Contemporary perspectives of railway, logistics and urban development in Budapest
Abstract
EconStor is a publication server for scholarly economic literature, provided as a non-commercial public service by the ZBW.
Full text
Wolf, Péter; Kádár, Bálint Book Part Contemporary perspectives of railway, logistics and urban development in Budapest Provided in Cooperation with: ARL – Akademie für Raumentwicklung in der Leibniz-Gemeinschaft Suggested Citation: Wolf, Péter; Kádár, Bálint (2019) : Contemporary perspectives of railway, logistics and urban development in Budapest, In: Scholl, Bernd Perić, Ana Niedermaier, Mathias (Ed.): Spatial and transport infrastructure development in Europe: Example of the Orient/East-Med Corridor, ISBN 978-3-88838-095-2, Verlag der ARL - Akademie für Raumforschung und Landesplanung, Hannover, pp. 243-271, https://nbn-resolving.de/urn:nbn:de:0156-0952134 This Version is available at: https://hdl.handle.net/10419/213384 Standard-Nutzungsbedingungen: Die Dokumente auf EconStor dürfen zu eigenen wissenschaftlichen Zwecken und zum Privatgebrauch gespeichert und kopiert werden. Sie dürfen die Dokumente nicht für öffentliche oder kommerzielle Zwecke vervielfältigen, öffentlich ausstellen, öffentlich zugänglich machen, vertreiben oder anderweitig nutzen. Sofern die Verfasser die Dokumente unter Open-Content-Lizenzen (insbesondere CC-Lizenzen) zur Verfügung gestellt haben sollten, gelten abweichend von diesen Nutzungsbedingungen die in der dort genannten Lizenz gewährten Nutzungsrechte. Terms of use: Documents in EconStor may be saved and copied for your personal and scholarly purposes. You are not to copy documents for public or commercial purposes, to exhibit the documents publicly, to make them publicly available on the internet, or to distribute or otherwise use the documents in public. If the documents have been made available under an Open Content Licence (especially Creative Commons Licences), you may exercise further usage rights as specified in the indicated licence. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nd/3.0/de/
Wolf, Péter; Kádár, Bálint: Contemporary Perspectives of Railway, Logistics and Urban Development in Budapest URN: urn:nbn:de:0156-0952134 CC-Lizenz: BY-ND 3.0 Deutschland S. 243 bis 271 Aus: Scholl, Bernd; Perić, Ana; Niedermaier, Mathias (Eds.) (2019): Spatial and Transport Infrastructure Development in Europe: Example of the Orient/East-Med Corridor. Hannover. = Forschungsberichte der ARL 12. Die ARL ist Mitglied der Leibniz-Gemeinschaft
243CONTEMPORARY PERSPECTIVES OF RAILWAY, LOGISTICS AND URBAN DEVELOPMENT IN BUDAPEST Péter Wolf, Bálint Kádár 13 CONTEMPORARY PERSPECTIVES OF RAILWAY, LOGISTICS AND URBAN DEVELOPMENT IN BUDAPEST Resume 1 Introduction 2 Transport and logistics 2.1 Position of Budapest in the National Framework 2.2 Logistics performance in Budapest metropolitan area 2.3 Future trends: diversification of trade and transit routes? 3 The railway infrastructure in the Budapest metropolitan area 3.1 Connecting or bypassing 3.2 Contemporary railway development in the Budapest metropolitan area 3.3 Passenger train developments in the railway network 4 Urban development possibilities tied to railway development 4.1 Development strategies of Budapest 4.2 Development possibilities along railways 5 Conclusions Literature Abstract Budapest metropolitan area is the major logistic hub of Hungary, as major TENT-T corridors cross the city. Growth potential is high, and railway infrastructure, brownfields and new hubs of logistics are key areas of development; still none of these sectors are at their full potential. The case study introduces the historical background and evolution of logistics and the rail network, and national objectives aiming to improve efficiency in infrastructure to foster sustainability and competitiveness. The focus areas are rail freight, offshore trade, service export, intermodal terminals, air cargo terminals, suburban passenger services and investments aiming to increase the usage of railway in freight and passenger transport. The study highlights how the region is seeking its competitive edge, and how progress is hindered by the lack of railway capacities or a lack of integrated urban planning. The urban rail concept and large brownfield sites along the lines may create opportunities for exploitation, but a lack of synergies impedes strategic development for now. Keywords Logistics – transportation – spatial planning – railway development – Budapest
244 12 _ SPATIAL AND TRANSPORT INFRASTRUCTURE DEVELOPMENT IN EUROPE Aktuelle Perspektiven des Schienenverkehrs, der Logistik und der Stadtentwicklung in Budapest Kurzfassung Der Großraum Budapest ist das wichtigste logistische Zentrum Ungarns, da die wichtigsten TENT-T-Korridore die Stadt durchqueren. Das Wachstumspotenzial ist hoch, und die Eisenbahninfrastruktur, Brachflächen und neue Logistikzentren sind wichtige Entwicklungsbereiche; dennoch ist keiner dieser Sektoren voll funktionsfähig. Die Fallstudie stellt den historischen Hintergrund und die Entwicklung der Logistik und des Schienennetzes sowie nationale Ziele vor, die darauf abzielen, die Effizienz der Infrastruktur zu verbessern, um Nachhaltigkeit und Wettbewerbsfähigkeit zu fördern. Die Schwerpunkte liegen in den Bereichen Schienengüterverkehr, OffshoreHandel, Dienstleistungsexport, intermodale Terminals, Luftfrachtterminals, Personennahverkehr und Investitionen zur Steigerung der Nutzung der Schiene im Güterund Personenverkehr. Die Studie zeigt, wie die Region ihren Wettbewerbsvorteil sucht und wie der Fortschritt durch fehlende Bahnkapazitäten oder einen Mangel an integrierter Stadtplanung behindert wird. Das Stadtbahnkonzept und große Industriebrachen entlang der Trassen können Chancen zur Nutzung eröffnen, aber fehlende Synergien behindern derzeit eine erfolgreiche strategische Entwicklung. Schlüsselwörter Logistik – Transport – Raumplanung – Eisenbahnentwicklung – Budapest 1 Introduction Budapest is the capital city of Hungary, by far the largest business hub in the country, the center of domestic financial services, tourism and consumer markets, and the location of 1.7 million inhabitants. Budapest is also the center of higher education and R&D, the main location of the largest FDI corporations. The city’s share of the GDP of Hungary is close to 40 %, which is 50 % for the wider metropolitan area (Pest County included) with a population over 2.7 million. GDP per capita is 148 % of the EU average measured on purchasing power parity,1 much over the national average and the average of Pest County (55 %) signaling an extreme territorial difference between the country and the metro area. This is a unique level of concentration in CEE comparison, as no other urban area exists in Hungary with more than 500 thousand inhabitants. Even the second largest city of Debrecen has a population of only 200 thousand, 238,000 with its agglomeration included. This is probably because of the transport infrastructure of the country, as historically all highways, railways and other transport infrastructure have one main node: Budapest. This centrality is well visible in the rail network; lines 1, 30, 40, 70, 80, 100, 120, and 150 all start from Budapest, and beside these there are six others used only for passenger commuting without freight transport. 1 KSH Hungarian Central Statistical Office, 2017.
245CONTEMPORARY PERSPECTIVES OF RAILWAY, LOGISTICS AND URBAN DEVELOPMENT IN BUDAPEST Fig. 1: Railway passenger transport map of Hungary / Source: MÁV-START Zrt; https://www.mavcsoport. hu/mav-start/media/terkepek !" # ! $% &' &() & *() + + + + + + ,$- . /0" / ' ' 1( # #2% #%" 3 3 3 3 3 4 4' 4 4 4 4 4 5 5 6 7 7 7 7' 72 7 7() 7% 7 7 7 7% % ' % % ) ) '2(" % ( 2 % !) !"% !% ! !% ! ! ! ! ! ! 8 9 9 ! $% $% $ $ $' $ $ $ $ &"2 & & & & "### &'% &'2 &' &' &'% & & & & &% *' * * * +" 7 +" +' + + + + + + +2 + + +" +"( +' + +% + + +% $ + + +% + $ :('# :% : :$% ; .' .% . .% . . . .2% .2 .2% /" /'% %& / / / / / /' / ) % ) < ' '% ' < < ' < 0" 2 0% 0 0' 0 ( " ! 1) )* 1 1% 1 1 ) 12(" 1 1 1 1 1 1 1() 1( 1( 1 1 1 1 1 # #( #()' # #%2 ! !" ! # $ $ % % #&' $##( )*+,,&- !" #,&#& '' .. '/' 0 0,0 11 23 456" '"5'" 77 & 3/ 8, $ $ .2'& 9: + ;0< 0;.=) 4 =, >), 4 1, &= 4 7?, $?, :) +,#,,-,7% "% ( ",-," = +,#,. > * = (( +,##,. > * = (( $./,+ > $=" = "012 "012 "012 %3' %3' "045 '#,+ !"#$ !"#$$ " %&%%"% '%%"%%( %&'!" '(&%%%&&)$(
246 12 _ SPATIAL AND TRANSPORT INFRASTRUCTURE DEVELOPMENT IN EUROPE The exceptional position is due to the heritage of the past, when the Carpathian Basin was ruled by the Hungarian Kingdom and the predecessor settlements of Budapest were appropriate locations for crossing the Danube. Since Roman times and during the mediaeval ages these towns were linked to the main European trade routes of the east-west and north-south (the ‘Amber Road’). This fundamental, geographical advantage was powered up by developing the national railway network from 1844 to 1914, whereas the development of the network promoted the radial rather than the transversal elements of the network. A very specific ‘zone-tariff’ system was implemented by Gábor Baross, Minister of Public Works and Transport, from the 1880s in order to support long-distance trade but restrict the access of Vienna and Prague from the eastern part of the Austro-Hungarian Empire (Oszter 2017). Budapest today is the intersection of Pan-European transport corridors IV, V, VII and the new XI (‘Amber’). It is no exaggeration to say that the future of Budapest as a hotspot depends on its central position and on major infrastructural investment along the corridors. The Orient/East-Med (OEM) Corridor is the most important axis of development, the main route for sharing goods, technologies and knowledge in Europe and beyond. The comparison with central and eastern European (CEE) capital cities shows a more controversial picture. Even with the centrality of Budapest in the country’s spatial-economic system and relative wellbeing, certain parameters (e. g., GDP per capita or property prices) are below the level of other capitals in CEE. This may have been caused by the major conflicts of the 20th century and the disintegration of the CEE markets including the decades of socialism. However, the macro-regional ecosystem is also different today, compared to the golden ages of the 19th century because, nowadays, Budapest metro is constantly searching for a position in the global value chains, whereas Hungary is primarily a manufacturing hub, but manufacturing is underrepresented in the metropolitan area compared to other Hungarian regions. The capital has a steady economic performance in services, but at the same time it has no strong comparative advantage in specific industries or R&D (Ketels/Protsiv 2016). Yet, Budapest metropolitan area is the major logistics hub of Hungary. Almost two thirds of the major logistics service providers are located in Budapest or Pest County (Oláh/Karmazin/Balogh et al. 2017). In view of the territorial concentration of logistics and inter-related industries it is likely that an emerging logistics intensive cluster (Sheffi 2010) is developing along the M0, without a supportive policy framework or adequate spatial planning. Hence, it is important to understand how the transit corridors may impact the future of the capital region. International-related transportation grew considerably in past decades, with high fluctuations. The engines of development vary: regional distribution, warehousing, freight transit, supply chain management, business services, air cargo and real estate development. After EU enlargement, the spending of the Hungarian government on railways, waterways and suburban transportation also contributed to the growth. The total amount of investment (without spending on motorways) exceeds € 4.8 billion between 2014 and 2020, primarily financed from the EU cohesion fund.
247CONTEMPORARY PERSPECTIVES OF RAILWAY, LOGISTICS AND URBAN DEVELOPMENT IN BUDAPEST Fig. 2: Transport system of Budapest / Source: Mathias Niedermaier, ETH/IRL, Chair of Spatial Development
248 12 _ SPATIAL AND TRANSPORT INFRASTRUCTURE DEVELOPMENT IN EUROPE The overview of the Hungarian strategic and OP framework provides clarification on how controversial the national-level interventions are from the perspective of the metropolitan area. The allocation of specific funds for R&D and innovation, human resources and SME development, or other funding schemes highlights a contradiction between national objectives: (1) To be one of the largest logistics hubs of the CEE macro-region; (2) To accelerate territorial cohesion by focusing on convergence regions and regional city centers. Altogether more than 80 % of the development funds are only available in the convergence region. There is no connection between spatial (or land-use) planning and sectoral based policies (Oszter 2017). The impact of investments in the transportation infrastructure in Budapest and the effect of the corridors on specific areas are not evaluated or monitored. Neither do the brownfield areas from which railway functions are slowly pulling out have consistent development plans or strategies at the level of urban planning. The weakness of the capital city municipality versus the district municipalities and the state is an additional reason why no coherent implementation of the respective development plans is possible. As a result, market actors and local stakeholders on the one hand, and the Hungarian state on the other hand, are the ones defining the transformations of Budapest. Railway infrastructure and related logistics and brownfield areas are well spread over the city to shape its spatial development in many ways. Therefore, railway and logistics development must have synergies with urban development. But is this city ready to benefit from the transformation of the railway network? This case study will highlight the development possibilities tied to the main transport networks of Budapest regarding the economy and logistics on the one hand, and the resulting urban development opportunities on the other. 2 Transport and logistics 2.1 Position of Budapest in the National Framework Different sectoral stakeholders and ministries are responsible for the regulation and development of the transport and logistics sector. Primarily the Ministry of National Development (MND) and the Ministry of National Economy (MNE) share the responsibility, as the physical infrastructure is managed by the MND but business ‘infrastructure’ (e. g. logistics parks), industrial policies and entrepreneurial development is coordinated by the MNE. The lack of efficiency in collaboration between the two ministries decreases the impact, as the gains from synergies between individual measures and development tools are not maximized. The most important policy documents defining governmental objectives in transportation and logistics are: The National Transport Strategy (NTS), prepared by the MND and the Coordination Center for Transport Development (CCTD),2 adopted by the 2 http://www.kormany.hu/download/b/84/10000/Nemzeti%20K%C3%B6zleked%C3%A9si%20Infra strukt%C3%BAra-fejleszt%C3%A9si%20Strat%C3%A9gia.pdf (May 24, 2019; The center was amended, its role and duties taken by the Ministry of ND at the end of 2016).
249CONTEMPORARY PERSPECTIVES OF RAILWAY, LOGISTICS AND URBAN DEVELOPMENT IN BUDAPEST government in 2014; and (2) the Mid-Term Logistics Strategy (MTLS),3 prepared by the MNE and Public Benefit Non-Profit Ltd for the Development of Industry (IFKA) and the Logistics Consultation Forum (LEF), approved by the national government in 2013. Both strategies are linked to and developed according to the National Development and Spatial Development Concept of Hungary4 and in accordance with the National Spatial Plan (‘Master Plan’).5 The NTS is a long-term strategy which focuses on infrastructure (capacities of motorways, railways, waterways), the economic and environmental sustainability of the network, the modernization of public transport and the development of low-cost intermodal hubs (P+R, B+R). The main objective is “exploiting Hungary’s role as a transport hub by considering societal demands”. In particular, the NTS is the basis for focusing on transit corridors and on upgrading suburban transport networks (whereas the metropolitan area of Budapest is far the largest network in scale and usage). The main objective of the MTLS is to increase the contribution of logistics to the GDP from 6 % (2013) to 10–12 %, with a specific focus on developing supply chains and industrial production. MTLS highlights the topic of employment, investment in fixed capital and corporate competitiveness, and aims to develop business competence and infrastructure, corporate networks, R&D and innovation. The MTLS framework rather emphasizes the role of stakeholders (1PL-5PL) and processes to make Hungary “the region’s logistics service provider centre”. Operational programs for the period 2014–2020 are structured by the label ‘Széchenyi 2020’ to use EU funding. As more than 90 % of investments in the infrastructure and businesses come from EU grants, the availability and objectives of the OPs are decisive. The Integrated Transport OP6 primarily uses the Cohesion Fund, so it is available in Budapest and Pest County. The ITOP specifies e. g. the aim of building almost 240 km of new motorway, upgrading 280 km of railway line,7 improving travel times on railways, and providing more attractive public transport in cities by upgrading or building over 132 km of metro, tram and local train lines. The program’s priorities are to: (1) Improve international road accessibility; (2) Improve international railway accessibility; (3) Develop sustainable urban and suburban transport; (4) Improve access to the TEN-T road network. 3 http://2010-2014.kormany.hu/download/7/d5/e0000/IFKA_logstrat_130521.pdf https://ifka.hu/uploads/content/doc/projects/logistic-sector-strategy-en.pdf (May 24, 2019). 4 OFTK, 2012: http://www.terport.hu/webfm_send/4616 (May 24, 2019). 5 OTrT: http://www.terport.hu/orszagos-szint/orszagos-teruletrendezesi-terv-otrt-2003-evi-xxvitorveny (May 24, 2019). 6 http://ec.europa.eu/regional_policy/en/atlas/programmes/2014-2020/ital/2014hu16m1op003 (May 24, 2019). 7 The total length of the Hungarian railway system is 7,712 km, of which 1,224 km (15.9%) is double-track, whilst the electrified railway network has a total length of 3,033 km (39.3%). Source: HIPA Logistics & Transportation Industry in Hungary (2017).
256 12 _ SPATIAL AND TRANSPORT INFRASTRUCTURE DEVELOPMENT IN EUROPE Fig. 3: Railway connection plan of the Liszt Ferenc international Airport Budapest / Source: NIF Zrt; https://nif.hu/projektek/2016/02/a-budapest-liszt-ferenc-nemzetkozi-repuloter-kotottpalyaskapcsolatanak-kialakitasanak-elokeszitese/
257CONTEMPORARY PERSPECTIVES OF RAILWAY, LOGISTICS AND URBAN DEVELOPMENT IN BUDAPEST average in air cargo.21 In 2 years the annual turnover may reach 150,000 tons; this may be a good basis for being a CEE ‘hub & spoke’ node by utilizing opportunities in new flight connections and by offering an alternative solution for regional consolidation to the existing western European freight terminals (Frankfurt, Amsterdam). Besides increasing air transport, the ongoing transformation of manufacturing supply chains, mass customization, e-commerce and the emergence of the offshore markets (China) – in all a wide set of factors and trends are helping to achieve the aspired position. In the framework of ‘BUD:2020’ new logistics facilities were built at Terminal 1 for major parcel services, finished at the end of 2017, and the next phase at Terminal 2 – The Cargo City – is under construction with a capacity to handle up to 200,000 tons per year.22 The central government is able to support this vision by building a new motorway section (M4 to eastern Hungary and Romania), by the reconstruction of the ‘Fast Road’, the main road connection to the downtown, and a 22-km-long bypass for intercity rails to connect the airport into the national railway network. There are some uncertainties about how the planned investments will affect the neighboring districts and suburban settlements, the ‘downtown-airport corridor’, and urbanization in general fuelled by the ‘Aerotropolis’ (Kasarda 2018) ecosystem (Poungias 2009). From the perspective of Budapest as a hotspot, the locally existing synergies, the scale and concentration of interlinking activities, the presence of digital transformation and emerging business platforms connected to aviation, logistics and specific manufacturing services have great importance. The ecosystem of the airport region consisted of 190 companies, 45,000 employees and 5.6 % of the national gross added value in 2016 (Századvég Gazdaságkutató Zrt 2017). The area may also be the center for urban development (Airport City/Aerotropolis) and applications in mobility technologies in the near future – a desired broad base for hotspots. 3 The railway infrastructure in the Budapest Metropolitan Region 3.1 Connecting or bypassing One must be aware of the fact that the main drivers of the Hungarian and especially of Budapest’s transition in logistics have been (1) flexibility in road freight; (2) emerging demand for regional distribution and city logistics; (3) logistics services needed for manufacturing supply chains. All these drivers are based on agile and lean operation, where railways were not and indeed still are not competitive. Railway freight is well below its potential. Just in container traffic, the output was 255,000 TEU in Hungary in 2015,23 below one third of the traffic in Austria (755,000 TEU in 2014) or half that in the Czech Republic (410,000 TEU in 2015). 21 https://www.internationalairportreview.com/news/38412/budapest-airport-cargo-2017/ (May 24, 2019). 22 General overview for investors in Hungary’s Real Estate market – Hungarian Investment Promotion Agency 2017 http://www.investhipa.hu/images/hipa_kiadvany_intro_realestate_web_20170822.pdf (May 24, 2019). 23 Communication by Firbás György from ZVF Zrt.
258 12 _ SPATIAL AND TRANSPORT INFRASTRUCTURE DEVELOPMENT IN EUROPE Fig. 4: Railway areas and brownfield areas in Budapest / Source: Author The second peculiarity of the railway system of Budapest is that freight capacities compete with passenger capacities within the network, at the southern railway bridge, which is the main bottleneck, as this one pair of tracks must handle all east-west and south-west transit (freight and passenger) together with commuter transport, and this competition will increase with the planned S-Bahn-like services. The vision of the
259CONTEMPORARY PERSPECTIVES OF RAILWAY, LOGISTICS AND URBAN DEVELOPMENT IN BUDAPEST ‘V0’ is that a bypass could ease this conflict once and forever (Markovits-Somogyi/ Karmazin/Bokor 2012), but it would also ‘bypass’ Budapest regarding the most important OEM Corridor. The main priorities of the period 2014–2020 is to improve the commuter and intercity usage of the railway network in Budapest. Improving the service level of commuter (and intercity) services is important for the Budapest metro, because 60 % of the commuting users of the railway network in Hungary use it in this area.24 Reconstruction of the respective lines and stations may improve the conditions for freight traffic too. Ongoing investments from ITOP into the transport management systems (GSM-R, ETCS) also improve the capacity. Still, the question remains as to the extent to which the bottleneck has been solved or the conflict between the different usages simply prolonged. A bygone project: V0 bypass corridor Bypassing Budapest via a southern railway was always a popular idea in the past century (Takács 2012). The Treaty of Trianon (1920) defined the new borders of Hungary and cut off all the transversal railway lines connecting the regional urban centers of the Carpathian basin. The network was always Budapest-centered, but since that time crossing the Danube from Budapest to the southern border by rail was possible only at Baja, without direct links to the major transport corridors. The first concept of ‘V0’ was elaborated during the 1930s, and the first 13 km was built in 1940 (No.151a), including a new bridge at Dunaföldvár. Because of World War II, an even more devastating war, the original, ambitious plan was never realized, so the section was not appropriately connected to the main network. Also, the bridge could not meet the changing requirements of the post-war period, so a new plan was created in 1975 to solve this problem, but implementation was then delayed. During the 1990s, Hungary focused on managing the huge yearly deficits and national debt, and even the existing railway network had to compete for resources with the new motorway development programs. Finally, the bridge at Dunaföldvár and the line of 151a were closed in 2000/2001 due to inappropriate physical and technical features and a lack of connections. In 2011, after seven years of EU membership, a revised proposal was made about V0 by the Association of the Hungarian Logistics Service Centers.25 A feasibility and technical design study was prepared in 2012. The feasibility study proved that the bottleneck exists all along the railway sections at Budapest, including those where no significant improvement is possible, like at commuter stations where usage will be even more intensive (see line 100) in the future. In 2013, the National Spatial Plan (NSP) was modified to include the approved scenario of ‘the new route of Szárliget–Vértesboglár–Vértesacsa–Baracska (south)–Ercsi (south)–the Danube–Kiskunlacháza– Bugyi–Dabas–Pusztavacs–Ceglédbercel’, following the Pan-European corridor IV, with connections (intermodal terminals) to the Corridors V, XI and VII (Danube waterway) outside Budapest. 24 KSH Hungarian Central Statistical Office, 2016. 25 http://iho.hu/hir/hataridore-elkeszultek-121219 (May 24, 2019).
260 12 _ SPATIAL AND TRANSPORT INFRASTRUCTURE DEVELOPMENT IN EUROPE Fig. 5: The proposal for the V0 railway line in the national network / Source: https://hu.wikipedia.org/ wiki/V0_vasútvonal; map by Joliet Jake Magyarország vasúti térképe V0 vasútvonal Keskeny nyomtávú vonal Mellékvonal Törzshálózati vonal TUDQV]HXUySDLIĘYRQDO Kétvágányú vonal Villamosított vonal MÁV vonal GYSEV vonal BHÉV vonal Egyéb vonal Felhagyott vonal Állomás* * A térképen nincs feltüntetve az összes állomás! Budapest Miskolc Debrecen Szeged Pécs Szombathely Balassagyarmat Hatvan Füzesabony Szerencs Nyíregyháza Záhony Püspökladány 9pV]WĘ Békéscsaba Kiskunhalas Kecskemét Szolnok Dombóvár Kaposvár Nagykanizsa Zalaegerszeg Celldömölk Veszprém *\ĘU Komárom Székesfehérvár 1 1 1 2 4 5 5 6 8 89 10 10 11 11 12 13 13 14 15 16 16 17 17 18 20 20 20 21 21 22 23 25 25 25 26 26 27 29 29 30a 30 30 30 35 36 37 39 38 40a 40 40 40 41 41 42 43 42 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 60 60 61 62 62 64 65 66 70 70 71 75 75 76 77 78 78 80a 80 80 80 80 81 81 83 84 85 82 86 87a 87 88 89 90 92 92 92 94 95 98 80c 100a 100 100 100 100 101 102 103 105 106 107 108 108 109 110 110 111 111 112 113 113 113 114 115 116 117 117 118 119 120a 120 120 121 121 121 125 125 125 126 127 127 128 128 129 130 130 130 135 135 135 135 136 140 140 142 145 145 146 146 147 147 148 149 150 150 150 150 151 152 153 154 154 155 Pozsony Bécs Nezsider Ebenfurt Bécsújhely )HOVĘOiV]Oy Graz Ljubljana Ljubljana Zágráb Eszék Belgrád Szabadka Arad Nagyszalonta Nagyvárad Érmihályfalva Nagykároly Munkács Kassa ÁgcsernyĘ Kassa Kassa Losonc Losonc Losonc Nagykürtös Pozsony Érsekújvár Dré g el y palán k R étsá g R omhán y S z ob V ác Vác r á t ót G al g amácsa A s z ód *|G| OO Ę S el yp Kisteren ye N óg r á dszak á l Ipol y tarnóc 6 RPRVNĘ~ MI DO X S al g ótar j án N O VĘ Má tr a n o v á kH omokteren ye Má tr a min ds z e n t G y ön gy ös V i so nt a Vámos gyö r k Na gy ú t Kál-Kápolna E g e r E g er-Felnéme t B ü kkábrán y 0H ] Ę N H U HV ]W HV 0 H]ĘQ \ iUi G 0H ] ĘFViW N y ékládháza T isza p alk on y a- (U Ę P Ħ + H M ĘNHUHV]W~U ' LyV J\ ĘU Ó z d B á nr é v e Pu tn ok K a zin cba r c ik a R udabán y a S a j óbábon y S a j ószentpéte r S a j óecse g )H O VĘ ] VR O FD H idvé g ard ó H i das n é m e t i 0H ] Ę z o m bo r S átoral j aú j hel y T i s z a l ök G örö g - s z á ll ás Vásárosnamén y Má t és z a lk a N y írbátor Na gy káll ó N y íradon y Tócóv ö l gy Apa f a S árán d L é t a v é rt es N y írábrán y K ocso r d a l só C sen g er Za j ta ÈJ HUGĘPD M RU Bih a rk e r es zt es Na gy kerek i K ö r öss z a k ál S ze g halom Dévaván y a K aba N ádud v a r Karca g Kisú j szállás O hat-Pusztakócs T i s z a f ü r ed S za j o l T LV]DWHQ \Ę 0H ] Ę W ~ U Gy oma B é k és K ö te gy á n M uron y Kéte gy háza / Ę N |V K i ] D Batton y a 0 H]ĘKH J\ HV O r os h á z a + yGPH]ĘYiViUKHO \ Ma k ó Új sze g e d Rös zk e S zentes K u n s z e ntm á rt on K o n do r os Ki ss z é n ás L a kit e l ek Kiskun f éle gy háza Ce g lé d Új szász La j osmizs e K ecs k e m é t a l só Kunszentmiklós-T ass T T F ü l öp szállás .L V N Ę U |V Dunapata j K a l ocsa K e l eb i a B ácsa lm ás Cs ik é ri a Ba j a Ba j a-Dunapar t B á t as z ék Bon y há d H idas-Bon y há d 3pFVEiQ \ D5HQGH]Ę K o ml ó Pécs -K ü lv á r os V illán y M a gy arból y Na gy harsán y 6 ]HQWOĘULQF S ell ye K ö zépri g óc G odisa .H]VĘKLGH J N~W G y ön k T amási T T Pa k s Ré t s zil as S árbo g ár d 0H ] Ę I D OY D Dunaú j város Lepsén y En y in g S zabadb att y á n B ö r gö n d P us zt as z abo l cs T á rn ok S i ó f ok F on y ó d T apolca T T Z alahalá p U z sa U zsabán y a B a l a t o ns z e ntgyö r gy S ármellé k Keszthel y Na gy atá d S omo gy szob Gy ékén y es Mu r a k e r es zt ú r Réd i cs ėULV]HQW S pWH U = D O D O | Y Ę Z a l as z e ntiv án Z alaszent g ró t U kk Z alabér-Bat y k K ö rm e n d S zent g otthár d Zir c Dudarbán y a V ár p alota P ét H a j máské r In o t a Aj ka P adra g kú t )HOVĘFVLQ J HU B oba P ápa V eszprémvarsány VV * \ ĘUV]DEDGKH J\ Ki sbé r Boda j k B a link a Mó r P us zt a v á m Bi cs k e O roszlán y K ö rn ye $OP iV I ]tW Ę T okod T T Eszter g om-kertváros Eszter g om H e gy eshalom Rajka Moso ns z o ln o k C sorna P or p ác .ĘV]H J ) H UW ĘV ] H QWPLNO yV S opro n Ha rk a Csa j á g S z e nt e n d r e Ráckeve ke T atabánya TT S zekszár d S al g ótar j án-Acél gy ártele p Vá r os f ö l d T u z sé r D o m b r ád B a l sa Kiskunma j sa B a l a t o nfenyves S omo gy - s zentpál T ás k a Cs i s zt a Lovasberén y P écs v á r ad Ma rt o nv ásá r S zilvásvára d T iszaú j - v á r os T ornanádaska T T Fehér gy arma t T i bo r s z á ll ás S ül y sáp Na gy káta Mo n o r S zázha l o mba tt a B a r cs Al be rtir sa Dabas Ki s k u nl ac h á z a Ercsi cs f Keskeny nyomtávú vonal Mellékvonal Törzshálózati vonal TUDQV]HXUySDLIĘYRQDO Kétvágányú vonal Villamosított vonal MÁV vonal GYSEV vonal BHÉV vonal Egyéb vonal Felhagyott vonal Állomás* * A térképen nincs feltüntetve az összes állomás!
261CONTEMPORARY PERSPECTIVES OF RAILWAY, LOGISTICS AND URBAN DEVELOPMENT IN BUDAPEST No decision has yet been made, as the estimated budget of 1.3 billion euros is as large as e. g. the total budget of the IKOP 2nd priority, aiming to finance the reconstruction and improvement of all the TEN-T railway (and waterway) lines of Hungary during the 2014–2020 period with more than 26 % of the overall IKOP budget. There is a broad consensus between the stakeholders that the scale of the project is simply too large, and the proposed developments in the existing network (capacity building, level of services, ICT, scheduling, etc.) may improve efficiency sufficiently. The plan conceptualizes a great vision of bypassing densely populated areas, improving logistics services, creating jobs in lesser developed areas, and last but not least increasing the capacity of the corridors.26 According to this, the V0 is more than infrastructural development. It is a spatial concept too, highlighting the need for integration between the two, and targeting the development of Komárom, Székesfehérvár and Szolnok, two regional urban centers along the new line. This is an important aspect and a progressive idea, but the main question is still about the physical capacity which underlines the concept and the sustainability of the current structure. What if 30 % of road freight over 300 km shifts to other modes such as rail by 2030, and more than 50 % by 2050 – in line with the EC Transport White Paper (2011)? How will the existing network ensure the necessary capacities to handle three to four times the cargo volume of today? (Islam/Ricci/Nelldal 2016). Unfortunately, the ‘V0’ still has no sound business model. The main argument against implementation is what if the scenario of ‘liner trains’ and combining passenger and freight transport is valid, rather than today’s ‘hub & spoke’ model which is seen as the future of railway transportation. Perhaps the future of transportation depends on integration and the shared use of the same network? 3.2 Contemporary railway development in the Budapest metropolitan area The current patterns of railway usage are quite sophisticated, while the overall system is still the same as it was when developed in the 19th century (Garay 2014). Layers of usage are diverse (commuter and intercity trains vs transport), and transit is just one component of them. There are questions concerning the validity of the concept of separating transit and other freight and passenger traffic, or promoting transit without added value (local service, manufacturing), which is definitely a controversial topic from Budapest’s perspective. The growing openness of the Hungarian market gradually transformed transportation in terms of mode, destination and geolocation during the 1990s. The growth in transportation and logistics has been fuelled by exports and imports. However, the share of real transit within international freight traffic was almost marginal (5 % of total traffic) till EU enlargement, and transit only began to develop thereafter as it went above 20 % in the next 5 years; even the crisis failed to shatter this trend. By 2009 the share of transit in rail freight (measured in performance / ton-kilometer) reached 26 Presentation of the MLSZKSZ at Vecsés, at the Forum held by the Local Government of Pest County, 2014.
262 12 _ SPATIAL AND TRANSPORT INFRASTRUCTURE DEVELOPMENT IN EUROPE 31 %, and 34 % by 2016.27 An evaluation is considering how a real transformation can change the railway network at Budapest, introduce the necessary improvements for transit, and tackle the mismatch between passenger usage and freight transport, either in a radical way (V0) or incrementally, by upgrading and expanding existing lines. Developments between Kelenföld and Ferencváros The government realized the untenable situation of the bottleneck in the railway infrastructure between Kelenföld and Ferencváros and worked out a series of projects. Two of these are considered to offer a medium-term solution. Fig. 6: Southern railway bridge / Source: https://hu.wikipedia.org/wiki/Összekötő_vasúti_híd; image by Joliet Jake The most important is the extension of the south rail bridge crossing the Danube, and of the connecting rail transport system between Kelenföld and Ferencváros. This practically means the building of a new bridge (next to the existing) and a new (3rd) railway line (with two new rail stations: Danubius and Népliget). The notice of open procedure for public procurement for designing the bridge was published in 2015; the procurement for designing the connected networks started in 2017.28 The ongoing development of the intermodal center of Kelenföld (P+R and B+R services, commercial developments), and the proposed intermodal nodes and stations may be a basis for developing the ‘S-Bahn’ railway network (the ‘circle line’). So the bypass line to the airport could be an integrated part of this network just like the majority of other projects under construction, like the Kelenföld–Százhalombatta, Rákospalota–Esztergom, Rákos–Hatvan railway track reconstructions (all of them TEN-T project, proposed for CEF funding) affecting main commuter usage. 27 KSH Hungarian Central Statistical Office, 2016. 28 The other is a set of country level developments, like improving efficiency by developing ETCS2 signaling control and a rail traffic management system, diagnostic and monitoring systems, GSM-R, IT and software, modernization of rail tracks and sourcing of new electrical multiple units (EMU). These together will also improve the network capacities (IKOP ÉFK 2015, 2016, 2017).
263CONTEMPORARY PERSPECTIVES OF RAILWAY, LOGISTICS AND URBAN DEVELOPMENT IN BUDAPEST There are further related investments: the reconstruction of Line 150 ‘Kelebian’ (incl. the relocation of the track) will be part of the Belgrade-Budapest (Pan-European corridor 10) project. The estimated 2.42-billion-euro investment project of the new Belgrade line will have an efficient connection to the main container terminals at Pest (BLIK) and also to the Csepel-Island intermodal centers (Csepel Free Port/MCC, METRANS) after the reconstruction of the Gubacsi bridge and the related 2.3-km truck line. New intermodal services of METRANS, and also the MCC, BILK terminals may achieve competitive advantage, as less delay and more reliable freight traffic can be managed thanks to improvement and reconstruction. Using the connections to the main sea ports as a basis for evaluation, the competitive advantage of these terminals is clear, especially in handling offshore traffic. Further developments of the smaller regional terminals of Békéscsaba, Záhony, Paks,29 Miskolc and Kiskunhalas probably will not alter this position. 3.3 Passenger train developments in the railway network Train still has a considerable modal split in Hungary. The country had the second largest share of public transport from the modal split in the EU in 2012, 34.2 % (Juhász/ Mátrai/Kerényi 2014). The same second position was valid for passenger train usage, with 13.8 % of the modal split share (EMTA 2012). Intercity railway usage and commuting usage were the most successful segments. In recent years the modernization of the Kelenföld–Székesfehérvár line 30, and Nyugati-station-Esztergom line 2, together with the new numbering and new motor-trains of commuters’ lines, brought new users to the railway system. The usage of commuter rails increased by 20 % from 2010 to 2017 and reached the 60 million passengers per year,30 which is manageable but also increases the existing physical congestion of the Kelenföld–Ferencváros section. However, passenger transport on the railways is characterized by further contradictions in Budapest. As opposed to the commuter lines coming from the agglomeration to the city, the usage of trains inside the city is almost immeasurable. HÉV (commuter rail, rapid transit) lines, formerly part of the urban public transport system was handed to the national railway company for concession, even though it is now planned that the southern HÉV line of H6 ’Ráckeve’ és and the H7 ‘Csepel’ should be integrated into the city tram network.31 Budapest has four lines of suburban railway and a considerable tram network, which have high percentages from the modal split, but inside the city’s boundaries the integrated railway system still does not serve the public transport system. The reasons for this are multiple, basically the position of the lines inside the city and the position of the stations show almost no coherence with the areas where people live or work. 29 532/2017 (VIII. 14.) Governmental order on the foundation of a National Intermodal Container Terminal Network. 30 https://www.mavcsoport.hu/mav/dinamikusan-no-utasforgalom-budapesti-elovarosi-vonalakon (May 24, 2019). 31 http://hvg.hu/itthon/20170314_Indul_a_nagy_HEVfejlesztes_Rackevetol_az_asztalfiokig (May 24, 2019).
264 12 _ SPATIAL AND TRANSPORT INFRASTRUCTURE DEVELOPMENT IN EUROPE S-Bahn Budapest This situation should be improved with an ambitious S-Bahn concept currently under implementation. The concept named ‘Railway permeability study of Budapest’ was approved in the 1081/2017 (II.13) government decree, and right now is limited to the development of a strategy from CEF funds. The main core of the program would be the connection of lines 2 and 150 across the city using the existing tracks but building new stations to create viable connections with the public transport system of Budapest. The S-Bahn concept would create 15 new stops on mainly existing railway lines, the corresponding study is under delivery at the cost of 1.9 million euros, partly using CEF funds.32 This concept would not directly affect the bottleneck of the southern bridge or the development of the Orient/East-Med Corridor, but improved passenger usage of the city would further increase overall demand. Fig. 7: S-Bahn concept to reform the passenger rail system in Budapest / Source: author 32 http://iho.hu/hir/ujabb-s-bahn-program-vagy-a-regi-ujragombolasa-170217 (May 24, 2019).
265CONTEMPORARY PERSPECTIVES OF RAILWAY, LOGISTICS AND URBAN DEVELOPMENT IN BUDAPEST The S-Bahn system in Budapest could only be completed if the lines would finally close into a full circle. Just as in the case of the M0 highway connection, the railway system of Budapest has two bridge connections across the Danube, but these two lines have no connection on the western side. This is partly because of the extreme topography of the western (Buda) side in the north, so the only solution for both the motorway and the trains is to develop the system in tunnels. The plan of the Déli–Nyugati tunnel bypass under the Danube There is one plan that could affect the overall accessibility and permeability of Budapest, with a considerable effect on the cargo transport capacity shortages too, and this is the 100-year-old dream of a tunnel under the Danube connecting Déli railway station in the west with Nyugati railway station in the northeast. A plan to connect terminal stations underground has existed since 1934, when the elimination of the present Keleti station was projected, and extensive underground connections were planned under the city with a three-track connection between Kelenföld and Nyugati stations, traced in three tunnels. Fig. 8: Plans for the underground connections of inner city stations / Source: Kálmán 2012 There is a vision (more than a concrete plan) of an underground tunnel connecting Déli and Nyugati passenger railway stations under the Danube (Kálmán 2012). Both stations are terminal stations, but their lines could easily be connected with a 3–4 km tunnel. Such a plan is still kept in reserve with some regulatory lines allowing the future HISTORY _1901. 1 central station with 4 underground rails and 4 stations in the city _1934. New Keleti Station with 6 rails elevated rails + underground tunel with 3rails _1940. undergroun tunel with 8 rails northern transfer station southern transfer station H I S T O R Y _ 1 9 01 . 1 ce ntr a l s t a ti on wit h 4 under g roun d ra il s a n d 4 s t a ti o n s i n th e c it y _ 1 93 4 . N e w K e l e t i S tatio n wit h 6 ra il s e l e v a t ed ra il s + under g roun d t u ne l wit h 3 ra il s _ 1 9 4 0 . u nder g rou n t u n e l wit h 8 ra il s no rth e r n tra nsf er sta tio n sou the r n tr a n s f e r s t a ti on Keleti Nyugati Déli Recent plans to connect Déli and Nyugati stations: _version 1 _version 2 Plans for underground railway connectivity: _METRO 2 _METRO 3