forward-looking atlas

FORWARD-LOOKING ATLAS
Freight transport
in North-Western Europe:
bottlenecks, missing links,
underused infrastructures
and alternative routes
FORWARD-LOOKING ATLAS
Freight transport
bottlenecks, missing links,
underused infrastructures
and alternative routes
Weastflows project - Action 1 - 3rd and 4th deliverables - April 2015

Introduction.........................................................................................................................p.5
1/ Reminder of key stakes involved in freight transport...............p.7
1.1 Infrastructures and inter-regional freight exchanges...........................................p.8
1.2 The European transport policy...................................................................................p.10
2/ Bottlenecks, missing
and underused infrastructures...........................................................p.11
About the analysis of bottlenecks, missing and underused infrastructures...........................p.12
2.1 Threats and opportunities of the infrastructure network: a global approach.............p.13
2.2 Threats and opportunities of the infrastructure network: a regional approach..........p.14
3/ Alternative East-West routes................................................................p.17
3.1 Transport corridors and alternative routes..............................................................p.18
3.2 “Northern” alternative route.........................................................................................p.20
3.3 “Southern” alternative route.........................................................................................p.22
3.4 Complementary sections: the United Kingdom and Ireland..............................p.24
3.5 Complementary sections:
Germany, Belgium, France, Luxembourg and the Netherlands......................p.26
Conclusion
Towards a redistribution of flows in North-Western Europe?.......p.31
Acknowledgements.....................................................................................................p.32
Map index.............................................................................................................................p.33
Already published.........................................................................................................p.35
TABLE OF CONTENTS

Data source powered by AURH
Boudaries ©MBR and EuroGeographics,©ESRI
Map data © OpenStreetMap contributors, ODbl
®AURH - 2015/04

Forward-Looking Atlas - North-Western Europe freight transport: bottlenecks, missing links, underused infrastructures and alternative routes - AURH - April, 2015 5
AURH has been a partner in the Interreg IV B Weastflows European project since 2011, with
the following goals:
• identifying and describing the infrastructure network adapted to freight transport;
• assessing stakes involved in freight transport taking place in North-Western Europe;
• pinpointing “issues” such as bottlenecks and missing links and proposing “remedies” for
them through alternative routes to facilitate exchanges.
The mobility of passengers and freight is considered as a historic cornerstone in the
construction of what is now Europe, and the quality of transport infrastructures remains a
key asset in Europe’s attractiveness. The European transport policy is consequently at the
intersection of economic, social, technological and environmental stakes which require a
transversal approach in order to ensure optimal mobility for its citizens and freight in the E.U.
In 2011, the European Commission’s white book stated there would be “highly increased traffic
by 2050, up to 50% for passengers and 80% for freight.”
The Forward-Looking Atlas focuses on identifying and analysing bottlenecks and missing
or underused infrastructures, to determine alternative routes to the main transport
corridors defined by the European Commission. Our goal is to favour modes with low
environmental impacts, to avoid congestion, to use infrastructures that are currently
underused and to identify preferential East-West directions.
This report includes three parts:
• the first one is a synthetic analysis of the stakes involved in freight transport in NWE;
• the second targets bottlenecks, missing or underused infrastructures;
• the last part proposes and analyses routes which complement those proposed by the
European Commission (TEN-T corridors).
This partnership-based undertaking is the third stage in work done by AURH for Weastflows
and continues and concludes the two atlases previously published:
• The Atlas of freight transport infrastructures in North-Western Europe, published in June,
2013;
• The Analytical Atlas, published in September, 2014.
We hope that Weastflows, generally speaking, and this report, in particular, will participate
in improving knowledge on the infrastructure network at the North-West European level as
well as the comprehension of stakes involved in modal changes, fluidity and sustainable
development.
The Geographical Information System designed for the Weastflows project
Work undertaken by AURH corresponds to a geomatics approach, with a Geographical
Information System dedicated to freight transport. Primary data in the infrastructure network
is the base of the system. This includes roadways, railways, inland waterways, sea transport
as well as multiple mode hubs, such as ports, railroad stations and airports. This network is
coherent in all of North-Western Europe and is standardised with the TEN-T classification as
well as capacitive knowledge (morphology of the roadway network, electrification of railways,
ECMT classification of inland waterways, depth of ports).
Complementary information has been included, such as maritime liaisons, and some key
regional information, in particular concerning railways. This selection was mapped out on the
Atlas of the main freight transport infrastructures in North-Western Europe, analysed in the
Analytical Atlas and simplified into hubs and modal sections in The Forward-Looking Atlas in
order to allow their combination to map out key routes.
A set of useful data was thus drawn up on congested areas and routes as well as underused
and missing infrastructures in order to complete the analysis of the infrastructure network.
This was a transnational and collaborative approach between the project’s partners and
observers. We have also drawn up a set of data concerning European corridors and
alternative solutions. All of this information, which can be accessed through an open
license or open data, feeds into the GeoWeastflows interactive cartography platform
(http://geo.weastflows.eu) as well as the shared reference data set.
INTRODUCTION

1/ Reminder of key stakes involved
in freight transport
1/ Reminder of key stakes involved
in freight transport

Forward-Looking Atlas - North-Western Europe freight transport: bottlenecks, missing links, underused infrastructures and alternative routes - AURH - April, 20158
0 50 10025
Km
Data source Eurostat - 2012
®AURH -2014/05$
North Range
900 Mt
Atlantic
Coastline
29,8 Mt
Coastline of
the British and Irish Isles
500 Mt
Paris
London
Dublin
Brussels
Amsterdam
Luxembourg
Shetland, Scotland Shetland
Infrastructure densityMaritime port traffic
North-Western Europe corresponds to 817,000 km2 of area, with over 173 million inhabitants who
are unevenly distributed. Ireland, the United Kingdom, Belgium, Luxembourg, the Northern part
of France, the Western part of Germany and the Southern part of the Netherlands make up this
area, which has a huge coastline.
Sixty-five ports total freight traffic that exceeds 1.5 billion tonnes, headed by the Northern Range
ports, in particular Antwerp and Rotterdam, which are the key inbound sea ports for Europe.
This port network is backed by a terrestrial network of infrastructures exceeding 90,000 km,
broken down as follows: 46% of roads, 42% of railways, 12% of navigable inland waterways.
The grid analysis of infrastructure density per type allows us to highlight six regional areas which
concentrate on stakes linked to modal changes and flow massification: the Glasgow - Edinburgh
route, the centre of the United Kingdom, Greater London, the Benelux - Rhine River Basin area,
the Seine River Valley and the Saône River Valley.
The Benelux -Rhine River Basin aggregate, as well as the Seine River Valley, are the only regions
in North-Western Europe where modal transport changes can massively take place both by inland
waterways and by rail.
For further information on stakes involved in freight transport in North-Western Europe, consult
the Analytical Atlas, published in September, 2014.
Infrastructures and inter-regional freight exchanges1.1
Analyse croisée des infrastructures*
Europe du Nord-Ouest
Éléments de contexte
Concentrations multimodales
Concentrations bimodales
Concentrations mono-modales
Concentration forte de réseaux routier,
ferroviaire et fluvial
Concentration forte de ports
et de terminaux ferroviaires
Concentration forte de réseaux routier
et ferroviaire
Concentration forte de réseaux
ferroviaire et fluvial
Concentration forte de réseau fluvial
Concentration forte de réseau routier
Pas de données**
Région d’infrastructure de transport
Concentrations cumulées d’infrastructures
* seules les infrastructures adaptées pour le transport
de marchandises ont été prises en compte pour cette
analyse
** l’absence de données peut signifier qu’il n’y a pas
d’infrastructure ou qu’il n’y a pas d’infrastructure
adaptée pour le transport de marchandises
Cross analyses
of infrastructures network*
North-Western Europe
Contextual information
Multimodal concentrations
Bimodal concentrations
Single mode concentrations
High concentration of road, railway
and inland waterway networks
High concentration of ports and
railway terminals
High concentration of road and railway
networks
High concentration of railway and
inland waterway networks
High concentration of inland waterway
networks
High concentration of road networks
No data**
Infrastructure region
Cumulated infrastructure concentrations
* only relevant freight transport infrastructures have
been considered
** no data can mean no infrastructures or no
infrastructure relevant for freight transportation
0 50 10025
Km
®AURH$ Data sources: Weastflows project,
powered by AURH
- 2014/06
Centre of United Kingdom
London area
Seine Valley
Benelux
and Rhine basin
Glasgow - Edinburgh axis
Saône Valley
Shetland, Scotland Shetland
en milliers de tonnes, en 2012 Range Nord
400 000
1 000
100 000
50 000
10 000
Façade des Îles Britanniques
Façade Atlantique
Façade maritime
500 Mt Trafic total en millions de tonnes par
façade maritime
Capitale
*sélection des ports ayant un trafic supérieur à
1 million de tonnes
Total freight traffic
by main ports*
per thousand tonnes, in 2012
North Range
Maritime coastlines
400,000
1,000
100,000
50,000
10,000
Coastline of the British and Irish Isles
Atlantic coastline
Maritime coastline
500 Mt Total trafic in millions of tonnes
per maritime coastline
*selection of ports with a freight traffic
over 1,000 thousand tonnes
Capital city

The analysis of estimated freight exchanges between regions in North-Western Europe, in
tonnes, including all types and modes of freight, carried out using an origin-destination matrix
structure highlights three subsystems that are not connected between themselves and are rarely
transnational:
• the first one, which is transnational and on the Rhine River, is very intense from Rotterdam to
Dortmund, with Duisburg/Dusseldorf as an intersection;
• the second one is British, and highlights a concentration of exchanges in the centre of the
United Kingdom;
• the last one, smaller, is French and shows a lower volume in exchanges as well as the
absence of any East-West corridors.
Three peripheral areas were identified: Ireland, Scotland and the Centre-Eastern part of France.
The analysis of tonnes-kilometres according to the different modes shows the intensity in short
liaisons. It also highlights preferential long distance liaisons as well as maritime links.
TheRhineRiverandcentreoftheUnitedKingdomareconfirmedintheintensityoftheirexchanges.
The first by the inland waterway and railway mode, whereas the latter only uses roadways.
Dominant interactions in the maritime mode connecting the North-East to the United Kingdom,
take place mainly in Rotterdam for both input and output. They confirm the position of this port
as a European multiple mode hub whilst posing the question of long-term sustainability of this
concentration.
Freight exchanges per transport modeMain freight exchanges
9
300 - 1 000
1,001 - 1,996
985 - 1,815
1,816 - 3,141
2,053 - 3,500
3,501 - 4,389
872 - 1,500
1,501 - 8,586
in million tonnes-km
Main interactions per mode*
inside North-Western Europe
* Main interactions per mode were selected
after having determined a significant threshold
that is specific to each interaction mode in
million tonnes per km
All interactions inside
Geozone
Geometrical centre of Geozone
Capital
ROAD
MARITIME
RAILWAY
INLAND
WATERWAY
300 - 1 000
1 001 - 1 996
985 - 1 815
1 816 - 3 141
2 053 - 3 500
3 501 - 4 389
872 - 1 500
1 501 - 8 586
en millions de tonnes-km
Principales interactions par mode*
à l’intérieur de l’Europe du Nord-Ouest
* la sélection des principales interactions par mode a été é
significatif et spécifique à chaque mode, en millions de tonnes
ROUTE
MER
FER
FLEUVE
Principales interactions* entre géozones
18 652 - 40 470
6 848 - 18 652
5 039 - 6 847
Géozone recevant ou émettant
une ou plusieur(s) interaction(s)
supérieure(s) à 18 Mt
Géozone
Centre de géozone
en kilo-tonnes par an
18 652 - 40 470
6 848 - 18 652
Toutes les interactions
Major interactions*
between geozones
18 652 - 40 470
6 848 - 18 652
5,039 - 6,847
* Main interactions represent interactions
exceeding 5 million tonnes
Geozones receiving or emitting one or
several interactions exceeding 18 mT
Geozone
Geometrical centre of Geozone
in thousands of tonnes per annum
18,652 - 40,470
6,848 - 18,652
All interactions inside
(in tonnes-kilometre)(in tonnes)

TEN-T corridors in North-Western Europe
In October, 2013, the European Commission made its new policies on transport
infrastructures public. The priorities were consistent with Weastflows’ goals: building
missing links, reducing bottlenecks, developing multiple mode connections, reducing
greenhouse gas by developing alternative methods of transport, other than roads
and lastly, developing East-West routes.
Amongst the nine transport corridors selected by the European Commission, five
are located in the North-West European area. Four have East-West direction section
(cf. map):
• the “Atlantic Corridor” in its Le Havre - Mannheim and Le Havre - Strasbourg
section;
• the “North Sea - Mediterranean Corridor” in its “Cork - Dublin- Brussels” section;
• the “North Sea - Baltic Corridor,” from Antwerp and Rotterdam towards Berlin;
• the “Rhine River - Danube Corridor,” which is a continuation of the Atlantic
Corridor, and only flows in an East-West direction.
The only corridor going in a North-South direction is the “Rhine-Alps” corridor, which
connects Rotterdam to Genoa.
This new transport layout strengthens the “Blue Banana” as the key European
backbone where infrastructures converge. It links peripheral areas to central ones,
though it increases congestion and has few alternative itineraries. Some structuring
routes seem to be missing, for example, from Paris to Dijon.
st
d
s
Port with a total traffic up to
50 million annual tonnes
TEN-T corridors connecting
Rest of Europe
East-West direction corridor section
North-South direction corridor section
City connected to a corridor
Capital connected to a corridor
The European transport policy1.2
0 100
Km
Commission européenne, TENtec, ®AURH -2013/06$
Cork
Le Havre
Lille
Metz
Dijon
Bordeaux
Lyon
Dover
Liverpool/
Manchester
Birmingham
Felixstowe
Southampton
Strasbourg
Basel
Gênes
Mannheim
Stuttgart
Francfurt
Köln
Dusseldorf
Hanover
Antwerp
RotterdamZeebrugge
Gent
Liège
OsnabrückUtrecht
Calais
Belfast
Glasgow
Edinburg
MarseilleVitoria
Bilbao
London
Dublin
Paris
Brussels
Amsterdam Berlin
Praha
Wien
Luxembourg
Bern
Hamburg
To Bucharest
(Romania)
and the Black Sea
To Ostava
(Bulgaria)
and Ukraine
to Warsaw
(Poland)
and Belarus
To Madrid
Lisbon
Algeciras
Bremerhaven
Immingham

and underused infrastructures
and underused infrastructures

This is an analysis that had to be carried out before seeking alternative routes. The goal is
firstly to draw up a geography of congested areas, missing or underused links for all types
of transport infrastructures, whether they concern inland waterways, railways, roads or the
sea. Here, we will be pinpointing situations where problems were circumvented or postponed
by dealing with traffic saturation, opportunities and stakes related to freight transport. Thus,
the “issues” networks have, which hamper exchanges, find their “remedies” in the creation of
bypasses or by turning to underused infrastructures.
What types of data were used?
As there is no European reference data set on the structural use of infrastructures which
would allow us to assess their level of use, AURH designed and carried out a qualitative
opinion survey. This survey was taken by project partners as well as many experts including
infrastructure administrators for its French part (RFF, VNF, HAROPA, etc.).
This “expert’s opinion” survey took
place online with a questionnaire
(Google Forms®), from November,
2014 to January, 2015. The new
functions of GeoWeastflows were used,
and in particular, the possibility to key
in geographical information online.
Roughly forty pieces of information
were gathered by fifteen different
contributors.
The following criteria were used to justify data collection:
• information sought can apply to sections of an infrastructure network (roads, railways or
inland waterways), or to hubs (pots, railway terminals, etc.), and can be, without this
being necessary, a part of an on-going study or project;
• problems identified have no “geographical boundaries”;
• information gathered concerns both local traffic as well as traffic at a European level.
Complementary data sources stemming from work done in the framework of TEN-T corridors
were also used, and in particular “Work Plans” of the “Rhine River - Alps” and “North Sea -
Mediterranean” corridors, which can be accessed at the following address:http://ec.europa.
eu/transport/themes/infrastructure/ten-t-guidelines/corridors/corridor-studies_en.htm.
What were the results?
The information gathered was integrated and laid out in the Weastflows Geographical
Information System as points and lines. Approximately one hundred objects located on
existing infrastructures were pinpointed. Because this system has an open and reusable
status category, published under GeoWeastflows, others will be able to complete or update
this information.
It must be noted that this information is non-exhaustive and lacunary for some regions,
in particular for the United Kingdom. Nevertheless it gives a preliminary approach to
dealing with bottlenecks, missing and underused infrastructures.
Consequently, a complete cartography of North-Western Europe, and three regional
highlights were proposed: the Seine River Valley and Northern France, Benelux and the
Rhine River Valley.
About the analysis of bottlenecks, missing and underused infrastructures
Why must bottlenecks, missing and underused infrastructures be
analysed?

By preferring East-West routes for freight transport, Europe hopes to
develop alternative solutions in congested regions which lead to Northern
Range ports, as well as North-South corridors, which are also congested.
The goal here is also to tackle European freight traffic growth and ensure
that the whole of Europe is correctly connected. (In 2011, the European
Commission’s white book forecast there would be highly increased traffic by
2050, up to 50% for passengers and 80% for freight).
This map gives a non-exhaustive overview of threats and opportunities in
the North-West European transport network. This network is faced with
congestion problems that are both structural and economic ones, which are
mainly located:
• in the most heavily populated and industrialised regions (the “Blue
Banana”),
• on structuring transport lines (Rotterdam - Frankfurt - Mannheim,
London – Birmingham – Liverpool – Glasgow, Paris – Lille),
• near large European cities: mainly surrounding Paris, London,
Birmingham, Luxembourg, Brussels and Cologne.
This leads us to reflect upon solutions to be rolled out to mitigate these
problems. One possible response is to move a part of traffic onto an
underused infrastructure (in yellow) or to think of building the missing ones
(in orange).
Congestion, missing infrastructures, underused infrastructures*
Infrastructure
network
Congested
infrastructure
Missing
infrastructure
Underused
infrastructure
Rest of Europe
City over 1 million inhabitants
City between 450,000 and
150,000 inhabitants
City with less than
150,000 inhabitants
London
Mannheim
City between 1 million and
450,000 inhabitants
Dublin
Rouen
*Non-exhaustive list
Threats and opportunities of the infrastructure network: a global approach2.1

Three main elements of congestion stood out for the Seine River Valley and
Northern France:
• Paris, its outskirts, suburbs and the Francilien belt line;
• the Rouen - Paris railway line, with the “Mantes knot”;
• theA1 Motorway between Paris and Lille with a high concentration of heavy
vehicles, nearly 20%.
The French way of organising networks, in a star-shape, explains a part of this
situation.
Itmustbenotedthatcongestionismainlyroadtrafficcongestionandthatcapacity
exists for inland waterway and railway traffic. The Serqueux-Gisors railway line
is undergoing an ambitious modernisation programme whose goal is to offer an
alternative to the historical Le Havre - Rouen - Paris railway line, suffering from
serious structural issues. The carrying out of the new railway line between Paris
and Normandy is also an answer to Rouen and Mantes congestion.
The Rouen- Amiens - Reims railway line is an itinerary which bypasses Paris
and its outskirts and which is currently underused. The Seine River also remains
an underused infrastructure, in spite of its high seaworthiness level (ECMT V).
In the West, the Le Havre port has large capacity reserves, in particular
concerning terminal ports. This situation, linked to an uncongested hinterland
and commissioning of a multiple mode terminal, is both an opportunity and a
solution at the European level.
The Seine River Valley and Northern France
Threats and opportunities of the infrastructure network: a regional approach2.2
Missing infrastucture*
Network concerned
Underused infrastucture*
Network concerned
Contextual information*
Airport
Seaport
Inland port
Railway terminal
Inland waterway
network
Road network
Railway network
""
)
""
)
""
)
Congested infrastucture*
Network concerned
Inland waterway
network
Road network
Seaport
Urban node: railway
and road network
congested
Railway network
!(
!(
!(
!(
!
!!
Inland waterway network
Railway network
Seaport
o
Infrastructure
network
Infrastructures Éléments de contexteInfrastructures

Benelux, a heavily populated and highly industrialised region, is an
intersection between maritime and terrestrial flows, because of the presence
of Europe’s two largest ports: Antwerp and Rotterdam.
Congestion can be observed right in the port terminals, with waiting time that
can reach, for example, 92 hours in Rotterdam and 72 hours in Antwerp for
barge handling. It then trickles down to the rest of the infrastructure network,
and impacts all modes, including inland waterways which often suffer from a
lack of equipment when compared with the volume of freight.As an example,
the section between Rotterdam, Dordrecht and Emmerich lacks mooring
places, in spite of its high capacity.
Traffic is organised, by corridor, around very few structuring elements, which
reinforces the saturation of this system, particularly so from Cologne to
Rotterdam. The obsolescence of some infrastructures, in particular in the
Belgian network, linked with higher volumes transported, is also a problem.
The railway network, challenged by traveller demand, is also saturated:
between Duisburg and Utrecht, Liège and Cologne, as well as the
Luxembourg - Namur - Brussels line. Extra capacity is rare within these
areas: between Liège and Rotterdam using the Meuse River, in the south
between Thionville and Koblenz using the Moselle River or by the Lille -
Thionville railway line in the West.
Benelux
Network concerned
Network concerned
Airport
Seaport
Inland port
Railway terminal
Inland waterway
network
Road network
Railway network
""
)
""
)
""
)
Network concerned
Inland waterway
network
Road network
Seaport
Urban node, railway
and road network
congested
Railway network
!(
!(
!(
!(
!
!!
Railway network
Seaport
o
Infrastructure
network

The Rhine River Valley system is in interaction with Benelux port traffics.
This is a region where topographical constraints play a huge role, with the
“natural” Rhine River Valley bottleneck, which favours North-South relations,
in particular between Mannheim, Strasbourg and Mulhouse. This natural
barrier must be overcome for East-West relations towards Central Europe,
taking into account geographical constraints and traffic that is increasing.
Congestion is present in all transport modes, including the Rhine River. Road
congestion in most of Luxembourg is also an issue. This can be explained by
the accumulation of local traffic with transit traffic.
The Moselle River is a capacity reserve as well as an alternative route
parallel to the Rhine River. This inter-corridor liaison should be considered.
A reservoir of railway capacity between Strasbourg and Mannheim could be
an alternative to the congested Mulhouse - Basel - Mannheim route.
The Metz - Strasbourg railway line, which is a continuation of the Brussels -
Luxembourg line, has speed constraints, which impact service levels.
Rhine River Valley
Network concerned
Network concerned
Airport
Seaport
Inland port
Railway terminal
Inland waterway
network
Road network
Railway network
""
)
""
)
""
)
Network concerned
Inland waterway
network
Road network
Seaport
Urban node, railway
and road network
congested
Railway network
!(
!(
!(
!(
!
!!
Railway network
Seaport
o
Infrastructure
network

3/ Alternative East-West routes3/ Alternative East-West routes

Transport corridors and alternative routes3.1
The goals of the Weastflows project are to identify alternative East-West routes for congested
areas by employing underused infrastructures and by favouring other transport modes than
roads. Opportunities are located in the West part of Europe, where the infrastructure network
is the least saturated and where gateway projects are already underway: the Limerick/
Shannon Gateway, Seine Gateway® or the Liverpool/Manchester Gateway.
Two East-West routes are proposed as a complement to the TEN-T corridors:
• the “Northern” route (in orange on the map): Shannon/Limerick – Dublin – Liverpool –
Immingham - Rotterdam, doubled in the North, by Glasgow – Edinburgh – Rotterdam;
• the “Southern” route (in yellow on the map): Shannon/Limerick – Le Havre – Paris –
Metz – Mannheim - Strasbourg – Stuttgart – Nuremberg.
There are eleven section which interconnect with the corridors (in green on the map), thus
completing the grid and making up a third set.
This contribution aims to better connect peripheral areas, focus on hubs, avoid congestion
and build on the potentials of under-used infrastructures.
Links between Ireland and the United Kingdom with the continent are strengthened with two
connections in the West: Limerick and Portsmouth, and two in the East: Immingham and
Edinburgh.
The port of Le Havre is further reinforced in its position as the western entrance port into
the European continent. Shannon/Limerick, which are not a part of the TEN-T corridors, are
connected to two new roads.
Focus on the “Northern” route (in orange on the map)
The “Northern” route connects Ireland and the United Kingdom to the continent. It is mainly
a maritime connection where key ports, in particular Rotterdam and Immingham, as well
as the centre of the United Kingdom, which is not present in the TEN-T network, are all
interconnected.
This is an alternative route to the North Sea-Mediterranean corridor. It bypasses the English
Channel, the Pas-de-Calais strait and Greater London. It uses the maritime mode as an
alternative to roads or railways.
Focus on the “Southern” route (in yellow on the map)
The “Southern” itinerary connects Ireland directly to the continent via Le Havre. It completes
the Atlantic Corridor:
• by identifying a bypass for Greater Paris;
• by continuing up to Nuremberg to facilitate its interconnection with the Rhine/Danube
River corridor in order to avoid using the heavily congested Strasbourg-Mannheim route.
This itinerary has four modes and the main one is the rail, with over 1,800 km of railways.
Focus on complementary sections (in green on the map)
Complementary sections aim to strengthen intra-European connectivity. They mainly run
from North to South. They accompany itineraries proposed by Weastflows and make up an
indispensable complement for the TEN-T network to mitigate congestion.
In the United Kingdom, this is a means of proposing an alternative route to the Glasgow -
Liverpool - Birmingham - London route, which is congested both for its roads and railways
(the West Coast Main Line), connecting Edinburgh to London through Leeds and Sheffield.
On the continent, this offers a road and rail complement to two branches of the Rhine River
- Alps corridor whilst completing the North Sea - Mediterranean corridor by two parallel
sections, one of which structures North-South relations and the other which gives an
alternative itinerary to the congested Rhine River axis.

0 100
Km
Immingham
Leeds/
Sheffield
Francfurt
Koblenz
Cork
Le Havre
Lille
Metz
Dijon
Bordeaux
Lyon
Dover
Liverpool/
Manchester
Birmingham
Felixstowe
Southampton
Strasbourg
Basel
Gênes
Mannheim
Stuttgart
Köln
Dusseldorf
Hanover
Antwerp
RotterdamZeebrugge
Gent
Liège
OsnabrückUtrecht
Calais
Belfast
Glasgow
Edinburgh
MarseilleVitoria
Bilbao
London
Dublin
Paris
Brussels
Amsterdam Berlin
Praha
Wien
Luxembourg
Bern
Hamburg
To Bucharest
(Romania)
and the Black Sea
To Ostava
(Bulgaria)
and Ukraine
to Warsaw
(Poland)
and Belarus
To Madrid
Lisbon
Algeciras
Bremerhaven
North-Western Europe, TEN-T corridors and complements
0 100
Km
Cork
Le Havre
Lille
Metz
Dijon
Bordeaux
Lyon
Dover
Liverpool/
Manchester
Birmingham
Felixstowe
Southampton
Strasbourg
Basel
Gênes
Mannheim
Stuttgart
Francfurt
Köln
Dusseldorf
Hanover
Antwerp
RotterdamZeebrugge
Gent
Liège
OsnabrückUtrecht
Calais
Belfast
Glasgow
Edinburg
MarseilleVitoria
Bilbao
London
Dublin
Paris
Brussels
Amsterdam Berlin
Praha
Wien
Luxembourg
Bern
Hamburg
To Bucharest
(Romania)
and the Black Sea
To Ostava
(Bulgaria)
and Ukraine
to Warsaw
(Poland)
and Belarus
To Madrid
Lisbon
Algeciras
Bremerhaven
Immingham
Corridors RTE-T concernant
l’Europe du Nord-Ouest
Port ayant un trafic total annuel
supérieur à 50 millions de tonnes
Reste de l’Europe
Ville connectée à un corridor
Capitale
Tronçon de corridor orienté Ouest-Est
Tronçon de corridor orienté Nord-Sud
Itinéraires alternatifs
Tronçon alternatif orienté Ouest-Est
Tronçon alternatif orienté Nord-Sud
Itinéraire «Nord»
Itinéraires «Sud»
Barreau complémentaire
TEN-T corridors connecting
Port with a total traffic up to
50 million annual tonnes
Rest of Europe
City connected to a corridor
Capital connected to a corridor
East-West direction corridor section
North-South direction corridor section
Alternative routes
East-West direction alternative
corridor section
North-South direction alternative
corridor section
“Northern” route
“Southern” route
Complementary route
Corridors defined by
the European Commission
19Forward-Looking Atlas - North-Western Europe freight transport: bottlenecks, missing links, underused infrastructures and alternative routes - AURH - April, 2015

Sections description
Name of the section Modes
Total
length
(in km)
Length per mode
(in km)
Modal split
(in %)
Remarkable hubs Connected TEN-T
corridors
Comments
RO RA IWW MA RO RA IWW MA MP IWP RT AI
Shannon/Limerick – Dublin Road, Rail 421 225 196 0 0 53.4 46.6 0 0 2 0 0 2 North Sea - Mediterranean Section linking Shannon/Limerick to Dublin
Dublin – Liverpool Maritime 219 0 0 0 219 0 0 0 100 2 0 1 1 North Sea - Mediterranean
Transborder section already registered in the
corridor North Sea - Mediterranean
Liverpool - Immingham Road, Rail 640 333 306 0 0 52.1 47.9 0 0 5 0 7 4 North Sea - Mediterranean
Section linking key hubs in the centre of the United
Kingdom
Immingham - Rotterdam Maritime 350 0 0 0 350 0 0 0 100 3 0 2 1
North Sea - Mediterranean;
Rhine River - Alps;
North Sea - Baltic
Transborder itinerary bypassing the Pas-de-Calais
strait and Greater London
Glasgow - Edinburgh Road, Rail 270 98 172 0 0 36.4 63.6 0 0 2 0 1 2 North Sea - Mediterranean
Section already registered in the corridor
North Sea - Mediterranean
Edinburgh - Rotterdam Maritime 712 0 0 0 712 0 0 0 100 2 0 1 2
Rhine River - Alps;
North Sea - Baltic
Transborder itinerary connecting Scotland directly
to the continent
Number of sections 6
Road Rail Inland waterways Maritime Total
Length (in km) 657 675 0 1,281 2,613
Modal split (in %) 25.2 25.8 0 49 100
Concerned countries Ireland, the United Kingdom, the Netherlands
Connected urban areas Shannon, Limerick, Dublin, Liverpool, Manchester, Leeds, Sheffield, Immingham, Grimsby, Glasgow, Edinburgh, Rotterdam
“Northern” alternative route3.2
RO : road
RA : rail
IWW : Inland Waterway
MA : maritime
MP : maritime port
IWP : inland waterway port
RT : railway terminal
AI : airport

Alternative routes, ports, railway terminals, airports
Other infrastructure
network
Road network
Railway network
Inland waterway
network
Maritime link
®AURH - 2015/04
"
o
#
)
Railway terminal
(rail - road)
Port (maritime or inland)
Airport
Interconnection point
between corridors
" o#
Other railway
terminal
Other port
(maritime or inland)
Other airport
Shannon/Limerick - Rotterdam
Glasgow - Rotterdam
Focus on selected infrastructures: the “Northern” route

Total
length
(in km)
Length per mode
(in km)
Modal split
(in %)
corridors
Comments
Shannon/Limerick - Le Havre Maritime 1,151 0 0 0 1,151 0 0 0 100 2 0 1 1
Atlantic
Transborder section connecting Ireland directly to the
continent
Le Havre - Rouen
Road, Rail,
IW
315 85 126 104 0 27 39.8 33.2 0 3 1 1 0 Atlantic
Tri-modal section, recently registered in theAtlantic
Corridor
Rouen - Paris
Road, Rail,
IW
640 150 277 213 0 23.4 43.3 33.3 0 1 4 1 2
Atlantic;
Tri-modal section, recently registered in theAtlantic
Corridor
Rouen - Amiens Road, Rail 254 141 113 0 0 55.5 44.5 0 0 1 0 0 0 Atlantic Greater Paris bypass
Amiens - Reims Road, Rail 407 163 244 0 0 40.1 59.9 0 0 0 1 0 0 Atlantic
Greater Paris bypass with a possibility of interconnection
with the corridor North Sea - Mediterranean around
Compiègne
Paris - Reims Road, Rail 287 142 145 0 0 49.5 50.5 0 0 0 4 4 2
Atlantic;
Section already registered in theAtlantic corridor
Reims - Metz Road, Rail 393 183 210 0 0 46.6 53.4 0 0 0 4 0 0
Atlantic;
Metz - Mannheim Road, Rail 405 200 205 0 0 49.4 50.6 0 0 0 7 2 0
Atlantic;
Rhine River - Alps;
Transborder section already registered in theAtlantic
Corridor, which allows interconnection with two main cor-
ridors: North Sea - Mediterranean and Rhine River -Alps
Metz - Strasbourg Road, Rail 243 115 128 0 0 47.4 52.6 0 0 0 5 0 1
Atlantic;NorthSea-
Mediterranean;RhineRiver-Alps
Strasbourg - Stuttgart Rail 181 0 181 0 0 0 100 0 0 0 4 2 3
Atlantic;
NorthSea-Mediterranean;
RhineRiver-Alps;
RhineRiver-Danube
Transborder section partially registered in the corridors
Rhine River -Alps, North Sea - Mediterranean and Rhine
River - Danube, allowing 4 corridors to interconnect and
the continuation of theAtlantic Corridor towards the East
Stuttgart - Nuremberg Road, Rail 412 207 204 0 0 50.4 49.6 0 0 0 3 1 2
RhineRiver-Alps;
RhineRiver-Danube;
Scandinavia-Mediterranean
Section continuing theAtlantic Corridor towards the East,
allowing interconnection with Eastern Europe corridors
Length (in km) 1,443 1,807 318 1,151 4,719
Modal split (in %) 30.6 38.3 6.7 24.4
Concerned countries Ireland, France, Germany
Connected urban areas Shannon, Limerick, Le Havre, Rouen, Amiens, Paris, Reims, Metz, Strasbourg, Mannheim, Stuttgart, Nuremberg
“Southern” alternative route3.3

Le Havre - Nuremberg
Shannon/Limerick - Le Havre
Focus on selected infrastructures: the “Southern” route
network
Road network
Railway network
Inland waterway
network
Maritime link
®AURH - 2015/04
"
o
#
)
Railway terminal
(rail - road)
Airport
between corridors
" o#
Other railway
terminal
Other port
Other airport
Itiné
Élém

Section description
Total
length
(in km)
Length per mode
(in km)
Modal split
(in %)
corridors
Comments
Shannon/Limerick - Cork Road, Rail 226 94 132 0 0 41.7 58.3 0 0 2 0 0 2 North Sea - Mediterranean
Direct section connection between two regional
economic hubs
Edinburgh - Leeds Road, Rail 788 362 426 0 0 45.9 54.1 0 0 4 0 3 3 North Sea - Mediterranean
Secondary itinerary to congested itinerary
London - Manchester - Glasgow
Sheffield - Birmingham Road, Rail 288 122 166 0 0 42.3 57.7 0 0 0 0 2 3 North Sea - Mediterranean
London - Manchester - Glasgow; Connection
between two key industrial regions with heavy flows
Sheffield - London Road, Rail 624 378 246 0 0 60.5 39.5 0 0 0 0 1 3 North Sea - Mediterranean
London - Manchester - Glasgow
Felixstowe - London Road, Rail 253 112 141 0 0 44.2 55.8 0 0 4 0 0 1 North Sea - Mediterranean
Section connection between London and the
largest port in Great Britain
Dover - London Road, Rail 215 58 157 0 0 26.8 73.2 0 0 3 0 0 2 North Sea - Mediterranean
Southern itinerary bypassing Greater London,
connecting the West Coast Main Line
Portsmouth - Le Havre Route, Rail 176 0 0 0 176 0 0 0 100 2 0 1 0 North Sea - Mediterranean
Transborder section connecting the United
Kingdom to the continent;
an alternative to the Channel Tunnel
Length (in km) 1,003 1,269 0 176 2,448
Modal split (in %) 41 51.8 0 7.2
Concerned countries Ireland, the United Kingdom, France
Connected urban areas Shannon, Limerick, Cork, Edinburgh, Leeds, Sheffield, Birmingham, London, Felixstowe, Portsmouth, Southampton, Le Havre
Complementary sections: the United Kingdom and Ireland3.4

Focus on selected infrastructures: complementary sections (United Kingdom and Ireland)
network
Road network
Railway network
Inland waterway
network
Maritime link
®AURH - 2015/04
"
o
#
)
Railway terminal
(rail - road)
Airport
between corridors
" o#
Other railway
terminal
Other port
Other airport
Itiné
Élém
Edinburgh - London - Felixstowe Portsmouth - Le Havre / Cork - Limerick

Total
length
(in km)
Length per mode
(in km)
Modal split
(in %)
Remarkable hubs
Connected TEN-T corridors Comments
Paris - Dijon Road, Rail 592 287 305 0 0 48.4 51.6 0 0 0 3 2 1
Atlantic;
Missing section from a historical radial road allowing
the Seine River basin to be connected to the Rhone
River basin
Lille - Metz Rail 391 0 391 0 0 0 100 0 0 0 3 2 1
Rhine River - Alps
Rail itinerary only between two industrial regions, an
alternative to the Brussels - Luxembourg
Luxembourg - Koblenz Road, Rail 347 186 161 0 0 53.6 46.4 0 0 0 3 1 1
Rhine River - Alps
Transborder section completing the Rhine River -Alps
corridor, allowing a trimodal itinerary to be created
(Moselle is already registered in the TEN-T corridor);
Interconnection with theAtlantic Corridor is possible;
An alternative itinerary to the congested
Strasbourg - Mannheim route
Strasbourg - Mannheim Road, Rail 241 109 132 0 0 45.1 54.9 0 0 0 5 2 2
Atlantic;
Rhine River - Alps;
Atransborder itinerary which is a complement to the
trimodal infrastructures already registered in
the Rhine River-Alps corridor
Length (in km) 581 1,112 0 0
Modal split (in %) 34.3 65.7
Concerned countries France, Luxembourg, Germany
Connected urban areas Lille, Metz, Paris, Dijon, Luxembourg, Koblenz, Strasbourg, Mannheim
Complementary sections: Germany, Belgium, France, Luxembourg
and the Netherlands
3.5

Focus on selected infrastructures: complementary sections
(Germany, Belgium, France, Luxembourg and the Netherlands)
network
Road network
Railway network
Inland waterway
network
Maritime link
®AURH - 2015/04
"
o
#
)
Railway terminal
(rail - road)
Airport
between corridors
" o#
Other railway
terminal
Other port
Other airport
Paris - Dijon and Lille - Metz Luxembourg - Koblenz and Strasbourg - Mannheim

Towards a redistribution of flows in North-WestERN Europe?
Work carried out by AURH in the partnership-based and collaborative Weastflows project, has
highlighted quite a few challenges for freight transport in North-Western Europe: bottlenecks
and congestion, modal changes and better connecting peripheral regions to hubs.
The European Commission defined nine priority transport corridors, four of which pass through
North-Western Europe. They bring a response that had been lacking, though it remains
insufficient to tackle these challenges. Indeed, these corridors cannot:
• propose alternative routes in order to bypass congested areas, in particular in
the “Blue Banana”;
• use the potential that peripheral regions such as Ireland, Scotland, the Seine River Valley
and the Atlantic facade have to offer;
• consider the maritime mode as an alternative transport mode, especially for short
distances;
• optimise, for the western part of Europe, interconnections between corridors because of
the many missing connections (for example, between Paris and Dijon).
With the forecast of an 80% increase in freight traffic in Europe by 2050, congestion of
the European backbone is a crucial issue. This congestion can only increase the isolation
in peripheral regions and lead to a type of deadlock, where the European hinterlands from
Antwerp and Rotterdam cannot be served in a sustainable manner.
Three types of actions could improve this tense situation:
• the use of collaborative technological tools;
• the search of adapted routes proposing the best offer at the best price;
• a solution at the source with other unsaturated or forecast gateways: Le Havre
(Seine Gateway®), Shannon/Limerick, and Liverpool/Manchester.
As a response to this issue, this Forward-Looking Atlas has identified two East/West
uncongested alternative routes that are interconnected with TEN-T corridors and favour
the rail, inland waterway and maritime modes. Complementary sections, including the
roadway mode when justified, complete this approach, to make up a coherent and
rebalanced network in the heart of North-Western Europe.
The Liverpool/Manchester axis in the North-West is an alternative to Greater London hub
congestion. The port of Le Havre, more in the South, is the first port in the Channel coming
from the West, as well as an alternative to Northern Range ports. It is interconnected with the
United Kingdom, Ireland and the continental part of North-Western Europe. The continuation
of the Atlantic Corridor from Shannon/Limerick to Nuremberg has the goal of proposing a
better interconnection with the East of Europe, whilst bypassing many of the most congested
areas.
The solutions proposed here ask the question of the redistribution of flows as well as the
regional rebalancing between major hubs and peripheral areas. They invite us to rethink
and redefine priorities of the European transport policy by:
• establishing a limit to the massification reached by Antwerp and Rotterdam on a large
part of the Rhine River-Alps corridor;
• adding value to these peripheral regions to offer a new territorial development logic;
• including the maritime mode as an alternative mode and as a continuation of the terrestrial
modes;
• exploring innovative solutions to mitigate the lack of infrastructures in the network, such
as continuity of track clearance, and the electrification level through intensifications and
raising the level of services.
More indirectly, and generally speaking, the Weastflows project raises the question of data in
Europe. We have noted that information in Europe is often lacking (lacunary, sub-standard or
inexact information). Data, however, is a strategic resource. In Weastflows, data has allowed
us to have a shared and collaborative vision of stakes involved in freight transport and how
this is changing. Europe would win hands down, for all of its projects and developments, by
drafting, as soon as possible, a “data bank” to serve the (great) European project.

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
AURH would like to give special thanks to the CODAH, HAROPA and the Caisse des Dépôts
et Consignations for their financial support of this project.
Heartfelt thanks also to Emmanuel Preterre and to CRITT Transport et Logistique who invited
us to take part in this project. We would also like to thank Europe as well as the Interreg IV B
North-Western Europe programme project managers.
Special thanks to the entire CRITT team for its assistance in this project, to the OpenStreetMap
contributors, as well as the OpenStreetMap France Association.
Our work would not have been possible with out the Weastflows project partners and observers.
We are especially grateful to the Normand members of this adventure: LSN, IDIT, CTS as
well as the Luxembourger partner, LIST (Luxembourg Institute of Science and Technology),
with whom we had this beautiful baby, who will never stop growning: GeoWeastflows, the
interactive mapping platform.
Lastly we would also like to thank: the Le Havre University, Paris Geo (CNRS), Neoma
(Rouen Business School), the SNCF network, SNCF Logistics, Voies Navigables de France
(VNF), Ports Normands Associés (PNA), Ports de Paris, CPMH, GPMR, the Upper and Lower
Normandy Regions, CG 76, Le Havre Développement, Nov@log, the Normandy CCI, the
Seine Estuary CCI, the Rouen CCI, the Eure CCI, Paris Seine Normandie®, Delta 3, SOGET,
AIVP, CREA, EPFN, SANEF, SAPN, the DREAM, the Seine River Valley Town Planning
Agencies (APUR, IAU, AUDAS, AURBSE, AUCAME), as well as the Saint-Nazaire and
Strasbourg town planning agencies for the interest in our undertaking, their fruitful exchanges
and many contributions.
Last but not least, we would like to thank all of our colleagues from AURH who supported this
project and who became truly European citizens during these last four years.

MAP INDEX
• Maritime port traffic.........................................................................................................p.8
• Infrastructure density.......................................................................................................p.8
• Main freight exchanges (in tonnes)............................................................................p.9
• Freight exchanges per transport mode (in tonnes-kilometre)........................... p.9
• TEN-T corridors in North-Western Europe...........................................................p.10
• North-Western Europe ...............................................................................................p.13
• The Seine River Valley and Northern France......................................................p.14
• Benelux.............................................................................................................................p.15
• Rhine River Valley.........................................................................................................p.16
• North-Western Europe, TEN-T corridors and complements........................... p.19
• Focus on selected infrastructures: the “Northern” route.................................... p.21
• Focus on selected infrastructures: the “Southern” route................................... p.23
• Focus on selected infrastructures: complementary sections
(United Kingdom and Ireland)....................................................................................p.25
• Focus on selected infrastructures: complementary sections
(Germany, Belgium, France, Luxembourg and the Netherlands).................. p.27

ALREADY PUBLISHED
Weastflows project - Action 1 - Deliverable 2 - September 2014
ANALYTICAL ATLAS
Freight transport
regional dynamics,
infrastructure and
inter-regional exchanges
ANALYTICAL ATLAS
Freight transport
regional dynamics,
infrastructure and
inter-regional exchanges
ATLAS
Major North-West European
freight infrastructures
ATLAS
Major North-West European
freight infrastructures
Weastflows project - Action 1 - Deliverable 1 - June 2013
GeoWeastflows platform
November, 2013 - The interactive cartography
tool developed by the Luxembourg Institute
of Science Technology (LIST) and AURH,
accessible free of charge by simple registration.
http://geo.weastflows.eu
Stage N°2 report
July, 2014 - The second intermediary
progress report on AURH’s actions in
the Weastflows project.
Stage N°1 report
June, 2013 - First intermediary
progress report on AURH’s actions
in the Weastflows project.
The Atlas of North-Western Europe freight transport infrastructures
June, 2013 - 47 maps bringing together context maps, maps by
transport mode and regional maps.
The Analytical Atlas of North-Western Europe freight transport
September, 2014 - Nearly 30 maps which examine regional dynamics
and the infrastructure network and inter-regional exchanges of freight
in North-Western Europe.

AURH -Town Planning Agency
of the Le Havre and Seine Estuary Area
76063 Le Havre cedex FRANCE
Tel : + 33 (0)235 421788
aurh@aurh.fr
www.aurh.fr - www.aurhinweastflows.com
Document created with the support of the European INTERREG IV B programme
in the framework of the European Weastflows project.
This forward-looking report is AURH’s last contribution to Action 1
“Assessment of sustainable transport capacity.”
www.weastflows.eu
Copyright deposit: April, 2015
ISBN : 979-10-93006-09-3
Not for sale
With the kind financial support of:
Publisher:AURH-E1471-Printed:April2015–Printer:LaPetitePresse,LeHavre

forward-looking atlas

Recommended

Recommended

More Related Content

What's hot

What's hot (20)

Similar to forward-looking atlas

Similar to forward-looking atlas (20)

More from AURH - Agence d'urbanisme Le Havre - Estuaire de la Seine

More from AURH - Agence d'urbanisme Le Havre - Estuaire de la Seine (20)

Recently uploaded

Recently uploaded (20)

forward-looking atlas