sub-corridor assessment route 7 – kosovo segment … · collapse on the inland transport...

SUB-CORRIDOR ASSESSMENT ROUTE 7 – KOSOVO* SEGMENT

1 | P a g e

Sub-corridor assessment Orient/East-Med Corridor (Kosovo)*

Key findings

• The task of this report is to discuss climate impacts on the Route 7 corridor between Merdare

and Prishtina, Kosovo1. For this purpose a modified CLIMACOR II methodology is used, which

includes a survey followed by a validation workshop held in Prishtina.

• Main findings of this process show that the sub-segment from Vranidoll (Врани До) village to

Lluzhan (Лужане) village is the area where major risks are foreseen to happen. This includes

area from where Llapi River crosses the road on Lluzhan (Лужане) village and gets closest to the

road in Lupç i Poshtëm (Доње Љупче) village. The latter is also prone to flash floods. The same

area is also prone to erosion from both river Llap from west and hills from the eastern side of

the road.

• Mitigation measures to prevent such issues from appearing are proposed in this study.

1. Transport infrastructure

The Core Road Network of southeast Europe consists of three Corridors (containing 8 corridor –

branches) and seven Routes (containing 9 route – branches). The estimated total length of the network

is 5,975 km (3,019 km of Corridors and 2,956 km of Routes). Within Kosovo*, there are no main

Corridors, however there are some 250 km of Routes 6 and 7, which are important at regional level†.

Figure 1: Map of Major road network of Kosovo*, and insert

of Kosovo* segment of Route 7 (Sources: Kosovo* Ministry of

infrastructure, Google Earth)

* This designation is without prejudice to positions on status, and is in line with UNSCR 1244 and the ICJ Opinion on the Kosovo Declaration of

Independence. † http://www.seetoint.org/wp-content/uploads/downloads/2014/01/Kosovo_Multimodal-Transport-Strategy-2012-2021.pdf

1

Главник

Majaнце Бело Поље

Шаjковч

Подујево

Дуз


2 | P a g e

Figure 2: Flash Flood Hazard Level Distribution Map for Kosovo* ‡

The map showing road network of Kosovo* and insert with the segment under consideration in this

report are presented in Figure 1. Route 6 connects Ribarevina (Montenegro) to Skopje (FYROM) through

Zubin Potok, Mitrovica (Косовска Митровица), Prishtina, Ferizaj (Урошевац) and Hani i Elezit (Елез Хан)

(Kosovo*). At Ribarevina Route 6 connects to Route 4 connecting the port of Bar (Montenegro) to

Belgrade (Serbia) and Vatin (Romanian border).

Route 7, part of which is the segment from Prishtina to Merdare, connects Lezhe (Albania) to Dolcevac

(Serbia) through Vermica (Врбница), Prizren, Prishtina and Podujevë (Подујево) (Kosovo*). Dolcevac is

located on Corridor X.

Road M2, going from the Northern Kosovo*, through Pristina, to the Southern bundary with Republic of

Macedonia. This road corresponds to Route 6 of SEETO Core Road Network.

Road M25, coming from Nis (Serbia) to the North-Eastern boundary with Serbia, through Pristina and

Prizren, to the Southern boundary with Albania. This road corresponds to Route 7 of the SEETO Core

Road Network.

Road M9, from Eastern boundary with Serbia, through Pristina, to Pejë (Пећ), and to the Western

boundary with Montenegro. Part of this road is also part of rout 7 till Arllat (Орлате), after deviation of

highway rout form original plan. The section towards the boundary of Montenegro is currently being

upgraded, It is completed till Kijevë (Кижево) from Prishtina side and started widening from Pejë (Пећ)

in direction of Prishtina, and this will improve the link to Montenegro.

Additional main roads are M9.1, M22.3, M25.2 and M25.3 (see Figure 1.) that constitute branches of

these main links.

‡ VRAM Flash Flood Risk Assessment – Figure 4, www.gaia-

geosystems.org/PROJECTS/VRAM/UNK/REPORTS/VRAM_UNK_short_report_Eng_final.pdf


3 | P a g e

The core network is well organized, with Pristina in its centre and connects well all regions of the

economy to the capital city of Prishtina. The part of Rout 7 that passes through Kosovo* is completed

from Albanian boundary till north of Prishtina. The uncompleted part of this route in Kosovo* is the

segment under consideration in this study, a 26.5 km long, magistrale road with two lanes. The

topography of the terrain is mostly flat, with part form connection of highway north of Prishtina to

Lluzhan (Лужане) village consisting of forested hills

from the eastern side of the road and river Llap from

the western part. The river crosses the road on Lluzhan

(Лужане) village and gets closest to the road in Lupç i

Poshtëm (Доње Љупче) village. The later is also prone

to flash floods as shown in maps with read part showing

the high risk from floods. The topography of the rest of

route, from Lluzhan (Лужане) to Merdare, is more or

less flat, high in humus (organic matter) land, which if

not properly designed and constricted drainage system

can be prone to flash floods as well. The part from

Prishtina to Lluzhan (Лужане) village is especially

vulnerable to both landslides from hills and erosion

from river or flash floods (se Figure 2).

Figure 3: Congestion based on Average Annual Daily Traffic

(AADT), scenario without network development 3

The quality of the existing road is average, but the congestion of the road is of major concern. According

to Action and Investment Plan for Kosovo* Road, carried out by BCEOM - COWI Consortia in 2009§, that

measured the congestion based on Average Annual Daily Traffic (AADT), the segment from Prishtina to

Podujevë (Подујево) (see Figure 2. is already congested and needs to be widened. The estimated cost

for this construction of four-lane road is estimated to be Euro 150 million for the whole segment under

consideration. First 3 km of this road, starting from Podujevë (Подујево) in direction to Prishtina, are

already under construction. In addition, during the Workshop held in Prishtina (October 7th 2016), we

learned that Ministry of Infrastructure of Kosovo* has done a feasibility study to build an additional

highway that runs parallel to this road, but which will be constructed in a green field. We do not have

the feasibility study to conclude on need for such an additional road at this time, but based on the 2009

feasibility study and AADT analyses done for different scenarios, with an assumed traffic growth rate of

4% per annum, there might be no need for such a dramatic increase in road capacity of this segment.

§ BCEOM - COWI, 2009, Action Plan for the Kosovo Roads Sector. Ministry of Transport and Communication of Kosovo*


4 | P a g e

2. Climate Concerns

i) Current threats, consequences, likelihood, risks.

During the survey carried out with Kosovo* respondents (see Appendix I), the following 10 threats were

considered as major threats:

T2. Erosion and slide of embankments due to heavy showers

T1. Bridge scour due to heavy showers

T8. Failure of flood defence systems of rivers and

lakes due to long periods of rain in catchment area

T10. Ground subsidence, slide, or collapse on the

inland transport infrastructure due to long periods

of rain in catchment

T5. Fluvial flooding due to heavy showers (overland

flow after precipitation, groundwater level

increase)

T6. Loss of driving ability due to reduced visibility

and vehicle control due to heavy showers

T9. Erosion or slides of infrastructure and

embankment due to long periods of rain in

catchment

T11. Pluvial flooding due to long periods of rain in catchment (overland flow after precipitation,

groundwater level increase)

T14. Erosion of embankments and foundations due to increased variability in warm/cool days

T18. Cracking, embrittlement due to thermal expansion; migration of liquid asphalt, asphalt rutting due

to heatwaves

T38. Reduced ability to perform general maintenance due to snowfall/blizzards (snow and ice removal)

Table 1: The key to score on threat route availability/usability, and human & route safety hazard

THREAT TO ROUTE

AVAILABILITY/USABILITY HUMAN & ROUTE SAFETY HAZARD

Score Severity Score Severity

1

Negligible impact on the availability

(Up to a few hours)

1 A negligible impact on user safety (light material damage), injuries that

won’t result in hospital visit

2

A minimal negative impact on the

availability (up to a day)

2 An influence that reaches the boundaries of acceptable user safety, with

as a consequence a number of extra accidents with temporary loss of

health or injuries without absence (material damage, slight injuries)

3

A serious impact on the availability

(several days, up to a month)

3 An influence to such extent that the boundaries of user safety are

exceeded, with as a consequence a serious increase of the number of

accidents with permanent loss of health (serious material damage,

heavy injuries)

4

A catastrophic impact on the

availability (more than a month of

unavailable transport to significant

numbers of people)

4 A catastrophic influence on user safety, with as a consequence extra

deadly danger during normal use (serious material damage, heavy

injuries, casualties)


5 | P a g e

Graph 2: Threat Severity – the average

score of threat to route

availability/usability, and human &

route safety hazard

Graph 2 shows that respondents gave equal importance to impact on Availability/Usability (score 3, see

explanation in Table 1) of road for threats for T2 (Erosion and slide of embankments due to heavy

showers), T5 (Fluvial flooding due to heavy showers), T8 (Failure of flood defence systems of rivers and

lakes due to long periods of rain in catchment area), T10 (Ground subsidence, slide, or collapse on the

inland transport infrastructure due to long periods of rain in catchment), T5 (Fluvial flooding due to long

periods of rain in catchment), T14 (Erosion of embankments and foundations due to increased variability

in warm/cool days), and T38 (Reduced ability to perform general maintenance due to snowfall/

blizzards). While for impact on human and route safety the highest score is given to Threat T5 (Fluvial

flooding due to heavy showers) (score 3.7 out of 4), followed by T10 (Ground subsidence, slide, or

collapse on the inland transport infrastructure due to long periods of rain in catchment) (score 3.3), and

T38 (Reduced ability to perform general maintenance due to snowfall/blizzards) (score 3).

4 3 2 1 0 1 2 3 4

3.0

3.7

3.3

2.7

2.3

2.2

2.0

2.7

2.0

2.7

1.7

3.0

3.0

3.0

3.0

3.0

3.0

3.0

2.7

2.5

2.3

2.3


6 | P a g e

Table 2: Threat Likelihood key.

4 Often (more than once every 3 years)

3 Sometimes (once every 3 to 10 years)

2 Seldom (once every 10 to 50 years)

1 Very seldom (once every 50 years)

Graph 3: Threat likelihood under current conditions vs. under foreseen climate change conditions.

As can be seen in graph 3, the highest likelihood of threats happening under current condition is given

to Threats T5 (Fluvial flooding due to heavy showers) and T10 (Ground subsidence, slide, or collapse on

the inland transport infrastructure due to long periods of rain in catchment) with equal average score of

3.3 (see explanation in table 2), while most of other top 10 threats have an average score of 3. The

highest likelihood of threats happening under foreseen climate change conditions is given to threat T18

(Cracking, embrittlement due to thermal expansion; migration of liquid asphalt, asphalt rutting due to

heatwaves) with average score 3.7 out of 4, threat T1 (Bridge scour due to heavy showers) (score 3.5),

threats T5 (Fluvial flooding due to heavy showers), threat T9 (Erosion or slides of infrastructure and

embankment due to long periods of rain in catchment) and T38 (Reduced ability to perform general

maintenance due to snowfall/blizzards) (score 3.3).

Risk by Threat Under Current and Foreseen Scenarios

The previously concluded assessments of consequences and probabilities are combined in order to rate

each threat’s risk. This is achieved by multiplying the severity of impact with likelihood of such impact

happening for each 10 identified most significant threat, and is shown in Graph 4. It is seen in Graph 4

that under current conditions the highest risk factor is seen for the threats T5 (Fluvial flooding due to

heavy showers), T10 (Ground subsidence, slide, or collapse on the inland transport infrastructure due to

long periods of rain in catchment), T38 (Reduced ability to perform general maintenance due to

4

3

2

1

0

1

2

3

4

3.0 3.0 3.3 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.3 3.0 3.0 2.3

3.7 3.5 3.3 3.3 3.3 3.0 3.0 3.0 2.7 2.3 2.0


7 | P a g e

snowfall/blizzards).and T (Pluvial flooding due to long periods of rain in catchment), while under

foreseen Climate Change conditions is for T5 (Fluvial flooding due to heavy showers), T38 (Reduced

ability to perform general maintenance due to snowfall/blizzards), T10 (Ground subsidence, slide, or

collapse on the inland transport infrastructure due to long periods of rain in catchment), and T9 (Erosion

or slides of infrastructure and embankment due to long periods of rain in catchment). The main changes

from current conditions to foreseen Climate Change conditions are seen for T38 (Reduced ability to

perform general maintenance due to snowfall/blizzards) (from score 9 to score 10), T9 (Erosion or slides

of infrastructure and embankment due to long periods of rain in catchment) (from 8 to 8.9) T1 (Bridge

scour due to heavy showers ) (from score 7 to score 8.2). The threat T5 (Fluvial flooding due to heavy

showers) remains the biggest threat under both conditions, but does not change. We also note that

some of the threats are foreseen to decrease under conditions of Climate Change [T38 (Reduced ability

to perform general maintenance due to snowfall/blizzards), T14 (Erosion of embankments and

foundations due to increased variability in warm/cool days), and T8 (Failure of flood defence systems of

rivers and lakes due to long periods of rain in catchment area)].

Graph 4. Risk Under current conditions and under foreseen Climate Change conditions.

The average respondent prioritizes road ‘Availability’ over

‘Road Safety’ in Kosovo* as follows 6.7:3.3. The perception

of respondents indicates that the region where the road

passes is not perceived to have major safety threats, as the

terrain is more or less flat with few obstacles in the sub-

segment from Vranidoll (Врани До) to Lluzhan (Лужане).

Graph 5: Route Availability vs Safety


8 | P a g e

ii) Future risks.

Representatives of the Ministry of Infrastructure,

Department for Road Management; the University of

Prishtina; the Ministry for Environment and Spatial

Planning, the Regional Cooperation Council, the Regional

Environmental Center for Central and Eastern Europe

(REC), the South East European Transport Observatory,

the Kosovo* Environmental Protection Agency, GAP

Institute; and various consultants came together to

discuss climate impacts on the Route 7 corridor between

Merdare and Pristina, Kosovo* (see Appendix I).

Figure 4 shows the map of the sub-segment from

Vranidoll (Врани До) village to Lluzhan (Лужане) village,

where major risks are foreseen to happen. This includes

area from where Llapi River crosses the road on Lluzhan

(Лужане) village and gets closest to the road in Lupç i

Poshtëm (Доње Љупче) village. The later is also prone

to flash floods as shown in map in Figure 2, with read

part showing the high risk from floods. The same area is

also at risk from landslides from hills on the eastern side

of the road at this sub-segment. The entire area from

Vranidoll (Врани До) village to Lluzhan (Лужане) village

is especially vulnerable to both landslides from hills and

erosion from river or flash floods.

The topography of the rest of route, from Lluzhan

(Лужане) to Merdare, is more or less flat, high in humus

(organic matter) land, which if not properly designed

and constructed drainage system can be prone to flash

floods as well.

Figure 4: Vulnerable part of the road segment under

study (source: Google Earth)

(Врани До) (Лужане)

Лужане

Majaнце

Доње Љупче

Тенеш До


9 | P a g e

Major findings of the group are presented in the table below.

Threat Graphic representation (threat) Place of threat

T5. Fluvial flooding due

to heavy showers

(overland flow after

precipitation,

groundwater level

increase)

Lupç i Poshtëm (Доње Љупче)

This is the place where road

comes closest to the Llap River

and floods have happened in

the past.

T9. Erosion or slides of

infrastructure and

embankment due to

long periods of rain in

catchment

Segment from Vranidoll (Врани

До) to Lupç i Poshtëm (Доње

Љупче).

T10. Ground

subsidence, slide, or

collapse on the inland

transport infrastructure

due to long periods of

rain in catchment

Segment from Vranidoll (Врани

До) to Lupç i Poshtëm (Доње

Љупче).

T18. Cracking,

embrittlement due to

thermal expansion;

migration of liquid

asphalt, asphalt rutting

due to heatwaves

(roads)

The whole route.

T38. Reduced ability to

perform general

maintenance due to

snowfall/blizzards

(snow and ice removal)

(roads and railways)

The whole Segment.


10 | P a g e

3. Recommendations

The group determined that infrastructure between Vranidoll (Врани До) village and Lupci I Poshtëm

village will be at greatest risk from embankment and infrastructure collapse and mudslides caused by

flash flooding, while those around Lupci and Lluzhan (Лужане) and Podujeva will be at risk from

prolonged periods of heavy rain. The experts also flagged their concern about road damage caused by

prolonged periods of drought during winter. Among the adaptation measures agreed were clay

embankments and artificial flood barriers, afforestation, storm water drainage, and the enforcement of

access restrictions for heavy-goods vehicles.

Threat Place of threat and measures to be taken

T5. Fluvial flooding due to heavy

showers (overland flow after

precipitation, groundwater level

increase)

Lupç i Poshtëm (Доње Љупче)

Protection of River banks, better drainage of road, increasing the height of

the road bed. Protection from erosion of bridge struts that are submerged in

water and which ought to be reinforced with gabions of 0.5 to 1 m in the

river bed 20 m before the pole and 20 m after in the direction of river flow.

T9. Erosion or slides of

infrastructure and embankment

due to long periods of rain in

catchment

Segment from Vranidoll (Врани До) to Lupç i Poshtëm (Доње Љупче).

Strengthening sloped embankments (constructing protective structures

made of reinforced concrete, protective concrete walls, gabions, pilot

foundations), afforestation, geo-synthetic embankments

T10. Ground subsidence, slide, or

collapse on the inland transport

infrastructure due to long periods

of rain in catchment

Segment from Vranidoll (Врани До) to Lupç i Poshtëm (Доње Љупче).

a) reinforcing the road bed with thick layers of gravel and sand; b) putting a

reinforced layer on the deformed road with geo-synthetic materials; and c)

raising the road level in order to improve drainage of run-off

T18. Cracking, embrittlement due

to thermal expansion; migration

of liquid asphalt, asphalt rutting

due to heatwaves (roads)

Entire route.

Introduction of heavy load truck axes weight measurement, better road bed

construction, adding a lasting layer of high temperature resistant asphalt

T38. Reduced ability to perform

general maintenance due to

snowfall/blizzards (snow and ice

removal) (roads and railways)

The whole Segment.

Automatic road surface salting system when snow and ice occur,

implementing early warning system and constructing snow barriers

(dedicated barriers for preventing of snow-drifting)

Tx. Loss of driving ability due to

reduced visibility due to fog

during the late autumn and

winter seasons

Better signalization – not required only to cope with the fog threat. Apart

from the standard road signalization, it is proposed to use Variable Message

Signs (VMS) and dynamic signalizations, particularly upfront the critical

sections of the Macedonian segment to inform road users of any irregularity

or interested situations on the motorway. Special attention when utilizing

VMS needs to be paid to their harmonization at regional or European level,

as they need to be understood by all motorway users of different

nationalities.


11 | P a g e

A recommendation was also made for a guidebook on innovative technological solutions for decision

makers. To this end, during the road construction the following issues can be expected to appear and

the following solutions are advised to solve them:

1. Reinforcement of slopes to protect from landslides can be done by constructing protective

structures made of reinforcement concrete, protective concrete walls, gabions, pilot

foundations, slope reinforcement with geo-synthetic materials, etc. examples of above

mentioned techniques are shown schematically in the figure below.

2. Protection of bridge poles that are submerged in water from erosion. They should be reinforced

with gabions of 0.5 to 1 m in the river bad 20 m before the pole and 20 m after the pole of a

river bridge in the direction of river flow.


12 | P a g e

3. In cases when we have to deal with issues of unstable lands where road bad passes through, be

it from ground water or unstable surfaces, then the protection can be done in three ways: a) to

reinforce the road bad with thick layers of gravel and sand; b) to put a reinforced layer on the

deformable road with geo-synthetic materials; and c) to raze the road level in order to improve

the water drainage.


13 | P a g e

Appendix I

A1: List of Respondents

Name last Name Institution

1 Halil Berisha TITAN Group SHARRCEM Kosovo*

2 Qani Kadiri University of Prishtina, Civil Engineering Faculty

3 Jeton Mehmeti GAP Institute

4 Gani Berisha MESP – Water Department

5 Nexhmedin Merovci EIA Consultant - Eximmer

6 Agron Bektashi REC –Kosovo*

A2: List of Participants in Validation Workshop in Prishtina

Name last Name Institution

1 Gjynejt Mustafa Ministry of Infrastructure

2 Jeton Mehmeti GAP Institute

3 Mendim Rugova MESP, Deputy Minister

4 Refik Ramaj MESP, Chief of Minister’s Cabinet

5 Gani Berisha MESP – Water Department

6 Sabit Restelica MESP-KEPA

7 Nexhmedin Merovci EIA Consultant - Eximmer

8 Abdullah Pirçe MESP – Environmental Department

9 Agron Bektashi REC –Kosovo*

10 Firdeze Bekteshi REC-Kosovo*

11 Naim Arifaj REC-Kosovo*

12 Mate Gjorgjievski SEETO

13 Radovan Nikčević RCC

14 Natalia Ciobanu REC

15 Jerome Simpson REC

16 Bedri Drini Drini Consulting

17 Daut Ibrahimi Translator

18 Sead Derguti Translator

19 Skender Drejta Audiosolution

sub-corridor assessment route 7 – kosovo segment … · collapse on the inland transport...

Documents