Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
1
INTERREG IVC – CYCLECITIES (1307R4)
3.1.1 Good practice guide on land use planning and mobility management
3.1.1 2nd Version June 2014
Thanos Vlastos, Anestis Filopoulos, Efthimios Bakogiannis, Avgi Vassi SUSTAINABLE MOBILITY UNIT, NATIONAL TECHNICAL UNIVERSITY OF ATHENS
2
Project acronym: CYCLECITIES
Project name: European cities for integrating cycling within sustainable mobility management schemes
Project code: 1307R4
Document Information
Document Identification Name: CYCLECITIES_CP03_D311_Land_use_good practice guide
Document title: Good practices on land use planning and mobility management. Good practice guide. Type: Guide
Date of Delivery: 06-06-2014
Component: CP3
Component Leader: BSC
Dissemination level: Restricted
Document Status
No. Action Partner Date
1 Submitted NTUA 6TH
June 2014
2 Re-submitted NTUA 30th
June 2014
3 Approved and released
NTUA 05-07-2014
Document History
Versions Date Changes Type of change Delivered by
Version 1.0
6
TH June 2014
Initial Document
Initial Document
National Technical
University of Athens
Version 2.0 30th
June 2014 Revised Document Added sections & content National Technical University of Athens
Version 3.0 05-07-2014 Revised Document Added sections & content National Technical University of Athens
Disclaimer
The information in this document is subject to change without notice.
All rights reserved
The document is proprietary of the CYCLECITIES Consortium. No copying or distributing, in any form or by any means, is allowed without the prior written agreement of the owner of the property rights. This document reflects only the authors’ view. The INTERREG Programme is not liable for any use that may be made of the information contained herein.
3
List of Contents
1 Introduction .................................................................................................................................. 5
1.1 Scope and use of guide.......................................................................................................... 6
1.2 Land use planning and Transport .......................................................................................... 7
1.3 Land use planning and enhancement of cycling promotion ................................................. 8
1.4 Types and implementation areas of LUP for cycling ........................................................... 11
2 Methodology .............................................................................................................................. 13
2.1 Collection of practices ......................................................................................................... 13
2.2 Evaluation of practices ........................................................................................................ 14
3 Good Practices ............................................................................................................................ 16
3.1 Legislative/Regulatory cases ............................................................................................... 16
3.1.1 Italy – Genoa: Urban mobility plan .............................................................................. 16
3.1.2 United Kingdom – London: London Plan 2011 ............................................................ 19
3.2 Cases of (Re)Developments ................................................................................................ 22
3.2.1 Greece – Kourouta: Coastal Pedestrian Street ............................................................ 23
3.2.2 Slovenia – Ljubljana: Different local implementations (Slovenia) ............................... 25
3.2.3 Spain – Bilbao: Abandoibarra ....................................................................................... 28
3.2.4 United Kingdom – London Borough of Merton's Draft Sites and Policies Plan ........... 32
3.3 Cases of Car-Free / Soft Transport Measures ..................................................................... 34
3.3.1 Germany – Freiburg: Car-free housing in the Vauban district ..................................... 34
3.3.2 Germany – Hamburg: Car free housing in the Barmbek district ................................. 38
3.3.3 Greece – Spetses: Traffic restrictions .......................................................................... 40
3.3.4 Poland – Krakow: Package of measures ...................................................................... 43
3.3.5 Poland - Gdansk First cycling-friendly street in Gdansk - Wita Stwosza Street ........... 47
3.3.6 Spain – Vitoria-Gasteiz: Sustainable Mobility and Public Space Plan .......................... 49
4 General Conclusions and Areas of Interest ................................................................................ 52
4.1 Respondents ........................................................................................................................ 52
4.2 Cases .................................................................................................................................... 54
5 Guidelines ................................................................................................................................... 57
5.1 Design LUP measures as integrated interventions of mobility management and traffic regulations ...................................................................................................................................... 57
5.2 Promotion of local centres with economic/cultural activity to cover the needs of residents and reduce the necessary travel distances .................................................................................... 57
4
5.3 Creation of areas with reduced car traffic, where traffic is diverted to the periphery ...... 58
5.4 Creation of car free urban districts ..................................................................................... 58
5.5 Locating projects closer to city centres ............................................................................... 59
5.6 Ensure that the rules/regulations are properly monitored and enforced .......................... 60
5.7 Ensure sufficient political and public support ..................................................................... 60
5.8 What not to do .................................................................................................................... 61
REFERENCES ....................................................................................................................................... 62
5
1 Introduction
This report is an output of the INTERREG IVC CycleCities project. It consists the deliverable of CP3:
Exchange of experiences dedicated to the identification and analysis of good practices of the
CYCLECITIES project, “3.1.1 Good practice cases on land use planning related to the integration of
cycling into urban mobility management”, part of the “3.1. Collection of good practices related to
cycling and mobility management policies in Europe”. It is additional and complementary to the
deliverable “3.1.1 Methodology to collect & identify good practices on land use planning and
mobility management”.
CycleCities aims to build and share knowledge and facilitate good practice transfer and experience
exchange among European cities on the integration of cycling into urban mobility management
schemes. It specifically aims to:
Exchange experiences and make transferable good practices on mobility management and
cycling available to European stakeholders.
Establish consensus on policies towards sustainable European mobility management
schemes.
Establish a European, multilingual, freely-accessible knowledge and experience base.
Disseminate field experiences and project results as a means to enhance awareness on the
integration of cycling in urban mobility management schemes.
The main purpose of this report is to highlight the most successful implementation cases identified
on the basis of the proposed methodology, as described in the preceding CYCLECITIES deliverable,
and to provide useful information and basic guidelines regarding the transferability and uptake of
these practices by the other countries and interested stakeholders.
In this vein the report provides a good practice guide on land use planning. The aim is to identify
and highlight best practices and success stories in effectively addressing mobility management
challenges through certain land use planning policies, practices and interventions across European
cities.
6
This document identifies and assesses land use planning policies, practices and interventions as
related to mobility management in European urban settings. Following the processes, the
methodological tools and techniques provided by the previous deliverable of the Methodology to
collect and identify good practices on land use planning and mobility management, 12 good
practice cases have been identified and used in order to develop guidelines – instructions
addressed to stakeholders and key persons actively involved in land use planning policies (policy
makers, authorities, planners, etc.).
1.1 Scope and use of guide
Good practices are specific projects, strategies or methodologies having already been
implemented, or are going to be implemented, and led (or are expected to lead) to desired results
by fulfilling the initial objectives set by the stakeholders involved. In order for a strategy to be
categorized as good practice, it must be transferrable and adaptable to different circumstances
each time. A good practice should be considered as a benchmark for other practices of the same
sector.
In this vein, the purpose of the good practice guide on land use planning is to identify and highlight
best cases and success stories in effectively addressing mobility management challenges through
certain land use planning policies, practices and interventions across European cities, and to
generate guidelines for those who relate in any way to land use planning policies.
The Good Practice Guide on integrating land use planning with mobility management addresses all
critical aspects, challenges and factors that have to be considered by city authorities and local or
regional administrations when planning or implementing a policy or solution that can have a wider
impact within urban settings. It also covers various implementation fields, and different urban
scales and settings as showcased by a representative list of case studies of European towns, cities
and urban areas.
In what follows, the LUP guide presents:
7
A clear and short description of the case taxonomy and evaluation scheme providing some
examples.
A list and a short profile of all selected good practice cases.
General conclusions and areas of interest.
A set of guidelines derived from the presented cases.
1.2 Land use planning and Transport
Land use planning (LUP) refers to the regulatory frameworks and practical interventions that
define, control and implement different land uses and developments. According to the definition
provided by the FP6 MAX project:1
*The Land Use Planning (LUP) system is that collection of law, guidance, policy and practice that governs where, when, and how land is (re)-developed.
*Max project: www.max-success.eu
In European Commission documents, land use planning is considered an aspect of spatial planning.
Spatial planning is defined, for example, in the 1997 Compendium of Spatial Planning Systems and
Policies 2 as:
“the methods used by the public sector to influence the future distribution of activities in a space or spaces. It is undertaken with the aim of creating more rational territorial organisation of land uses and linkages between them to balance demands for development with the need to protect the environment and to achieve social and economic objectives”.
“Spatial planning” as a generic term or different terms such as “physical planning”, “land use
planning”, “urban planning” or “territorial planning” are used and refer to similar contexts.
However, the terms used in national regulatory frameworks in Europe may differ (e.g. town and
country planning/UK, Raumplanung/Germany, land use planning / Ireland).
1 Max project: Successful travel awareness campaign and mobility management strategies. http://www.max-success.eu
2 European Commission / Regional Development Studies: EU compendium on spatial planning systems and policies.
8
According to the literature the urban characteristics which affect the modal choice are3:
Urban micro-scale characteristics
Height of buildings to road width ratio
Pavement width
Percentage of two-way roads
Distance from the metro station
Percentage of main arteries in the road network
Availability of parking spaces
Travel characteristics
Modal split (car use, public transport use, walking)
Mean journey length by car
Land use policies can constitute an effective tool for changing travel behavior, although travel behavior is largely dependent on socio-economic parameters.
Milakis, D. (2006)
1.3 Land use planning and enhancement of cycling promotion
In the context of the CycleCities project, land use planning is investigated in relation to those
policies and practices that help integrate cycling into urban mobility management schemes in
sustainable and effective ways. Although land use planning may refer to various sectors or touch
upon several economic, environmental and societal aspects, CycleCities explores the concept
aiming to identify success stories that have best balanced the interactions between land use and
transport into effective mobility management schemes that integrate or facilitate the uptake of
cycling in different European urban settings and scales. In this sense land use planning may involve
both regulatory frameworks and actual interventions such as:
Environmental legislation
Building permission regulations 3 http://irakleitos.ntua.gr/dns/67.pdf
9
City/town planning / local development plans
New developments
Urban regeneration projects
Car use limitation measures
Possible success stories of interactions between land use and transport planning that facilitate the
uptake of cycling are mentioned below:
An act concerning the creation of a new commercial centre near a metro station can be
combined with specific accessibility measures including cycling prioritization.
A historical city centre regeneration project, which aims to attract new inhabitants and
visitors by improving public spaces and old houses, can be combined with the creation of
new mini-bus lines, new pedestrian streets and cycling lanes.
A car-free housing scheme is always combined with effective public transport services and
appropriate bicycle lanes.
Transport and land use are both directly and indirectly linked in several ways that have not been
yet fully researched and explored. Transport policies, infrastructures and measures define the
accessibility level, cluster economic activities and affect the environmental quality of urban areas.
At the same time, land use policies and interventions have an effect on transport modes and
journey lengths in urban settings and therefore, when combined with effective public transport
services and infrastructures for soft transport (walking, cycling) can greatly contribute to
sustainable urban mobility.
The European Commission has early on acknowledged the complex relations between transport
and land use and the need for balanced and integrated planning. As stated in the 2006 policy
brochure4 on land use and regional planning:
4 Land use and regional planning. Achieving integration between transport and land use. Policy brochure. Directorate General for
Energy and Transport. European Commission. 2006. http://www.transport-research.info/Upload/Documents/200608/20060831_102457_87241_Land_use.pdf
10
“A land use policy change will affect demand for travel, which may well in turn lead to pressure for new transport investment or demand management. At the same time, transport policies will influence land use, which will also lead to new patterns of travel and pressure for further changes in transport policy”.
The Commission’s Thematic Strategy on the Urban Environment5 has also identified the need for
coordinated and integrated policies in land use and transport planning:
“Effective, transport planning requires long-term vision to plan financial requirements for infrastructure and vehicles, to design incentive schemes to promote high quality public transport, safe cycling and walking and to coordinate with land-use planning at the appropriate administrative levels.”
The priority on integrated urban development policy approaches was also reflected in the 2007
Leipzig Charter on sustainable European cities6.
Recent research and evidence from previous European projects7 8 show that an integrated land-
use and transport planning facilitates better and more effectively mobility management schemes
that respond to the needs and standards of smart and sustainable cities. Such an integrated
approach is defined based on certain key factors and priorities:
\
5 Communication from the Commission to the Council and the European Parliament on Thematic Strategy on the Urban
Environment, 2006. {SEC(2006) 16 } /* COM/2005/0718 final. http://eur-lex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/LexUriServ.do?uri=COM:2005:0718:FIN:EN:HTML 6 Leipzig charter on Sustainable European Cities, 05/2007.
http://ec.europa.eu/regional_policy/archive/themes/urban/leipzig_charter.pdf 7 See for example the FP6 Max project (2006-2009): http://www.max-success.eu/
8 Certain aspects of the links between land use and transport are still to be further explored. For a discussion on the relationships
between land use and travel behavior see Milakis, D., Vlastos, T., Barbopoulos, N, 2008. Relationships between Urban Form and Travel Behaviour in Athens, Greece. A Comparison with Western European and North American Results. European Journal of Transport and Infrastructure Research’’, Volume 8, Issue 3, pp. 201-215.
11
1.4 Types and implementation areas of LUP for cycling
LUP cases and practices can be categorised based on:
a) their implementation status:
planned/foreseen
in-use or implemented
b) their scope and intended impact:
interventions aiming to have a certain impact or put specific mobility management
strategies into effect
interventions with indirect, or not originally intended impact on urban mobility
management
c) their scale:
wider region or metropolitan interventions
local area interventions
d) their type:
legislative/regulatory
development/regeneration projects
transport oriented measures
Based on this categorisation, a simple matrix taxonomy scheme (based on non-exclusive fields) is
proposed as shown below:
12
Table 2. LUP case taxonomy scheme (MM=Mobility management)
Primary FOCUS MM integration SCALE (population)
Sub-category Limited Moderate High >500.000 100.000-500.000
<100.000
LEG
ISLA
TIV
E /
REG
ULA
TOR
Y
General Legislative acts
Land use code
Building permissions
Other
(RE)
DEV
ELO
PM
ENTS
City centre development/regeneration
Local centres / areas development/regeneration
Building re-use / public space regeneration
Other
CA
R -
FREE
/ S
OFT
TR
AN
SPO
RT
MEA
SUR
ES
Car free city centres
Car-free housing
Slow speed zones
Off-street parking
Reorganisation of Public Transport means
Other
13
2 Methodology
2.1 Collection of practices
For the purposes of this report and the collection of practices, a primary survey was conducted on
integrated land use / transport planning. The collection of information from the respondents took
place through a purpose specific on-line questionnaire, addressing the issues related to the land
use planning and the integration of cycling in urban mobility management schemes. The on-line
questionnaire was created according to the methodology developed and analytically presented in
the first stage of the A3.1.1 deliverable, namely “3.1.1 Methodology to collect & identify good
practices on land use planning and mobility management”.
A number of practices relevant to LUP was first identified through desk research. Then, an on line
questionnaire was used for collecting data from key persons involved in these specific cases. The
questionnaire was structured in a clear and simple manner in order to encourage participation and
facilitate communication with the respondents; the aim was to create a structured, organised and
well documented way to collect opinion-based evidence on the specific cases.
The online questionnaire focused on aspects relating to the effectiveness, end-user feedback and
impact assessment of each case as stated by the key factors involved. Data collection occurred
between 24/09/2013 and 10/04/2014. The total amount of the responses was 23.
14
2.2 Evaluation of practices
The selection of the practices was a two stage procedure. During the first screening of the
collected cases only those relevant to the thematic scope of the report were selected, as defined
in section 1.3 and section 1.4 and the methodology report9 of this guide. In particular, the criteria
taken into consideration were the following: (a) year of implementation (b) linkage with
CycleCities project scope and objectives, (c) relation to LUP. This resulted in the selection of 19
cases (out of 23) that incorporated LUP characteristics.
Subsequently, during the second stage of the evaluation the cases that stand out as good were
selected, based on the methodology report of this guide. Table 1 briefly presents the tools and
criteria used for the evaluation of the collected cases.
Table 1: LUP cases’ evaluation chart
CRITERIA
SCORE
1 2 3 4 5
Level of impact
Practice
addresses a
unique problem
The problem
addressed refers
only to a limited
number of
cities/administrations
with specific
problems
The problem
addressed is
relevant to a
certain number
of urban
settings.
Practice addresses a
problem shared by
several
cities/administrations
Practice addresses
a widespread
issue that is
relevant to all
urban contexts
Level of MM
integration
Practice does
not take into
consideration
MM
Practice has
limited/poor MM
integration
Practice has
partial/indirect
MM integration
Practice has
reasonable MM
integration
Practice has
full/primary focus
on MM integration
Type of achieved
objectives and
produced results
Practice has
not produced
any concrete
results.
Practice has reached
some objectives but
not produced
measurable results.
Practice has
reached certain
objectives and
produced
measurable
results.
Practice has reached
most objectives and
produced measured
and validated results
Practice has
reached all
objectives and
produced valid,
measured results
Type and level of
previously applied
evaluation
Practice has
never been
evaluated
Practice has been
evaluated only on a
preliminary / non
standardised stage
Practice has
been internally
evaluated
Practice has been
externally evaluated
Practice has been
systematically
evaluated both
internally and
externally
9 CycleCities project deliverable: “Methodology to collect & identify good practices on land use planning and mobility
management”
15
CRITERIA
SCORE
1 2 3 4 5
Extent of problems
encountered
Implementation
had serious
problems that
significantly
reduced its
results
Practice had some
problems that
hindered its
implementation
Practice had
only occasional
problems that
have not
hindered its
implementation
Practice
implementation had
almost no problems
and difficulties
Practice
implementation
had no problems
or difficulties
whatsoever.
Level of end user
involvement/adoption
Practice has
been only
implemented
within a limited
group of people
/ end users
Practice has been
only implemented
within a small
area/department
affecting a limited
number of end-users
Practice has
been
implemented in
considerable
urban area
involving a
significant
number of
end-users
Practice has been
implemented in the
entire city/urban
agglomeration
involving most of its
citizen
Practice has been
implemented in
the entire
city/urban
agglomeration
involving all of its
citizen
Level of end-user
satisfaction
End users had
negative/hostile
views regarding
the solution
applied
End users were
reluctant towards
the solution applied
End users were
partly satisfied
with the
solution
applied
End users were
highly satisfied with
the solution applied
The solution was
massively adopted
by end users
Extent of using own
resources
Practice has
been
exclusively
implemented
by external
associates or
contractors.
Practice has been
mostly implemented
by external
associates or
contractors.
Practice has
been
implemented
by both
internal staff
and external
associates or
contractors.
Practice has been
mostly implemented
by in-house staff
and resources
Practice has been
exclusively
implemented by
in-house staff and
resources
Level of
transferability
Practice has
not shown any
indications of
transferability
to different
urban settings
Practice has shown
indications of
possible replication
in a limited number
of urban contexts.
Practice has
demonstrated
strong
potential of
being
replicated in
different
settings
Practice has been
transferred to a
different city/urban
context
Practice has been
transferred to
more than one
cities/towns/urban
contexts
16
3 Good Practices
The result of the aforementioned evaluation process was the selection of 12 cases that can be
considered as “good” and are presented in this Good Practice Guide. They will serve as reference
for the identification of general conclusions summarizing the common characteristics among them
and identifying trends, wherever this is possible. These general conclusions, in conjunction with
other important individual characteristics of the collected cases, will facilitate the development of
guidelines towards territorial public administrations on how they can exploit land use planning
interventions (either separately or within a wider mobility management policy framework) in
order to promote the integration of cycling as an everyday means of transport.
The cases are classified according to their type of LUP and are presented in alphabetical order
depending on the country of implementation.
3.1 Legislative/Regulatory cases
This section contains interventions that are predominantly legislative. This means that the
appropriate public authority introduces a new law/regulation that can be considered as LUP
intervention and aims at achieving or facilitating a modal
shift among the population in favor of sustainable
mobility in general and cycling in particular.
3.1.1 Italy – Genoa: Urban mobility plan
Description
The Urban Mobility Plan (PUM) is a planning instrument
to define the main characteristics of transport and
mobility for the 2010 – 2020 decade in the urban area of
Genoa; Genoa is located in Northern Italy with a
population slightly above 600,000. Adopting a long term
Country: Italy
City: Genoa
Local Population: >500.000
Year of implementation:2010 - 2020
Status: In use
Current Cycling/Walking Share: 21%
Links: http://www.genovasmartcity.it/pum.aspx
17
perspective, the PUM includes various interventions on aspects including infrastructures,
employed technological solutions and organizational approaches.
The aim is to create a comprehensive approach taking into account other projects and
programmes related to the urban development and territorial administration.
Based on these considerations, Genoa’s PUM is setting the following policy objectives:
Change public attitude towards cycling. Increased cycling adoption can increase road safety
for cyclists and enable and magnify the realisation of significant environmental
externalities associated with cycling. In order to achieve increased adoption of cycling by
the local population, the plan for Genoa employs various interventions, such as creation of
areas that are car-free or with restrictions for motorised traffic. These interventions and
changes in urban planning greatly facilitate the adoption and regular use of the bicycle as a
means for everyday transportation to work, school and shopping as well as for leisure
activities.
Increase the overall capacity of the whole transportation system. The aim is to facilitate
multi-modal transport, especially through fostering the usage of urban public transport
infrastructures. Efforts will focus in extending the subway system and implementing
innovative surface axes.
Increase significantly the levels of service provided by the public transportation system at
18
the widest possible scale. The aim is to attract new users and consolidate existing users
(already using public transportation regularly). The increased levels of service are being
pursued with the coordination of different systems (rail, metro, innovative system of
surface systems lifts, ship) in an array of integrated services through identifying important
nodes, facilitating interchange between public transport systems and providing alternative
transportation means to the public.
One major innovation and key land use planning measure of the Urban Mobility Plan (PUM) for
Genoa is that it foresees the formation of “Environmental Islands”. These are areas where the
streets are used as a public space aiming to strike a balance between the realities of an urban area
and increased pedestrian and cycling activity. Automobiles in these areas are either completely
prohibited, or are allowed to travel at very low speed. The main volume of traffic is diverted to
streets peripheral to the “Environmental Island”. The aim of the “Environmental Islands” is to
serve as a space for people who live, work, play and study in the area. Using the appropriate
legislation and regulations motorised traffic is prevented from crossing these zones while moving
towards a different destination; it is expected that the adopted measures will be sufficient for
reducing cut-through traffic in the “Environmental Islands” and improving the safety and quality of
life in the area.
Main Achievements
According to the data collected through the online questionnaire, the stakeholder opinion is in line
with the targeted objectives of the PUM. Specifically stakeholder perception is that the Urban
Mobility is expected to affect urban life significantly in a variety of different aspects. It is expected
to contribute in improving the quality of life for citizens both in the areas where these measures
are implemented, but also on a city-wide scale. This will be achieved by motivating an attitude
change towards sustainable modes of transportation which will reduce the environmental impact
of automobiles in the area. Furthermore, the interventions in urban planning are expected to
affect local and regional growth prospects and generate increased revenue both for private and
public economic agents.
19
In the same vein the planed and implemented interventions are expected to have significant
impact on the mobility management scheme in Genoa. This will be achieved through
improvements in the existing infrastructures, and the better connectivity provided. The result will
be the increased adoption of sustainable transport modes, which is expected to enhance the
overall safety for commuting citizens, while creating a variety of economic benefits and other
environmental externalities (e.g. reduction of CO2 emissions).
An important role to the success expectations can be attributed to the “Environmental Islands”.
The combination of mobility management and land use planning measures that reduce the access
of motorized transportation, and facilitate the development of cultural and economic activities,
can be a driving force to revitalize these areas and generate a sustainable shift towards soft
transportation modes, especially cycling and walking.
3.1.2 United Kingdom – London: London Plan 2011
Description
The London Plan is a fully integrated economic,
environmental, transport and social framework for the
development of the UK capital to 2031. It is the strategic
plan for the city and is part of the development plan for
Greater London. It sets the general policy framework for
land use and mobility management in the London area. This
implies that local plans developed by the various London
boroughs need to be in conformity with the London Plan,
and that the policies included in it will guide land use
planning and the decisions taken by the councils and the
Mayor.
Initial proposals for the London Plan were published in April
2009, in a document titled ‘A New Plan for London’. This preliminary document served as a
Country: United Kingdom
City: Greater London
Local Population: >500.000
Year of implementation: 2011 - 2031
Status: In development
Current Cycling Share: 2%
Targeted Cycling Share: 5%
Links: https://www.london.gov.uk/priorities/planning/london-plan
20
discussion basis for consultation with the London Assembly and the GLA functional bodies (the
London Development Agency, London Fire and Emergency Planning Authority, Metropolitan Police
Authority and Transport for London); comments were also invited and welcome from anyone who
wished to participate in the initial public consultation.
The collected comments were the basis upon which a draft Plan was developed; this Plan was
published for full public consultation between October 2009 and January 2010. Responses were
received from 944 authorities, developers, groups and individuals, making approximately 7,166
separate comments. An independent panel was formed, which was in charge of publicly examining
the collected comments and responses; this process lasted between June and December 2010,
and concluded with the Panel making 124 recommendations, many of which are reflected in the
text of the new London Plan. The final text takes into account all policy objectives of the Mayor of
London; in particular, special attention has been given to policies affecting Economic
Development, Transport and London Housing strategies.
The London Plan is expected to have significant impact on the citizens’ quality of life, through
various channels, such as the changed attitude of commuters in favor of sustainable means of
transportation. The results in terms of reduced environmental impact (e.g. reduction of CO2
emissions) are expected to be very important for the city and the wider area.
In order to achieve its objectives, the London Plan was designed to integrate the urban mobility
management scheme (to the highest possible extent) with all other relevant policies. This enables
the design of encompassing solutions that foster sustainable transportation modes. Particular
importance is given to the achievement of a modal shift in favor of cycling. To this end the Plan
explicitly aims to integrate cycling into the mobility management scheme of the area. The
expectation is, for example, that within the next decade regular bicycle users will increase from 2%
to 5% of the local population.
21
The objectives of the London Plan are pursued through the adoption of a complete approach on
the transportation needs, and its association with other economic and urban development needs.
This includes interventions in land use planning which aim at affecting the necessity for urban
travelling10. In this vein the Plan attempts to shape the pattern of development by influencing the
location, scale, density, design and mix of land uses; the objective is to achieve a reduction in the
need to travel and the length of journeys, and make it safer and easier for people to access jobs,
shopping, leisure facilities and services by public transport, walking, and cycling. Furthermore
changes in land use planning can facilitate the construction infrastructures that allow for better
connectivity between public transportation means, and the improvement of infrastructures to
enhance their quality. This can improve the uptake of cycling (and other sustainable
transportation modes) and increase the overall safety of citizens.
Main Achievements
The main expected benefit derived from the London Plan is the achievement of a modal shift in
favor of cycling and other soft transportation modes. However, the mobility management and land
use planning interventions included in the London Plan are expected to have a much wider impact
on urban life, since they are also associated with a variety of additional benefits for economic
development.
In this vein the London Plan takes into account the necessity to foster growth and create
opportunities. It successfully pursues the objective of facilitating economic development, while
10
The London Plan refers extensively to the necessity of mixed land uses in the urban environment, and their effectiveness in achieving a redistribution of economic activity and a more homogenous economic development
22
ensuring that it protects social, environmental and other priorities. The Plan creates a clear
framework which will give developers the confidence to go ahead with investments in the fabric of
the city and its communities. It takes into consideration the constraints in available resources that,
due to the general current economic situation, make growth with quality difficult, but not
impossible; to this end it incorporates the possibility of innovative funding techniques, such as the
Community Infrastructure Levy11. At the same time it integrates the fact that funding for some key
investments for London (e.g. the Crossrail and the Underground Upgrades) has already been
secured, creating a promising vantage point for achieving prosperity in the greater London area.
Another important aspect taken into account in the London Plan is the reality of living and doing
business in London, and how it is affected by changing climatic conditions. This is very important in
view of the expected impact of the rising urban temperatures on living and working in the city. The
adopted approach focuses on transforming a challenge into an opportunity, by setting London as
an example of how a modern city should deal with climate change and achieve moderation of its
future extent and impact.
Taking into account all the above factors and aspects, it does not come as a surprise that the
London Plan is expected to be highly effective in achieving its objectives, resulting in high impact
on both the modal split in transportation and general economic activity. This is expected to be
achieved through the (expected) high participation of private stakeholders. Given the resources
used for the development of the Plan, and the implementation of its suggestions, and taking into
account the estimated impact, it is expected that the Plan will prove to be an initiative featuring
relatively high return on investment.
3.2 Cases of (Re)Developments
11
Local authorities have been given powers to raise a Community Infrastructure Levy (CIL). This is a statutory charge on new development and will be used to help fund future infrastructure provision. http://www.cityoflondon.gov.uk/services/environment-and-planning/planning/planning-policy/Pages/Community-Infrastructure-Levy.aspx
23
3.2.1 Greece – Kourouta: Coastal Pedestrian Street
Description
The Kourouta area is part of the town Amaliada in Western Greece where a successful
regeneration project was implemented. The project involves the re-development of the coastal
zone through the construction of a pedestrian street and the introduction of cycling lanes. At the
same time local authorities proceeded with changes in the urban design by changing the land use
regulations in the area. As a result in Kourouta, the area along the coastline where the pedestrian
road passes is now designated for commercial and
entertainment use. At the same time the pedestrian road
connects with the bicycle route from the beach to the
town of Amaliada, fostering the uptake of cycling by local
residents and tourists.
As mentioned earlier, emphasis has been given in the
land use planning in the area. Specifically, Kourouta
belongs to a zone of residential control, and the area in
proximity to the coastal line and the pedestrian street is
part of the sub-zone named A1; in this sub-zone land use
is foreseen for tourist and entertainment purposes. This
means that in this area buildings can be used for the
following purposes:
Residential;
tourist facilities;
restaurants, bars, clubs;
sport facilities, playgrounds;
small shops;
facilities for use of cultural functionalities, facilities with cultural or social utility.
Country: Greece
City: Amaliada
Local Population: <100.000
Year of implementation: 2005
Status: In use
Cost Category: €100k - €1M
Links: http://www.apd-depin.gov.gr/files/Docs/PDF/Periballon/Amaliada_A_2-final.pdf
http://www.amaliada.gr/Portals/0/files/images/front_page/news/Amaliada-B1_%CE%A03.pdf
24
The aim of this approach is to change the character of the area, by supporting sustainable mobility
and thus facilitating the regeneration of the coastal area.
Main achievements
The implementation of the proposed measures has had significant impact on citizens’ mobility in
the area. By relocating cultural and social activities and motivating an attitude change in favor of
sustainable modes of transportation, local authorities have achieved, among others, a reduction of
the environmental impact of private transportation. This was achieved mainly through the
implementation of the land use planning measures and their integration to the local mobility
management scheme. Increased adoption of soft transportation measures resulted in reducing
CO2 emissions and increasing quality of life and safety for local residents and tourists. At the same
time significant positive effects are also encountered for the Kourouta area economic activity.
Changes in the urban design and land use regulations have resulted in transformation of the local
economy (by offering an alternative access to the beach) and increased growth.
The implementation of the Kourouta redevelopment was not without problems though. These
were mainly a result of poor planning and execution of the plan. The bicycle lanes were poorly
illuminated making cycling difficult during the night-time. Furthermore, deficiencies in the
enforcement of the new rules, regulations and mobility management solutions were noticed.
25
Specifically, traffic control in the area is not sufficient, resulting in motorcycles entering the
pedestrian zone and the bicycle lanes. Better planning and implementation of the plans could
possibly had reduced the aforementioned problems.
3.2.2 Slovenia – Ljubljana: Different local implementations (Slovenia)
Description
The municipality of Ljubljana implemented several measures at the city centre in the context of
the CIVITAS ELAN project; the measures were aligned with the project’s central objective of
“Mobilising citizens for vital cities”.
The measures were a combination of land use planning
and mobility management interventions. They included:
the development of a large pedestrian zone in the
city centre;
the determination of reduced speed zones and of
one way streets;
the development of new parking areas for people
living in the new pedestrian zones;
The introduction of telemetry system for the bus
service, providing real-time information on bus
arrivals at bus stops;
The installation of cameras on buses to increase
passengers’ safety;
The introduction of a public transport priority
scheme, which was based on satellite navigation
and resulted in reduced travel time;
The introduction of a smart electronic city card,
creating the conditions for an integrated payment system for local and regional public
transport.
Country: Slovenia
City: Ljubljana
Local Population: 100.000 – 500.000
Year of implementation: 1998 - 2011
Status: In use
Cost Category: >€1M
Current Cycling/Walking Share: 20%
Targeted Cycling/Walking Share: 26%
Links: http://www.mobile2020.eu/fileadmin/presentations/Lokar_2_mobile2020_2013_ljubljana.pdf
http://www.civitas.eu/content/reduced-speed-zones
26
In this context the municipality implemented several 30km/h zones and installed traffic signs at
the entire area of the city centre. Additionally, wherever necessary, traffic was streamlined using
travel control devices, while radar facilities and traffic calming devices where installed in order to
enforce the speed limits. All measures resulted in enhancing road safety for all users.
In conjunction with traffic management systems, an ecological zone has established in the wider
city centre area to promote “the sustainable development vision”. As a result, over the past five
years in the ecological zone the pedestrian areas have been increased fivefold while five bridges
have been created. Similarly, actions for renovating the river banks have been completed, creating
new walking and cycling paths.
The implementation of the measures had a huge impact on sustainable changes revitalizing the
old city centre. The mobility management measures and land use planning interventions resulted
in the opening of a variety of new restaurants, cafes and shops. This economic boost in the region
took place in a short period of time, despite the fact that initially the proposed measures were not
massively accepted, since (for example) they foresee a reduction of the parking spaces available
for cars. This initial lack of public acceptance is gradually diminishing, and citizens are accepting
the interventions, magnifying the expected outcomes.
27
Main Achievements
As discussed earlier the main expected results from the project and the implemented measures
were to:
Increase the pedestrian / reduced-speed zones. Decrease the average vehicle speed in
speed zones
Increase the level of traffic safety and reduce traffic accidents
Increase stakeholders acceptance
Indeed it appears that the implemented measures had a positive effect on all the stated
objectives. The city centre was regenerated by the pedestrian zone created, as more than 70 roads
have been transformed into pedestrian-only pathways. The road network has been reorganized
through the determination of one-way roads and speed reduction measures.
As a result the chosen strategy achieved to increase the quality of life in the city and improve the
urban public areas. The measures were effective in changing attitudes towards sustainable modes
of transportation; as a result there was a change in the modal split in favor of cycling and walking
which has a positive effect on traffic pollution by reducing CO2 emissions. The changes in land use
planning, in conjunction with the mobility management measures increased economic activity and
provided a boost to the development of the region.
Although overall the project had a positive outcome and can be regarded as successful, this does
not mean that its implementation did not encounter problems and adversities. The main
weaknesses / negative aspects of the changes introduced do not significantly diverge from the
problems encountered in other practice presented in this guide; this includes inefficiencies in
implementation and financing as well as insufficient political and public support stemming from
inadequate public consultation.
Despite these adversities, implementation was successfully completed achieving the stated
objectives. The majority of the local residents, and especially those with negative views about the
implementation of these measures (pedestrian zones and reduction of car parking spaces), where
sufficiently convinced and accepted the scheme to a great extent. Not only that, but in some
28
aspects the final outcome surpassed the initial objectives. For example, although initially the
objective of the project was the conversion of a road line to pedestrian, the final implementation
was extended to create a web of low speed zones, pedestrian roads and the ecological zone.
3.2.3 Spain – Bilbao: Abandoibarra
Description
Abandoibara is one of the urban regeneration projects
undertaken by the “Bilbao Ría 2000” organization. It
involved the redevelopment of 348,500 m2 of land in the
heart of the town which for years had been closed off to
the public. The project involved the redevelopment and
improvement of the site through the improvements in
areas of cultural interest, improvements in parks and
recreation areas, and construction of hotels and
residential buildings. This encompassing approach
creates opportunities for the creation of an ecosystem
which will foster economic and cultural development.
Such sustainable policies will support and promote
growth and development in an area that was previously
inaccessible to locals and visitors.
Abandoibarra is the nerve centre of
the new Bilbao. The urban
development project seeks to
transform perceptions for Bilbao from
a declining industrial city to a modern
post-industrial metropolis.
Redevelopment work began in 1998,
Country: Spain
City: Bilbao
Local Population: >500.000
Year of implementation: 1998 - 2011
Status: In use
Cost Category: >€1M
Current Cycling Share: 1%
Links: http://www.bilbaoria2000.org/ria2000/ing/zonas/zonas.aspx?primeraVez=0
29
based on a master plan for the zone drawn up by Cesar Pelli, Diana Balmori and Eugenio Aguinaga.
Bilbao Ría 2000's work in this area finally concluded in September 2011 with the opening of the
Campa de los Ingleses park.
Of a total of 348,500 m2 covered by the new Abandoibarra, 115,714 m2 are given over to green
areas and recreational zones, partially as a result of changes in land use planning. Such an area is
the Campa de los Ingleses Park, which flows from the Guggenheim Bilbao Museum, unifying the
Abandoibarra area and the Nervión River. It covers a total area of 24,580 square metres, occupies
the area between the Guggenheim Museum and the Deusto Bridge and runs around some of the
major new buildings of Abandoibarra, including the Deusto University Library, the UPV-EHU
Auditorium and the Iberdrola Tower.
The general objectives of the Abandoibarra project are:
Reducing Environmental Impact
Reallocation of cultural and social activities in public spaces
Improving citizens’ quality of life
Motivating attitude change towards sustainable modes of transport
Boosting local area/regional growth
30
Generating public/private revenue
At the centre of the redevelopment is the Guggenheim museum, which serves as a focal point to
attract tourists and locals. The various projects for improving the Abandoibarra region have
created a unified area, encompassing various aspects of urban life by integrating different land use
zones (residential, commercial, cultural site). The Abandoibarra project has created an area were
emphasis is given on sustainable mobility management, improving quality of life for citizens. It is
thus helpful to present an indicative selection of projects that were part of the Abandoibarra
redevelopment.
Campa de los Ingleses
Campa de los Ingleses flows from the Guggenheim Bilbao Museum, unifying the Abandoibarra
area of Bilbao and the Nervión River. The design of the park is very attractive and includes
terraces, ramps, stairs and walls that gracefully integrate the Mazarredo, Deusto Bridge, and the
Plaza Euskadi with surrounding buildings and most importantly the Nervión River into a seamless
urban experience. In the park several nodes of activities have emerged, such as tapas bars.
Alongside the ‘topographic objects’, the paths widen to shape public spaces designed for
relaxation and views of the river, mountains and the Guggenheim. The challenging topography
inspires and organizes the landscape into an exciting and unique array of park spaces, planting. It
explores the interface between the urban landscape, architecture and public space.
In the park various grass species, clover and wildflowers have been planted that fix nitrogen and
reduce the need for pesticides. The paving used in the Park designed by Balmori contains an
additive called GeoSilex® which absorbs CO2; the paving was developed with the University of
Granada and made entirely from industrial waste. The local newspaper referred to the park as “a
new lung for the city.”
Bank Park
This was the first completed structure seen by visitors of Abandoibarra. It was designed by Javier
López Chollet’s team of architects along 800 metres of the waterfront as a facility to connect
existing promenades. The city of Bilbao has thus reclaimed almost 6 kilometres of leisure space on
31
both sides of the River Nervión. The park is between 40 and 120 metres wide, and total surface
area is 48,000 m2.
The park also features the collection of sculptures Paseo de la Memoria, a kind of “Memory Lane”
to commemorate the intense industrial activity which used to be the main feature of an area
which now accommodates the works of well-known Basque artists and others from overseas.
Avelida de las Universidades
This was the third structure inaugurated on 28 March 2003 along with the Abandoibarra
promenade and the Pedro Arrupe bridge. The avenue was opened to the public on 23 December
2002, following remodelling work to broaden it by 2 - 9 metres over a total length of 650 metres.
The new layout covers a surface area of 5,814 m2, and the budget for renovation work was 3.8
million euros. The avenue connects Botica Vieja to Campo de Volantín.
Main Achievements
The main achievement of the project is that, through the land use changes and the redevelopment
interventions, the previously inaccessible Abandoibarra area became accessible to local residents
and visitors and a focal point for cultural and leisure activities. The integration of open public
spaces with a residential and commercial area, and the extensive exploitation of sustainable
transportation modes have fostered economic development, while improving the quality of life in
the area and the wider city. This is in line with the aim to establish Bilbao as a modern post-
industrial city.
In this vein the project is expected to have high impact on the mobility management scheme of
Bilbao by creating improved infrastructures that will allow for improved connectivity with public
transportation modes. It is expected, among others, that safety of citizens will be enhanced
through the use of sustainable transportation modes, especially walking and cycling, which in turn
is expected to generate a change in the modal split in favour of the latter. Such a shift may result
in significant benefits and externalities for the local society and economy, e.g. increased economic
growth and reduced CO2 emissions.
32
3.2.4 United Kingdom – London Borough of Merton's Draft Sites and Policies Plan
Description
Merton's Sites and Policies Plan contains the detailed
planning policies to help assess development and
construction projects in Merton. It also allocates sites for
redevelopment between 2014 and 2024. Merton's
Policies Map (formerly known as the Proposals Map) is
published alongside the Sites and Policies Plan setting out
where town centre boundaries, areas of open space and
nature conservation, shopping frontages and industrial
areas are found in Merton. As a result, the Plan presents
sites intended for specific developments and it includes
the design of a specific network of cycle routes and cycle
infrastructure needs that planners will have to take into
account when delivering their development proposals.
This is an important improvement vis-à-vis the previous
Policy Plan, which included only plans for cycle parking
provision. Measurable effects from the implementation
of the Plan will not be noticeable until at least 3 years of operation.
Currently, minor amendments are taking place. The Sites and Policies Plan is part of Merton's Local
development framework. The latter, in turn, is aligned and depends on the London Plan (the
regional spatial planning document for the entire UK capital area).
The strategic objectives of the implementation of the Merton's Sites and Policies Plan are:
To make Merton a municipal leader in improving the environment, taking the lead in
tackling climate change, reducing pollution, developing a low carbon economy, consuming
fewer resources and using them more effectively.
Country: United Kingdom
City: London Borough of Merton
Local Population: 100.000 – 500.000
Year of implementation: 2011 – 2014
Status: In progress
Cost Category: N/A
Current Cycling Share: 1%
Targeted Cycling Share:
Links: http://www.merton.gov.uk/environment/planning/planningpolicy/ldf/sites_policies_plan.htm
33
To promote social cohesion and tackle deprivation by reducing inequalities.
To provide new homes and infrastructure within Merton's town centres and residential
areas, through physical regeneration and effective use of space.
To make Merton more prosperous with strong and diverse long term economic growth
To make Merton a healthier and better place for people to live and work in or visit.
To make Merton an exemplary borough in mitigating and adapting to climate change and a
more attractive and green place.
To make Merton a well-connected place where walking, cycling and public transport are
the modes of choice when planning all journeys.
To promote a high quality urban and suburban environment in Merton where
development is well designed and contributes to the function and character of the
borough.
Main Achievements
The interventions proposed in Merton’s Sites and Policies are expected to have significant impact
on the overall mobility management in the area. This is achieved, among others, through land use
planning interventions to reallocate cultural and social activities towards public places. These
interventions combined with the active promotion and support of sustainable transportation
modes (by improving available
infrastructures and ensuring better
connectivity) are expected to motivate
citizens towards the adoption of soft
transport modes.
A modal shift in favor of sustainable
transportation, such as cycling, can generate
a variety of benefits for the local population.
It is therefore expected that Merton’s Sites
34
and Policies Plan will improve economic growth prospects, and generate a variety of benefits for
businesses and citizens. Additionally, the reduction of the usage of private cars is associated with a
multitude of environmental benefits (including the reduction of CO2 emissions and noise
pollution), which will contribute to the improvement the citizens’ quality of life.
At this point it is important to point out that the implementation of the Plan faces various
adversities, most significant of which are:
The danger of poor implementation of the plan
The high overall cost for implementing the suggested intervention
Insufficient resources and funding sources for achieving all objectives
Lack of political support for the Plan
3.3 Cases of Car-Free / Soft Transport Measures
3.3.1 Germany – Freiburg: Car-free housing in the Vauban district
Description:
The Vauban district in Freiburg was constructed on the
area that used to be army barracks for the French army
and was abandoned in 1992. It is a 41 hectare site on the
southern edge of Freiburg, 3km from the city centre. 38
hectares of the site have been used for the introduction
of a city district where private car usage is under strict
limitations. The council delegated the mandatory
community consultation to Forum Vauban; the role of
the latter in the project was paramount from the
beginning, since they were the ones that had convinced
an initially skeptical council to try the „car-free‟ concept.
Country: Germany
City: Freiburg
Local Population: 100.000 – 500.000
Year of implementation:1998 – 2009
Status: In use
Cost Category: >€1M
Current Cycling/Walking Share: 64%
Links: http://carfree.com/papers/freiburg.pdf
http://www.atr.fc.it/admin/PagPar.php?op=fg&id_pag_par=1317&fld=file
35
Relations between the two have fluctuated as they worked together on the development.
Construction of the first building started in 1998, while the development phase of the project
ended in 2009. The masterplan foresaw the construction of 2000 dwellings, leading to a final
population of more than 5,000.
Most of the individual plots have been sold to building co-operatives (Baugruppen). These co-
housing groups made bids which were assessed against criteria favoring families with children,
older people and Freiburg residents12. Some building co-operatives were formed by architects,
others by prospective residents actively involved in planning and building. The design of the
Vauban district foresaw increase population density; this resulted in few individual houses being
constructed and most blocks being four floors high. Given the absence of relevant constraints, the
existence of other restrictions (population density, dwelling characteristics etc.) facilitated
considerable architectural diversity.
At this point it is important to emphasize that the Vauban district is not a car-free but a car-reduced town quarter. The traffic concept consists of the following facts:
The surrounding roads have a speed limit of 50 km/h
The district’s main road (Vauban Allee) has pay-and-display parking spaces and a 30 km/h
speed limit
The traffic-reduced residential roads do not have public parking spaces and speed is limited
to walking speed.
12
Currently 30% of the Vauban district population is under 18 years old, while only 2% is over 60.
36
The remaining streets are foot/bicycle paths and completely pedestrianised areas.
It becomes apparent that cars are not completely prohibited in the district; the idea is to promote
the option of car-free living. Cars are allowed to enter the district for pickup and deliveries, while
there are metered parking spots on the main street. Permanent residents are actively encouraged
to reduce ownership and usage of private cars. In case car-ownership is necessary, parking garages
have been constructed near the entrances of the district; residents have to purchase a spot in case
they need it. Finally there are parking spots offered for visitors (both on the metered roads and in
parking garages).
It becomes obvious, that the success
of the project depends on the
willingness of residents to reduce
usage and ownership of private cars.
An influential factor to achieve this is
the provision of public
transportation solutions (a new tram
line has been constructed) and the
promotion of car-sharing solutions.
Main achievements
The combination of the land use planning intervention (car-free residential area) and the
necessary mobility management measures (e.g. sufficient provision of public transportation and
construction of cycling routes) has significant impact for the residents of the Vauban district. Most
influential among them are the following:
Reduce environmental impact, through the control and reduction of motorised
transportation;
Reallocate cultural and social activities in public spaces, by freeing up space that was
previously occupied by cars (e.g. parking spots) ;
Improve citizens’ quality of life, through the creation of an urban ecosystem that is not
dependent on private automobiles;
37
Stimulate attitude change towards sustainable modes of transport
So far it has become apparent that there are significant benefits to be gained from solutions like
the one implemented in the Vauban district. However, there were also some problems
encountered during the implementation of the project. The most important were poor planning,
poor financing combined with high overall cost, lack of political support and lack of public
consultation. They all affected the planned interventions in the local mobility management
scheme. At the same time poor implementation and ineffective provision for users’ needs were
reported as issues that should have been planned in a different way.
Overall, despite the various adversities and problems, the project can be considered successful. In
terms of land use planning the most characteristic benefit is the reduction of space taken up by
private cars (e.g. parking) which allowed for more space being dedicated to purposes increasing
the quality of life for local
residents (e.g. leisure
and entertainment
facilities)
38
3.3.2 Germany – Hamburg: Car free housing in the Barmbek district
Description:
At a former industrially used site in the inner-city of
Hamburg, a housing estate has been established as
housing without cars. The inhabitants use bikes, or the
nearby public transport. The project was planned and
established by the group of future residents and has
individually owned houses as well as rented flats
organized by a housing cooperative. Within 2
construction phases approximately 170 flats have been
constructed in an area of 3.5 hectares. Construction
costs were lower than in similar building projects while
the space normally used for cars could be used for bike
garage, garden etc.
The development is located approximately 4km away
from the city centre in the district Barmbek (inner city residential area). Shopping possibilities as
well as public and cultural facilities are easily accessible within walking distance. The metro station
Saarlandstraße is at a distance of 300m and the metro and tram stop Barmbek is 600m away. 17
bus lines are also available and the length of a journey with public transport to the city centre
takes approximately 10 to 15 minutes. Finally there is a car-Sharing station with different car-
sharing vehicles situated 900 meters away.
Development so far was separated into two stages.
Initially 111 flats were constructed up to 2001, while
the remaining 53 units were constructed between 2006
and 2009. A third development phase is being planned,
which could raise available accommodation units to
Country: Germany
City: Hamburg
Local Population: >500.000
Year of implementation: 1997 – 2009
Status: In use
Cost Category: >€1M
Current Cycling Share: 12%
Links: http://www.eltis.org/index.php?id=13&study_id=1833
39
210.
Regarding the necessary regulatory framework, the status of car-free housing is secured by
regulations under private and public law. The residents are bound by tenancy and purchase
contracts not to own or to use a car (private law). If it is impossible to abandon the use of car (e.g.
in case of handicap or disease), the user is required to get a special permission from the housing
associations. Theoretically the owner of the car has to pay compensation in case of acceptance of
his request. This compensation leans on the regulation about
payment in the Building law of Hamburg. In case of failure of the
car-free idea due to a too high number of cars, users have to
pay an additional amount to the city of Hamburg. The number
of parking spaces is limited to 0,15 parking spaces per
accommodation unit (regulated under public law by Building
law of the Federal State of Hamburg)
Main achievements
The car-free housing project in Hamburg is expected to have a
variety of benefits both for the local residents and the wider
area. The expected attitude change of local residents towards
sustainable modes of transportation and the increased adoption
of public transportation, cycling and walking will result in
reduced usage of private cars. This will have an environmental
impact by, for example, reducing the CO2 emissions.
Furthermore the land use planning interventions, by introducing
the car-free zone and relevant measures (improved
infrastructures and improved connectivity to public transportation) are expected to improve the
quality of life for citizens. Overall the chosen approach is expected to foster economic growth at
local and regional level, and generate public and private revenues.
Initial insight from the current implementation stage indicates that the idea of car-free living
seems well accepted: 2.500 requests are counted since 1995. The housing association is working
on the implementation of the total 210 households planned. Currently all 111 accommodation
40
units of the first construction part and all 53 of the second construction part are already sold or
allocated. The demand is high and the target group of car-free households seems to be big
enough. As a result the prospects for the remaining accommodation units that will be constructed
are very promising.
3.3.3 Greece – Spetses: Traffic restrictions
Description
The island of Spetses could be considered almost a car-
free island. This is the result of public policy decision that
has started as early as 1973. Currently there is a
comprehensive package of measures aiming at improving
the transport system in Spetses island. The adopted
measures aim at increasing the efficiency, safety,
economic and environmental characteristics of mobility
management scheme that affects both permanent
residents and tourists. They include actions geared
towards reducing the use of cars and generally the use of
all motorized vehicle. Some of the adopted measures are
the following:
It is prohibited to use a car inside the town of
Spetses
Permanent residents who own a car can bring it to the island. However they are obligated
to park it on their property (private parking) and not move it unless they are leaving the
island.
Permanent residents of the town have to obtain a license card for bringing their cars on the
island.
Country: Greece
City: Spetses
Local Population: <100.000
Year of implementation: 2012 - 2013
Status: In use
Cost Category: <€100k
Current Cycling Share: N/A
Links:
http://www.spetses.com.gr/spetses-site/info/rules.php
http://www.spetses.gr/#!-/c1bvd
41
The only cars that are used on the island are 10 taxis.
Motorcycles can move freely most of the time.
Motorcycles are banned during summer period on the coastal road from 19:00 to 2:00.
The parking of cars is prohibited on footpaths, on paved roads, and on the sides of the
roads where yellow lines or parking prohibition signs exist.
The main aim of the adopted measures is to address the traffic and parking problems in the town
of Spetses that have a negative effect on the traditional character of the town, i.e. they reduce the
availability and degrade the existing public space, reduce the quality of the environment and
create insecurity to pedestrians and cyclists.
The current update of the measures is a result of an extensive expert study that is comprised of
two parts. The first part contains suggestions of measures that can be immediately adopted,
whereas the second part contains the short and long term strategy. One of the major factors
affecting their implementation is the budgetary constraints and the limited availability of funding.
Main achievements
The implementation of the proposed measures has significant impact on the mobility
management and can be the source for significant environmental benefits. Restrictions of private
cars use will reduce CO2 emissions and improve the urban environment (e.g. reduction of noise
pollution). Furthermore the adopted policies will support the adoption of soft transport modes
(mainly cycling and walking), by increasing significantly the safety for citizens. All will result in
42
increasing the quality of life for local residents. The improved urban environment will be a vehicle
that will bring several economic benefits (e.g. tourism) that are expected to provide a boost to the
local and regional economic growth.
Success of the proposed and adopted measures is significantly affected by their characteristics.
Poor planning can have a significantly negative effect. Similarly political support is also an essential
issue. Both poor planning and lacking political support may result in the implementation of
ineffective measures and in inefficient provision of user’s needs. For example, the restrictions
related to motorcycle usage control may prove insufficient to solve the problem. Imposing tighter
restrictions and special routes for the motorized vehicles would have further improve safety for
cyclists and pedestrians.
Overall, the various adversities cannot negate the fact that the land use changes have resulted in
more space available for public use, through redistribution of the public space in favour of
cyclists/pedestrians as well as cultural/leisure activities.
43
3.3.4 Poland – Krakow: Package of measures
Description
This practice involves a package of measures that aim at
improving the transport system in Krakow and increasing its
efficiency, safety, economic and environmental characteristics
for goods and passengers. The majority of measures
concentrate on the modernization and better organization of
Public Transportation. However the measures include actions
geared towards expanding the city areas where motorized
traffic is severely limited, or outright prohibited accompanied
by measures that strengthen the enforcement of rules in these
areas.
The measures that have been adopted in Krakow are the following:
Transition towards clean vehicle fleets;
Integrated access control strategy;
Enforcement of access restrictions;
Clean high mobility corridor;
Demand-responsive transport services;
New leisure related mobility services;
Integrated ticketing and tariffs;
Security action plan for public transport;
Car pooling system;
Policy actions for car-sharing;
Bicycle renting;
Country: Poland
City: Krakow
Local Population: >500.000
Year of implementation:2005 – 2009
Status: In use
Current Cycling Share: 1%
Links: http://www.civitas.eu/sites/default/files/CARAVEL%20D5%20-%20pt%206%20krakow.pdf
44
New goods distribution scheme;
Sustainable mobility marketing;
Mobility Forum;
Integrated mobility plan for the Technical
University of Krakow;
Monitoring Centre for Road Safety and
Accident Prevention;
Informobility platform13
Public transport priority system
The above measures reveal that the city of Krakow
implemented a combination of a series of hard
measurements to help promote a more
sustainable transport system, accompanied by a
series of soft measures that promoted and foster
their impact and effectiveness.
At the centre of the measures was the
maintenance and reinforcement of the metropolitan transport system while supporting
improvement in the quality of life of Krakow’s residents. This came as a result to the realization
that supporting quality of life had become a challenge and was closely related to the city’s
development in the early years of the new millennium.
Faced with this challenge, the Transportation Master Plan (including the above measures) was
approved by the City Council in 2005. Its main goal was to provide an efficient, safe, economical
and environmentally friendly transport system for passengers and goods. This policy requested the
implementation of a selection of comprehensive and coordinated measures and activities. The
13
This is an online service providing, among others, information about public transport time tables, facilitating for example interchange at transfer points.
45
above 18 measures were implemented within the context of the CIVITAS CARAVEL project (2005-
2009), with the objective of improving the quality of Krakow’s transport system. As discussed
earlier they constitute a mix of mobility management interventions, such as modernization and
expansion of the services provided by the public transportation system, accompanied with new
regulations for private automobiles.
At the same time a significant role can be attributed to the measures that aimed at reducing
access to private cars to the historic city centre, transforming its character into an area where
pedestrian and bicycles have the dominant role. These hard measures were accompanied by a
series of soft measures targeted to specific user groups (students and employees of the University,
citizens, young people, shopkeepers) such as carpooling, car sharing, marketing and promotion
events, incentives, training, public meetings.
The aim of all these policies was to discourage the use of the private car, whilst at the same time
encouraging the use of PT or other transport modes; better, safer, more affordable and more
reliable and attractive urban transport offers and services were expected to serve as an
appropriate incentive. The measures were all designed and implemented to complement each
other and not implemented in isolation. A core project team supervised the progress and ensured
that there was an on-going exchange between the measures and the stakeholders concerned.
Main achievements
The expected benefits from the adopted measures are both environmental and economic.
Promotion of sustainable transportation modes and the provision of improved infrastructures and
improved connectivity are expected to result in the extensive usage of public transportation. This
will affect mobility management and reduce the usage of the private car, generating a positive
environmental impact through reducing CO2 emissions. These effects will be supported and
enhanced by interventions in land use planning that enforce restrictions for the use and access of
private cars in areas of the city.
This extensive program faced various adversities during implementation. Most important
problems were related to planning and financing as well as insufficient public consultation.
46
47
3.3.5 Poland - Gdansk First cycling-friendly street in Gdansk - Wita Stwosza Street
Description
The project refers to the successful construction of a
cycling street in Gdansk – Poland; it covers a distance of
3.5km long and is located in the University district. Wita
Stwosza Street is the main access to the University both
for residents and students. However although the
intervention mainly includes mobility and traffic
management measures, it also demonstrates significant
land use implications. The location and importance of
the road affects significantly economic and social
activity and creates a new important axis in the city
centre.
The project was inspired by a series of consultations
with inhabitants, which led to the development of
Gdansk’s Strategy for Realization of Cycling Routes.
According to this planning document, cycle lanes rather
than separate cycle ways will be provided on roads with a speed limit of 50 km/h. The inhabitants
initially expressed doubts regarding the safety of cyclists and pedestrians in the proposed solution;
however they were convinced that the real-life safety of on-road cyclists is far more important
than the perceived-but-false safety on separated cycle ways. The project creates more pleasant
and safer environment for pedestrians too.
For the purposes of the project a major street within the university district of Gdansk was
completely remodelled and became more cycling-friendly. The outcome was that a street that
previously featured two lanes that cars and cyclists had to share, now consists of one lane for cars
and a wide bike path for cyclists. At the same time various other complementary measures have
been taken to transform the street into one that is more cycling-friendly.
Country: Poland
City: Gdansk
Local Population: 100.000 – 500.000
Year of implementation:2013
Status: In Use
Current Cycling Share 2%:
Targeted Cycling Share: 15%
Links: http://www.abcmultimodal.eu/gdansk-planning.html
48
On the cycling friendly street cars are
allowed but they have to adhere to a tempo
limit of 30 km/h, which is expected to
achieve that cars and cyclists have similar
travel speeds. This measure is effective in
improving road safety; for example
compared to a tempo limit of 50 km/h, using
the lower speed limit reduces the length of
the brake path by half. Similarly speed
bumps have been installed on the car lane to
facilitate enforcement of the tempo limit. In the same context a variety of architectural design
actions and traffic management interventions have been implemented, also aiming at improving
safety for cyclists.
The bicycle-friendly street was inaugurated in September 2013.
Main achievements
The decision process for the project included an information campaign that involved local
residents and stakeholders. This process included workshops where local residents were informed
about the planned measures, with the intention to optimize the results of the project (by
collecting suggestions and feedback) and to accommodate their concerns in the planning process.
This series of consultations highlighted the doubts of local residents regarding the effectiveness of
the chosen measures regarding such as cyclists’
and pedestrians’ safety. This negative attitude was
magnified by the realization that the project would
lead to reductions in parking space availability.
Despite the initially negative attitude of the local
residents, the project was implemented. To this
end an important factor were the various
(important) benefits that are associated with
49
cycling friendly policies. In the present context these benefits are:
Improving citizens’ quality of life
Motivating attitude change towards sustainable modes of transport
Rather high impact to the mobility management scheme of the area
These benefits have a direct effect on the mobility management of scheme in Gdansk; the
improved infrastructures allow for better safety for citizens. The latter creates a positive trend in
favour of soft transport modes and increases adoption rates among local residents.
It was discussed earlier that the project encountered problems from the beginning (insufficient
consultation and negative attitudes during the consultation). During the implementation phase,
lack of political support and insufficient funding, as well as difficulties in transition from
design/planning to actual implementation were included in the problems faced.
3.3.6 Spain – Vitoria-Gasteiz: Sustainable Mobility and Public Space Plan
Description
Vitoria-Gasteiz has always been characterized by a strong
pedestrian mobility culture. This mentality has been
supported by the flat urban area which facilitates non-
motorized transportation modes. The aim of the urban
mobility plan, which is at the centre of the present
practice, is to give priority to the citizen over the private
car. To this end its main objectives are to:
Free up public space in order to enhance social
and neighborhood interactions;
Reduce noise and pollution;
Country: Spain
City: Vitoria - Gasteiz
Local Population: 100.000 – 500.000
Year of implementation: 2009
Status: In use
Cost Category: >€1M
Current Cycling Share: 3%
Links: http://www.civitas.eu/sites/default/files/modern_vg_m05.01_0.pdf
50
Maintain accessibility and;
Increase the use of public transport.
The sustainable mobility approach adopted in Vitoria-Gasteiz proposes the “Superblock model”
that reserves a space inside a block for pedestrians and cyclists. Private cars and public transport
run along the streets that border these blocks. Using this approach, Vitoria-Gasteiz intends to
design, plan and implement a new mobility and urban space framework consisting of 68
superblocks; this is a complex approach involving integrated measures of land use planning and
mobility management. The centre of the superblocks, where car use is severely restricted, can
serve as a zone where the additional free space (created by the restrictions in car use) can be used
by the public (e.g. entertainment/leisure activities) and/or be used to increase the availability of
other sustainable transportation modes (e.g. cycling). The blocks are connected through a
functional network of different mobility modes such as walking, public transport and cycling.
Three peripheral lines link different areas with the main entrances to the city.
Main achievements
51
The adopted measures have significant impact on the mobility management scheme of the city.
These benefits include the following:
Reduction of the environmental impact
Reallocation cultural and social activities in public spaces
Improvements in citizens’ quality of life
Motivation of an attitude change towards sustainable modes of transport
In this vein it is expected that the main benefits created by the change introduced to the
agglomeration's mobility management scheme will include the creation of improved
infrastructures and provision of better
connectivity for public transportation.
This will result enhanced safety for
citizens using soft transportation modes
(e.g. cycling and walking) and create
possibilities for the emergency of
various economic benefits (e.g.
economic growth) in the revitalized
superblock areas. The redistribution of
the public space by offering more space
to pedestrians and soft mobility modes of transport enhances these effects. It is expected that a
project of this scale will encounter difficulties which are mostly related to poor financing/ high
overall cost.
52
4 General Conclusions and Areas of Interest
4.1 Respondents
The cases described in the previous section cover 6 countries of the CYCLECITIES consortium,
namely Germany, Greece, Italy, Poland, Slovenia and the UK as well as Spain and the thematic
areas of interest (see Figure 1). One major common characteristic is that stakeholders responded
that land use planning decisions had a very significant impact on the overall mobility management
situation.
Figure 1: Good practices per thematic area of interest
2
4
6
Legislative/Regulatory
(Re)developments
Car - Free / Soft transport measures
Regarding the size of the cities, we have separated them into three groups, depending on the size
of the population.
One category included cities that had a population larger than 500k (overlapping with
categories XL, XXL and Global City in the OECD classification14), where 5 of the good
practices are located.
Another category included cases from cities with a population between 100k and 500k
(overlapping with the M and L categories in the OECD taxonomy), where 5 of the good
practices are located.
14
http://ec.europa.eu/regional_policy/sources/docgener/focus/2012_01_city.pdf
53
Finally 2 good practices are located in small-sized cities (population below 100k –
overlapping with the S category of the OECD taxonomy).
The above distribution of good practices among the cities could be an indicator towards the
necessity for LUP measures in larger agglomerations, where mobility management can have a
larger impact on overall quality of life.
Regarding the respondents (see Figure 2), the majority of them belong to public administration
staff (5 responses), something that was expected because of their thematic and occupational
relevance to land use planning. Three of the respondents are researchers / academic experts, two
are employed in the consultancy sector (consultant/private providers) and two of them are
directors/managers/team leaders. Their responses (Figure 3) indicate that the measures are aiming
at affecting the local population (including students and employees) and that tourists are rarely
the primary target of the implemented interventions.
One of the most important conclusions that can be made from the selected cases is that land use
planning interventions are usually embedded in wider policy interventions that include mobility
management measures and traffic regulations. The source of this common approach is the
complementarities between those policies, and the attempt from public authorities to exploit
them.
Furthermore there is no significant link between the size of the city, the selected measures and
the thematic area of the intervention. On the contrary, the general impression is that each
approach is selected on a case by case basis, taking into account the specificities in the area and
the objectives of the authorities. This is not to imply that these measures are not transferrable to a
different environment; on the contrary for most of these measures the necessary preconditions
for them to be transferred to a different environment are usually public acceptance, political
support and the existence of sufficient funding.
54
Figure 2: Respondents
16,67%
41,67%
25,00%
16,67%Director/Manager/ Team leader
Public administration staff
Researcher/Academic expert
Consultant/Private provider
Figure 3: Target groups of the adopted measures
4.2 Cases
Reviewing the practices included in this guide it is possible to extract common approaches and
trends in the solutions adopted by public authorities. In this vein it is possible to distinguish the
following common measures employed in the cases presented earlier:
55
The London Plan (see case 3.1.2) and the London Borough of Merton Plan (see case 3.2.4)
have integrated land use planning decisions into the more general mobility management
measures. In both cases this is the result of the explicit recognition from the respective
public authorities in charge that mobility management interventions have to be compatible
and complementary to land use planning decisions. Similar conclusions can be drawn from
all other practices included in the present guide. To this end, useful insights can also be
acquired by reviewing the promising results in Kourouta (Greece – see Section 3.2.1) and
Abandoibarra (Spain – see Section 0). In these cases the mixed land uses (residential,
commercial, cultural, etc) are effectively integrated into urban mobility management
schemes and achieve a shift in the modal split in favor of soft transportation (mainly cycling
and walking) while they foster economic growth and facilitate the regeneration of the area.
In the London Plan (see section 3.1.2) and the Genoa Urban Mobility Plan (see section
3.1.1), as well as (to a smaller extent) in the case of Vitoria-Gasteiz (see section 0) local
authorities have recognized the necessity for decentralization of economic, social and
other activities and incorporated them in their policy decisions and plans.
Vitoria-Gasteiz (see section 0) and Genoa (PUM – see section 3.1.1) can offer very
interesting cases of alternative urban design. The idea adopted by them involves
establishing areas where motorized traffic is either prohibited or heavily regulated and
reallocating in these areas economic and social activities. The main traffic volume remains
in the periphery. The positive aspect of this approach is that within an urban environment,
areas are created where soft transportation modes are prioritized.
In recent years a trend that is constantly gaining ground involves establishing city districts
where car traffic is prohibited or very restricted; in the context of the present guide two
practices have been presented, both from Germany (see section 3.3.1 and section 0). In
addition to them, the island of Spetses (Greece – see section 3.3.3) is also a case of car-free
districts, which, however, has a very significant difference to Freiburg and Hamburg: car-
ownership is not entirely prohibited. Spetses is also a very interesting case because the size
of the island and its flat surface reveal an interesting effect to the other complementary
56
measures adopted; for example there is no need for an extensive public transportation
network.
Local authorities have chosen intervention areas to be in proximity to the city centre. Good
examples for this can be found in Poland (Krakow and Gdansk – see sections 0 and 0
respectively), the city of Ljubljana (see section 3.2.2) and the city of Vitoria-Gasteiz (see
section 0). Interestingly in Bilbao the regeneration of the Abandoibarra region (see section
0) targeted areas that previously were inaccessible to the population.
Evidence shows that there can be significant differences in the scope of the public
consultation preceding the introduction of a cycling friendly land use planning measure.
For example, in the case of the London Plan consultation was used to actually shape the
measures that were included in the Plan; in this case some core measures were presented
to the public (a result of a consultation among experts) and then the public was asked to
comment on these measures and provide suggestions. On the contrary in the case of
Ljubljana the scope of the consultation was mainly to inform citizens and convince them
about the advantages associated with the project and the necessity to implement it. It is
noticed therefore, that the common characteristic of public consultation is to inform the
public and get a (varying degree of) feedback regarding its characteristics.
57
5 Guidelines
The insights drawn from the common approaches among various practices that have been
identified in the previous section can be used to develop guidelines for public authorities that wish
to implement cycling friendly land use planning measures.
5.1 Design LUP measures as integrated interventions of mobility management and traffic regulations
Planners and designers of land use planning interventions should always take into account that
land use planning and mobility management are complementary and mutually reinforcing. This
means that the expected results are significantly enhanced whenever public authorities design
policies where land use planning interventions are supported by mobility management measures
and traffic regulations. The expected result of such policies can be a shift in the modal split in favor
of soft transportation (mainly cycling and walking) while fostering economic growth and
facilitating the regeneration of the area.
5.2 Promotion of local centres with economic/cultural activity to cover the needs of residents and reduce the necessary travel distances
Policies should aim at reducing the necessity to travel in an urban environment, while making
commuting easier and safer. In this direction, land use planning interventions can play a very
important role by designating areas of mixed land uses (residential, commercial, cultural etc). This
way it is possible to create decentralized “hubs” of economic activity that can ensure the provision
of adequate services to the local population. This decentralization should not be restricted to
private economic activity, but also extent to the provision of public services (administrative,
healthcare etc) and to creating the opportunities for the development of activities related to
entertainment and leisure (including culture). Existence of such decentralized “hubs” is crucial for
reducing and/or minimizing the necessity to travel/commute in a modern urban environment,
58
since residents would be able, for example, to access public services, use leisure facilities, go
shopping and find employment in close proximity to their home. Minimizing travel distances
enables the shift to soft transportation modes (e.g. cycling and walking); in this direction provision
of efficient and effective public transportation can also play a very important role.
5.3 Creation of areas with reduced car traffic, where traffic is diverted to the periphery
Public authorities should embrace the idea of creating areas where motorized traffic is either
prohibited or heavily regulated, and reallocating in these areas economic and social activities. The
main traffic volume should remain in the periphery. The positive aspect of this approach is that
within an urban environment, areas are created where soft transportation modes are prioritized.
Thus, taking into account that cycling and walking are usually the primary modes favored by local
authorities, with public transportation also having a significant role, the combination of traffic
restrictions and urban design reprioritization creates the appropriate conditions for these areas to
become focal points of economic and cultural development, and is expected to result in significant
improvements in the quality of life for residents. One major disadvantage is that in order for such
a measure to be effective, it is necessary to ensure consistent and strict enforcement of the rules,
since the incentive for cut-through traffic to avoid the peripheral roads is very high for non-
residents.
5.4 Creation of car free urban districts
Planners and urban designers should attempt the creation of car-free urban districts. In recent
years this type of intervention is gaining ground in Europe, with Germany featuring important
examples of such measures (see section 3.3.1 and section 0). By using measures like these, local
authorities have introduced city districts where car traffic is prohibited or very restricted. The
difference in this approach, compared to the one presented in the previous segment, is that in this
case local residents are strongly incentivized to abandon car ownership altogether. This means
that in the case of car-free districts, the aim is to create a culture among the population that car
ownership is not necessary. In order to enforce the no car-ownership rule, local residents are
usually required to sign declarations that they do not own a car and that they do not need a car on
59
a regular basis. Under special circumstances (e.g. health reasons) some residents are granted a
special permission to own a car and acquire a parking spot in the periphery of the car-free zone
(usually in independent parking facilities).
The success of interventions like this depends on how the local population’s commuting and
travelling needs are covered; availability of sufficient transportation alternatives can indeed make
car ownership redundant. Therefore policy designers and local authorities have to ensure that
alternative transportation options are available. Possible options range from cycling/walking
infrastructures to sufficient public transportation connections and/or may also include car sharing
schemes. The extent of such public transportation needs may vary significantly depending on the
size and geographic characteristics of the area/city; a good example to this is the island of Spetses
(Greece – see section 3.3.3) where no extensive public transportation network is necessary. As a
result, in Spetses the impact of the measures on quality of life, local environment, and economic
growth remains substantial; this can serve as an example of how small communities can organize
life without using a car and achieve remarkable results.
5.5 Locating projects closer to city centres
Policy interventions may achieve greater impact if they are located in proximity to the centre of
the city. The effects of the adopted land use planning decisions can be enhanced since the
affected areas will be more accessible to the entire local population through soft transportation
modes. Additional benefits can be achieved if the targeted areas were previously inaccessible to
the population.
The argument of targeting areas close the urban centre is not in contrast to the decentralization
argument made earlier. Both arguments are valid and the optimal solution depends on many
factors; the final solution to be selected should take into account factors such as the size of the
urban agglomeration and the travelling/commuting needs of the population. Experience shows
that decentralization is more sensible for large cities (e.g. London) while targeting the city centre
makes more sense for smaller ones (e.g. Bilbao).
60
5.6 Ensure that the rules/regulations are properly monitored and enforced
The success of any type of measure that was discussed earlier heavily depends on the monitoring
and enforcement efforts and mechanisms adopted by the local authorities. This is especially true
for areas where car use is not strictly prohibited, but severely restricted. Areas where traffic is
diverted to peripheral roads, such as car free areas and pedestrianised streets, are susceptible to
drivers attempting to use the cars (e.g. cut-through traffic). Thus, it is evident that monitoring
mechanisms can be adopted to ensure the effective implementation of measures; these include
electronic monitoring (e.g. traffic cameras), regular police patrols etc.
5.7 Ensure sufficient political and public support
The success of a project depends on the extent of acceptance by the local population and relevant
stakeholders. In order to do that, it is advisable that every project undergoes a process of public
consultation before it enters the implementation phase. Consultation can be used:
to shape the measures that are going to be adopted. This implies that some core measures
were presented to the public (a result of a consultation among experts) and then the public
was asked to comment on these measures and provide suggestions.
to simply inform citizens and convince them about the advantages associated with the an
intervention and the necessity to implement it.
The common characteristic is that public consultation can be used to inform the public and get a
(varying degree of) feedback regarding its characteristics.
Another important factor determining the implementation and success of land use planning
measures is political support. Political support can be crucial, and lack thereof can result in a
project being delayed or not implemented. On many occasions, assuring political support is heavily
dependent on assuring public support (through public consultation) due to the dependence of
elected officials on public sentiments.
61
5.8 What not to do
Finally there are several factors that can reduce the impact and effectiveness of a project and
should be avoided. These include:
Poor planning. The land use measures that are chosen for an area have to be planned in
such a way to pursue the stated objectives of the project. If this is not the case, there is the
risk that the project might be ineffective and inefficient in achieving those objectives. In
extreme cases it is conceivable that the implemented measures can have the opposite
effect.
Poor financing. It is important that a proposed/implemented project has the appropriate
funds to achieve the stated objectives. Insufficient funds or fund misallocation could result
in an incomplete project, which offers a less effective or completely ineffective solution. In
extreme occasions it is conceivable that incomplete interventions could result in an overall
negative impact.
Poor implementation. It is crucial that the project is implemented according to the plan.
Among others this could be a result of wrong interpretation of the project specifications by
those implementing them, or it could be an outcome of amendments to the specifications
due to local pressures. Regardless of its source, poor implementation can reduce the
effectiveness of a project; every package of measures, if sufficiently researched, has an
internal consistency, in view of the stated objectives, and amendments/changes should be
sufficiently justified.
62
REFERENCES
[1] European Commission, 2009. A sustainable future for transport: towards an integrated, technology-led and user friendly system. Communication from the Commission, Brussels, 17.6.2009. COM(2009) 279 final. http://eur-lex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/LexUriServ.do?uri=COM:2009:0279:FIN:EN:PDF [2] European Commission, 2006. Land use and regional planning. Achieving integration between transport and land use. Policy brochure. Directorate General for Energy and Transport.2006. http://www.transport-research.info/Upload/Documents/200608/20060831_102457_87241_Land_use.pdf [3] European Commission, 2006 . Communication from the Commission to the Council and the European Parliament on Thematic Strategy on the Urban Environment, 2006. {SEC(2006) 16 } /* COM/2005/0718 final. http://eur-lex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/LexUriServ.do?uri=COM:2005:0718:FIN:EN:HTML [4] European Commission, 1997. Regional Development Studies: EU compendium on spatial planning systems and policies. [6] ELTIS Urban mobility portal http://www.eltis.org [7] EPOMM. Mobility management user manual http://www.epomm.eu/downloads/Usermanual.pdf [8] INTERRREG IVC Programme glossary: http://i4c.eu/afficheGlossaire.html#G [9] Leipzig charter on Sustainable European Cities, 05/2007. http://ec.europa.eu/regional_policy/archive/themes/urban/leipzig_charter.pdf [10] Max project. Max comprehensive research plan (Deliverable 2.1) http://www.max-success.eu [11] Milakis, D., 2006. http://irakleitos.ntua.gr/dns/67.pdf [12] Milakis, D., Vlastos, T., Barbopoulos, N, 2008. Relationships between Urban Form and Travel Behaviour in Athens, Greece. A Comparison with Western European and North American Results. European Journal of Transport and Infrastructure Research’’, Volume 8, Issue 3, pp. 201-215 [13] Randolph, J., 2004. “Environmental land use planning and management”, Island Press. [14] Patterson, W., T, 1979. “Land use planning: techniques of implementation”, New York: Van Nostrand Reinhold. [15] Fabos, Gy., J., 1985. “Land use planning: from global to local challenge”, Chapman and Hall ltd. [16] Koomen, E.; Borsboom-van Beurden, J.,2011. “Land-Use Modelling in Planning Practice”, GeoJournal Library, Vol. 101XVI, 214p.
