search the site
 daily menu » rate the banner | guess the city | one on oneforums map | privacy policy | DMCA | news magazine | posting guidelines

Go Back   SkyscraperCity > Infrastructure and Mobility Forums > Highways & Autobahns

Highways & Autobahns All about automobility



Global Announcement

As a general reminder, please respect others and respect copyrights. Go here to familiarize yourself with our posting policy.


Reply

 
Thread Tools
Old July 17th, 2015, 10:31 AM   #8301
Le Clerk
AUTOBANN.ED
 
Le Clerk's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 34,384
Likes (Received): 9531

Quote:
Originally Posted by pasadia View Post
Well, no, I must say, once again, that I disagree with LeClerk:
That's the fun of this !

Quote:
- on A3 we don't need first Sinaia by-pass but Busteni by-pass. After that will be time for Sinaia by-pass and conection between Predeal and Comarnic. And, at the end, Rasnov - Predeal. This is the right order, if they want to make it in little baby steps.
Choking points on Comarnic-Brasov are: Comarnic, Sinaia, and Busteni, in this order. Comarnic gathers 100% of traffic on the section, and in any case a lot more than Busteni gets, because a lot of people stop in Sinaia, which is just before Busteni for people who do not know the place. I agree though that Busteni is also a major choking point. That's why I think that they should do Comarnic-Brasov by making motorway by-passes for Comarnic, Sinaia and Busteni, and connect them later on. I do not understand the by-passes for Rasnov and Cristian now.

Quote:
- A6 (Lugoj - Craiova), just as A8 (Targu Mures - Iasi) or A13 (Brasov - Bacau) should be done initially just as half-profile or 2+1 alternatively. Traffic is not that huge and I rather have more safe 2+1 roads that just a few kilometres of highway.
Those are too many and expensive projects, and it's not feasible to start them all by 2020. I wold connect Craiova to the international traffic, through Pitesti - that is not very expensive - it could be done with EUR 500 m. That section is a very heavy traffic one. And then work on Bacau-Iasi, since the Bacau by-pass is already contracted and we need to build on that. Add to that Sibiu-Pitesti and Comarnic-Brasov and you have a huge amount of work already by 2020.

Quote:
At before any of that, our government should have realised that A0 is the main priority. It's a pitty that A0 doesn't get the right attention and public opinion seems to just desire a upgrade for DNCB to a really messsy design.
Agree !
__________________
Rebuilding Bucharest's History:
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
|
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
|
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.


To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

Best picture collection of
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.


To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

Le Clerk no está en línea   Reply With Quote

Sponsored Links
Old July 17th, 2015, 12:37 PM   #8302
Capt.Vimes
Holding the door
 
Capt.Vimes's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Радан Войвода
Posts: 9,284
Likes (Received): 10502

Quote:
Originally Posted by kostas97 View Post
-So, its going to be a long time to finally see the A6 finish at the New Europe Bridge
-The A0 is the Autostrada Centura Bucuresti, right?
Having in mind that this motorway, if fully constructed, will connect 3 motorways, something that will help decongestion of the CB and the city of Bucharest, so its true that it should be a priority
The Centura is a disaster. And A0 should connect 4 mtorways, not 3.
__________________
"A silvery thing in another cabinet, like a three-pointed star inside a circle, was made of no substance she knew; it was softer than metal, scratched and gouged, yet even older than any of the ancient bones. From ten paces she could sense pride and vanity."

Общинска администрация=/=Държавна администрация
Capt.Vimes no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old July 17th, 2015, 12:49 PM   #8303
mpeculea
Registered User
 
mpeculea's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Location: Bucuresti
Posts: 647
Likes (Received): 340

Quote:
Originally Posted by pasadia View Post
- A6 (Lugoj - Craiova), just as A8 (Targu Mures - Iasi) or A13 (Brasov - Bacau) should be done initially just as half-profile or 2+1 alternatively. Traffic is not that huge and I rather have more safe 2+1 roads that just a few kilometres of highway.
On DN6, between Drobeta Turnu Severin and ell after Mehadia (about 32km) you cannot safely overtake. And the route has its fair share of trucks.
Just last week I drove between Turnu Severin and DN57B near Iablanita, and I was stuck between a line of Trucks for the whole stretch.
I do not say, that we need a motorway just now, but something should be done there.
mpeculea no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old July 17th, 2015, 01:12 PM   #8304
Le Clerk
AUTOBANN.ED
 
Le Clerk's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 34,384
Likes (Received): 9531

Quote:
Originally Posted by Capt.Vimes View Post
The Centura is a disaster. And A0 should connect 4 mtorways, not 3.
A0 should be priority 0, even before Sibiu-Pitesti. But I think they will not do it before 2020. They only plan to expand Centura Bucuresti to 2x2 on its entire lenght by then.
__________________
Rebuilding Bucharest's History:
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
|
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
|
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.


To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

Best picture collection of
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.


To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

Le Clerk no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old July 17th, 2015, 04:30 PM   #8305
kostas97
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2014
Location: Athens
Posts: 491
Likes (Received): 101

Quote:
Originally Posted by Capt.Vimes View Post
And A0 should connect 4 mtorways, not 3.
If by 4 you mean the A1, A2, A3 and the Bucuresti-Giurgiu planned motorway, then yes
__________________

Capt.Vimes liked this post
kostas97 no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old July 18th, 2015, 12:31 AM   #8306
winnipeg
Registered User
 
winnipeg's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2014
Location: Arad
Posts: 663
Likes (Received): 206

Quote:
Originally Posted by Le Clerk View Post
A0 should be priority 0, even before Sibiu-Pitesti. But I think they will not do it before 2020. They only plan to expand Centura Bucuresti to 2x2 on its entire lenght by then.
I think that connecting decently Bucarest to all Europe and to the others large Romanians cities like Timisoara, Cluj, Oradea, Arad, Sibiu... should be the priority number one, way more than improving road on this capital who is "alone", not connected to many other romanians big cities...

At the opposite, Arad and Timisoara... and Oradea, Deva will be better connected to Budapest and all Europe than Bucarest. A shame...
winnipeg no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old July 18th, 2015, 08:03 AM   #8307
Le Clerk
AUTOBANN.ED
 
Le Clerk's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 34,384
Likes (Received): 9531

Yes, that is pretty correct, but we cannot build them (motorways) all at a time, right? We have national roads connecting Bucharest to main cities, but we only have motorways connecting Bucharest to Constanta and Pitesti. But Bucharest will be connected through motorways to Brasov, Sibiu, Cluj, Timisoara, Oradea, and Craiova by 2020, when Sibiu-Pitesti, Pitesti-Craiova, and Comarnic-Brasov motorways will be completed. And possibly by 2025 Bucharest will be connected to Bacau, Iasi, Galati, Braila and Suceava. And then Romania will have a decent network of motorways, cca 2,000 km.

These all will cost EUR 10 B at least so we cannot have all this money over a short span of time.
__________________
Rebuilding Bucharest's History:
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
|
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
|
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.


To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

Best picture collection of
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.


To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.


winnipeg liked this post

Last edited by Le Clerk; July 18th, 2015 at 08:12 AM.
Le Clerk no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old July 18th, 2015, 09:52 AM   #8308
MichiH
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Location: Lower Franconia
Posts: 4,031
Likes (Received): 1810

Quote:
Originally Posted by winnipeg View Post
should be the priority number one, way more than improving road on this capital who is "alone", not connected to many other romanians big cities...
I don't agree. Have you ever heard "benefit-cost-rate"? You always have to calculate which project has the biggest benefit relating to its costs.

The benefit is usually calculated for the economy. Where does the Romanian economy lose most money? Not European economy, not tourists, not commuters. Just the Romanian economy (all travels done during working time of Romanian companies). Time is money. Losing time on a substandard transit road is losing money but losing time in a daily congestion is also losing money.

I think - but it's only my personel opinion - that Bucharest - the economy region no.1 in Romania - should be connected to the so-called European motorway network. I think completing A1 should be priority 1. But it's not clever just to focus on one project. Projects must be pressed ahead parallel so that funding can always be used for construction works. A0 planning progress is quite behind A1. In addition, I think more people are concerned by A0 construction (higher population density in Bucharest area), that means there's a higher chance for discussions and complaints. The planning procedure will take long. It should be (planning) priority 1 now so that works could begin ~2018+. (btw. I think that's quite ambitious, don't trust politician announcements....)

The next step is connection major cities and developing regions, e.g. eastern Romania (Iasi, Bacau,...). The Romanian problem is the mountainous barrier in the middle of the country. I think the ongoing projects should be completed (A1 Hungary - Bucharest; A10 Turda - Sebes; A3 Cluj - Targu Mures). A0 (Bucharest ring), A12 (Craiova - Pitesti; FORD plant), A13 (Sibiu-Brasov) and A3 (Brasov-Comarnic) should be the next steps.

Construction works for A3 (Hungary - Cluj) were partially started but suspended. I don't know if costs are lower than A7 (Piotesti - Buzau - Bacau - Pascani)/A8 (Tg. Neamt - Pascani - Iasi). The higher benefit-cost-rate should make the priority.

I think A8 Targu Mures - Tg. Neamt, A13 Brasov - Bacau and A6 Lugoj - Craiova have a much lower benefit-cost-rate because their routes cross the mountains.

What's the advantage of A6? I think there are two advantages for Romania:
1. Connecting Bucharest (economy region no.1) and Craiova (FORD plant) to Hungary/Central+Western Europe but there will be A1/A12 which fulfill the same plus connecting major Romanian cities!
2. Developing the south-western region

In addition, A6 would connect Bulgaria, Turkey (and Greece) to Hungary/Central+Western Europe (via new Danube bridge at Calafat) as an alternative route to the route through Serbia. But what's the benefit for Romania improving transit traffic? I can't see one but there's a big disadvantage. More foreign trucks would congest Romanian roads...

Maybe 2+1 widenings of the existing roads should be implemented in the A6 corridor. The benefit-cost-rate is much higher for improvements like this.
__________________

Which new motorways are currently under construction?
Which new motorways will be opened next?


To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.


** Please help completing and updating of the list **

Been/driven: A, B, CDN, CH, CZ, D, DK, E, F, FL, H, I, L, N, NL, PL, RO, S, SLO, USA (
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
)


winnipeg, panda80 liked this post
MichiH no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old July 18th, 2015, 11:28 AM   #8309
Capt.Vimes
Holding the door
 
Capt.Vimes's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Радан Войвода
Posts: 9,284
Likes (Received): 10502

Quote:
Originally Posted by winnipeg View Post
At the opposite, Arad and Timisoara... and Oradea, Deva will be better connected to Budapest and all Europe than Bucarest. A shame...
They will always be better connected to "Europe" as they are hundreds of kilometers closer.
__________________
"A silvery thing in another cabinet, like a three-pointed star inside a circle, was made of no substance she knew; it was softer than metal, scratched and gouged, yet even older than any of the ancient bones. From ten paces she could sense pride and vanity."

Общинска администрация=/=Държавна администрация

winnipeg liked this post
Capt.Vimes no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old July 18th, 2015, 11:36 AM   #8310
ChrisZwolle
Road user
 
ChrisZwolle's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Zwolle
Posts: 41,384
Likes (Received): 15666

Romania has no dominant 'second city'. Yes of course there is a second largest city, but Romania has several 'tier II' cities with a population of 200,000 - 325,000 spread out over the country. This makes it more difficult to prioritize a connection between cities. Right now it is obviously A1, but Romania needs to spend much more money on motorways to complete something of a basic network that connects alls tier II cities before 2030. The current pace, although better than in the past, is not sufficient.
__________________

To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.


To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
/
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
• highway photography @
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
and
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

gogu.ca, winnipeg liked this post
ChrisZwolle no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old July 18th, 2015, 06:30 PM   #8311
Le Clerk
AUTOBANN.ED
 
Le Clerk's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 34,384
Likes (Received): 9531

Quote:
Originally Posted by MichiH View Post
I don't agree. Have you ever heard "benefit-cost-rate"? You always have to calculate which project has the biggest benefit relating to its costs.

The benefit is usually calculated for the economy. Where does the Romanian economy lose most money? Not European economy, not tourists, not commuters. Just the Romanian economy (all travels done during working time of Romanian companies). Time is money. Losing time on a substandard transit road is losing money but losing time in a daily congestion is also losing money.

I think - but it's only my personel opinion - that Bucharest - the economy region no.1 in Romania - should be connected to the so-called European motorway network. I think completing A1 should be priority 1. But it's not clever just to focus on one project. Projects must be pressed ahead parallel so that funding can always be used for construction works. A0 planning progress is quite behind A1. In addition, I think more people are concerned by A0 construction (higher population density in Bucharest area), that means there's a higher chance for discussions and complaints. The planning procedure will take long. It should be (planning) priority 1 now so that works could begin ~2018+. (btw. I think that's quite ambitious, don't trust politician announcements....)

The next step is connection major cities and developing regions, e.g. eastern Romania (Iasi, Bacau,...). The Romanian problem is the mountainous barrier in the middle of the country. I think the ongoing projects should be completed (A1 Hungary - Bucharest; A10 Turda - Sebes; A3 Cluj - Targu Mures). A0 (Bucharest ring), A12 (Craiova - Pitesti; FORD plant), A13 (Sibiu-Brasov) and A3 (Brasov-Comarnic) should be the next steps.

Construction works for A3 (Hungary - Cluj) were partially started but suspended. I don't know if costs are lower than A7 (Piotesti - Buzau - Bacau - Pascani)/A8 (Tg. Neamt - Pascani - Iasi). The higher benefit-cost-rate should make the priority.

I think A8 Targu Mures - Tg. Neamt, A13 Brasov - Bacau and A6 Lugoj - Craiova have a much lower benefit-cost-rate because their routes cross the mountains.

What's the advantage of A6? I think there are two advantages for Romania:
1. Connecting Bucharest (economy region no.1) and Craiova (FORD plant) to Hungary/Central+Western Europe but there will be A1/A12 which fulfill the same plus connecting major Romanian cities!
2. Developing the south-western region

In addition, A6 would connect Bulgaria, Turkey (and Greece) to Hungary/Central+Western Europe (via new Danube bridge at Calafat) as an alternative route to the route through Serbia. But what's the benefit for Romania improving transit traffic? I can't see one but there's a big disadvantage. More foreign trucks would congest Romanian roads...

Maybe 2+1 widenings of the existing roads should be implemented in the A6 corridor. The benefit-cost-rate is much higher for improvements like this.
I do not agree with your cost-benefit analysis. Cost is not only spent money but also lost opportunities, which can pose even a higher cost than the construction costs.

If we were to keep in mind only the construction cost, we'd not be building motorways in the mountains, and probably not even in the hilly areas (see the problems we have now with the sliding hill at Aciliu viaduct), but would choose the easy and cheap way of building motorways in the plains ... which can cost 10 times less than in the mountains, or half of the cost of motorways in the hilly regions.

The eastern part of Romania has a huge potential for development, but that potential is stifled by lack of modern infrastructure connecting it to European markets. For example, NE NUTS 2 region of Romania is one of the poorest in the EU, and poorest in Romania. It has a GDP/capita of 60% of the bordering central region and 4.2 times ! lower than Bucharest. If we managed to connect this region with a motorway accross the mountains though A8, and with Bucharest through A7, the region will attract a huge amount of investment because of significant lower incomes than in the neighbouring central region (it has already started attracting important industrial and R&D investments, but is light years away from the boost a motorway can create).

And coming to my cost-benefit analysis now, only by a fast calculation, converging this NE region to the central one by means of a motorway, means a difference of GDP/capita of EUR 4 k, or an additional EUR 15 B per year to Romania's GDP, or a GDP growth of 10 % for Romania !! Bucharest is not a target of convergence for this region as Bucharest has a different type of economy and actually is significantly above EU average, but at least the 4 x higher GDP/capita could be lowered to 2x GDP/capita through convergence.

If we would do this kind of math for other regions, we would probably get approx EUR 50 B in additional GDP, or 1/4 of current Romanian GDP, which is more than the total cost of motorways in Romania ! What about this opportunity cost ?

This should be the calculation the authorities should be making when they are trying to figure out ways to boost economic growth in Romania, apart from lowering taxes which seems to be the trend lately (the Gov wants to lower further VAT from 24% to 19% for all products, except for foodstuff which has been lowered to 9% at the begining of the year).

Romania could be growing for at least a decade at faster rates than 5% / year (as opposed to 3.5% currently), by investing in infrastructure connecting these regions. Thus, convergence between Romania and the EU could happen faster than projected. Delaying mountain motorways only delays development for generations.

Now, I agree with Chris that the government should figure out other sources of funding than EU funds. Romania should be making infrastructure a priority for the next 10 years, and invest at least EUR 1 B/year into motorway construction in addition of co-financing for EU projects. That means doubling the yearly budget for motorways in Romania.

That's why I advocated for Comarnic-Brasov to be built with governmental money - and luckly they finaly decided to do this way. The Government cashed EUR 1 B more funds than projected in H1 2015, due to improved collection and better fiscal compliance, and lower VAT applied at the begining of this year. This could be enough to build Comarnic-Brasov. From additional funds raised in only 6 months ! That is why I advocate the money to be used for motorways, and not other public spending such as increased salaries for bureaucrats for example.
__________________
Rebuilding Bucharest's History:
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
|
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
|
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.


To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

Best picture collection of
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.


To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.


winnipeg, TracoRomanul liked this post

Last edited by Le Clerk; July 18th, 2015 at 06:58 PM.
Le Clerk no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old July 18th, 2015, 06:48 PM   #8312
MichiH
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Location: Lower Franconia
Posts: 4,031
Likes (Received): 1810

Of course, your "lost opportunities" or "opportunity cost" count as benefit! Benefit to the current or the future economy which could be developed by the new road.
__________________

Which new motorways are currently under construction?
Which new motorways will be opened next?


To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.


** Please help completing and updating of the list **

Been/driven: A, B, CDN, CH, CZ, D, DK, E, F, FL, H, I, L, N, NL, PL, RO, S, SLO, USA (
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
)

MichiH no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old July 18th, 2015, 07:56 PM   #8313
Attus
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Rheinbach
Posts: 2,471
Likes (Received): 800

Quote:
Originally Posted by Le Clerk View Post
Cost is not only spent money but also lost opportunities, which can pose even a higher cost than the construction costs.
Those opportunities shall be counted as benefits!
Constructing motorays on the plains is cheap, but may have very low benefits as well so that benefit-cost-ratio will remain bad even so.
__________________

Le Clerk liked this post
Attus no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old July 18th, 2015, 09:20 PM   #8314
pasadia
Registered User
 
pasadia's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2013
Location: Brasov / Kronstadt, RO
Posts: 2,127
Likes (Received): 1832

Quote:
For example, NE NUTS 2 region of Romania is one of the poorest in the EU, and poorest in Romania. It has a GDP/capita of 60% of the bordering central region and 4.2 times ! lower than Bucharest. If we managed to connect this region with a motorway accross the mountains though A8, and with Bucharest through A7, the region will attract a huge amount of investment because of significant lower incomes than in the neighbouring central region (it has already started attracting important industrial and R&D investments, but is light years away from the boost a motorway can create).
More that 100 years ago that area was the first of Roumania that was connected to Europe through railways. Bucharest - Lvov - Katowice and from there on to Berlin or Wien. But now it's Ukraine between Roumania and Poland and untill they open up towards EU enough so that we can planned a motorways on that direction, all the connection are through out Budapest, over Carpathians.

And that's a pitty: Bucharest - Berlin will be the same distance through Lvov or through Budapest, Constanta (main harbour at Black Sea) - Poland (Krakow) will be the same distance as Rotterdam - Krakow...

For me, a more friendly western Ukraine (easier, safer acces, less complicated border controls, free market, etc...) means more oportunities for NE Roumania. And the impact would be higher than that of A8 or A13.
__________________

winnipeg, seszele liked this post
pasadia no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old July 18th, 2015, 10:28 PM   #8315
winnipeg
Registered User
 
winnipeg's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2014
Location: Arad
Posts: 663
Likes (Received): 206

Quote:
Originally Posted by Le Clerk View Post
I do not agree with your cost-benefit analysis. Cost is not only spent money but also lost opportunities, which can pose even a higher cost than the construction costs.

If we were to keep in mind only the construction cost, we'd not be building motorways in the mountains, and probably not even in the hilly areas (see the problems we have now with the sliding hill at Aciliu viaduct), but would choose the easy and cheap way of building motorways in the plains ... which can cost 10 times less than in the mountains, or half of the cost of motorways in the hilly regions.

The eastern part of Romania has a huge potential for development, but that potential is stifled by lack of modern infrastructure connecting it to European markets. For example, NE NUTS 2 region of Romania is one of the poorest in the EU, and poorest in Romania. It has a GDP/capita of 60% of the bordering central region and 4.2 times ! lower than Bucharest. If we managed to connect this region with a motorway accross the mountains though A8, and with Bucharest through A7, the region will attract a huge amount of investment because of significant lower incomes than in the neighbouring central region (it has already started attracting important industrial and R&D investments, but is light years away from the boost a motorway can create).

And coming to my cost-benefit analysis now, only by a fast calculation, converging this NE region to the central one by means of a motorway, means a difference of GDP/capita of EUR 4 k, or an additional EUR 15 B per year to Romania's GDP, or a GDP growth of 10 % for Romania !! Bucharest is not a target of convergence for this region as Bucharest has a different type of economy and actually is significantly above EU average, but at least the 4 x higher GDP/capita could be lowered to 2x GDP/capita through convergence.

If we would do this kind of math for other regions, we would probably get approx EUR 50 B in additional GDP, or 1/4 of current Romanian GDP, which is more than the total cost of motorways in Romania ! What about this opportunity cost ?

This should be the calculation the authorities should be making when they are trying to figure out ways to boost economic growth in Romania, apart from lowering taxes which seems to be the trend lately (the Gov wants to lower further VAT from 24% to 19% for all products, except for foodstuff which has been lowered to 9% at the begining of the year).

Romania could be growing for at least a decade at faster rates than 5% / year (as opposed to 3.5% currently), by investing in infrastructure connecting these regions. Thus, convergence between Romania and the EU could happen faster than projected. Delaying mountain motorways only delays development for generations.

Now, I agree with Chris that the government should figure out other sources of funding than EU funds. Romania should be making infrastructure a priority for the next 10 years, and invest at least EUR 1 B/year into motorway construction in addition of co-financing for EU projects. That means doubling the yearly budget for motorways in Romania.

That's why I advocated for Comarnic-Brasov to be built with governmental money - and luckly they finaly decided to do this way. The Government cashed EUR 1 B more funds than projected in H1 2015, due to improved collection and better fiscal compliance, and lower VAT applied at the begining of this year. This could be enough to build Comarnic-Brasov. From additional funds raised in only 6 months ! That is why I advocate the money to be used for motorways, and not other public spending such as increased salaries for bureaucrats for example.
Thank you for this really great analysis! I agree with it!
winnipeg no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old July 18th, 2015, 10:39 PM   #8316
winnipeg
Registered User
 
winnipeg's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2014
Location: Arad
Posts: 663
Likes (Received): 206

Quote:
Originally Posted by MichiH View Post
I don't agree. Have you ever heard "benefit-cost-rate"? You always have to calculate which project has the biggest benefit relating to its costs.

The benefit is usually calculated for the economy. Where does the Romanian economy lose most money? Not European economy, not tourists, not commuters. Just the Romanian economy (all travels done during working time of Romanian companies). Time is money. Losing time on a substandard transit road is losing money but losing time in a daily congestion is also losing money.

I think - but it's only my personel opinion - that Bucharest - the economy region no.1 in Romania - should be connected to the so-called European motorway network. I think completing A1 should be priority 1. But it's not clever just to focus on one project. Projects must be pressed ahead parallel so that funding can always be used for construction works. A0 planning progress is quite behind A1. In addition, I think more people are concerned by A0 construction (higher population density in Bucharest area), that means there's a higher chance for discussions and complaints. The planning procedure will take long. It should be (planning) priority 1 now so that works could begin ~2018+. (btw. I think that's quite ambitious, don't trust politician announcements....)

The next step is connection major cities and developing regions, e.g. eastern Romania (Iasi, Bacau,...). The Romanian problem is the mountainous barrier in the middle of the country. I think the ongoing projects should be completed (A1 Hungary - Bucharest; A10 Turda - Sebes; A3 Cluj - Targu Mures). A0 (Bucharest ring), A12 (Craiova - Pitesti; FORD plant), A13 (Sibiu-Brasov) and A3 (Brasov-Comarnic) should be the next steps.

Construction works for A3 (Hungary - Cluj) were partially started but suspended. I don't know if costs are lower than A7 (Piotesti - Buzau - Bacau - Pascani)/A8 (Tg. Neamt - Pascani - Iasi). The higher benefit-cost-rate should make the priority.

I think A8 Targu Mures - Tg. Neamt, A13 Brasov - Bacau and A6 Lugoj - Craiova have a much lower benefit-cost-rate because their routes cross the mountains.

What's the advantage of A6? I think there are two advantages for Romania:
1. Connecting Bucharest (economy region no.1) and Craiova (FORD plant) to Hungary/Central+Western Europe but there will be A1/A12 which fulfill the same plus connecting major Romanian cities!
2. Developing the south-western region

In addition, A6 would connect Bulgaria, Turkey (and Greece) to Hungary/Central+Western Europe (via new Danube bridge at Calafat) as an alternative route to the route through Serbia. But what's the benefit for Romania improving transit traffic? I can't see one but there's a big disadvantage. More foreign trucks would congest Romanian roads...

Maybe 2+1 widenings of the existing roads should be implemented in the A6 corridor. The benefit-cost-rate is much higher for improvements like this.
Thank you for this also interesting analysis!

It seems that you have a way better view of the situation of romanians transport infrastructures than me, and this is really complex... but transport infrastructures are definitly one of the biggest issues in Romania now, and their development in good conditions and in a decent time is directly linked to the future of Romania (which I hope will be excellent ).
winnipeg no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old July 18th, 2015, 10:57 PM   #8317
aubergine72
Registered User
 
aubergine72's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2014
Posts: 1,778


The advantage of transit traffic is that you make money off of them by charging them fees to transit. Duh.
__________________

winnipeg liked this post
aubergine72 no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old July 19th, 2015, 06:19 AM   #8318
Le Clerk
AUTOBANN.ED
 
Le Clerk's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 34,384
Likes (Received): 9531

Quote:
Originally Posted by pasadia View Post
More that 100 years ago that area was the first of Roumania that was connected to Europe through railways. Bucharest - Lvov - Katowice and from there on to Berlin or Wien. But now it's Ukraine between Roumania and Poland and untill they open up towards EU enough so that we can planned a motorways on that direction, all the connection are through out Budapest, over Carpathians.

And that's a pitty: Bucharest - Berlin will be the same distance through Lvov or through Budapest, Constanta (main harbour at Black Sea) - Poland (Krakow) will be the same distance as Rotterdam - Krakow...

For me, a more friendly western Ukraine (easier, safer acces, less complicated border controls, free market, etc...) means more oportunities for NE Roumania. And the impact would be higher than that of A8 or A13.
I personaly don't think that delaying A8 for the period after 2020 is a good idea, for the reasons I mentioned above : huge opportunity costs.

I think they should at least try to build the Tg mures-Tg Neamt section, which admitedly is the most difficult one as it crosses the East Carpathians. This because Campia Turzii-Tg Mures motorway will be completed by 2018, and it would make sense to increase its potential by taking it closer to Iasi as possible. The cost would be a problem (we will see the cost from the FS's which are now in contracting procedure), but since the section is TEN-T, the Government should only make the effort of matching existing EU funds - which it appears as an intention in the masterplan.

Building A8, at least in a partial section from Tg Mures to Tg Neamt would at least alleviate the fact that A7 will probably not be ready earlier than 2025-2030.
__________________
Rebuilding Bucharest's History:
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
|
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
|
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.


To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

Best picture collection of
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.


To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

Le Clerk no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old July 19th, 2015, 07:15 AM   #8319
ukraroad
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2015
Posts: 482
Likes (Received): 104

I was riding from Ukraine thru Romania to Bulgaria. Well, it is too difficult to overtake somewhere from siret and up to Roman because of freight transport. Plus the not very good road quality in judet Suceava... I'd be happy to see at least an expressway, 'cause it can detour some traffic from countless villages based on DN2. But the worst of it is Focsani and Bacau. There should be some bypass, because it is unbearable.
btw, what stage is A0, 'cause it is a disaster, too. Poor road quality and awful congestion from approx 6AM-9PM. That should be one of priorities, but A1, A3, A10 and A11 will make more money for sure.
ukraroad no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old July 19th, 2015, 07:28 AM   #8320
Le Clerk
AUTOBANN.ED
 
Le Clerk's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 34,384
Likes (Received): 9531

Siret-Roman-Pascani is planned for an expressway after 2020 (when it will probably be turned into a motorway directly, like other initially planed expressways). From Pascani to Bacau there will be a fool motorway, and then there's another expressway planned to Ploiesti A3, all these planed by 2020. But that is a very optimistic scenario.

Here's the map of motorway and expressway priorities according to masterplan.
In wide red are planned motorways, and in narrow red are planed expressways to be built by 2020.

__________________
Rebuilding Bucharest's History:
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
|
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
|
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.


To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

Best picture collection of
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.


To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

Le Clerk no está en línea   Reply With Quote


Reply

Tags
highways, infrastructure, motorways, romania

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Related topics on SkyscraperCity


All times are GMT +2. The time now is 10:50 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8 Beta 1
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Feedback Buttons provided by Advanced Post Thanks / Like (Pro) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2017 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.

vBulletin Optimisation provided by vB Optimise (Pro) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2017 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.

SkyscraperCity ☆ In Urbanity We trust ☆ about us | privacy policy | DMCA policy

Hosted by Blacksun, dedicated to this site too!
Forum server management by DaiTengu