D4 Planning Simulation

8/10/2019 D4 Planning Simulation

1/21

Project no.: 518368

Project acronym: MAX

Project title: Successful Travel Awareness Campaigns and Mobilit Management Strategies

!ntegrated "ro#ect

6$% Sustainable &evelopment

1$6$% Sustainable Surface Transport 'b#ective

3$1$1$1$3 Advancing (nowledge on innovative measures in urban transport

Title of Report:

)" & !ntegrating Mobilit Management and

*and +se "lanning

User guide for planning simulation workshops:

solutions for integrating Mobility Management

into local planning (!"

Period co#ered: ate of preparation: ,ul %--.

$tart date of project: 1 'ct$ %--6 uration: 36 mont/s

%ersion: 1$0Prepared by: !*S

&hecked by: Snergo +ni Mb

%erified by: 2+

$tatus: 4inal

issemination le#el: "ublic

"ro#ect cofunded b t/e 2uropean Commission wit/in t/e Sit/ 4ramewor7 "rogramme %--%%--89


2/21

Table of Contents

1 Introduction.....................................................................................................................................................3

2 What is a planning simulation workshop?....................................................................................................5

2.1 General description..................................................................................................................................5

2.2 Example: MAX planning simulation workshop in Lu!lana..................................................................."

3 Workshop procedure.......................................................................................................................................9

#.1 $nitiator and moderation...........................................................................................................................%

#.2 &reparation phase.....................................................................................................................................%

3.2.1 Scope of the planning simulation workshop.....................................................................................9

3.2.2 Selection of a local case study........................................................................................................10

3.2.3 Selection of suitable policies, planning instruments and MM measures........................................11

3.2. !articipants in"itation......................................................................................................................12

3.2.# $riefing of participants...................................................................................................................13

3.2.% !ossible inputs for discussion.........................................................................................................1

#.# 'orkshop per(ormance phase ) agenda and discussion.........................................................................15

#.* +esults o( a planning simulation workshop............................................................................................1"

3..1 &hat results can be e'pected(........................................................................................................1%

3..2 )ocumentation and presentation of results.....................................................................................1*

4 References.............................................................................................................................................. ........1

5 !urther information and contact details.....................................................................................................19

page 2 + 21


3/21

1 Introduction

'hy use a planning simulation workshop in local planning

f you are planning a new or rede"eloped area and want to use the planning process in new and inno"ati"e ways,

a planning simulation workshop could be for you. t-s an ideal way to e'periment with no"el ideas such as lower

parking standards and location of parking spaces, higher energy and insulation standards, integrating Mobility

Management MM/ in planning processes, different patterns of green space, special design specifications for

higher densities, or sustainable transport access to the new de"elopment. he workshop brings together the

professionals in"ol"ed in planning architects, planners, urban designers, landscape architects, de"elopers,

en"ironmental and transport planners and more to look at the de"elopment from new angles and to discuss new

ideas in a structured yet informal way. he planning simulation workshop

s a great starting point for inno"ation in planning

$rings together e"eryone who-s in"ol"ed in the planning process

dentifies ways that the planning system might need to change and

Stimulates new thinking about the planning of real sites.

,igure 1: -panish planning simulation workshop in Geta(e participants discuss new transport solutions (or a

planned residential district /0 Mattsson E3

page 3 + 21


4/21

'hat does this guide offer

he purpose of this document is to gi"e guidance on how to organise and hold a planning simulation workshop1

and to use it as an opportunity to raise awareness about MM and+or discuss possibilities of integrating MM intolocal land use planning and building permission processes.

he user guide includes a short description of the most important steps in the procedure, a prototype programme,

the participants that should be in"ited, their role during the workshop, and the kind of results that can be

e'pected.

'ho can use this guide

arget groups for this guide are mainly de4elopers andor owners o( sites in the planning processand local

administrations /representati4es o( ur!an transport andor en4ironmental departments3, but also politicians,public and other transport pro"iders, consultants, or other stakeholders in"ol"ed or interested in the planning

process 4 architects, research institutes and associations such as residential, transport, en"ironmental, or disabled

people-s groups.

Similar kinds of workshops !lanspiele/ were used in 5ermany to discuss planned changes in laws and

regulations with participants from the different le"els of go"ernment affected. 6or e'ample, a planning

simulation workshop composed of se"eral meetings was used to discuss and 7simulate- the planned procedures

and implementation process for new en"ironmental impact assessment regulations. !rofessionals from different

planning departments in national, regional + county administrations were in"ited and the workshop was used to

check the feasibility of and get some feedback from future users on the regulation. his was a "ery useful forum

in which to discuss possible ad8ustments to the law prior to its coming into force $unel 2001/.

1his user guide is based upon the e'perience gained as a result of fi"e planning simulation workshops that were

organised and conducted by &! ) partners within the M:; pro8ect. he complete report is a"ailable "ia

http++www.ma'4success.eu+downloads+M:;page + 21
http://www.max-success.eu/downloads/MAX_WPD_PlanningSimulationWorkshops_Results.pdfhttp://www.max-success.eu/downloads/MAX_WPD_PlanningSimulationWorkshops_Results.pdf


5/21

2 What is a planning simulation workshop?

2.1 General description

:planning simulation workshopas outlined in this user guide consists of a one)da6 round ta!le discussion

between local stakeholders about sustainable transport planning and Mobility Management MM/ for a selected

de"elopment area or building site or, more generally, for a city-s planning procedure.

>'perience gained from the research acti"ities of the >? pro8ect M:; and its &! ) show that a planning

simulation workshop is agood methodfor initiating the discussion about integrating MM into the planning and

building permission processes, to raise awareness of the possibilities of planning in fa"our of MM and

sustainable transport and to in"ol"e local stakeholders in such a discussion.

: planning simulation workshop pro"ides aplat(orm to exchange opinionsin an open and non4formal meeting

and discuss new solutions, processes and opportunities, such as the integration of MM into the city-s building

permission process. >"ery participant represents a different party in"ol"ed or affected by the selected planningdecisions or planned de"elopment. @e+she has a specific professional/ background and can pro"ide a particular

perspecti"e by 7playing- his+her own role within the discussion of the planning processes.

7ew solutionsandsuggestionsare discussed together, such as additions to or changes in planning

laws+instruments, or the introduction of MM as a "oluntary option or as an obligation on the de"eloper when

building permission is granted. >ach participant can add his+her professional and personal opinion about the

feasibility of this, how planning processes would need to change, and about the perception and acceptance of the

matter discussed.2

he workshop can gi"e 4alua!le insightsinto the participants- "iews and opinions of the suggestions discussed

and about the acceptance of and percei"ed barriers to the integration and implementation of MM with the

planning process. Ane important aspect is the informal nature of the workshop, which allows the introduction of

new concepts and discussing these in a free e'change of opinions. he informal workshop does not, for e'ample,

put great pressure on the local administration to defend e'isting plans nor does it ha"e to result in a "ery

concrete outcome, in contrast to something like, for e'ample, an official public hearing.

o pro"ide a better appreciation of the potential scope and content of such a planning simulation workshop, a

short summary of one of &! )-s fi"e workshops in Slo"enia 4 is pro"ided in the ne't chapter. 6or more

information about the other &! ) planning simulation workshops in Bithuania, 5ermany, Spain, !oland and

Slo"enia go towww.ma'4success.eu.

2hese kinds of discussion are described in the literature as scientific+ob8ecti"e kind of a role play situation. he

main focus is laid on the goal4oriented and planned action decision making/ of the participants. he aim is to

get more information about decision4making processes within the simulated/ planning system and their impacts.

t thus can be tested what could be achie"ed, if different courses of action were taken. he focus is not on

identifying one single best alternati"e but to show barriers and limits as well as backgrounds of actions. :t thesame time, the planning simulation workshops aim at clarifying participants- relationship to the planned pro8ect

and their freedom of action as well as discussing duties, responsibilities and options for decision making withinpage # + 21
http://var/www/apps/conversion/tmp/scratch_6/www.max-success.euhttp://var/www/apps/conversion/tmp/scratch_6/www.max-success.euhttp://var/www/apps/conversion/tmp/scratch_6/www.max-success.euhttp://var/www/apps/conversion/tmp/scratch_6/www.max-success.eu


6/21

2.2 Eample! "#$ planning simulation workshop in %&ubl&ana

Slo"enia B8ubl8ana

=oCna dolina green area de"elopment for a new uni"ersity campusre4location of two faculties/

)atehe planning simulation workshop took place on 11thof Dune 200E in B8ubl8ana.

nitiator?ni"ersity of Maribor as part of &! ) research within the M:; pro8ect/

Moderation?rban !lanning nstitute of the =epublic of Slo"enia ?=S/

!articipants=epresentati"es from

4 city departments ?rban !lanning, ransport !lanning :nd !ublic ransport/

4 ?rban !lanning nstitute landscape architect, urban F transport planner4 e'perts + scientists ?ni"ersity of Maribor urban F transport planning/

4 de"eloper and user ?ni"ersity of B8ubl8ana in"estment management, faculties, technical ad"iser,

students/

4 construction company, and

4 Ministry of >n"ironment and !hysical !lanning Spatial !lanning )irectorate/.

Sitehe Slo"enian case study for the workshop is the new uni"ersity comple' which is about to be built Guite

close to the city centre of B8ubl8ana distance H3 km/ in the area of =oCna dolina.

he new green area de"elopment site will contain new buildings for the e'isting 6aculties of Ihemistry and

Ihemical echnology, and Iomputer and nformation Science 6II F 6I/. he two faculties will ha"e

0 000 mJ floor space. :bout 330 employees work at the two faculties and 3 #00 students are matriculated

similar numbers are e'pected at the new campus location. n future an additional new 6aculty of Mechanical

>ngineering and a new technology park are planned in the area as well.

,igure 2: 8ni4ersit6 o( Lu!lana new de4elopment site /0 *M architects3

page % + 21


7/21

ransport related problemshe calculation of generated traffic shows a minimum of # 000 car trips a day for

the two faculties the whole comple' will be further de"eloped and is e'pected to generate much more traffic in

future.

Anly a "ery limited number of parking spaces H3#0/ are planned within the uni"ersity de"elopment. !arking

permits will be issued only to staff and not to students, despite the increasing numbers of student car4users.

:dditional parking spaces are planned to be built in parking garages at the edge of the uni"ersity campus, but

these will not be built simultaneously with the de"elopment and participants of the workshop doubted that they

will e"er be built at all. herefore a high spill o"er of search traffic into the surrounding neighbourhood is

e'pected.

he e'isting public transport ser"ice is not of a high freGuency or Guality and the stops are too far away to offer

Guality accessibility H#0 m/. n addition, the closure of one e'isting bus route is currently under discussion.

Ko footpaths are planned to connect the new buildings to the e'isting stops and on4site infrastructure for walking

and cycling is poor as well.

:genda he main scope of this workshop was to look for possibilities to integrate MM with planning processes

and mitigate the predicted transport problems at the site. he following aspects were discussed

4 legal framework of and plans for the uni"ersity de"elopment

4 introduction of MM, best practice e'amples from :ustrian and $ritish uni"ersity tra"el plans

4 problems regarding the de"elopment, e'pected transport problems and discussion of the reasons for these

4 suggested solutions parking policy, ! impro"ements, cycling and walking, mobility plan for faculties

4 discussion of the transferability of the abo"e measures and how MM could be integrated into the planning

or building permission process in Slo"enia more generally.

Main findingsMost of the MM measures discussed are considered to be interesting and useful, but are only

seen as rele"ant if combined with hard measures. : general lack of awareness of the possibilities offered by soft

measures to sol"e transport problems e'ists, probably due to lack of awareness + information about MM.

MM measures are seen as offering a clear opportunity an important element is the ability to implement them in

the short term and slow down the worsening of transport problems. 5enerally the discussion concentrated more

on hard measures as they are more familiar to the participants and the poor Guality or e"en the complete absence

of infrastructure for non4car modes was discussed at the introduction to the workshop. his was e'pected to be

one of the future problems when the planned buildings come into use. :dditionally, without impro"ements for

alternati"e modes the soft measures, for e'ample those that would aim to promote greater bus use would not be

at all effecti"e.

&ithin the workshop, e'amples of uni"ersity tra"el plans were presented. hey were discussed and seen as

suitable instruments to mitigate some of the e'pected negati"e effects of the de"elopment and to cope with

predicted transport problems. !articipants supported the idea of producing a tra"el + mobility plan for both

uni"ersity faculties. hey also agreed that a change of location is an e'cellent opportunity to break with old

habits car use/ and promote new sustainable/ tra"el beha"iour.

page * + 21


8/21

n Slo"enia, minimum parking standards are generally defined at the local le"el B8ubl8ana defines them with

respect to type of use and location. Some guidance on parking standards is gi"en on national le"el, but only for

two types of uses residential and kindergartens/ do the construction by4laws set nationwide binding standards.

Kegotiations about reducing the number of parking spaces are officially not possible, but in B8ubl8ana-s citycentre a part pay4off can be arranged to some e'tent. o set binding ma'imum standards for parking, the

participants see a national regulation or guideline as the best solution in order to o"ercome political

unwillingness at the local le"el to set limitations with regard to car4users.

he low number of planned parking spaces is seen as one of the main problems. he e'pected search traffic and

parking spill o"er from the uni"ersity campus reGuires the implementation of controlled parking in nearby areas

of the city. Ather measures like parking charges could be realised by the uni"ersity itself. !articipants agreed that

some kind of parking policy will ha"e to be adopted. !ossibly this will be done as part of an en"isaged uni"ersity

tra"el plan including criteria for the allocation of parking permits/, which was discussed as one possible

solution for the transport problems anticipated at the uni"ersity site. he idea of cross financing alternati"es or

the mobility plan from parking fees had less support those are e'pected to be reGuired for the maintenance costs

of the uni"ersity-s parking spaces.

Ko public transport de"elopment strategy e'ists for B8ubl8ana instead, bus routes and freGuencies are defined by

the ! operator city owned/, largely on an ad4hoc basis. 5enerally there is hardly any integration of local urban

de"elopment and local ! de"elopment. he discussion showed that some integration could be achie"ed by state

guidelines which would set ! access standards for main traffic generators. &ithin local negotiations new

arrangements seem possible, such as co4financing a new ! line in e'change for reducing the number of parking

spaces reGuired. Most of the participants did not welcome the suggestion to relocate the ! line so that it would

pass directly through the campus. his might be due to the general 7bad- image that ! currently suffers in

Slo"enia. :t present, fares seem fa"ourable to all participants. he local ! operator stated that promotional

discounts for first year students, for e'ample, could easily be realised by means of agreements this could be part

of the en"isaged tra"el plan.

$icycle parking for new buildings is not mandatory in Slo"enia. Iities are free to set standards, which is the case

in Maribor but not in B8ubl8ana. Ionstruction standards or guidelines for bicycle stands, storage facilities like

lockers and showers do not e'ist at all. :t the reGuest of the uni"ersity, the architects included some bicycle

parking + storage facilities and showers in the plans for the buildings, but these will be a"ailable for the

uni"ersity-s staff only. !roblems with 8ustifying these in"estments discouraged the architects to do the same for

students. he participants e'pressed general doubts about the efficiency of soft measures alone therefore, for

cycling, mainly infrastructural impro"ements were discussed too.

5enerally in the whole country a traffic impact assessment :/ should be submitted for planning applications

for large traffic generators, but asking for one is in fact at the discretion of municipal administrations or the

Slo"enian =oads :gency. Ko standards e'ist therefore the participants welcomed the idea of defining nationalthresholds for obligatory :s. his would then be similar to ?L practice, where a : is used for describing the

effects of the de"elopment with regard to transport issues and tra"el plans are used to mitigate the e'pected

negati"e impacts.

he planning simulation workshop was generally welcomed and seen as an e'cellent opportunity to come

together and discuss e'pected transport problems and possible solutions. :n e'change of participants- opinions

and their "iews on the planned de"elopment was seen as an important element of the workshop, especially as

there is no routine of integration of transport and land use planning in B8ubl8ana.

: direct output of the discussion about public transport solutions may well be a special ticket offer for the main

users of the site, the students. : general result is that such discussions support awareness4raising and knowledge

page E + 21


9/21

transfer about best practice e'amples from national and international e'periences in similar situations. n

B8ubl8ana this was also facilitated by the in"ol"ement of the e'perts from ?ni"ersity of Maribor and ?=S.

page 9 + 21


10/21

' Workshop procedure

'.1 Initiator and moderation

6or such a planning simulation workshop an initiator and organiser is needed. n most cases the city

administration will organise a planning simulation workshop, for a certain site. $ut the de"elopers, too, might be

the ones who appear as initiators or organisers. n any case, a neutral, e'ternal moderator will help to balance

interests and facilitate the discussion. he moderation of the discussion should be led by a person who is not

directly affected by or in"ol"ed with the proposed planning scheme. !ossibly a skilled moderation e'pert,

preferably one with knowledge of MM and B?!, but who is from outside the city administration, is reGuired

here.

'.2 (reparation phase

'.2.1 )cope of the planning simulation workshop

n the preparation phase, the organiser needs to decide first on the broad scope of the discussion. n the

following, different possible scopes are presented some of them could also be combined/

&ossi!le impro4ements (or preconditions (or Mo!ilit6 Management at a planned de4elopment (or a

speci(ic site:discussing impro"ements for accessibility by sustainable modes, like public transport

ser"ices, connections to walking and cycling network

-election and discussion a!out MM measures (or a de4elopment area or a single site: discussing

promising Mobility Management measures related to the selected site

&ossi!le changes in procedures within the !uilding permission process to include MM through

mo!ilit6tra4el plans:a general discussion about negotiation possibilities or a discussion focussed on a

specific de"elopment pro8ect and its concrete implementation what kind of agreements are needed,

how to monitor the implementation and effecti"eness of MM, what should a contract between the

municipality and the de"elopers look like, and so on

&ossi!le de4elopers9 /(inancial3 contri!utions:discussion on how to secure Mobility Management

through negotiations, through planning conditions or planning agreements within the normal

administrati"e processes in general or, more concretely, together with de"elopers, architects, future

users of a selected site

hanges (or general impro4ement o( preconditions (or Mo!ilit6 Management and sustaina!le transport

in local plans:discussing procedures for better integration of land use and transport planning in the

city

Mo!ilit6 Management guidance (or procedures within the cit6 administration:discussion about

guidance for different administrati"e procedures within affected departments, e.g. how to ad"ice

de"elopers about MM, when they apply for a building permission.

:n interesting aspect of transferability is the differences in mobility/ culture that should be taken into account

when discussing e'amples from other countries. n the &! ) planning simulation workshops these differences

were for e'ample most ob"ious, when bicycle parking, network/ standards were discussed for some of the

planned new de"elopments.

page 10 + 21


11/21

o deal with a city wide approach for supporting and integrating MM, another M:;4product could be useful

the uality Management System for MM. : workshop can be useful to discuss the first steps, but probably a

wider range of stakeholders should be taken into account when organising a meeting see www.ma'4success.eu/.

Mo!ilit6 Management polic6 (or the cit6: discussing general acceptance of MM as part of local

transport policies, discussing ideas for a statement to support MM and + or integrate MM into normal

local acti"ities

Mo!ilit6 Management programme (or the cit6: discussing a more concrete programme for the city,

where steps such as ...defining a tra"el plan for the city-s own employees, supporting MM at schools, or

initiating and organising local mobility campaigns and mobility e"ents are included. SubseGuent to the

general acceptance of such a concept, the city would then define the different tasks, responsibilities and

budgets reGuired and set up a time plan for the implementation, monitoring and e"aluation of the

programme and its single elements.

'.2.2 )election of a local case stud*

)epending on its scope, a concrete planning case will be discussed or a suitable demonstration site should be

found. >'periences within the M:; pro8ect ha"e shown that using a planned de"elopment site facilitates the

discussion about many aspects of integrating MM into planning and helps to make new suggestions and

solutions more tangible.

Iertain preconditions should be met to make it easier to discuss the integration of MM into building permission

processes. 6or e'ample, the demonstration site should be big enough to generate some noticeable traffic in the

future by employees, "isitors or customers/ and it should preferably be ser"ed by some public transport ser"icesor such ser"ices should be planned/. Atherwise, a discussion e.g. about information and promotion acti"ities or

rebated public transport tickets 78ob4tickets-/ would be more difficult and MM might be re8ected as unrealistic

or inappropriate, 8ust due to poor preconditions. $rown4field rede"elopments or new de"elopments within the

cities- core areas are in most cases already integrated in the e'isting transport networks and therefore offer better

preconditions for walking or cycling accessibility, for e'ample, than do green field de"elopments on the outskirts

of town. his does not mean that such cases cannot be discussed, but the range and effecti"eness of suitable

measures will be different to those in a city centre, for e'ample. here, a walking map for "isitors might be a

good measure in contrast to a company4run shuttle ser"ice to the nearest train station, which is more likely to be

a suggested measure for a green field de"elopment.

page 11 + 21
http://www.max-success.eu/http://www.max-success.eu/


12/21

,igure #: Aerial 4iew /;une 2


13/21

he '& > Guidelines (or the integration o( Mo!ilit6 Management with Land 8se &lanningare the core product.

he document gi"es in4depth information about the topic of better integrating MM and planning. $oth the plan

making and the building permission process are co"ered and illustrated with e'isting policies and good practice

e'amples. he anne'es gi"e more detailed information about e'amples of best practice for policies andinstruments, always in relation to real case studies.

he &! ) tools and instruments are

)1 4 &hat is site4based Mobility Management(

)2 4 @ow can Mobility Management be included in the planning and building permission process of a

new de"elopment(

)2a 4 : good e'ample of integration Sihlcity, NOrich, Switerland

)3 4 ?ser guide for a training course

) 4 ?ser guide for planning simulation workshops solutions for integrating Mobility Management

into local planning

)# 4 Iompendium of site based Mobility Management measures

)% 4 >'amples of contracts between public administration and de"eloper

he ) tools or instruments can be seen as co4products of the guidelines and gi"e some more detailed information

or present a Guick o"er"iew about different aspects of the integration of MM and sustainable transport into

planning. hey offer practical and ready to use material for special tasks, one of which is this document )/.

$esides this user guide and the training course )3/, there are some presentations ready to use )1, )2, )2a/.)1 can be used as a direct input for an introduction about MM to inform all participants about site base MM and

its benefits and to stimulate the discussion within a planning simulation workshop. he compendium of MM

measures )#/ offers additional information about the implementation process and typical measures.

>'amples of suitable policies and instrument for the better integration of MM within the planning and building

permission process are shown in the first part of the guidelines and in the )2 presentations. t gi"es an o"er"iew

of e'isting solutions and le"erage points starting from the moment a de"eloper first contacts the administration

until the building comes into use.

6or cases in which the integration of MM is discussed directly for a selected new de"elopment in order to come

to an agreement with the de"eloper and the city, some e'amples of contracts are gi"en in the document about

negotiation contracts )%/ as well.

here are also four two4page recommendations + summaries >14>/ a"ailable, which could be handed out

during a planning simulation workshop. 3

36or more details, please take a look at the M:;> Guidelines (or $ntegrating Mo!ilit6 Management and Land

8se &lanning. hese guidelines and further information, as well as many other helpful tools for enhancing the

use and integration of Mobility Management in "arious ways can be downloaded "ia www.ma'4success.euor

www.epomm.org. here are of course other "aluable sources to find suitable and transferable measures ande'periences all o"er >urope. he best way to find these is through >!AMM at www.epomm.org.

page 13 + 21
http://www.max-success.eu/http://www.max-success.eu/http://www.epomm.org/http://var/www/apps/conversion/tmp/scratch_6/www.epomm.orghttp://www.max-success.eu/http://www.epomm.org/http://var/www/apps/conversion/tmp/scratch_6/www.epomm.org


14/21

'.2., (articipants in-itation

: number of key actors from the public sector as well as pri"ate parties should be in"ited to the planning

simulation workshop. he aim is to get all rele"ant stakeholders together, depending on the specific scope of theplanning simulation selected. n all cases, the different departments of the city administration that are in"ol"ed in

planning should be brought together. hey are often in"ol"ed only in single aspects of planning and building

permission processes and functional integration between them is seldom already in place.

f not only an internal concept is discussed, the departments represented get the chance to e'change information

and opinions among each other as well as with architects, de"elopers, public and other transport pro"iders such

as car4sharing companies or other members of the public, such as representati"es of residents- groups,

en"ironmental or transport associations.

n"ite participants from

:ll rele"ant city departments town planning, transport planning, architectural control, businessde"elopment, .../

>'perts in MM, in construction and planning law, in town and transport planning

Site4owners, de"elopers and architects

Managers of e'isting companies or of companies which will be the future users of the site

ransport pro"iders such as public transport operator, local+regional car4sharing organisation, regional +

site based/ car4pooling organiser

Bocal associations en"ironmental, residential, disabled, walking, cycling

Ather e'perts like traffic police + road safety organisations, energy agencies.

$ecause such workshops are not common practice, some e'planation about the purpose and scope of a planning

simulation discussion should be gi"en. >'perience has shown that a short introduction and in"itation letter is

best followed by a personal call, in order to ensure that people understand the nature of the workshop to which

they are in"ited. hey are then much more likely to accept.

,igure 5: >iscussion at the -lo4enian planning simulation workshop /0oBina 8$+-3

page 1 + 21


15/21

'.2. /rie0ng of participants

:fter accepting the in"itation, the participants can be briefed in a separate meeting, where the scope and

programme and some background information can be e'plained. nformation about the state of planning for theselected de"elopment when feasible/ can be gi"en as well, in order to pro"ide all participants with the same

base le"el of knowledge to inform a meaningful discussion.

f a pre4meeting is not possible, the participants will get a short description of the planned scope and the agenda

of the meeting and will get a longer introduction into the issue on the day of the meeting.

'.2. (ossible inputs for discussion

nformation about the city-s local plans, detailed site de"elopment plans for the area and planned/ transport

network are important background information and should be pro"ided in any case

Show planning process, local plans, detailed site de"elopment plans, transport network other planning

instruments/.

f feasible, the discussion can start with suggestions about where and how to change current plans in order to

better support the use of sustainable transport modes from+to the site in Guestion. his is especially important

when the preconditions are not "ery supporti"e for MM in the current situation, for e'ample where accessibility

by !, bike or foot is not considered in the current plans and should be impro"ed first, before discussing further

measures like information about, or promotion of these modes

Show possible impro"ements on a map of the de"elopment.

he concept of MM and its benefits are often not well known and should be presented and introduced as well.

he ad"antages when MM is included early in the de"elopment process can be outlined by taking one of the

e'amples from the &! ) 5uidelines

Show best practice e'amples of MM and their integration in the planning or building permission

process.

raffic simulations for different scenarios with or without sustainable transport + MM/ can stimulate the

discussion by "isualising the traffic impact of the de"elopment if they can be calculated for the selected

de"elopment by the transport department or an e'ternal e'pert/

Show different scenarios with or without traffic simulation numbers/ for business as usual and MM +

sustainable transport scenarios.

: selection of suitable MM measures can be presented, and transferability of solutions in other places/ to the

local situation, feasibility and responsibilities can be discussed

Show + discuss transferable legal aspects and the suitability of selected MM measures.

f the preconditions are at least somewhat supporti"e for implementing MM good accessibility, good !

supply/, an important step is their integration into the building permission process. Mobility plans as a strategic

instrument to facilitate the implementation of MM for a certain de"elopment could be then discussed.

Kegotiations between de"elopers and city administration are an important element here. he Guestion of

page 1# + 21


16/21

contracts as well as of monitoring and penalties, of their implementation and outputs can also be a matter of

discussion

Show prototype or e'isting mobility plans, show model of contracts.

'.' Workshop performance phase agenda and discussion

n the following a possible programme for a one4day planning simulation workshop is presented. t corresponds

to the abo"e scope of a discussion about possible changes in procedures within the building permission process

to include MM through tra"el plan.

)genda of the one*day workshop

0930 &elcome and introduction of the participants

09# nput e.g. by moderation/

1. &hat is the purpose of the planning simulation workshop(

2. &hat is site4based Mobility Management what does it aim for, which are the measures, what

are the e'periences see also )1 presentation/(

1000 nput e.g. by city town or transport planning department/

3. Selected site state of the local and the detailed site de"elopment plan/

. !ossible transport problems

101# )iscussion about general acceptance of MM as part of the solutions, about the site and its transport

impacts, the plans for parking or accessibility by sustainable modes

10# nput e.g. by transport + MM e'pert/

#. !ossible solutions to anticipated transport problems impro"ing accessibility, using MM/

%. ntroduction of a prototype or e'ample/ tra"el plan as a feasible solution

page 1% + 21


17/21

1100 )iscussion about MM and the instrument mobility plan

possible Guestions to discuss/

*. s this a feasible approach for the selected site( @ow can de"elopers and companies benefit(

&hat are the positi"e effects(

E. Ian the city administration ask for a MM concept a company-s tra"el plan/ in order to

mitigate e'pected negati"e transport effects(

9. @ow could such a reGuirement be integrated in the building permission process( &hat changes

within the process and what reGuirements would be needed to adapt it(

10. &hat problems and barriers are anticipated +are seen by whom/(

11. &hat kind of support would the de"elopers and companies need technical ad"ice, economic

assistanceP/(

12. &hat kind of support can the local public transport operator and other transport ser"ices car

sharing/ offer(

121# 1330 Bunch break

1330 nput Q e.g. by transport + MM e'pert/

13. Minimum standards for a mobility plan and types of agreements within the building

permission process suitable e'amples e'isting in practice

13# )iscussion about transferability to the local situation

possible Guestions to discuss/

1. &hat kind of standards should be fulfilled and demonstrated to the city(

1#. Ian a tra"el plan be used as a reGuirement for a reduction of the parking spaces for the new

de"elopment(

1%. @ow to monitor the implementation and effecti"eness of a tra"el plan(

1*. &hat would a contract between the municipality and the de"elopers look like(

1#00 =RsumR + Ionclusions

1#30 >nd of workshop

'., 3esults of a planning simulation workshop

'.,.1 What results can be epected?

)epending on the selected scope of the planning simulation workshop, different results can be e'pected.

herefore it is not possible to list all the results of a workshop here.

page 1* + 21


18/21

Meet all in#ol#ed parties and other stakeholder

: general and important aspect of a planning simulation workshop which was "iewed "ery positi"ely by

almost all of the participants in the &! )-s workshops is the opportunity to e'change opinions in an open

atmosphere without the pressure of producing directly e'ploitable results. his does not mean that, for e'ample,the different administrati"e departments would otherwise work completely separately, but some participants

stated that they normally do not get together for a common meeting and are sometimes in"ol"ed in the planning

process only one after the other, seGuentially. o meet colleagues and additionally get to know the de"eloper and

other important stakeholder local public transport operator, associations/ is a "aluable aspect in itself.

+,change of opinions about new solutions

&hen discussing the transport implications of a planned de"elopment it is important to get the chance to hear

different opinions and "iews about rather new concepts such as MM. Suitable solutions and appropriate

measures for the local situation can more easily be discussed in such a way. Most participants of the &! )

workshops ga"e "ery positi"e feedback about this kind of meeting and appreciated that the discussionconcentrated on a real de"elopment, their plans and potential solutions to anticipated problems.

Transfer knowledge and discuss acceptance

f there is only one planning simulation workshop that only starts to discuss the matter of integration of MM into

local planning and the city-s acti"ities, the results will ob"iously be Guite "ague. @ere the transfer of knowledge

and the discussion about acceptance of the new concepts, policies, instruments and measures is one of the main

results.

Range of needed process changes

f the direct transferability of policies and instruments, for e'ample from one country to another is discussed inmore detail, it is interesting to get to know during the planning simulation workshop how + to what e'tend the

planning process would need to be changed, what go"ernment le"el would need to be in"ol"ed, and whether

e'isting laws and regulations would need some adaptation in order to use the new policy or instrument.

$uitable measures for selected site

f there already is a common understanding or a concept which can be discussed in detail maybe within a series

of workshops/, then it will be easier to get more tangible results e.g. if the scope is to discuss suitable MM

measures for a selected new de"elopment, and if this is seen as beneficial for both sides, the de"eloper and the

city, then some kind of agreement about a tra"el plan and the ne't steps to follow could be a possible result.

)greements between public and pri#ate partners

f the discussion focuses on what kind of agreements can be achie"ed between the administration, the de"eloper

and maybe with other participants like ! + car sharing operators in order to impro"e the accessibility of the new

de"elopment, then a better understanding and a possible record of the responsibilities of each partner can also be

a concrete result.

'.,.2 4ocumentation and presentation of results

page 1E + 21


19/21

o facilitate the discussion, the use of presentations, maps and other material is suggested as noted abo"e. he

documentation of results should start already within the discussion phase normally this would be the task of the

moderator. )uring the planning simulation workshop a collection and "isualisation of opinions and results from

different session and aspects of discussion with the help of moderation tools workshop cards, flipcharts.../ isrecommended. !hotos of the planning simulation workshop and its results are useful as well. his facilitates on

the one hand the discussion and makes it easier to summarise the workshop results at the end of the meeting and

within the follow up documentation.

o collect different opinions about suggested changes, policies or measures audio recording of the discussion

pro"ed useful during most of the &! ) workshops. he participants should in some countries need to/ be asked

for their appro"al. he recording makes it easier to recollect opinions, especially if the discussion was "ery

li"ely.

:fter the workshop a written record of the results should be produced, to make the results transparent to the

participants as well as to wider interested public. his could be the task of either the initiator or the moderation.

Minutes or a written summary are useful these should show the main results, a common understanding ordiffering "iews about special aspects of the discussion, and any agreements between participants. : list of

participants and the agenda can be attached to the minutes. 6or completeness, the input material like

presentations or maps can be put into an anne' as well.

page 19 + 21


20/21

, 3eferences

)iekmann, !. F Beppert, @. 19*E/ !lanspiel und !lanspiel4Simulation in der =aumplanung. e't 4 Spiele 4

Biteratur. $irkhuser Qerlag. $asel und Stuttgart.

$unel, :rno @g. 2001/ !lanspiel ur )urchfOhrung der ?Q! in der $auleitplanung Materialien des

)eutschen nstituts fOr ?rbanistik, $d. 2+2001, $erlin.

M architects 200%/. Iompetition entry for two new faculties in B8ubl8ana, M architects, B8ubl8ana.

&ebsite !ro8ektbOro !hoeni' online a"ailable last access 1.0.2009

http++www.phoeni'dortmund.de+de+ser"ices+downloads+fotos.8sp

page 20 + 21


21/21

5urther information and contact details

he M:; WP D Guidelines for the integration of Mobility Management with Land Use Planningand further

information, as well as other helpful tools for enhancing the use and integration of Mobility Management in"arious ways can be downloaded "iawww.epomm.orgor www.ma'4success.eu.

f you need further assistance in organising a planning simulation workshop, a training course )3/ or for

presentations on integrating Mobility Management and land use planning, please get in touch with any of the

following

"erman#

Danina &elsch

BS 4 =esearch nstitute for =egional and ?rban

)e"elopment g5mb@

!.A. $o' 101*%

)401* )ortmund

8anina.welschTils4forschung.de

www.ils4research.de

$ithuania

Lristina 5auUV

Qilnius 5ediminas echnical ?ni"ersity

SaulWtekio al. 11

B4200 Qilnius

krisTap."gtu.lt

www."gtu.lt

%oland

:leksandra 6aron

Iracow ?ni"ersity of echnology

&arsawska 2

!B4311## Lrakow

olaTtransys.wil.pk.edu.pl

www.pk.edu.pl

&lo'enia

:l8aC !le"nik

?ni"ersity of Maribor, 6aculty of Ii"il >ngineeringSmetano"a ulica 1*

S42000 Maribor

al8a.ple"nikTuirs.si

www.fg.uni4mb.si

&pain

Iaroline Mattsson

> 4 >Guipo de Rcnicos en ransporte y

erritorio S.:.

I+ >'planada, E, 1X

>S42E00 Madrid

cmattssonTett.es

www.ett.es

&weden

Ihrister B8ungberg

ri"ector raffic :$

Yldermansgatan 13

S>422*% Bund

christer.l8ungbergTtri"ector.se

www.tri"ector.se

&wit(erland

=oberto )e ommasi

synergo, Mobilitt 4 !olitik 4 =aum

5rubenstrasse 12

I@4E0# NOrich

detommasiTsynergo.ch

www.synergo.ch

)nited *ingdom

om =ye

>dinburgh Kapier ?ni"ersity10 Iolinton =d

>dinburgh >@10 #)

t.ryeTnapier.ac.uk

www.napier.ac.uk

he M:; pro8ect ran from 200% to 2009 and was the largest research pro8ect on Mobility Management within

the >?-s si'th framework programme. he M:; consortium, of 2E partners, ser"ed to e'tend, standardise and

impro"e Mobility Management it did so in the fields of Guality management, campaigns, e"aluation, modelling

and land use planning.

page 21 + 21
http://www.epomm.org/http://www.epomm.org/http://www.epomm.org/http://www.max-success.eu/mailto:[email protected]:[email protected]://www.ils-research.de/http://www.ils-research.de/mailto:[email protected]://www.vgtu.lt/mailto:[email protected]://var/www/apps/conversion/tmp/scratch_6/www.pk.edu.plmailto:[email protected]://www.fg.uni-mb.si/mailto:[email protected]://www.ett.es/mailto:[email protected]://www.trivector.se/mailto:[email protected]://www.synergo.ch/mailto:[email protected]://www.napier.ac.uk/http://www.epomm.org/http://www.max-success.eu/mailto:[email protected]://www.ils-research.de/mailto:[email protected]://www.vgtu.lt/mailto:[email protected]://var/www/apps/conversion/tmp/scratch_6/www.pk.edu.plmailto:[email protected]://www.fg.uni-mb.si/mailto:[email protected]://www.ett.es/mailto:[email protected]://www.trivector.se/mailto:[email protected]://www.synergo.ch/mailto:[email protected]://www.napier.ac.uk/

Documents

D4 Planning Simulation