TECHNICAL CONDITION OF NATIONAL ROAD PAVEMENTS

Table A2.1 Technical condition of national road pavements [data in km] Scale: A B C D Total

Fracturing 1529,3 10587,3 2922,4 1386,1 16425,1 Roughness 2126,3 10819,8 2656,5 873,8 16476,4 Rutting 3280,0 6175,4 4297,0 2593,6 16346,0 Surface 3297,7 11283,7 1530,6 313,1 16425,1 Slipperiness 2250,4 10376,7 2162,5 1685,8 16475,4 Source: Pavement conditions of national roads in 2001. GDDP/BSSD Report

Fig. A2.1 Technical condition of national road pavements

0%10%20%30%40%50%60%70%80%90%

100%

Fracturing Roughness Rutting Surface Slipperiness

DCA+B



DEFINITION OF OVER –WEIGHT VEHICLE AND RELATED LEGISLATION. Non-standard over-weight vehicle As it concerns weight of vehicles and axle loads the parameters of vehicles on public roads in Poland shouldn’t exceed the following values:

Gross Vehicle Weight (GVW) – single vehicle with two axles – 16t, with more then two axles – 24t,

•

•

•

• •

• •

GVW – modular vehicle with number of axles not higher then four – 32t, with number of axles higher then four – 42t, GVW – articulated bus – 28t.

The limitations should be considered together with the technical parameters of road network. As it concerns national roads and some voivodship roads (marked with special informational sign) the following loads are allowed:

single axle load –10t, component axle load when distance to the next neighboring component axle is: - up to 1,10m – 5,75t, - between 1,10-1,20 – 6,5t, - between 1,20-1,30 – 7,25t, - more then 1,30m – 8t kN

On other roads: single axle load –8t, component axle load when distance to the next neighboring component axle is: - up to 1,20m – 5,7t, - between 1,20-1,30 – 6,5t, - more then 1,30m – 7,25t.

When the distance between axles is longer than 2m, the axles are treated as single. A vehicle with just one parameter exceeding the values specified above is treated as non standard and over-weight. Related legislation The following legal acts are connected with the movement of over weight vehicles: 1. “Public Road Traffic Act”, 20 of June 1997 with further modifications. 2. “Public Roads Act”, 21 of March 1985 with further modifications. 3. “Road Transport Act”, 6 of September 2001. 4. The Minister of Transport Regulations on:

• vehicle technical conditions, 1 of April 1999, • permits for movement of non-standard vehicles, 12 of December 2001, • road use fares, 15 of January 2002, • institutions responsible, procedures of costs assessing and roads adjustment for

over-weight vehicles, 28 of June 1986, • traffic inspections, 25 of May 1999 • temporary traffic bans for heavy vehicles, 30 of May 2000

Over weight vehicles - movement restrictions The restrictions in movement are introduced by the Minister of Transport Regulation (dated: 30 of May 2000) concerning over-weight vehicles. The details are presented in the Appendix 3.2 The restrictions concern the following periods: 1. 11 days in a year of public holidays, between 7.00-22.00.



2. days preceding public holiday, between 18.00-22.00, 3. period from the 1st of July up to the 31 of August :

on Fridays, between 18.00-22.00, • • •

• • • • • •

on Saturdays, between 14.00-22.00, on Sundays between 7.00-22.00.

4. period from the 1st of June up to the 30th of June and from the 1st of September to the 30th of September, on Sundays, between 7.00-22.00.

Limitations in over-weight vehicles movement can be announced also in days with very high temperature. In such cases, limitations concern periods between 11.00-23.00 and the whole country or only selected regions. Limitations are announced by the Minister of Transport, who specifies periods and areas. The above rules do not concern, among others:

emergency vehicles, police, fire brigades, etc, working for road and bridge construction and maintenance, transporting quick-spoiling materials, living animals, agricultural machines, transporting press, radio and television equipment, post, vehicles serving combined transport and acting not farther then 100 km from land terminal and 150 km form see terminal.



PROGRAM OF MAIN ROADS IMPROVEMENT50 The program is presented in Tables A2.2-A2.3. Table A2.2 summarizes motorway investment program based on data from the former ABiEA (27.03.2002). Table A2.3 summarizes expressway rehabilitation and investment program based on GDKiA data (March 2002). Table A2.4 summarizes main roads strengthening program based on GDDKiA data (March 2002).

Table A2.2 Motorway investment program No Motorway Section Length [km]

Phase I: 2002-2005 1 A-1 Gdansk – Swarozyn 25 2 A-1 Warlubie-Nowe Marzy 16 3 A-1 Turzno-Czerniewice 16 4 A-2 Konin-Kolo 28,1 5 A-2 Emilia-Strykow 17,8 6 A-4 Zgorzelec-Krzyzowa 50,1 7 A-18 Olszyna-Golnice 69,9 Total I stage: 222,9

Phase2: 2005-2010 8 A-1 Swarozyn-Warlubie 50 9 A-1 Nowe Marzy-Turzno 45 10 A-1 Czerniewice-Kowal 64,6 11 A-1 Kowal-Tuszyn 119 12 A-1 Tuszyn-Czestochowa 83 13 A-1 Czestochowa-Gorzyczki 148 14 A-2 Swiecko-Nowy Tomysl 104,85 15 A-2 Kolo-Emilia 28,1 16 A-2 Strykow-Warszawa 93,8 17 A-2 Warszawa-Siedlce 101,8 18 A-4 Wroclaw-Krzywa 91,8 19 A-4 Wroclaw by-pass 26,8 20 A-4 Krakow-Tarnow 76,4 Total II stage: 1033,15

Phase III after 2010 21 A-2 Siedlce-Biala Podlaska 56,2 22 A-4 Tarnow-Jaroslaw 100,4 Total III stage: 156,6 TOTAL LENGTH*: 1412,65

* without existing motorway sections

50 List of planned investments do not include major ongoing investments, specified in the Appendix 1



Table A2.3 Expressway roads investment program (improvements and new constructions) No Road Section name Length Number Realization process

No. [km] of roadways

Program conception

Construction permission

Planned start of construction

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Phase I: 2002-2005

1 S1 Pyrzowice Podwarpie 12,4 1 from 1989 2002 2003 2 S3 Miedzyzdroje by-pass 2,9 1 done 2003 2004 3 S3 Dargobadz by-pass 2,8 1 done 2001 2002 4 S3 Gorzow Wlkp.

by-pass 9,5 1 from 2000 2003 2004

5 S3 Miedzyrzecz by-pass 6,5 1 done 2002 2004 6 S3 Nowa Sol by-pass 14,9 1 done 2002 2004 7 S3 West Legnica by-pass 3,2 1 done YES 2002 8 S3 Legnica II phase 4,8 1 done YES 2003 9 S5 Bydgoszcz-Stryszek-

Białe Blota 13,2 1 from 2000 2004 2004

10 S7 Grojec by-pass rebuild 7,3 2 in 2002 2004 2004 11 S7 Radzikowskiego-

Modlnica 2,8 1 done 2003 2003

12 S7 Myslenice-Lubien (second roadway)

16,0 2 done 2002 2003

13 S7 Skarzysko Kam. by-pass

2,1 1 from 1993 2003 2004

14 S7 Kajetanow by-pass 12 1 from 1993 2003 2004 15 S8 Olesnica by-pass 12,5 2 from 2002 2003 2003 16 S8 Wyszkow by-pass 12,8 2 done 2003 2003 17 S10 Szczecin-Motaniec

(second roadway) 6,0 2 done YES 2002

18 S10 South Torun by-pass 12,5 1 from 1999 2002 2003 19 S10 Motaniec-Lipnik 10 1 done 2002 2003 20 S11 Pila by-pass 3,1 1 done 2003 2004 21 S11 Kepno by-pass 10,4 1 done 2003 2004 22 S22 Elblag-Grzechotki 50,4 1 from 2000 2003 2004 TOTAL 2002-2005: 228,1

Phase II: 2005-2010 1 S1 Podwarpie-Dabrowa

Gornicza 10,5 1 from 2001 2005 2006

2 S2 Zakret-Konik (A2) 5,0 2 - 2005 2006 3 S3 East Szczecin by-pass 6,7 1 done 2004 2005 4 S3 Troszyn-Ostromice 7,5 1 done 2004 2006 5 S3 Miekow by-pass 2,3 1 - 2004 2006 6 S3 East Szczecin by-pass

(II phase) 8,0 1 done 2005 2006

7 S3 By-passes Żabow, Pyrzyce, Mielecin,

Mielecinek, Lipiany, Renice

61,0 1 done 2006 2006



8 S3 Zach-Pomorskie border-Smolczyn

7,5 1 - 2006 2006

9 S3 Deszczno-Trzebiszewo 13,5 1 - 2007 2007 10 S3 Trzebiszewo-Skwierzyna 3,7 1 - 2004 2006 11 S3 Kalawa-Jordanowo 10,5 1 - 2006 2008 12 S3 Rosin by-pass 7,8 1 - 2006 2007 13 S3 Kalsk by-pass 6,9 1 - 2006 2008 14 S3 Skwierzyna by-pass 9,0 1 done 2005 2006 15 S3 Skwierzyna-Miedzyrzecz 9,6 1 - 2003 2006 16 S3 Miedzyrzecz-Kalawa 2,1 1 - 2004 2006 17 S3 Potoczek-Lubin;

rebuilding or II roadway construction

65,1 2 - 2004 2006

18 S3 Lubin by-pass 11,8 2 done 2006 2006 19 S3 Jawor by-pass 11,0 1 done 2005 2006 20 S5 Iwno-Kleszczewo 13,4 1 - 2004 2005 21 S5 Gluchowo-Steszew 14,5 1 - 2004 2005 22 S5 Lubowo-Iwno 23,0 1 - 2006 2007 23 S6 Lebork-Gdansk 50,0 1 - 2005 2006 24 S7 Plonsk-Zaluski and

Plonsk bypass 8 2 done 2004 2005

25 S7 Czosnow-Kielpin 10,2 2 done 2004 2005 26 S7 Grojec-Jozefow 9,6 2 done 2004 2005 27 S7 Jozefow-Jedlinsk 23 1 done 2005 2005 28 S7 Mazowsze voiv. Border-

Wisniowka 49,6 2 from 1994 2005 2006

29 S7 Checiny – Jedrzejow 24,4 1 from 1994 2007 2008 30 S7 Kiezmark-Gdansk (A1)

with south Gdansk by-pass

26,0 2 done 2006 2006

31 S7 By-passes: Strzegow, Unierzyz and Wisniewo

11,5 1 done 2005 2006

3 S7 Radom by-pass 23,0 1 - 2007 2008 233 S7 Slomniki-Krakow

(Modlnica) 48,8 1 done 2006 2007

34 S7 Lubien-Skomielna B. 11,2 2 done 2005 2006 35 S7 Skomielna B.-Zabornia

(Chabowka) 6,3 2 done 2005 2006

36 S8 Trasa AK, section Bridge-Marki

7 2 - 2004 2005

37 S8 Radzymin-Gluchy 9,4 2 done 2004 2005 38 S8 Gluchy-Zabrodzie 7,7 2 done 2004 2005 39 S8 Warszawa /Salomea/ -

Wolica 12 2 done 2005 2005

40 S8 South Warsaw by-pass, section Konotopa-Opacz

6 2 - 2004 2005

41 S8 Trasa AK Konotopa- 10,6 2 - 2004 2005



Powązkowska 42 S8 Trasa AK Powazkowska-

Bridge 5 2 - 2004 2005

43 S8 Bialystok by-pass 7,6 2 done 2005 2005 44 S8 Wrocław-Sycow 30,0 2 - 2004 45 S8 Bralin by-pass 6,0 1 done 2005 2006 46 S8 Mazowsze border –

Piotrkow Trybunalski (rebuilding)

83,0 2 done 2005 2006

47 S8 Wolica-Lodz voiv. border (rebuild)

35,6 2 done 2005 2006

48 S8 Wyszkow-Podlaskie border

36,8 1 2003 2005 2006

49 S8 Mazowsze border-Bialystok

70,1 1 done 2006 2006

50 S8 Olszow by-pass 6,0 1 - 2006 2008 51 S10 Wyrzysk by-pass 7 1 done 2004 2005 52 S10 Stargard-Świete 10,0 - done 2005 2006 53 S10 Plonsk-Drobin 32,9 1 - 2007 2008 54 S11 Ujscie by-pass 5,5 1 - 2008 2009 55 S11 Oborniki-Poznań 45,5 1 - 2005 2006 56 S11 Pila-Oborniki and Sroda-

Ostrow Wlkp. 103,0 1 - 2005 2006

57 S11 Ostrow Wlkp. by-pass, II phase)

11,7 1 - 2007 2008

58 S11 Poznan-Kornik 13,6 2 from 2001 2004 2005 59 S11 Kornik-Środa Wlkp. 12,7 1 2003 2004 2005 60 S11 Jarocin by-pass 11 1 - 2004 2005 61 S11 Ostrow Wlkp. by-pass

(Phase 1) 6,1 1 done 2003 2005

62 S17 Garwolin by-pass 11,4 1 done 2005 2005 63 S17 East Warsaw by-pass 17,0 2 - 2006 2007 64 S17 Warszawa-Garwolin (2

roadways) 41,7 2 - 2006 2006

65 S17 Mazowsze border-Kurowwith Ryki by-pass

40,6 1 - 2008 2008

66 S17 Kurow-Lublin-Piaski (with by-passes: Kurow, Markuszow, Garbow and nort-east Lublin by-pass,

I phase)

57,5 1 done 2006-2007 2008

TOTAL: 2005-2010 1372,0 TOTAL: 2002-2010 1600,1

2006

Source: Main roads improvement program 2002-2005-2010, GDDKiA/BS



Table A2.4 Main roads (not specified in Tables A2.2 and A2.3) - road pavement and bridges strengthening program (115 kN)

Road Section name Length Realization process

No No [km] Program conception

Construction permission

Realization period

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Phase I: 2002-2005

1 1 Torun-Sierpow 68,8 - 2004 2004-2006 2 1 Tuszyn-Gluchow 8,0 - 2004 2004-2005 3 2 Krosniewice-Sochaczew 57,5 - 2004 2004-2006 4 4 Krakow-Tarnow 56,1 done YES 2002-2004 5 4 Machowa-Rzeszow 64,0 - 2004 2004-2006 6 7 Janki-Grojec 30,0 - 2004 2004-2005 7 8 Tomaszow-Wolborz 8,0 - 2004 2004-2005 8 22 Jazowa-Elblag 14,0 - 2004 2004-2005 9 50 Grojec-Minsk Maz. 86,0 done 2004 2004-2006 10 69 Zywiec-Zwardon 27,0 done partial 2002-2004 TOTAL: 2002-2005 419,4

Phase II: 2005-2010 1 2 Siedlce -Terespol 70 - 2005 2005-2010 2 4 Rzeszow-Korczowa 70 - 2005 2005-2010 3 5 Bydgoszcz-Poznan 121 - 2005 2005-2010 4 7 Elblag-Plonsk 210 - 2005 2005-2010 5 8 Bialystok-Suwalki 117 - 2005 2005-2010 6 10 Torun-Drobin 113 - 2005 2005-2010 7 11 Ostrow Wlkp.-Kepno 45 - 2005 2005-2010 8 12 Lublin-Dorohusk 75 - 2005 2005-2010 9 17 Piaski-Krasnystaw-Zamosc 59 - 2004 2005-2008 10 69 Bielsko Biala-Żywiec 20 - 2005 2005-2010 TOTAL: 2005-2010 900

TOTAL: 2002-2010 1319,4 Source: Main roads improvement program 2002-2005-2010, GDDKiA/BS



COSTS OF MAIN ROADS IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM Table A2.5 summarizes costs of main roads strengthening program based on GDDKiA data (March 2002). Table A2.6 summarizes costs of by-pass construction program based on GDDKiA data (March 2002).

Table A2.5 Foreseen costs of road network strengthening (for 115 kN axle load) Financing sources

No Road Section Length Cost State Foreign Number budget sources [M PLN] [M PLN] [M PLN]

1 2 3 4 5 6 7

Phase I: 2002-2005 1 1 Torun-Sierpow 68,8 400 120 280 2 1 Tuszyn-Gluchow 8,0 50 25 25 3 2 Krosniewice-Sochaczew 57,5 320 96 224 4 4 Krakow-Tarnow 56,1 97 29 68 5 4 Machowa-Rzeszow 64,0 300 90 210 6 7 Janki-Grojec 30,0 150 70 80 7 8 Tomaszow-Wolborz 8,0 40 20 20 8 22 Jazowa-Elblag 14,0 60 18 42 9 50 Grojec-Minsk Maz. 86,0 480 140 340 10 69 Zywiec-Zwardon 27,0 323 97 226

Phase II: 2005-2010 11 2 Siedlce –Terespol 70 210 40 170 12 4 Rzeszow-Korczowa 70 210 40 170 13 5 Bydgoszcz-Poznan 121 360 70 290 14 7 Elblag-Plonsk 210 630 130 500 15 8 Bialystok-Suwalki 117 350 70 280 16 10 Torun-Drobin 113 340 70 270 17 11 Ostrow Wlkp.-Kepno 45 130 60 70 18 12 Lublin-Dorohusk 75 220 45 175 19 17 Piaski-Krasnystaw-Zamosc 59 200 40 160 20 69 Bielsko Biala-Zywiec 20 566 116 450 Total, Phase I 419,4 2220 705 1515

Total, Phase II 900 3216 681 2535 Total, Phase I and Phase II 1319,4 5436 1386 4050

Source: GDDKiA/BP



Table A2.6. Foreseen costs of by-pass constructions (adjusted to 115 kN axle load) No By-pass Road number Length

[km] Cost

[M PLN] IRR [%]

1 2 3 4 5 6

PHASE I: 2002-2005 1 Ropczyce 4 4,5 60 43,0 2 Wojnicz 4 3,7 60 3 Pilzno 4 i 73 2,5 30 4 Szubin 5 5,7 60 5 Slawno 6 2,8 22 6 Wasilkow 8 i 19 4,5 54 27,8 7 Glogow Mlp. 9 4,6 41 26,0 8 Borek (1 roadway) 12 4,0 20 9 Zagan 12 4,9 54 32,5/42,010 Zary 12 2,0 11 46,6/63,011 Gniezno (1 roadway) 15 6,3 40 12 Hrebenne (I phase) 17 2,3 28 13 Czluchow 22 3,1 22 14 Chojnice 22 13,1 140 15 Slesin (1 roadway) 25 5,1 15 16 Wilkanowo 27 4,9 21 70,5/94,517 Biecz 28 5,0 50 18 Sulechow 32 4,4 19 58,6/71,819 Lubrza 40 3,5 25 18,8 20 Prudnik 40 i 41 3,5 10 17,2 21 Lubliniec (I phase) 46 9,5 24 22 Dobrodzien 46 5,6 30 23 Otmuchow 46 3,8 31 13,9 24 Mszczonow (I phase) 50 3,0 34 29,3 25 Stojadla 50 4,0 35 26 Barcikowo 51 1,6 19 34,3 27 Wadowice 52 1,8 16 28 Kutno 60 14,8 60 13,8 29 Gostynin 60 8,3 45 29,3 30 Raciaz 60 5,0 34 27,0 31 Jablonna 61 2,6 40 77,5 32 Goldap 65 5,4 40 33 Rawa Mazowiecka 72 3,4 45 20,0 34 Ozarow 74 4,0 28 35 Kije 78 3,0 27 13,0 36 Chalupki 78 3,9 37

PHASE I: 2005-2010 37 Krosniewice 1 i 2 6,6 119 14,0 38 Bolkow 3 i 5 5,0 72 39 Lancut 4 5,7 60 33,2



40 Jaroslaw 4 11,2 200 40,3 41 Przeworsk 4 5,5 58 42 Rynarzewo 5 2,7 40 43 Bozepole Wlk. 6 8,3 110 44 Slupsk 6 16,2 225 26,1 45 Nowogard 6 8,5 50 46 Strzegowo Unierzyz 7 8,7 60 47 Wisniewo 7 2,8 26 48 Grabin 7 2,5 25 49 Szyldak 7 2,2 20 50 Wielun 8 13,2 145 28,1 51 Belchatow 8 11,0 150 52 Augustow 8 17,9 185 22,0 53 Ilza 9 6,2 42 54 Stargard 10 13,0 110 55 Walcz 10 10,0 60 56 Okopy (I phase) 12 3,7 40 57 Pulawy + bridge (I phase) 12 12,8 254 58 Opoczno 12 7,8 115 59 Lublin (I phase) 12/17/19 24,0 605 30,9

Pabianice (section Lodz-Dobron) 14 18,0 250 61 Kozmin (1 roadway) 15 2,6 7 25,8 62 Brodnica 15 1,7 30 63 Miedzyrzec Podlaski (I phase) 19 6,5 72 33,3 64 Janow Lubelski (I phase) 19 4,4 35 65 Sokolow Mlp. 19 6,3 65 21,4 66 Krasnik (I phase) 19 i 74 5,5 75

Wegorzyno (II phase) 20 6 68 Nowe Skalmierzyce (1 roadway) 25 7,4 80 69 Nowogrod Bobrzanski 27 5,5 33 70 Limanowa 28 5,3 55 71 Krosno Odrz. 29 4,9 37 72 Kargowo 32 7,5 55 73 Klodzko 33 6,0 45 74 Swidnica (2 roadways) 35 12,7 202 75 Kedzierzyn-Kozle 40 4,9 70 35,4 76 Lubliniec (II phase) 46 3,0 69 77 Myslina 46 2,5 12 12,5 78 Mszczonow (II phase) 50 6,1 50 29,3 79 Zyrardow 50 12,7 80 22,1 80 Sprecowo 51 2,0 20 81 Andrychow 52 12,5 75 46,8 82 Serock 61 6,3 70 44,6 83 Olecko 65 7,0 55 84 Dabrowa Tarnowska 73 7,0 96

60

67 0,9



85 Domaszowice, Cedzyna 74 4,4 50 86 Lezajsk 77 3,7 40

77 3,0 36 88 Jedrzejow 78 7,3 75

Szczekociny 78 5,4 90 Siewierz 78 6,6 76 91 Pradla 78 4,0 70 92 Zawiercie 78 17,0 204 93 Tarnowskie Gory 78 5,6 50 94 Chrzanow i Trzebinia 79 5,9 82

Total 2002-2005 170,1 1327,0 Total 2005-2010 427,6 5160,3 Total 2002-2010 597,7 6487,3

87 Nisko 45,0

89 65

Source: GDDKiA/BP



A P P E N D I X 3



BASIC TRAFFIC DATA – NATIONAL AND VOIVODSHIP ROADS

increase Table A3.1 Traffic increase by vehicles categories – national roads

Vehicle Share of vehicles category category 1995 2000 index

AADT % AADT % 1995-2000 Motorcycle 29 0,5 15 0,2 0,52 Passenger car 3811 71,2 4931 70,3 1,29

10,5 801 11,4 1,43 Truck 367 6,9 428 6,1 1,17 Heavy truck 417 7,8 699 10,0 1,68 Bus 134 2,5 116 1,7 0,87 Tractor 30 0,6 19 0,3 0,63 Total 5350 100,0 7009 100,0 1,31

Van 562

Table A3.2 Traffic increase indexes – voivodship roads Vehicle Share of vehicle category increase category 1995 2000 index

AADT % AADT % 1995-2000 Motorcycle 26 1,4 19 0,73 0,8

1332 74,4 1876 79,4 Van 170 9,5 206 8,7 1,21 Truck 102 5,7 104 4,4 1,02 Heavy truck 81 4,5 83 3,5 1,02 Bus 52 2,9 50 2,1 0,96 Tractor 28 1,6 26 1,1 0,93 Total 1790 100,0 2363 100,0 1,32

Passenger car 1,41

Table A3.3 Length of national roads in traffic volumes ranges AADT range Length of roads

[veh./day] International Other national Total YEAR 2000 km % km % km %

<1000 - - 258 2,2 258 1,5 1 000-1 999 21 0,4 1357 11,7 1378 8,3

2426 48,8 9103 78,4 11529 69,6 10 000-14 999 1441 29 683 5,8 2124 12,8 15 000-19 999 608 12,2 149 1,3 757 4,6 > 20000 477 9,6 67 0,6 544 3,3 Total 4973 100 11617 100 16590 100

2 000-9 999

Source:Traffic Census 2002 – report



Table A3.4 Length of voivodship roads in traffic volumes ranges

AADT range Length of roads YEAR 2000 km %

<1000 6836,5 25 1 000-1 999 8461,9 30,9 2 000-3 999 7892,8 28,8 4 000-9 999 3935,8 14,4 > 10 000 247,4 0,9 Total 27374,4 100



A P P E N D I X 4



Table A4.1 Heavy goods vehicles tariff Charge rate [PLN/EUR]*

24 hour 1 week 1 month 6 months year Vehicle type

EURO 0

min. EURO 1

EURO 0

min. EURO 1

EURO 0

min. EURO 1

EURO 0

min. EURO 1

EURO 0

min. EURO 1

3.5t < GVW* < 12t two axles PLN 6 205 18 60 54 240 215 400 360 EUR 1,7 1,4 5,6 5,0 16,7 15,0 66,7 59,7 111,1 100,0 three axles or more PLN

20 18 60 54 180 165

720

650 1280 1150

EUR 5,6 5,0 16,7 15,0 50,0 45,8 200,0 180,6 355,6 319,4GVW > 12t up to three axles PLN 30 27 70 63 210 190 840 760 1600 1450 EUR 8,3 7,5 19,4 17,5 58,3 52,8 233,3 211,1 444,4 402,8 four axles or more PLN 45 40 100 90 300 270 1300 1080 2200 1900 EUR 12,5 11,1 27,8 25,0 83,3 75,0 361,1 300,0 611,1 527,8Buses GVW > 3.5t PLN 12 11 45 40 120 108 480 430 800 700 EUR 3,3 3,1 12,5 11,1 33,3 30,0 133,3 119,4 222,2 194,4

Exhaust fumes emission

* GVW – Gross Vehicle Weight

Table A4.2 Truck vignette revenue in 2002 [thousand EUR]* January February March April Type No. sold Revenue No. sold revenue No. sold revenue No. sold revenue

172 821 1 497 170 474 1 430 1 600 176 552 1 579one week 37 605 898 40 723 963 45 277 1 069 46 690 1 122

5 224 311 5 909 325 6 207 4 757 312half year 8 895 2 104 8 153 1 834 5 748 1 173 3 358 948year 11 587 3 182 7 745 1 990 5 722 1 538 1 740 780Total 236 132 7 992 233 004 6 543 257 385 5 718 233 097 4 740

24 hour 194 430

one month 339

* 1 EUR = 3,6 PLN Source: Ministry of Infrastructure

Table A4.3 Excise duty on fuels Excise duty

[PLN/ 1000 liter] in force from: Fuel type

1.01.2002 1.01.2001 1.09.2000 1.03.2000 1.01.2000leaded petrol 1 629 1 588 1 399 1 339 1 279unleaded petrol 1 464 1 427 1 257 1 217 1 177diesel with sulfur content: > 0,2% 1 104 1 076 948 908 868 0,05% < < 0,2% 1 090 1 062 926 886 846 0,005% < < 0,05% 1 027 1 001 881 841 801 < 0,005% 980 955 850 830 795

Source: Ministry of Finance



Table A4.4 License fees in for international passenger transport Vehicle type Fee [PLN] for one country bordering on Poland for more than one country validity period [years]

2-15 15-30 30-50 2-15 15-30 30-50 passenger: car 1 500 1 900 2 400 3 000 3 800 4 800bus 5 300 6 000 7 000 10 500 12 000 14 000goods of GVW: 3,5t<<12t 2 500 2 900 3 300 5 000 5 800 6 60012t<<20t 4 100 4 700 5 300 8 200 9 400 10 600>20t and truck tractors

5 750 6 500 7 500 11 500 13 000 15 000

Table A4.5 Fees for regular international passenger transport

Type of vehicle Validity period Fee [PLN] up to 6 months 400up to 1 year 800up to 2 years 1 600up to 3 years 2 400up to 4 years 3 200

bus

up to 5 years 4 000

Table A4.6 Fees for licenses for domestic transport. Vehicle type

Fee [PLN]

within one gmina within two gminas within Warsaw validity period [years] 2-15 15-30 30-50 2-15 15-30 30-50 2-15 15-30 30-50 taxi 200 250 300 280 350 400 320 380 450

within one gmina within more than one gmina and Warsaw

within more than one powiat

car 225 300 340 375 450 675 525 600 750 400 500 600 700 800 900 1000

truck of GVW:

3,5t<<12t 400 460 540 550 600 640 650 740 85012t<<20t 500 580 680 685 700 750 760 870 990>20t and truck tractors

600 700 800 810 830 845 850 980 1 100

bus 300 450



Table A4.7 Fees for permission for regular domestic transport. Vehicle type Validity

period [years] Fee [PLN]

within one gmina

within more than one gmina and

Warsaw

within more than one powiat

car and bus up to 1 year 100 250 500 up to 2 years 150 325 550 up to 3 years 200 400 600 up to 4 years 250 475 650 up to 5 years 300 550 700



A P P E N D I X 5

TINA ROAD NETWORK



L I S T O F M E E T I N G S



The following meetings were held during realization of the Study

Date: Institution Person contacted 1 19.03.2002 GDDP/GDDKiA Mr. Tadeusz Suwara 2 20.03.2002 BSSD/BS Mr. Marek Rolla 3 20.03.2002 ITS Mr. Edward Menes 4 20.03.2002 MI Mr. Rafal Rybacki 5 20.03.2002 ABiEA Mr. Eugeniusz Mroz

Mr. Zbigniew Rapciak 6 26.03.2002 BSSD/BS Mr. Marek Rolla 7 26.03.2002 BSSD/BS Mr. Waldemar Kurylowicz 8 26.03.2002 BSSD/BS Mr. Krzysztof Kowalski 9 26.03.2002 BSSD/BS Mr. Aleksandra Hutnik 10 26.03.2002 BSSD/BS Mr. Miroslaw Warzachowski 11 26.03.2002 BSSD/BS Mr. Krzysztof Kania 12 29.03.2002 BSSD/BS Mr. Tadeusz Kowalczyk 13 02.04.2002 MI Mrs. Slawomira Wojnar 14 23.04.2002 GDDP/GDDKiA Mrs. Elzbieta Talunas 15 23.04.2002 GDDP/GDDKiA Mr. Ludomir Szubert

BSSD/BS Mr. Miroslaw Warzachowski 17 24.04.2002 BSSD/BS Mr. Krzysztof Kowalski 18 25.04.2002 ABiEA Mr. Pawel Pilatkowski 19 30.04.2002 GDDP/GDDKiA Mr. Edward Archutowski 20 8.05. 2002 MoF Mrs. Alicja Zielinska,

Mr. Wojciech Ostrowski 21 10.05.2002 MI Mr. Piotr Stomma 22 10.05 2002 GDDP/GDDKiA Mr. Jerzy Kozicki,

Mr. Slawomir Kul 23 13.05.002 MI Mr. Tomasz Kowalczyk

Mr. Wojciech Zarnoch 24 14.05.2002 MI Mr. Jaroslaw Waszkiewicz 25 14.05.2002 MI Mr. Stanislaw Zielinski 26 15.05.2002 MI Mr. Tomasz Michalski 27 16.05.2002 BSSD/BS Mr. Marek Rolla 29 17.05.2002 MI Mr. Rafal Rybacki 30 20.05.2002 ABiEA/GDDKiA Mr. Pawel Pilatkowski 31 21.05.2002 GDDP/GDDKiA Mr. Tadeusz Suwara

16 24.04.2002

GDDP/GDDKiA – General Directorate of Public Roads BSSD/BS – Bureau of Road Network Studies ITS - The Motor Transport Institute MI – Ministry of Infrastructure ABiEA – Motorway Agency MoF – Ministry of Finance


financing roads in poland – present status and … · goods vehicles (hgvs) on the poland's...

Documents