Report on the Local Site Analysis Report and List of Relevant Issues and Resources” of the Eupolis Project
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Ref. Ares(2021)2243436 - 31/03/2021 D2.2 Report on the local site analysis and list of relevant issues/problems and resource (Version 1) WP2 – Stakeholders and Communities’ Engagement and Benchmarking This project has received funding from the European Union’s Horizon 2020 Research and Innovation Program under grant agreement No 869448. The contents of this publication are the sole responsibility of the authors and can in no way be taken to reflect the views of the European Commission. D2.2 Report on the local site analysis and list of relevant issues/problems and resource Lead Contributor Čedo Maksimović (IMPERIAL COLLEGE LONDON) Stanislava Bosković (ICL) Contributors Manthos Bimpas, Emmanuel Sardis, Ranko Bozović, Mikolaj Biesaga, Maja Lalić, Natasa Djurić, Milena Zindović, Morten Rask Madsen, Alix Aliaga, Marta Chomczynska, Kinga Kruze, Renata Wlodarczyk, Betty Charalampopoulou, Tassos Karatasakis, Maria Bellou, Juliana Uribe, Xie Bixia, Sokratis Magides, Gisella Liuzzo, Elenia Drago, Natasa Tucić István Kenyeres, Erzsébet Poór-Pócsi, Ágnes Gyuró Reviewers (BPL) Juliana Uribe Aguado, Juan Pablo Rodriguez Sanchez (CEE) Due Date M6, 28 February, 2021 Delivery Date 31 March, 2021 Dissemination Level Public (PU) Participatory planning, co-design, education, stakeholders’ Keywords concerns, resources Document History Version Date Description Comments Edited by V 0.1 28nd October Draft 01 1std raft Layout Čedo Maksimović 2020 (ICL) V 0.2 8th January 2021 Draft 02 2nd layout Čedo Maksimović (ICL) V 0.3 11th January Draft 03 Structure Čedo Maksimović 2021 definition (ICL) V 0.4 2nd March 2021 Draft 04 Sent to reviewers Čedo Maksimović V 0.5 7th March 2021 Draft 05 Template Emmanuel Sardis corrections and (NTUA) full document review V 0.6 17th March 2021 Draft 06 Work on Čedo Maksimovic, reviewers' Stanislava Bosković comments V 0.7 31th March 2021 Final Work on final Čedo Maksimović comments 2 D2.2 Report on the local site analysis and list of relevant issues/problems and resource Legal Disclaimer This document reflects only the views of the author(s). Neither the Innovation and Networks Executive Agency (INEA) nor the European Commission is in any way responsible for any use that may be made of the information it contains. The information in this document is provided “as is”, and no guarantee or warranty is given that the information is fit for any particular purpose. The above referenced consortium members shall have no liability for damages of any kind including without limitation direct, special, indirect, or consequential damages that may result from the use of these materials subject to any liability, which is mandatory due to applicable law. This document and the information contained within may not be copied, used, or disclosed, entirely or partially, outside of the euPOLIS consortium without prior permission of the project partners in written form. © 2021 by euPOLIS Consortium. 3 D2.2 Report on the local site analysis and list of relevant issues/problems and resource Table of Contents Executive Summary ................................................................................................................... 7 List of Figures ............................................................................................................................. 8 List of Tables .............................................................................................................................. 9 List of Acronyms /Abbreviations ............................................................................................. 10 Introduction ..................................................................................................................... 11 1.1 Introductory note on the concept of the report ............................................................................ 13 Definitions of BGS/NBS Interventions and Planning System ........................................... 14 2.1 BGS/NBS Planning System .............................................................................................................. 14 2.2 Why is BGS Planning System needed ............................................................................................. 17 2.2.1 Planning objectives matched by capacity building/education of stakeholders ........................ 17 2.2.2 Multi-disciplinarity and multifunctionality as the basic principles of BGS Planning System ..... 18 2.2.3 Planning methodology - euPOLIS’s BGS/NBS innovative planning system/methodology in the nutshell 19 2.2.4 Goal Driven Planning Matrix and its customization for implementation on euPOLIS ............... 20 2.2.5 Examples of BGS/NBS interventions to be implemented in euPOLISs FRs ............................... 22 Stakeholders Education Guidelines ................................................................................. 26 3.1 The Mission and the Contents of the Education Guidelines........................................................... 26 3.1.1 The Mission .............................................................................................................................. 26 3.1.2 Matching the EU strategic needs by euPOLIS concept and participatory planning .................. 28 3.2 Educational needs of different stakeholder groups ....................................................................... 29 3.3 Stakeholders’ participatory planning education needs and goals within the framework of the euPOLIS project’s capacity building ........................................................................................................... 34 3.4 Stakeholders’ long-term interests as reasons for co-planning. ...................................................... 35 3.4.1 Questionnaire (Q3) for Citizens in 4 FR Cities and 5 FL Cities ................................................... 35 3.4.2 Engagement through the on-line Questionnaire ...................................................................... 35 3.4.3 Following steps to be taken by FR and FL Cities ....................................................................... 35 Specific Conditions for the FR and FL Cities DSs .............................................................. 37 4.1 Methodology of data & information gathering .............................................................................. 37 4.2 FR Cities DS preliminary information on specific conditions .......................................................... 37 4.2.1 FR City Belgrade – Linear Park and Ušće................................................................................... 37 4.2.2 FR City Gladsaxe – Pileparken................................................................................................... 40 4.2.3 FR City Łodz – Pasaz Anny Rynkowskiej .................................................................................... 42 4.2.4 FR City Piraeus – Mikrolimano, Akti Dilaveri and Ralleion ........................................................ 44 4 D2.2 Report on the local site analysis and list of relevant issues/problems and resource 4.3 FL Cities CS preliminary information on specific conditions ........................................................... 45 4.3.1 FL City of Bogota’ – El Reencuentro Case Study ....................................................................... 45 4.3.2 FL City Limassol – Public Garden Case Study ............................................................................ 46 4.3.3 FL City of Palermo – Villa Turrisi Park ....................................................................................... 48 4.3.4 FL City of Trebinje – Otok ......................................................................................................... 49 4.3.5 FL City Fengxi New City – National Pilot Sponge City................................................................ 50 Stakeholders Issues, Concerns and Resources ................................................................ 53 5.1 FR Cities - preliminary stakeholders’ issues.................................................................................... 53 5.1.1 Belgrade preliminary DS’s stakeholders’ issues ........................................................................ 53 5.1.2 Gladsaxe preliminary DS’s stakeholders’ issues ....................................................................... 55 5.1.3 Łodz preliminary DS’s stakeholders’ issues .............................................................................. 56 5.1.4 Piraeus preliminary DS’s stakeholders’ issues .......................................................................... 58 5.2 FL Cities CSs – preliminary stakeholders’ issues ............................................................................. 61 5.2.1 City of Bogotá – preliminary stakeholders’ issues .................................................................... 61 5.2.2 City of Limassol – preliminary stakeholders’ issues .................................................................. 61 5.2.3 City of Palermo – preliminary CS’s stakeholders’ issues ........................................................... 62 5.2.4 City of Trebinje – preliminary CS’s stakeholders’ issues ........................................................... 62 5.2.5 Fengxi New City – preliminary CS’s stakeholders’ issues .......................................................... 62 Implementation of participatory planning methodology ................................................ 64 6.1 The general methodology/the principles