SUMP: getting organised to fund SUMP activities

Transcription

1 SUMP: getting organised to fund SUMP activities Tallinn, 26 March Ivo Cré, Polis

2 In this presentation Presenting SUMPS The question! Needs of different actors in the process EU examples UK France Flanders Region Comparison of examples Recommendations for the Estonian context

3 Disclaimer Nothing of what is included in this presentation implies any assessment or appreciation of current practices at Estonian national or local level.

4 SUMP a concept promoted by the EU Sustainable Urban Mobility Plans have gained increased recognition and importance at European level Action Plan on Urban Mobility actions at EU level/ Action 1: SUMP Review ongoing! EU Transport Ministers support SUMP European Parliament recommends the introduction of SUMP Transport White Paper 2011 Urban Mobility Package (spring 2013)

5 SUMPs in the EU Transport White Paper to "establish procedures and financial support mechanisms at European level for preparing Urban Mobility Audits and Urban Mobility Plans to "examine the possibility of a mandatory approach for cities of a certain size, according to national standards based on EU guidelines" to link regional development and cohesion funds to cities and regions that have submitted a current, and independently validated Urban Mobility Performance and Sustainability Audit certificate to consider the establishment of a European support framework for a progressive implementation of Urban Mobility Plans in European cities"

6 ELTISplus: the reference project for SUMP Knowledge consolidation, awareness raising and training on SUMP in 31 European countries Guidelines on Developing and Implementing a Sustainable Urban Mobility Plan Based on broad practitioner input from all over Europe 49 interviews with stakeholders from 26 countries online survey, expert consultations workshops with 54 experts from 19 countries

7 A Sustainable Urban Mobility Plan (SUMP) is a strategic plan designed to satisfy the mobility needs of people and businesses in cities and their surroundings for a better quality of life. It builds on existing planning practices and takes due consideration of integration, participation, and evaluation principles.

8 The SUMP planning cycle A full SUMP planning cycle includes four main phases: I: Preparing well for the planning process II: Rational and transparent goal setting III: Elaborating the plan IV: Implementing the plan SUMP Guidelines developed in ELTISplus: 11 Elements (= main steps) and 32 Activities (= detailing specific tasks) Elements and activities provide a logical rather than a sequential structure obvious timing requirements, but process resembles cycle of activities, partially running in parallel

9

10

11

12 Question to EltisPlus Can you give ideas on how to link expected cohesion fund budgets for 5 Estonian cities in the next budget period ( ) to SUMP activities? What are European examples of decentralised funding linked to SUMPs

13 EC objectives Link regional development and cohesion funds to cities and regions that have submitted a current and independently validated urban mobility performace and sustainability audit certificate 2020 strategy goals Transparent and manageable procedures Timeframe:

14 EP study - findings Only 8.1bn out of 347 bn (2,3%) of cohesion policy funding has been allocated to urban transport No SUMP: Transport infrastructure SUMP: traffic management measures Open OP bottom up process Information about funding opportunities Geographical scope

15 EP study - recommendations Tailor made information for potential beneficiaries Exchange between managing authority and transport authorities SUMP as a condition for OP funding for urban transport Guidelines on elements and implementations of SUMP Consideration of demographic change

16 Member state level Accountable for national performance in terms of European goals and legislation National priority goals Spend cohesion funding Level playing field between cities Transparent and manageable procedures Timeframe:?

17 Local level Achieve local goals Realise concrete projects Transparent and manageable procudures Capital and operational cost Timeframe =?

18 SUMP?

19 SUMP?

20 UK England - Local Transport Plans (LTP1, ; LTP2, ; LTP3, ~2026) Strategy for development of local, integrated transport supported by transport improvement programme; reference to sustainability principles; cover passenger and freight transport Mandatory for local authorities (outside London); Guidance provides framework for minimum requirements, f.e. stakeholder involvement, monitoring and evaluation LTP1&2 linked quality of the plan to national peformance funding; LTP3 introduces flexible set of principles with good practice examples Transport innovation fund Urban challenge fund Local Sustainable Transport Fund Higher involvement of stakeholders in EU budgets spending

21

22 France - Plan de Déplacement Urbains (PDU) Sustainable balance between mobility needs and accessibility as well as environmental protection and health; strategic for sustainable urban development; cover passenger and freight transport Mandatory by law for agglomarations with more than 100,000 inhabitants; Different guidance documents PDUs conditional for transport improvement funding; strong public awareness for urban mobility issues; PDU framework very complex and resource-demanding The French state subsidised the planning process as well as PT projects until The programme was reinstalled in 2009, funding 14% (= 2.5bn) of the 18bn needed to manage French local PT. Projects in this framework were only eligible if a PDU was added.

23 Stakeholder and Citizen Involvement in the Planning Process Thematic working groups and debates with local stakeholders and relevant authorities Public involvement through mobility forum and Mardi du PDU ( SUMP Tuesdays ) Your opinion. In 10 years, which will be the most important transport mode to travel through the agglomeration? Source: Lille Metropole,

24 Flanders region Situation before the mobility covenant (1996): 330 municipalities 5 provinces 13 core cities two larger cities, Antwerp and Gent 4 mid size cities several smaller cities Regional Land Use Plan, but no Regional Mobility Plan Region = road authority PT operator = regional company

25 Flanders Region Challenge: design a system that initiates reform of regional administration objectifies spending at regional level motivate local authorities to act increase skills and capacity within the local authorities

26 Comparison Traditional Transport Planning Sustainable Urban Mobility Planning Focus on traffic Focus on people Primary objective: Traffic flow capacity and speed Political mandates and planning by experts Primary objectives: Accessibility and quality of life Important stakeholders are actively involved Domain of transport engineers Interdisciplinary planning Infrastructure as the main topic Combination of infrastructure, market, services, mechanisms, information, and promotion Investment-guided planning Cost efficient achievement of goals Focus on large and costly projects Gradual efficiency increase and optimisation Limited impact assessment Intensive evaluation of impacts and shaping of a learning process

27 Mobility policy goals Derived from the spatial Structure

28 Mobility policy goals Derived from the spatial Structure Road safety

29 Mobility policy goals Derived from the spatial Structure Road safety Basic mobility Modal shift

30 The solution: the man with the plan

31

32 The solution: the mobility covenant: voluntary contract between PT operator, local authority and region committing the parties to a general framework for cooperation in which different funding streams can be activated by so called modules.

33 Commitment local authories draft a mobility plan following the procuderes defined by the region assign a responsible skilled person within the city administration that is the contact for the process carry out actions that are linked to local competence (as such - or linked with regional road network (side walks) or PT system (bus lanes or priority measures))

34 Commitment regional government Facilitate local capacity building Manuals training and exchange salary of civil servant dealing with the covenant Commit to priority road works on regional roads defined in the action plan Set up independent auditing structure

35 Commitment PT operator Engage in priority projects defined in the mobility plan Network reform Capacity increase Infrastructure improvements (bus stops)

36 Spending money in MP Modules: Clauses within the contract linked to actions for the Region or the PT operator One 'integrated' module: school environment school and parents: school travel plan Regional: safe school environment or routes PT: school bus infrastructure

37 Spending money in MP Smart principle of 'rolling programme' on road safety: regional roads black spots PT: basic mobility In order not to slow down regional government spending Modules related projects are also linked to objective external audit Large projects of regional importance are taken out of this procedure

38 Audit process 1. Plan audit: Linked to mile stone deliverables in process orientation document scenario development Action plan 2. Project audit: Procedure oriented, so not discussing the content. Two levels: Regional steering committee Provincial audit committee Benefit of Dutch language experts from the Netherlands

39 Ex post evaluation: - Topics not covered by modules drop of the radar Fast movers are slowed down by approach Inflation of mobility consultancy sector very limited cooperation between municipalities, although procedures allowed for this Internal organisation regional ministry (Mobility vs Road works) did not succeed to the fullest Balancing power remains an issue Managed by 'ministerial decree', out of scope of the parliament

40 Ex post evaluation: + Steep learning curve, also for slow movers Balancing power: Initial feelings of 'blackmail' have faded fast Immense increase of skills and capacity in the field of mobility planning Better understanding transport in cities Managed by 'ministerial decree', out of scope of the parliament Basis for mobility decree Flexible system: audit process has been changed now that planning culture has been established

41 Mobility Visioning

42 SUMP can make the difference! Vrijdagmarkt in the 1980 s and today

43 Comparison UK/F/Flemish Region Objectives differ (innovation?) Instrument differs: Internal procedures (institutions) vs law (citizens) Budget sizes and scale of projects differ PT operational context differs

44 Recommendations for Estonian context Do not make the whole budget dependent on the SUMP no to loose time initiating projects. Define a 'rolling programme' based upon common objectives Invest in local capacity building Quality assessment: - based upon procedures - external independent auditors - why not include a peer review process?

45 Assure eligibility of Proposed approach budget No only SUMP Project implementation Quality assurance Vision and objectives procedures Capacity building Planning

46