HRJ 2035
The information presented here concerns the Horizontal Timetable (HRJ) for the 2034/2035 timetable, in the version updated after consultations and valid as of 29 June 2026.
A detailed description of the assumptions of the Horizontal Timetable and basic information on each service line can be found in the summary report (in Polish). The document also presents the assumptions of the HRJ project, the working methodology, a summary of the four consultation paths, a description of changes compared with the previous version, the assumptions adopted for commercial services, and the concept of AeroExpress services.
Key Information
The HRJ long-distance service network for the 2034/2035 timetable includes both public service obligation services and planned commercial services operating under the open access model. It covers domestic services as well as international services.
The purpose of this approach is to propose a division of the market and allocation of capacity between the public service segment and the commercial segment in such a way that they do not compete with each other inefficiently, but instead complement one another. At the current stage of HRJ work, long-distance night services have not been included.
The annual operational volume planned in HRJ for long-distance public service obligation services and commercial services, in the maximum assumed scope, amounts to approximately 183 million train-kilometres per year. According to the forecast prepared using the Passenger Transport Model, the total number of long-distance rail journeys will reach approximately 140 million passengers per year. One journey means a passenger’s complete trip, regardless of the number of transfers.
HRJ also takes into account regional and metropolitan services, for which responsibility lies primarily with public transport authorities at regional level. For the “Y” high-speed line from Warsaw via Łódź to Wrocław and Poznań, capacity has also been reserved for regional express services using this line. In addition, AeroExpress services (airport express trains), are assumed to operate on the Warsaw – new national airport – Łódź section. In addition to serving the new airport, their function will be to provide daily connectivity between Warsaw and Łódź. Detailed information on this subject is available in the “Regional Services” section.
Types of Long-Distance Service Lines
HRJ distinguishes three types of service lines:
- Express lines (Ex): these primarily provide services between major metropolitan areas and international services. They may be operated using either high-speed rolling stock or conventional rolling stock. They are characterised by a limited number of stops and the most attractive travel times on key routes. In the current version of HRJ, separate markings for lines operated with high-speed rolling stock have been discontinued. In the previous version, these lines began with the KDP designation. From the perspective of their transport function, they are express lines. The express category includes both commercial services and services planned under public service obligation.
- Fast lines (P): these form the backbone of domestic long-distance rail services. They are characterised by a denser stopping pattern than express lines, similar to the IC and TLK train categories currently in operation.
- Supplementary fast lines (U): their main function is to include smaller towns located outside the main transport corridors in the long-distance service network. A stopping pattern similar to fast lines has been assumed for these lines, together with operation using lower-capacity rolling stock.
System and Non-System Lines
HRJ assumes that the service network should be based on system service lines. These are lines where all train services follow the same precisely defined route, have the same passenger stopping pattern and operate at a regular interval of no less than every 4 hours. This means at least 4 pairs of trains on the core section of the route.
Exceptions to this rule are allowed, for example on the initial or final sections of a route. This may apply when, due to an early or late operating time, a given service is shortened to a station located on the core route of the line. At the beginning or end of a route, it is also possible to split one system service line into two system branches serving different destinations.
Basing the timetable on system lines increases the possibilities for coordinating services and connections. It also makes timetable solutions repeatable throughout the day, improving the readability of the entire service network.
System services are supplemented by non-system lines. These may include, in particular, services operated by 1–2 pairs of trains per day, or year-round or seasonal extensions of individual services from system lines. Non-system lines respond to specific transport needs that do not justify the operation of a full system service.
Due to the high frequency of system lines, which cover most main passenger travel directions, and the limited capacity of the railway network, non-system services represent a minority of the planned service pattern.
Diagram of Year-Round Daytime Long-Distance Services
The diagram of year-round daytime long-distance services for the 2034/2035 timetable includes:
- international and domestic PSO services,
- capacity (slots) reserved for open access services,
- capacity (slots) reserved for regional express services on the “Y” high-speed line, including AeroExpress services.
You can view the diagram above in full resolution here.
Diagrams of Services to Tourist Destinations
In addition to year-round long-distance services, it is assumed that during the tourist season the most important destinations will be strengthened by additional extensions of selected year-round services. Due to the high level of year-round services and capacity constraints on the railway network, no need has been identified to launch separate seasonal services.
The diagrams of services to tourist destinations show services to the most important mountain and seaside resorts, as well as the Great Masurian Lakes. They include both year-round trains and additional services operating only during the tourist season.
You can view the diagram above in full resolution here.
You can view the diagram above in full resolution here.
Regional and Metropolitan Services
Based on consultations held with regional and metropolitan public transport authorities as part of the HRJ project, service assumptions for regional and metropolitan rail services were developed. They were prepared for the 2030–2040 period for the 16 regions, the Warsaw metropolitan area and the Upper Silesian and Zagłębie Metropolis.
This is the first study in Poland to present the assumptions for the development of regional and metropolitan services in a coherent way for the entire country.
Work on the service assumptions was carried out in cooperation with public transport authorities. The process can be divided into four stages.
Stage 1. Collection of materials from public transport authorities
The first stage consisted of collecting input material on the planned development of services from regional and metropolitan public transport authorities. Due to the complexity of the subject and the need for additional analyses on the part of public transport authorities, work on the material lasted from August 2024 to January 2025. In one case, the material was submitted only in September 2025.
Stage 2. Preparation of the proposed service network
The second stage consisted of the preparation, by experts from the HRJ Team, of a comprehensive proposal for the regional and metropolitan service network based on the materials received.
The material covered, among other things:
- routes of service lines, including proposals for regional express services;
- frequency of service lines — a 2-hour cycle was adopted as the basic service standard for regional lines;
- stopping patterns;
- proposals for coordination between regional and metropolitan service lines, as well as with long-distance services;
- proposals for timetable and fare integration between regional and long-distance services, including the line sections proposed for such integration.
The material was prepared on the basis of proposals submitted by public transport authorities, analyses performed using the Passenger Transport Model, the expert experience of the HRJ Team and information from the infrastructure manager on ongoing and planned investments.
Stage 3. Workshops with public transport authorities
The third stage consisted of workshops with the participation of the HRJ Team and representatives of public transport authorities. During the meetings, the prepared material was discussed and verified. Public transport authorities submitted proposals and comments on the presented service solutions. A total of 16 workshops were held, each lasting from one to two days depending on the complexity of rail traffic in the region.
Since the planned level of service covers the 2030–2040 period, it was indicated that at this stage it is difficult to clearly assess what financial resources may be available for regional rail PSO services. For this reason, it was assumed that train paths, or “slots”, would be developed for regional services and could be used depending on the capabilities of the public transport authority and the operator — primarily financial, rolling-stock-related and technical.
This approach is intended to enable optimal capacity allocation on individual sections of the railway network, taking into account the needs of different traffic segments.
Stage 4. Coordination of interregional services
The fourth stage consisted of meetings with regional governments concerning services crossing regional borders. These meetings took place in March 2026. They were necessary because, in some cases, assumptions for service development on both sides of regional borders were inconsistent.
A total of 31 meetings were held with neighbouring regions.
Results of the work
The process made it possible, as part of the HRJ project, to develop uniform assumptions for regional and metropolitan services for the 2030–2040 period.
These assumptions are presented in tabular form in the “Report on HRJ Consultations with Regional and Metropolitan Public Transport Authorities” (in Polish), as well as on service diagrams — separately for each region and on a national diagram.
You can view the full-resolution nationwide map here, whilst individual maps showing regional transport services for each province can be found in the downloadable ZIP archive.
Further use of the assumptions
The developed assumptions will form the basis for further work under the HRJ project, in particular the coordination of timetables for long-distance, regional and metropolitan services on detailed train graphs prepared in the Railway Microsimulation Model.
The expected result of this coordination is a coherent rail service network in Poland, covering regional, metropolitan and long-distance services. It will be based on planned slots and systematic connections at interchange stations, including regional hubs.
The service assumptions may also be used by PKP Polskie Linie Kolejowe S.A. when planning investments on the railway network and when preparing investments under the Port Polska programme.
Further working contacts with public transport authorities are assumed in order to keep the service assumptions up to date and adapt them to changing needs.
Narrow-Gauge Lines
The service diagrams also indicate sections of narrow-gauge lines for which the HRJ Team has initially identified potential for daily passenger services. Indicating these sections does not determine the public transport authority responsible for them or the target level of service.
In the future, these lines could serve as feeder services to the regional rail PSO network under the responsibility of the regions.
Principles for Passenger Stops
As part of HRJ work, the stopping policy for individual categories of service lines is an important issue. The aim is to develop guidelines in this area that remain stable over time, are consistent across Poland and treat residents of different regions fairly.
The proposed principles for determining scheduled passenger stops are consistent with the stopping policy included in the draft of “Plan zrównoważonego rozwoju publicznego transportu zbiorowego w międzywojewódzkich i międzynarodowych przewozach pasażerskich oraz wojewódzkich przewozach pasażerskich w transporcie kolejowym” (transport plan of ministry responsible of transport for long distance services) for 2031–2034. This policy was developed in cooperation between experts from the Ministry of Infrastructure, Centralny Port Komunikacyjny and CUPT, with the aim of ensuring the long-term predictability of the adopted solutions.
The basic locations of scheduled passenger stops depend on the function of a given town or city in Poland’s settlement system and on its size. Spatial accessibility of services and the possibility of creating interchange connections are also important. The general principles are independent of train category — express, fast or supplementary fast — but they are applied differently for each category.
The adopted stops have been included in the service line diagram and in the GIS map.
Stops of Fast and Supplementary Fast Trains
Stops of fast trains (P) and supplementary fast trains (U) were designated:
- in regional (voivodeship level) capitals,
- in county seats or other towns serving a given county, for example Terespol Pomorski serving Świecie County,
- in towns with a population of more than approximately 10,000 on main corridors,
- in towns or localities with a population of more than approximately 5,000 on the initial or final sections of service lines,
- in important tourist centres generating significant passenger flows,
- at interchange stations, if the stop makes it possible to provide interchange connections,
- at locations that improve accessibility in large metropolitan areas and make it possible to shorten the total door-to-door travel time for a significant group of passengers, for example Warszawa Służewiec,
- at stations serving neighbouring localities with a significant combined population potential or serving a large area without access to the interregional service network,
- at selected stations improving access to services only at the earliest or latest times of the day, where access by regional train and transfer to an interregional train is difficult,
- at locations agreed under ticket acceptance agreements with regional public transport authorities responsible for passenger rail services.
Stops of Express Trains
Express trains (Ex) should complement the basic fast service network. Therefore, it is assumed that trains in this category may skip selected stops on sections where the basic frequency of fast train services is provided.
Stops of express trains (Ex) were designated:
- in regional (voivodeship level) capitals,
- in urban centres defined as rank I–IV centres, in accordance with the classification adopted by IRMiR,
- at stations selected according to the principles for fast trains — only on the initial or final sections of a given service line, in order to increase passenger flows and service accessibility without negatively affecting travel time on the central section of the service line,
- in tourist centres generating significant passenger flows,
- at interchange stations, if the stop makes it possible to provide an interchange connection to a city that meets the criterion for an express service but does not have such a service,
- at stations improving accessibility in large metropolitan areas, where this is beneficial from the perspective of reducing door-to-door travel time for a significant group of passengers, for example Lublin Zachodni,
- at stations selected according to the principles for fast trains, if the basic service frequency has not been provided on a given section,
- at selected stations improving access to services only at the earliest or latest times of the day, where access and transfer from a regional train to an interregional train is difficult.
Additional Conditions
When planning the locations of scheduled passenger stops, the following conditions, not directly resulting from the country’s settlement system or from service accessibility, were also taken into account:
- Stops depend on the availability of railway infrastructure and on the investment plans of infrastructure managers. The assumptions current at the time of HRJ preparation were adopted. Some stops may depend on the routing of a service line via a given railway line in a given time horizon.
- Alternating stops serving different locations on the same section, sometimes referred to as “bead-like stops”, should be avoided. This is due to the limited time savings for modern rolling stock, the reduction in direct connections and the reduced readability of services for passengers.
- If a town or city is served by two stations, for example Warka and Warka Miasto, one of them may be selected depending, among other things, on the possibility of maintaining interchange connections, available passenger infrastructure, the potential to create an interchange hub, and transport plans and land-use plans for adjacent areas. On the final sections of a service line, both stations may be served.
- Scheduled passenger stops are also designated at those border stations where customs and passport checks are required or where a technical stop is necessary.
Permitted Exceptions to the General Principles
The following exceptions to the general principles were allowed:
- Scheduled passenger stops not meeting the general principles were included in the stopping pattern where they perform an important transport function for residents of the area and are characterised by high passenger exchange.
- It is permitted to move a scheduled passenger stop to another location that customarily serves a given town or city, for example serving Garwolin through stops in Pilawa or serving Pyskowice through stops in Gliwice.
- Some stops may be omitted in order to avoid extending journey times where distances between consecutive stops are short.
- In metropolitan areas, stops of fast trains were limited at stations meeting the criteria if an excessive number of stops would extend travel time, and if the reduced number of stops is compensated by existing metropolitan or regional services, as shown in the table below:
| Area name | Area boundaries, including stops | Stops within the area |
| warszawska | Grodzisk Mazowiecki1), Legionowo, Mińsk Mazowiecki, Otwock, Piaseczno, Sochaczew, Wołomin | Warszawa Centralna, Warszawa Gdańska2), Warszawa Główna2), Warszawa Młynów2), Warszawa Służewiec, Warszawa Wschodnia, Warszawa Zachodnia, |
| wrocławska | Oława, Strzelin, Jaworzyna Śląska, Legnica, Brzeg Dolny, Oborniki Śląskie, Oleśnica Rataje/Oleśnica3) | Wrocław Główny, Wrocław Mikołajów1), Wrocław Nadodrze, |
| krakowska | Trzebinia, Miechów, Bochnia, Kalwaria Zebrzydowska Lanckorona, Gdów4) | Kraków Główny, Kraków Piastów1), Kraków Płaszów |
| łódzka | Pabianice, Zgierz, Koluszki, Tomaszów Mazowiecki, Piotrków Trybunalski | Łódź Chojny5), Łódź Fabryczna, Łódź Kaliska, Łódź Widzew, Łódź Żabieniec |
| poznańska | Szamotuły, Oborniki Wielkopolskie, Gniezno, Września, Środa Wielkopolska, Kościan6), Opalenica. | Poznań Główny, Swarzędz |
| górnośląska | Tarnowskie Góry, Dąbrowa Górnicza lub Dąbrowa Górnicza Ząbkowice, Sławków, Mysłowice, Tychy, Mikołów, Gliwice | Bytom, Chorzów Miasto, Katowice, Sosnowiec Główny, Sosnowiec Południowy7), Zabrze |
| trójmiejska | Tczew, Wejherowo, Kartuzy | Gdańsk Główny, Gdańsk Oliwa, Gdańsk Port Lotniczy, Gdańsk Wrzeszcz, Gdynia Główna, Rumia, Sopot, Żukowo |
Notes:
1) subject to the adaptation of passenger infrastructure
2) in the event of insufficient capacity on the Warszawa Zachodnia – Warszawa Centralna – Warszawa Wschodnia section
3) after the revitalisation and electrification of railway line 181 on the Kępno – Oleśnica section, construction of the Wieruszów – Chorzew – Bełchatów line, revitalisation and electrification of railway line 24 Piotrków Trybunalski – Bełchatów – Zarzecze, and construction of the new Zarzecze – Bogumiłów section
4) after completion of the project involving the construction of the new Podłęże – Szczyrzyc – Tymbark / Mszana Dolna railway line and modernisation of the existing line 104 Chabówka – Nowy Sącz
5) in the event of insufficient capacity on the Łódź Fabryczna – Łódź Kaliska / Łódź Żabieniec section
6) after adaptation of platform infrastructure, the stop will be changed to Mosina
7) until the Dąbrowa Górnicza Huta Katowice – Dąbrowa Górnicza Gołonóg section is restored
Local Fare and Timetable Integration
During consultations with regional and metropolitan public transport authorities, sections of the railway network were identified where only a limited number of long-distance services are planned, for example 2 or 4 pairs of trains per day, while regional services are limited or irregular. As a result, the overall level of service on some corridors may become fragmented, and some train services could overlap. Another issue is the diversity of fare systems, especially for season ticket holders, which may limit access to available services.
During the HRJ consultations with public transport authorities, discussions were held on mechanisms for fare and timetable integration between trains provided under the responsibility of different public transport authorities. Such mechanisms could improve the level of service without launching additional train services. At the same time, representatives of many regions pointed to the issue of low fares on long-distance trains, which creates intra-modal competition with the regional segment.
All regional public transport authorities recommend implementing fare and timetable integration between regional and long-distance services. This would make it possible to improve the planned level of service without launching additional connections. The scope of integration should be adjusted each time to the specific needs of a given area. In general, long-distance service lines could also systematically perform a regional function, for example by introducing additional passenger stops at the request of a regional public transport authority. Cooperation between public transport authorities could also increase the efficiency of services by improving passenger load factors and facilitate timetable development on sections with limited capacity, such as single-track lines.
At the formal level, it would be reasonable to prepare tender procedures for the operation of service lines with provisions requiring operators to implement fare and timetable integration on selected sections. Implementing this recommendation requires cooperation between the national and regional public transport authorities, for example through appropriate agreements. As part of CPK’s support for the Ministry of Infrastructure and CEUPT in the process of preparing services for the 2031–2034 period, work is under way on the possible implementation of local fare and timetable integration.
The list of sections recommended for local fare and timetable integration as a result of the consultations is included in the Report on HRJ Consultations with Regional and Metropolitan Public Transport Authorities and shown on the diagram below:
Review of County Accessibility
The information presented here concerns the HRJ version valid as of 29 June 2026. The analysis was prepared on the basis of partial products developed as part of the project: the principles for scheduled passenger stops and the proposed service lines.
For the services prepared under HRJ for the 2034/2035 timetable, together with the corresponding network of scheduled passenger stops, the accessibility of the long-distance rail system from the county level was analysed. Stations served by express services, including express services (Ex), as well as fast services (P) and supplementary fast services (U), were adopted as access points. These are PSO services for which the minister responsible for transport is the public transport authority.
County seats were adopted as the reference points, as they are assumed to be the most important urban centres within their respective counties.
For the purposes of the analysis, counties were classified according to whether access to the system is possible:
- in the county seat itself, meaning direct access,
- within the county, but outside the county seat,
- by regional rail,
- by feeder bus services.
The analysis shows that, according to the solutions currently assumed for the 2035 horizon:
- 283 counties have direct access to the long-distance rail system in their county seat,
- 27 counties have access to the long-distance rail system from another locality within the county,
- 53 counties have access to the system from their county seat by regional rail,
- 45 counties have access to the system from their county seat by road transport.
Among the 45 county centres with access to the system only by road transport are Piekary Śląskie and Siemianowice Śląskie, which are part of the Upper Silesian and Zagłębie Metropolis, a compact urban area. Therefore, the remaining 43 county centres constitute the minimum set of locations for which the potential need for feeder bus services has been initially identified. Such services would ensure their integration into the national long-distance service network.
Efforts are being made so that the system could already function during the period covered by the “Public Transport Sustainable Development Plan for Interregional and International Passenger Services and Regional Passenger Rail Services” for 2031–2034.
The county-level accessibility analysis is presented in the tables below:
Table 1. List of counties which, according to the adopted assumptions, have direct access to the long-distance rail system from the county seat
| Voivodeship | Counties, excluding cities with county rights | Cities with county rights |
| dolnośląskie | bolesławiecki, dzierżoniowski, głogowski, karkonoski, kłodzki, legnicki, lubański, lubiński, oleśnicki, oławski, strzeliński, średzki, świdnicki, wałbrzyski, wołowski, wrocławski, ząbkowicki, zgorzelecki | Jelenia Góra, Legnica, Wałbrzych, Wrocław |
| kujawsko-pomorskie | aleksandrowski, brodnicki, bydgoski, grudziądzki, inowrocławski, mogileński, nakielski, rypiński, toruński, wąbrzeski, włocławski | Bydgoszcz, Grudziądz, Toruń, Włocławek |
| lubelskie | bialski, biłgorajski, chełmski, hrubieszowski, krasnostawski, kraśnicki, lubartowski, lubelski, łukowski, parczewski, puławski, świdnicki, zamojski | Biała Podlaska, Chełm, Lublin, Zamość |
| lubuskie | gorzowski, międzyrzecki, nowosolski, świebodziński, wschowski, zielonogórski, żagański, żarski | Gorzów Wielkopolski, Zielona Góra |
| łódzkie | bełchatowski, brzeziński, kutnowski, łaski, łęczycki, łowicki, łódzki wschodni, opoczyński, pabianicki, piotrkowski, poddębicki, radomszczański, sieradzki, skierniewicki, tomaszowski, wieluński, wieruszowski, zduńskowolski, zgierski | Łódź, Piotrków Trybunalski, Skierniewice |
| małopolskie | bocheński, brzeski, chrzanowski, gorlicki, krakowski, limanowski, miechowski, nowosądecki, nowotarski, olkuski, oświęcimski, suski, tarnowski, tatrzański | Kraków, Nowy Sącz, Tarnów |
| mazowieckie | ciechanowski, gostyniński, grodziski, legionowski, miński, mławski, nowodworski, ostrołęcki, otwocki, piaseczyński, płocki, płoński, przysuski, radomski, siedlecki, sierpecki, sochaczewski, wołomiński, wyszkowski, żyrardowski | Ostrołęka, Płock, Radom, Siedlce, m.st. Warszawa |
| opolskie | brzeski, kędzierzyńsko-kozielski, kluczborski, namysłowski, nyski, oleski, opolski, prudnicki, strzelecki | Opole |
| podkarpackie | bieszczadzki, dębicki, jarosławski, jasielski, kolbuszowski, krośnieński, leżajski, łańcucki, mielecki, niżański, przemyski, przeworski, ropczycko-sędziszowski, rzeszowski, sanocki, stalowowolski, strzyżowski, tarnobrzeski | |
| podlaskie | augustowski, białostocki, bielski, grajewski, hajnowski, łomżyński, moniecki, sokólski, suwalski | Białystok, Łomża, Suwałki |
| pomorskie | chojnicki, człuchowski, kartuski, kościerski, kwidzyński, lęborski, malborski, słupski, starogardzki, sztumski, tczewski, wejherowski | Gdańsk, Gdynia, Słupsk, Sopot |
| śląskie | bielski, cieszyński, częstochowski, gliwicki, kłobucki, lubliniecki, mikołowski, myszkowski, pszczyński, raciborski, rybnicki, tarnogórski, wodzisławski, zawierciański, żywiecki | Bielsko-Biała, Bytom, Chorzów, Częstochowa, Dąbrowa Górnicza, Gliwice, Jaworzno, Katowice, Mysłowice, Rybnik, Sosnowiec, Tychy, Zabrze, Żory |
| świętokrzyskie | jędrzejowski, kielecki, ostrowiecki, sandomierski, skarżyski, starachowicki, staszowski, włoszczowski | Kielce |
| warmińsko-mazurskie | działdowski, elbląski, ełcki, giżycki, iławski, kętrzyński, nidzicki, olecki, olsztyński, ostródzki, piski, szczycieński | Elbląg, Olsztyn |
| wielkopolskie | chodzieski, gnieźnieński, jarociński, kaliski, kępiński, kolski, koniński, kościański, krotoszyński, leszczyński, międzychodzki, nowotomyski, obornicki, ostrowski, ostrzeszowski, pilski, pleszewski, poznański, rawicki, słupecki, szamotulski, wrzesiński, złotowski | Kalisz, Konin, Leszno, Poznań |
| zachodniopomorskie | białogardzki, choszczeński, drawski, goleniowski, gryfiński, kołobrzeski, koszaliński, łobeski, sławieński, stargardzki, szczecinecki, świdwiński, wałecki | Koszalin, Szczecin, Świnoujście |
Table 2. List of counties which, according to the adopted assumptions, have access to the system from their county seat by regional rail
| Voivodeship | Counties, excluding cities with county rights | Cities with county rights |
| dolnośląskie | górowski, jaworski, kamiennogórski, lwówecki, milicki, trzebnicki, złotoryjski | – |
| kujawsko-pomorskie | lipnowski, tucholski, żniński | – |
| lubelskie | janowski, łęczyński, rycki, włodawski | – |
| lubuskie | krośnieński, słubicki, sulęciński | – |
| łódzkie | – | – |
| małopolskie | wadowicki, wielicki, dąbrowski | – |
| mazowieckie | kozienicki, ostrowski, pruszkowski, sokołowski, szydłowiecki, warszawski zachodni | – |
| opolskie | głubczycki | – |
| podkarpackie | lubaczowski | – |
| podlaskie | – | – |
| pomorskie | bytowski, gdański, nowodworski, pucki, | – |
| śląskie | będziński, bieruńsko-lędziński, | Jastrzębie-Zdrój, Ruda Śląska, Świętochłowice |
| świętokrzyskie | buski, konecki, | – |
| warmińsko-mazurskie | bartoszycki, braniewski, mrągowski | – |
| wielkopolskie | czarnkowsko-trzcianecki, gostyński, grodziski, średzki, śremski, wągrowiecki, wolsztyński | – |
| zachodniopomorskie | gryficki, kamieński, policki | – |
Table 3. List of counties which, according to the adopted assumptions, have access to the system from their county seat by road transport
| Voivodeship | Counties |
| dolnośląskie | polkowicki |
| kujawsko-pomorskie | chełmiński, golubsko-dobrzyński, radziejowski, sępoleński, świecki |
| lubelskie | opolski, radzyński, tomaszowski |
| lubuskie | strzelecko-drezdenecki |
| łódzkie | rawski, pajęczański |
| małopolskie | myślenicki, proszowicki |
| mazowieckie | białobrzeski, garwoliński, grójecki, lipski, łosicki, makowski, przasnyski, pułtuski, węgrowski, zwoleński, żuromiński |
| opolskie | krapkowicki |
| podkarpackie | brzozowski, leski |
| podlaskie | kolneński, sejneński, siemiatycki, wysokomazowiecki, zambrowski |
| pomorskie | – |
| śląskie | Piekary Śląskie*, Siemianowice Śląskie* |
| świętokrzyskie | kazimierski, opatowski, pińczowski |
| warmińsko-mazurskie | gołdapski, lidzbarski, nowomiejski, węgorzewski |
| wielkopolskie | turecki |
| zachodniopomorskie | myśliborski, pyrzycki |
* No recommendation for the implementation of feeder bus services due to the public transport services provided within the ZTM GZM system.