1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26

THE STATE OF URBAN RAIL FREIGHT STRATEGIES IN EUROPEAN CITIES

Tobias M. Fumasoli, Corresponding Author ETH Zurich Institute for Transport Planning and Systems (IVT) Stefano-Franscini-Platz 5, 8093 Zurich, Switzerland Tel: +41-44-633-4042 Fax: +41-44-633-1057; Email: [email protected] Prof. Ulrich A. Weidmann ETH Zurich Institute for Transport Planning and Systems (IVT) Stefano-Franscini-Platz 5, 8093 Zurich, Switzerland Tel: +41-44-633-3350 Fax: +41-44-633-1057; Email: [email protected] Word count: 2,457 words text + 4 tables/figures x 250 words (each) = 3,457 words

Submission Date August 1, 2015

Fumasoli, Weidmann

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19

ABSTRACT With a shifting focus of urban planners towards freight transport, the use of railways in urban transport chains is increasingly advocated. The shift to rail-based freight transport is expected to reduce the dependency on road infrastructure, and to contribute to a range of current challenges in transportation, such as congestion, pollution and road safety. However there seems no consolidated approach to rail freight in the urban context. This paper analyses the state of urban (freight) transport strategies by public bodies concerning the use of railways. It compiles and compares transport strategies from cities in the largest metropolitan areas in Europe. The strategies and plans are studied with respect to their specificity, their objectives and the measures they propose. Local circumstances and the type of public body issuing the strategy are taken into account. The study identifies a lack of rail-specific measures in transport strategies. Strategies that contain details on rail freight are restricted to network and terminal infrastructure, leaving a gap in terms of train operation and technology. Keywords: Urban rail freight, urban transport policy, transport strategy

2

Fumasoli, Weidmann

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46

INTRODUCTION For many cities the focus of urban planning is currently shifting towards urban freight transport. In the debate on urban logistics the use of (heavy) railways is increasingly being advocated (Dinwoodie 2006, Maes and Vanelslander 2010, Alessandrini et al. 2012, Browne et al. 2014). The shift to rail-based supply chains is expected to reduce the dependency on road infrastructure, and to contribute to a range of current challenges in transportation, such as congestion, pollution and road safety. Additionally freight transport plans are instruments for economic development. However planners often give little thought to the requirements for freight railways in urban areas. Mostly the need for additional infrastructure (e.g. transshipment facilities), improved rolling stock and organizational integration of transport services is only covered on a conceptual level. Additionally in Europe the disintegration of railway infrastructure managers, operators and regulators (European directive 2001/12/EC) has led to a loss of planning competence in the public administration. On the basis of urban (or metropolitan) transport strategies and freight plans this paper analyzes the state of specific measures to improve rail freight transport in urban areas in Europe. A range of freight plans and transport strategies by urban and metropolitan administrations is analyzed. A categorization is applied and specific rail freight planning measures are identified. Freight transport planning and policies have been researched before. However little literature could be found with respect to specific planning measures in rail freight in an urban context. The work of Browne et al. (2007) compares the approaches taken in freight transport strategies in London and Paris. Lindholm (2010) evaluates how small and medium cities in Sweden deal with urban freight transport planning. Further analysis of Swedish freight transport policies on the local level is provided by Lindholm and Blinge (2014). A paper by Ruesch et al. (2012) deals with the institutional integration of freight transport in public planning. Ballantyne et al. (2013) have analyzed the state of urban freight transport planning using semi-structured interviews with local authorities and freight stakeholders in five European countries. Also related are the works of Bontekoning et al. (2004) which have reviewed 92 scientific publications on intermodal (rail-truck) transport to analyze the state of intermodal research, and Zografos et al. (2012) which compare EU transport policies with policies from its member states. The review of a range of transport strategies reveals the lack of a mutual understanding of the role of freight railways in European metropolitan regions. Additionally the potential of operational and technical innovation seems not to be taken into account in long term strategies. METHODS Selection of Rail Freight Strategies The state of strategic rail freight planning in urban areas was analyzed by reviewing publicly available transport plans and strategies. The research was limited to cities belonging to the largest metropolitan areas in Europe; TABLE 1 shows the selected cities for this study. Only plans and strategies from bodies of the public administration were regarded, excluding corporate strategies of freight train operators and infrastructure managers. This approach was taken due to (i) the strong regulatory role of municipalities and regional governments in urban transportation matters and (ii) the administrations’ increasing awareness of the need for improving freight transport policies.

3

Fumasoli, Weidmann

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10

Since urban areas are often not congruent with administrational structures a range of public entities was considered as sources of freight transport strategies in the urban context. Depending on territorial definitions and administrative structures, strategies and long term plans can be issued by (i) municipalities or greater cities, (ii) interadministrational cooperation, if the urban area does not form an administrative unit, (iii) regional, state or provincial governments, if the urban area is congruent to the mentioned, or (iv) governmental bodies, if the central state takes responsibility for a certain urban area (e.g. in capital cities). TABLE 1 Selected Cities and Strategies/Plans City, Country

11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23

4

Name of Strategy/Plan London Freight Plan London, UK Rail Freight Strategy Plan de déplacements urbains d’Île-de-France Paris, France Document d’orientations stratégiques pour le Fret en Île-de-France à l’horizon 2025 Berlin, Germany Integriertes Wirtschaftsverkehrskonzept Berlin Pla de Mobilitat Urbana de Barcelona Barcelona, Spain Pla Director de Mobilitat de la Regió Metropolitana de Barcelona Milano, Italy Piano Urbano Della Mobilità Sostenibile Milano Rome, Italy Piano per la Mobilità delle Merci Hamburg, Germany Mobilitätsprogramm 2013 Warsaw, Poland Strategii Transportowej Miasta Stołecznego Warszawy Le Plan régional de mobilité Région de Bruxelles-Capitale Brussels, Belgium Plan stratégique pour le transport de marchandises en Région de Bruxelles-Capitale

Abbr. FP RFS PDUIF

Year 2007 2007 2014

Fret-IdF

2012

IWV PMU pdM PUMS PMM MobP STMSW IRIS II

2005 2012 2015 2015 2007 2013 2013 2011

TranMar

2013

Classifications of Rail Freight Strategies Rail freight strategies were classified according to the type of the issuing body, the specificity of the document and special local circumstances. TABLE 2 shows the classification of the different rail freight strategies and their respective issuing body. Specificity describes the significance of the railways sector in the document. Is it (i) mentioned in a general strategy/plan, (ii) a self-contained chapter in a general strategy/plan, (iii) a follow-up/specification to a broader strategy, or (iv) an isolated strategy? In some cities special local circumstances—apart from freight distribution—have to be considered. This is the case when a cities’ freight transport system (i) is dominated by transport-intensive industries (e.g. coal power plant) and/or (ii) is exceeding an urban function (e.g. major sea ports).

Fumasoli, Weidmann

1 2

5

TABLE 2 Issuing Entities and Classification City, Abbr. London, FP London, RFS

Issuing Public Entity Transport for London TfL Transport for London TfL

Syndicat des Transports d’Île-de-France STIF Direction Régionale et Interdépartementale de l’Équipement et de Paris,Fret-IdF l’Aménagement d’Île-de-France DRIEA Senatsverwaltung für Berlin, IWV Stadtentwicklung Ajuntament de Barcelona Barcelona, PMU Autoritat del Transport Barcelona, pdM Metropolità ATM Comune di Milano Milano, PUMS Città metropolitana di Rome, PMM Roma Capitale Behörde für Wirtschaft, Hamburg, MobP Verkehr und Innovation Urząd Miasta Stołecznego Warszawy, Biuro Warsaw, STMSW Drogownictwa i Komunikacji Bruxelles Mobilité Brussels,IRIS II Brussels, TranMar Bruxelles Mobilité Paris, PDUIF

3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19

Entity Type municipal municipal

Specificity Local Circumstances mentioned exceeding function follow-up/ exceeding function specification interadministrational mentioned cooperation governmental body self-contained

municipal

self-contained

municipal interadministrational cooperation municipal regional authority

mentioned mentioned

municipal

mentioned

exceeding function

municipal

mentioned

exceeding function

regional authority regional authority

mentioned self-contained

exceeding function exceeding function

mentioned mentioned

RESULTS Objectives of Rail Freight Strategies In general the purpose of transport strategies issued by public bodies needs to be compliant with public objectives. Objectives can be assigned to (i) efficient public spending, (ii) maintaining or improving public health, (iii) improving (road) safety, (iv) the protection of the environment, and (v) the promotion of economic development. In some strategies objectives refer to freight transport, in others partially or not.

TABLE 3 shows the scope of objectives in the analyzed strategies and their freight-relevance. More efficient public spending (i.e. on transport infrastructure) seems to be the major driver of freight transport strategies. Diverting traffic from roads to non-road modes also helps to improve road safety, as well as reducing air pollution, noise and the emission of greenhouse gases. Economic development is especially important in freight-oriented strategies (e.g. London Rail Freight Strategy) whereas more general strategies rather focus on public health. In general, objectives in transport strategies are usually not explicitly connected to freight transport, especially not to rail freight.

Fumasoli, Weidmann

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28

Measures and Recommendations of Rail Freight Strategies The measures proposed in transport strategies are manifold. They range from general transport policies to awareness campaigns, development schemes and specific local projects. Irrespective of the degree of particularity, the measures related to rail freight transport can be attributed to one or several of the following aspects: - Network infrastructure - Network capacity - Terminal infrastructure - Terminal capacity - Terminal location - Freight train operations - Freight train technology Infrastructural measures range from expanding networks and building new terminals to safeguarding of railway areas from urban development in order to hold them available for future rail freight needs. Capacity measures include dedicating capacity to freight, securing train paths from increasing passenger services. Additionally measures to increase capacity by improving track infrastructure and signaling are included. In terms of rolling stock measures are limited to the technical adaptation of freight trains to passenger trains. Of major interest to urban planners is infrastructure, capacity and the location of terminals at the interface between rail and road transport. Terminal types range from standard container terminals—partly trimodal (road, inland waterway and rail)—to road-rail crossdocking facilities (FIGURE 1). Special solutions are also part of some freight transport strategies. The use of the tramway network for freight is considered in Paris and Brussels; the use of the French high speed railway network for freight is also mentioned (Fret-IdF, PDUIF, TranMar).

6

Fumasoli, Weidmann

TABLE 3 Objectives and Rail-related Measures of Transport Strategies

3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11

x

x x x x x x x x x

x x

x x x x

x x x x x x x

x x

x x

x x x

x x

x

x x x x

x

x

x x

x x x

Freight train technology

Economic development

x

Network infrastructure Network capacity Terminal infrastructure Terminal capacity Terminal location Freight train operations

Environment

x x x x x

(Road) Safety

x x x

Rail Freight Measures

Public health

Yes Yes Partially Yes Yes No Partially No Yes Partially Partially Partially No

Main Objectives

Public spending

City, Abbr. London, FP London, RFS Paris, PDUIF Paris,Fret-IdF Berlin, IWV Barcelona, PMU Barcelona, pdM Milano, PUMS Rome, PMM Hamburg, MobP Warsaw, STMSW Brussels,IRIS II Brussels, TranMar

Objectives refer to freight transport

1 2

7

x

x x

x

x

x

n.a. x x

x

x x

x

x x

x

The analysis shows that, the less specific a transport strategy, the less likely it is to contain measures directly connected to rail freight transport. Even freight-oriented strategies such as the London Freight Plan do not necessarily contain rail-specific measures; however it is backed up by a specific rail freight plan. Also, in areas with specific freight transport demands, e.g. deep sea ports, strategies seem to contain less specific measures. Most strategies do not comment on the way freight trains should be run and rather focus on infrastructural topics. The physical networks and nodes seem to be of higher priority to public planners than operations.

Fumasoli, Weidmann

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31

FIGURE 1 Freight terminal infrastructure and operations in Paris-Rungis (Kate Barry, Marché International de Rungis). London’s Rail Freight Strategy in detail To highlight the range of measures, the London case is presented in detail. Besides being the largest metropolitan area in Europe, London has the probably most comprehensive rail freight strategy in terms of urban transport. The Rail Freight Strategy of London is part of the London Freight Plan, designed by Transport for London (TfL) a functional body of the Greater London Authority (GLA, 2007). The proposed solutions include (i) capacity and capability schemes in

London, (ii) capacity and capability schemes outside London, (iii) encouraging more efficient use of the network, (iv) terminal development, and (v) other pro-rail policy initiatives. Capacity and capability schemes aim to increase the available freight routes and therefore improving the reliability and the diversionary capability for freight. The measures include gauge enhancement, increasing the number of available tracks, the strengthening and reconstruction of bridges, headway improvements, electrification and train lengthening. This allows diverting some freight traffic away from busy cross-London routes, and creating additional capacity for passenger services. More efficient use of the network can be achieved by improving the allocation of train paths. Well-designed track charges support more efficient capacity utilization by encouraging performance of freight trains to be as similar to passenger trains as possible. This may require some technical adaptations of rolling stock. Additionally the availability of alternative routes allows more efficient track maintenance. The development of new multimodal terminals should allow rail to increase its share in the retail distribution market and support international freight. The location in proximity to highways and main arteries of London is of major importance. Additionally smaller freight terminals concentrating on local markets should be developed. Pro-rail policy initiatives refer to the liberalization of access to rail infrastructure in Continental

Europe. This should make the European rail freight market more permeable across national borders. Additionally the introduction of a road pricing scheme will help to create a more level playing field in terms of payment for infrastructure at point of use.

8

Fumasoli, Weidmann

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19

DISCUSSION Although academics and planners agree on the need to increasingly include rail freight in urban freight transport, most transport strategies seem to be reluctant in defining clear rail-related measures and in expressing demands on train operators. Those strategies which are explicitly involving rail freight seem to agree on the need for securing or expanding network capacity and the development of terminals close to the urban core. Many transport strategies define only generic desirable developments. However some of the more generic strategies are backed up by more specific plans. In areas with special local conditions, e.g. deep sea ports, strategies seem to be less specific. This could be attributed to the larger private actors involved, but in smaller numbers. This involves a higher degree of private planning, which in turn leads to less need for governmental involvement. There seems to be a gap in terms of train operations and train technology. Only few strategies comment on the way freight trains should be run. Unlike road transport—where vehicle-related rules are the norm—rail strategies by public bodies seem to be restricted to purely infrastructural measures. In Europe network infrastructure is often state owned (or by publicly-owned undertakings) and terminals are often subsidised. Public bodies might therefore see their main role in providing and regulating infrastructure. Although the efficient use of the networks is often mentioned, the promotion of more efficient train operations and rolling stock technologies is rare.

9

Fumasoli, Weidmann

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46

REFERENCES 1. Alessandrini, A., P. Delle Site, F. Filippi, and M. V. Salucci. Using rail to make urban freight distribution more sustainable. European Transport/Trasporti Europa, Vol. 50, No. 5, 2012. 2. Browne, M., J. Allen, A. Woodburn, and M. Piotrowska. The potential for non-road modes to support environmentally friendly urban logistics. Procedia – Social and Behavioral Sciences, Vol. 151, No. 10, 2014, pp. 29–36. 3. Dinwoodie, J. Rail freight and sustainable urban distribution: potential and practice. Journal of Transport Geography, Vol. 14, No. 4, 2006, pp. 309–320. 4. Maes, J., and T. Vanelslander. The use of rail transport as part of the supply chain in an urban logistics context, paper presented at the 12th WCTR Conference, July 11– 15, 2010, Lisbon 5. London Freight Plan —sustainable freight distribution: a plan for London. Greater London Authority, Transport for London, London, 2007. https://tfl.gov.uk/info-for/freight/planning/london-freight-plan. Accessed February 2, 2015. 6. Rail Freight Strategy. Greater London Authority, Transport for London, London, 2007. https://tfl.gov.uk/info-for/freight/moving-freight-efficiently/alternative-modes. Accessed February 2, 2015. 7. Plan de déplacements urbains d’Île-de-France PDUIF. Syndicat des Transports d’Île-de-France STIF, Paris, 2014. http://pdu.stif.info/Les-documents-a-telecharger.html. Accessed December 12, 2014. 8. Document d’orientations stratégiques pour le Fret en Île-de-France à l’horizon 2025. Direction Régionale et Interdépartementale de l’Équipement et de l’Aménagement d’Île-de-France DRIEA, Paris, 2012. http://www.driea.ile-de-france.developpement-durable.gouv.fr/document-d-orientati ons-strategiques-pour-le-fret-a3975.html. Accessed December 12, 2014. 9. Integriertes Wirtschaftsverkehrskonzept Berlin. Senatsverwaltung für Stadtentwicklung, Berlin, 2005. http://www.stadtentwicklung.berlin.de/verkehr/politik_planung/gueter/konzept. Accessed March 31, 2015. 10. Pla de Mobilitat Urbana de Barcelona 2013-2018. Ajuntament de Barcelona, Barcelona,2012. http://mobilitat.ajuntament.barcelona.cat/ca/pla-de-mobilitat-urbana/presentacio. Accessed June 24, 2015. 11. Pla Director de Mobilitat de la Regió Metropolitana de Barcelona. Autoritat del Transport Metropolità, Barcelona, 2015. http://www.atm.cat/web/ca/documentspdm.php. Accessed June 30, 2015. 12. Piano Urbano Della Mobilità Sostenibile. Comune di Milano, Milan, 2015. https://www.comune.milano.it/wps/portal/ist/it/servizi/mobilita/Pianificazione_mob ilita/piano_urbano_mobilita. Accessed June 24, 2015. 13. Piano per la Mobilità delle Merci. Città metropolitana di Roma Capitale, Rome, 2007. http://www.provincia.roma.it/percorsitematici/trasporti/studi-e-pubblicazioni/pianomerci-0. Accessed June 24, 2015.

10

Fumasoli, Weidmann

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15

14. 15.

16.

17.

Mobilitätsprogramm 2013. Freie und Hansestadt Hamburg, Behörde für Wirtschaft, Verkehr und Innovation, Hamburg, 2013. http://www.hamburg.de/bwvi/mobilitaetsprogramm. Accessed July 29, 2015. Strategii Transportowej Miasta Stołecznego Warszawy. Urząd Miasta Stołecznego Warszawy, Biuro Drogownictwa i Komunikacji, Warsaw, 2013. http://www.transport.um.warszawa.pl/strategia-transportowaocena-realizacji/ocenarealizacji-strategii-transportowej. Accessed June 29, 2015. Plan stratégique pour le transport de marchandises en Région de Bruxelles-Capitale. Bruxelles Mobilité, Brussels, 2013. http://www.bruxellesmobilite.irisnet.be/articles/la-mobilite-de-demain/plan-transpor t-de-marchandises. Accessed July 29, 2015. Le Plan régional de mobilité Région de Bruxelles-Capitale. Bruxelles Mobilité, Brussels, 2011. http://www.bruxellesmobilite.irisnet.be/articles/la-mobilite-de-demain/en-quelquesmots. Accessed July 29, 2015.

11