D1.2 NEIGHBOUR- BREMEN HOOD BUDAPEST MOBILITY JERUSALEM DOSSIERS MALMÖ SOUTHEND-ON-SEA THESSALONIKI
This deliverable is a product of Work Package 1 in SUNRISE. It assembles in a documentary way the steps taken by the City Partners (Bremen, Budapest, Jerusalem, Malmö, Southend-On- Sea and Thessaloniki) towards the Co-Identification and Co-Validation of problems and needs in their Action Neighbourhoods. The performance and documentation of these steps has been supportet by the work package leader urbanista and the technical support partners Koucky & Partners AB, Rupprecht Consult, TU Vienna and Zaragoza Logistics Center. © urbanista
The CIVITAS SUNRISE project has received funding from the European Union’s Horizon 2020 research and innovation programme under grant agreement No 72 33 65 NEIGHBOURHOOD MOBILITY DOSSIER
BREMEN - AREA AROUND “NEUES HULSBERG-VIERTEL“
© urbanista More information about SUNRISE: Content www.civitas-sunrise.eu www.sunrise-bremen.de 1 INTRODUCTION 1.1 Objective and content of “Co-Identification and Co-Validation“ 4 and the Neighbourhood Mobility Dossier
The CIVITAS SUNRISE project has received funding from the European Union’s Horizon 2020 research and innovation program- me under grant agreement No 72 33 65 2 DOSSIER Title Neighbourhood Mobility Dossier of Bremen in SUNRISE [within the 2.1 Status quo description 9 phase of WP1: Co-Identification and Co-Validation of Problems and • General situation of the neighbourhood (social, economic, environmental features) Needs] • Description of the mobility issues in the neighbourhood 16 Deliverable 1.2 of the EU Project ID: 723365 2.2 Objectives, challenges, opportunities • Locally specific constellation of the main objectives, challenges and opportunities • The Participation Promise Contributors to case studies Budapest Fovaros XIV Kerulet Zuglo, Budapesti Kezlekedesi Kozpont and technical support 2.3 The Co-Identification Process 20 Zartkoruen Mukodo Reszvenytarsasag (BKK), Edinburgh Napier Uni- • Aims and Expectations versity (TRI), Fundación Zaragoza Logistics Centre (ZLC), KOUCKY • Overview about the steps taken in the Co-Identification process & Partners AB, HQ ARCHITECTS, MOBILISSIMUS, Malmo Stad, • Target groups, Tools used Freie Hansestadt Bremen, Municipality of Jerusalem, Promotion of • Constitution/formation of the Co-Creation-Forum/Core Group Opertional Links with Integrated Services, Association Internationale (POLIS), Southend-On-Sea Borough Council, Technical University 2.4 Culminating Outcomes 38 Vienna (TUW), Transport Authority of Thessaloniki SA (TheTA) • Collected needs and ideas • Contradictions and correlations 2.5 SWOT Analysis & Corridor of Options 46 Quality control Koucky & Partners AB – Sustainable Transport Consultants • SWOT strategies Alex Spielhaupter • Corridors of options
2.6 Lessons Learnt: Drivers and Barriers, Potentials and Challenges 62 Rupprecht Consult – Forschung und Beratung GmbH • Potentials Hana Peters and Ralf Brand • Challenges
2.7 Following Steps 70 Authors and Design Responsible for the content: • Conclusion drawn and further concept Susanne Findeisen, Freie Hansestadt Bremen, Der Senator für Umwelt, 2.8 Data & Expertise 72 Bau und Verkehr; • Resources the city can offer Michael Glotz-Richter, Freie Hansestadt Bremen, Der Senator für Umwelt, Bau und Verkehr
Accompanying consulting and design: References 75 urbanista GmbH & Co KG 3 Astrid Großmann & Marie-Christin Schulze Bäckerbreitergang 14, 20355 Hamburg [email protected]
Bremen | Area around “Neues Hulsberg-Viertel“ Figures 1 – 2: from upper left row to right: „Street chats” in the neighbourhood (© S. Findeisen/City of Bremen)
Figures 3 – 5: from lower left row to right: SUNRISE Kick-off event: Citizens discuss problems in the street room during the workshop (© M. Glotz-Richter/City of Bremen) Inspirational field trip to Hamburg (© M. Glotz-Richter/City of Bremen) Internal Kick-off meeting (© M. Glotz-Richter/City of Bremen) 1.0 1.1. Objective and content of “Co-Identification“ INTRODUCTION and the Neighbourhood Mobility Dossier
Occasion and Purpose organisation and implementation of a participatory process A Neighbourhood Mobility Dossier to identify, validate and has been produced in each articulate locally perceived neighbourhood as a final document mobility challenges as well as of the »Co-Identification and Co- neighbourhood specific strengths, Validation« phase – the first work weaknesses, opportunities and package of SUNRISE. The aim of this threats work package was to ensure that all The Neighbourhood Mobility Dossier SUNRISE action neighbourhoods aims to comprehensively capture – Bremen, Budapest, Jerusalem, the results of co-identification and Malmö, Southend-On-Sea and co-validation process including the Thessaloniki – lay a solid foundation factual and subjectively perceived for all following activities. This situation with regard to mobility encompassed the establishment and other related aspects. The of strategic local alliances and the Dossier serves as a guidebook for the thorough participatory identification neighbourhood themselves regarding of problems, needs and opportunities the upcoming co-creative phases (co- in each neighbourhood. development and co-implementation of sustainable mobility solutions), but Its key objectives were furthermore: also as an overview and inspiration • To guide each Action for other cities and neighbourhoods Neighbourhood in the set up and regarding the co-creative development constitution of a local Co-Creation of sustainable mobility solutions. 1 Forum (CCF) and the Core Group The set of the six Dossiers of each 2 (CG) Action Neighbourhood constitutes the • To ensure that all relevant status- final product of the Co-Identification quo information concerning the phase in SUNRISE. Additionally, a Action Neighbourhoods will be summarised overview of the results included and fully taken into of the Co-identification and Co- account validation phase will be integrated in • To instruct and support each the »Neighbourhood Mobility Action Action Neighbourhood in the Plan«3.
1The Co-Creation Forum (CCF) is a forum/platform where everyone can express their views, ideas and concerns related to the current and future mobility situation within a neighbourhood. It can bee seen as a strategic local alliance, covering the public, covering all major stakeholders. 2The Core Group (CG) works as a coordinator of the CCF in the sense of a steering committee and administrative secretariat. 3 The Neighbourhood Mobility Pathfinder is SUNRISE‘s online toolbox to enable exploitation of SUNRISE results beyond the project‘s lifetime. Bremen | Area around “Neues Hulsberg-Viertel“ 8 When? What? WP1 Who? Process Internal Kick-off Date: December 2017 Participants: invited group of key stakeholders »Co-Identification«: Objectives In chapter 2.4 the condensed PREPARATORY STEPS outcomes of the collected problems, The main objective of Co-Identification needs and ideas are illustrated a INTERNAL PREPARATORY MEETINGS b INTERNAL | INFORMATIVE KICK-OFF was to ensure that all SUNRISE and possible contradictions and INFORMATION & PREPARATION Action Neighbourhoods lay a solid correlations highlighted. EXCHANGE MILESTONE M33 foundation for the following activities. »MEMORANDUM OF Afterwards the main outcomes of UNDERSTANDING« This encompasses the establishment Field trip to mobility projects PUBLIC KICK-OFF | OFFICIAL LAUNCH EVENT the top-down and bottom up SWOT Place: Hamburg of strategic local alliances and the Date: June 2018 Analysis of the neighbourhood are Participants: public Public Kick-off with workshop thorough participatory identification Participants: public (citizens, outlined by means of the derived BRING PEOPLE TOGETHER INTRODUCE TO THE PUBLIC Place: Friedenskirche, of problems, needs, ideas and stakeholders) Bremen strategies and corridors of options. Date: February 2018 opportunities in each SUNRISE GATHER PROBLEMS Participants: public (Citizens, stakeholders) Action Neighbourhood. GAIN LOCAL AWARENESS AND NEEDS ! ! In the next chapter the lessons learnt ? ! Content and Structure of the of the Co-Identification process ? ON-SITE COLLECTING EVENTS Neighbourhood Mobility Dossier are illustrated firstly by pointing ! SUNRISE Bremen out the potentials and challenges 8* Street chats Website – online tool Place: different locations in ? Place: online that arose during the participation the SUNRISE-neighbourhood ? Date: starting To get a first impression of the ? REACH DIFFERENT February 2018 process in Co-Identification and Date: April 2018 PEOPLE IN DIFFERENT Participants: public respective neighbourhood and its Participants: public (residents, ! (citizens, stakeholders) GATHER PROBLEMS ! PLACES played a significant role for the street users) ! characteristics the Dossier starts with AND NEEDS ? an introduction of the status quo further planning and execution of participatory events. Secondly by ! situation of the neighbourhood in ! ? ? ! general and mobility wise followed naming and describing the most ! SYNTHESIS? ! ! ? ! by a description of the individual relevant drivers and barriers in the ? ! ! first work package. ! ! ? objectives, challenges, opportunities CONDENSE ? ! MERGE and limits regarding the SUNRISE Finally the next steps for the ! ? ? process of the Action Neighbourhood. upcoming co-creation phase are outcomes of former outcomes of former
The next chapter shows the Co- outlined, based on the conclusion ! participation participation ! ? processes processes Identification process-design of the drawn from the participatory activities ! ! ? of the Co-Identification process. Action Neighbourhood including >essence of problems and needs< DELIVERABLE D1.1 »SWOT REPORT« content about the tools and methods In the last step the city gives an SWOT review ( and used and groups reached as well as NLR II) REVIEW overview of what kind of data can be Date: June 2018 information about the constitution of offered (data, calculations, modelling, Participants: CG CHECK WITH EXPERTS / SPECIALISTS the Core Group (CG). legal expertise, money, speakers etc.) APPROVE AND PRIORITISE
- MILESTONE M2 >neighbourhood mobility fields of action< DELIVERABLE D1.2 »2ND NEIGHBOUR »NEIGHBOURHOOD HOOD LEARNING RETREAT« NEIGHBOURHOOD MOBILITY DOSSIER MOBILITY DOSSIER «
DOCUMENT WP1 PRESENT TO THE TRANSFER TO WP2 PUBLIC
PUBLIC INTERNAL
*All Formats and activities in SUNRISE Graphic of the ideal typical process of Co-Identification Bremen are described starting from in SUNRISE with the different steps taken. page 22 in this document. ©urbanista
9 Bremen | Area around “Neues Hulsberg-Viertel“ Bremen | Area around “Neues Hulsberg-Viertel“ 10
Presenting *Bremen and its mobility 2.0 situation DOSSIER 2.1. Status-quo description The general situation of the Neighbourhood
The Free Hanseatic City of Bremen It is an area with a wide mix of (or “State of Bremen”) is the smallest social groups: Traditionally a high of Germany’s 16 states and is situated percentage of students and academics in the North. The state consists of the live in this borough. In 2015 more City of Bremen as well as the exclave than 40 percent of the residents were of Bremerhaven, which lies around 55 young to middle aged grown-ups (age km further north, at the North Sea. 25 – 50 years old). Around 20 percent The City of Bremen has about 560,000 of the residents had a migration residents and is the 11 largest city in background. This is however Germany (Statistisches Landesamt significantly lower than in the whole Bremen, 2018 a). Bremen is part of of Bremen (more than 32 percent) the Bremen/Oldenburg Metropolitan (Statistisches Landesamt Bremen, Region, with 2.4 million people. 2018 a, b). In the last years, house prices have increased significantly Industries, trade and administration – the quarter faces gentrification. In are the backbone of Bremen’s economy. 2015, the average income of this area Today Bremen has particular expertise has been a bit over the overall city in maritime services, logistics, level (Statistisches Landesamt Bremen, aerospace engineering, wind energy 2018 a, b). and automotive. Being a harbour city, The borough is very lively, hosting Bremen suffered severely under the a large area for shopping, with structural changes of shipbuilding, restaurants, pubs and bars. Also, the fish industry etc.. The level of “Weser Stadion”, Bremen’s soccer unemployment is above German stadium, is situated in the borough. average – causing also some financial Therefore, a large number of visitors is restrictions. regularly attracted to the quarter.
The SUNRISE focus area – the Figure 6: Free Hanseatic City of surrounding streets of “Neues Bremen – Historic Hulsberg-Viertel” – belongs to the market place (© M. Glotz-Richter/ borough “Östliche Vorstadt”. It is City of Bremen) situated close to the city centre and is a densely populated residential and mixed-use area, with its 29,500 inhabitants (figure for 2015, Statistisches Landesamt Bremen, 2018 b).
Bremen | Area around “Neues Hulsberg-Viertel“ 12 Figures 8 – 11: Typical streets in the “SUNRISE –quarter”, the The general situation of the Neighbourhood surrounding of the “Neues Hulsberg-Viertel” (upper row: © S. Findeisen/City of Bremen; lower row: © City of Bremen)
Figure 7: Focus area of SUNRISE in Bremen – the surrounding streets of the “Neues Hulsberg-Viertel” (© City of Bremen)
The streets around the “Neues is a typical European neighbourhood The development and planning Hulsberg” and the hospital have been with also typical problems of overused processes for “Neues Hulsberg” have defined as the neighbourhood in street space. started in 2011/12 and are still in process. focus of SUNRISE (figure 7). These Just recently, in Mid 2018, the official streets belong to several quarters: to The “Östliche Vorstadt” is experiencing development plan entered into force. the old “Hulsberg”-quarter, “Steintor”, some new developments in one of “Fesenfeld” and “Peterswerder”. its quarters, the “Hulsberg”-Quarter: The residents and other stakeholders A local hospital (“Klinikum Bremen of the ‘Östliche Vorstadt’ have already All of those are historically evolved Mitte”) is undergoing a spatial experienced many participation quarters, with narrow streets and concentration. Only parts of the processes on various themes of houses in block construction (figure former 10 ha large hospital area will be urban development. For the new 8 – 11). Typically, the buildings are further used from the hospital – this housing area ‘Hulsberg’, an intense narrow 2 to 3 storey townhouses for 1 makes room for new housing (about participation process has started in up to 3 families. Many of the houses 1,500 new apartments, 2,200 – 2,500 2012 and will continue during the were built between the mid-19th additional inhabitants) and hospital planning and implementation phase century and the 1930s but also post- related businesses (figure 12). The new (www.neues-hulsberg.de). war buildings can be found, some residential area is referred to as “Neues
of them being apartment buildings. Hulsberg” (New Hulsberg). Figure 12: Area of new development: The spatial concentration of the Typically, the houses have only tiny hospital (Klinikum Bremen-Mitte) makes room for a new residential area (Neues Hulsberg-Viertel) (© GEG) front yards, some of them do not even have those. The „SUNRISE“ quarter 13 Bremen | Area around “Neues Hulsberg-Viertel“ Bremen | Area around “Neues Hulsberg-Viertel“ 14 Description of the Mobility Issues in the Neighbourhood
Figures 13 and 14: Station based car sharing concept Figures 15 and 16: Bremen is a “cyclists-town” – Every fourth trip is done by bike. in the public space: the “Mobil.punkt” or “Mobil. left: “bicycle-street” Humboldtstraße – where cyclists have priority (© L. O. Kvalbein) pünktchen” (for smaller stations) (© City of Bremen) right: Many school kids go to school by bike (© City of Bremen)
Bremen has a high level of sustainable The City of Bremen actively promotes The City of Bremen implements modes in the modal split of the station based car sharing, to offer car sharing stations (called ‘mobil. citizens. In total, 64 percent of all alternatives to car ownership (Figure punkt´ and `mobil. pünktchen’) in journeys of Bremen citizens are made 13–14). The 17,000 users (2019) have the narrow streets of the inner city with sustainable modes (Infas, 2019). taken more than 5,500 cars off the neighbourhoods. Here, not only car The bicycle is very present on Bremen’s road - Every cars haring car replaces sharing cars are provided, but as well streets with a 25 percent share, every about 16 private cars in Bremen [Team bike racks help to improve the parking fourth trip is done by bicycle (figure Red, 2018]. Car sharing is regarded as situation for bicycles. Extended kerbs 15 – 16). a key measure to reduce the number of at intersections improve safety – as cars in inner city areas [Bremen’s Car there is better visibility without cars Bremen is also a tram city – all public Sharing Action Plan, 2009; Bremen’s being parked into the intersection. But transport is overground. The tram Sustainable Urban Development it also helps bigger vehicles like waste is the backbone – being extended in Plan “VEP” 2025, 2014]. Therefore, collection or fire fighters to manoeuver the last two decades – even running the promotion of car sharing has into the small streets. Accessibility for into neighbouring municipalities. The become a crucial part of the strategy such vehicles is a big concern in the public transport system in Bremen in Bremen to reclaim street space – for neighbourhood. is part of a regional public transport pedestrians, cyclists, the provision of association (Verkehrsverbund cycle-parking, etc. Bremen/Niedersachsen) – 33 operators working jointly under one ticketing and information system.
15 Bremen | Area around “Neues Hulsberg-Viertel“ Bremen | Area around “Neues Hulsberg-Viertel“ 16 Bremen has recently updated its Sidewalks are partly used for car Over decades, the practice of car During the planning process of Sustainable Urban Mobility Plan (VEP parking. As a consequence, the space parking halfway on sidewalks was the new neighbourhood “Neues Verkehrsentwicklungsplan 2025) and for pedestrians is significantly reduced. accepted – although not being legal. Hulsberg” a mobility concept has won the European SUMP Award – Bicycle parking on the sidewalk The introduction of a stricter approach been developed. It builds on an not only for the ambition in terms of and garbage bins further add to the represents a problem as it would mean increased use of sustainable modes. sustainable transport but as well for problem. In many streets, people with to reduce the number of cars which The new residential area will have a its innovative participation concept. rollators, prams or shopping bags can be parked on public space. Due ratio of 4 car parking spaces per 10 Online tools were used in addition to must use the road ways instead. Illegal to the high pressure on parking space, apartments. However, it will offer high concepts of proactive consultations parking is regularly happening to the car parking has become emotionally quality bicycle parking, car sharing (e.g. on Saturdays in shopping centres) extent that fire brigades cannot pass charged and an extremely sensitive and services for bike sharing, freight and with an online scenario game. many streets and crossings. theme within the neighbourhood as delivery etc. as integral part of the With this concept, new (younger) Currently the residents have to share well as a political issue. innovative mobility concept. Street groups got involved – and the intense the space with visitors of the shops, space will primarily be dedicated involvement on the political level restaurants and also with visitors The integration of the new to pedestrians and cyclists with no led to an unanimous decision in the of the hospital. Although a parking neighbourhood “Neues Hulsberg” car parking except for handicapped. political bodies on the Bremen SUMP garage for visitors and employees of might increase already existing While those ambitious mobility goals (2014). the hospital will be build, it is expected problems: While a significant number of car-reduced living add to the living that people try to avoid the parking of new residents will move to this quality of the new neighbourhood, The street space of the direct fee and search for free parking spots in quarter, the parking situation might there is a certain risk of shifting the neighbourhood of the “Neues the surrounding streets. become even more difficult at the additional stationary traffic coming Hulsberg” area – the focus area of same time. The former hospital area, with the new residents into the SUNRISE – is heavily overused these days used as parking space by surrounding streets. (Figures 17–18). Although the modal residents and visitors, will not be Also, the hospital is working on a split of the neighbourhood shows a available for this purpose anymore. mobility concept – this process is still preference of non-motorised modes The options for building new in progress. There are ongoing debates (which are quite space efficient), the neighbourhood garages are limited about how to reduce the risks of obvious and widely discussed key due to rarely available space. In attracting more car traffic (of visitors problem is the high pressure of car addition, construction costs are high and patients) and how to prevent cars parking and its related consumption and adequate parking fees will not be parking in the residential area next to of street space. accepted if there is free parking space the hospital. close-by (on public streets).
Figure 17: One of the main problems related to car parking in the Bremen borough “Östliche Vorstadt” is illegal parking, which also can result in blocking fire engines (© M. Glotz-Richter/ City of Bremen)
Figure 18: One of the main problems related to car parking in the Bremen borough “Östliche Vorstadt” is illegal parking, which also can result in blocking fire engines (© S. Findeisen/ City of Bremen)
17 Bremen | Area around “Neues Hulsberg-Viertel“ Bremen | Area around “Neues Hulsberg-Viertel“ 18
What is *SUNRISE 2.2. Objectives, challenges, opportunities aiming for in Bremen? Locally specific constellation of the main objectives, challenges Concrete qualitative targets have and opportunities be allocated to all street users – also been defined for SUNRISE in Bremen pedestrians, bike riders, children and with regard to car sharing, which is a disabled persons – in a fairer manner concepts, implementation of solutions Objectives of the Neighbourhood suitable measure for reclaiming street (Figure 20, 21). It can be assumed, and evaluation of results. in the SUNRISE Project space for all street users: about 500 that changing those long established The development of solutions shall new car sharing users – and about 100 practices will create strong conflicts be based on the discussion with and The aim of the Bremen SUNRISE cars shall be taken off the roads. with the car owners and finding some among citizens and stakeholders as activities is to foster innovative consensus between car owners and well as on quantitative data derived sustainable mobility options. It will be Main Challenges of the Project other street users might be difficult. from the SUNRISE study on parking the goal to develop a concept to reduce Therefore it needs the political will to in the neighbourhood. space consumption of parked cars and SUNRISE will deal with an extremely change things in favour of those whose to carry out a pilot demonstration of sensitive and highly controversial interests were neglected for a long The vision for the SUNRISE re-allocating street space to walking, issue, which is regularly subject in time – like pedestrians, bike riders, neighbourhood – the surrounding cycle-parking, greening etc. the local media: space consumption children and disabled persons. of the „Neues Hulsberg”-Quarter is: by parked cars in residential areas Another challenge of SUNRISE is As for many European cities with • keeping routes for fire engines (figure 19 and 20). It is the established the relatively short duration of the intense problems in streets due to clear at all times practice to tolerate illegal parked cars project (4 years). Urban development high parking pressure, any change by • a better and fair use of the limited (e.g. halfway on the pathways) in and mobility projects often are long reorganising limited street space is street space available many neighbourhoods in Bremen for processes, which need a suitable time a sensitive political issue. Despite all • improved mobility of all decades. This has led to the perception frame for the development, planning images of Germans keeping rules - population groups and increased that those parking habits are legal and implementation phases. there is poor rule-keeping in traffic, use of sustainable mobility options or – at least – do not result in any especially related to speeding and consequences. Also, parking of cars on • improved quality of stay and parking. The low level of fines - being public space is for free in most areas quality of life in the streets of the set by federal regulations - is leading to of the neighbourhood. This leads to neighbourhood. severe problems in all German cities. an attitude of entitlement, that public The discussion about car-parking is Within the four years project space can be occupied with private emotionally overcharged due to the vehicles. On the other hand more and various citizens‘ interests: parking the duration the following should be achieved: more opposition against this car- own car, having sufficient space for friendly practice is formed. Citizens pedestrians, including handicapped • a concept for innovative, sustainable and activists demand that blocking the or guaranteeing good accessibility for mobility solutions and a coordinated ways of other street users must stop firefighters. It is seen as a special value action plan agreed with local and the limited space available must of SUNRISE to initiate and moderate residents and stakeholders the necessary debate among citizens • individual measures to improve - being aware that there will be no the use of street space and to foster solution that will make everybody sustainable mobility – implemented happy. and tested in an exemplary manner Figure 19: Local Newspaper “Weser • a sound basis for further, medium to Kurier”, 27.09.2018 (“Here the parking pressure is It is also the aim of SUNRISE to long-term implementation after the especially high”) carry out an intense “co-creation” end of the project process: Street-users, residents, • increased trust between residents businesses and other stakeholders and stakeholders in order to continue shall participate in all phases of the the dialogue and to work on further process; including the identification Figure 20: Local Newspaper “Weser sustainable solutions for the street Kurier”, 03.02.2018 of problems, the development of (“Parking spaces to become scarce and space in the neighbourhood expensive”) 19 20
What *happend in The single phases can be deferred by the process of urban and mobility 2.3. The Co-Identification Process many factors which are outside the development in a systematic and Bremen sphere of influences (e.g. decision- integrated manner. This represents so far? making in political processes, the an opportunity to find sound and involvement of many stakeholders, the sustainable solutions and to initiate Aims and Expectations time slots granted by the responsible substantial changes in the street space authorities for construction works of the neighbourhood. etc.). Also the intense participation Aims of the participation process process of SUNRISE is very time consuming. In a good bottom-up- The participation process in SUNRISE process the process needs to have a shall go beyond the standards certain flexibility, to react on the needs legally required. It encompasses the of the citizens in the different project consultation of the public in all phases phases. Additional process steps might of the project – from the identification be required. Producing “measurable” of local needs, the development of new outputs within the time span of solutions towards the implementation SUNRISE is therefore a real challenge and evaluation of them. and in many cases beyond the control Interested citizens, residents, stakeholders of the SUNRISE project management. etc. can become involved by: The SUNRISE project budget for the actual implementation is very • bringing problem descriptions small. Furthermore, Bremen is a state and formulating own wishes and with a very tight financial budget, ideas; so that the financing of mobility measures is strictly limited to the most • developing and discussing needed actions. The financing of the solution approaches, the action implementation of measures is unclear plan and measures; and might only be possible in the • initiating, joining or supporting medium or long term. implementation activities; of the neighbourhood. • collaborating in the evaluation of outputs and the process; Main Opportunities of the Project • participating in shaping the Currently there are a number procedural steps and formats of of parallel initiatives in the the participation process. neighbourhood that enforce a debate about the use of street space, illegal car parking and the need for pricing public space for car parking. It seems as it is the right time for initiating a change. Supported by those other initiatives, SUNRISE might be able to use this momentum. The issues in the SUNRISE neighbourhood are complex and the problems have been subject of debates among the residents, the borough Figure 21: Magazine of Bremen’s office of the German Cyclists' administration and the borough Federation (ADFC), 10/2018, parliament for years. SUNRISE has Topic “How will we use space in the city? – The absurd normality the (personal) resources to manage of the distribution of urban space“
21 Bremen | Area around “Neues Hulsberg-Viertel“ Bremen | Area around “Neues Hulsberg-Viertel“ 22
How is *bottom-up 2.3. The Co-Identification Process participation organised in Participation Promise Bremen?
How is the participation process What does “participation” mean in The use of street space and parking What financial resources are designed? SUNRISE? of cars is a topic, which is discussed available through SUNRISE? SUNRISE will be implemented by The participation process in SUNRISE very controversially. Therefore, it can SUNRISE is funded by the European running a highly participatory “co- goes beyond what is required by law. be expected, that the input from the Commission’ research and innovation creation” process in all phases of the It encompasses the consultation of the citizens will be very divers – reflecting programme “Horizon 2020”. The project, including the identification of public in all phases of the project – the diverse interests, needs and financial resources available for the problems and needs, the development from the identification of local needs, convictions of the people. When it City partners (e.g. Bremen) mainly of concepts, the implementation of the development of new solutions comes to re-allocating street space, cover the personnel costs to set up and solutions and evaluation of results. towards the implementation and there will be one group who will “gain” manage the participation process, the Everyone who is interested shall evaluation of them. from the changes, but there will be development of an action plan, the feel invited to express ideas and others, who may experience negative In SUNRISE, participation of a wide implementation of pilot solutions, the concerns related to the current and effects. It therefore can be expected range of stakeholder groups shall evaluation of results and processes. future mobility situation and the use that there will be no consensus with be facilitated. Specific efforts will be Being funded as a research project, of street space within the Hulsberg regard to some of the measures taken. made to involve groups which often the project has rather limited funding neighbourhood: street users, residents, It is clear from the start, that not all are underrepresented in participation available for investments. Only businesses, individuals, initiatives wishes and ideas can be fulfilled. processes (e.g. by target group specific trials of solutions (pilots) identified or organisations. Participation is workshops). for the locations as well as small facilitated via: Who is involved in decision making scale interventions can be covered in SUNRISE? What will be done with the input by the SUNRISE funding from the • the „Co-Creation Forum“: from the citizens? Decision making in SUNRISE is European Commission. Therefore, the This is the overall framework carried out according to the applicable implementation of further measures The ideas and suggestions from the for participation in SUNRISE – legislation. The sovereignty of the has to be covered by other sources people becoming involved will be the “platform” on which all responsible bodies remains untouched. identified within SUNRISE. taken up and represent the basis for participation activities are carried Depending on the type, scope and the further working steps within out, where participants meet and impact of the measures, decisions are SUNRISE: The input received from get involved; taken by, for example: What is the focus area of SUNRISE the participating residents and • the Borough Parliament in Bremen? other stakeholders will be collected • The Core Group (“Projektbeirat”) (“Stadtteilbeirat”); and analysed by the SUNRISE In Bremen, SUNRISE will focus on the This is formed from membersof • the administration of the Free project team, considering technical direct neighbourhood of the “Neues the Co-Creation Forum (citizens Hanseatic City of Bremen feasibilities, financial and legal Hulsberg-Viertel”, the new housing and stakeholders). The core e.g. by the Road Authority (“Amt für implications or interdependencies area currently being developed, and of group meets regularly and Straßen und Verkehr”); within the whole mobility system. the hospital “Klinikum Bremen Mitte”. works in cooperation with the • the City of Bremen‘s Deputation for It will also be the task of the SUNRISE Figure 1 gives an indication about SUNRISE implementation Team Environment, Construction, Traffic, implementation team (City of the approximate extension of the from the City of Bremen on the Urban Development, Energy and Bremen), in cooperation with the core “SUNRISE-Neighbourhood”. development of the project and Agriculture; group, to weigh the different positions. discussion of results. • Bremen’s Parliament This way, also the interests of groups (“Bürgerschaft”); can be adequately considered, who do • private actors, investors, others. not have the opportunity or ability to become involved in the project in the same extent as other groups can (e.g. mobility impaired people).
23 Bremen | Area around “Neues Hulsberg-Viertel“ Bremen | Area around “Neues Hulsberg-Viertel“ 24 What is the timeframe of SUNRISE? Which are our principles for All relevant (intermediate) results of The project duration of SUNRISE is working together? the SUNRISE activities in Bremen will four years: from May 2017 to April In SUNRISE, we want follow the be documented in reports and made 2021. All direct activities of SUNRISE following principles of working available. Furthermore, all relevant need to be carried out within this together: official SUNRISE “deliverables” (EU- timeframe. Nevertheless, there will • all voices and ideas, different project language: English) will be be more long-term impacts – as perspectives and opinions are made available for interested citizens behavioural impacts can be part of a heard and valued in the project and stakeholders. longer process. • we facilitate an open discussion and carry out a neutral moderation SUNRISE is a European Research • we make processes and results Project – What does this imply? transparent for the citizens and Being funded by the European stakeholders Commission’s research and innovation • formal responsibilities e.g. of programme “Horizon 2020”, SUNRISE the politically elected bodies are has significant research elements. The respected. SUNRISE processes themselves and their impacts will be systematically How will transparency of the steps described and assessed in order to and methods taken through the extract transferable key lessons learnt. process be ensured? This extraction of lessons will not Transparency is ensured by regularly only take place towards the end of providing information on the the project, but throughout the life SUNRISE processes, results and the of the project, for constant reflection current status of the project. A wide to “learn as we go”, as well as build range of communication channels guidance for future projects. will be applied to reach the different As a part of a European consortium, stakeholder groups and the general we will share learning and inspiration public with partner cities (Bremen, Budapest, • the SUNRISE website (www. Jerusalem, Malmö and Thessaloniki) sunrise-bremen.de) and will receive guidance and • SUNRISE newsletter or emails assistance of a number of SUNRISE to those having subscribed to “Technical Support” partners. In a the SUNRISE-distribution (all ‘media society’, there is a growing interested persons can subscribe role of ‘lighthouse projects’ and ‘best under www.sunrise-bremen.de) practice examples’ elsewhere that inspires and influences local politics • presentations at specific SUNRISE and decision-making. events, workshops etc. • presentations of SUNRISE at external events, like public meetings of the Borough Parliament, conferences etc. • press releases • articles, interviews etc.
25 Bremen | Area around “Neues Hulsberg-Viertel“ Bremen | Area around “Neues Hulsberg-Viertel“ 26 Process Design
The implementation of SUNRISE WP 2: Identification and selection WP4: Assessment and Evaluation WP5: Joint Learning, follows a similar approach in all of mobility solutions for the of outputs and processes Communication activities six participating neighbourhoods, neighbourhood (“Co-assessment & co-evaluation”) (“Co-learning & Uptake”) which has been predefined in the (“Co-development & co-selection The objective of this work package This work package includes all proposal. SUNRISE consists of six of solutions”) is to identify optimal (as well as dissemination and communication work packages (WP): Novel solutions are developed, problematic) co-creation techniques activities from the neighbourhoods prioritised and selected in this work (i.e. participation methods) and to inform, activate and involve WP 1: Inventory of problems and package, through a collaboration of solutions for changing mobility residents and other stakeholders needs in the neighbourhoods, residents and stakeholders that are patterns with an explicit view (e.g. by project websites, newsletters together with residents and interested in, affected by and required on transferability. Participation etc.). Furthermore, findings are stakeholders for the implementation, operation and processes applied and the impact of disseminated towards other cities and (“Co-identification of problems & maintenance of these solutions. The the developed novel solutions are the European research community. co-validation of needs”) key output will be a Neighbourhood analysed, assessed and evaluated, An exchange and “co-learning” within It is the objective to identify Mobility Action Plan for each both quantitatively and qualitatively. the SUNRISE consortium and with and validate local mobility- neighbourhood. The results will be documented so called “Take-Up Cities” which are related problems as perceived by in assessment, evaluation and interested to benefit from the results residents and businesses of the WP3: Pilot-like implementation transferability reports. A key output and findings of SUNRISE is organised. action neighbourhoods through and testing of solutions will be final “Lessons Learned” Bremen is additionally active in collaborative processes. The overall (“Co-implementation & co-creation documents. various networks of cities on national, participation process of the project of solutions”) European and international level. is set up. Residents and other local Work package 3 deals with the stakeholders are invited and activated implement of innovative solutions to participate in the project. The open through co-creative processes WP 6: Project Management participation process is launched involving residents and other This work package involves with the identification of problems stakeholders. Within the framework activities like regular financial and of needs in the neighbourhood. The of SUNRISE, solutions will be technical reporting to the European outputs of this work package include exemplary tested (pilot actions). Commission and consortium the neighbourhood mobility status Concrete improvements of people’s meetings. quo description, co-identified and quality of life shall be achieved from co-validated inventory of mobility these pilot activities. Furthermore, concerns and challenges expressed recommendations will be developed by citizens, experts and stakeholders to facilitate learning from experience and a SWOT analysis. The key output made within the SUNRISE cities, will be the Neighbourhood Mobility for other interested cities (e.g. a Dossier. position paper on SNMP Sustainable Neighbourhood Mobility Planning).
27 Bremen | Area around “Neues Hulsberg-Viertel“ Bremen | Area around “Neues Hulsberg-Viertel“ 28 2.3. The Co-Identification Process
Tools, formats, events Figure 25: SUNRISE Kick-off Meeting: Key note speaker Michael Koucky (partner of the SUNRISE consortium) presents how other ci- ties deal with sustainable mobility and parking problems (© M.Glotz-Richter/City of Bremen)
Figure 22: Internal Kick-off meeting (© M. Glotz-Richter/ City of Bremen) Figure 23: SUNRISE Flyer (City of Bremen) Figure 24: SUNRISE Kick-off event: Citizens discuss problems in the street room during the Figure 26: Online participation tool on the SUNRISE website: Stated “problems”, “ideas” and workshop (© Gerald Weßel) “good examples” can be allocated to a specific location in the neighbourhood
Internal kick-off meeting (Dec 2017) Start of public relation activities Public kick-off-event (Feb 2018) SUNRISE-website with online The internal kick-off meeting has A wide range of public relation A public evening event has been participation tool (questionnaire) been organised as a three-hour activities have been started in the carried out as an information event (Since Feb 2018) workshop, to introduce SUNRISE, to first phase of SUNRISE, to reach and and workshop. It was the aim to A project website for Bremen’s identify core group members and to involve (a cross section) of citizens and inform about SUNRISE, to safeguard SUNRISE activities has been set up safeguard support and involvement relevant stakeholders, to inform about acceptance and support from with the aid of SUNRISE partner from relevant stakeholders. Around the project, ongoing processes and citizens and to involve them into the Urbanista, to provide online 15 invited representatives of key upcoming events and to report about participation process to come. A key information and frequent updates stakeholder groups have participated: latest developments. The activities have note speech on sustainable mobility about the project (www.sunrise- the Borough Administration, included the production of press releases, solutions in other cities was held by bremen.de). A key feature of the the elected Borough Parliament, the production and distribution of PR Michael Koucky, technical support website is the online participation the Management of the hospital material/ project information, interviews partner in the SUNRISE project tool, which allows citizens and “Klinikum Bremen Mitte”, the in newspapers/ magazines or invitations and mobility expert from Göteborg, stakeholders to contribute their Development Agency of the new of the press to events. There have been Sweden. Last but not least, a workshop opinion within the co-creation neighbourhood “Neues Hulsberg- a good and positive media echo. The has been carried out in which the process, independent from physical Viertel” (GEG), Fire department activities will be continued until the end participants had the opportunity events or workshops. The online (Preventive fire protection), Chamber of the project. to identify problems in the street tool also has been used to display of Commerce, Bremen’s parking room and contribute ideas or good all contributions (including those space management, automobile club examples. Around 80 participants – collected at non-line activities), for (ADAC), German Cyclists‘ Federation interested residents, representatives maximum transparency. The online (ADFC) etc.. The meeting has been of local initiatives, businesses, tool (“NEXTSEVENTEEN” tool) has very successful. The project has been administration etc. – took part in the been kindly provided by Urbanista. received well and everybody expressed event. their willingness to support SUNRISE. A number of participants agreed to become a member of the core group. 29 Bremen | Area around “Neues Hulsberg-Viertel“ Bremen | Area around “Neues Hulsberg-Viertel“ 30 Figure 30: Test ride of Bremen’s fire brigade within the SUNRISE neighbourhood, with local media Figure 27: Example of the wide and positive coverage invited (© S. Findeisen/City of of SUNRISE by local media Bremen)
Figure 28: SUNRISE Newsletter Figure 29: “Street chats” in the neighbourhood (© KW Schlie ) Figure 31: Internal Workshop with the SUNRISE core group (“Projektbeirat”) Figure 32: Inspirational field trip to Hamburg (© S. Findeisen /City of Bremen) (© S. Findeisen/City of Bremen)
SUNRISE Bremen newsletter and DIN-A0 street map and prepared Workshop with Core Group Field trip to projects on sustainable email communications cards to collect the input of the people. (June 2018) mobility in neighbourhoods Interested citizens have been provided The team was present at eight dates A three-hour internal workshop has (June 2018) with direct information on SUNRISE and different locations. The aim was been successfully carried out with the An inspirational one-day field trip by means of a SUNRISE newsletter to make the project known to more members of the SUNRISE core group. was organised for interested residents and email communications. Around residents, to talk directly to residents The group jointly validated the SWOT- and other stakeholders to Hamburg 80 persons have registered for the and street users on site and to collect Analysis, which had been prepared by (projects visited: “Neue Mitte Altona” mailing list within a few months. their views on problems, ideas, the SUNRISE team on the basis of the and “HafenCity”). The main aim was good examples. Around 110 persons citizen’s contributions. Furthermore, to collect impressions and ideas from Series of eight “Street Chats” participated – mostly residents passing the workshops was used to exchange other projects on sustainable mobility (Straßengespräche) (Apr 2018) the stand by chance. However, some on the process so far and to discuss the solutions. The trip was also used to people visited the stand on purpose, An opportunity for direct dialogues plans for the further SUNRISE process exchange about the ongoing work after having read about it in the with residents and “street users” in (“Neighbourhood learning retreat”) in SUNRISE and to discuss the joint newspaper, to use the opportunity the neighbourhood was organised by further processes (“Neighbourhood to talk to the SUNRISE team and to means of series of “Street Chats”. The Learning Retreat”). Last but not least, contribute their views. SUNRISE team was present in the the trip served the purpose of team- neighbourhood with a “mobile market building. Being a successful event, stand”, equipped with a tent, table, more field trips will be organised.
31 Bremen | Area around “Neues Hulsberg-Viertel“ Bremen | Area around “Neues Hulsberg-Viertel“ 32
Who are the *participants Target groups and participants in SUNRISE in Bremen?
In SUNRISE, participation of a wide as an interface between SUNRISE Police German Cyclists‘ Federation range of stakeholder groups shall and various initiatives • responsible contact for aspects (ADFC) be facilitated. Specific efforts will be • brings in long term experience of safety on the streets of the • represents cyclists and their made to involve groups, which often about political conflicts and their neighbourhood - especially requirements are underrepresented in participation solution in the neighbourhood concerning traffic aspects • becomes involved in the processes (e.g. mobility impaired • is involved in the development of • becomes involved in the development of solutions and in people). solutions and in decision-making development of solutions and in their implementation The participation process of SUNRISE for their implementation their implementation shall contribute to an increased trust Citizen’s initiative for the between citizens, other stakeholders Management of hospital Fire department development of a cooperative and decision-makers. It also shall exchange about the hospital’s • responsible contact for aspects of housing project in the new neigh- increase the understanding and mobility concept, how displacement preventive fire protection in the bourhood (“Stadtteilgenossenschaft appreciation of the demands of all effects of car parking (of visitors neighbourhood Neues Hulsberg”) street users and of sustainable mobility and employees of the hospital) into the • supports SUNRISE with test rides • represents citizens, who actively options. neighbourhood can be prevented with the fire brigade’s vehicles on seek to develop new solutions for • contributes to finding synergy the streets of the neighbourhood the new development area (Neues Citizens effects with the SUNRISE • becomes involved in the Hulsberg Viertel) • contribute their view on problems neighbourhood development of solutions and in • can contribute to finding synergy and own ideas as being „experts“ • involved in the development their implementation effects with the SUNRISE for their neighbourhood of solutions and in their neighbourhood • become involved in the planning implementation Chamber of Commerce • becomes involved in the and implementation of solutions • represents the business community development of solutions and in • learn about sustainable mobility Development Agency of New and their needs their implementation solutions Neighbourhood (Neues Hulsberg) • becomes involved in the • interaction between the „new“ development of solutions and in Association, which provides Borough administration and the surrounding „old“ their implementation ambulant care (“Ambulante • organises support in the borough neighbourhood in relation to Versorgungsbrücke e.V.”) with a wide range of stakeholders mobility and urban development Bremen’s parking space • represent elderly or mobility • acts as an interface between in general management (BREPARK) impaired people and their SUNRISE and various initiatives in • provides an exchange about • responsible for parking space requirements in street space the neighbourhood as well as to the mobility concept of the management, operation of parking • becomes involved in the the elected borough parliament “Neues Hulsberg-Viertel”, how garages and implementation of on- development of solutions and in („Stadtteilbeirat“); displacement effects of parking street car sharing stations etc. their implementation • brings in long term experiences cars into the neighbourhood can • becomes involved in the from work in the neighbourhood be prevented development of solutions and in Ministry of Internal Affairs (Senator • becomes involved in the • contributes to finding synergy their implementation für Inneres, der Freien Hansestadt development of solutions and in effects with the SUNRISE Bremen) their implementation neighbourhood Automobile Club (ADAC) • is responsible for issues relating to • involved in the development • represents motorists and their the police and public order Elected Borough parliament of solutions and in their requirements • becomes involved in the • democratically legitimated implementation • becomes involved in the development of solutions and representation of the citizens in development of solutions and in possible in their implementation the borough their implementation • acts in the participation process
33 Bremen | Area around “Neues Hulsberg-Viertel“ Bremen | Area around “Neues Hulsberg-Viertel“ 34 2.3. The Co-Identification Process
Constitution/Formation of the Core Group Current members of the Core Group
Set Up of the Core Group (CG) Work mode of the Core Group • Susanne Findeisen • Florian Kommer The implementation of the core group Decision making procedures Project Manager responsible for Property Development Agency was very successful and without There are no strict decision-making SUNRISE at Free Hanseatic Hospital Bremen-Mitte (GEG problems, as key stakeholders had a procedures established for the CG. The City of Bremen, Ministry of the Grundstücksentwicklung Klinikum strong professional and/or personal group works with open discussions, Environment, Urban Development Bremen-Mitte GmbH & Co KG) interest in improving the mobility exchanging arguments, mostly and Transportation (Der Senator für situation in the SUNRISE quarter resulting in consensual decisions Umwelt, Bau und Verkehr – SUBV) • Anne Mechels and they have been willing to become or compromises. Decision making Citizen’s initiative for the • Michael Glotz-Richter directly involved. The involvement on major issues (e.g. approval of development of a cooperative Project Manager responsible of key stakeholders needed diverse action plan measures) is carried out housing project in the new for Sustainable Mobility at Free informal meetings in advance, to according to the applicable legislation. neighbourhood Hanseatic City of Bremen, Ministry inform about the project, its targets, The sovereignty of the responsible (“Stadtteilgenossenschaft of the Environment, Urban the planned processes etc. It has been bodies remains untouched. Depending Neues Hulsberg”) Development and Transportation supportive that many of the core group on the type, scope and impact of the (Der Senator für Umwelt, Bau und members and parts of the SUNRISE measures, decisions are taken. • Frank Möller team have known each other before. Verkehr – SUBV) Fire Department Bremen
Some have worked together before (Feuerwehr Bremen) • Daniel de Olano in other professional contexts, and in Borough Parliament (Stadtteilbeirat many cases, there have been already • Daniela Wendorff Östliche Vorstadt) established trustful relations. Hospital Bremen Mitte (Klinikum • Sven Eckert Bremen Mitte) • Format: open group, with irregular German Cyclists‘ Federation (ADFC) meetings every couple of months • Elsbeth Rütten (due to time constraints of relevant • Steffen Eilers Ambulantory Supply Bridge key stakeholders) Borough Parliament (Stadtteilbeirat Initiative (Ambulante • Legal form: No legal form Östliche Vorstadt) Versorgungsbrücke AVB) • Meeting place: Different meetings places, e.g. rooms from borough • Hellena Harttung • Dirk Matthies administration, rooms of SUNRISE Borough Administration (Ortsamt Automobile club (ADAC) management team (of Free Hanseatic Bremen Mitte/Östliche Vorstadt) City of Bremen) • Axel Lindemann • Funds: no funds • Andreas Kartscher Police Bremen (Police Station • The SUNRISE implementation team BREPARK GmbH - Bremen‘s Steintor) is the head of the core group parking garage operator • Torsten Öljeschläger • Helmut Kersting Ministry of Internal Affairs (Der Borough Parliament (Stadtteilbeirat Senator für Inneres) Östliche Vorstadt) • Olaf Orb Chamber of Commerce (Handelskammer)
35 Bremen | Area around “Neues Hulsberg-Viertel“ Bremen | Area around “Neues Hulsberg-Viertel“ 36 The results of the Co-Identification phase: The process from collection towards synthesis
Establishment of dedicated 2018: concrete problems in the street SUNRISE core group space, ideas suitable to overcome (“Projektbeirat”) problems or good examples on how A SUNRISE core group has been former problems have been solved identified and established. The successfully. Furthermore, strategies members represent important and options for actions have been stakeholder groups and work brought in by the core group. dedicated on the success of SUNRISE.
Increase of knowledge on Figure 33: The structure of the participation Establishment of communication sustainable mobility (“co-creation”) process, © City of Bremen channels to the target groups and Members of the SUNRISE Team, effective communication the core group, citizens and other Successful first phase of co- Communication channel to interested stakeholders increased their creation process • Contributions have shown the stakeholders, citizens have successfully knowledge on sustainable mobility Overall, the project has been well whole spectre of problems. been established (e.g. newsletter, options and could learn from best received so far. A wide range of key However, the contributions cannot website) to inform them directly about practice examples. stakeholders support the project, many be considered as “representative”. the project, the ongoing process and of them as part of the core group. participation opportunities. Validation of top-down SWOT Furthermore, citizens have been open The first participation phase has Analysis and supportive and show appreciation been very successful. Overall, 381 Involvement of citizens and On the basis of bottom-up for the project. contributions (=statements cards) stakeholders into the project characterisation of the neighbourhood from citizens have been collected Citizens and stakeholders have actively and own research a SWOT-Analysis Data collection from the end of February until the participated via the online-tool and has been produced by the SUNRISE- • All contributions from citizens beginning of June 2018. Around 200 at events (e.g. Public Kick-off event, team, which has been validated by have been made visible through persons contributed their statements “street chats”). the core group (during the “SWOT- the online-tool in the kick-off-Workshop, via the Workshop”). • Online contributions are directly online-tool and in the series of eight Awareness on SUNRISE in the visible „Street Chats“. public, with stakeholders and Validation of options for actions • “non-line” contributions (from The 381 filled out “statement cards” institutions Options for actions have been workshops, street chats) are contained: The public, stakeholders and discussed and validated with the core transferred into the online-tool institutions have been made aware of group (Workshop to validate options • 321 statements on specific prob- (with clear identification of the lems: SUNRISE, by public relation activities for actions). date and location of contribution) and events carried out. by the SUNRISE team • 285 of those referring to the Feedback on the process so far and locations with the SUNRISE • Contributions of citizens and ideas for the SUNRISE process ahead neighbourhood (shown in Bottom-up identification of stakeholders (problems/ideas/good detail below) problems, ideas, good examples The core group members provided examples) have been analysed and • 32 refer to other locations The first participation phase has been feedback on the SUNRISE process grouped with regard to “topics • 4 „other“ statements, not successfully carried out. Around so far and contributed new ideas for mentioned” the implementation of SUNRISE. The directly relevant 380 contributions from approx. 200 • Summaries of citizens input, with excursion to projects in Hamburg persons have been collected in an example “quotes” and locations • 97 statements on specific ideas served as inspiration. open process with on-street market mentioned in this context have • 36 good examples stands and as well internet based been produced tools between February and June • Results have been used as basis for SWOT Analysis and strategy development
37 Bremen | Area around “Neues Hulsberg-Viertel“ Bremen | Area around “Neues Hulsberg-Viertel“ 38
Which are *the essential 2.4. Culminating Outcomes ideas, problems and needs on Collected problems mobility in (285*) Bremen?
#Illegal parking (56*) #High parking pressure (37*) #Quality of life/environment/ #Risks of accidents (12*) room for children (26*)
• Illegal parking (inclusive parking halfway on side- • Non-residents (visitors) use the parking space • Noise pollution (10*) (e.g. St.-Jürgen-Straße, • Risks of accidents, uncertain traffic situation walks) blocks other street users (46*) (18*) Bismarckstraße) (12*) (e.g. Kleine Bismarckstraße, St.-Jür- gen-Straße/Graf-Haeseler-Straße, Fried- • Illegal parking reduces the accessibility of streets • Not enough parking space (6*) • Not sufficient space for child’s play (6*) rich-Karl-Straße, Manteuffelstraße) for the fire brigade (reduced security) and waste • Not enough/destroyed greenery (4*) collection vehicles or delivery vans (10*) • “Temporary” residential parking at football games is not ideal (6*) • Air pollution (2*) • Anticipated increase of parking pressure due to #Route Connection (4*) # the development of “Neues Hulsberg” quarter • Missing places to sit (benches etc.) (2*) #Bike paths, space for cycling (42*) (4*) • Polluted street room (waste etc.) (2*) • Missing route connections for pedestrians and • Loss of parking space (3*) cyclists (4*) (Out of this: 3* route across the • Problems within the bicycle street (14*) (out of hospital area) this: 13* Humboldtstraße) #Car traffic and related road • Cycling on cobblestone (8*) #Behaviour of other road users (34*) infrastructure (21*) • Bad condition of the bike path (e.g. Fried- #Public transport (3*) rich-Karl-Straße, St.-Jürgen-Straße, Verdener • High traffic volume (10*) Straße) (6*) (z.B. Friedrich-Karl-Straße, Bismarckstraße) • Speeding (13*) • High ticket prices (2*) • Too narrow width of the carriageway (6*) • Narrow bike paths (5*) (e.g. Am Schwarzen Meer, • Non-compliant behaviour or limited knowledge (out of this: 5* Friedrich-Karl-Straße) • Missing tram/bus stations (1*) Am Hulsberg, St.-Jürgen-Straße) of traffic rules (e.g. rights of cyclists are not granted by car divers, cyclists ride on the wrong • A lot of through traffic (4*) • Risk for cyclists due to tram lines (Vor dem side of the road, cars illegally turning) (9*) Steintor) (5*) • Bad condition of carriageway • Cycling on sidewalks (5*) (“kleine Bismarckstraße”) (1*) • Risk for cyclists due to opening car doors (2*) The list summarises the 285 specific • (Little) consideration of other road users (e.g. problems referring to locations within • Narrow distance of carriageway and bike paths; from cars who overtake cyclists or from fast narrow distance of sidewalks and bike baths (2*) cyclists) (4*) the SUNRISE neighbourhood and how #Conditions for pedestrians/ often they have been mentioned. • Car drivers crossing the traffic lights when the accessibility (16*) lights are red (3*) Comments: • Problems due to cobblestones (3*) (e.g. Wendt- straße, Graf-Waldersee-Straße, Hemelinger • 4* contributions did not target the Straße) concrete topic, they have not been #Problematic crossings (34*) included in the above summary • Height of kerbs (3*) (e.g. Hemelinger Straße) • additional 32 contributions on • Narrow width of sidewalks (3*) • Lacking/ improvable crossing aids (20*) “problems” were made to locations (out of this: 11* junction Humboldtstraße/ St.-Jürgen-Straße) • Bad condition of sidewalks (1*) outside the SUNRISE area – those are not included in the above summary • Traffic light circuit unfavourable for pedestri- • Other obstacles on sidewalks (other than parked ans/cyclists (14*) cars) (6*) (e.g. dust bins, bulky waste, bikes, bollards) 39 40 Collected ideas (97*)
The following list summarises all 97 specific ideas and how often they have been mentioned:
#Parking (33*) #Bicycle Traffic (27*) #Car Traffic (21*) #Pedestrian Traffic / Accessibility (5*)
• Introduction of residential parking (9*) • Improvement of bike paths (6*) • Introduction of speed limits (13*) (e.g. • Specific activities for students (e.g. Joint Friedrich-Karl-Straße, Bismarckstraße, walks/bike rides to schools, temporary clo- • Creation of more parking space (with new • Improvement of route connections (5*) Myrthenstraße, Schaumburger Straße) sing of roads before school starts) (3*) building projects); intensifying the use of parking space (e.g. on hospital area: Multiple • Improvement of crossing aids (4*) • More car sharing (2*) • Improve accessibility (2*) use considering shift workers, underground (e.g. Hemelinger Straße) car park) (6*) • Implementation of additional bicycle • Reduction of the width of traffic lanes (1*) streets („Fahrradstraßen”) (4*) • Stronger monitoring to enforce car parking in • Speed monitoring (1*) accordance with the road traffic regulations • Increase bike sharing services #Public Transport (5*) (4*) (also cargo bikes) (2*) • Banning of trucks (1*)
• Allocation of parking costs on public space to • Implementation of “waiting zones” for • Car-free city centre (1*) • Implementation of additional bus stop (3*) the users (2*) bikes in front of traffic lights (1*) • Leaving individual motorised traffic behind • Higher service frequencies of trams (1*) • Reduce parking spaces (2*) • Clearer marking of bicycle streets – towards public transport, bike traffic and („Fahrradstraßen”) (1*) walking (1*) • Shuttle/mini bus (“bus-on-demand”) to the • Establishing loading zones for delivery vans hospital (1*) (1*) • Grinding off/flattening cobblestone pave- • Removal of the already installed width ments (1*) reduction of traffic lane (Braunschweiger • Using /re-investing income from parking ma- Straße) (1*) nagement for public transport (1*) • Bi-directional cycle paths (1*)
• Using flower buckets (instead of bollards) for • More bike racks (1*) preventing illegal parking (1*) • Awareness-raising campaign (1*) #Quality of Life (6*) • Clear markings to indicate legal parking spaces (1*) • Implementation of “temporary play streets” (4*) (e.g. Anna-Lühring-Straße, Sachsen- • Implementation of no-parking zones (1*) straße) • Check the actual usage of private parking • Improving the quality of stay (2*) (e.g. Seats garage (to contain misuse) (1*) in public space, use of area of former filling station at Am Schwarzen Meer) • Legalising parking halfway on sidewalks (on one side of the street) (1*)
• Regularly changing the street side on which parking is allowed street cleaning (1*)
• Using stickers “Do not park on our sidewalks” (1*)
• Higher sanctions for illegal parking (1*)
41 Bremen | Area around “Neues Hulsberg-Viertel“ 42 Collected good examples (36*)
The following list summarises 36 good examples collected and how often they have been mentioned:
#Bicycle Traffic (17*) #Car Traffic (8*) #Pedestrian Traffic / Accessibility (3*)
• Improved bicycle infrastructure (7*) • Through traffic prevented (4*) (e.g. • Good crossing possibilities (2*) (Oster- (e.g. asphalt bike path on cobble Sachsenstraße) deich) stone – in Schaumburger Straße; Am Schwarzen Meer, St.-Jürgen-Straße) • Electric recharging points (1*) • Wide sidewalks (1*) (Humboldtstraße)
• Implemented bike racks (2*) (e.g. • Car-sharing (2*) Graf-Waldersee-Straße) • Bike racks serve as space reserve in • Implemented bicycle streets (“Fahr- narrow streets (where cars and bikes #Parking (2*) radstraßen”) (2*) (Graf-Haeseler can pass each other) (1*) Straße, Humboldtstraße) • Temporary residential parking zone du- ring Soccer-Games (1*) • Good bike paths (1*) (Bismarckstraße) #Quality of Life (5*) • Bollards prevent illegal parking (1*) • Traffic lights for bike paths (1*) (Fried- rich-Karl-Straße) • Greening of streets (3*) (Schaumburger • Allowing cycling against the one-way Straße, Humboldtstraße, Verdener Stra- street direction (1*) ße) #Other (1*)
• Copenhagen as good example for bike • Street suitable for playing (1*) (Manteuf- traffic (1*) felstraße)
• Traffic control for cyclists (example • Cobble stones allow rain water to City of Münster) (1*) infiltrate into the ground (1*) • Bike riding training for migrants (1*)
43 Bremen | Area around “Neues Hulsberg-Viertel“ 44 Contradictions and Correlations
• The input from the citizens show of certain groups (e.g. mobility the whole spectrum of problems impaired persons, more vulnerable for all mobility modes: walkers, road users) should have a higher cyclists, car drivers and public value in the weighting process of transport users. Also, although planning. it has not been the main element of this participation activity, • Some ideas mentioned are many good ideas and examples outside the direct framework have already been identified by of action of SUNRISE, as they the citizens. The answers of the are not compatible with local or citizens illustrate, that there are national legislation. Other ideas – as expected – contradictory are simply not financeable within demands for the street space: a foreseeable time. Nevertheless, Many people wish for less car those ideas are still valid as they traffic and space consumption for can serve as stimulations for car parking – to give more room future projects or initiatives to for other street users. Others adapt legislation. demand for more parking space.
• It is clear, that the contributions collected cannot be considered as representative. The number of participants is too low for that and some citizen groups (e.g. mobility impaired people, young people) have been underrepresented. Therefore, the count of how often a particular issue has been mentioned cannot be used to identify clear priorities. But the input can be well used as a basis for further analysis of the problems and demands. This should also include the particular consideration of groups and their demands who have not been considered adequately so far. It is a general question in participation processes, whether demands
45 Bremen | Area around “Neues Hulsberg-Viertel“ Bremen | Area around “Neues Hulsberg-Viertel“ 46 2.5 SWOT Analysis & Corridor of Options 2.5 SWOT Analysis & Corridor of Options
SWOT-Matrix SWOT-Matrix
STRENGHTS STRENGHTS
Pedestrian traffic Bicycle traffic Local public transport Individual motorised transport
Many pedestrians in relation to total Many cyclists in relation to total High frequency of tram lines and Generally comparatively few road traffic: 30 percent of all ways by traffic: 29 percent of all ways are buses congestions in Bremen and in the foot (for statistical district „Bremen done by bicycle (for statistical district neighbourhood Mitte“; Bremen as a whole: 25 „Bremen Mitte“; Bremen as a whole: percent) 23 percent) Coordinated timing of trams (time- shifted) low share of individual motorised transport in relation to total traffic (25 Short connections within the quarter Increased visibility and safety of percent of all ways by car for statistical for pedestrians (low factor of cyclists through „critical mass“ Some public transport services also district „Bremen Mitte“) compared to detours) at night Bremen as a whole (36 percent)
Very high bicycle ownership rate 30 km/h on most roads reduces the (88 percent, for statistical district Good bus stop facilities (roofed, Small number of cars compared risk of accidents „Bremen Mitte“; Bremen as a whole: protected from rain/wind) to other districts and the German 84.6 percent) average (in the borough “Östliche Vorstadt”: 34.3 cars/100 inhabitants; Many school children walk to school Dynamic passenger information 31.4 private cars/100 inhabitants; some streets of the neighbourhood Three „bicycle streets“ in the Bremen in total: 41.1 cars resp. 35.6 with a lot of vegetation SUNRISE neighbourhood (20 in total cars/100 inhabitants; Germany: 55,5 in Bremen), with priority for bicycle Barrier-free public transport vehicles cars/100 inhabitants) traffic (low-floor technology, use of lifts, Sufficiently good surface condition etc.) of many footpaths (for users without High share (48 percent) of households special needs!) One-way streets opened for bicycle without cars (46 percent with 1 car/ traffic in the opposite direction Environmentally friendly engines household; 6 percent with 2 cars/ Bicycle tests for primary school (trams with 100 percent green household) (for statistical district High urban density, short distances children electricity, 3 electric buses) “Bremen Mitte“)
High quality of urban development Offers for refugees to use bicycles to Electronic tickets (“BOB Ticket”, More than 15000 users of station- with many picturesque town houses participate in Bremen mobile ticket of the VBN Regional based car-sharing in Bremen; 4 etc. Traffic Association) stations with 11 vehicles in the neighbourhood (in the wider area: 14 additional stations, 54 vehicles) Joint ticket system for all public transport of regional traffic association VBN Many one-way streets – reduces through traffic in many residential streets App for timetable and ticketing available Temporary resident parking is regularly established during soccer games in the local soccer stadium (free parking space just for residents)
47 Bremen | Area around “Neues Hulsberg-Viertel“ Bremen | Area around “Neues Hulsberg-Viertel“ 48 2.5 SWOT Analysis & Corridor of Options
SWOT-Matrix
WEAKNESSES WEAKNESSES
Pedestrian traffic Bicycle traffic Low accessibility for blind and visually Not all cyclists use the “bicycle Many sidewalk are too narrow – little impaired people as infrastructural Many cycle paths are too narrow streets” according to the rules, e.g. as room for pedestrian traffic elements (e.g. tactile elements) are they feel insecure about riding on the mostly missing road (Humboldtstraße) Cycle paths are often blocked by Sloping sidewalks reduce the cars, which do not park in accordan- accessibility (freedom of barriers) Reduced accessibility for mobile ce with the rules, which leads e.g. to Traffic lights partially unfavourable for impaired people as structural unsafe situations due to the reduced cyclists requirements (e.g. paving, lowering) visibility for cyclists Frequently blocked sidewalk due to are mostly missing cars not parked in accordance with Not enough parking spaces for bicy- the rules - without being sanctioned Cobblestone roads in many residen- cles or bicycles with special features, Low accessibility for mobile impaired tial streets which are difficult to drive e.g. for (expensive) e-bikes or cargo people due to impassable cobblestones on by bike (comfort/safety issue) bikes (rain-prove, secured, with large Poor visual conditions for pedestrians on the roadways of many residential dimensions) (especially for children) due to cars streets parked in zones of parking bans Often poor surface quality of cycle paths Missing crossing aids, e.g. on main Large hospital area of “Klinikum roads Regularly blocked sidewalks due to Bremen Mitte” represents a barrier for garbage bins, waste paper etc. pedestrians Some cycle paths with interruptions or ending abruptly Barrier effect of the hospital “Klinikum Bremen Mitte” Many blocked sidewalks due to Few areas for children’s play, no parked bicycles reduced traffic areas („play streets“ – Risk of accidents due to cycle paths streets forming a designated playing in the close proximity of parked cars Lack of good bicycle routes connec- area), no “temporary play streets” (opened car doors) ting the neighbourhood with different Pedestrians are disturbed by cyclists parts of the city who illegally use the sidewalks (especially when they want to avoid Some streets with only little Risk of accidents due to spatially cobblestone roads with their reduced vegetation separated cycle paths which reduce Inadequate accessibility of the neigh- comfort and safety for cyclists) the visibility of cyclists) bourhood via important junctions in the surrounding area (e.g. “Am Dob- Few green areas (parks) ben”) Missing crossing aids on many roads Risk for bike riders by incorrect turning of cars and disregarding the (Almost) no public seats priority regulations Parts of the population are not riding Some traffic lights are unfavourable bicycles at all for pedestrians (too short green light phases for crossing the whole street, Few spaces of encounter Lack of attention/consideration of long waiting time) some motorists, e.g. urging cyclists Limited range of rental bicycles and using the road almost no bike-sharing offer of freight Temporary problems: Littering bikes Some hazardous locations for pedestrians near bus/tram stops, No consistent design of “bicycle where users of the bus/tram easily streets”, resulting in uncertainties Risky ways for cyclists where tram get in conflict with individual among street users and some disre- tracks have been laid (“Vor dem motorised transport or cyclists garding the specific rules Steintor”).
49 Bremen | Area around “Neues Hulsberg-Viertel“ Bremen | Area around “Neues Hulsberg-Viertel“ 50 SWOT-Matrix
WEAKNESSES WEAKNESSES
Local public transport Individual motorised transport Despite sufficient traffic potential, The hospital “Klinikum Bremen Mitte” No barrier-free bus/tram stations the implementation of a new railway No residential parking in the neigh- generates high car traffic (kerbstone heights of 12 cm) station (“Mitte”) is not feasible bourhood – foreigners compete with residents for parking spaces Only a few parking spaces are clearly Noise pollution from rail traffic 16 percent of all journeys are made marked by public transport (statistical district Free parking in public spaces – only a “Bremen Mitte“, Bremen as a whole: few exceptions Relatively unfavourable public 16 percent) – this is a rather low value Very high traffic volume on the main transport access in ”Neues Hulsberg” compared to other cities roads which leads to noise and air area, especially for hospital (distance Free parking attracts car traffic pollution from tram stops e.g. to main entrance; for shift workers hardly usable because of the few night rides) Only few parking area monitoring: Road space often strongly car-oriented toleration of cars not parked in accordance with the rules (Parking not in accordance with the rules is Lots of through traffic on all main ro- perceived as „customary law”) ads and in individual residential streets
Often cars are parked illegally (dou- Increased noise due to cobblestone ble-sided parking or parking half-way pavement on the pavement) and thus block the way for other street users Car drivers often exceed the speed limit (partly subjective perception) There are significant safety risks for residents as ambulance services and the fire brigade often cannot pass Low fees for parking in parking garages junctions or streets due to the illegal (in the city centre / next to the neig- parking of cars hbourhood), public transport more expensive
Stationary traffic dominates many Very low availability of charging sta- roads tions for alternative fuels – electric charging stations, hydrogen filling station Continuously very high parking pres- sure (more cars than parking spaces) which leads e.g. to a lot of traffic due Car-sharing in the neighbourhood has to the search of parking spaces almost no e-vehicles
Occasionally poor condition of the Parking pressure is additionally road surface increased by the many visitors of the quarter/hospital/soccer games etc. No parking garage in the neighbour- hood
51 Bremen | Area around “Neues Hulsberg-Viertel“ Bremen | Area around “Neues Hulsberg-Viertel“ 52 SWOT-Matrix
OPPORTUNITIES OPPORTUNITIES
High quality and availability of New leasing offers for bicycles for the Innovative „micro-hubs“ concept New ”Neues Hulsberg” area residents station-based car sharing in Bremen job (instead of company cars) facilitating local logistics – use of increase public transport demand (Cambio, Flinkster, MoveAbout) decentralised distribution points by suppliers / parcel service providers Vehicles with low-emission engines- Potentially new tram stop “Sorgenfrei” A high level of environmental and reduction of environmental pollution could give better accessibility to sustainable mobility awareness Digitisation in traffic (e.g. sensor- ”Neues Hulsberg” area among residents controlled parking management Discussion about diesel and impending systems to reduce parking search driving bans in other cities traffic, apps for barrier-free routes) Popular urban living environment – Atmosphere “pro bicycle/pedestrian“ citizens become involved to in the neighbourhood (and in increase the quality of life in „their“ Bremen in general), coming from Aging society – which could lead Innovative shuttle concepts (e.g. VW: neighbourhood the population, politics and being to an increasing consideration of Moia) supplement public transport supported by initiatives accessibility
„Micro-mobility“ (electric scooters, Declining importance of driving Development of the hospital and the segways, hoverboards) as opportunity licence and car ownership among ”Neues Hulsberg” area could enable for sustainable mobility but requires young people improved pedestrian routes between to clarify where and how to use neighbourhoods
Replacement of car rides / attracting New mobility offers through the new new groups of cyclists with EU, federal and regional funding development of the hospital/”Neues pedelecs/e-bikes and freight bicycles programmes for sustainable mobility Hulsberg” area, which can also be (additional areas of use and larger (e.g. for digitisation in pedestrian traffic) used by local residents (car-sharing, radius of action) micro-hubs, parking facilities, etc.)
Framework conditions of the federal Trend: “using” instead of “owning” policy is beneficial for a change in Short distances in the neighbourhood, transport policy good local supply situation
Many car-sharing users („testimonials“) Strategies of Bremen‘s transport New residents in ”Neues Hulsberg” policy promote sustainable mobility area secure the demand for a local supply with everyday necessities (i.e. A study, commissioned by the city a contribution to make local shops of Bremen, showed that one station Inclusion/participation as objective of economic viable in the long term – based shared car can replace 16 many policy areas which contributes to a liveable city) individual private cars
Bike-sharing providers (also freight bikes, e-bikes) looking for markets
53 Bremen | Area around “Neues Hulsberg-Viertel“ Bremen | Area around “Neues Hulsberg-Viertel“ 54 SWOT-Matrix
THREATS THREATS
Additional traffic through new Potentially reduced acceptance of Long process for the further “Micro-mobility“ on sidewalks (electric development of the hospital/”Neues bike-sharing due to (non-regulated) development of the traffic rules scooters, segways, hoverboards) Hulsberg” area (e.g. at entrances and free-floating bike-sharing offers (many (legislative procedures) can interfere with pedestrians if exits to car parks) cities have experienced problems with the according infrastructure is not the large number of wildly parked designed to meet those extra needs bikes of bike sharing companies) Increase of match days in the soccer Ambitious mobility concept of the league – additional burdens for ”Neues Hulsberg” area which could residents during the working week Privileged status (i.e. tax advantages) lead to the relocation of stationary Free-floating car-sharing offers tighten of company cars increase the use of traffic to the surrounding districts parking problems MIV Increasing number of parents driving their children by car to school, Delay of several years in the „Micro-mobility“ (electric scooters, leisure activities etc. (“mama taxi / Low fines for illegal parking construction of the multi-storey segways, hoverboards) can become a Elterntaxi”) car park of the hospital “Klinikum problem if used with some speed on Bremen Mitte” sidewalks (Subjectively perceived) increase of aggressiveness/lack of consideration With the development of the High public transport ticket prices: it in road traffic Hospital/”Neues Hulsberg” area can prevent people to use buses or comes an elimination of unofficial trams (and can increase the use of parking areas (at night) for residents private cars) Increased parking pressure through from neighbouring streets which digital aids for drivers (e.g. apps for could lead to an increasing parking displaying free parking spaces) pressure for the neighbourhood Economic constraints of BSAG (Bremen’s Public transport company) Increasing car ownership through Unfinished mobility concept of the gentrification hospital Election of the City Parliament (“Bürgerschaft”) and Borough Parliament (“Stadtteilbeirat”) in Increasing motorised traffic (also with Possible conflicts between spring 2019: Sensitive decisions might electric cars) supporters and opponents of become postponed for the time after cobblestone the election; possible new political objectives of transport policy Increasing number of commuters in Bremen A high number of bicycle theft Lack of courage (political will) to demand enforcement of traffic rules Increasing width of cars exacerbates Cycling infrastructure is not suitable parking problems (SUVs) for increasing speed differences and vehicle widths (pedelecs/e-bikes, Unclear financing of measures (limited freight bicycles, child trailers) budget of Bremen) More delivery traffic due to increasing online trade
55 Bremen | Area around “Neues Hulsberg-Viertel“ Bremen | Area around “Neues Hulsberg-Viertel“ 56
*Which strategies 2.5 SWOT Analysis & Corridor of Options support reaching the SWOT-Strategies SUNRISE goals for Bremen? The “Weaknesses-Opportunities-Strategy” can be used to improve weak- nesses by taking advantages of opportunities. The “Weaknesses-Threats-Strategy” can be used to minimise weaknesses and avoid dangers in Bremen. eakness W es- 2. Th re • Introduction a akness of parking t e es s W -O management - 1. p S p • Contributing to the t o r • Reduction of illegal r development of the a t parking u mobility concepts t
n e of the hospital g
• Support of i t (“Klinikum Bremen y sustainable mobility i
options e Mitte”) and the
s - new neighbourhood
• Improvement of the S (“Neues Hulsberg-
quality of stay t
r Viertel”)
a
• Implementation t e
of information g campaign y
57 58 2.5 SWOT Analysis & Corridor of Options
The following actions might be an option for the SUNRISE Corridor of Options neighbourhood:
1. Reduction of illegal parking (W-O-Strategy) • Pricing of parking space/introduction of fee based parking in Illegal parking shall be reduced to minimise the blocking of sidewalks public areas and cycle paths, to minimise barriers for mobility impaired persons • Introduction of residential parking and to reduce the risks of fire engines not being able to pass junctions • Coordinated price system of local public transport and car and streets. The current atmosphere “pro bicycle/pedestrian“ coming parks/parking fees in adjacent neighbourhoods (to make public from the population, politics and being supported by initiatives could transport more attractive) change the political will to tackle the conflicts around car parking • Development of parking opportunities for the public on and to shift the space allocation towards a fairer consideration of existing car parks/spaces on private properties the demands of other street users. To reduce effects on residents, • Construction of (multi-storey) car parks to reduce the number this strategy should be implemented in combination with parking of parking cars on the streets management measures and with improved offers on alternative mobility options. 3. Support of sustainable mobility options (W-O-Strategy) The following actions might be an option for the SUNRISE neighbourhood: The support of sustainable mobility options will be a vital strategy in a situation where the street space is very limited, the space for parking • Stronger monitoring (and fining parking offensives) to enforce is scarce and common (illegal) parking practices needs to be further parking in accordance with the road traffic regulations reduced to prevent blocking of other street users. Sustainable mobility • Constructional measures to reduce illegal parking (e.g. bollards options (walking, cycling, using public transport) and innovative in narrow junctions) services (e.g. car-sharing, sharing of freight bikes) can reduce the number of private cars. Therefore, related offers have to be enhanced • Other measures to reduce illegal parking (e.g. markings to and conditions have to be improved to draw more people or “users” clearly indicate legal parking spaces) towards sustainable mobility and away from using or owning cars. The following actions might be an option for the SUNRISE 2. Introduction of parking management (W-T-Strategy) neighbourhood: The current situation of free parking in the neighbourhood for • Further increase of car-sharing stations to create alternatives to everybody attracts parking cars and the related traffic. Thus it intensifies private car ownership the problem around the limited street space available for residents. Therefore parking management measures shall be implemented to • Implementation of lending station(s) with (rental and) freight enable the steering of parking in the neighbourhood. This is particularly bicycles etc. important for reducing the potential threat of attracting parking visitors • Creation of bicycle parking spaces in the neighbourhood - also and employees of the hospital and to reduce possible relocation effects rain protected/ large dimensioned / secured spaces for of stationary traffic into the neighbourhood, derived by the ambitious pedelecs, freight bicycles etc. mobility concept of the ”Neues Hulsberg” area. • Measures to improve cycling infrastructure (cycle paths, better marking of cycle paths etc.) A fee based parking has to be introduced in combination with • Measures to privilege bicycle traffic (further development of residential parking to allocate the limited parking space available to “bicycle streets”, introduction of “bicycle zones”) residents and to reduce the attractiveness for visitors to park in the • Micro-hubs (decentralised collection points for suppliers / neighbourhood. This has to be accompanied by a tuned price system parcel service providers), to reduce delivery traffic for local public transport and parking fees – so that public transport • Barrier-free/cyclist-friendly road surface (no cobblestone) becomes more attractive than car rides or even private car ownership. in residential streets, to increase accessibility and to free the Finally parking opportunities should be further developed. The sidewalks from cyclists exploitation of existing space (e.g. supermarkets) for the public can be • Measures to improve important crossing situations (street a cost-efficient option. It has to be investigated, if the construction of a refuge, traffic lights, pedestrian crossing) multi-storey car park is also an option.
59 Bremen | Area around “Neues Hulsberg-Viertel“ Bremen | Area around “Neues Hulsberg-Viertel“ 60 2.5 SWOT Analysis & Corridor of Options
Corridor of Options
• New street design to implement innovative mobility concepts („meeting zones“, „shared space“) instead of speed limitation to 5. Contributing to the development of the mobility concepts 30 km/h of the hospital (“Klinikum Bremen Mitte”) and the new • Digital help to improve the finding of available parking space neighbourhood (“Neues Hulsberg-Viertel”) (W-T-Strategy) • Digital help for pedestrian traffic The motivation for SUNRISE in Bremen has been the new • Further improvement of accessibility of public transport developments in Hulsberg – the re-alignment of the hospital and stations the development of a new housing area – with the related concerns • Measures to increase accessibility for mobile impaired and about increasing the existing traffic and parking problems for the visually impaired people (paving, lowering, tactile elements, etc.) neighbouring streets. It is clear that solutions for a better use of street space need to encompass the whole area, a) to avoid relocation of • Revision and further development of public transport services problems b) to make use of synergy effects between the neighbouring (stops, lines) areas and the hospital. Therefore, it will be an option to become • Innovative services complementing conventional public involved in the development and/or implementation of the mobility transport (shuttle buses, new taxi services, bike sharing etc.) concepts of the hospital and the new neighbourhood and to consider those concepts in the design of own measures. The following action might be an option for the SUNRISE 4. Improvement of the quality of stay (W-O-Strategy) neighbourhood: Currently in many streets of the “SUNRISE”-neighbourhood the • Consideration of the mobility planning of the hospital “Klinikum quality of stay is reduced by the dominance of parking cars. The Bremen Mitte” and the new Neighbourhood “Neues Hulsberg- potential of many streets is not utilised to invite residents to meet, to Viertel” (using synergies, becoming involved) communicate or spent time in them. Furthermore, children have not many options to play in the public area. Measures should be taken to improve the quality of stay in the streets. They can be supported 6. Implementation of information campaign (W-O-Strategy) by resident’s initiatives: There is a high level of environmental and sustainable mobility awareness among residents and many of them Sustainable mobility – innovative options and services, costs, benefits have proved to be very engaged. This engagement can be used by for etc. – need to be communicated to the public to initiate a change of habits. The organisation of events and activities can be suitable • The creation of more space for play of children (playgrounds, to establish first contacts to new technologies and to make people traffic-calmed streets - „play streets“, temporary “play streets”) curious and interested. Last but not least the understanding of other • Measures to improve the quality of stay: greenery initiatives, street users demands is essential for creating an acceptance for a waste bins, expansion of „nice toilet“ initiative of gastronomy, reallocation of street space. benches etc. The following actions might be an option for the SUNRISE Another important measure can be the enforcement of speed neighbourhood: restrictions, which can add to the quality of life and safety in the • Information campaigns about (sustainable) mobility offers, neighbourhood, in particularly: car-sharing, multimodality, consideration etc. • Speed monitoring on main roads
61 Bremen | Area around “Neues Hulsberg-Viertel“ Bremen | Area around “Neues Hulsberg-Viertel“ 62
What has *been learnt? 2.6 Lessons Learnt
What went well? What didn‘t work?
What went well? • Increase of knowledge on sustainable mobility options and learning from best practices with • Establishment of dedicated SUNRISE core group stakeholders. (“Projektbeirat”). Participants of the SUNRISE process have increased A SUNRISE core group has been identified and their knowledge on sustainable mobility options and established. The members represent important stakeholder could learn from best practice examples. groups and work dedicated on the success of SUNRISE. • Validation of top-down SWOT Analysis. • Establishment of communication channels to the On the basis of a bottom-up characterisation of the target groups and effective communication. neighbourhood and own research a SWOT-Analysis Communication channel to interested stakeholders, has been produced by the SUNRISE-team, which has citizens have successfully been established (newsletter, been validated by the core group (during the “SWOT- website) to inform them directly about the project, the Workshop”). ongoing process and participation opportunities. • Validation of options for actions. • Involvement of citizens and stakeholders into the Options for actions have been discussed and validated project. with the core group (Workshop to validate options for Citizens and stakeholders have actively participated via the actions). online-tool and at events (e.g. public kick-off event, “street chats”). • Feedback on the process so far and ideas for the SUNRISE process ahead. • Awareness on SUNRISE in the public, with The core group members provided feedback on the stakeholders and institutions. SUNRISE process so far and contributed new ideas The public, stakeholders and institutions have been made for the implementation of SUNRISE. The excursion to aware on SUNRISE, by public relation activities and events projects in Hamburg served as inspiration. carried out. • High interest of local media. • Bottom-up identification of problems, ideas, good Due to public debates on the topics (illegal) parking, examples. parking pressure, traffic situation and the Hulsberg The first participation phase has been successfully carried developments, the media have strong interests in any out. Around 380 contributions from approx. 200 persons news about it. have been collected in an open process with on-street market stands („street chats“) and as well internet based • Successful first phase of co-creation process. tools between February and June 2018: concrete problems Overall, the project has been well received so far. A in the street space, ideas suitable to overcome problems wide range of key stakeholders support the project, or good examples on how former problems have been many of them as part of the core group. Furthermore, solved successfully. Furthermore, strategies and options for citizens have been open and supportive and show actions have been brought in by the core group. appreciation for the project.
63 Bremen | Area around “Neues Hulsberg-Viertel“ Bremen | Area around “Neues Hulsberg-Viertel“ 64
What should be developed further?
The participation process coming up will be based on the • Further efforts will be carried out to reach and experiences made in the preceding phase. Therefore, in the involve relevant stakeholders which have not subsequent months, the following participation formats participated yet. and aspects will be considered: • It has been found valuable to invite “external • More inspirational field trips to other cities and experts” to report on the experiences of ot- neighbourhoods will be offered to interested her cities and who can provide good examples, citizens and stakeholders. The trips will target lessons learned, inspiration and new perspecti- preferably neighbourhoods with quite simi- ves. Also, external experts are neutral and their lar problems and new/different approaches in input might be perceived as more credible than solving them. Also, field trips serve the purpose from local players. Therefore, external experts of team building and have turned out to be very will also play a role in future workshops or public valuable in this respect. events.
• Further on the SUNRISE participation process will be an open process, which can be joint by citizens also to a later stage – for one or more activities.
• Efforts will be done to involve stakeholders groups, which have not yet been reached suffi- ciently (e.g. mobility impaired people).
65 Bremen | Area around “Neues Hulsberg-Viertel“ Bremen | Area around “Neues Hulsberg-Viertel“ 66 2.6 Lessons Learnt
Key stakeholder: long history of working together Main drivers Main barriers Unfulfilled expectations with preceding Highly engaged citizens participation processes Information needs and participation demands High interest of local media Data protection Strong support for the project from key stakeholders Time constraints with relation to joint meetings, Need for different participation options/formats to reach Current developments in the neighbourhood different stakeholder groups events with the core group A high pressure of problems Missing Support with individual key stakeholders Important topic of discussion for years Reaching and involving (a cross section) Good examples serve as inspiration of citizens
• #1 Strong support for the project from key • #1 Reaching and involving (a cross section) of stakeholders citizens SUNRISE is strongly supported by key stakeholders (the borough It is a challenge to reach and involve a good cross section of administration and the elected borough council and others). Many citizens with public relation activities and participation events, key stakeholders have become member of the core group. • e.g. the online tool only reaches people with high web-affinity; some (often senior) people do not use the internet • e.g. not everybody can participate during evening events (time/ • #2 Highly engaged citizens mobility constraints) There are many highly engaged citizens, who are interested in • e.g. participating at an excursion is time-consuming and not becoming involved in any process relating to their neighbourhood, everybody can and wants to invest the time/effort the environment in general etc. Some of them have experiences • generally, persons get involved who have a (strong) interest in with participation processes. mobility issues as well as in their living environment and who have the time/ability to do so
• #3 A high pressure of problems The problems with relation to over-used street space and car • #2 Time constraints with relation to joint meetings, parking are considered to be very high in the neighbourhood. events with the core group It has been difficult to find time slots for events which suit all invited stakeholders (some of them act in an honorary function, with regular jobs at the day time).
• #3 Unfulfilled expectations with preceding participation processes Some residents/initiatives of the neighbourhood have been engaged in other participation process before. Some of those participation processes have created (in parts) frustration, due to unfulfilled expectations (very long duration of the process; the feeling that ideas were not adequately considered in decisions making). As a consequence, there have been limited trust towards “another” participation process (i.e. SUNRISE) with some individuals and a reluctance to participate.
67 Bremen | Area around “Neues Hulsberg-Viertel“ Bremen | Area around “Neues Hulsberg-Viertel“ 68
What *happened 2.7 Following Steps next? Mai/June 2019 Conclusion Drawn & Further Concept (Activities, Ideas, Wishes, ...) Public event and workshop on action
3 What? • To inform about the outcomes of the first phase of the participation process, the preceding analysis and the suggested action plan September • To collect a feedback on the action plan 2018 • To facilitate participation of citzens and January stakeholders Strategy development Workshop 2019 • To increase the understanding for the measures 1 What? • To discuss and validate strategies and measures for the SUNRISE neighbourhood How? • Information event (presentation of results • To discuss and validate strategies and June - October • Workshop element to collect citizens` measures for the SUNRISE neighbourhood 2019 feedback Several thematic walks How? Who? • Workshop • Interested citizens, stakeholders • Open Group discussion (representatives of the administration, 5 What? borough parliament etc.), members of the • To show problems and explain measures November Who? core group etc. • To target specific stakeholder groups 2018 • To increase the understanding for other • Members of core group • Field trip to Cologne street users and the need for measures
2 What? June Who? • Inspiration from other neighbourhoods 2019 • Interested citizens, stakeholders • Teambuilding (representatives of the administration, • To learn how other other cities/ Field trip to Munich or another suitable city borough parliament etc.), members of the neighbourhoods deal with parking core group etc. problems (residential parking, parking 4 What? management etc.) • Inspiration from other neighbourhoods Teambuilding • To learn how other other cities/ How? neighbourhoods deal with parking • Meeting with representative of local problems (residential parking, parking traffic authority etc. management etc.) • Guided tour around the visited neighbourhood How? Who? • Meeting with representative of local traffic • Interested citizens, stakeholders authority etc. (representatives of the administration, • Guided tour around the visited borough parliament etc.), members of the neighbourhood core group etc. Who? • Interested citizens, stakeholders (representatives of the administration, borough parliament etc.), members of the core group etc.
69 Bremen | Area around “Neues Hulsberg-Viertel“ Bremen | Area around “Neues Hulsberg-Viertel“ 70
Which *support is 2.8 Data & Expertise available for future steps? Resources the city can offer
Access to municipal communication channels Public relations are vital to reach the target groups Decision-making and inform the public Decision-making on measures for and are supported by the the SUNRISE neighbourhood will be city, e.g. via press releases, Active participation of carried out according to applicable communications to municipal staff in the process legislation: The sovereignty of the journalists etc. responsible bodies remains untouched. City staff from a wide range Technical planning of departments (Borough Depending on the type, scope and Prior to implementation Administration, Ministry of impact of the measures, decisions are the measures identified Internal Affairs, Traffic authority, taken by e.g. the Borough Parliament Provision of rooms and decided on needs more Fire Brigade, Police etc.) invest (“Stadtteilbeirat”); the administration for events detailed planning, which time and energy to support of the Free Hanseatic City of Bremen Either for outdoor or will be managed by the the overall process, provide e.g. by the Road Authority (“Amt für indoor events the city Municipality. technical information/analyses/ Straßen und Verkehr”), the City of provides a room or the investigations, organise activities, Bremen‘s Deputation for Environment, necessary permit to use participate in informal meetings, Construction, Traffic, Urban public space. workshops and events etc. Development, Energy and Agriculture, Bremen’s Parliament (“Bürgerschaft”).
71 Bremen | Area around “Neues Hulsberg-Viertel“ Bremen | Area around “Neues Hulsberg-Viertel“ 72 3.0 Sources City of Bremen (2009). Bremer Car-Sharing Aktionsplan; Car Sharing Action Plan for Bremen. https://mobilpunkt-bremen.de/assets/uploads/2015/09/Bremen_-Car-Sharing-Action- REFERENCES Plan_English.pdf Der Senator für Umwelt, Bau und Verkehr, Freie Hansestadt Bremen (2014): Verkehrs- entwicklungsplan Bremen 2025 City of Bremen, Ministry of Environment, Urban Design and Transportation(2014): Sustainable Urban Mobility Plan 2025. https://www.bauumwelt.bremen.de/verkehr/ver- kehrsentwicklungsplan-5586
Infas (2019): Mobilität in Deutschland 2017 - MiD http://www.mobilitaet-in-deutschland.de/pdf/MiD2017_Ergebnisbericht.pdf
Statistisches Landesamt Bremen (2018 a). Statistische Daten zur Freien Hansestadt Bre- men; Statistical data about Bremen http://www.statistik-bremen.de/tabellen/kleinraum/stadt_ottab/1.htm#oben
Statistisches Landesamt Bremen (2018 b). Statistische Daten zum Stadtteil Östliche Vorstadt; Statistical data about the borough „Östliche Vorstadt“ http://www.statis- tik-bremen.de/tabellen/kleinraum/stadt_ottab/131.htm
Team Red (2018). Analyse der Auswirkungen des Car-Sharing in Bremen; Analysis of the effects of car-sharing in Bremen. https://share-north.eu/2018/08/impact-analysis-of-car-sharing-in-bremen-english-re- port-published/
Figures
Cover: urbanista, 2019 Graphic of the ideal typical process of Co-Identification in SUNRISE with the different steps taken. : urbanista, 2019
Bremen | Area around “Neues Hulsberg-Viertel“ 74 NEIGHBOURHOOD MOBILITY DOSSIER
TÖRÖKŐR - BUDAPEST
© urbanista More information about SUNRISE: Content www.civitas-sunrise.eu
1 INTRODUCTION 1.1 Objective and content of “Co-Identification and Co-Validation“ 4 and the Neighbourhood Mobility Dossier
The CIVITAS SUNRISE project has received funding from the European Union’s Horizon 2020 research and innovation program- me under grant agreement No 72 33 65 2 DOSSIER 9 Title Neighbourhood Mobility Dossier of Törökőr/Budapest in SUNRISE 2.1 Status quo description [within the phase of WP1: Co-Identification and Co-Validation of • General situation of the neighbourhood (social, economic, environmental features) Problems and Needs] • Description of the mobility issues in the neighbourhood 15
Deliverable 1.2 of the EU Project ID: 723365 2.2 Objectives, challenges, opportunities • Locally specific constellation of the main objectives, challenges and opportunities • The Participation Promise 17 2.3 The Co-Identification Process Contributors to case studies Budapest Fovaros XIV Kerulet Zuglo, Budapesti Kezlekedesi Kozpont • Overview about the steps taken in the Co-Identification process and technical support Zartkoruen Mukodo Reszvenytarsasag (BKK), Edinburgh Napier Uni- • Target groups versity (TRI), Fundación Zaragoza Logistics Centre (ZLC), KOUCKY • Tooles used • Constitution/formation of the CCF/CG & Partners AB, HQ ARCHITECTS, MOBILISSIMUS, Malmo Stad, 28 Freie und Hansestadt Bremen, Municipality of Jerusalem, Promotion of 2.4 Culminating Outcomes Opertional Links with Integrated Services, Association Internationale • Collected problems, needs and ideas (POLIS), Southend-On-Sea Borough Council, Technical University • Contradictions and correlations 32 Vienna (TUW), Transport Authority of Thessaloniki SA (TheTA) 2.5 SWOT Analysis & Corridor of Options Quality control Rupprecht Consult - Forschung und Beratung GmbH • SWOT strategies Hana Peters and Ralf Brand • Corridors of options 40 2.6 Lessons Learnt: Drivers and Barriers, Potentials and Challenges Technical University Vienna, Department of Spatial Planning, • Potentials Centre of Sociology (E 280/6) • Challenges 44 Nadine Haufe and Lukas Franta 2.7 Following Steps • Conclusions drawn and further concept Authors and Design Responsible for the content: Budapest Fovaros XIV Kerulet Zuglo, Budapesti Kezlekedesi Kozpont 2.8 Data & Expertise 46 Zartkoruen Mukodo Reszvenytarsasag (BKK), • Resources the city can offer Mobilissimus: Noémi Szabó and Antal Gertheis
Accompanying consulting and design: 3 References 48 urbanista GmbH & Co KG Bäckerbreitergang 14, 20355 Hamburg Astrid Großmann & Marie-Christin Schulze [email protected]
Budapest | Törökőr Parking alongside of a residential street ©Mobilissimus Ltd
Thematic walk with blind people Neighbourhood Festival ©Mobilissimus Ltd ©Mobilissimus Ltd
CCF Meeting ©Mobilissimus Ltd
On tour problem mapping ©Mobilissimus Ltd
Online problem mapping ©Mobilissimus Ltd
Walking tours ©Jóügy
3 Budapest | Törökőr 4 1.0 1.1. Objective and content of “Co-Identification“ INTRODUCTION and the Neighbourhood Mobility Dossier
Occasion and Purpose organisation and implementation of a participatory process A Neighbourhood Mobility Dossier to identify, validate and has been produced in each articulate locally perceived neighbourhood as a final document mobility challenges as well as of the »Co-Identification and Co- neighbourhood specific strengths, Validation« phase – the first work weaknesses, opportunities and package of SUNRISE. The aim of this threats work package was to ensure that all The Neighbourhood Mobility Dossier SUNRISE action neighbourhoods aims to comprehensively capture – Bremen, Budapest, Jerusalem, the results of co-identification and Malmö, Southend-On-Sea and co-validation process including the Thessaloniki – lay a solid foundation factual and subjectively perceived for all following activities. This situation with regard to mobility encompassed the establishment and other related aspects. The of strategic local alliances and the Dossier serves as a guidebook for the thorough participatory identification neighbourhood themselves regarding of problems, needs and opportunities the upcoming co-creative phases (co- in each neighbourhood. development and co-implementation of sustainable mobility solutions), but Its key objectives were furthermore: also as an overview and inspiration • To guide each Action for other cities and neighbourhoods Neighbourhood in the set up and regarding the co-creative development constitution of a local Co-Creation of sustainable mobility solutions. 1 Forum (CCF) and the Core Group The set of the six Dossiers of each 2 (CG) Action Neighbourhood constitutes the • To ensure that all relevant status- final product of the Co-Identification quo information concerning the phase in SUNRISE. Additionally, a Action Neighbourhoods will be summarised overview of the results included and fully taken into of the Co-identification and Co- account validation phase will be integrated in • To instruct and support each the »Neighbourhood Mobility Action Action Neighbourhood in the Plan«3.
1The Co-Creation Forum (CCF) is a forum/platform where everyone can express their views, ideas and concerns related to the current and future mobility situation within a neighbourhood. It can bee seen as a strategic local alliance, covering the public, covering all major stakeholders. 2The Core Group (CG) works as a coordinator of the CCF in the sense of a steering committee and administrative secretariat. 3 The Neighbourhood Mobility Pathfinder is SUNRISE‘s online toolbox to enable exploitation of SUNRISE results beyond the project‘s lifetime.
Budapest | Törökőr 5 When? What? WP1 Who? Process
September 2017 Zugló City Hall Active stakeholders »Co-Identification«: Objectives In chapter 2.4 the condensed PREPARATORY STEPS outcomes of the collected problems, The main objective of Co-Identification needs and ideas are illustrated a INTERNAL PREPARATORY MEETINGS b INTERNAL | INFORMATIVE KICK-OFF was to ensure that all SUNRISE and possible contradictions and INFORMATION & October 2017 PREPARATION Action Neighbourhoods lay a solid correlations highlighted. Törökőr, local school EXCHANGE foundation for the following activities. All stakeholders Afterwards the main outcomes of This encompasses the establishment PUBLIC KICK-OFF | OFFICIAL LAUNCH EVENT MEMORANDUM OF the top-down and bottom up SWOT UNDERSTANDING of strategic local alliances and the Analysis of the neighbourhood are thorough participatory identification INTRODUCE TO THE PUBLIC outlined by means of the derived BRING PEOPLE TOGETHER September 2017 of problems, needs, ideas and European Mobility Week strategies and corridors of options. Törökör opportunities in each SUNRISE NEIGHBOURHOOD GATHER PROBLEMS Information & Collection Action Neighbourhood. LEARNING RETREAT I GAIN LOCAL AWARENESS AND NEEDS ! ! In the next chapter the lessons learnt ? ! Content and Structure of the of the Co-Identification process ? ON-SITE COLLECTING EVENTS October 2017 Neighbourhood Mobility Dossier are illustrated firstly by pointing ! October 2017 Launch Website out the potentials and challenges Törökőr, public spaces Active stakeholders Local residents ? April 2018 March 2018 ? Thematic walks Törökőr that arose during the participation ? To get a first impression of the Thematic walks Törökőr GATHER PROBLEMS REACH DIFFERENT Disabled people, people Parents or grandpa- with wheelchair respective neighbourhood and its process in Co-Identification and rents who often walk AND NEEDS PEOPLE IN DIFFERENT ! October 2017 with prams ! PLACES ! Launch Website characteristics the Dossier starts with played a significant role for the January 2018 ? Thematic walks Törökőr Active stakeholders an introduction of the status quo further planning and execution of Visually impaired or participatory events. Secondly by blind people ! situation of the neighbourhood in ! ? ? ! general and mobility wise followed naming and describing the most ! SYNTHESIS? ! ! ? ! by a description of the individual relevant drivers and barriers in the ? ! ! first work package. ! ! ? objectives, challenges, opportunities CONDENSE ? ! MERGE and limits regarding the SUNRISE Finally the next steps for the ! ? ? process of the Action Neighbourhood. upcoming co-creation phase are NEIGHBOURHOOD LEARNING RETREAT II outcomes of former outcomes of former
The next chapter shows the Co- outlined, based on the conclusion ! participation participation ! ? processes processes Identification process-design of the drawn from the participatory activities ! ! ? of the Co-Identification process. Action Neighbourhood including >essence of problems and needs< content about the tools and methods In the last step the city gives an REVIEW D.1.1 SWOT REPORT used and groups reached as well as overview of what kind of data can be information about the constitution of offered (data, calculations, modelling, the Core Group (CG). legal expertise, money, speakers etc.) APPROVE AND CHECK WITH PRIORITISE EXPERTS / SPECIALISTS
>neighbourhood mobility fields of action<
NEIGHBOURHOOD MOBILITY DOSSIER D.1.2 NMDS
DOCUMENT WP1 PRESENT TO THE TRANSFER TO WP2 PUBLIC
PUBLIC INTERNAL
Graphic of the ideal typical process of Co-Identification in SUNRISE with the different steps taken. ©urbanista
6 Budapest | Törökőr Budapest | Törökőr 7
Presenting *Törökőr and its mobiltiy 2.0 situation DOSSIER 2.1. Status-quo description The general situation of the Neighbourhood
Törökőr in the context of Budapest were settled here creating jobs for Törökőr is situated in Zugló, thousands, and new housing estates which is one of the 23 districts of were built. From 1990 major industry Budapest, located in the transitional has moved out, while small enterprises zone, between the core and the and new services were established. outskirts of the city. Budapest has New housing estates were built on 1,7 million residents, of which brownfield areas, but industrial- approximately 125.000 live in Zugló commercial areas still exist. and 12.000 in Törökőr. The size of the Budapest has a two-tier administrative neighbourhood is 1.75 km2. system: The Municipality of the Capital City of Budapest being Zugló became a district of Budapest responsible for the issues of city level in 1935. The first buildings of the interest, and 23 district municipalities neighbourhood were built between responsible for the issues of district- 1900 and 1930, when the main roads level interest. The Municipality of on its borders became structural Zugló is the 14th district of Budapest, elements of the City of Budapest. and has a representative body with After WW2 industry and services elected representatives.
The location of Törökőr in Budapest The neighbourhood ©Mobilissimus Ltd ©Open Street Map (above), ©Google Earth (below)
Budapest | Törökőr 9 Social features of Törökőr The neighbourhood is divided into 5 Törökőr has a population of 12.045 smaller areas by the railway and three inhabitants. Numbers show that the crossing collector roads; the Egressy population of the neighbourhood road, the Mogyoródi road and the has been nearly unchanged since the Fogarasi road. West from the railway 1990s, in the last ten years a slight older tenement houses and empty sites increase can be observed. lay, with a high population density in the blocks of the old buildings. East The issue of ageing population from the railway in the northern area seriously affects the neighbourhood. there are mainly family houses with The 12.045 people that were registered lower density, while in the southern in 2015 fell into the following part a housing estate lays with high categories: 0-14 years: 1545, 15-24 population density in the blockhouses. years: 970, 25-62 years: 6586, 62+ In the middle of the area mostly years: 2944. Ageing causes problems commercial units are located with for the municipality to reorganise a few residential buildings. Törökőr the institutions like kindergartens, is home to middle-class people or schools. It also has its effects on with higher qualification than the mobility. For instance, ageing has an average of Budapest. 5 kindergartens, effect on public transport as there are 2 elementary schools, 7 technical areas with more passengers that suffer colleges and one high school are from locomotor diseases. located in the area.
Population density in Törökőr, 2017 ©Municipal Data
Economic features of Törökőr gas stations are operating. The number Zugló is part of an economically of cars per 1000 habitants in Törökőr strong area of the Budapest is high (580)2, though this is partly Functional Urban Area, which has due to the large share of the company- higher economic indicators than owned cars. Counting only the the Hungarian and EU average and privately-owned vehicles, the number high potential for further economic drops down to 240, which is less than development. In the district, most the average in Budapest (284) and in of companies work in tertiary Hungary (308).3 (service) and quaternary (R&D&I) sector providing higher added value Budapest‘s most famous park, the City The number of people in different age groups in Törökőr, 2015 ©Hungarian Central Statistical Office products. The three most important Park is located in the district. Despite sectors in the area are the technical the fact that park attracts many scientific activities, the commerce tourists from the country and from The number of people in different age groups in Törökőr, 2015 ©Hungarian Central Statistical Office and repair of motor vehicles and the abroad, other areas of the district do information, communication sector.1 not belong to the touristic destinations of Budapest. From the eight In the area of Törökőr 391 companies neighbourhoods located in Zugló, have operational permission, 70 Törökőr is the third most expensive companies have site permission and 7 concerning the average price per 1 m2 of a flat.4
10 Budapest | Törökőr Budapest | Törökőr 11 Environmental features of Törökőr four different districts on its way. Description of the Mobility Issues in the Neighbourhood In the Pest side of Budapest (the area The stream has been regulated and located east form the river Danube), directed into a concrete ditch much Two city-level main roads and two The neighbourhood has a reasonably Zugló is the greenest district. Besides deeper than the usual water level, district-level main roads run at well-developed public transport the City Park which is located here, which resulted in the loss of the the edge of the neighbourhood, system, however, coverage is not the houses usually placed into stream‘s natural environment. Plans causing congestion and a high level satisfying as there are white spots greenery or have some garden on their have been made to revitalise the Rákos of air and noise pollution. Törökőr (areas, which are not covered by the own. The City Park is located in the stream, to make the surrounding of it is divided from the inner city of public transport routes ) in the inner north-western corner of the district more natural and pleasant to use, but Budapest by the main road Hungária area. Getting to the main public at the end of Andrássy Avenue. The they have not been implemented yet. ring. Along this road the volume transport lines causes problems for park was created more than 100 years of traffic has a significant negative some groups of people (handicapped, ago and since then it is the city’s most The two main sources of air pollution effect for businesses (e.g.: the noisy aged or parents with babies). prominent green area with a lake and in the district – besides the residential surrounding is a big problem for office other attractions (Széchenyi Thermal heating – are the industry and the workers and also for enterprises in Cycling is growing rapidly, the need Bath, Vajdahunyad Castle, Municipal vehicles. The main industrial sites the HoReCa sector). Some can adapt for developing cycling infrastructure Grand Circus...etc.) used by locals causing the pollution are located to the circumstances by for instance, – cycling routes, bicycle parking – and tourists throughout the year. outside of the area of Törökőr. Mostly the CO2, NO2 and particulate matter changing windows, or rebuilding is evident. The public bike sharing their facilities. Others move from the system MOL Bubi does not reach Besides the park, the other important pollution coming from the vehicles place or suffer from the pollution. Törökőr. natural element of the district is affect the area because lots of main The number of private cars using Rákos stream, which runs through roads with heavy traffic run around alternative fuels is not known for the Within the area of the neighbourhood the district from the east to the west, the neighbourhood (Hungária ring, neighbourhood, but it is assumed that pedestrians can move in safe towards the river Danube, connecting Thököly road, Mogyoródi road). the number is very low. conditions. Conditions of crossings or harmonisations of traffic lights could The area suffers from a huge number be developed, but the main problem of parking cars. 6,550 cars were is on the borders of Törökőr, where registered in Törökőr in 2013, most the main roads block the movement of them are parked on public spaces; and separate Törökőr from the more than half of the cars are owned neighbouring areas. New pedestrian by enterprises. The area also serves crossings could improve the situation. as an “informal P+R” solution for The area is flat, ideal for walking and commuters due to parking fees in cycling. neighbouring areas. Having the national sport stadium and Hungary’s biggest sports court just across from the Hungária-ring also causes parking problems.
Photos of the Törölör Neighbourhood ©Budapest Municipality
Parking alongside of a residential street ©Mobilissimus Ltd
12 Budapest | Törökőr Budapest | Törökőr 13
What is *SUNRISE 2.2. Objectives, challenges, opportunities aiming for in Törökőr? Locally specific constellation of the main objectives, challenges and opportunities
Objectives of the Neighbourhood Main Challenges of the Project and mindset of people concerning this project to be the starting point of in the SUNRISE Project One of the main challenges in Törökőr mobility-consciousness. The reason for this process. Since Zugló has its own The core group (CG) is an informal is to find the best and most suitable it is firstly that if locals do not have a municipality and representative body group of around ten residents who way to develop pedestrian friendly different mindset, bad feedback could it has the power to influence the public live in Törökőr and volunteered public spaces with the help of the emerge after “unwanted” and not transport routes in the area. Due to to take active part in the whole redivision of roads and traffic calming understood infrastructural changes, SUNRISE the municipality has the SUNRISE process, this way helping measures. Those measures need to give and secondly, that the real change collected needs and problems of the the management of the project and special attention to the area of schools, of modal split only could happen if residents concerning the topic. Those making decisions at some point (see kindergartens and day nurseries. locals voluntarily chose active and could be presented to the responsible more on page 26). The group set up Another challenge is to find out the sustainable mobility modes. organisations. Within the project one its own hierarchy of goals for the real needs of locals concerning the of the most important and long-lasting project frame on the first CG meeting public transport network of the area. Main Opportunities of the Project challenges and opportunities of the in autumn 2017. During the ranking Those findings should be addressed Törökőr has many wide, green streets partners is to find ways to change the process, the participants evaluated subsequently by the change of routes, which could be used more for cycling mindset and the way of thinking of different possible objectives according the establishment of new routes or and walking. For this aim a change of locals. It also offers possibilities to to their own opinion. Based on the new stops. During the project, an street division and further measures motivate them to shift from individual results the list and priority of the goals important objective and challenge at are needed. It is the opportunity of motorised transport modes towards emerged (see the table below). the same time is to change the attitude sustainable mobility modes.
The Participation Promise for SUNRISE Törökőr
The Participation Promise (or the • Development of the sustainable goals of the project) as formulated in mobility action plan of Törökőr. the Memorandum of Understanding:6 • Experimental use of participatory planning in mobility issues. • Identification of the problems • Testing and disseminating regarding broadly defined mobility sustainable mobility solutions in the Törökőr neighbourhood, • Shaping attitudes. with the involvement of the • Local community development. community. • Development of sustainable The participation promise was solutions by common planning, established by the Municipality of the taking into account all participants XIV. District according to the aims of and modes of mobility, such the project, the possible outcome of as pedestrians, people with the process and the financial resources wheelchair, visually impaired, available within the project. The cyclists, elderly, young, people with participation promise is available on small children, car drivers etc. the website of the project and have • Taking into account maximally the been presented and discussed on the priorities of the local community first CG meeting as well when using the financial sources Hierarchy of goals of the Core Goup (CG) ©Mobilissimus Ltd provided by the project (ca. 65 000 14 Budapest | Törökőr EUR). Budapest | Törökőr 15
What *happend in 2.3. The Co-Identification Process Törökőr so far? Process and Events
Summary The SUNRISE participatory planning Regarding the different methods The Process Design process in Zugló-Törökőr is seen as an used, some can be considered fully The process of participation was opportunity to test various formats, successful, while others could not planned in the autumn of 2017 and with the ultimate goal to integrate contribute to the process to the during the following months it went successful formats in the municipal envisaged extent; e.g. the open according to the plan. The main steps planning processes beyond the project questionnaire mainly due to the are described in the figure below. lifetime. Consequently, a broad range overlap with the problem mapping; The participatory process involved of formats have been tested in the the customer service office due to the many different methods, formats and phase of co-identification of problems high need of human resources etc. events. The co-identification phase, & co-validation of needs. For the next steps, the main when the collection of problems and conclusion is that currently only a ideas happened, took place between The collection of problems and small, committed group of people September and November in 2017. strengths has been successful, as a (the CG members) are willing to This was the most intensive phase large number of items have been regularly spend time and effort on of problem-gathering. For one week collected by a wide range of events the co-creation process, mainly due every day a stand was put up in and tools (both online and offline, to internal motivation. In order to different frequently used places in the covering several areas of Törökőr), reach a wider group of residents and neighbourhood and the local or those for all areas of the neighbourhood stakeholders, the right formats have people who work or study in the area and also covering all mobility issues to be found, and the content has to could share their problems, ideas or and transport modes. The CCF and be specific enough so that people can give feedback on the good solutions in CG meetings, as well as the thematic identify if they are directly affected the neighbourhood. walks contributed to the more in- and motivated to take part in the depth common understanding of process. specific areas or problems for different stakeholders.
Process design figure of the participation ©Mobilissimus Ltd
16 Budapest | Törökőr Budapest | Törökőr 17 1st Core Group Meeting ©Budapest Municipality 2.3. The Co-Identification Process
Tools, formats, events
The SUNRISE participatory planning one was a mapping tool with the help process in Zugló-Törökőr is seen as an of a big satellite picture of the area opportunity to test various formats, and the other was a questionnaire. with the ultimate goal to integrate The 1st (forming) meeting of the CG successful formats in the municipal was held on the 09/11/2017. The 2nd participation in general and therefore planning processes beyond the project CG meeting, held on the 17/12/2017, are stable, regularly contributing to lifetime. Consequently, a broad range was dedicated to successful examples the process. Other stakeholders are of formats have been tested in the of participatory planning processes however harder to reach and integrate phase of co-identification of problems in Hungary and abroad, while the 3rd to a regular series of meetings. & co-validation of needs. CG meeting on the 14/02/2018 to the SWOT presentation and validation Activity 2 – Title: Awareness raising Activity 1 – Title: Core Group and setting topics for the co-design events (neighbourhood festival, (CG) & Co-Creation Forum (CCF) workshops. On the 3rd workshop, European Mobility Week) meetings after the presentation of the SWOT, Two existing events have been used to This activity covers a series of events. the members discussed its items raise awareness about the SUNRISE An internal kick-off was held on and and added to the list, then the process: A neighbourhood festival on 08/09/2017 to present the SUNRISE preparatory work for the co-design 16/09/2018 in Törökőr, open air in project and process and give insight workshops started with 3 small groups front of the tennis club, as well as the SUNRISE flyers into participation in general and the that did a brainstorming exercise on main European Mobility Week event ©Mobilissimus Ltd co-identification process (including possible workshop topics, which they of Budapest, on 16-17/09/2018 at the role of CG) to key stakeholders. shared and discussed amongst one Andrássy Avenue. Activity 3 – Title: MIZUglónk The CCF kick-off on 09/10/2017 another. website and Facebook channel, aimed for a wider audience (open The objective was to raise awareness local press for all) and already included the Participants were generally positive, about the co-creation process. The main communication channels of collection of SWOT items of the area. but participation levels remain This was more successful at the the co-creation process towards the The SWOT describes a tool to analysis low. The core CG members (local neighbourhood festival which was general public are the following: strengths, weaknesses, opportunities residents) are people committed to organised in Törökőr (also some • MIZUglónk website (http:// and threats. We used two different SWOT items were already collected), mizuglonk.hu/) with a SUNRISE techniques for the identification of while the EMW event was off site and subpage; problems and strengths in the area, most people were not relevant for • MIZUglónk facebook channel Törökőr. (https://www.facebook.com/ mizuglonk/, the channel is In the neighbourhood festival the followed by around 450 people SUNRISE project presented with • local (municipal) newspaper its own tent, informational desk, (fortnightly) problem mapping tool, questionnaire • SUNRISE flyers and different games connected to the mobility of the area. With the help of Articles, news, events are also shared these tools and games the collection of at partners’ websites and Facebook SWOT items has been started. channels (Mobilissimus and BKK).
CCF Meeting Neighbourhood Festival ©Mobilissimus Ltd ©Mobilissimus Ltd
18 Budapest | Törökőr Budapest | Törökőr 19 2.3. The Co-Identification Process
Tools, formats, events
The wider public is being informed of people: those who are living in the Activity 5 – Title: Online problem questionnaire had three parts: the first about the co-creation process and its area, those who work here and those mapping was a table about the transport habits results. There is generally low level of ones who bring their children here The Nextseventeen online mapping of the respondents (how often they use interaction on the Facebook channels. to study as well. During the tour we tool has been provided and adapted the different transport modes), in the used a big satellite picture of the area, by Urbanista, translated by Zugló and second part there were open questions Activity 4 – Title: On tour problem where the participants could mark Mobilissimus and integrated into the about the perceived problems and mapping the locations of the problems, ideas or MIZUglónk website. strengths of the different transport After the CCF kick-off, a problem good solutions they experienced in the modes in the area and in the third mapping tour was organised. For a area with the help of different coloured People could pin locations on the part there were questions about week, a stand (table, chairs, project stickers according to the different online map with problems, strengths personal data, which was required banner) was set up in several different mobility modes. or ideas they know, and include frequented public spaces in Törökőr, description and photo. They could also in order to collect problems and During the tour we tried to contact comment on already uploaded ideas. strengths perceived by the residents everybody passing by the stand. (SWOT items). Nine locations were People were generally reserved and not 280 items (problems, strengths, chosen for the tour; around half of going up to the stands on their own ideas) have been collected in total (on them were in front of kindergartens initiative, they had to be approached tour & online). The answers of the or schools and half of them were near personally. People approached were on-tour mapping (see above) have busy transport nodes (e.g.: in front of generally open to sharing their ideas, also been manually uploaded to the the metro station, near a big shopping but were mostly sceptical (“nothing online mapping tool, thus giving a mall). Thanks to the different will happen anyway”). When they full overview of items identified. The locations, we reached a wide range shared their experiences and ideas, results were later exported to Excel, we put marks on the map, this way analysed by Mobilissimus experts, everybody could see which locations published on the MIZUglónk website had been identified as having more or and presented to the CG, who had the Online problem mapping fewer problems. Answers have been opportunity to review and discuss it, ©Mobilissimus Ltd manually uploaded to the online by adding the members’ own opinions mapping tool (see below). 280 items and experiences to it on the event or to fill in, if the responders wanted to (problems, strengths, ideas) have been afterwards by e-mail. participate in the later activities. The collected in total (on tour & online). questionnaire was promoted on the Activity 6 – Title: Online and offline webpage of the project as well as on its problem questionnaire Facebook channel. An open problem (and success) perception questionnaire has been Due to the overlap with other developed and published on the activities (especially the on tour and MIZUglónk website, and also offline online problem mapping) the number with ballot boxes at 9 locations (mostly of answers (57 in total, of which 42 on schools, kindergartens) for 2 weeks. paper, 13 online and 2 blind-friendly) The format was successful earlier in remained relatively low. Also, shops other cities. Also, a blind-friendly and services (hairdresser’s etc.) were version has been developed. The not open to host the ballot boxes. The locations of the on-tour problem mapping On tour problem mapping ©Mobilissimus Ltd ©Mobilissimus Ltd
20 Budapest | Törökőr Budapest | Törökőr 21
Who are the *participants 2.3. The Co-Identification Process in SUNRISE in Törökőr? Tools, formats, events Target groups and participants
For this reason most were placed situation of the morning peak when The stakeholder mapping was done at leaflets dropped in to every mailbox in in schools and kindergartens, but a schools start. several preparatory meetings during the neighbourhood. People could also school holiday also negatively affected the Summer 2017. In addition to openly register their interest at events the number of answers. A few active and cooperative blind brainstorming, several checklists (awareness raising events and the open people and active and engaged local have been used (e.g. from the SUMP CCF kick-off) and on the website The results were later exported to residents in the Újvidék tér area made Guidelines). (promoted also on Facebook). Excel and analysed by Mobilissimus both events successful, especially for experts, presented to the CG and also raising awareness and providing in- As there was already a participation Involvement of participants published on the MIZUglónk website. depth local knowledge to municipal process in the area before (Pillangó • Local residents: currently only a staff. Park), the idea was to build on its small, committed group of people Activity 7 – Title: Customer service existing core group and adapt it (the CG members) are willing to office (ZETI office) to the SUNRISE project’s focus. spend regularly time and effort on The plan was to upgrade the existing Stakeholders would have included the co-creation process, mainly ZETI (energy efficiency consultancy local residents, NGOs, institutions due to internal motivation. Since for residents) customer service office (schools, kindergartens) and local there is not a long history of co- to also serve as a regular contact point businesses. District councillors planning in Hungary, the mindset for residents about SUNRISE (with a elected in Törökőr were also invited. of people towards this cannot limited opening time of one afternoon Thematic walk with disabled people Universities with campuses in Zugló easily be changed. SUNRISE is a by week). This was not realized due ©Jóügy or having relevant scope (transport good step, but the change of the to the location outside of the area, engineering, communication, civic attitude of a whole society always technical constraints (access to keys involvement etc.) were regarded as takes longer time. The lesson in the etc.) and limited human capacity to potential partners. SUNRSIE project is that the best staff the office. way to catalyse the participatory A group of stakeholders (around 20) process is to find those key The office still serves as a meeting were invited to the internal kick-off persons, who are local-patriots and point for the CG, being much easier to present the project to them and feel committed to the development to access from the street than any discuss the way working of the CG. of the area. municipal office. Invitations were mostly sent by e-mail. • Blind people: direct approach via Later on, those residents who showed the Institute of Blinds (with seat in Activity 8 – Title: Thematic walks great interested to the project were Zugló) proved successful. As the Institute of Blinds is based invited personally to the CG. in Zugló, several people with visual • Universities: students of Central impairment walk and travel day-by- To bring people to the CCF and make European University (CEU) have day in the area. The aim of the first them interested in the project many participated at several events. walk (18/01/2018 13:00) was to map different advertising methods were Budapest University of Technology out the specific obstacles and identify used. There were reports about the (BME) organised a student case suitable solutions. project in the local newspaper from study competition on Zugló time to time, on the website and on railway station (in Törökőr), where The second walk (13/03/2018 7:30) social media the events were always the winning team also built on the was a site visit to Újvidék tér, Bölcső advertised. Before the thematic walks results of the SUNRISE problem Thematic walk with blind people and workshops posters were put out mapping. The lesson is that with utca and neighbouring schools ©Mobilissimus Ltd and kindergartens to see the traffic in the relevant places and there were every participatory project is really
22 Budapest | Törökőr Budapest | Törökőr 23
How is *bottom-up 2.3. The Co-Identification Process participation organised in Target groups and participants Törökőr?
important to try connecting it to how and why the quality of the them as well. Businesses have to but since local businesses receive other already existing projects neighbourhood and the situation be addressed via direct contact, many ads through email, this way with similar scope (in topic or in of mobility affects their lives. e.g. for sponsorship (when the is not effective in their case. territorial), because this way more Also, better communication of measures have been identified). information is available and the the Pillangó Park process is a In the project just a few local projects can support each other to prerequisite to save the credibility businesses have been contacted be more effective. of the participation process, directly, the others only via e-mail, because the plan of the Pillangó • People with little babies: The Park was created by co-planning, thematic walk with prams was but after the pans were ready, not a success, not many people the Municiplality has stopped participated; even though the communicating about the further Constitution/Formation of the CG timing was probably good for steps of the process this way them (in the morning). It is not leaving the locals in uncertainty easy to understand the reason Set Up of the Core Group below), being much easier to access about the whole situation. for low participation. It could As there was already a participation from the street than any municipal be either a lack of interest or not • Local institutions (schools, process in the area before (Pillangó office. The fund and operational costs having seen the information, kindergartens): people who are Park), the idea was to build on its of the CG are not high, partly thanks but the lesson here is that other willing to participate from schools existing core group and adapt it to the to the ZETI Office which is possible tactics are needed to reach this and kindergartens in the area SUNRISE project’s focus. A group of to use for this reason, only a small group. Reaching out to this are especially important because stakeholders (around 20) were invited amount of printed materials and group personally or through through them, large groups of to the internal kick-off to present sometimes some beverage and snacks kindergartens, local GPs, nurses parents and children can be the project to them and discuss the were needed, which were financed rather than via online forums and reached, and they can also have an way working of the CG. The CG from the project budget. posters, may be more effective. important role as a multiplier in membership was however open: the process. Some representatives people could register at events and on Members of the Core Group People or groups to be activated participated at the internal kick- the website, and also at the open CCF The CG officially consists of 10 within the next steps of bottom-up off, but after that they did not kick-off. people as of 06/04/2018 (those participatory activities follow the project. In their case a who have signed the Declaration of • Further local residents and other more direct approach should be Based on the contacts from the Membership7 required to become stakeholders: In order to reach used (e.g.: visiting them personally previous participatory planning a member). Nine of them are local a wider group of residents and in their institutions). process of the Municipality 60 people residents and one represents a local business. From the residents, one is stakeholders, the right formats • Local businesses: Local business received direct invitation to be a representing an informal local group have to be found, and the content are important for two main member of the CG and 3 more people (The neighbourhood group) and one has to be specific enough so that reasons. Firstly, the business registered on the first promotional is a civil member of the Municipality’s people can identify if they are starts to connect more to the activities. At the first CG meeting 7 Committee for Environment. Apart directly affected and motivated neighbourhood, and therefore feel people participated. from him, two members have a to take part in the process. To more responsible for it. Secondly, background connected to the topic, reach also those groups who are they have the possibility and the The CG was planned to be an informal they are urbanists, one of them not directly affected, awareness resources to support a project group from the beginning, to avoid currently on maternity leave and raising programmes or projects which can be important for any administrative burden resulting are needed in order to convey from a legal form. As meeting place the other one already active in civic the ZETI office has been selected (see initiatives and a member of the
24 Budapest | Törökőr Budapest | Törökőr 25 The results of the Co-Identification phase: The process from collection towards synthesis
Hungarian Cycling Association. The reason for it is that people who The main steps of the organisation and others are motivated to be part of are working in the area, but living pre-evaluation of the collected prob- the CG because they feel responsible someplace else, rush home after the lems and suggestions: for their surrounding end the end of the workday and are not in development of the area. Törökőr when the meetings and other 1) Collection of problems, suggestions events of the SUNRISE project take and comments (683 items altogether). Fluctuation in membership cannot place. Another reason could be that be measured yet, as there were only they do not care as much about the 2) The organisation of the items into 3 CG meetings so far. The average area of Törökőr as they do about the 48 thematic group within 5 different participation from the CG’s part is areas where they live. A promotional mobility modes and one additional four people, plus the project partners campaign targeted specifically to category for the positive feedback. (including NEM and Municipality). those people who are not living in the From the Municipality usually one area, but working here, could help to 3) Localisation and visualisation of or two people are present, who are involve them more in the project. the items in a geographical informa- responsible for the project. tion system (QGIS) in a way that they could be filtered either by theme or by Responsibilities and powers of the area. Core Group The meeting rhythm and procedures 4) The localisation of those focus are flexible, adapted to the actual points in the neighbourhood, in which phase of the project. The goal is to multiple items focussed on the same maintain a regular meeting rhythm, topic and in the same are are grouped, while avoiding unnecessary meetings identifying them as possible projects. when there are no questions to discuss or decisions to be made. 5) From all of the possible projects se- In addition to the meetings, there is a lecting the ones which fit into the aim mailing list for the CG which is also and scope of SUNRISE. used carefully and in a focused way to share relevant information. The 6) Project creation from those items presentations and minutes are made which could not be localised on the public on the MIZUglónk website.8 map, because they refer to the whole area. The core CG members (local residents) are people committed to 7) Project creation form those topics participation in general and therefore which spatially irrelevant, but were are stable, regularly contributing to mentioned many times (e.g.: awaren- the process. Other stakeholders (e.g.: ess raising). business owners, leaders or teachers of local educational institutions) are 8) Experts’ supervision of the project however harder to reach and integrate ideas, determining the future of those to a regular series of meetings. The projects which are out of the SUNRISE scope.
26 Budapest | Törökőr Budapest | Törökőr 27
Which are *the essential 2.4. Culminating Outcomes ideas, problems and needs on Collected problems mobility in Bicycle traffic #3 Public transportation #4
Törökőr? • Missing bike paths and • Missing or unsuitable Parking #1 Pedestrian traffic #2 cycling infrastructure track for public transportation (27 mentions) (pl.: Róna utca) • Residential parking problems, • Missing pedestrian crossing (22 mentions) because the commuters use the (26 mentions) • Dangerous, unsuitable bike area as Park and Ride (P+R) paths • Traffic jam, missing bus or (22 mentions) • On some streets the cars park (12 mentions) trolley lane on both sides, causing traffic- (10 mentions) • Not enough parking lots flow problems • Missing bike racks (17 mentions) (20 mentions) (12 mentions) • On some streets the cars park on both sides, causing traffic- • Illegal forms of parking (on the • Missing sidewalks • Missing bike rental stations flow problems sidewalk, on green areas) (11 mentions) (5 mentions) (8 mentions) (15 mentions) • Missing, unsuitable public • One-way streets not suitable • Train station in bad condition, • Unsuitable parking lots, parking lighting for cycling both directions not accessible and cannot be cars obstructing the flow of (11 mentions) (4 mentions) reached easily from different traffic directions (6 mentions) • Inaccessible areas • Car and bus drivers‘ ignorance (8 mentions) (curbs, lifts…etc.) toward cyclists • On some streets the cars (9 mentions) (3 mentions) • Not full accessibility (not park on both sides, causing enough low floor vehicles, traffic-flow problems • Short green light at the • Bicycle racks not in the right missing or broken elevators, (5 mentions) pedestrian crossings places narrow safety islands) (8 mentions) (2 mentions) (mentions 7) • P+R parking lots are not free to use • Trash, dirt, public spaces • Delays, cancellations (3 mentions) in bad condition (5 mentions) (8 mentions) • Stops not suitable or • Worn-out markings of the not in the right place pedestrain crossings (5 mentions) (4 mentions) • Missing train station (4 mentions)
• Slow metro (4 mentions)
• Missing bus stops (3 mentions)
• Missing noise protection wall (2 mentions)
28 Budapest | Törökőr 29 2.4. Culminating Outcomes
Collected problems Contradictions and Correlations
Individual, motorized transport #5
contradictions and correlations The most important correlations • Dangerous intersections Two main contradictions appeared within the wishes and needs of the (e.g.: missing traffic lights) during the whole process of the co- citizens and later on within the project (46 mentions) identification and the elaboration ideas were those which overlapped of the first draft list of the possible with each other in theme and in area • Transit traffic on the residential project ideas: as well. This occurred most visibly streets, missing or not suitable in those three different areas of the traffic calming (tempo 30, 1) Between the problems and neighbourhood, where many said speed bumps) suggestions collected from the that the creation of a home zone (25 mentions) citizens, there were many which were (with a 20km/h maximum speed) not in line with the overall approach would be really useful while many • Dangerous street, pedestrian and aim of the SUNRISE project (e.g.: only expressed the need for different crossing, area (e.g.: around the wish for more parking spaces traffic calming measures. Because of some institute) due to car instead of green areas, increasing road the correlation, we merged the ideas traffic capacity, etc.). These wishes and needs for little traffic calming interventions (12 mentions) were sorted out and not used in the in these areas underneath the project later phases of the process. ideas for creating home zones. • Traffic jams on a regular bases (11 mentions) 2) After the first draft list of the possible project ideas was concluded, • More traffic lanes are needed it became obvious that many of the (more 4 lane roads) ideas are out of the scope of the (10 mentions) SUNRISE project, mostly because the responsible authority for the • Mogyoródi út is not renewed realisation of the specific project is not entirely the XIV. district of Budapest (Zugló), (4 mentions) but a different organisation usually on higher level. Some projects were • Too many cars sorted out because they did not fit (4 mentions) into the theme of transportation or referred to maintenance problems. • Pavement in bad condition The projects which were sorted out (4 mentions) were handed over to the responsible organisations or authorities (e.g.: • Some streets should be Centre for Budapest Transport (BKK), converted into one-way streets Hungarian State Railways (MÁV), (3 mentions) Budapest Public Road (BK)).
• Francia út is missing/ uncompleted in construction (2 mentions)
30 Budapest | Törökőr 31
Which strategies *support reaching 2.5 SWOT Analysis & Corridor of Options the SUNRISE goals for SWOT-Matrix Törökőr? As a result of the co-identification phase a SWOT analysis was created to sum up the actual state of the neighbourhood‘s mobility and to state clearly the main EXTERNAL FACTORS strengths, weaknesses and those external factors, which could influence the future of Törökőr“s mobility. During the co-identification phase and the status Opportunities Threats quo description we categorised and handled the SWOT items in three different categories according to the mobility modes they refer to: pedestrian and bicycle Pedestrian and bicycle traffic: Pedestrian and bicycle traffic: • The culture of cycling is getting • Growing number of cars on the roads traffic, public transportation and individual motorised transportation. stronger in Budapest due to the economic recovery after • Available financial sources for the years of the financial crisis started INTERNAL FACTORS sustainable mobility solutions in 2018 • Strengthening eco- and mobility Strengths Weaknesses conscious education in schools Public transportation: • The appearance of autonomous cars Public transportation: might increase the number of cars on Pedestrian and bicycle traffic: Pedestrian and bicycle traffic: • Accessibility issues get more the streets • Existing bicycle infrastructure • Bicycle infrastructure is not suitable attention and not kept in good condition • Decrease of demand due to growing • Bicycle usage for everyday purpose is • Aspects and problems of the more common • Missing elements of the bicycle net car use work sensitive groups in the area of mo- • Existing bicycle racks bility are taking into account more • Wide, green streets, ideal for cycling, • Some roads are not suitable for Individual motorized transport: cycling seriously walking • Strengthening through traffic on the • Missing bike racks and bike rental Individual motorized transport: roads • Existing Bicycle Network Plan and stations • Appearance of electric cars • More people using the area as a P+R a cycling referent responsible for the • Public spaces and intersections are cycling issues in the district not pedestrian-friendly • Installation of electric charging zone due to the implementation of the • Accessibility problems in public areas facilities parking fees Public transportation: • Missing or not safe pedestrian • Appearance of car-sharing systems • Renewed tram number 1 crossings • Accessible tram stops • Degraded, littered area around the • Many low-floor buses, trams and railway and Zugló Train Station trolleybuses in the area Public transportation: SWOT-Strategies • Some areas without suitable public With the “OW Strategy”, the opportunities are used to reduce existing Individual motorized transport: transportation • Not entirely accessible vehicles and • Main roads with big capacity around weaknesses. The dominance of weaknesses in the SWOT analysis of the infrastructure Törökőr resulted that the OW Strategy was taken into account. the area • Missing bus lanes and public transport • Traffic calming measures on the side priority on some streets streets • Intersections which are dangerous or The not the best way designed for public 1. 3. transportation The use of expansion of • Missing train station on Kerepesi road the growing mobility- sharing trends • Degraded trolleybus infrastructure consciousness and stronger in mobility is also a • Missing connections on the trolleybus possibility to build upon network bicycle culture in the society, • Zugló Train Station is in bad condition could be a good basis for the and make the mobility development of the cycling 2. system more Individual motorized transport: The growing infrastructure in the area sustainable. • P+R use of the streets, P+R parking is attention towards not properly legislated and also motivational for sensitive groups could • Significant through traffic on the the people to cycle be used to get support for narrow, low capacity streets more. • Dangerous intersections, pedestrian a mobility infrastructure crossings which is understandable • Temporary traffic jams, over-parking, and accessible for illegal parking in front of the educational, social institutions everybody. • During big events there are conflicts between the residential and client parking, not enough parking lots 32 Budapest | Törökőr 33
Which are *the possible 2.5 SWOT Analysis & Corridor of Options options for actions in Corridor of Options Törökőr?
Traffic calming measures in residential streets • Reduced corner radii Despite the fact that at the borders of the neighbourhood feeder roads The reduction of a corner radius gives more space to pedestrians connect the core of Budapest with the suburbs, in peak hours many in the intersections and at the same time makes the drivers more drivers chose to go through the area aiming a fast transit passing. cautious because of the narrowed street width. It is a low-cost Tempo 30 areas exist in Törökőr, but in many cases drivers do not ad- measure, but it still needs a simple traffic management plan and here to the speed restrictions. More and/or more serious measures are the approval by authorities. needed to make Törökőr quieter and safer for pedestrians and cyclists, especially around kindergartens, schools, playgrounds.
Possible specific measures: Solutions for overdemand in parking • Residential zone in the northern family house area Using the area as a spontaneous Park&Ride zone is a serious problem, The design of a residential zone in the northern area of Törökőr therefore solutions need to be found by managing the demand for is a complex measure which can take place only if the responsi- parking and fostering the use of public transport or other modes and ble bodies and authorities on local and city-level both approve by restricting the illegal parking on sidewalks and green areas. the idea. The measure should be built upon an elaborated traffic management plan, which alters all the streets into one-way streets Possible specific measures: in order to exclude through traffic. The cost of full implementation • Extension of the paid parking zone to cover the area of Törökőr may be high, not fitting into the budget of the SUNRISE project, The regulation of parking and the determination of parking zones but a basic version can be a result of the project. and paid parking areas within the capital is a joint responsibility of • Raised intersections for pedestrian priority the districts and the City of Budapest. For this reason the decision This low-cost measure can be useful especially near schools, kin- on the expansion of the paid parking zone cannot be made in the dergartens or green areas where children, as well as adults, cross Municipality of the XIV. District, the Municipality‘s role can be the streets to reach their destination. The design of a raised inter- only to report the problems to the City of Budapest and lobby for section requires a traffic management plan and approval from the the right decision. As a result of SUNRISE, the request of the citi- responsible authorities. zens - to introduce paid parking in the area - can be represented • Chicanes to the Municipality of Budapest with a big support from the local The introduction of chicanes on a residential street needs elabora- residents. ted and detailed planning, especially because these forms of traffic • Stricter control of illegal parking calming are not yet common in Hungary. The cost of this measure One of the biggest problem concerning the illegal parking in the can vary according to the design; in the case of the usage of simple area is the discrepancy of the control. The vehicles parking on an mobile panels and plant boxes the cost is low, but in the case of a appointed parking space without a parking ticket are controlled detailed and permanent design it can be higher. Since the measure by a parking company, but those ones parking on green areas or directly affects only one street it is questionable if it is worthwhile illegal spots are controlled either by the police or by public-space to spend a large amount of money on it. controllers (similar to municipal police). To change this situation • Speed bumps the adjustment of the system or an extended scope of the parking Even though there are many speed bumps in the area, more are controllers is needed. The measure does not require high im- needed, and in a variety of forms, since the design of the existing plementation cost, but rather the good cooperation between the ones is not suitable. This low-cost measure could be especially use- different actors. ful in the family house area or near the educational institutions.
34 Budapest | Törökőr Budapest | Törökőr 35 2.5 SWOT Analysis & Corridor of Options
School mobility In Törökőr and especially in the northern areas there are lots of • Designating Kiss&Go drop-off points near schools schools, kindergartens and day-nurseries and many of them have se- For the establishment of a Kiss&Go zone the approval of the local rious problems regarding mobility (e.g.: huge amount of parking cars authorities and the understanding of the leaders and parents of the at the beginning and the end of school time, dangerous intersections school is also needed. The action needs a traffic management plan, and crossings, missing public lighting, etc.) Solutions to these prob- the solutions can be low- or medium-cost. In Hungary Kiss&Go lems mean both measures which aim to make physical, infrastructural zones are not common yet, that is why effective communication is changes (e.g.: new pedestrian crossings, proper sidewalks, etc.) and very important and parents may need some time to adjust to the the change of the mobility habits of parents and children by changing changes. their attitudes towards sustainable mobility solutions (e.g.: introduc- tion of walking bus, bicycle train, etc.).
Possible specific measures: Solutions for improving safety of pedestrian crossings • Ban for motor vehicles/creation of dead-end streets in front Existing pedestrian crossings in the area in many cases are not safe, of schools, kindergartens because of the lack of streetlight or traffic lights, unforeseeable corners The measure can have a high positive effect on the safety of school or sometimes they are dangerous just because of the missing attention and kindergarten areas with relative low-cost interventions. Even of drivers. The improvement of these crossings is necessary with the the simplest solutions (e.g. only the placement of some mobile attention for the different problems and surroundings of them. panels or plant boxes) can have really positive outcomes, but in the case of a stronger financial background the design of a beautiful Possible specific measures: public space is also possible. • Improving public lighting (street lights) • Awareness raising, mobility-consciousness games/campaigns Missing street lights are not only a mobility problem, but also a in schools (e.g.: STARS) problem of public safety. The placement of new street lights needs The implementation of the measure depends on three major thorough utility plans. factors: the financial background, the know-how and the willing- • Installing traffic lights ness of the schools. The measure is low-cost, even small amount Some of the intersections of Törökőr are dangerous in spite of the of dedicated money is enough for a programme, the know-how is fact that pedestrian crossings link the pavements. The solution can available from public sources or earlier similar projects in Hunga- be the placement of traffic lights, which needs a detailed traffic ry and the third factor is the most unpredictable, the willingness of management plan and the reconsideration of the harmonisation of schools mostly depends on the mindset of the leaders. traffic lights in the area. • New pedestrian crossings, building of the lacking sections of • Traffic mirror sidewalks The placement of a traffic mirror is a low-cost and fast solution, The elaboration of new pedestrian crossings or new sections of which could be a big help at certain intersections and corners. the sidewalk can be a big help for the pedestrians in the area. Both Most of these intersections are not foreseeable because of dense of the measures need a traffic management plan and the approval bushes, but lay near to educational institutions, in an area, which is of the responsible authorities. The cost of these measures can be used constantly by children. categorised as low- or medium-cost.
36 Budapest | Törökőr Budapest | Törökőr 37 2.5 SWOT Analysis & Corridor of Options
• Creating new bicycle routes (Róna utca, Mogyoródi út) Solutions for improving accessibility for mobility impaired and The bicycle network in the area is not continuous and there are blind/visually impaired important and frequently used streets where there is no infras- • The Institute for blind people is located near Törökőr and because tructure for cyclists even though in some of the cases the streets of this many blind or visually impaired people use or live in the are really wide. The expansion of the network is necessary to foster neighbourhood. They are a group with specific mobility needs and the use of bicycles for everyday purposes. The difficulty of these problems, which should be solved by making public transport ea- interventions is that main roads are operated by the City of Buda- sily accessible and creating blind-friendly public spaces for them. pest and not by the district.
Possible specific measures: • Lowering the curbs of the pavement The measure is a low-cost solution, which does not need special Shared mobility solutions permissions or plans, but could improve the mobility situation of Shared mobility solutions currently are not available in the area. The the sensitive groups significantly. extension of the already existing bike-sharing systems (MOL BuBi and • Awareness raising within the society Donkey Republic) or a station based car-sharing system could give the Many creative modes of awareness raising exist, which can have residents the possibility to use the shared mobility solutions. a big impact on people who otherwise do not know how to help those who need it. These solutions usually are low-cost and Possible specific measures: the success of them highly depend on the good design and the • Extension of existing bike sharing system(s) to the area well-worded message. The extension of the existing bike sharing systems can foster the use of active modes in the neighbourhood, but this measure meets serious obstacles since the system on the extended area might not be maintained economically. Furthermore, another obstacle is Low-scale measures supporting cycling that extending bike sharing systems is not only an investment, but There are several elements of the cycling infrastructure in the area would probably need the constant co-financing of operation. (both bicycle lanes and bicycle parking facilities) but the cycling net- • The establishment of the area’s own bike sharing system work is not complete and at some important locations bicycle parking If it is not possible to extend the already existing bicycle sharing facilities are missing. systems, the solution can be the creation of Törökőr’s own bike sharing system. There are many different operational models, Possible specific measures: finding the right one probably would be one of the most important • Installing new bicycle racks and hardest task. New bicycle racks make the use of bicycle for everyday mobility • Extension of existing station based car sharing system to the area much easier. The implementation does not need a big budget and There is only one station–based car-sharing system in Budapest, can be done step by step. Possible locations for bicycle racks are in which is mostly used by companies for business trips and not front of schools, kindergartens, shops, office buildings and parks. by residents. The popularity and promotion of the system is not • Opening one-way streets to two-way cycling strong either. That is why the extension and more visible promo- If the specific road is wide enough the implementation of this tion of the system is necessary. The implementation needs high measure does not need hard infrastructural changes, only the investment cost, which does not fit into the budget of SUNRISE, painting of the signs on the road and the putting of street signs at but the project can have a major role in catalysing such a process. the ends of the road are necessary. The measure is low-cost, but can help a lot to connect the existing bicycle infrastructure and create a continuous bicycle network.
38 Budapest | Törökőr Budapest | Törökőr 39
What has *been learnt? 2.6 Lessons Learnt
What went well? What didn‘t work?
What went What should be well? developed further?
• Engaged core members of the CG • Low participation levels, especially when needing regular effort • People were generally open (even if passive) • Weak outreach to local businesses, institutions • More concrete topics (more specific location/area, more specific • Weak participatory culture (in general), trust topic) potentially attracting more people must be built (results delivered)
• The online and offline questionnaires had been filled out only by a few
• Because of the big project team sometimes the information can easily get lost in between the different actors
40 Budapest | Törökőr Budapest | Törökőr 41 2.6 Lessons Learnt
Involvement/ Institutional Communication Main drivers Involvement/ Main barriers Political/StrategicSpatial Spatial communication Organisational Positional Planning Technological Cultural Cultural Technological Financial Political
• CULTURAL – A handful of engaged residents • POLITICAL/STRATEGIC – Backlash of no (transparent) com- The core group played a key role in the co-identification of pro- munication of the implementation phase of previous partici- blems, needs, and wishes. The members of the group mostly live patory process (Pillangó Park) in Törökőr and for this reason they are really motivated to help to Pillangó Park is the most important and the biggest green area in improve the mobility situation of the area. Furthermore, since they the neighbourhood. Since the park is in bad condition new plans use the streets and parks every day, they have a really deep unders- were made during 2016 and 2017 with a participatory planning tanding about the local problems. process involving local citizens. In the process, many workshops and meetings took place. The plans were ready in the summer of • FINANCIAL – SUNRISE funding available for a limited range 2017, but the city council first did not accept the them, because of interventions of the high cost. This undermined the perceived effectiveness of The fact that at the end of the SUNRISE project some interventi- participatory planning in the neighbourhood, which caused disap- ons will really take place was important, because it gave credibility pointment and distrust in similar projects among some residents. to the whole process and this way helped to convince the people Later on, in the autumn of 2017 the city council accepted the plans that it is worth participating and sharing their opinion. and secured the financial background for the first phase of the renewal. • TechnologicalWhat – Online didn‘t mapping work? tool (Nextseventeen) provi- ded by Urbanista presents motivating people to participate • CULTURAL – Scepticism of people (“nothing will happen”) From all ofWhat the methods should we used be during developed the co-identification further? phase Participatory planning was not very common in Hungary in the the online mapping tool was by far the most successful. People re- past. Most of the time, residents were only informed about what is ally enjoyed searching on the map for the streets where they live or going to happen in their neighbourhood, but did not have the real the daily routes they use and to identify the locations where they power to influence the changes and therefore had a general lack of experience difficulties in the area of mobility. good experiences. This might be the reason why many people were mistrustful in the beginning. It was the project‘s task to convince people that they can have a say in what the future of their neighbourhood will look like.
• PLANNING – 1 week school holiday within the 2 weeks peri- od (of problem questionnaire) Among all the methods we used in the co-identification phase, the questionnaire (both online and offline) was the least successful one. The paper-based questionnaires were put out in approxima- tely 10 educational institutions for two weeks, but due to a lack of proper planning, the first week overlapped with the autumn holiday, when these schools and kindergartens are closed. This problem caused a low participation rate. 42 Budapest | Törökőr 43
What *happened 2.7 Following Steps next?
Autumn Study Tour 2018 Conclusion Drawn & Further Concept (Activities, Ideas, Wishes, ...) 3 What? • get to know good practices from Vienna For the next steps, the main allowed residents and stakeholders to • reward CG • take home ideas (with proposed measures conclusion is that currently only a concentrate their efforts on the topics in mind) small, committed group of people and areas most relevant for them. (the CG members) is willing to The voting on the measures to be How? regularly spend time and effort on implemented within the SUNRISE • 1-day study tour to Vienna the co-creation process, mainly due project had to be broadly available and Who? to internal motivation. In order to easily accessible for the local residents • CG members reach a wider group of residents and and stakeholders, both online and • municipality stakeholders, the right formats have offline. to be found, and the content has to be specific enough so that people can The promotion of events and other identify if they are directly affected contribution opportunities is key, in Autumn Measure Development 2018 and motivated to take part in the due time, with broad reach and in process. an appealing format. The 1st design 4 What? workshop was e.g. promoted via • Develop proposed measures in detail The topics of the 3 design workshops leaflets distributed to the mailboxes (technical content, feasibility, costs…) were organised in March and April of 1660 households in the area of 2018 were selected in a way that Újvidék tér and Bölcső utca. How? • expert workshops
Who? Technical Meetings March March - April • municipality 2018 Design Workshops 2018 • experts • international experts (Koucky) 1 What? 2 • CG What? • possible implementers (road authority, PT • exchange information with key • Defining a set of measures to be prepared authority etc.) stakeholders (implementers) and planned with the involvement of stake- • pre-check the feasibility of some ideas holders • getting to know major projects affecting Törökőr (schedule of known road How? developments, possible rail projects) and • public design workshops (with walks before) the possibility to solve collected problems Autumn Measure Voting 2018 • provide the relevant collected problems Who? to the partners to include them into their • local residents planning • other local stakeholders 5 What? • inviting them to public design workshops • municipality • co-decision and selection on the set of • experts measures to be implemented within How? • possible implementers SUNRISE • meetings (road authority, PT authority etc.) • e-mail, phone… How? • online and non-line voting Who? • BKK (public transport authority) Who? • Budapest Közút (road authority) • local residents • MÁV (Hungarian State Railways) • local stakeholders
44 Budapest | Törökőr Budapest | Törökőr 45
Which *support is 2.8 Data & Expertise available for future steps? Resources the city can offer
Cost estimates of the projects The Municipality will give a draft Active participation of municipal staff estimation of the cost of the possi- in the process ble projects. City staff will be present in the upco- ming events and will help all along the process. The execution of the voting The precise planning and execution of the voting Provision of rooms for event procedure will be in the Either for outdoor or indoor events the hands of the Municipality. city will provide a room or the necessary Technical design permit to use public space. After the voting, the projects chosen by the citizens will need more detailed planning, which will be Access to municipal managed by the Municipality. communication channels Local municipal communication chan- nels (local newspaper, website, face- book channel, mailbox leaflets…) will play an important rule in the future of the project as well.
46 Budapest | Törökőr Budapest | Törökőr 47 3.0 Cover: urbanista, 2019 Graphic of the ideal typical process of Co-Identification in SUNRISE with the different steps taken. : urbanista, 2019
REFERENCES 1 source: ITS megalapozó – gazdasági SWOT analízis 2 source: Municipal Data
3 Hungarian National Statistical Office
4 source: ITS megalapozó - 118
5 note: The number of CG members who indicated they agree with the objetive.
6 see: http://mizuglonk.hu/wp-content/uploads/Egyuttmukodes_ SUNRISE_ZUGLO_20180201.pdf
7 see: http://mizuglonk.hu/wp-content/uploads/Tags%C3%A1gi-nyi latkozat.pdf
8 see: http://mizuglonk.hu/sunrise-projekt/torokor-tanacsado-testulet/
Budapest | Törökőr 49 NEIGHBOURHOOD MOBILITY DOSSIER
BAKA - JERUSALEM
© urbanista More information about SUNRISE: Content www.civitas-sunrise.eu
1 INTRODUCTION
The CIVITAS SUNRISE project has received funding from the 1.1 Objective and content of “Co-Identification and Co-Validation“ 4 European Union’s Horizon 2020 research and innovation program- me under grant agreement No 72 33 65 and the Neighbourhood Mobility Dossier
Neighbourhood Mobility Dossier of Baka/Jerusalem in SUNRISE Title DOSSIER [within the phase of WP1: Co-Identification and Co-Validation of 2 Problems and Needs] 2.1 Status quo description 9 Deliverable 1.2 of the EU Project ID: 723365 • General situation of the neighbourhood (social, economic, environmental features) • Description of the mobility issues in the neighbourhood 2.2 Objectives, challenges, opportunities 14 Contributors to case studies Budapest Fovaros XIV Kerulet Zuglo, Budapesti Kezlekedesi Kozpont • Locally specific constellation of the main objectives, challenges and opportunities and technical support Zartkoruen Mukodo Reszvenytarsasag (BKK), Edinburgh Napier Uni- • The Participation Promise versity (TRI), Fundación Zaragoza Logistics Centre (ZLC), KOUCKY 2.3 The Co-Identification Process 18 & Partners AB, HQ ARCHITECTS, MOBILISSIMUS, Malmo Stad, • Aims and Expectations Freie und Hansestadt Bremen, Municipality of Jerusalem, Promotion of • Overview about the steps taken in the Co-Identification process Opertional Links with Integrated Services, Association Internationale • Target groups, Tools used (POLIS), Southend-On-Sea Borough Council, Technical University • Constitution/formation of the CCF/CG Vienna (TUW), Transport Authority of Thessaloniki SA (TheTA) 2.4 Culminating Outcomes 26 • Collected needs and ideas • Contradictions and correlations Quality control Rupprecht Consult - Forschung und Beratung GmbH Hana Peters and Ralf Brand 2.5 SWOT Analysis & Corridor of Options 28 • SWOT strategies Technical University Vienna, Department of Spatial Planning, • Corridors of options Centre of Sociology (E 280/6) 2.6 Lessons Learnt: Drivers and Barriers, Potentials and Challenges 32 Nadine Haufe and Lukas Franta • Potentials • Challenges
Authors and Design Responsible for the content: 2.7 Following Steps 36 Miri Jano-Reiss • Conclusion drawn and further concept Maya Tapiero 2.8 Data & Expertise 38 Adi Perry • Resources the city can offer Maayan Omer
Accompanying consulting and design: urbanista GmbH & Co KG References 40 Astrid Großmann and Marie-Christin Schulze 3 [email protected]
Jerusalem | Baka Photograph 1: by the SUNRISE Baka team Photographs 2 -3 : Street festival, 2017, Miri Reiss – mapping opportunities and obstacles with the community Photograph 1 by the Sunrise Baka team Photographs 2 -3 : Street festival, 2017, Miri Reiss – mapping opportunities and obstacles with the community
Photograph 4: by the SUNRISE Baka team Photographs 5 - 7: Walking and mapping Workshop with the CCF and HGQ Architects Photographs 4 by the Sunrise Baka team Photographs 5 - 7: Walking and mapping Workshop with the CCF and HGQ Architects.
Photograph 9: CCF meeting, 2017, Miri Reiss – co identification descations Photograph 8: Third age, 2017, Miri Reiss Co identification with the third age at „Moses House“ Photograph 10: by the SUNRISE Baka team Photograph 8: Third age, 2017, Miri Reiss Co identification with the third age at „Moses House“: Photograph 9: CCF meeting, 2017, Miri Reiss – co identification descations: Photograph 10 by the Sunrise Baka team
Jerusalem | Baka 3 4 1.0 1.1. Objective and content of “Co-Identification“ INTRODUCTION and the Neighbourhood Mobility Dossier
Occasion and Purpose organisation and implementation of a participatory process A Neighbourhood Mobility Dossier to identify, validate and has been produced in each articulate locally perceived neighbourhood as a final document mobility challenges as well as of the »Co-Identification and Co- neighbourhood specific strengths, Validation« phase – the first work weaknesses, opportunities and package of SUNRISE. The aim of this threats work package was to ensure that all The Neighbourhood Mobility Dossier SUNRISE action neighbourhoods aims to comprehensively capture – Bremen, Budapest, Jerusalem, the results of co-identification and Malmö, Southend-On-Sea and co-validation process including the Thessaloniki – lay a solid foundation factual and subjectively perceived for all following activities. This situation with regard to mobility encompassed the establishment and other related aspects. The of strategic local alliances and the Dossier serves as a guidebook for the thorough participatory identification neighbourhood themselves regarding of problems, needs and opportunities the upcoming co-creative phases (co- in each neighbourhood. development and co-implementation of sustainable mobility solutions), but Its key objectives were furthermore: also as an overview and inspiration • To guide each Action for other cities and neighbourhoods Neighbourhood in the set up and regarding the co-creative development constitution of a local Co-Creation of sustainable mobility solutions. 1 Forum (CCF) and the Core Group The set of the six Dossiers of each 2 (CG) Action Neighbourhood constitutes the • To ensure that all relevant status- final product of the Co-Identification quo information concerning the phase in SUNRISE. Additionally, a Action Neighbourhoods will be summarised overview of the results included and fully taken into of the Co-identification and Co- account validation phase will be integrated in • To instruct and support each the »Neighbourhood Mobility Action Action Neighbourhood in the Plan«3.
1The Co-Creation Forum (CCF) is a forum/platform where everyone can express their views, ideas and concerns related to the current and future mobility situation within a neighbourhood. It can bee seen as a strategic local alliance, covering the public, covering all major stakeholders. 2The Core Group (CG) works as a coordinator of the CCF in the sense of a steering committee and administrative secretariat. 3 The Neighbourhood Mobility Pathfinder is SUNRISE‘s online toolbox to enable exploitation of SUNRISE results beyond the project‘s lifetime.
Jerusalem | Baka 5 When? What? WP1 Who? Process
July 2017 City Hall municipality and project team »Co-Identification«: Objectives In chapter 2.4 the condensed PREPARATORY STEPS outcomes of the collected problems, The main objective of Co-Identification needs and ideas are illustrated a INTERNAL PREPARATORY MEETINGS b INTERNAL | INFORMATIVE KICK-OFF was to ensure that all SUNRISE and possible contradictions and INFORMATION & PREPARATION July2017 EXCHANGE Action Neighbourhoods lay a solid correlations highlighted. Baka Community Centre, MILESTONE M33 foundation for the following activities. »MEMORANDUM OF Afterwards the main outcomes of All stakeholders This encompasses the establishment PUBLIC KICK-OFF | OFFICIAL LAUNCH EVENT UNDERSTANDING« the top-down and bottom up SWOT of strategic local alliances and the Analysis of the neighbourhood are thorough participatory identification outlined by means of the derived BRING PEOPLE TOGETHER INTRODUCE TO THE PUBLIC of problems, needs, ideas and October 2018 strategies and corridors of options. Neighbourhood Lear- opportunities in each SUNRISE ning Retreat I GATHER PROBLEMS Action Neighbourhood. GAIN LOCAL AWARENESS AND NEEDS ! ! In the next chapter the lessons learnt ? ? ! Content and Structure of the of the Co-Identification process November 2017 ON-SITE COLLECTING EVENTS are illustrated firstly by pointing On-site collection at Neighbourhood Mobility Dossier November 2017 ! Bet Moses Seniors Home out the potentials and challenges On-site collection in public spaces in Baka ? that arose during the participation ? To get a first impression of the GATHER PROBLEMS ? REACH DIFFERENT process in Co-Identification and AND NEEDS PEOPLE IN DIFFERENT respective neighbourhood and its ! ! PLACES February 2018 December 2017 ! characteristics the Dossier starts with played a significant role for the ? On-site collection at On-site collection with Baka Green Path further planning and execution of CCF at Baka an introduction of the status quo Community Centre participatory events. Secondly by ! situation of the neighbourhood in ! ? ? ! general and mobility wise followed naming and describing the most ! SYNTHESIS? ! ! ? ! by a description of the individual relevant drivers and barriers in the ? November 2018 ! ! objectives, challenges, opportunities first work package. ! ! ? Neighbourhood CONDENSE ? January 2018 Learning Retreat II ! MERGE Internal Synthesis and limits regarding the SUNRISE Finally the next steps for the ! ? ? process of the Action Neighbourhood. upcoming co-creation phase are November 2018 SWOT Review as part outcomes of former outcomes of former of the NLR The next chapter shows the Co- outlined, based on the conclusion ! participation participation ! ? processes processes Identification process-design of the drawn from the participatory activities ! ! ? - of the Co-Identification process. MILESTONE M2 Action Neighbourhood including >essence of problems and needs< DELIVERABLE D1.1 »2ND NEIGHBOUR »SWOT REPORT« content about the tools and methods In the last step the city gives an HOOD LEARNING RETREAT« REVIEW used and groups reached as well as overview of what kind of data can be information about the constitution of offered (data, calculations, modelling, March 2018 June 2018 Synthesis Review at the Core Group (CG). legal expertise, money, speakers etc.) Synthesis Review with APPROVE AND CHECK WITH Baka Community CG at Baka Community EXPERTS / SPECIALISTS Centre Centre PRIORITISE
>neighbourhood mobility fields of action< DELIVERABLE D1.2 »NEIGHBOURHOOD NEIGHBOURHOOD MOBILITY DOSSIER MOBILITY DOSSIER «
DOCUMENT WP1 PRESENT TO THE TRANSFER TO WP2 PUBLIC
PUBLIC INTERNAL
Graphic of the ideal typical process of Co-Identification in SUNRISE with the different steps taken. ©urbanista
6 Jerusalem | Baka Jerusalem | Baka 7
Presenting *Baka and its mobility 2.0 situation DOSSIER 2.1. Status-quo description The general situation of the Neighbourhood
Baka’s population is 13,000 inhabitants community interests. The council is and is a strongly diverse neighbour- led by an elected board which inclu- hood, with communities spanning: des residents, municipal and political the religious and nonreligious; econo- representatives. mically well to do and economically The vision of this community as it more marginal; native born and new recently evolved as part of the neig- immigrants; a European cultural hbourhood master plan, with hun- orientation and a Middle Eastern cul- dreds of residents participating, states: tural orientation. Despite the different cultural orientations of the popula- “The Baka Neighbourhood is part of tion, the community has a pluralistic the “weave” of neighbourhoods that ideology which fosters a shared sense make up the city of Jerusalem. The of community identity, a heightened neighbourhood has developed over sense of environmental awareness, and 120 years and wisely sustained its a strong commitment to civic duty. unique heritage... The neighbourhood The community activity is organised is to remain green with well-developed under the „Bak‘a neighbourhood open public space accessible to all: community council“ which functions children, adults, disabled and senior as a „mini municipality“, and includes citizens. Streets are to be pleasant and social services, cultural activities, local safe, accommodating pedestrians, communal committees that handle cyclists, and motorists. The neig- operational and strategic matters in hbourhood is to develop, linking the the local level. past with the future, in keeping with three underlying principles: commu- There is a long history of interaction nity, historic preservation, and “green” between the municipality and the innovation.” community on both the political level and on the professional level. This has Thus it is important to point to the included the preparation of the neig- high level of environmental awareness hbourhood master plan with active and commitment held by the residents community involvement. As in many of Baka. Alongside this, one of the cities there is also the tension between major challenges in the implemen- neighbourhood priorities and city tation of programs for sustainable wide priorities which at times leads to transportation is the social-cultural scepticism and lack of trust. The Baka dynamic, which is expressed in a high Community Council’s role is to bridge percentage of car ownership and low between the municipality and the satisfaction with public transportation.
Jerusalem | Baka 9 Description of the Mobility Issues in the Neighbourhood
The growth percentage in car owner- with communal vibrant participation The agricultural history of the • Main bus lines are on the ship in Jerusalem was 6.5 percent at there are residents that are less repre- neighbourhood has left its imprint neighbourhood borders – that 2017. Cycling paths in Bak‘a and from sented, as elderly ages, immigrants, of narrow dead-end streets that makes public transportation the neighbourhood are not connected students and youngsters that are not make travel by roads cumbersome. accessible to residents, but less to with popular destinations in the neig- consuming local communal services. Congestion is a major issue for travel the elderly population. hbourhood and outside it, along with The other side of participatory herita- within the neighbourhood and • In some areas sidewalks and other rickety cycling infrastructures. That is ge is the expectation that the process through the neighbourhood. Parts of obstacles have not been adapted to why encouraging cycling as part of en- will be focused on results. At that the infrastructure to enable creating people with disabilities and not all couraging sustainable transportation, point - generating long methodologi- a walkable and bikeable district locations have adequate access to as a main tool to reduce private car cal process may exclude some resi- are already in place. Specifically, public transportation. usage, is problematic because of safety dents. an old rail line into the city, which considerations, especially among kids Baka is a well-organized community, was previously an obstacle to local • Except elderly population, that arrive to school and to afternoon with a structured communal partici- transportation, has been transformed residents prefer that bus line will activities. patory activities and decision making into a „Rail Line Park“ and pedestrian/ not cross in the neighbourhood. processes, which enables the develop- cycle way linking the neighbourhood There are multiple forums in which ci- ment of new models for active engage- on one side to an industrial Actual Travel Behaviour and Modal vil society takes action, such as forums ment and community partnership in commercial area and on the other side Split for urban planning, sustainability, and implementing sustainable transporta- to the CBD. • At this point close to 60 percent pensioners. The forums are diverse tion innovations at the local level. of the population travels to work and reflect the multi-cultural make- The policy of Jerusalem and Israel by car and about 30 percent use up of the population. A commitment in general is to ensure accessibility public transportation with only 4 to sustainability is shared by all these to all forms of public transportation. percent walking or cycling. groups in Baka, as a cross-sectional In the Baka neighbourhood this has issue shared by different groups. Along been implemented in most of the bus Use of Public Spaces stops (design-friendly to the visually- impaired and wheelchairs) and will • Baka’s public spaces (parks and be incorporated into the light rail Beit Lehem Street, a commercial transportation system. centre) are often full of residents, with a lot of activity throughout Transport Demand and Supply the day. • Narrow dead-end streets that • There’s a strong culture and desire make travel by roads cumbersome for an open and aesthetic public – as mentioned above. space, and many residents invest • Congestion is a major issue for in greenery and beautification of travel within the neighbourhood their facades and fences for the and through the neighbourhood, good of the public sphere. especially during school beginning and ending time, because the existing of two elementary schools at the neighbourhood.
Figure 1: Map of Baka on the basis of GoogleMaps by the SUNRISE Baka team
10 Jerusalem | Baka Jerusalem | Baka 11 • Parking situation – there are • Many of Baka’s streets are narrow Mobility-relevant Trends Mobility-relevant Policies and Plans 900 parking places in the and without sidewalks, causing • The state is pushing forward • The development of two new light neighbourhood (on-street parking positive and negative outcomes: policies for urban regeneration rail lines on two sides of Bak‘a only). The urban planning • cars, pedestrian and cyclists without providing adequate – the neighbourhood would be communal committee and the overlap and weave within each measures for public works affected during the construction SUNRISE‘s CCF is now promoting other’s routes (schools, parking, parks), period and when the train will be initiative to convert 120 parking • it slows the travel speed of cars impacting the density in the activated. During construction, places into walking paths and • it has the effect of neighbourhood and increasing congestion will increase and a to encourage walkability by pedestrianizing the street congestion. reduction is predicted with the additional shade, benches and train activation. pleasant open space. • there is often congestion for all three types of modes • There is a joint national-municipal • In light of the fact that the parking body for public transportation • Parking rearrangement – as • decreases the safety of is free at the neighbourhood (Transportation Master Plan) described before. Bottom-up pedestrians, seniors and and that Baka‘s borders are with that is in charge of the mobility initiative that will reduce private children main public transportation lines, system (the whole spectrum from cars’ entry to Bak‘a. passengers from peripheral • it creates issues of accessibility walkability to train network). neighbourhoods park their cars for seniors, parents with • Walking to school project – by at Bak‘a and take the bus to their carriages, and people with • Walkability is now embedded at City Architect destinations from Bak‘a. That disabilities all new transportation plans – as a increase congestion at rush hours • The community with the municipal policy. • Air pollution redaction projects – and the use of a long term parking communal urban planner by Education Administration in Bak‘a. has a new initiative to replace • The Environment Ministry parking places into walking is just beginning to integrate • Healthy cities educational paths, and encouraging electric buses into mass public programme in Jerusalem schools walkability with shade, benches transportation. etc. part of the plan is to limit the parking only to residents.
12 Jerusalem | Baka Jerusalem | Baka 13
What is *SUNRISE 2.2. Objectives, challenges, opportunities aiming for in Baka? Main Challenges of the Project Main Opportunities of the Project Locally specific constellation of the main objectives, challenges • The historic urban morphology/ • There is a strong basis for and opportunities building environment of the community involvement and neighbourhood limits the leadership Objectives of the Neighbourhood council and residents as a principal infrastructural changes that can in the SUNRISE Project axis to be developed by and for the be made, and increase costs of • There is an established community. During SUNRISE‘s physical interventions that can commitment to sustainability and The stated objective of SUNRISE in proposal preparations, the community be made in order to improve walkability the Baka neighbourhood are to: steering committee decided to walkability and cycling. • Increase the number of children consider the detailed planning of • The neighbourhood lies at the walking to school rather than the Green path as one of the project • Accessibility for all populations - cross-section of significant urban being driven by car modules). people with disabilities, seniors, areas (post-industrial zone of parents with strollers and the like - Talpiot, the German Colony, the • Reduce air pollution through is a neighbourhood-wide challenge First Station, main thoroughfares, increased use of public transport and requires a neighbourhood- proximity to the city centre, etc) and less motorised travel scale improvement • Change the split of travel mode in • The topography is suitable for general: less motorised transport, • It is unclear how to integrate walking and bicycle riding. more walking and cycling cycling lanes into the narrow • Redesign public spaces that enable streets • There is a professional SUNRISE safe and pleasant non-motorised team in Baka that is very familiar travel • Bicycles cannot be placed in public with the neighbourhood and its • Implement a neighbourhood transportation vehicles by law. communities “Mobility Innovation Centre” This prevents bicycle riders from having true connectivity – if they • Local schools are partners in • Advance community cohesiveness can‘t combine cycling and public project for reducing air pollution and programming that encourages transportation, it impacts their the above objectives decision to cycle at all. • Baka is already a pleasant neighbourhood to experience (but Through SUNRISE, neighbourhood • It will be necessary to allocate lacks real accessibility) stakeholders that were not previously additional budget for some of the involved in the formulation of these initiatives. A collaboration with • Major road and transportation goals will be identified and their other municipal programs will be changes around Baka provide an views taken on board towards a required and we can‘t guarantee opportunity to introduce further truly representative community the implementation of those change at the neighbourhood level vision. This vision will be translated initiatives. into a clear work plan with shared responsibilities among stakeholders. • There is a tension between The focus of action is anticipated to be encouraging residents to propose around the redesign of public spaces their own initiatives and the and the creation of a low-motorised professional understanding of “Green Path” to link residential areas, what can and needs to be done by community institutions and businesses the professional team (facilitation (the Green Path was identified some is necessary and delicate) decades ago by the neighbourhood Figure 2: Map of the Green Path in Baka by the SUNRISE Baka team • Retaining resident involvement due to the minimal budget and perceived impact of the project
14 Jerusalem | Baka Jerusalem | Baka 15
What *happend in 2.3. The Co-Identification Process Baka so far? Aims and Expectations The Participation Promise
Our aim was to: Our aims for Baka in the These were communicated at participation process were the each CCF meeting, in which the 1. To establish a core group of local The Baka neighbourhood has a strong following: background and aims of SUNRISE activists legacy of community participation, in Baka were communicated and a legacy that has continued with the 1. To establish a core group of local developed. 2. To engage previously unaffiliated implementation of the SUNRISE activists residents in community project. The community is well- In order to empower stakeholders development 2. To engage previously unaffiliated organized into several sub-networks, residents in community to transform their statements into 3. To invite the wider public to be each with their own representatives development projects, the following steps were and engaged activists. aware and involved with SUNRISE 3. To invite the wider public to be taken: themes and activities aware and involved with Sunrise While the SUNRISE project was 1. There is a designated team in 4.To gage the issues and needs of the themes and activities introduced by the municipality and charge of bridging and connecting diverse local populations the EU, the content and key decisions 4. To gage the issues and needs of the the citizens to the urban-planning are still directed by the residents diverse local populations experts. This team is familiar with We expected: themselves in the CCF and the Core 5. For the community to design and the current issues in the area and is Group. implement initiatives regarding very accessible to the residents. 1. Residents already involved in SUNRISE themes. 2. An existing and vast communal community initiatives to take up At the start of the project, the CCF 6. Reducing motorised travels infrastructure supports the issues leading roles in the SUNRISE core and Core Group came to meetings and and increase sustainable of the community within the group discussed as a collective the general transportation. neighbourhood. direction of the SUNRISE project in 2. Unaffiliated residents to join the 3. The community‘s joint work Baka. With each meeting, residents The participation promise for core group and/or to take part is dependent upon the active voiced their desire to see results on SUNRISE in Baka approached the in SUNRISE events such as the participation of diversified group the ground, and with this feedback following questions: walking tours, the Baka street the work plan was divided into of citizens. The diverse partners festival, and filling out the survey several projects, each one with a point include more targeted populations • Which possibilities and limits do of the stakeholders‘ such as elected person from the CG. While budgetary the process and its outcomes have? 3. The wider public to be involved in decisions are still taken as a collective, stakeholders at the neighbourhood filling out the survey and providing each project is being moved along at • How and by whom are decisions and the municipal level. their perspective on the challenges, the initiative of leading residents for made throughout the process 4. A relatively short timeframe needs and positive qualities of the each project. (Explain why and if there exist to execute a significant and neighbourhood limits or dependencies framing prolonging change. our SUNRISE project such as area, This was the most intensive phase 5. A project which was imposed on 4. Diverse groups to be involved target groups, topics, etc. of problem-gathering. For one week the neighbourhood hinders the in different phases and in different every day a stand was put up in • Please spell out the condition residents‘ sense of ownership over ways i.e. seniors were instrumental different frequently used places in the under payment will occur in the project. in identifying infrastructural and neighbourhood and the local or those order to give an orientation on the transportation challenges, while people who work or study in the area financial resources.)? youth activists were able to imagine could share their problems, ideas or solutions by walking around the give feedback on the good solutions in neighbourhood the neighbourhood.
16 Jerusalem | Baka Jerusalem | Baka 17 2.3. The Co-Identification Process
Activity 2: Focus groups and community worker, and talking SUNRISE survey to pedestrians, cyclists and car- Tools, formats, events owners, business-owners and In order to assess the current residents, about the project and transportation and mobility situation giving the survey link through in Baka, we designed several strategies WhatsApp or email. Activity 1: Baka street festival The aims of tabling at the festival were: for reaching residents, including hard- to-reach-populations. CCF Meetings • Tabling and PR materials • Co identification - Collecting The Co-identification phase was for SUNRISE (interactive information on the issues residents conducted through: • At CCF meetings we have dissemination of PR materials as shared with us a part of the Co- presented a summary of the a way to spread the word and get identification process 1. Residents meetings, custom SUNRISE aims and format, a feedback at an early stage) • PR about the project to the whole designed to the needs and summary of previous activities, • Conversations with interested neighbourhood availabilities of the residents - a work plan for that particular residents about sustainable meeting, the budget, and the • Recruiting residents to the CCF open discussion at the Seniors’ mobility in Baka and Jerusalem timeline for overall SUNRISE Home Bet Moses, walking tour • Summarised the feedback with a group of youth movement projects. So far there have been 8 concerning challenges and desired members, evening-hours meetings meetings. changes in the neighbourhood on for working individuals and • Tables and charts have been posters and charts parents produced and shown for: Co- • Several of the residents became 2. Custom-designing a survey (in Identification activities and part of the CCF partnership with the municipal feedback about challenges and strategic division and the survey opportunities relating to Baka’s unit of Transportation Master walkability and transportation Plan) for multiple types of modes; the stated values, aims and residents (parents, children, means of the CCF in Sunrise; the working individuals and students). projects viewed as having the most The survey assesses people of all potential. ages, occupations, and mobility • For each CCF meeting, an email patterns currently employ and Facebook post is sent out. various modes of transportation in Baka, and for what purposes • Currently the chosen projects of (school, errands, sports and residents are being developed and leisure, work, etc). The survey built for implementation. The CCF format is a questionnaire and it voted on which projects are most was distributed online by email,
Photograph 3: Street festival, 2017, Miri Reiss – mapping opportunities and WhatsApp and Facebook, as well obstacles with the community as by approaching people in the street. The survey was interactive and showed different questions based on the age and occupation of the respondent, including students.
Photograph 2: Street festival, 2017, Miri Reiss – mapping opportunities 3. Walking around the and obstacles with the community neighbourhood with Baka’s
18 Jerusalem | Baka Jerusalem | Baka 19
Who are the *participants 2.3. The Co-Identification Process in SUNRISE in Baka? Tools, formats, events Target groups and participants
important according to SUNRISE Involvement of participants Lessons learned from approaches principles, Baka’s needs, and a realistic assessment of what can be • The Baka team listed all the • Different groups need different done with the available budget and different populations in the approaches in terms of timing, the the municipality‘s readiness. neighbourhood and connected amount of time spent, the number with representative groups i.e. of times approached, and the • Meetings with HQ Architects were seniors were contacted through topics broached. the Bet Moses retirement home, designed as workshops in order to • For example, the seniors at the youth were contacted through provide concrete mapping tools for Bet Moses had an easy time youth groups. the residents to visually articulate communicating through their visions. HQ ran a workshop • The Baka team met residents conversations, and were able to with the CCF in which they asked randomly by tabling at the Baka meet in the late afternoon. the resident about the urban neighbourhood street festival, and • Conversely, active and committed layout, design and connectivity of by publishing and disseminating residents with kids could attend Baka. The residents communicated PR materials during conversations CCF meetings only in the late their needs while explaining how with residents. evenings. Baka works well and less well. • As a group, the CCF also did • And in parallel, the youth • HQ is currently working on ground work, by walking around groups enjoyed taking part in designs for the Green Path. Photographs 5 + 7: Walking and mapping Workshop with the CCF the neighbourhood and chatting and HGQ Architects physically active events, such In the Co-Creation and co- with pedestrians, parents and kids, as a neighbourhood tour and implementation phases, HQ will be seniors, shopkeepers etc. brainstorming sessions outdoors . Activity X : Walking Tour of the • Great brainstorming sessions • The Community Council has a Green Path occurred on the walking tour strong network of established and because residents could feel and see long-time active residents. • Materials included maps (as a tool what needed attention in the actual • The Community Council’s social for seeing connections between moment. worker, urban planner, and youth, landmarks and streets), a summary • Residents came up with ideas senior and education coordinators of the identified needs and for implementation based on the are all in touch with residents challenges in the neighbourhood tour and on the list of challenges relating to their specialty; they (as a guide to identify problems distributed at the start of the tour. invited residents they knew to and solutions along the green The ideas with the most potential be interested in advancing Baka’s path), and a mini-workshop in to be realized (according to the mobility needs in tandem with Placemaking (based on Project for Baka team and the residents) were SUNRISE, through phone calls, Public Spaces). articulated into project proposals for Facebook and mailing lists. • With the materials in hand, both the Placemaking competition in residents could identify and the Jerusalem Municipality, and for articulate particular aspects the next phases of SUNRISE. in public spaces that required • One project from this tour received upgrades, whether through funding from the municipality’s physical or social interventions. placemaking 2018 budget.
20 Jerusalem | Baka Jerusalem | Baka 21
How is *bottom-up 2.3. The Co-Identification Process participation organised in Baka? Target groups and participants Constitution/Formation of the Core Group
People or groups to be activated Set Up of the Core Group Members of the Core Group within the next steps of bottom-up participatory activities • The Core Group (CG) was The Core Group is mostly composed established by inviting members of local residents, some of whom are • Seniors, people with special needs, • The community at large (not just of the CCF to take the lead or to elected within the neighbourhood to single parents, and people in lower the CCF) should be involved in join in specific SUNRISE projects, be representatives on the Community income brackets are more limited the SUNRISE process through such as the Walking to School Council’s Board of Directors. A few in time and availability, and they events every few months, and programme. examples include: should be invited to meetings given the chance to provide • The core group was very motivated at times they can attend (or the feedback on the CCF’s work . to be involved in this project • The chair of the Parents Board for SUNRISE team should go meet about sustainable mobility and the Efrata Elementary School them where it’s easier for them - in walkability in Baka, and they • The deputy chair of Baka’s the seniors home, parks etc) identified strongly with the values Community Council Board of and framework of the project. Residents • The multitude of steps and • A long-time activist in Baka’s meetings tired out several urban forum of the core group members, • Young parents who lives along the especially because they want to Green Path A young couple achieve concrete results on the ground already. The Baka team • Two of the Core Group are encouraged them to stay with the Jerusalem City Council Members process, and presented the budget for discussion and vote. The number of attendees has stayed between 12-16 people at a time • The meeting place in the (including the Neighbourhood Community Centre is a great Evaluation Manager for SUNRISE Photograph 8: Third age, 2017, Miri Reiss Co identification with the third age at „Moses House“ space to meet and do workshops, in Baka and Municipality). From and walking around the the Municipality usually one or neighbourhood has proven to help two people are present, who are with brainstorming and seeing responsible for the project. outside the box. • Despite the efforts made to explain the division of funds within the project, many Core Group members felt the budget for implementation is too small for the scope of the vision advanced by SUNRISE.
22 Jerusalem | Baka Jerusalem | Baka 23 The results of the Co-Identification phase: The process from collection towards synthesis
Responsibilities and powers of the In Baka there is an active CCF group, 1) The community has been involved Core Group and many residents are aware of the with SUNRISE since the start of the SUNRISE activities and are happy proposal stage in 2016, and has also The CG is very aware of what it wants about them. Residents from a variety been engaged with urban issues since in the neighbourhood, and has expres- of backgrounds have expressed who- before SUNRISE - they feel it is time sed their visions through the various le-hearted agreement with the aims for implementation, and these detailed CG meetings held at the community of SUNRISE, and on this basis the processes are overdrawn. centre. Co-Identification and Co-Design pha- ses have been successfully ongoing. 2) When the needs were identified and Every meeting and workshop has yiel- We were able to reach most of the the initiatives were designed, the par- ded a strong response of values, aims, populations we intended to contact ticipants were dismayed at the stark and physical and community-based and engage, and with future projects difference between their ideas and the elements intended for SUNRISE pro- we hope to continue involving popula- budget allocated for initiatives within jects. Photograph 9: CCF meeting, 2017, Miri Reiss – co identification descations tions from all parts of Baka. the SUNRISE framework. However, we are currently facing 2 Currently we are developing project main obstacles: formats and timetables with motivated individuals in order to advance each idea and aim.
Members of the CG meet frequently, depending on the project being im- plemented. The members involved in the Walking to school programme met once a week for a month during the Pilot program; the members involved in the seating area upgrade have met 3 times so far, and will meet several more times this summer until the pro- ject is completed; and so on.
24 Jerusalem | Baka Jerusalem | Baka 25
Which are *the essential 2.4. Culminating Outcomes ideas, problems Collected needs/issues and needs on mobility in Baka? The following are the collected and the Co-Creation Forum of residents co-identified needs found through the (the main committee and forum for SUNRISE co-identification process. public participation within SUNRISE These needs were identified through a in Baka), focus groups, tabling in variety of tools and forums: the survey, public spaces, and workshops.
Accessibility #1 Public Spaces- Maintenance Traffic and congestion #4 Awareness #5 and Aesthetics #2
• Mechanisms that facilitate • Benches – maintain existing • Many residents take the • Strong awareness of crossing the street for hearing/ ones by renovating the wood, car instead of walking short sustainable issues in Baka, visually impaired people i.e. painting them distances in an effort to save but the perception of the sounds or blinking lights time or because they perceive importance and ease of • Litter and construction waste walking distances as too far walking (or taking the car less) • Renewing crosswalk signage block passage on sidewalks can be improved • Many parents drop off kids • Urban lighting on crosswalks by car, which increases traffic Urban Connectivity - visual and congestion during rush hour. • Trees that block passage on infrastructural issues #3 There should be a way for sidewalks (foliage, falling fruit, dropping off kids without the and full trees themselves) • Connect substantially Baka car or at drop-off points and Talpiot neighbourhoods • Regulating electric bicycle traffic on sidewalks and • Shade, water fountains pedestrian pathways • Create points of interest on • Putting a stop to cars parked the way - community gardens, on sidewalks and crosswalks, urban history, etc making parking arrangements • Create a uniform design Contradictions and Correlations • Crooked sidewalks, potholes language for connectivity and walkability • Litter and construction waste • Infrastructure repairs or changes • Walking to school program – block passage on sidewalks • Create clear walking pathways require long-term planning and many students come from distant towards public institutions, big-budget allocation. neighbourhoods. The planned • Safe walking for kids from public and community gardens, intervention can hardly affect home to schools courtyards • Suggested traffic changes their travel habits. may contradict new traffic • Strengthen the east-west arrangements that are planned as • Behavioural intervention can be axis of Baka (Talpiot-Katamon part of other plans that regards evaluated in long term – result neighbourhoods) main road on the eastern border of will be less clear in 2-3 years. Baka. 26 Jerusalem | Baka Jerusalem | Baka 27 2.5 SWOT Analysis & Corridor of Options
SWOT-Matrix
INTERNAL FACTORS EXTERNAL FACTORS
Strengths Weaknesses Opportunities Threats
The community‘s commitment and Dead-end streets discourage Implementing the SUNRISE project Neglecting the promises already the residents vision to find alternative connectivity and walkability. in Baka. made to the residents with relation to transportation means. transport planning.
Rickety pavement infrastructure and Implementing new bottom-up The main route in the neighbourhood lack of accessibility in some spots at approaches by the urban planning Existing city plans contradict the which has the potential to encourage the neighbourhood. experts. desired trends. These plans have connectivity and walkability. an impact on the capacity of the neighbourhood and its transport Lack of continuity in sustainable Transport revision at one of the infrastructure. Geographical location and the layout transport (e.g., bicycles cannot main streets at Bak‘a might open of the neighbourhood enable the be placed in public transportation opportunities for infrastructure and citizens to be in proximity with the vehicles). walkability improvement. city centre and other daily sites, such as the centre for employment and commerce. According to national regulation, A master transportation plan is children under the age of 9 years committed to implement changes old cannot walk to schools and according to the current needs of the The topography is suitable for walking kindergartens due to the need to cross residents. and bicycle riding. roads.
Similar objectives to the „Eden There is a designated team in charge The community‘s joint work Talpiyot“ plan to improve with bridging and connecting the is dependent upon the active the walkability in the area. citizens to the urban-planning participation of diversified group of Neighbourhoods in proximity to experts. This team is familiar with the citizens. Baka will also benefit the changes in currents issues in the area and is very transportation. accessible to the residents. There is no budget allocated to the green path construction. Continuing SUNRISE initiatives and Existing vast communal implementing additional activities infrastructure to support the due to cooperation with similar issues of the community within the A relatively short timeframe to projects. neighbourhood. execute a significant and prolonging change.
The local schools participate in a reducing pollution project. A project which was imposed on the neighbourhood hinders the residents‘ sense of ownership over the project.
28 Jerusalem | Baka Jerusalem | Baka 29
*Which Which are strategies *the possible 2.5 SWOT Analysis & Corridor of Options support options for reaching the actions in SUNRISE goals Baka? SWOT-Strategies Corridor of Options for Baka? INTERNAL FACTORS Strengths-Threats Weaknesses-Threats Option 1 Walking to Changes to surrounding Strong participation with a limiting school programmes thoroughfares may impact the physical infrastructure means SUNRISE in conjunction with the number of cars driving by Baka projects can be creative in its commu- City Architect project „the but also provide an opportunity to nity-based programming way to the gymnasia“, may have the Municipality implement lead to budget alloca- infrastructural changes as part of The need for better cycling infrastruc- tion for implement the its »cityworks« projects. In fact, the ture and rules in Baka can bolster the Municipality-approved Master Plan changes needed for the locality and for „green path“. for Baka demands such changes for the city as a whole. Baka can join cyc- accessibility and walkability. ling movements, promoting initiatives in the municipal level. Diverse communities will have Option 2 different challenges, and also diverse The limited budget means it is neces- Connectivity ideas for solutions. sary to prepare in advance and work and walkability in- with the right stakeholders in the muni- itiatives can be finan- cipality to get projects implemented. ced by transportation Therefore, Baka SUNRISE is pulling re- major projects on the sources from other programs (the Baka edges of Bak‘a. team has already recruited 10,000 NIS for physical intervention from the city’s „placemaking“ grant and we have a partnership with the educational ad- Option 3 Placemaking ministration for the coming educatio- approach for im- nal plan of 2018-19) plementing small scale projects and improving an overall sense of wal-
EXTERNAL FACTORS Strengths-Opportunities Weaknesses-Opportunities kability.
Baka’s community network and po- To compensate for the potential lack of litical experience can help open up influence residents have on transport All avenues for budgets and solutions. policies around Baka: Option 4 infrastructure projects will be done The professional team in Baka and in Ensuring shared expectations from the in conjunction with Baka’s the municipality can do the same. start (being on the same page) district office (Rova Oranim) and the municipality. Because The location of Baka is strategically Ensuring dialogue between municipal public works sector is very important to Jerusalem’s transpor- actors and residents, and navigating hands-on, we will meet with tation fluidity. Therefore it is almost compromises in public works projects. them only when the projects guaranteed that any interventions around Baka will improve services for are well-defined. the neighbourhood as a whole.
30 Jerusalem | Baka Jerusalem | Baka 31
What has *been learnt? 2.6 Lessons Learnt
What went well? What didn‘t work?
What went What should be well? developed further?
• Substantial data collection on Baka’s issues • The absolute necessity to establish trust-building processes with the residents through previous or • Strong CCF, intent on implementing goals small-scale success stories
• Raising awareness to the concepts of • The importance of building strong ties and sustainable mobility, walkability, urban partnerships within municipal and governmental improvements agencies, NGOs
• Engaging residents and including them in the • The importance of keeping the residents enga- SUNRISE process allows them to feel heard ged and empowered in the process, through: and involved in the actions Consistent momentum of meetings, events and implementation • Extensive mapping of the issues by the CCF, Baka SUNRISE team and HQ Architects • Establishing clear and focused goals, schedule pinpoints the issues and improvements that and expectations between project coordinators can be made and residents
32 Jerusalem | Baka Jerusalem | Baka 33 2.6 Lessons Learnt
Main drivers Main barriers Positional Technological Political Cultural Political Problem related Financial Cultural Problem related Involvement/Communication Involvement/Communication Positional Organisational Technological Financial Institutional Planning Institutional Planning
• #1 POLITICAL • #1 CULTURAL This was the most important driver because of: The commitment Walkability, as a concept and practice, is not widely prioritized or and mutual interests of key figures within the community (elected familiar yet. While people are aware of environmental issues, they council members, chairperson of the board, long-time activists), are less aware of the feasibility and strategies possible for making within the community council (CEO, urban planner, director of sustainable mobility an integrated reality in their day-to-day. The- social affairs), and within the municipality (the Environmental refore, with each of the activities, it was important to talk about Department, the Municipal Council). the objectives and theory, and not simply to dive into community This driver helped to actualize every activity in the Co-Identifica- recruitment; for the survey, getting the walking to school program tion process - disseminating and filling out the survey, the Baka underway is a logistical challenge, especially for parents who are Street festival, and CCF meetings and the workshops and walking less involved with community council and activism and requires tours. Without this driver it would have been much more difficult key activists within the Parents Board to move the project forward; to undertake co-identification activities. and of course, even with long-time activists it has been hard to keep them engaged because they want results on the ground and • #2 CULTURAL not meetings and planning - this led us to move relatively easily This was almost as important as the first driver. The residents and quickly through the co-creation phase. make the process happen, and Baka has a strong legacy of resident participation and activists. Many members of the CCF have been • #2 INVOLVEMENT/COMMUNICATION involved in Baka’s development and community for years, with As mentioned in the first barrier, many residents aren’t involved experience and a commitment the place and people. With their or aware of walkability as a basis for sustainable mobility. For this commitment, the beginning of SUNRISE and the co-identification reason, one of the outcomes of the co-development of solutions process was a success. phase and the co-implementation phase is a PR campaign on the Communal commitment to sustainable developments goals, as importance and feasibility of walkability in both Baka and Jerusa- reflected in Baka‘s sustainability vision, which was created by the lem as a whole. community. • #3 PROBLEM RELATED • #3 POSITIONAL The complexity of improving Baka’s walkability, especially issu- SUNRISE came at an opportune time because of 2 other pro- es relating to physical infrastructure, is quite daunting and were jects that began at the national and city levels: the education and seen as a question mark by many residents. Even with knowing awareness campaign for reducing air pollution (from the Ministry what the goals of SUNRISE are, simple activities such as recruiting for the Protection of the Environment); and the PR programme residents, or having them fill out the survey, was slightly more for walkability by the Jerusalem Master Plan for Transportation complicated by the high number of factors that go into identifying agency. With these 2 important partners, which have coordinators and solving such an issue. As a way to respond, we (successfully) at the city and neighbourhood levels, certain principles of SUN- broke down the problem into themes and projects: for example, RISE were already part of the public discourse. For example, one- the survey speaks about various aspects of mobility, the CCF did age group at both schools was excited about the walking to school workshops that helped identify all the many aspects of mobility in program because of their education on air pollution issues. Baka, and the promotional activities like the festival presented the project in a simplified manner (people walking or cycling as the main objective). 34 Jerusalem | Baka Jerusalem | Baka 35
What *happened 2.7 Following Steps next?
Conclusion Drawn & Further Concept (Activities, Ideas, Wishes, ...)
Updates on SUNRISE activities will be consistently published on Facebook 1 CCF Meetings and in the Baka Community Council newsletter for the wider public to Community Participation 4 Gad-Rivka follow the process and get involved and empowerment inviting residents to workshops, where and when they would like. 1. Gad-Rivka Corner Upgrade discussion to be in charge – to take place in mid-Sep- of content and decisions tember. The activities shown here are related to of the SUNRISE initiatives. the second phase „Co-Selection“ and 2. Designing and renovating the third phase „Co-Implementation“ the Gad-Rivka entrance from in SURNISE. Talpiot to Baka with an indust- rial designer. 2 Walking to School Programme
A continual educational program about reducing air pollution in the two elemen- 5 Green Path tary schools of Baka from 2018 - 2019. 1. Walking tour of the Green Path with the CCF.
2. HQ Architects urban design programme to redesign the 3 Green Path as a means of PR Campaign connecting routes between popular destinations will be PR Campaign on walkability presented at October 2018. to school and for the general population with the Jerusalem Master Transportation Plan agency
Phase 1: Walking routes and directives for safe walking to 6 Social Media school, in partnership with two Baka schools. Updates on SUNRISE ac- Phase 2: Walking routes tivities will be consistently throughout Baka and published on Facebook and in connecting to surrounding the Baka Community Council neighbourhoods. newsletter for the wider pu- blic to follow the process and Phase 3: City-wide PR for get involved where and when walkability. they would like.
36 Jerusalem | Baka Jerusalem | Baka 37
Which *support is 2.8 Data & Expertise available for future steps? Resources the city can offer
Physical interventions Survey 1. Working with the municipal bureaucracy - how to navigate the 1. Professional assistance from the strategic planning division. complex system? 2. Dissemination infrastructure
a. The Green Path Programme will be presented to various departments in the municipality, especially the planning department, and included in work plans underway as a way to ensure funding and development. Educational program b. Traffic arrangements – the Green Path‘s traffic 1. Partnering with similar programs to ensure optimal consultant recommendations will be included in the results Traffic Infrastructure Department‘s considerations. a. Partnering with the schools and teachers who took part in the pedagogical programme for c. Safety hazards – a list of safety hazard in public areas reducing air pollution has helped make the will be sent to Public Works District Manager, who has walking to school programme a reality expressed a willingness to take care of them as apart of her yearly work plan. b. The Walking to School programme educational program is accompanied by traffic safety activities – provided by the municipal Road Safety 2. Identifying issues on the ground Department. with residents by means of workshops and tours
a. Several of the co-identification aims were achieved by bringing residents together with architects, by touring with them on the Green Path, and by providing them with tools for assessing issues and opportunities on the ground. b. Conducting workshops outside, at the site of interest – these brought in a wealth of feedback and additional activists. Being on site, talking to people who use it daily, approaching strangers and inviting them to be part of the SUNRISE and Baka Council’s community of engaged residents, makes a huge difference in the process and results. c. Workshops in identifying principals and goals of the project, which eventually helped with making methodical and clear processes for the co-creation and co-implementation phases.
38 Jerusalem | Baka Jerusalem | Baka 39 3.0 Cover: urbanista, 2019 Photographs 1–10: (2017 – 2018) authors: SUNRISE Baka team REFERENCES Figure 1: (2019) Map of Baka on the basis of GoogleMaps, SUNRISE Baka team
Figure 2: Map of the Green Path in Baka, SUNRISE Baka team
Jerusalem | Baka 41 NEIGHBOURHOOD MOBILITY DOSSIER
LINDÄNGEN - MALMÖ
© urbanista More information about SUNRISE: Content www.civitas-sunrise.eu
1 INTRODUCTION 1.1 Objective and content of “Co-Identification“ 4 and the Neighbourhood Mobility Dossier
The CIVITAS SUNRISE project has received funding from the European Union’s Horizon 2020 research and innovation program- me under grant agreement No 72 33 65 2 DOSSIER Title Neighbourhood Mobility Dossier of Lindängen/Malmö in SUNRISE 2.1 Status quo description 9 [within the phase of WP1: Co-Identification and Co-Validation of • General situation of the neighbourhood Problems and Needs] • Description of the mobility issues in the neighbourhood 16 Deliverable 1.2 of the EU Project ID: 723365 2.2 Objectives, challenges, opportunities • Locally specific constellation of the main objectives, challenges and opportunities
2.3 SWOT Analysis & Corridors of Options 18 • SWOT strategy Contributors to case studies Malmö Stad, Sunfleet Carsharing AB, Skånetrafiken - Region Skåne and technical support • Corridors of options
2.4 The Co-Identification Process 22 Quality control Koucky & Partners AB - Sustainable Transport Consultants • Step 1-5 Alex Spielhaupter • Participation Promise • Process Design Rupprecht Consult - Forschung und Beratung GmbH • Tools, format, events Hana Peters and Ralf Brand • Target groups and participants • Constitution/formation of the CCF/CG • The results of Co-identification phase 2.5 Culminating Outcomes 32 Authors and Design Responsible for the content: • Three prioritised fields for action • Contradictions and correlations Joanna Christensson, Malmö Stad Kerstin Geppert, Malmö Stad 2.6 Lessons Learnt 36
2.7 Following Steps 40 • Conclusion drawn and further concept Accompanying consulting and design: 2.8 Data & Expertise 42 • Resources the city can offer urbanista GmbH & Co KG Bäckerbreitergang 14, 20355 Hamburg Astrid Großmann & Marie-Christin Schulze 3 References 44
Malmö | Lindängen Photograph 1 by the Sunrise Baka team Photographs 2 -3 : Street festival, 2017, Miri Reiss – mapping opportunities and obstacles with the community
Photographs 4 by the Sunrise Baka team Photographs 5 - 7: Walking and mapping Workshop with the CCF and HGQ Architects.
Photograph 8: Third age, 2017, Miri Reiss Co identification with the third age at „Moses House“: Photograph 9: CCF meeting, 2017, Miri Reiss – co identification descations: Photograph 10 by the Sunrise Baka team
3 4
Photograph 6 : Inviation to Bike Day June 2018, photographer: Emmy Linde
Photograph 7 : Container On-Tour Event June 2018, photographer: Maria Örn
Photographs 1-3 : Bike Day May 13, 2017, Photographs 4-5 : Bike Day May 13, 2017, photographer: Johan Fridh photographer: Johan Fridh
Malmö | Lindängen Malmö | Lindängen 1.0 1.1. Objective and content of “Co-Identification“ INTRODUCTION and the Neighbourhood Mobility Dossier
Occasion and Purpose organisation and implementation of a participatory process A Neighbourhood Mobility Dossier to identify, validate and has been produced in each articulate locally perceived neighbourhood as a final document mobility challenges as well as of the »Co-Identification and Co- neighbourhood specific strengths, Validation« phase – the first work weaknesses, opportunities and package of SUNRISE. The aim of this threats work package was to ensure that all The Neighbourhood Mobility Dossier SUNRISE action neighbourhoods aims to comprehensively capture – Bremen, Budapest, Jerusalem, the results of co-identification and Malmö, Southend-On-Sea and co-validation process including the Thessaloniki – lay a solid foundation factual and subjectively perceived for all following activities. This situation with regard to mobility encompassed the establishment and other related aspects. The of strategic local alliances and the Dossier serves as a guidebook for the thorough participatory identification neighbourhood themselves regarding of problems, needs and opportunities the upcoming co-creative phases (co- in each neighbourhood. development and co-implementation of sustainable mobility solutions), but Its key objectives were furthermore: also as an overview and inspiration • To guide each Action for other cities and neighbourhoods Neighbourhood in the set up and regarding the co-creative development constitution of a local Co-Creation of sustainable mobility solutions. 1 Forum (CCF) and the Core Group The set of the six Dossiers of each 2 (CG) Action Neighbourhood constitutes the • To ensure that all relevant status- final product of the Co-Identification quo information concerning the phase in SUNRISE. Additionally, a Action Neighbourhoods will be summarised overview of the results included and fully taken into of the Co-identification and Co- account validation phase will be integrated in • To instruct and support each the »Neighbourhood Mobility Action Action Neighbourhood in the Plan«3.
1The Co-Creation Forum (CCF) is a forum/platform where everyone can express their views, ideas and concerns related to the current and future mobility situation within a neighbourhood. It can bee seen as a strategic local alliance, covering the public, covering all major stakeholders. 2The Core Group (CG) works as a coordinator of the CCF in the sense of a steering committee and administrative secretariat. 3 The Neighbourhood Mobility Pathfinder is SUNRISE‘s online toolbox to enable exploitation of SUNRISE results beyond the project‘s lifetime. Malmö | Lindängen 5 When? What? WP1 Who? Process
October 2017 Internal Kick-Off event »Co-Identification«: Objectives In chapter 2.4 the condensed with City Council PREPARATORY STEPS outcomes of the collected problems, The main objective of Co-Identification needs and ideas are illustrated a INTERNAL PREPARATORY MEETINGS b INTERNAL | INFORMATIVE KICK-OFF was to ensure that all SUNRISE and possible contradictions and INFORMATION & PREPARATION EXCHANGE Action Neighbourhoods lay a solid correlations highlighted. March 2018 MILESTONE M33 Public Kick-Off event »MEMORANDUM OF foundation for the following activities. with Real estate Afterwards the main outcomes of UNDERSTANDING« This encompasses the establishment owners PUBLIC KICK-OFF | OFFICIAL LAUNCH EVENT the top-down and bottom up SWOT of strategic local alliances and the Analysis of the neighbourhood are thorough participatory identification May 2018 INTRODUCE TO THE PUBLIC outlined by means of the derived Neighbourhood BRING PEOPLE TOGETHER of problems, needs, ideas and Learning Retreat strategies and corridors of options. with the Core group opportunities in each SUNRISE GATHER PROBLEMS Action Neighbourhood. GAIN LOCAL AWARENESS AND NEEDS ! ! In the next chapter the lessons learnt ? ? ! Content and Structure of the of the Co-Identification process May 2017 Pop-up event I ON-SITE COLLECTING EVENTS June 2018 Neighbourhood Mobility Dossier are illustrated firstly by pointing at Lindängen ! On-site collection I Square at Hermodsdal out the potentials and challenges ? Square June 2018 that arose during the participation ? On-site collection II To get a first impression of the Nay 2018 ? REACH DIFFERENT at Nydala Square process in Co-Identification and Pop-up event III PEOPLE IN DIFFERENT respective neighbourhood and its at Nydala Park November 2017 ! June 2018 played a significant role for the Pop-Up event II GATHER PROBLEMS ! ! PLACES On-site collection III characteristics the Dossier starts with at sites around AND NEEDS ? at Lindängen an introduction of the status quo further planning and execution of Lindängen Park Bairam Festival participatory events. Secondly by ! situation of the neighbourhood in ! ? ? ! general and mobility wise followed naming and describing the most ! SYNTHESIS? ! ! ? ! by a description of the individual relevant drivers and barriers in the ? ! ! August 2018 first work package. ! ! ? objectives, challenges, opportunities CONDENSE ? Internal Synthesis June 2018 ! by municipality and limits regarding the SUNRISE ! ? ? MERGE Finally the next steps for the Neighbourhood Lear- process of the Action Neighbourhood. upcoming co-creation phase are ning Retreat with the Core Group outcomes of former outcomes of former
The next chapter shows the Co- outlined, based on the conclusion ! participation participation ! August 2018 ! ? processes processes ! ? SWOT Review Identification process-design of the drawn from the participatory activities with Core Group of the Co-Identification process. - Action Neighbourhood including MILESTONE M2 >essence of problems and needs< DELIVERABLE D1.1 »2ND NEIGHBOUR »SWOT REPORT« content about the tools and methods In the last step the city gives an HOOD LEARNING RETREAT« REVIEW used and groups reached as well as overview of what kind of data can be information about the constitution of October 2018 offered (data, calculations, modelling, August 2018 CHECK WITH Mini Sythesis Review the Core Group (CG). Mini Synthesis Review EXPERTS / SPECIALISTS legal expertise, money, speakers etc.) Focus Bike Parking APPROVE AND with Representatives with real estate PRIORITISE from the community managers centre
>neighbourhood mobility fields of action< DELIVERABLE D1.2 »NEIGHBOURHOOD NEIGHBOURHOOD MOBILITY DOSSIER MOBILITY DOSSIER «
DOCUMENT WP1 PRESENT TO THE TRANSFER TO WP2 PUBLIC
PUBLIC INTERNAL
Graphic of the ideal typical process of Co-Identification in SUNRISE with the different steps taken. ©urbanista
6 Malmö | Lindängen Malmö | Lindängen 7
Presenting *Lindängen and its mobility 2.0 situation DOSSIER 2.1. Status-quo description The general situation of the Neighbourhood
Lindängen is located in the south of but hardly no detached houses, Malmö and home for 7.620 people. compared to the rest of Malmö. Compared to other parts of Malmö, During a time when housing was the population in this neighbourhood scarce, the national government is characterized by a high migration encouraged the construction of one background. 76 percent of the million new apartments with a clear population of Lindängen have foreign separation of transport modes. Up background compared with the until now, parking is reserved in Malmö average of 45 percent. Most underground garages and outside the frequently spoken languages are neighbourhood. Inside, bike lanes and Arabic, Polish, Danish and Serbian/ pedestrian paths connect residential Croatian. Lindängen is home to a areas with its central amenities, shops very young population. 36 percent and services. Public places where of the residents are below the age people can meet are parks with vast of 24 compared to 29 percent for lawns, a central square, public and Malmö’s average. In Lindängen residential playgrounds and sports households with children are more grounds. common than city average. In Lindängen a significantly lower share Malmö is once again standing at of the population has reached a high the outset of a building boom and level of education compared to the Lindängen will be one of the main Malmö average. However, the school beneficiaries of this development. 200- results rank above average. Other 300 new apartments will be built and socio-economic statistics describing two existing schools expanded to meet Lindängen are an employment rate the needs of a growing population. and per capita disposable income Two bus express lines will be directed below the city average. through the neighbourhood and accompanied with complementary The neighbourhood is representative changes e.g. redistribution of public for the Swedish building style of the and private space, bike-sharing 1960s–70s. The buildings consist system, bicycle paths (Nellerup and of multi-storey buildings with a Andreasson 2016). high percentage of rental flats,
Malmö | Lindängen 9 Description of the Mobility Issues in the Neighbourhood
The traffic separated neighbourhood Transport Demand and Supply Based on the indicators above Lin- Motorisation rate and car parking might have been intended to become a dängen can be described as an area of situation safe environment for children to play. Accessibility acceptable to poor accessibility. Howe- Unfortunately, it is not used in that ver, this index has not taken levels of Car ownership in Lindängen is slightly Figure 1 below depicts the result of the way. In the absence of an adequate personal insecurity into account. lower than Malmö’s average (220 cars aggregated Accessibility Index from system to direct public and private per 1,000 inhabitants compared to the 2013. The index divides Malmö into services, e.g. deliveries, maintenance, A look at Malmö’s commuting sta- average of 255 cars per 1,000 inhabi- 225 zones according to eight indicators. police heavy vehicles regularly occupy tistics shows that a high share of tants) and lower than the average in pedestrian and bicycle lanes. These indicators consist of: Lindängen’s population is employed SUMP area 7 Fosie (237 cars per 1,000 1. travel time by walking to 10 in Denmark (11 percent compared inhabitants) which Lindängen is a part Insecurity has become a notable destinations to 8 percent for the total of Malmö), of. The parking norm varies across factor influencing residents’ everyday 2. travel time by cycling to 10 which makes commuting routes to housing units that were built during mobility choices. Besides a high crime destinations the train station in Hyllie particularly the 1970-80s (Balladen, Serenaden, rate, other factors influencing the 3. travel time ratio bicycle/car to 10 important. Lindängen itself is not a Kantaten and Motetten with 0,6-1 perception of insecurity include illegal destinations destination for many commuters, but cars/ household) and a more recently and fast driving on bicycle lanes. The out of the people who come to or stay constructed housing unit (Vårsången 4. travel time ration public transport/ absence of residential houses along in Lindängen for work 70 percent are with 1,5 cars/ household). car to city centre, nearest com- the pedestrian and bicycle paths and women. Parking in Lindängen costs 10 SEK (1 mercial area/ shopping mall, and close to the centre leaves no eyes on EUR) per hour and 60 SEK (6 EUR) nearest public transport node the street after dawn. Consequently, for a 24-hour day pass. Residents have 5. distance to nearest bus stop people take detours and avoid moving also the option to get a 30-day pass for (with good headway) through the neighbourhood at certain 375 SEK (37.50 EUR). This is ave- locations or certain times. 6. distance to nearest major public rage compared to the rest of Malmö. transport node According to real estate owners, there The question is how to facilitate 7. distance to nearest car sharing is a strong interest in renting on- sustainable travel in a neighbourhood facility street-parking lots, while underground that was built during a strong phase 8. range of travel opportunities, i.e. garage spaces are less attractive and of motorisation and where peoples’ access to several sustainable trans- frequently available. mobility choices are determined by a port modes with good accessibility high perception of insecurity? (freedom of choice)
Accordingly, half of the areas have acceptable accessibility or better. 59 percent of Malmö’s population live in these areas. Many of the areas with poor accessibility have relatively few inhabitants and low population density.
Figure 1: Lindängen’s position according to Malmö’s accessibility index
10 Malmö | Lindängen Malmö | Lindängen 11 Cycling and pedestrian network Shared mobility: car-sharing and bike-sharing A well-developed network of bicycle paths, with good road surface quality, Malmö counted 93 station based runs through the neighbourhood and car-sharing pools in March 2018, Figure 2: Map of bus lines and stops connects Lindängen with other parts one of which is located in Lindängen between Hyllie and Lindängen of town (indicated with pink lines in (currently with only two subscribers). the figure below). Amongst these is The local car-sharing operator Sunfleet Public transport infrastructure: bus #170 it takes 15 respectively 10 minu- the route to the city centre through envisages an extension by another 80 connections, prices and payment tes to get from Lindängen to Hyllie. Fi- the neighbourhoods Hermodsdal and car-sharing pools in Malmö within the methods gure 2 below shows bus lines (orange) Nydala. However, as different traffic coming year. Studies have shown that and bus stops (red dots) in the area. modes are separated from each other, car-sharing has its limits in semi-peri- Three municipal bus lines and one bike paths run through a park-like, but phery areas such as Lindängen (Wenn- regional bus line connect Lindängen A standard ticket within Malmö costs rather isolated, area. Bicycle paths are berg et al. 2018). to Malmö and the surrounding region 25 SEK (2,50 EUR) which is cheap missing to a large extent alongside for The city’s own station based bike-sha- of Skåne. compared to other cities like Gothen- example Munkhättegatan. While many ring system Malmö by bike exists of 50 City bus #2: directed from the city’s burg and Stockholm. Children to the residents appreciate Lindängen for stations located in the central parts of South (Kastanjegården) across the age of 7 travel free. Pupils to the age of its car-free environment, the separa- Malmö. An annual membership fee of city centre (with stops at Södervärn, 19 receive a 40 percent discount and tion of pedestrian and cycling paths 250 SEK (25 EUR) makes the system Triangeln and Centralen) towards students a 20 percent discount. Pen- from streets, can make it somewhat very affordable and popular among re- the new harbour (Fulriggaren) de- sioners from the age of 70 receive a 30 difficult to orient oneself across neig- sidents and visitors alike. For 2019, the parts every 10 minutes, on weekends percent discount. Moreover, there is a hbourhoods and, as they go through system will be extended by another 50 and evenings every 20 minutes. couple discount that gives a 20 percent isolated and sometimes desolate areas, stations. Eight stations will be leading City bus #31: directed from Lindän- discount when travelling together. can contribute to a sense of insecurity the way to Lindängen, but are not yet gen across eastern Malmö (Jägersro, Bikes can be taken on the metro for a (Hammarberg et al. 2015). However, in place. Bulltofta, Värnhem) towards the charge of 20 SEK (2 EUR), but are not some pedestrians-and-cyclist-on- industrial harbour (Mellersta ham- allowed on city buses (which is com- ly-areas are not respected. nen) departs approximately every 30 mon in Sweden but can cause some The fact that car and motor- minutes. issues for i.e. a cyclist with a flat tire). scooter drivers sometimes City bus #33: directed from Malmö’s A monthly ticket for Malmö costs 550 take shortcuts via pedestrian western parts (Ön och Hyllie) across SEK (55 EUR). A special summer ta- and bike paths diminishes Lindängen towards the city’s eastern riff allows travellers from 15 June – 15 the positive aspects behind parts (Rosengård and Värnhem) August to visit the whole of Skåne for the traffic mode separation departs every 20 minutes. 695 SEK (69,50 EUR). planning idea. Munkhät- tegatan also creates a main Regional bus #170: directed from Payment is either possible via a smart barrier to pedestrians in the Hyllie station across Lindängen travel card or the local transport ope- area. Pedestrian and bicycle and Malmö’s south-eastern suburbs rator’s app. Skånetrafiken plans to suc- tunnels offer crossing points towards Lund (Technical University cessively phase out smart travel cards under Munkhättegatan at five and industrial science park) departs in the region and instead focus on different points. Pedestrians every 20 minutes, on weekends and developing the app-function further. often choose to cross above other less frequently travelled times Overall, the neighbourhood bus sys- even if only one of these every hour. tem is well-developed and connects with other parts of the city and regio- points is provided with an Hyllie is an important train stop close nal public transport system. However, additional zebra crossing on by that connects travellers to central the numbers of users are high and an ground level. This is a com- Copenhagen and Copenhagen airport. increase in capacity is included in the mon feature in traffic mode Taking the city bus #33 or regional bus municipality’s infrastructure plans. separated areas. Figure 3: Map of Lindängen’s bicycle network 12 13 Actual Travel Behaviour and Modal Split
Modal split: Malmö and Fosie latest survey 2013 and 2030 objectives compared:
Figure 5: Levels of Sense of security per subareas, shown in total and by gender. The blue arrows Use of Public Spaces indicate Lindängen subarea.
Security Security has been raised as a major and Nydala (BRÅ 2017). There have issue by the people of Lindängen. been multiple shootings with deadly Many places are perceived as outcomes in and around Lindängen. uninviting and unsafe. Notably, 54 Consequently, people take detours percent of the residents indicated to avoid certain locations, avoid that they did not feel secure on their going out alone, after dawn or choose own at night, compared to 34 percent to limit the errands they make – in the rest of Malmö (BRÅ 2017). leaving public spaces as the square, Figure 5 shows how levels of security playgrounds, parks including their amongst women in Lindängen is lower bike lanes empty at large part of the compared to the neighbourhood’s time. male population. Part of the reason lies in the neighbourhood’s architectural design. Figure 4: Actual (in brackets) Buildings open to the inside. Closed and anticipated modal shift housing fronts to the outside leave changes until 2030. no eyes on streets or bicycle paths. Functions that otherwise are arranged at a house’s backside, e.g. waste Figure 4 above shows Malmö’s modal already high use of public transport disposal, parking and loading spaces, Use of pedestrian and bicycle tunnels split objective until 2030 in total as and encouraging walking and cycling. have been placed at its entrance, well as for each SUMP area. The result However, Lindängen’s lower car creating a first impression that Due to their dark and underground from a travel survey 2013, is displayed ownership (compared to Malmö and residents do not feel represented by. character pedestrian and bicycle tunnels within brackets. The modal split Fosie average) could be an indicator are contested. We were interested regards all trips made by inhabitants that car usage also is lower compared Moreover, vast spaces of greenery in residents’ use of the tunnels going within, to/from and outside the areas. to the other neighbourhoods included that are neither parks nor squares under Munkhättegatan and conducted Lindängen is part of SUMP area 7, in SUMP area 7. Inhabitants in SUMP create unsafe places between buildings traffic counts in summer 2017. The Fosie. The comparison between this area 7 make fewer trips (2,3 per (Hammarberg et al. 2015). A high analysis shows that people use tunnels area and Malmö’s total modal split person) compared to the city average crime rate with open drug dealing predominately when travelling by bike change illustrates that the challenge (2,6 per person). and gang violence contribute to this 85 percent. Pedestrians prefer to cross for Fosie consists in significantly public perception. More recently, the Munkhättegatan on street level, whether reducing car use, increasing the neighbourhood was listed among a designated zebra crossing was available the most exposed areas to crime in or not. Sweden alongside Hermodsdal
14 Malmö | Lindängen Malmö | Lindängen 15
What is *SUNRISE 2.2. Objectives, challenges, opportunities aiming for in Lindängen? Locally specific constellation of the main objectives, challenges and opportunities
Objectives of the Neighbourhood Main Opportunities of the Project Main Challenges of the Project in the SUNRISE Project • As there are seemingly more • Local knowledge shared by pressing issues than sustainable Malmö has two objectives with • Gain access to local networks local actors also indicate that mobility; SUNRISE: and actor groups to co-identify the residents of Lindängen to a • How to gain residents relevant mobility needs. large extent have a project and engagement? 1. On an overarching level, we participation fatigue. Residents’ • How to unite around mobility want to identify a method and • Learn about different ways to trust in the municipality has related core problems tools that help us, together understand and approach mobility been strained by disappointment and goals? with the population of a certain issues from a specific local context. connected to previous “fruitless” neighbourhood, to identify, test • Mobility issues are entangled in • Holistic approach to public and regeneration focused projects and and develop relevant mobility great complexity and are a part of a private spaces. participatory initiatives. solutions. As a result, residents so called “wicked” problem. • Reclaiming and activating certain • Relevant solutions might and companies shall be able to • To achieve a holistic approach to urban spaces to create a sense of not entirely be within the contribute in concrete ways to public and private spaces regarding security. municipality’s domain of implementing Malmö’s sustainable maintenance and other issues. urban mobility plan. responsibility and action field. 2. We also want to identify and test Actors like local organisations concrete mobility solutions that and real estate owners should facilitate people living and working therefore be involved as partners in Lindängen to travel in a more in the co-creation process (and/ sustainable way. or in the facilitation there of) in order to have greater potential to implement measures. • As there are a lot of other processes/projects ongoing within the neighbourhood, partners’ and residents interest in and prioritisation of mobility related issues (and the SUNRISE project) might be at risk. Considering that Lindängen (alongside with the neighbouring areas Hermodsdal and Nydala) is listed among the most crime exposed areas in Sweden with gang violence and killings, sustainable mobility issues might be perceived less urgent.
16 Malmö | Lindängen Malmö | Lindängen 17 2.3 SWOT Analysis & Corridor of Options
SWOT-Matrix
INTERNAL FACTORS EXTERNAL FACTORS
Strengths Weaknesses Opportunities Threats
Comparably low car ownership Lindängen only has an acceptable to Lindängen is beneficiary of large phy- Ongoing gang crime in Malmö with poor level of accessibility according to sical investments in coming years deadly shootings and narcotic sales in index (see figure 1) public increase the sense of insecurity Cycling network well-developed in some respects New parking policy allows for exten- Bus stops, parts of cycling and ded use of different kinds of mobility pedestrian network are avoided at management measures Relative high level of public transport certain times, which indicate an even usage lower level of perceived accessibility Facilitate the implementation of measures to show tangible results High sense of urgency to find Some pedestrian-and-cyclist-only- solutions to security related issues areas are not respected by car and motor scooter/moped drivers
A lot of processes are ongoing with active forums and engaged residents A lot of active community forums but (albeit non-mobility related) not specifically mobility related
A lacking sense of urgency when it comes to narrowly defined mobility issues: What engages people to improve their mobility situation?
Previous experience of “fruitless” projects and participation processes
A lot of ongoing processes. What engages partners to prioritise and contribute to mobility solutions?
18 Malmö | Lindängen Malmö | Lindängen 19
*Which Which are strategies *the possible 2.3 SWOT Analysis & Corridor of Options support options for reaching the actions in SWOT-Strategy SUNRISE goals Corridors of Options Lindängen? for Lindängen? The “Weaknesses-Threats-Strategy” can be used to minimise weaknesses and avoid dangers in Lindängen: Option 1 Option 2 Project results should focus on measures. The high level of perceived improving the neighbourhood’s insecurity in the Lindängen area accessibility to sustainable modes of should be seen as an overarching Placemaking Reclaiming urban space back travel and the perceived accessibility perspective and a factor that any to activate certain places to pedestrians and cyclists (i.e. people’s perception of actually mobility solution has to take into being able to access and utilize consideration. The high sense of Perceived insecurity is a big Some pedestrian-and-cyclist- sustainable mobility infrastructure). insecurity amongst the residents, and issue in the neighbourhood and only-areas are not respected SUNRISE can contribute on long to the sense of urgency connected to the influences mobility choices. by car and speeding moped medium term basis by continuously issue, risk overshadowing other topics The neighbourhood has a well- drivers. This makes these areas feeding back of SUNRISE process in the neighbourhood (like sustainable developed bicycle infrastructure less suitable for children to play results into upcoming physical mobility). This could be somewhat but have sometimes an isolated and less attractive as meeting changes and synchronising with mitigated if narrow approaches to character. According to surveys places. This corridor of option other relevant processes. However, mobility issues are avoided. The co- people, especially women, do could include different ways of improvements on a short to medium creation process should be built on not to feel comfortable going physically blocking and hindering term basis can be achieved within the openness and an understanding outside after dark. Particularly motorist to enter the area and the scope of SUNRISE together of direct and indirect connections places where people do not feel for moped rider to speed. with partners and local stakeholders between mobility and sense of secure and therefore avoid could working on and testing relevant insecurity. be activated to increase the flow of people in public places. This corridor of option could include Emphasis should be put on: 3. Be mindful measures as different kinds of of latent antipathy events, festivities and types of towards participation placemaking. 1. initiatives amongst residents. Exploring Prevent contributing to any the existing active further disappointment by forums of residents and ensuring (to the largest extent partners and the different possible) that residents’ ways these can be utilised engagement in SUNRISE as forums and channels will result in tangible in SUNRISE. outcomes. 2. Testing positi- ve, playful and enga- ging methods facilitating the reflection upon the mobility situation in the area, expressing underlying mobility needs and encouraging idea generation on prospecti- ve solutions.
20 Malmö | Lindängen Malmö | Lindängen 21
What *happend in 2.4 The Co-Identification Process Lindängen so far? Step 1 - 5
Step 1: Preparations Step 2: External kick-off Purpose: residents as possible. Information (May 2017 – January 2018) (February - March 2018) Familiarise ourselves to and get was spread through local real estate • Internal preparatory meetings • After having learned more about general insights on the area. Capture/ managers communication channels, with the aim to initiate the process the neighbourhood and having identify local trends and needs e.g. flyers in letter box, hall way and and to get to know Lindängen translated the ambitions with regarding mobility issues. To meet other public spaces. Information was as well as relevant actors in the SUNRISE to a process that suits people wherever they are and being also circulated through respective neighbourhood. the neighbourhood’s specific present in their everyday lives. A way websites, social media and local • Assessment of earlier work that has challenges and circumstances, we to build trust, raise interest and make newspapers. Other local actors been done in the neighbourhood invited central actors to be part in people curious about the topic – thus were also carriers of information. In connected to co-creation and defining next steps. laying a foundation for upcoming addition to direct face-to-face dialogue mobility. What was lifted in earlier activities. in Lindängen, residents had the dialogues that we can take with us Purpose: opportunity to leave their ideas and and build further on? To identify advantages of jointly suggestions via email or letter to us. • Internal kick-off with addressing the challenges that Step 4: Dialogue activities representatives working at travelling from, to and within the (May-June 2018) different parts of the city council neighbourhood entail. To establish a • “On-Tour activities” or “mobile Step 5: Summary and validation of and with a clear responsibility core group responsible for collecting questionnaires” activities were results (June-August 2018) affecting Lindängen’s future and analysing ideas and suggestions organised in close cooperation • The challenges and needs development. The focus was to which will be raised during future with local real estate managers. identified during dialogue identify synergies between their dialogue activities. These kind of participatory activities in June were summarised work and SUNRISE. activities was used with the and condensed. To get an Co-creation: purpose to reach out to as many overview over the different ideas Purpose: This phase focussed on involving real residents as possible and to get and proposals that have been To collect information and knowledge estate managers in Lindängen. Other a better understanding of their lifted, we categorised them into about the neighbourhood as well as actors that have a connection to the concrete needs while meeting possible future working areas, future and past projects in Lindängen. neighbourhood’s mobility situation them in their daily lives. then evaluated and validated them To inform central actors about and can become relevant later on, with the real estate managers and SUNRISE and identify synergies such as residents connected with the Purpose: Allaktivitetshuset. The summary amongst each other. community centre Allaktivitetshuset, The aim with the dialogue activities and synthesis will be our vantage were informed as well. was to identify challenges and needs point for future actions. Co-creation: of the local residents. How do people The focus of this phase was on Step 3: Dialogue activities travel today? What hinders them from Purpose: involving different parts of the city (Nov-Dec 2017 and May 2018) choosing more sustainable means of To provide an overview of main council. First connection has also • Focus group meetings were held transport? And what do they need mobility challenges and needs. been established with associations and and moderated by a subcontractor to be able to travel in a sustainable Co-creation: Dialogue results were local networks that are active in the and organised around user group manner tomorrow? summarised by the SUNRISE- neighbourhood. experience of urban surroundings team at the municipality and and features. Co-creation: validated by the members of the • “Pop-up” events were held with Co-creation was key during this core group and representatives from focus on mobility related topics. phase. We wanted to involve as many Allaktivitetshuset.
22 Malmö | Lindängen Malmö | Lindängen 23 2.4 The Co-Identification Process
Participation Promise Process Design
“Together, Malmö City and the • Develop and test concrete In the beginning we focused on The synthesis process was done neighbourhood’s real estate owners solutions for sustainable mobility. getting to know the neighbourhood, internally at the municipality. Other have great opportunities to influence the local actors and to build a local than these low-key reviews with local the local conditions for travel to, from The suggestions and comments that presence and trust. We chose to start stakeholders (including an evaluation and within Lindängen, Nydala and come through participation activities low-key and small-scale to get a of feasibility when relevant), no public Hermodsdal. The city of Malmö and will be compiled and fed back to basis to build on. We left our process synthesis review was executed. We real estate owners will collect and the participants. The proposals that design quite open and to be able to considered this not to be appropriate handle the mobility needs that exist, so dominate, and are economically and adjust and define it based that people living and working in the practically feasible, will be further on the neighbourhood’s area will be able to travel sustainable investigated. Residents, organisations circumstances and the to a greater extent. and businesses will be offered the impression we got along the opportunity to participate in the way from meeting the local Through our cooperation we want to: process, both regarding the details actors and residents. We • find working methods to, together of the design of the measures and arranged different public Pop- with the population in a certain the testing of solutions. All tests up events including Try-outs part of the city, identify mobility and permanent solutions are jointly to “feel the waters” when it solutions that would make it easier decided by Malmö city and real estate came to the residents’ interest for residents to switch to a more owners.” in mobility related topics and sustainable transport mode. to create a local presence for SUNRISE. A focus group gathered around a running track together with the On- Photograph 1: Bike Day / May 13, 2017, tour participatory events photographer: Johan Fridh allowed us to be present, meet
people where they were (doing Photograph 5: errands, exercising or just hanging at that time. However, the fields for Bike Day May 13, 2017, out) and collecting problems, needs, actions are broadly defined and in the photographer: wishes and ideas on-site. Although next steps of the co-creation residents Johan Fridh we had a digital suggestion-box, our will have an active role in developing approach was otherwise “nonline”. and selecting the measures.
18 Malmö | Lindängen 25
Who are the *participants 2.4 The Co-Identification Process in SUNRISE in Lindängen? Tools, formats, events Target groups and participants
Involvement of participants the residents tired of being asked to get involved for no tangible reason. Description of tools and related Identifying: Residents have asked for physical participants reaction, topics and • The initial stakeholder-mapping change for a long time but there is a specific outcomes: was made together with sense that nothing happens. representatives from the city’s • The perception of insecurity and Planning office and Job market Activity 1 – Visibility Campaign Pop- sense of low personal security is a and social department looking at up event big local issue. Sustainable mobility prior participation activities • People we offered giveaways expressed has a low priority. It is important to positive astonishment as they were • The fact that the neighbourhood define the topic for mobility focused unaccustomed to receiving practical has a low share of publicly owned activities without the participant promotional products. land led us to involve the local interpreting that this issue is estate owners/managers. overlooked. Activity 2 – Focus group meetings • The fact that the area has a young Running track population led us to contact People or groups to be activated • Good to involve an active multiplicator the local community center, within the next steps of bottom-up to maintain the process and feedback. Allaktivitetshuset. participatory activities:
• Good to link the participation process Residents who have a stake and to something tangible. Activating: interest in, and/or ideas and • Face-to-face • A good starting point to get residents’ experiences concerning the three • Multiplicators general thoughts about the area. fields of action – secure bike parking, • Personal invitation placemaking/activating urban spaces Activity 3 – Bike Day Pop-up event and reclaiming urban space. The plan • Meeting people wherever they are. is to reach target groups through Photograph 4 : Lessons learnt from approaches: Bike Day • Building trust by being present. existing forums and networks. May 13, 2017, photographer: Photographs 1-2 : • Gained better understanding • Spark interest and curiosity. Johan Fridh Bike Day for peoples’ every day travel May 13, 2017, Overall • Capture and get a feel for local trends circumstances. Every journey photographer: • We used the same form of visual Johan Fridh and tendencies regarding mobility issues. starts and ends at home. This is one expression/design language (in order important reason for why we to create a sense of recognition). Activity 4 – On Tour station events reached out to local real estate • We learned that it was important to • Three On-Tour events – based on „run managers and invited them to join be out in person. into” or “pick up”- method the project. • An event meant a temporary • Location and timing were important, • Project and participation fatigue redesign of places where it might not we selected spots where people gather – there has been multiple projects happen so much otherwise which (supermarket and festival) in order to and participatory activities in the was appreciated. reach a range of residents. neighbourhood, which have been • Positive reactions but some • By offering coffee we could talk about perceived by many not to have hesitance. mobility “under cover”. resulted in anything, and have left
26 Malmö | Lindängen Malmö | Lindängen 27
How is *bottom-up 2.4 The Co-Identification Process participation organised in Lindängen? Constitution/Formation of the Core Group
Set Up of the Core Group Members of the Core Group Work mode of the Core Group
The core group during WP1 consisted • Members of the Core Group: The core group members already How should we handle permanent vs mainly of representatives from the • Representative from Trianon (real have a lot on their plate so are temporary solutions, and operation local real estate managers/owners. estate owner/manager) very busy and a bit hesitant to be and maintenance of what is to be We judged it to be important with • Representative from MKB (real involved in yet another project or co-created? To find solutions to members who have local knowledge, estate owner/manager) workgroup. However, SUNRISE’s these questions the wording of the have a stake in the area with mandates • Representative from Stena focus on sustainability and with participation promise and MoU were to implement change and channels for fastigheter (real estate owner/ funds to implement user-identified important together with the phrasing- influence. The distribution between manager) measures made them curious and process itself. One key-point was private, semi-private and public spaces cautiously optimistic. Once onboard, the agreement to do maintenance • Representative from Victoria Park is not self-evident. The local centre, for the main challenge that the real estate measures first and when it came to (real estate owner/manager) instance, was sold to a private investor managers/owners had to overcome any investments, each party decides • Representative from in the 1980s. A fragmented ownership was the integral uncertainty in the when there is more information Fastighetsägarna syd (real estate structure complicates responsibilities co-creation process. How could the available. owner/manager) when it comes to maintenance real estate managers plan personal The format of the core group improvement questions in the area. • Representative from Trianon (real and financial resources without estate owner/manager) meetings had to be adjusted to fit Maintenance issues effect mobility knowing exactly what measures the tight schedules of the members. • Representative from Job market behaviour and use of public spaces would be implemented in the end? The attendance at the meetings have and social department (Malmö directly (i.e. concerning de-icing varied depending on the scope of the municipality) and lighting matters) and indirectly meeting and unforeseen hinderance (littering and neglected management to partake. of common areas and facilities contribute to sense of insecurity) – and are therefore a relevant to the SUNRISE process.
The representative from the Job market and social department at Malmö city were initially engaged to share local knowledge and to provide guidance when navigating the many processes ongoing in the neighbourhood. All things considered, the constitution of the core group worked well.
28 Malmö | Lindängen Malmö | Lindängen 29 The results of the Co-Identification phase The process from collection towards synthesis
Summary of on-site collected Factors that would make it more Feasibility analysis on their land. The theme’s feasibility citizen problems, needs, appealing for people to walk, the was evaluated together with them and suggestions and ideas top three topics were maintenance, The SUNRISE co-project heads they committed to continuing within activities or other reasons to at the Malmö’s streets- and parks this co-creation process and in the Problems, needs, suggestions and go outside as well as adequate department sorted the on-site upcoming work package co-facilitate ideas concerning travel behaviour illumination at night. collected problems, needs, wishes labs with residents. The review did not from, to and in Lindängen were raised and ideas into themes. We checked follow any specific method. during a series of participatory events The existing network of pedestrian and analysed the feasibility to in June 2018. The question posed paths running through the facilitate and create results through The other themes were especially was: “What would make it easier neighbourhood was also perceived as matching the themes of collected discussed and reviewed with two for you to walk, cycle or use public isolated and therefore not interesting ideas and problems with mandate representatives (who also live in transport for your daily errands?” after nightfall. Insecurity was a and resources available directly the neighbourhood) from the In total, we received 124 answers, relevant topic for many. A high rate amongst and/or indirectly through multi-activity community centre among them 47 comments relevant of gang violence was one of two main the involved stakeholders. Previous since residents organised around to cycling, 36 comments concerning causes for that perception. The other feedback from participatory activities Allaktivitetshuset are important co- public transport, 24 comments about one was mopeds driving quickly was also taken into consideration creation partners when reclaiming walking. on and bigger vehicles blocking together with the comments from and activating urban space. The designated pedestrian and cycling the stakeholders’ review of the representatives were very positive Amongst the participants’ comments paths. SWOT. We evaluated if ongoing towards being involved in these two addressing cycling, issues about programmes and/or upcoming co-creation processes and to co- parking and the risk of bicycle investments could meet the needs facilitate labs with residents in the theft were reoccurring. A feeling of (learn-how-to-ride-a-bike-courses upcoming work package. The review insecurity was dominant and lead are available in the neighbourhood did not follow any specific method. people to ride their bikes along traffic through the Red Cross, Bus Rapid Based on the feasibility analysis we at Munkhättegatan rather than using Transport investments are planned, settled on the three fields of action. the existing bicycle network through bike lanes and additional crossings parks. Others avoided cycling all along Munkhättegatan will be built Other than these low-key reviews with together. Others did not find it easy in the upcoming years and one of the local stakeholders, no public synthesis to orient themselves on the somewhat problematic crossings was already review was executed. We considered isolated bicycle networks. Moreover, due to be fixed during autumn 2018). this not to be appropriate at that time the need for better bicycle crossings The synthesis process was hence done considering the context of project was indicated both inside and internally at the municipality. and participation fatigue amongst outside the neighbourhood. Several the residents. However, the fields for participants mentioned that they did The expressed need amongst citizens actions are broadly defined and in the not know how to ride a bike. for more secure bike parking was next steps in the co-creation residents discussed and reviewed together with will continue to have an active role in the real estate owners as they have the defining the fields and developing and mandate over bike parking facilities selecting the measures.
30 Malmö | Lindängen Malmö | Lindängen 31
Which are *the essential 2.5 Culminating Outcomes ideas, problems and needs on Three prioritised fields for action mobility in Lindängen? #2 ACTIVATING URBAN SPACE
Actual and perceived insecurity is an issue that directly influences people’s mobility choices throughout all transport modes. The neig- hbourhood has a well-developed bicycle infrastructure, that is avoi- ded after dark because of its isolated character. People report not to feel comfortable going outside or waiting for the bus. Particularly #1 IMPROVED BICYCLE PARKING places where people do not feel secure and therefore avoid, could be activated and repopulated through different kinds of events, festivi- ties and placemaking. Cycling related questions clearly dominated citizen feedback during the participatory events. Amongst them, bicycle parking was The objective in this field for action would be to, together with young one concrete issue. While some people did not have access to par- people (young women especially) and adult men and women, co-plan king facilities that protected their bikes from rain and thieves, others and co-develop measures for activating urban spaces. reported that storage spaces are not easy to get to. But cycling par- The municipality will partner with representatives from Allaktivitets- king was not only compromised at home, but also at important desti- huset (community center) in facilitating the activity and to invite/ nations in the area, such as workplaces or at local grocery shops. engage the target groups. Possible solutions span over short, medium and long term. Improving cycling parking could be a first action area for real estate owners, the municipality and engaged residents to co-create tangible solutions. The expertise of SUNRISE partner »Koucky & Partners« could be #3 RE-CLAIMING URBAN SPACE used to get inspiration and support. The objective would be to, together with residents, co-plan and co-develop test measures for safer bike parking facilities. The municipality, real estate managers Some pedestrian-and-cyclist-only-areas are not respected by and Hyresgästföreningen (Tenants Association) should partner up motorists and speeding moped drivers. This makes these areas less in facilitating the co-creation activities and to invite/engage target suitable for children to play and less attractive as meeting places groups through available channels. and cycling and walking routes.
The objective in this field for action would be to, together with especially families with young children, co-plan and co-develop measures for reclaiming designated pedestrian and cycling paths and the urban space around them back to pedestrians, playing kids and cyclists. This will be achieved by gathering both “experts” in mobility solutions and citizens (who are experts on their everyday life and the urban space they use) to work together to define, plan and develop test solutions to the safety and mobility issues in one or more areas.
The municipality will be facilitating the activity and tapping into Allaktivitetshuset’s networks to invite/engage the target group.
32 Malmö | Lindängen 33 Contradictions and Correlations
Sense of insecurity Development processes
• High levels of perceived • Big physical and structural insecurity, actual crime rate but – changes have been discussed at the same time – high levels of and planned for a long time sense of community. and communicated (i.e. from the municipality) to be on their • Sense of insecurity permeates way, however there are not many other issues, such as mobility. projects that have gone from the Choices regarding mobility are planning to the implementation made based on how we perceive stage. The result is that there is an our surroundings. Not feeling impression that local actors seem secure can alter one’s behaviour to wait for things to take off and and change or radically narrow are not prepared or incentivised the options one perceives to have. to initiate something new. For Living with a sense of insecurity instance, property owners are integrated in your everyday lives dependent on the municipality‘s soon makes you see this lack construction process to implement of options or altered behaviour any physical measures. They don´t as normal and just a part of want to invest in improvements going about your day. But when that will have to be removed or talking about mobility with risk becoming obsolete when residents there is sometimes a low the construction finally starts. awareness of how and to what Meanwhile, the residents in the extent one’s sense of insecurity area, the ones living with the influences one’s mobility problems that need mitigation, behaviour or choices. grow frustrated by the lack of improvement. • Some of the building projects that have been started seemingly come to a halt. Physical attributes of start-up phases are perceived to become permanent. • People living in Lindängen want things to happen but it seems to be difficult for them to believe and engage in this type of project as former processes might have generated a lack of trust.
34 Malmö | Lindängen Malmö | Lindängen 35
What has *been learnt? 2.6 Lessons Learnt
What went What should be well? developed further?
• We identified the three corridors of actions that • The goals of the project should be broken down are practically feasible (in that the municipality into details by the core group and made more and partners own mandate to produce tangible precise, and if needed developed further. results within the corridors). At the end of WP1 we now have relevant themes and topics to continue • Co-creation should be initiated in the corridors co-working with partners and residents. of option/action concerning bike parking, reclai- ming and activating urban space/placemaking. • We learned more about the neighbourhood and Alternative methods to collect and develop citi- which participation methods that actually could zen ideas further should be explored and tested. work in this kind of neighbourhood. Language barriers have to be considered and worked on/solved. • We have found a niche for SUNRISE amongst other ongoing projects and processes. The SUNRISE process can provide a mobility perspective and, in this way, be a complement to the larger Program Lindängen. In WP1 process we have been able to see connections and connect topics and local actors in the neighbourhood which would not have been made without SUNRISE.
• After resolving hurdles along the way and finding it hard to continuously integrate residents and local actors in the process, a core group consisting of local estate managers is established and will be expanded in WP2 with representatives from the community center. There is greater sense of ownership at the end of WP1 for the co-creation process amongst the estate managers than in the beginning.
36 Malmö | Lindängen Malmö | Lindängen 37 2.6 Lessons Learnt
Main drivers Main barriers Positional Spatial Cultural Political Cultural Involvement/Communication Problem related Organisational Planning Problem related Involvement/Communication Institutional Positional Planning Institutional
#1 POLITICAL #1 CULTURAL The political/strategic type drivers relate to commitment of key actors, The cultural type barriers relate to frustrated and unengaged residents, coalition between key (policy) stakeholders due to converging inter- caused by bad experience with participation projects not resulting in ests. In Lindängen far-reaching municipal and national level invest- anything tangible. SUNRISE expected us to have a fully public exter- ment into housing and public transport infrastructure have recently nal kick-off. We decided against this recommendation to avoid con- been agreed on. This was a main driver behind the real estate mana- tributing to the project fatigue that had built up during past externally gers interests in SUNRISE as they initially saw their involvement in funded projects. Another important reason was the need to create a the project as a way to also learn more about future plans and their sense of ownership among actors that could contribute with resources impact on Lindängen. like e.g. direct communication channels, property ownership, insights and experience with the local circumstances etc. By doing so we were #2 INVOLVEMENT / COMMUNICATION able to lay the ground for a successful implementation and maintenan- The involvement/communication type drivers relate to open involve- ce of mobility solutions that SUNRISE will result in. ment of key stakeholders. The real estate owners’ openness to intro- duce a similar process for neighbouring areas increased real estate #2 INVOLVEMENT / COMMUNICATION managers interest for engaging in the project. The involvement/communication type barriers relate to language barriers. As the languages spoken by the representatives from the #3 PROBLEM RELATED municipality sometimes differed from the languages spoken by the Problem related drivers are fueled by the pressure of the pro- participants this complicated the exchange during the participatory blems which cause shared sense of urgency among key stake- events, even though both groups did their best to communicate. The holders. Real estate managers were/are aware of mobility related extent of this barrier was an important lesson learned for the process problems in the neighbourhood and were hence interested in ini- going forward. tiating a closer cooperation with the municipality to solve these. #3 PLANNING The planning type barriers relate to the real estate owners’ difficulties to gain internal support for the extent of their engagement in SUN- RISE. As they already were involved in the larger process connected to Program Lindängen, this complicated their meeting participation. As corrective actions we co-revised and restructured the times and activi- ty plan. We initially scheduled a full-day meeting in line with the idea of the neighbourhood learning retreat. As this proved hard for the invitees to commit to, we shortened it to a two-hour lunch meeting instead and planned to continue with a series of follow-up meetings.
38 Malmö | Lindängen Malmö | Lindängen 39
What 1 Bike parking January * co-creation lab 2019 happened 2.7 Following Steps next? What? • To co-plan and co-develop measures for at least one bike parking testbed facility to be Conclusion Drawn & Further Concept implemented in the next WP. • To partner with real estate managers and Hyresgästföreningen in facilitating the activity. The SUNRISE co-project heads The other themes were especially • To, together with residents, co-plan and checked and analysed the feasibility discussed and reviewed with two co-develop measures for safer bike parking to facilitate and create results through representatives (who also live in facilities. matching the themes of collected the neighbourhood) from the 2 Activating urban space December ideas and problems with mandate and multi-activity community centre How? co-creation lab 2018 resources available directly amongst (Allaktivitetshuset) since residents “Charrette”-styled/”future workshops” to and/or indirectly through the involved organised around Allaktivitetshuset address the existing issues and together develop ideas and solutions. What? stakeholders. We evaluated if ongoing are important co-creation partners • To have co-planned and co-developed programmes and/or upcoming when reclaiming and activating urban Who? measures for one reclaim-urban-space- investments could meet the needs, space. The representatives were very • Co-creation facilitation partners: real testbed area to be implemented in the and if so, we excluded these topics positive towards being involved in estate owners, Hyresgästföreningen. next WP. from the SUNRISE focus areas. The these two co-creation processes and to • Target group: residents living in the • To partner with representatives from interested/ selected rental buildings. Allaktivitetshuset in facilitating the expressed need amongst citizens co-facilitate labs with residents in the activity. for more secure bike parking was upcoming work package. • To, together with young people (young discussed and reviewed together with Based on the conclusions from the women especially) and adult men and the real estate owners as they have the feasibility analysis we settled on the women, co-plan and co-develop measures 3 January for activating urban space. mandate over bike parking facilities three themes/categories/fields of Reclaiming urban space 2019 on their land. The theme’s feasibility action. co-creation lab was evaluated together with them and How? they committed to continuing within The fields for actions are broadly • “Open space event” – with only What? the dominant topic/issue of “safety this co-creation process and in the defined and in the next steps in • To have co-planned and co-developed and activating urban space” defined upcoming work package co-facilitate the co-creation residents will have measures for one reclaim-urban-space- beforehand. labs with residents. an active role in defining the fields testbed area to be implemented in the and developing and selecting the next WP. • To partner with representatives from All Who? • Co-creation facilitation partners: measures. aktivitetshuset in facilitating the activity. representatives from Allaktivitetshuset. • To, together with families with young • Target group: young people (young children, co-plan and co-develop measures women especially) and adult men and for reclaiming urban space back to pede- women. strians, playing kids and cyclists.
How? • “Charrette”-styled workshop gathering both “experts” in mobility solutions and citizens (who are experts on their everyday life) to work together to define, plan and develop solutions to the safety and mobili- ty issues in one or more areas.
Who? • Mobility Co-creation facilitation partners: mobility unit at Malmö municipality. • Target group: families with young children.
40 Malmö | Lindängen Malmö | Lindängen 41
Which *support is 2.8 Data & Expertise available for future steps? Resources the city can offer
Cost estimates concerning different Data from the municipality’s measures. databases and analysis/ modelling.
Professional know-how in different fields of expertise related to urban development and maintenance.
Legal expertise.
42 Malmö | Lindängen Malmö | Lindängen 43 3.0 Literature BRÅ (Brottsförebyggande rådet), “National Security Study” 2017.
Hammarberg S., Andreasson Å. and Svensson Å., ”Traffic study for Lindängen centre”, REFERENCES 2015. Nellerup J. and Andreasson Å, ”Plan description for Lindängen centre”, 2016.
Nordin A., Håkansson P., Stjärnkvist A. and Hedberg C., 2016, ”Sustainable urban mo- bility plan: creating a more accessible Malmö”.
Wennberg H., Kerttu J., Runesson H. and Hansson A., 2018, ”Mobility and accessibility of residents in socially exposed areas” Project report 1 of the research project Inclusive MaaS, financed by Vinnova.
Photography
Photographs 1 - 5: Bike Day May 13, 2017, photographer: Johan Fridh
Photograph 6 : Inviation to Bike Day June 2018, photographer: Emmy Linde
Photograph 7 : Container On-Tour Event June 2018, photographer: Maria Örn
Figures
Cover: urbanista, 2019 Graphic of the ideal typical process of Co-Identification in SUNRISE with the different steps taken. : urbanista, 2019
Figure 1: Malmö Stad, 2018 Figure 2: Malmö Stad, 2018 Figure 3: Malmö Stad, 2018 Figure 4: Malmö Stad, 2016 Figure 5: Malmö Stad, 2018
Malmö | Lindängen 45 NEIGHBOURHOOD MOBILITY DOSSIER
SOUTHEND-ON-SEA
© urbanista More information about SUNRISE: Content www.civitas-sunrise.eu
1 INTRODUCTION 1.1 Objective and content of “Co-Identification and Co-Validation“ 4 and the Neighbourhood Mobility Dossier
The CIVITAS SUNRISE project has received funding from the European Union’s Horizon 2020 research and innovation program- me under grant agreement No 72 33 65 2 DOSSIER Title Neighbourhood Mobility Dossier of Lindängen/Malmö in SUNRISE 2.1 Status quo description 9 [within the phase of WP1: Co-Identification and Co-Validation of • General situation of the neighbourhood (social, economic, environmental features) Problems and Needs] • Description of the mobility issues in the neighbourhood 20 Deliverable 1.2 of the EU Project ID: 723365 2.2 Objectives, challenges, opportunities • Locally specific constellation of the main objectives, challenges and opportunities • The Participation Promise
Contributors to case studies Budapest Fovaros XIV Kerulet Zuglo, Budapesti Kezlekedesi Kozpont 2.3 The Co-Identification Process 24 and technical support • Aims and Expectations Zartkoruen Mukodo Reszvenytarsasag (BKK), Edinburgh Napier Uni- • Overview about the steps taken in the Co-Identification process versity (TRI), Fundación Zaragoza Logistics Centre (ZLC), KOUCKY • Target groups, Tools used & Partners AB, HQ ARCHITECTS, MOBILISSIMUS, Malmo Stad, • Constitution/formation of the CCF/CG Freie und Hansestadt Bremen, Municipality of Jerusalem, Promotion of Opertional Links with Integrated Services, Association Internationale 2.4 Culminating Outcomes 36 (POLIS), Southend-On-Sea Borough Council, Technical University • Collected needs and ideas Vienna (TUW), Transport Authority of Thessaloniki SA (TheTA) 2.5 SWOT Analysis & Corridor of Options 38 • SWOT strategies Quality control Technical University Vienna, Department of Spatial Planning, • Corridors of options Centre of Sociology (E 280/6) 2.6 Lessons Learnt: Drivers and Barriers, Potentials and Challenges 44 Nadine Haufe & Lukas Franta • Potentials • Challenges Authors and Design Responsible for the content: 2.7 Following Steps 48 • Conclusion drawn and further concept Krithika Ramesh & Justin Styles Department for Place l Southend-on-Sea Borough Council 2.8 Data & Expertise 50 Civic Centre, Victoria Avenue, Southend on Sea, Essex SS2 6ER • Resources the city can offer
Accompanying consulting and design:
urbanista GmbH & Co KG 3 References 52 Bäckerbreitergang 14, 20355 Hamburg Astrid Großmann & Marie-Christin Schulze [email protected]
Southend-on-Sea | City Centre Internal kick-off- placemaking session- Krithika Ramesh SUNRISE pop-up event at Victoria Circus – Justin Styles Public kick off- Krithika Ramesh
Internal kick off- ice breaking session- Krithika Ramesh
SUNRISE pop-up event at Victoria Circus – Krithika Ramesh Southend Italian festival- Chris Styles 1.0 1.1. Objective and content of “Co-Identification“ INTRODUCTION and the Neighbourhood Mobility Dossier
Occasion and Purpose organisation and implementation of a participatory process A Neighbourhood Mobility Dossier to identify, validate and has been produced in each articulate locally perceived neighbourhood as a final document mobility challenges as well as of the »Co-Identification and Co- neighbourhood specific strengths, Validation« phase – the first work weaknesses, opportunities and package of SUNRISE. The aim of this threats work package was to ensure that all The Neighbourhood Mobility Dossier SUNRISE action neighbourhoods aims to comprehensively capture – Bremen, Budapest, Jerusalem, the results of co-identification and Malmö, Southend-On-Sea and co-validation process including the Thessaloniki – lay a solid foundation factual and subjectively perceived for all following activities. This situation with regard to mobility encompassed the establishment and other related aspects. The of strategic local alliances and the Dossier serves as a guidebook for the thorough participatory identification neighbourhood themselves regarding of problems, needs and opportunities the upcoming co-creative phases (co- in each neighbourhood. development and co-implementation of sustainable mobility solutions), but Its key objectives were furthermore: also as an overview and inspiration • To guide each Action for other cities and neighbourhoods Neighbourhood in the set up and regarding the co-creative development constitution of a local Co-Creation of sustainable mobility solutions. 1 Forum (CCF) and the Core Group The set of the six Dossiers of each 2 (CG) Action Neighbourhood constitutes the • To ensure that all relevant status- final product of the Co-Identification quo information concerning the phase in SUNRISE. Additionally, a Action Neighbourhoods will be summarised overview of the results included and fully taken into of the Co-identification and Co- account validation phase will be integrated in • To instruct and support each the »Neighbourhood Mobility Action Action Neighbourhood in the Plan«3.
1The Co-Creation Forum (CCF) is a forum/platform where everyone can express their views, ideas and concerns related to the current and future mobility situation within a neighbourhood. It can bee seen as a strategic local alliance, covering the public, covering all major stakeholders. 2The Core Group (CG) works as a coordinator of the CCF in the sense of a steering committee and administrative secretariat. 3 The Neighbourhood Mobility Pathfinder is SUNRISE‘s online toolbox to enable exploitation of SUNRISE results beyond the project‘s lifetime. Southend-on-Sea | City Centre 5 When? What? WP1 Who? Process
11 October 2017 Internal Kick-Off event »Co-Identification«: Objectives In chapter 2.4 the condensed 26 participants PREPARATORY STEPS outcomes of the collected problems, The main objective of Co-Identification needs and ideas are illustrated a INTERNAL PREPARATORY MEETINGS b INTERNAL | INFORMATIVE KICK-OFF was to ensure that all SUNRISE and possible contradictions and INFORMATION & PREPARATION Action Neighbourhoods lay a solid correlations highlighted. 19-21 April 2017 EXCHANGE Public Kick-Off MILESTONE M33 foundation for the following activities. event with 16 »MEMORANDUM OF Afterwards the main outcomes of participants This encompasses the establishment PUBLIC KICK-OFF | OFFICIAL LAUNCH EVENT UNDERSTANDING« the top-down and bottom up SWOT of strategic local alliances and the Analysis of the neighbourhood are thorough participatory identification outlined by means of the derived INTRODUCE TO THE PUBLIC of problems, needs, ideas and BRING PEOPLE TOGETHER strategies and corridors of options. opportunities in each SUNRISE NEIGHBOURHOOD GATHER PROBLEMS Action Neighbourhood. LEARNING RETREAT I GAIN LOCAL AWARENESS AND NEEDS ! ! In the next chapter the lessons learnt ? 13 - 25 October 2017 ? ! Content and Structure of the of the Co-Identification process Internal Drop-in sessions with 40 participants at ON-SITE COLLECTING EVENTS the civic centre Neighbourhood Mobility Dossier are illustrated firstly by pointing ! 14 November 2017 November 2017 out the potentials and challenges Open Access event 22 January 2018 with 50 participants Pop-Up at ? Business Breakfast with ? Co-Creation workshop that arose during the participation 50 participants To get a first impression of the ? REACH DIFFERENT with 50 participants process in Co-Identification and PEOPLE IN DIFFERENT respective neighbourhood and its 22 March 2018 ! Southend Active Day GATHER PROBLEMS ! PLACES played a significant role for the with 5 participants ! characteristics the Dossier starts with AND NEEDS ? an introduction of the status quo further planning and execution of participatory events. Secondly by ! situation of the neighbourhood in ! ? ? ! general and mobility wise followed naming and describing the most ! SYNTHESIS? ! ! ? ! by a description of the individual relevant drivers and barriers in the ? ! ! first work package. ! ! ? objectives, challenges, opportunities CONDENSE ? ! August 2018 and limits regarding the SUNRISE ! ? MERGE Finally the next steps for the ? Internal Synthesis process of the Action Neighbourhood. upcoming co-creation phase are outcomes of former outcomes of former
The next chapter shows the Co- outlined, based on the conclusion ! participation participation ! July 2018 ! ? processes processes ! ? Identification process-design of the drawn from the participatory activities SWOT Review of the Co-Identification process. with 5 particpants Action Neighbourhood including >essence of problems and needs< DELIVERABLE D1.1 »SWOT REPORT« content about the tools and methods In the last step the city gives an REVIEW used and groups reached as well as overview of what kind of data can be information about the constitution of offered (data, calculations, modelling, CHECK WITH 9 October 2018 11 September 2018 EXPERTS / SPECIALISTS Synthesis Review the Core Group (CG). legal expertise, money, speakers etc.) Synthesis Review APPROVE AND at the Forum at the Forum PRIORITISE with 6 participants with 6 participants
>neighbourhood mobility fields of action< DELIVERABLE D1.2 »NEIGHBOURHOOD NEIGHBOURHOOD MOBILITY DOSSIER MOBILITY DOSSIER «
DOCUMENT WP1 PRESENT TO THE TRANSFER TO WP2 PUBLIC
PUBLIC INTERNAL
Graphic of the ideal typical process of Co-Identification in SUNRISE with the different steps taken. ©urbanista
6 Southend-on-Sea | City Centre Southend-on-Sea | City Centre 7
Presenting *Southend and its mobility 2.0 situation DOSSIER 2.1. Status-quo description The general situation of the Neighbourhood
The Southend City Centre The neighbourhood falls within neighbourhood lies at the heart of one of the most deprived wards Southend-on-Sea. It is a dynamic in Southend-on-Sea and there are neighbourhood with a mixture of efforts being made to regenerate the business, residential, demographics area. These societal challenges are and environments and is in close mirrored in the quality of some of the proximity to both railway networks neighbourhood’s environment.The car and public transport services. The is seen as a safer mode of transport area is also divided by two of the busy and hence many opt not to walk or roads in the Borough which converge cycle. in the north of the neighbourhood. The neighbourhood covers an area of Social networks in the neighbourhood around 0.5 km2 and has a population are affected by the on-going of around 4,700. Around 27 to 30 regeneration of the neighbourhood, percent of the inhabitants in the creating a divide between the older, neighbourhood are economically less affluent, original residents, and the inactive which includes people who younger, more affluent new residents. are retired, looking after home/ The car often is perceived to represent family, long term sick or disabled, a status symbol and is another reason and students. The neighbourhood that some choose the car over public is mixed with some affluent areas transport, cycling and walking. Having and some very low-income groups. said that, a recent survey revealed that There is a higher percentage of people walking is the main mode of travel unemployed in this neighbourhood to the City Centre. This includes compared to Southend as a whole. people coming from different parts The neighbourhood falls under three of Southend (not just the City Centre Council wards which have overall Neighbourhood). about 15 percent of the inhabitants over the age of 60. However, the proportion of inhabitants over the age of 50 in certain parts of this neighbourhood is as high as 36 to 86 percent.
Southend-on-Sea | City Centre 9 Description of the Mobility Issues in the Neighbourhood
If Southend City Centre is to remain • Poor public realm: and develop as a destination for Despite the low traffic flows the visitors, residents and businesses, the infrastructure is built to promote streetscape and public spaces must car use. Cyclists and pedestrians, be improved to support the overall especially the elderly and those with offer. If town and city centres across mobility issues perceive this as an Europe are to continue to have a key unpleasant and dangerous route to economic role in the future, then the heart of the town centre. The they have to have quality streetscapes lack of seating, planting and the and public realm that can encourage poor quality of public realm fail to people to visit, dwell in and businesses create a welcoming environment for to invest. Many Local Authorities have pedestrians and cyclists. Victoria recognised this over the last few years Circus is a large pubic space at the top and invested heavily in place-making of the City Centre. It sees high levels of projects of urban improvements pedestrian flows, approximately 3,000 as part of economic regeneration pph on the weekday and 4,000 at the strategies. weekend. However, the dwell time in the space is very low and the square • Wide road: is under used. A lot of this can be London Road is a 24m wide road attributed to the lack of seating areas that runs through the middle of this and other street furniture that could Figure 1: S-CATS Phase 3 Project Area – Victoria Circus and stub end of London neighbourhood. As London Road help the public space to be occupied Road (Southend Borough Council) terminates at Victoria Circus, a big for longer periods of time and become public space at the top of the high more of a destination. street, vehicular flows tend to be low in comparison to the adjacent side streets but there are significant turning • Attitudes / images: movements from taxis and pick up The neighbourhood falls within and drop offs which increases the one of the most deprived wards perception of a busy road and reduces in Southend-on-Sea and there are the permeability for pedestrians. efforts being made to regenerate the (Refer to map below). area. These societal challenges are mirrored in the quality of some of the neighbourhood’s environment and the image of the area is not very desirable for walking, cycling and socialising.
Figure 2: Southend Town Centre, S-CATS Phase 3 project area in orange (Southend Borough Council)
10 Southend-on-Sea | City Centre Southend-on-Sea | City Centre 11 Figure 3: Average Vehicle Flows Figure 4: Average Vehicle Flows by – stub end of London Road Type – stub end of London Road (Southend Borough Council) (Southend Borough Council)
Transport Demand and Supply
Due to its location and limited onward The number of OGV(s), motorcycles taxis would leave the queue without connectivity, this section of London and cyclists is very low and less than a passenger. It is presumed that the Road is not an important vehicular two percent of all users were cyclists. taxi driver had received a call to ‘through route’ and, as such, vehicular Despite the fact that taxis account for pick up a passenger somewhere else, flows during commuter times are not only eight percent of all vehicle flows, therefore, it could be suggested that especially pronounced. Vehicular flows a large share of the street space at the often taxis drivers use the taxi rank as steadily increase through the morning, stub end of London Road is taken up a provisional ‘waiting’ area between and remain at a fairly constant level by the taxi rank. calls. The taxi rank did not impact from 10:30 onwards significantly on footway capacity, as Taxi rank operation and performance the number of people waiting, if any, Private cars make up the vast majority study conducted in February 2016 was very low. of vehicles in the area: 81 percent of showed that in general the demand all vehicles during the weekday and 85 for taxis is not high and the trend was percent at the weekend; with taxis and for taxis to wait for passengers and LGV(s) accounting for approximately not vice versa. Further, it was noticed eight percent of traffic for both days. that approximately 15 percent of all
12 Southend-on-Sea | City Centre Southend-on-Sea | City Centre 13 Figure 6: Modal Split, Journeys made to the Town Centre (Southend Borough Council)
Actual Travel Behaviour and Modal Split
Despite the high car use in the on the weekday and 4,000 at the neighbourhood, recent survey suggest weekend. that the main mode of transport used Focusing on London Road, traffic to get to the City Centre is walking. surveys show that there are almost The public space at Victoria Circus, twice as many pedestrians along this has high levels of pedestrian flows, section of London Road compared to Figure 5: View along the stub end of London Road approximately 3,000 people per hour vehicles. – Justin Styles
Pick up and drop off activity represents an important share of vehicle arrivals at the eastern end of London Road, however these uses comprise a relatively low proportion of kerbside occupancy time as they are usually short stay.
Whilst loading vehicles represent around 10 percent of vehicles using the kerbside space along London Road, deliveries are an integral part of this retail and restaurant-oriented area. All kerbs across the study area are regularly used for this purpose as demand frequently outnumbers provision for loading.
London Road is also a key access point for visitors to the area, where pick up/ drop off activity often overflows out of the assigned taxi rank and onto Figure 7: Average pede- strian flow and vehicle adjacent loading zones. flow – stub end of London Road (Southend Borough Council)
14 Southend-on-Sea | City Centre Southend-on-Sea | City Centre 15 Use of Public Spaces
Victoria Circus is located at the end Despite the high volumes of of the (Southend) High Street, and pedestrians, Victoria Circus fails to strategically located between Southend establish itself as vibrant public space. Victoria and Southend Central train Apart from a few times in the year
stations. The High Street, running when it is used as an event space, Figure 8: Pedestrian access routes at Victoria from Southend Pier to Victoria Circus Victoria Circus largely is used as a Circus (Southend Borough Council) is busy with high levels of pedestrian transitional space for people entering flows and stationary activity the space from the routes A to E as throughout. Much of this activity shown in the diagram below. is focused around Victoria Circus, Most of the stationary activities at which offers a shopping centre, cafes, Victoria Circus during the weekday restaurants and a number of other relates to people who use the public retailers and services. There is also the space for smoking or waiting for proximity to Southend Central Library friends. Along London Road, much of and the South Essex College, a hub of the stationary activity is related to the educational facilities. betting shop and banks when people need to wait to use the cash point. At The high levels of pedestrian flows the weekends, apart from being busier, across the public space, approximately the pattern was overall similar. 3,000 pph on the weekday and 4,000 at the weekend. Overall peak is between 10:00 and 16:00, decreasing steadily afterwards.
Figure 9: Pedestrian stationary activities at Victoria Circus (Southend Borough Council)
16 Southend-on-Sea | City Centre Southend-on-Sea | City Centre 17 Use of Public Spaces Mobility-relevant Policies and Plans
• Trend 1 Decline of High Streets • Trend 4 Air Pollution • Policy / Plan 1 – The Southend • Policy / Plan 4 - Southend’s Decline of High Streets as retail Air pollution is estimated to cost the Central Area Action Plan adopted Core Strategy centres in England. This has led to a UK around £16 billion a year, largely (SCAAP) will guide and promote all ...makes provision for a large share decrease in local shopping cultures through health costs. Wide realisation development and regeneration within of the Borough’s employment and and short journeys resulting from it. about the impact of transport on the town centre area and central housing growth and associated air quality has led a greater push to seafront until 2021. The document regeneration to be focussed in the • Trend 2 Technology encourage electric mobility, walking sets out the overall ambition for Central Area, this will be associated There is also increasing use of new and cycling. London Road policy area (See Policy with an increase in the levels of traffic models for hiring taxis or minicabs. Area map below) to be an area of the growth in the area. Companies, use the location • Trend 5 Bus Use City Centre that provides for high awareness and internet connectivity Bus use across the UK has declined for quality office space, shops, cafes/ of smartphones to quickly identify a number of decades. restaurants, and homes above street appropriate cars and set fares in level. It also identifies the need for response to the number of vehicles • Trend 6 Housing this to be complemented by high available and consumer demand. Cities have experienced an apartment quality public realm enhancements to boom in recent years. If housing create a pedestrian-priority area and • Trend 3 Cycling Investment – supply continues to increase in line improvements for pedestrians and The number of cycle journeys is with demand, then the return to city cyclists. increasing in flat, dense urban centre living seen in these places will areas such as London, Cambridge, continue and so will the pressure on • Policy / Plan 2 – Southend’s Oxford and Brighton. Factors behind transport network. Economic Development cycling’s popularity within London and Tourism Strategy (2017) include significant investment in ...identifies that by supporting cafes, cycle infrastructure, the introduction bars, restaurants and residential of the congestion charge and the accommodation within the City introduction of the cycle hire scheme Centres, a revitalised and refreshed (which has seen annual journeys high street offer will be achieved. This increase to over 10 million in five in turn will encourage businesses years). to remain open longer, increasing the number of jobs in the area and encouraging further spending.
• Policy / Plan 3 – Southend’s Low Carbon Energy and Sustainability Strategy Southend Council has a Low Carbon Energy & Sustainability Strategy (LCESS) for 2015-2020 which emphases supporting walking and Figure 10: CAPP Policy Areas cycling (sustainable travel), as well – SCAPP Policy Document as integrating Sustainable Urban (Southend Borough Council) Drainage Systems (SUDS) to reduce the ever increasing risk of local flooding.
18 Southend-on-Sea | City Centre Southend-on-Sea | City Centre 19
What is *SUNRISE 2.2. Objectives, challenges, opportunities aiming for in Southend ? Locally specific constellation of the main objectives, challenges and opportunities
Objectives of the Neighbourhood Main Challenges of the Project Recent investment and activity by the in the SUNRISE Project public sector has been the catalyst If Southend Town Centre is to remain for private investment which will Southend-on-Sea aims to find creative and develop as a destination for see some buildings, like the Forum, solutions to mobility issues in the City visitors, residents and businesses, the brought back into use. However, there Centre. It will use temporary trials streetscape and public spaces must be is still a lot more that needs to be done to enable local stakeholders to test improved to support the overall offer. to bring back life to the Town Centre co-developed solutions for improving If town and city centres across the UK and attract locals and visitors that Victoria Circus and London Road are to continue to have a key economic spend time and money locally. (between College Way and Victoria role in the future, then they have to Victoria Avenue and the stub end Circus). The results will form the basis have quality streetscapes and public of London Road area is the main for new design solutions that will be realm that can encourage people to gateway into the Town Centre. implemented as permanent changes by visit, and businesses to invest. There Therefore, it is critical that this space the end of the project. is competition between towns and is welcoming and attractive to draw cities for visitors, and there is also people to the Town Centre. However, • Redistribution of street space: competition for retail from out-of- the poor public realm of this gateway Street space is not only transport town developments and online. Many currently stands more as an obstacle, space but space for social Local Authorities have recognised this discouraging people from spending interactions with direct impacts over the last few years and invested time in the area. Once the retail outlets on quality of life for citizens. The heavily in the place-making project close in the evening, Victoria Circus project will aim to reclaim all/part of urban improvements as part of and particularly the alleyway is seen of carriageway to ensure the street economic regeneration strategies. as unsafe and pedestrians hesitate to space is used to its full potential Southend Borough Council is cross the space. and not just for car use. determined to therefore continue the The car is perceived as a safer mode work that has taken place over the last of transport due to the high antisocial • Creation of a welcoming few years to improve the public spaces behaviour in the area. Having said gateway to the City Centre: across the Town Centre. that, a parking survey revealed that Innovative solutions to create an The project area falls within one of the walking is the main mode of travel attractive entrance to the City most deprived wards in Southend-on- to the Town Centre. This includes Centre. Sea and there are efforts being made people coming from different parts to regenerate the area. These societal of Southend. Despite the presence of • Promoting active travel: challenges are mirrored in the quality many restaurants and bars that have of some of the neighbourhood’s the potential to create a vibrant evening Facilitating active modes through environment. Poor urban environment economy, the stub end of London Road comprehensive ‚convenience‘ and derelict buildings in the City has greater space dedicated to vehicles (infrastructure, information, Centre area have deterred investors, than pedestrian activity. Redistribution campaigns etc.). lowered confidence, triggered of space is therefore required to create a anti-social behaviour and been an safe and welcoming area that supports unwelcoming gateway to the town walking, cycling and social interactions centre for visitors and businesses alike. in the area.
20 Southend-on-Sea | City Centre Southend-on-Sea | City Centre 21 Main Opportunities of the Project
The project supports the objectives The Town Centre currently is unable • Active and involved: Usable public space, wayfinding and of the Southend Central Area to attract the large number of visitors - Southenders get together regularly- improvements to walking and cycling Action Plan (SCAAP) and is the coming to the Southend seafront, the there are plenty of good places to do facilities that will be delivered through delivery mechanism for the policies project will be focused on public realm so the project work towards this theme of set out within it that are aimed at improvements and place-making in - Southend is known for its warm the vision. strengthening and transforming the the Town Centre area that enhance the welcome The project supports the objectives Town Centre sub-regional role as experience for visitors, residents and - A sense of family and community, of the Southend Central Area a successful commercial and retail workers, improving access, extending enjoying and supporting each other – Action Plan (SCAAP) and is the destination, cultural hub, educational opportunities for more activity a strong sense of settled communities delivery mechanism for the policies centre of excellence, leisure and and enlivened streetscapes into the set out within it that are aimed at tourism attraction – an excellent place evening. This directly supports the A welcoming gateway and a public strengthening and transforming the to live, work and visit. Southend 2050 vision: space where people can meet Town Centre sub-regional role as The project supports this vision by and spend time will contribute to a successful commercial and retail building upon existing successes • Pride and Joy – The vision includes achieving this vision. destination, cultural hub, educational and investment and unlocking the a desire for the following: centre of excellence, leisure and potential of significant regeneration • Opportunity and Prosperity: - The town centre and public places tourism attraction – an excellent place opportunities. Developments within - There is a good balance of quality to live, work and visit. the Central Area will be supported being clean, attractive, thriving, and reflect success; retail, residential and social space in These five visions have been adopted by transport improvements to create our town centres and are taken forward as the a safe and vibrant atmosphere for - Southend to be a ‘destination’- People want to visit, live and study here all opportunities on the project. The communities and businesses and as a An investment to improve the public following table maps the objectives to welcoming visitor experience. year round and from far and wide - Arts, culture & attractions that to be realm will play an important role in the opportunity discussed above. This changing the image and attractiveness was developed as part of the strategic The main objectives of SUNRISE available year round in Southend. of the Town Centre as a whole case for the application of external are identified as follows: As an important gateway and drawing in commercial investment funding by the project team. • Creating a welcoming gateway to the public space into the Town Centre Town Centre improvements to the public realm, • Smart and connected introduction of elements like gateway • Providing a useable public space that features, street furniture and public - Lots of opportunities to be in open is attractive, thriving, and reflect the art will contribute to pride and joy in space character of Southend Southend. - It’s easy for me to get around when I want – this helps my independence • Improving wayfinding in the Town - We are leading the way on green and Centre • Safe and Well – The vision includes: innovative travel • Encouraging walking and cycling in - Easy connectivity with minimal the Town Centre - Combating social issues like rough barriers, however I choose to travel sleeping/begging in public spaces • Improving safety for pedestrians at - Creating spaces that everyone feels all times of the day safe in all times of the day.
22 Southend-on-Sea | City Centre Southend-on-Sea | City Centre 23
What *happend in 2.3. The Co-Identification Process Southend so far? Aims and Expectations Participation Promise
The aim of the bottom-up Projects in the past have done As a part of the ‘Participation Promise’, participatory activities was as extensive public consultation, a commitment was made to all follows: however, SUNRISE has brought about stakeholders that their time and effort a shift in the practice in the sense towards the project will result in actual • Create awareness and support for that we have moved from consulting, implementation of improvement the SUNRISE project in Southend- where stakeholders share opinions and measures. This is critical to the on-Sea. comments on plans that are developed success of the co-creation process. The following commitment was made to • Contribute to stakeholder mapping internally, to true engagement all stakeholders at the start of WP1: and identified other schemes in the and empowerment, where in the area. stakeholders are leading the project • SUNRISE will undertake an in partnership with the project team. inclusive co-creation process. • Establish the SUNRISE Core Group Early engagement has allowed them that represents the key stakeholder • Small scale mobility solutions will to contribute to the project, its scope groups. be implemented through SUNRISE. and aims from the onset of the project • Generate a list of ideas/ helping in the creation of a feeling of • Large scale mobility solutions for measures that could improve the ownership. London Road (from College Way neighbourhood, particularly the to Victoria Circus) and Victoria stub end London Road and Victoria Circus will inform the business Circus. case for the next phase of Southend Central Area Transport Scheme (S-CATS).
24 Southend-on-Sea | City Centre Southend-on-Sea | City Centre 25 2.3. The Co-Identification Process
Process Design and Methodology
The workshops facilitated particularly WP1 activities generated a long- intensive interaction among the list of ideas that were categorised The public at large was involved in WP1-related activities participants (10-15) and fostered into the following 6 groups of through three types of activities: Workshops, Drop-in the creation of trust and a sense of improvement types: sessions and various public events. The styles and location of “ownership”. However, the series of the engagement event was based on the following: workshops proved the difficulty of • Planting – ideas for greening finding venues and times that are including, trees, planters, grassed convenient for the broadest possible areas as well as water features What is the aim of the event? Who is attending? representation of local citizens. The • Street Furniture – ideas for addition drop-in sessions provided a much of elements like seating, lighting, • General public - Public spaces • General awareness – Tried to piggy broader range of times at which public art, covered area, play (indoor or outdoor) with simple back on events in the community. citizens could visit and interact with equipment etc. Events such as the SUNRISE Open activities like post-its on maps, the SUNRISE team, thus leading Access event and SUNRISE Pop-up questionnaires with no more than to an even wider audience – this, • Use of public space – ideas for at Business Breakfast 3-4 questions. Incentivise with however, proved to be extremely change of layout, reallocation of prizes and free bees. staff-intensive as team members had road space and use of space. • Ideas and questionnaire – Events to be in attendance for long hours on • Wayfinding – ideas related to signage like SUNRISE Pop-up event and • Invited stakeholders – Preferable several days. This was also true for and wayfinding in the Town Centre Southend Italian festival were indoor location with necessary the public events on-the-street with a organised in the public space and facilities like toilets, refreshments special SUNRISE gazebo; these on-site • Walking and cycling – ideas for attracted large numbers of people and chairs to encourage activities achieved the widest publicity improving walking and cycling participants to engage for longer with a particularly positive cost/ facilities • Development of ideas – Used periods. participation ratio. These latter events • Improving safety – ideas to improve repeating workshops and activities were most productive if they were safety and security like placemaking sessions in a • Single stakeholder group (for combined with other events like public public and easy to access building. example a college, a specific football screenings. For all types of As with any innovation process, the Ex. SUNRISE Internal Kick-off employer etc )- drop in sessions involvement techniques, the degree of phases of problem co-identification that allow participants a wide range input was highest during interactive and the co-development of solutions of time slots and give them the activities like photo-tagging with could not be sharply separated (this opportunity to spend as little or lot post-it notes or a stakeholder mapping would have been unhealthily artificial of time at engagement activity. exercise. anyway). Therefore, many ideas for potential concrete interventions were mentioned by citizens already during the abovementioned workshops, drop- in sessions and public on-site events. The local Core Group, however, held separate meetings in which specific proposals were gathered, developed, analysed and prioritised.
26 Southend-on-Sea | City Centre Southend-on-Sea | City Centre 27
Who are the *participants 2.3. The Co-Identification Process in SUNRISE in Southend? Tools, formats, events Target groups and participants
Description of tools and related Involvement of participants The following measures have participants reaction, topics and been used to communicate with specific outcomes: Internal stakeholders –The internal stakeholders workshop and drop in sessions were used to identify projects in the area • Social media Place-making activity The second Core Group meeting that can support SUNRISE, are similar focussed on a discussion around the • Emails to list of stakeholders Participants were split into three or in the same neighbourhood. The identity of the neighbourhood. A clear previously involved groups and each had a plan of the internal stakeholders also kick-started vision for the Town Centre would help in neighbourhood. They used these plans the stakeholder mapping exercise • Letter drops to the residents in the co-selecting solutions that help achieve to mark mobility issues and develop that identified stakeholders under 3 neighbourhood the overall vision. categories: potential solutions using model trees, • Banners and leaflets in key public model putty and Lego. This was the To this end, we developed a questionnaire • Directly impacted buildings most effective tool in gathering and – stakeholders for the SUNRISE project that ties in with developing concrete ideas and helped within or outside the neighbourhood • Merchandise like branded banners, a questionnaire survey being conducted participants get creative, involved and who are directly impacted by the t-shirts, free bees used to attract Borough wide by the Southend 2050 take ownership. project. participants project. • Indirectly impacted – stakeholders This was useful in gathering information within or outside the neighbourhood Internal Kick Off – Memory lane ice breaker exercise Krithika Ramesh during the co-identification phase when who are indirectly impacted by the Old photos of the neighbourhood gathering views from stakeholders that project were used to centre conversation about could be shared between projects. The the identity of the neighbourhood SUNRISE team often weaved these • Champions/supports/influences This was a useful ice breaker for questions into conversations when – Key groups or individuals in the participants. participants were keen on writing. neighbourhood who can champion and lead on a grassroots level. Internal stakeholders also check Stakeholder mapping feasibility, deliverability and Participants engaged in the stake- maintenance of measures put holder mapping process by identifying forward by all stakeholders individuals and groups who are – directed impacted, indirectly impacted • External stakeholders – These and/or can support the project as include directly impacted, indirectly champions and influencers impacted groups and individuals and local champions that help in identifying key issues and potential measures for change.
Questionnaire (Southend Borough Council) Questionnaires
28 Southend-on-Sea | City Centre Lessons learnt People or groups to be activated STAKEHOLDER MAPPING FOR SUNRISE IN SOUTHEND-ON-SEA within the next steps of bottom-up participatory activities Champions/supports/ Directly Impacted: Indirectly Impacted: influences: • General public – Public spaces The shortlist will now be taken to a • (indoor or outdoor) with simple Borough wide voting to confirm a activities like post-its on maps, democratic design selection process • Residents • The Forum • Sustrans questionnaires with no more than and the final scheme will be a 3-4 questions. Incentivise with prizes developed on its basis. The preferred • Cyclists • Museum • South Essex Homes and free bees. scheme option will include elements from the 6 improvement categories • Economy • Queensway development • Trust Links • Invited stakeholders – Preferable described. • Local restaurants and • College and university indoor location with necessary • Churches businesses facilities like toilets, refreshments • Leigh Teadeus Group and chairs to encourage participants • HAARP • Taxi to engage for longer periods. • Fire service and emer- • Pedestrians gency services • One Love Chasity • Single stakeholder group (for example a college, a specific • Young people • Market stall owners • Local artists employer etc ) – drop in sessions • Odeon cinema that allow participants a wide range • Local groups (community) of time slots and give them the • Victoria wards opportunity to spend as little or lot of • Local resturants and time at engagement activity. • Shoppers and tourists businesses
• Milton ward St. Lukes • Healthy School‘s Network
• Old peoples forum • Bike shops
• Minority groups • Branch library network
• Cycle Southend
• SAVS
• Ideas in Motion
• Leigh and Shoebury
• LCP police
• Southend Sparkle
• Comfy Saddle
• Parent champions Milton Ward
Table of stakeholders – (Southend Borough Council)
30 Southend-on-Sea | City Centre Southend-on-Sea | City Centre 31
How is *bottom-up 2.3. The Co-Identification Process participation organised in Work mode of the Core Group Southend? Constitution/Formation of the Core Group The core group members were is communicated to the Co-Creation selected from names that were Forum to confirm that the solution volunteered/nominated at previous is still based upon the original SUNRISE workshops/events/drop-in intentions suggested by the Co- sessions. The Core group includes 6 Creation Forum. The diagram below representatives from Southend-on-Sea represents the interaction between the Council, 6 representatives from each co-creation project and the Council local partner and 3 local residents. procedures. The Core Group meets monthly at the The diagram below shows the Forum for 2 hours to discuss a pre- interaction between the key parties determined agenda prepared by the on the project. The Core Group Set Up of the Core Group SUNRISE team. Minutes are shared represent the wider forum and drives post the meeting and we have an the project in determining how it its The Core Group was created by using a nomination form that all participants online forum called “stickyworld” run, how the selection process will filled out during the initial events and then one person from each stakeholder The Core Group shall present those take place and delivers these views group was shown to join the CG. solutions that meet the needs and and measures through to the Project objectives of both the neighbourhood Board and Implementation Team. The and the project, to the Project Board Project Board represents the decision and the Implementation Team who making process for the Council will ensure that Corporate Policies and will ensure the overall objects are being adhered to and that for the Borough are represented. the solutions are practical for the The Implementation Team will locations. check the feasibility of ideas against Comment from both the Project physical constraints and ensure the Board and the Implementation measures are practical, this will assist Team shall be feedback to the Core in gathering support for a practical Group, who in turn will ensure this solution from the Project Board.
Members of the Core Group
Internal Reps (6) Local Patners (6) Stakeholders (3)
• Scott Dolling | • Giles Tofield | • Elizabeth McLachlan | Director (Culture, Cultural Engine Resident Tourism & Property) • Dawn Jeakings | BID • Jane Sealy | • Neil Hoskins | Interim • Phil Broadbent | Resident GM Major Projects Sustrans • Julian Milton | • Mark Sheppard | • Anthony Quinn | Residents Planning Turning Tide/SAV Association • Marzia Abel | • Just Ride | TBC • Youth Council Town Centre • Peter Shrimplin | • Anthony Bryne | Taxi Project 49 Project Structure • Paul Jenkinson | Parks – Justin Styles
32 Southend-on-Sea | City Centre Southend-on-Sea | City Centre 33 Mood board of the ‘short list’ of ideas – Chris Styles and Krithika Ramesh
The results of the Co-Identification phase: The process from collection towards synthesis
The following were the most The public at large was involved in important outcome of WP1: WP1-related activities through three types of activities: Workshops, Drop- • setting up of the Core Group in sessions and various public events. • Collection of a shopping list of The workshops facilitated particularly measures intensive interaction among the participants (10 – 15) and fostered All measures as well as procedures the creation of trust and a sense of that are to be used for the project have “ownership”. However, the series of been developed by the Core Group workshops proved the difficulty of and hence a true bottom-up approach finding venues and times that are WP1 activities generated a long-list As with any innovation process, the is being followed for the project. convenient for the broadest possible of ideas that were categorised into the phases of problem co-identification representation of local citizens. following 6 groups of improvement and the co-development of solutions Potentials: types: could not be sharply separated (this The drop-in sessions provided a • Members of the Core Group to would have been unhealthily artificial much broader range of times at which lead on future engagement with • Planting – ideas for greening anyway). Therefore, many ideas for citizens could visit and interact with support from the SUNRISE team. including, trees, planters, grassed potential concrete interventions were the SUNRISE team, thus leading to an • Setting up a community resource areas as well as water features mentioned by citizens already during even wider audience – this, however, like a newsletter that would keep the abovementioned workshops, proved to be extremely staff-intensive • Street Furniture – ideas for everyone updated, especially drop-in sessions and public on- as team members had to be in addition of elements like seating, during the implementation phase. lighting, public art, covered area, site events. The local Core Group, attendance for long hours on several however, held separate meetings days. This was also true for the public play equipment etc. Challenges: in which specific proposals were events on-the-street with a special • Use of public space – ideas for • May require some training for gathered, developed, analysed and SUNRISE gazebo (see Figure 1); change of layout, reallocation of members of the neighbourhood prioritised. these on-site activities achieved the road space and use of space. • Requires additional time and widest publicity with a particularly The Core Group took the theme of the resource for editing that may not • Wayfinding – ideas related to positive cost/participation ratio. These six improvement types and distilled be possible to be provided by the signage and wayfinding in the latter events were most productive if the ‘long list’ gathered during the Council without the employment Town Centre they were combined with other events WP1 events, into a ‘short list’. Each of a dedicated resource. like public football screenings. For all • Walking and cycling – ideas for member of the group took those types of involvement techniques, the improving walking and cycling ideas that they felt resonated with the degree of input was highest during facilities project and would provide the most interactive activities like photo-tagging • Improving safety – ideas to benefit within the neighbourhood. with post-it notes or a stakeholder improve safety and security These were then presented to the mapping exercise. other members of the Core Group for discussions and voted on to create the ‘short list’ that would be taken forward to the wider public vote on measures. The vote was a simple show of hands to after each member presented their selection, those which garnered the most support were taken forward. 34 Southend-on-Sea | City Centre 35
Which are the *essential ideas, 2.4. Culminating Outcomes problems and needs on Collected needs/issues mobility in Southend?
These categories below are conside- ved lack of strategic signing to local Usable public space Walking/Cycling red to fit the outcomes of the SWOT destinations and services. ‘walking Activities/events/cafes analysis as the either capitalise on and cycling’ will be a direct support to the strengths identified or are able the redistribution of the carriageway Victoria Circus • Bike parking to be included but to counteract one of the weaknesses. to provide enhanced facilities and will • The need to retain the space in a manner that is consistent The ‘planting, street furniture and promote the awareness of air quality for events with seating with the vision of the space Usable public space Activities/events/ issues with the removal of vehicles arranged in a manner that rather than ad-hoc. Parking to cafes’ headings will be able to assist in within the space. All of these headings allow a multi-purpose use, be clustered rather than in one the enhancement of the nightlife and if delivered upon successfully will as- such as an Amphitheatre area. restaurant culture whilst developing a sist it the delivery of ‘improving safety’ arrangement, this would allow vibrant public space that is a destina- within the project area. tiered seating and an event • Additional hour bikes to be in- tion rather than a transitional space. The figures represent the outcome of space within the centre of Vic corporated. ‘Wayfinding’ will address the percei- this process. Circus. When empty the space would not feel vacant and will • 20mph zone within the whole accommodate greening. of London Road, from Queens- way roundabout to High Street furniture Planting • Restaurant seating area within • Street. the middle of Vic Circus, which • Seating to be sympathetic to • General greening, no specifics would still accommodate an the useable public space, but at this stage to allow greater event space at specific dates. it was agreed more is required choice and not to limit the within the space. Improving safety space to opportunities. London Road • Lighting to be used in a variety This can also incorporate • Regular market that was more of ways, to reduce the unso- water features as part of the artisan in nature and provided • Designing out ASB through ciable spaces i.e. the alleyway greening, not necessarily a something different to what creating a more active space, or as way finding (beams of both during the day and in the fountain in the image of the was already available in the evening. light) and to provide a visual High Street. enhancement to greening. seafront, but something that can incorporate SUDs. • Entrance features to be con- • Seating for restaurants outside It emerged, that a number of sidered at the gateways to the to create a more continental particularly innovative suggestions space i.e. the alleyway, London feel. were indeed put forward by the citizens Road and Southchurch Road. Wayfinding This can be formed from light- themselves. These include an interactive ing or from vertical features. • Taxi rank to be made drop off water feature, raised planting areas, an and pick up only, extended outdoor games area, market stalls or • Public Art this does not need • Visual link from the station waiting for taxis to be reduced. interactive projections in public areas. to be a permanent feature, and other key entry points of Taxis to be spread around the Suggestions like these are currently but rather temporary and the town, with attractions and perimeter of the High Street changeable and even digital. being investigated for their technical other strategic destinations to allow more pickups at other and financial feasibility as well as for • Deeping at Southchurch signed to remove confusion. key locations. their potential to make a true difference Road to be covered/reduced to the quality of public life in the city in width to provide greater space. centre neighbourhood of Southend.
36 Southend-on-Sea | City Centre Southend-on-Sea | City Centre 37 2.5 SWOT Analysis & Corridor of Options
SWOT-Matrix
INTERNAL FACTORS EXTERNAL FACTORS
Strengths Weaknesses Opportunities Threats
Low vehicular flows during commuter Low share of cycling in the modal split. The number of cycle journeys is Decline of High Street across UK. times. increasing in flat, dense urban areas Southend’s High Street is also in parts of the U.K. where significant declining with poor quality of shops. Public space- Lack of any activities, investment in cycle infrastructure, Most of the shops shut around Pedestrians- Walking is the main seating areas and poor public realm has the introduction of the congestion 5-6pm, after which the City Centre mode of transport to the City resulted in limited social interactions in charge and the introduction of cycle Neighbourhood feels deserted. Centre. the space. hire schemes. • Victoria Circus has high levels of pedestrian flows. Bus use across the UK has declined. • There are twice as many Restaurants along London Road Wide realisation about the impact Bus network in Southend is also only pedestrians as cars along this have front deliveries and will hence of transport on air quality has led a East to West/West to East. This means section of London Road. vehicular access would need to be greater push to encourage electric that buses can’t be used to go down to maintained. mobility, walking and cycling. Southend.
Public space- Victoria Circus has the potential to be a vibrant public Taxis The SCAAP policy supports public space due to its strategic location • Low share of taxi in the vehicular realm enhancements to create a at the top of the High Street, flow. There is a large number pedestrian-priority area and improve- between Southend Victoria and of taxis that are waiting for ments for pedestrians and cyclists in Southend Central train stations, and passengers. the City Centre Neighbourhood. its proximity to Southend Central • Large share of carriageway space Library and the South Essex College, taken up by taxis a hub of educational facilities. London Road has a concentration of restaurants and cafes attracting evening activity.
Taxis- This taxi rank is considered the second most important taxi rank in Southend-on-Sea. The low share of vehicular flow does not demonstrate this location as a strength however there is potential for a reduction in vehicle movements in the area if the use of the rank is encouraged as it can reduce private car drop offs and eventually car use in the area.
38 Southend-on-Sea | City Centre Southend-on-Sea | City Centre 39
*Which strategies 2.5 SWOT Analysis & Corridor of Options support reaching the SWOT-Strategies SUNRISE goals for Southend?
INTERNAL FACTORS INTERNAL FACTORS
Strengths-Threats Weaknesses-Threats Strengths-Opportunities Weaknesses-Opportunities
Redistribute the carriageway to Developing Victoria Circus as a vibrant Enhancing the public realm along Lon- Relocating the taxi rank within the provide greater priority to walking public space, a destination rather than don Road in a way that it enables the Neighbourhood to create more space and cycling as vehicle flows are low, just transitional space, encouraging restaurants to spill outside, allowing for social activities whilst ensuring that with greater promotion of cycling evening activities and increased dwell the street to capitalise further on the it is easily accessible from the high infrastructure and streetscape to time in the space and establishing the evening activities. This would integra- street and able to support the night increase the modal share. space as the gateway into the City te London Road with the High Street. time economy. Centre., this is supported through the The low vehicle flows along London Councils SCAAP policy and meets Road would facilitate the reallocation Creation of a ‘destination’ rather than the aims and objects of the town as a of space to favour pedestrians more an area that is simply passed through whole. than vehicles.
EXTERNAL FACTORS by the introduction of more seating EXTERNAL FACTORS and conversational pieces within the area. The increased awareness around air quality issues will lend support to the potential removal of vehicles within the Enhancement of the existing nightlife space. and restaurant culture within the area to create a more vibrant and safer environment, whilst encouraging deliveries to be undertaken at specific times of the day.
Reduction in car use through the promotion of other transport modes in the area and streamlining existing transport modes through the use of technology to reduce standing traffic along London Road.
40 Southend-on-Sea | City Centre Southend-on-Sea | City Centre 41
Which are *the possible options for actions in Corridor of Options Southend?
1 Option: Pedestrianised Zone area who maintain their access in the current situation resulting from Carriageway converted to pedestrian area. heavy lobbying, thus limiting the scope from Option 1. This option will include: Victoria Circus can be developed into a vibrant public space with seating, performance area and/or planting etc. to complement • Conversion of road space to pedestrian area to provide and support the pedestrian/community activities that the local increased space for pedestrian activities and increased dwell stakeholders decide to carry out in the improved space along London time in the area. Road. • Limited access for taxis and delivery vehicles along stub end of London Road. • Improved cycling facilities, public realm and lighting. 3 Option: Improved Gateway • Enhancement of the existing nightlife and restaurant culture Reduced width of carriageway with improved public realm and within the area. gateway features. This option will include: All measures will be focused on changing the nature of use of the road • Widening of the footways along London Road to give from car dominated to a pedestrian zone that encourages people to increased space for pedestrian movement. walk, cycle and socialise in the area. This will only be constrained by the desire for taxis and deliveries still wishing to access the area, this • Improved cycling facilities, public realm including gateway will have to be carefully assessed to restrict access to certain times only features and lighting. to ensure pedestrian traffic takes priority in the area. Victoria Circus can be developed into a vibrant public space with All measures will be focused on changing the nature of use of the seating, performance area and/or planting etc. to complement road from car dominated to a pedestrian and cyclist friendly zone that and support the pedestrian/community activities that the local encourages people to walk, cycle. This option is derived as a direct stakeholders decide to carry out in the improved space along London response to both vehicles maintaining access in their current form, Road. limiting the scope for intervention along London Road. Victoria Circus can be developed into a vibrant public space with Option: Pedestrian priority area seating, performance area and/or planting etc. to complement and support the pedestrian/community activities that the local Redistribute the carriageway to provide greater priority to stakeholders decide to carry out in the improved space along London walking and cycling. 2 Road. This option will include: • Widening of the footways along London Road to give increased space for pedestrian activities. • Access only for taxis and delivery vehicles along stub end of London Road. • Improved cycling facilities, public realm and lighting. • Enhancement of the existing nightlife and restaurant culture within the area.
All measures will be focused on changing the nature of use of the road from car dominated to a pedestrian and cyclist friendly zone that encourages people to walk, cycle and socialise in the area. This option will be a direct result of the constraints imposed by vehicles in the
42 Southend-on-Sea | City Centre Southend-on-Sea | City Centre 43
What has *been learnt? 2.6 Lessons Learnt
What went well? What didn‘t work?
What went What went well? well?
• Emphasising the fact that time and • Connecting with other on-going projects to avoid contributions to the project will result in physical repetition and to utilize existing networks. implementation. This was especially important in this neighbourhood where past projects have • Events in the neighbourhood where people are tried to improve the area, however due to lack already meeting. Co-creation events are resource of funding did not result in implementation. This intense (time and money) and any new project made stakeholders understandably sceptical about will take time to establish itself and attract participating in any new projects. participation. Therefore, we found collaborating with other initiatives in the neighbourhood, show • Having good communication material including up at community events, etc. especially in the a way for people to contact both online and early stages. in person. The co-creation activities created awareness and interest but co-creation is long ongoing process and ensuring people have a way to stay connected to the project was key to success.
• Branded merchandise was helpful especially for outdoor events as it helped participants recognise What should be the project and engage. developed further? • Recording issues and ideas, even those beyond the scope of the project. We then managed to direct them to the Southend 2050 project • A greater online platform and potentially a news- which is looking at a wider range of issues in the letter that can be sent to participants on a regu- neighbourhood. lar basis, including throughout the implementa- tion phase.
44 Southend-on-Sea | City Centre Southend-on-Sea | City Centre 45 2.6 Lessons Learnt
Technological Main drivers Spatial Main barriers Positional Cultural Organisational Political/Strategic Planning Positional Financial Political/Strategic InstitutionalInvolvement/Communication Problem related Spatial Institutional Cultural Problem related Organisational PlanningFinancial
• #1 POLITICAL • #1 PROBLEM RELATED Policy relevance: Improvements in the area align with the overall vision Complexity of the problem: The issues in the neighbourhood go beyond the to make Southend Town Centre more sustainable. It fits with the Local obvious mobility issues to include socio-economic and political issues. Some Transport Plans and Southend Central Area Transport Policy. It also supports of these are beyond the scope of SUNRISE. The following three corrective the Southend 2050 Vision. measures have been taken: • Identified focus area within the neighbourhood where we can have • #2 FINANCIAL greatest impact. Funding: We have identified a source of funding for the implementation • Explored the aspired identity of the neighbourhood and attempted to of ideas: Small scale measures will be implemented through the SUNRISE prioritise issues and ideas in line with this wider vision. project. Large scale measures will inform the business case for the next phase • Recorded issues and ideas, even those beyond the scope of the pro- of Southend Central Area Transport Scheme, which has an allocation of £4m. ject and then directed them to the Southend 2050 project which is looking at a wider range of issues in the neighbourhood. • #3 SPATIAL • #2 ORGANIZATIONAL Locational Importance: The Town Centre is at the heart of the Borough. Like Logistics of events: Some of the events had poor attendance mainly due to the many Town Centres in England, Southend Town Centre is declining and following 4 reasons: there is a shared interest in reviving the neighbourhood. We identified early • Lack of awareness about the SUNRISE brand. People didn’t recognise the in the engagement that London Road and Victoria Circus was the focus area branding and hence weren’t drawn to the event. within the neighbourhood where we can have greatest impact. • Poor timing of events - Issues like organising an event during school half- • #4 INSTITUTIONAL term when many people were on leave. • Location of the event – Location greatly impacts level of participation. Cross-departmental interest: Pressure of the problem(s) in the The Forum building is usually well used and gets a high rate of footfall. neighbourhood effect a range of internal departments and there However, we didn’t have as many participants at the public kick-off as is a shared sense of urgency to improve the neighbourhood. expected. This may have been due to exceptionally nice weather. We saw increased number of people heading towards the beach. On other occasi- ons, like for invite based events, the Forum has been a successful venue. • Poor weather conditions – Sometimes even with the ideas location, for instance the Christmas market on the high street, the event draws low levels of participation due to unexpected weather conditions, like strong wind and snow. Corrective measures taken included organising additional events on site. • #3 COMMUNICATION Not all members are able to make every monthly Core Group meeting be- cause of other commitments. A Core Group discussion portal was created on stickworld for those unable to attend to contribute to discussions. Minutes of the meeting were shared with all the Core Group members.
46 Southend-on-Sea | City Centre Southend-on-Sea | City Centre 47
What will *happen 2.7 Following Steps next?
Conclusion Drawn & Further Concept (Activities, Ideas, Wishes, ...)
Due to the strategic importance and location of the neighbourhood, there is a need to allow everyone in the neighbourhood to view and comment on the short listed ideas.
1 Borough Wide January /February 2 Activating urban space Voting 2019 co-creation lab
What? What? The Shortlist of ideas will be taken to a Evaluating the results of the Borough wide Borough wide voting to confirm a demo- voting to assess: cratic design selection process and the final • Level of engagement – need for ad- scheme will be a developed on its basis. The ditional promotion preferred scheme option will include ele- • Results of the polling ments from the 6 improvement categories • Revisions required to be made to the described below: shortlist • Planting • Street Furniture • Use of public space Where? • Wayfinding • The Forum (public library) • Walking and cycling • Improving safety Who? • Organisational responsibility by Southend SUNRISE team Where? • Online – SUNRISE website, social media, Southend Council website, Council stakeholder list, partner organisation email Contacts • Polling stations – The forum, Victoria Shopping mall, the Civic Centre, trains station, museum and other locations based on previous activity.
Who? • Everyone in the Borough • Organisational Responsibility by Southend SUNRISE team with support from the Core Group
48 Southend-on-Sea | City Centre Southend-on-Sea | City Centre 49
Which *support is 2.8 Data & Expertise available for future steps? Resources the city can offer
The Community engagement aspect of the project is fundamental to its success and if it is not considered The Major projects and appropriately will reduce the Strategic Transport Policy participation on the project. team in particular has The Community Engagement We have also gained a wealth expertise in Highway Team has, and will be, of knowledge and experience and Coastal engineering, supporting the project through from our participation in urban design, community to implementation to ensure previous European projects engagement, travel The engineering aspects the project remains active including Bike Friendly Cities, planning, behaviour of the final measures for on engagement and offering www.bikefriendlycities.eu, change campaigns, public implementation can be a barrier insights into behaviours that DG MOVE funded SaMERU transport management, for delivery if the appropriate otherwise would go unnoticed (Safer Mobility for Elderly cycling schemes etc. considerations are not given at on a traditional approach to Road Users), www.sameru. key milestones, the knowledge delivering a project. eu., SWITCH, http://www. and expertise that has been switchtravel.eu/) gain in this area through our in- house design teams can support in understanding the physical practicalities of delivery.
50 Southend-on-Sea | City Centre Southend-on-Sea | City Centre 51 3.0 Literature Atkins (2017) London Road Vehicular Study for Southend-on-Sea Borough Council. Issue 01. London: Atkins.
Atkins (2016) Pedestrian and Patterns of Space Use Study for Southend-on-Sea REFERENCES Borough Council. Issue 02. London: Atkins. Atkins (2016) Pedestrian and Patterns of Space Use Study for Southend-on-Sea Borough Council. Issue 01. London: Atkins
Internet
Southend-on-Sea Borough Council (2018) Southend Central Area Action Plan [online] Available: file:///C:/Users/krithika%20ramesh/Downloads/1._SCAAP_Word_Version_ FINAl_print_version%20(2).pdf [Accessed on 16 March 2]
Southend-on-Sea Borough Council (2017) Economic Growth Strategy [online] Available at: file:///C:/Users/krithika%20ramesh/Downloads/SBC_Economic_Growth_ Strategy_2017_22_a_.pdf [Accessed on 16 March 2017]
Photography
Krithika Rames, Justin Styles and Chris Styles
Figures
Cover: urbanista, 2019 Graphic of the ideal typical process of Co-Identification in SUNRISE with the different steps taken. : urbanista, 2019
Southend-on-Sea | City Centre 53 NEIGHBOURHOOD MOBILITY DOSSIER
NEO RYSIO THESSALONIKI
© urbanista More information about SUNRISE: Content www.civitas-sunrise.eu
1 INTRODUCTION 1.1 Objective and content of “Co-Identification and Co-Validation“ 7 and the Neighbourhood Mobility Dossier
The CIVITAS SUNRISE project has received funding from the European Union’s Horizon 2020 research and innovation program- me under grant agreement No 72 33 65 2 DOSSIER Title Neighbourhood Mobility Dossier of Neo Rysio/Thermi/Thessaloniki in SUNRISE 2.1 Status quo description 11 [within the phase of WP1: Co-Identification and Co-Validation of Problems and Needs] • General situation of the neighbourhood (social, economic, environmental features) • Description of the mobility issues in the neighbourhood Deliverable 1.2 of the EU Project ID: 723365 2.2 Objectives, challenges, opportunities 14 • Locally specific constellation of the main objectives, challenges and opportunities • The Participation Promise Contributors to case studies Budapest Fovaros XIV Kerulet Zuglo, Budapesti Kezlekedesi Kozpont Zartkoruen Mu- and technical support 2.3 The Co-Identification Process 16 kodo Reszvenytarsasag (BKK), Edinburgh Napier University (TRI), Fundación Zaragoza • Aims and Expectations Logistics Centre (ZLC), KOUCKY & Partners AB, HQ ARCHITECTS, MOBILISSI- • Overview about the steps taken in the Co-Identification process MUS, Malmo Stad, Freie und Hansestadt Bremen, Municipality of Jerusalem, Promo- • Target groups, Tools used tion of Opertional Links with Integrated Services, Association Internationale (POLIS), • Constitution/formation of the CCF/CG Southend-On-Sea Borough Council, Technical University Vienna (TUW), Transport Authority of Thessaloniki SA (TheTA) 2.4 Culminating Outcomes 28 • Collected needs and ideas
Quality control 2.5 SWOT Analysis & Corridor of Options 30 M. Teresa de la Cruz, PhD. • SWOT strategies Fundación Zaragoza Logistics Centre (ZLC) • Corridors of options 2.6 Lessons Learnt: Drivers and Barriers, Potentials and Challenges 38 Authors and Design Responsible for the content: • Potentials • Challenges Chrysa Vizmpa, Transport Planner Engineer, TheTA, [email protected] 2.7 Following Steps 42 Dimitra Komnianou, Transport Planner Engineer, TheTA, [email protected] • Conclusion drawn and further concept Zanna Manoli, Production Manager, TheTA, [email protected] 2.8 Data & Expertise 44 • Resources the city can offer Accompanying consulting and design:
urbanista GmbH & Co KG References 47 Bäckerbreitergang 14, 20355 Hamburg 3 Astrid Großmann & Marie-Christin Schulze [email protected]
Thessaloniki / Neo Rysio Impressions from Neo Rysio and the SUNRISE events on site all photos: ©TheTA 1.0 1.1. Objective and content of “Co-Identification“ INTRODUCTION and the Neighbourhood Mobility Dossier
Occasion and Purpose organisation and implementation of a participatory process A Neighbourhood Mobility Dossier to identify, validate and has been produced in each articulate locally perceived neighbourhood as a final document mobility challenges as well as of the »Co-Identification and Co- neighbourhood specific strengths, Validation« phase – the first work weaknesses, opportunities and package of SUNRISE. The aim of this threats work package was to ensure that all The Neighbourhood Mobility Dossier SUNRISE action neighbourhoods aims to comprehensively capture – Bremen, Budapest, Jerusalem, the results of co-identification and Malmö, Southend-On-Sea and co-validation process including the Thessaloniki – lay a solid foundation factual and subjectively perceived for all following activities. This situation with regard to mobility encompassed the establishment and other related aspects. The of strategic local alliances and the Dossier serves as a guidebook for the thorough participatory identification neighbourhood themselves regarding of problems, needs and opportunities the upcoming co-creative phases (co- in each neighbourhood. development and co-implementation of sustainable mobility solutions), but Its key objectives were furthermore: also as an overview and inspiration • To guide each Action for other cities and neighbourhoods Neighbourhood in the set up and regarding the co-creative development constitution of a local Co-Creation of sustainable mobility solutions. 1 Forum (CCF) and the Core Group The set of the six Dossiers of each 2 (CG) Action Neighbourhood constitutes the • To ensure that all relevant status- final product of the Co-Identification quo information concerning the phase in SUNRISE. Additionally, a Action Neighbourhoods will be summarised overview of the results included and fully taken into of the Co-identification and Co- account validation phase will be integrated in • To instruct and support each the »Neighbourhood Mobility Action Action Neighbourhood in the Plan«3.
1The Co-Creation Forum (CCF) is a forum/platform where everyone can express their views, ideas and concerns related to the current and future mobility situation within a neighbourhood. It can bee seen as a strategic local alliance, covering the public, covering all major stakeholders. 2The Core Group (CG) works as a coordinator of the CCF in the sense of a steering committee and administrative secretariat. 3 The Neighbourhood Mobility Pathfinder is SUNRISE‘s online toolbox to enable exploitation of SUNRISE results beyond the project‘s lifetime. Thessaloniki / Neo Rysio 7 When? What? WP1 Who? Process
27 February 2018 Internal Kick- Off event »Co-Identification«: Objectives In chapter 2.4 the condensed 28 participants PREPARATORY STEPS outcomes of the collected problems, The main objective of Co-Identification needs and ideas are illustrated a INTERNAL PREPARATORY MEETINGS b INTERNAL | INFORMATIVE KICK-OFF was to ensure that all SUNRISE and possible contradictions and INFORMATION & PREPARATION Action Neighbourhoods lay a solid correlations highlighted. EXCHANGE MILESTONE M33 »MEMORANDUM OF foundation for the following activities. 23 May 2018 Afterwards the main outcomes of UNDERSTANDING« This encompasses the establishment Kick-off Co- PUBLIC KICK-OFF | OFFICIAL LAUNCH EVENT the top-down and bottom up SWOT Creation Forum of strategic local alliances and the 16 participants Analysis of the neighbourhood are thorough participatory identification outlined by means of the derived INTRODUCE TO THE PUBLIC of problems, needs, ideas and 20 May 2018 BRING PEOPLE TOGETHER strategies and corridors of options. Public Festive approx. 1500 GATHER PROBLEMS opportunities in each SUNRISE participants Action Neighbourhood. GAIN LOCAL AWARENESS AND NEEDS ! ! In the next chapter the lessons learnt ? ! Content and Structure of the of the Co-Identification process ? 8 – 22 November 2018 ON-SITE COLLECTING EVENTS Neighbourhood Mobility Dossier are illustrated firstly by pointing Mobilising the local ! community with special 30 October 2018 out the potentials and challenges view to students ? Interviews with shop parents and guardians owners along Konstanti- 15 participants ? To get a first impression of the that arose during the participation ? noupoleos road REACH DIFFERENT 12 participants process in Co-Identification and PEOPLE IN DIFFERENT respective neighbourhood and its 8 November 2018 ! played a significant role for the Interviews with GATHER PROBLEMS ! ! PLACES characteristics the Dossier starts with elderly people AND NEEDS ? an introduction of the status quo further planning and execution of 15 participants participatory events. Secondly by ! situation of the neighbourhood in ! ? ? ! general and mobility wise followed naming and describing the most ! SYNTHESIS? ! ! ? ! by a description of the individual relevant drivers and barriers in the ? ! ! first work package. ! ! ? 27/28 November objectives, challenges, opportunities CONDENSE ? 26 November 2018 ! and limits regarding the SUNRISE 2018 ! ? ? MERGE Internal Synthesis Finally the next steps for the 1st NLR process of the Action Neighbourhood. upcoming co-creation phase are 12 participants outcomes of former outcomes of former
The next chapter shows the Co- outlined, based on the conclusion ! participation participation ! ? processes processes Identification process-design of the drawn from the participatory activities ! ! ? of the Co-Identification process. Action Neighbourhood including >essence of problems and needs< DELIVERABLE D1.1 »SWOT REPORT« content about the tools and methods In the last step the city gives an REVIEW used and groups reached as well as overview of what kind of data can be information about the constitution of 18 February 2019 offered (data, calculations, modelling, 2nd NLR CHECK WITH EXPERTS / SPECIALISTS the Core Group (CG). legal expertise, money, speakers etc.) Core Group APPROVE AND PRIORITISE - MILESTONE M2 >neighbourhood mobility fields of action< DELIVERABLE D1.2 »2ND NEIGHBOUR »NEIGHBOURHOOD HOOD LEARNING RETREAT« NEIGHBOURHOOD MOBILITY DOSSIER MOBILITY DOSSIER «
DOCUMENT WP1 PRESENT TO THE TRANSFER TO WP2 PUBLIC
PUBLIC INTERNAL
Figure 1: Graphic of the ideal typical process of Co- Identification in SUNRISE with the different steps taken. ©urbanista
8 Thessaloniki / Neo Rysio Thessaloniki / Neo Rysio 9
Presenting *Neo Rysio and its mobility 2.0 situation DOSSIER 2.1. Status-quo description The general situation of the Neighbourhood
The neighbourhood of Neo Rysio 57 percent of the population is is located in the Municipality of economically non-active, and that Thermi, about 20 kilometres from unemployment in Neo Rysio is a bit the city centre of the Municipality higher than 14 percent. Additionally, of Thessaloniki. The municipality of according to the latest Census, around Thermi constitutes of three municipal 25 percent of the population is less districts, Mikra, Thermi and Vasilika than 20 years old, while the respective The municipality of Thermi has an share of the elderly (older than 60 area of 382.106 square kilometres, the years) is around 20 percent. Emphasis municipal unit of Thermi has an area should be given to new residents that of 100.943 square kilometres. Neo are developing new mobility habits Rysio is a village and a community and therefore are more receptive to of Thermi municipality and Thermi new sustainable travel choices. Finally, municipal unit. in Νeo Rysio there is a high degree of sense of belonging and cultural linkage With a population of 2,952 inhabitants that dates back to the historical roots (2011 Census), Neo Rysio consists of Neo Rysio as a refuge of relocated primarily of residential areas with local Greek populations during the 1920s. commercial activity and it has a strong functional relationship with the urban core of the municipality of Thermi, as well as the centre of Thessaloniki, in terms of administrative, economic, health, educational, and other lifestyle-related activities. The 15,000 square kilometres area has undergone a noteworthy population increase of 65 percent, during the decade 2001 until 2011, which is indicative of the dynamics and the people-focused potential of this neighbourhood. It should be noted though that around
Figure 2: Neo Rysio © TheTA
Thessaloniki / Neo Rysio 11 Description of the Mobility Issues in the Neighbourhood
The two main streets Moreover particular problems are Constantinoupoleos and created as a result of parked vehicles Metamorphoseos are crossing Neo at the corners of intersections with the Rysio and are part of District 30 local vertical roads making visibility connecting the provincial road to hard for drivers in many cases. Perea with Basilica village. These Additionally, there is no satisfactory streets also offer a direct connection to length and width of sidewalks along the National Road of Thessaloniki (Nea the main street Konstantinoupoleos Moudania), through the interchange which poses significant problems of Neo Rysio. For these reasons roads to pedestrians. Vehicles parking at suffer from heavy traffic as these routes the intersections of the junctions also form the shortest paths to the also create conditions of reduced aforementioned areas. Two signs at road safety. A major problem is the entrances of the settlement prevent encountered by pedestrians with vehicles to reduce speed to 40kms/ wheelchairs and parents with hour. Several uses (shopping, dining, children‘s pushchairs. and recreation) have evolved along the area attracting traffic and resulting An issue of utmost importance in significant pedestrian movements. is also the accessibility to crucial The responsibility for the maintenance infrastructures with a special view of District 30 belongs to the Region to schools. These areas gather of Central Macedonia and not the many trips in the same time period
Municipality. and for a very short duration. The Figure 4: Municipality of Thermi and its main settlements trips are made by different ©Municipality of Thermi transport modes, including cars, buses, bicycles and a direct connection to the centre of infrastructure for children’ and pedestrians. In most of the their municipality in Thermi except familiess’ recreation activities are cases the infrastructure by municipal transport which is also some of the problems that have been is not appropriate and limited as well as intermunicipal indicated. the accessibility is limited connections. creating safety issues for the The area is included in the Strategic users. SUMP for the metropolitan area of Thessaloniki, while the operational Public transport coverage local SUMP for the Municipality is limited despite the fact was concluded in 2016. Public that Neo Rysio is very close transport coverage, parking issues in terms of distance to the and other cases of misuse of public interchange station of IKEA. space, the lack of a central square Moreover citizens don’t have or playgrounds and appropriate
Figure 3: Overview of the main streets crossing the settlement © TheTA
12 Thessaloniki / Neo Rysio Thessaloniki / Neo Rysio 13
What is *SUNRISE 2.2. Objectives, challenges, opportunities aiming for in Neo Rysio ? Locally specific constellation of the main objectives, challenges and opportunities
Objectives of the Neighbourhood environment close to the forest economy based solutions, as well in the SUNRISE Project and located at the hills, the active as the reallocation of public space municipality and the potential for through the construction of relevant Car is the dominant transport sustainable mobility, make Neo small scale infrastructure Other mode in the neighbourhood of Rysio an attractive destination for likely measures include the provision Neo Rysio in the Municipality of new residents who wish to receive of real time and personalised travel Thermi (Thessaloniki, GR) and a high standard of quality of life for information, delivered through the SUNRISE intervention aims at themselves and their children. car/ride sharing web and mobile triggering a paradigm change in Improving of public transport services platforms and smart stops. These the neighbourhood, based on a co- with more frequent and qualitative goals were internal goals at the creative decision making process, public transport connection to begging of the project but were as well as modal split change in Thessaloniki, intermunicipal also validated and resulted through favour of sustainable and shared connection with Thermi and the the participatory Co-identification mobility solutions. TheTA, in close other settlements, improving phase. During the co-identification, cooperation with a number of relevant accessibility and road safety in main co-development and co-selection local stakeholders, will manage the road axes, improving bike facilities, processes, traditional and innovative planning, implementation, monitoring introduction of a more organised participatory approaches will be used and evaluation of the SUNRISE co- car sharing system, maintenance to reap their respective benefits in creative process, by using traditional of basic infrastructure as well as terms of establishing efficient and and innovative participatory eliminate heavy vehicles from the effective two-way communication centre of the settlement are some channels. The Municipality will have Main Challenges of the Project of the challenges that should be the chance to receive the real needs addressed in the framework of problems and ideas indicated by the One of the main challenges for Neo SUNRISE and have resulted through end users that are the residents of Rysio is to shift the modal split in the Co – identification phase. All the Neo Rysio and understand the real favour of public transport, car sharing, aforementioned have to be combined needs of the community from their bicycle and alternative modes of with a more active, sustainable and perspective. The measures that will be transport as the area is mainly car viable way of living that will be implemented will be a joint outcome dominant but has a big potential resulted from raising awareness and coming from a deep democratic and for change towards sustainability consciousness of the residents and creative procedure. having also the basic infrastructure change the way of thinking. to achieve it. Improving accessibility to crucial infrastructures by giving emphasis to schools, athletic, cultural Main Opportunities of the Project and recreation centres will enhance inhabitants daily quality of life. The co-creation process in Neo The area’s location close and away Rysio will result in improvement at the same time from Thermi and measures around public transport, Thessaloniki as well as the natural the introduction of IT- and shared
14 Thessaloniki / Neo Rysio Thessaloniki / Neo Rysio 15
What *happend in 2.3. The Co-Identification Process Neo Rysio so far? Aims and Expectations Participation Promise Process Design and Methodology
The main objective of the participatory Throughout all the processes of the The methodology for the Co- identification phase revealed an issue process of the project was to involve SUNRISE project and in order to set identification and Co-validation phase that need special and more thorough as much as possible of the local the framework to guarantee the free initially involved the establishment investigation in this phase through community and not just those people flow of ideas and the creative discus- of the core group, a team that will be special interviews with traders. who act in politics or are used to sions among the participants, the committed to the aims of SUNRISE express opinions in such consultation rules in the following figure should be during the lifetime of the project and Steps processes. In addition, one of the key maintained: will try to reach out a big percentage issues raised by SUNRISE is to ensure of the residents depending on the Internal Meetings & Internal Kick Off that all voices should be heard and • The basis: Transparent participa- groups they can have an influence at. The Municipality of Thermi as well as especially vulnerable social groups tion promise and limits Then, with the help of the Core Group the regional government entity and a such as the elderly, disabled, students, • There must not be a “No” a wider team would be created namely number of other key local stakeholders women with stroller, migrants etc. • Be neutral! the “Co-Creation Forum”. With the have been informed about the goals For this reason, and as Neo Rysio is • Be prepared for a fluid community help of these two groups and through and the processes of the project. They a very active community with a big • Be where the people are present public and other events, SUNRISE got the opportunity to express their percentage of elderly and students it was • Online works only in combination TheTA team will try to mobilize the expectations on the SUNRISE initiative very important to ensure that they will with offline local community to participate in and share important information be heard. Therefore, special events for • Create a stage the identification of problems and concerning mobility in Neo Rysio. data collection where organized during • Have fun needs so that a mapping of the current the Co-identification phase for the • Be patient situation can be realized. Public Kick Off described target groups. • Love it or leave it The entire community (neighbourhood From the start of the project, and residents, interested public, stakeholders The position of Neo Rysio at the given that SUNRISE‘s main goal is to and local partners) was invited to beginning of the project was for sure improve sustainable mobility securing the first official presentation of the at the side of “citizen control”. This that all voices should be heard and SUNRISE project in Neo Rysio. The results due to previous documents not only the strong ones, it has been purpose of the public kick-off is to raise and procedures concerning the decided to approach “sensitive” and local awareness, since the participants implementation of measures proposed “hard to reach” social groups as the were informed on the project’s discrete within traffic studies and approved elderly, students and the disabled. steps and the relevant timeline. by the Local Council were never During the first phase of the project, Furthermore, they were informed and implemented because of residents local it emerged that another category had the opportunity to participate and arguments. For the time we cannot of locals affected by the mobility get involved – to the extent they wish – put Neo Rysio in a new position. It situation should be heard and that is to the Co-Creation Forum and the Core is expected that next phases of co – the shop owners operating across the Group, playing a very important role for creation will indicate if this position has main road of the settlement. Thus, the neighbourhood’s representation on been shifted. the data that emerged during the co the project.
16 Thessaloniki / Neo Rysio Thessaloniki / Neo Rysio 17 2.3. The Co-Identification Process
Process Design and Methodology
Neighbourhood Mobility Check It is essential to the co-creation phase of the project that different groups of people are reached and placing their input/suggestions. To this end, various “on the spot” workshops will take place in different locations including preschools, the church of Neo Rysio as well as the Figure 6 –10: community center for the elderly. The internal kick-off with the CG in Neo Rysio Tools, formats, events Figure top right ©TheTA, other fugures ©urbanista Synthesis To this step, the collection of input Description of tools and related gathered at the various workshops and participants reaction, topics and the online tool will be summarised specific outcomes: in main categories of mobility issues • Initially, a speed dating took place on Neo Rysio, by the Neighbourhood between all attendees in order Activity 1 – to break the ice and start the Evaluation Manager, the Core Group Figure 5: The internal kick-off with the CG in Neo Rysio Core Group (CG) meeting discussions to each other. and members of the Co-Creation ©urbanista The Internal Kick-off meeting was Forum. • Later on, the “mapping of actors” held in the cultural Center of Neo took place. Participants were Mobility Dossier These categories will produce the Rysio on 27.02.2018, having as its divided into two groups and where The end of the Co-identification & essence of the co-identification and co- main aim to present to the local asked to propose any actors they Co-validation phase is marked with validation process and will be subject stakeholders and interested parties thought are in charge of mobility the documentation of all the above in to consideration and validation during the project and its expected outcomes issues in the area or are influencing the Neighborhood Mobility Dossier. the closing event of the first phase, th and the process that will be followed the mobility situation. With this This is a document that summarizes Neighborhood Learning Retreat (NLR). during the co- creation phase. With way the participants identified the participation process as well as the the help of urbanista the participation people or groups that haven’t been validated outcomes of this phase. The Fields of Action Review promise and the process design invited initially to the internal Neighborhood Mobility Dossier will This is the phase of prioritisation and were presented to the audience with Kick-off event and should be be presented to the public to provide validation of the categories produced active participation by their side and invited to take part in the next information, to give an update on the on the Synthesis step. These categories interesting on expressing their ideas meetings of the project. first phase and to create transparency will be subject to approval by the Core about the formats and methods that • The process design was depicted for the second phase of the project, Group and the Co-Creation Forum and would be followed during the co on the wall by urbanista and was “Co-development & Co-planning”. prioritised accordingly. identification and validation. During “built” with the participation of Last but not least, all collected input will the meeting the Core Group aims and the attendees as well as the choice be reviewed by experts and specialists work was also presented and invited of the participatory methods that in order to validate the proposed fields participants decided whether they should be used to involve the local of action. want to join the group or not. community in the process.
18 Thessaloniki / Neo Rysio Thessaloniki / Neo Rysio 19 Figure 16: CCF Meeting in Neo Rysio ©TheTA
Figure 17: CCF Meeting in Neo Rysio ©TheTA
Figure 15: The SUNRISE Neo Rysio website ©urbanista
Figure 18: Figure 11 –14: SUNRISE questionnaires SUNRISE presented at a public festive in Neo Rysio ©TheTA ©TheTA
Activity 2 – • Last but not least, TheTA project • After the end of their filling the was the same as the structure Awareness raising event – manager welcomed the attendees cards by identifying the problems, of the website‘s database. The public festive of the festive and invited them to needs and good examples they had questionnaires collected were On 20 May 2018, one day before the participate in the official opening of in mind about Neo Rysio they were inserted in the website by TheTA celebration of Saint Konstantine and the project, which took take place a asked to pin on the map with the team members. Helen, an open public Festive took place few days later in the Cultural Center aforementioned colors the topics • In collaboration with the Director as part of the annual celebration in of Neo Rysio. identified in specific locations by of the secondary school and the the yard of the Athletic Center on Neo putting for example a red pin on professor of computer science, all Rysio. It is a common tradition that the Activity 3 – the map for a problematic situation students between ages 12-14 filled majority of the residents participate in Promotional material, website, radio to a specific location. This was an in the website during the computer the cultural and religious events that During the CCF meeting that took exciting and pleasant activity for course. take place, with groups of local dancers place on 23 May 2018 at the Cultural participants. • Some days before the public Kick- coming from the folklore center and Center, TheTA team presented the • While there as weren’t initially off event, TheTA project manager other cultural centers of Thessaloniki, to vwhich was set by urbanista, as a tool to many visits to the website and in of SUNRISE gave an interview at dance traditional Greek dances. enable take place the Co-identification order to continue the recording of “Radio Thessaloniki”, discussing the • During this year’s celebration TheTA of the local problems and needs. the current situation TheTA team project aims, procedures and events team had a stand and distributed the • The meeting was the public starting visited the schools, the sports and that are going to be held in Neo SUNRISE leaflet to the participants. point for the process of Co- cultural center where brochures Rysio. • At the same time promotional identification. Representatives were were distributed. In addition, and ballons with SUNRISE and TheTA given red, orange and green cards in collaboration with the school logo where distributed to the to record the problems, suggestions principals, questionnaires were children while at the same time they and good examples respectively provided to the students’ parents had the chance to paint how they of Neo Rysio mobility situation. who completed and returned back imagine the ideal neighborhood for Participants showed particular to TheTA the questionnaires. The children. interest in filling the cards. structure of the questionnaire
20 Thessaloniki / Neo Rysio Thessaloniki / Neo Rysio 21 Activity 4 – Activity 5 – Special interviews Validation of results • Elderly people: On 11 November At the final event of Phase 1, a 2018, a unique event took place at neighbourhood learning retreat took the Center for elderly people of Neo place trying to validate the results Rysio. Elderly where very positive emerged in the SWOT analysis and the to answer the questions of TheTA identification of problems and needs. about the problems they face in their daily life and their trips. Moreover, • Validation of identification of the one and only blind people of the problems: Sixteen basic problems community was also present. emerged from the Co-identification • Traders across Konstantinoupoleos process. In order to validate these street: As the problem of heavy results, participants were asked to vehicles and traffic congestion on the prioritize problems by placing the main Street (Konstantinoupoleos) number 1 in what they consider as of the settlement emerged from the the most important problem and very beginning of the recording of number 16 at this one they consider mobility problems, it was considered the least important problem important to ask the traders who are • Validation of SWOT analysis: active in the area about the problems The participants were split in two they face. groups. They were given cards with strengths, weaknesses, opportunities and threats and they were asked to put them on four different pin boars according to the category Figure 20 – 23: Joint review of the SWOT they thought every card belong to. ©TheTA After the two groups checked all pin boards the results of SWOT analysis as they are described in the deliverable were presented. A comparison took place between the SWOT analysis by The TA an the participants from a bottom- up perspective. Missing points were discussed and incorporated. Participants were very active during the whole process and referred that this is one of the most interesting things they have realized during Co- identification phase. Figure 19: SUNRISE event at Center for elderly people of Neo Rysio ©TheTA
22 Thessaloniki / Neo Rysio Thessaloniki / Neo Rysio 23 Target groups and participants
One of the first steps of the Co- of the 2nd Secondary School of Neo • Elderly: People or groups to be activated identification phase was to proceed Rysio In contrast to the groups described within the next steps of bottom- to the mapping of the local actors and • Teaching staff of the 2nd Secondary above who mention more and up participatory activities people to be involved in the project. School of Neo Rysio more issues of their interest, • Blind and disabled people: These people would try to represent as • „Anagenisi“ Athletic Association of elderly people expressed more Unfortunately, the Co- many of the residents as possible and Neo Rysio general issues of mobility and not identification phase raised issues would be dedicated to the project idea. only topics concerning their needs of interest for this sensitive social The initial approach was to contact the Lessons learnt regarding accessibility and their group. However, these issues were central municipality of Thermi, who • Local Council: quality of life as one wοuld expect. not expressed by people influenced introduced the Local Council and gave Two or three representatives of • One of the main conclusions directly but form other members of a general picture of the people and the Local Council come in every that emerged during the Co- the core group as well as the local social groups that are active in the area. meeting organized while each identification phase is that each council. After these discussions a first list with of them is trying to mobilize group, such as those of the elderly, • Local businesses: Local businesses potential stakeholders was created and corresponding groups to which they is expressed and placed first on the and shop owners was not a group these people where invited via Email have access to. For example, the issues that concern them directly to be reached separately initially. and telephone conversation to the first chairman of the local council has and then on the general issues of The first results during the Co- kick off meeting which was held in access to the elderly. Further, one mobility of Neo Rysio, something identification phase highlighted the February 2018. This meeting has as its of the members of the council is in that is also expected to happen. need for further research into store main outcome to present the project parallel chairman of the cultural owners along the main road axis of to the invited people and mapping the centre expressing their views and the settlement as parking problems stakeholders. After discussions the final needs etc. As they represent the and through traffic resulted at the map was formulated as below: local community, their positions main street were arose as an issue • Municipality of Thermi / are more holistic in order to express of outmost importance Programming Dpt the whole settlement in the most • Local Council of Neo Rysio suitable way. • „Aretsou“ Folklore Association of • Schools: Neo Rysio Representatives of secondary school • Cultural Center of N. Rysio parents and guardians attend • Parents and Guardians Association the meetings, while occasionally of the 1st Elementary School of Neo representatives from both parents and Rysio teachers from all the local schools • Teaching staff of the 1st Elementary have joined the meetings. The issues School of Neo Rysio they raise have mainly to do with • Parents and Guardians Association issues around schools’ accessibility.
24 Thessaloniki / Neo Rysio Thessaloniki / Neo Rysio 25 2.3. The Co-Identification Process
Constitution/Formation of the Core Group
Members of the Core Group Set Up of the Core Group Work mode of the Core Group
| The groups mentioned above were In general, the communications invited in the kick off meeting. Twenty between TheTA team and the core • Municipality of Thermi / • Teaching staff of the 1st people attended the meeting from Group are going well. They are usually Programming Dpt | Elementary School of Neo which fourteen of them accepted to be willing to participate in both Core Technical staff working at Rysio | Director of the members of the Core Group. In order Group and CCF meetings but they do Programming school and teaching staff to avoid any administrative burden the not work a lot in attracting newcomers Departments • Parents and Guardians As- group didn’t take a legal format. The in the project. Many of them insist that • Local Council of Neo Rysio | sociation of the 2nd Secon- Group meets regularly depending on there is a need to raise awareness of The Chairman of the Local dary School of Neo Rysio | the project needs at the Communities such mobility issues in Neo Rysio and council and one local coun- Citizen, parent offices or the Cultural Centre or via that, in general, people are unwilling cil member telephone conversations with TheTA to participate in such consultative • Teaching staff of the 2nd team. Core group representatives are procedures. • »Aretsou« Folklore Secondary School of Neo Association of Neo Rysio | Rysio | Teacher at the secon- indicative of the Local Community The Chairman of the dary school even some of the members are more Association • »Anagenisi« Athletic Asso- dedicated to the project while others • Cultural Center of N. Rysio | ciation of Neo Rysio | are not that active. The Core Group The Chairman of Cultural The chairman of the meets in time intervals depending on center association the project needs. There is no legal form of the group except form their • Parents and Guardians As- declaration that they want to join the sociation of the 1st Elemen- group that took place at the first kick tary School of Neo Rysio | off. The core group doesn’t have a Parents whole access to any funds.
26 Thessaloniki / Neo Rysio Thessaloniki / Neo Rysio 27
Which are the *essential ideas, 2.4. Culminating Outcomes problems and needs on Collected needs/issues mobility in Neo Rysio?
Problems – General Public • Proposals – General Public • Problems – Students Proposals – Students • Parking problems • Improvements in: • • Public and municipal transport • Traffic regulations basically for • Lack of playgrounds, recrea- • Public Transport / School bus Improvements in: illegal parking tion areas routes • Expansion of the bicycle path • Playground, recreation and • Incomplete Signalling • Parking problems • Public transportation sports facilities • Limited signing • Stray animals (better frequencies and sche- • Road network / heavy vehicles • Other • Public Transport / School dule punctuality, renewal of • Road network / road surface • Traffic regulations Schedules bus fleet) • Traffic jam at main axes • Traffic congestion • Incomplete signalling, missing • Road network / heavy vehicles • Accessibility • Road network / asphalting / asphalt pavers of signalling in crucial roads • Stray animals • Playground, recreation and • Shared bicycles • Other • Garbage, recycling sports facilities • Playgrounds, recreation and • Bicycle track • Bicycle track sports facilities • Narrow sidewalks • Access to schools because • Parking problems. Too many • School bus routes of two much traffic outside vehicles park in the intersecti- • Other schools during peak school ons of the main street and the • Traffic regulations hours vertical axes • Pollution • Pedestrian • Trash • Other • Narrow sidewalks
28 Thessaloniki / Neo Rysio Thessaloniki / Neo Rysio 29 2.5 SWOT Analysis & Corridor of Options
SWOT-Matrix
INTERNAL FACTORS
Strengths Weaknesses There are many areas for cultural and Unofficial car sharing system has athletic activities as well as meeting A car dominant area with many daily Vertical signposts placed on low poles been established by commuters points of the local community commuters to Thessaloniki prevent pedestrians from seamlessly walking
Two municipal bus lines for A dynamic and people-focused Through traffic with many heavy intermunicipal connections neighbourhood. New residents are vehicles in the three main streets Traffic calming measures have been developing new mobility habits placed but most of them are damaged and are more receptive to new either from vandalism or wear. There is a bicycle path connecting sustainable travel choices Traffic safety issues caused by through educational, athletic and leisure uses traffic in main streets and activities Sidewalks are not blind friendly and There are no parking problems ramps are missing except from the main streets CO2 emissions and environmental A forest area with opportunities for consequences recreation activities Lack of a central square
Public transport is limited and there is no direct connection with the Accessibility to crucial infrastructures Municipality of Thermi like schools, the Community offices etc need improvements
There are gaps in some parts of the cycle lane
Parking problems in the main streets. and parked cars on the sidewalks.
Width of the sidewalks in most cases is insufficient for pedestrians
30 Thessaloniki / Neo Rysio Thessaloniki / Neo Rysio 31 2.5 SWOT Analysis & Corridor of Options
SWOT-Matrix
EXTERNAL FACTORS
Opportunities Threats
Bus fleet is to be renewed: 170 buses Traffic Study: Growing number of cars on the roads where proposed for purchase, 120- Traffic Study was conducted in 2004 due to population increase and limited 140 of them with advanced diesel or and updated in 2010 but no con- public transport connections hybrid technology and 30-50 with sensus between City Council and CNG gas residents has achieved. Traffic arrangements were proposed Increased through traffic on the roads in the Traffic Study in order to create Bike culture starts growing more o an important pedestrian area more in Greece not only as a way for Old and outdated technology is used in recreation and exercise but also as the bus fleet that service bus lines new everyday lifestyle for multipur- Technical Programme: pose including commuting. The Technical Programme for year 2019 is available including infrastruc- Local council and residents couldn’t ture improvements reach an agreement to implement Car sharing is staring getting into what the traffic study has proposed for the mentality of some residents for years. commuting. Operational Programme: The Operational Programme for years 2014-2019 is also available. It Neo Rysio is considered a transpor- includes also the implementation of tation node and car sharing in the the measures that have been propo- entrance of the settlement is not sed in the SUMP only used by the residents of Neo Rysio but also from commuters from Thessaloniki who leave their cars at General Urban Plan: the entrance of the settlement and A bypass of the settlement has been transfer to other cars proposed, which is expected to alleviates the problem of road safety, environmental issues and through SUMP: traffic in the main streets SUMP concluded in 2016 proposing specific sustainable mobility measu- res measures for Neo Rysio
32 Thessaloniki / Neo Rysio Thessaloniki / Neo Rysio 33
*Which strategies 2.5 SWOT Analysis & Corridor of Options support reaching the SWOT-Strategies SUNRISE goals for Neo Rysio?
eaknesse W s-O eaknesse 2. p W s-O p 1. p o p r New policies for shared o The existing documents t r and plans for the u and sustainable mobility t n u Municipality and Neo like car sharing and i n Rysio have concluded to t i cycling constitutes the i e t measures and interventions
new trend for sustainable i s
e
related to sustainable -
mobility. These policies S s
- mobility which are now
are increasingly gaining t
S
mature to be funded and r a
ground as they are also an t
t
r implemented.
e economic way of moving a
g
especially today in the era t e y
of economic crisis. g y
34 35 ^
Which strategies support Corridor of Options reaching the SUNRISE goals for Neo Rysio? 1 Option 1: Improvements of the cycle network, parking scheme and bike sharing system The existing cycle path network linking the center of the and parents, as well as for other passing and parked vehicles. settlement with vital infrastructure, such as the high school In this context, this action concerns the improvement of road and the sports center, could be used more if improvements safety in the movement of pupils to and from school units. This were made to the infrastructure and the missing link of the action promotes the creation of a pedestrian bus that will reduce infrastructure was completed. In addition, the creation of a vehicles in the area and increase road safety for both pedestrians bicycle parking system or a bike sharing scheme coupled with and vehicles. a good promotion of the mode could raise public awareness of sustainable mobility and lead to a bike shift in favor of sustainability. Option 5: Informative infokiosk and dissemination activities 5 Information and raising awareness on sustainable mobility is an issue of outmost importance. Even in schools educational 2 Option 2: Create a platform for car sharing programmes are starting taking place, this is not the case for the Current trends in Europe and the economic crisis has led to a rest of the population. The operation of an info kiosk in a central shift in a more sustainable and cost-effective way of using cars point of the settlement with information about alternative that led respectively to an increase of car sharing. Already many solutions for mobility in and outside the settlement would be very commuters in Neo Rysio use car sharing in an unofficial way by useful. Moreover promotional material that would be distributed parking their car at the entrance of the settlement and massively to the residents could give an added value to SUNRISE project embark on a common vehicle. This could be organized by creating activities and the aim of changing mobility behaviour towards a a platform to which all stakeholders could have access. more sustainable living.
Option 3: Improvement of public transport and public transport Option 6: Implementation of traffic regulations in 3 information 6 Konstantinoupoleos and the vertical axes Public transport seems to be inadequate for locals who are asking The Konstantinoupoleos main street issue as well as the vertical for more reliable and frequent transport. Even in the main street axes seems to be of a great issue for the residents. As there is Konstantinoupoleos there is no smart stop that would inform the already an updated traffic study and recent decisions of the Local passengers about the arrival of the bus in real time, something Council, a consensus should be achieved between the council and quite useful especially when they have to wait for it for a long the residents in order to implement some traffic regulations that time during bud weather conditions. A smart stop would improve would improve traffic conditions in the central area. the situation while improvements in the accuracy and the punctuation of the time schedules will improve the perception of PT services. Option 7: Raising awareness with special educational 7 programmes for children
Option 4: Accessibility to schools 4 Most primary school pupils, mainly with their parents, are moving around, mainly by using private cars. As a result, traffic congestion is created outside the school buildings during students‘ hours of attendance and leaving, as well as an increase in CO2 emissions and other pollutants due to the large number of vehicles has. Most of these vehicles are parked in inappropriate parking areas and create road safety issues both for pedestrians
36 Thessaloniki / Neo Rysio Thessaloniki / Neo Rysio 37
What has *been learnt? 2.6 Lessons Learnt
What went well? What didn‘t work?
.
What went What should be well? developed further?
• A committed and focused Core Group (CG)with strong • Activation of general public. People need moti- potential: The CG is a team committed to the aims of vation but mobilizing them is not always an easy SUNRISE during the lifetime of the project aiming task as people tend to forget easily and publicity to reach out a big percentage of the local community actions should be repeated in frequent intervals. and influence them in favour of the project outcomes Constant publicity actions and raising awareness on sustainable mobility. The synthesis of the CG has campaigns are always useful as well as incentivi- representatives of the following structures: ze the local community by giving different kind • Municipality of Thermi / Programming Dpt of incentives. That would be very useful in the • Local Council of Neo Rysio next phase of the project. Moreover more active • „Aretsou“ Folklore Association of Neo Rysio participation by organizing community activities • Cultural Center of N. Rysio and public events would be a good idea as active • Parents and Guardians Association of the 1st Elementary School participation in different kind of activities would of Neo Rysio mobilize the residents of the settlement. • Teaching staff of the 1st Elementary School of Neo Rysio • Parents and Guardians Association of the 2nd Secondary School of Neo Rysio • Last but not least during the CCF meeting with • Teaching staff of the 2nd Secondary School of Neo Rysio local participation the presentation of other show • „Anagenisi“ Athletic Association of Neo Rysio cases and good examples form other city partners as well as other good practices from all over Euro- • Contemporary methods of approach where the pe would convince participants about the benefits audience actively participates were well accepted. of sustainable mobility actions and their results to During the Co- identification and Co-validation enhance their everyday life. phase many participatory and innovative methods of public participation were tested. The methods used were well accepted not only my the committed CG members but also from the CCF group and the general public showing that active participation of the local community is preferable instead of traditional and stable methods.
38 Thessaloniki / Neo Rysio Thessaloniki / Neo Rysio 39 2.6 Lessons Learnt
Main drivers Involvement/ Main barriers Spatial Communication Involvement/ Communication Political/Strategic/ Financial Institutional Technological Organizational
#1 Support from the central municipality, the local #1 Involvement / Communication council and the key stakeholders of Neo Rysio Not big participation in public events even though there This support is considered to be the most important factor were higher expectations, as during the internal kick off the for the success of the project. If the local stakeholders do not participants showed a high interest believe in the project outcomes and what achievements it can accomplish for the community then it is quite sure that the project will not reach the desirable effects. On the other hand #2 Organisational good support from the municipality and the local stakeholders Insufficient planning of some meetings, last minute email is a crucial factor as they have the power to mobilize and and calls to CG members encourage the local community, promote the results of the project and support the implementation of both the project procedures as well as the measures that are going to implement.
#2 A committed and active Core Group The CG is actually the “core” of the project. These people will mobilize with their enthousiasm the local community by reaching (each of them) the local groups they have access at and can influence.
#3 Funding is available from SUNRISE for some interventions A project from which funding is missing is many of the times not a successful one. Asking from citizens to participate in a project that they know funding is missing and the main outcomes of it is just planning but implementation is missing doesn’t incentivise them to participate. So, a crucial driver for the success of SUNRISE is the available funding from the project for direct interventions without huge delays as budget is available and people are aware of it.
40 Thessaloniki / Neo Rysio Thessaloniki / Neo Rysio 41
What *happened 2.7 Following Steps next?
Conclusion Drawn & Further Concept (Activities, Ideas, Wishes, ...)
The Co-identification and Co- in regular intervals at the project 3 validation phase indicated the fact activities and meetings. To this end, Focus Group February that only the core group, a committed, most of them agreed that promotional 2019 small group of representative campaigns and publicity actions should stakeholders of the neighbourhood be organised in order to activate more What? is willing to actively participate and more citizens of the area. During the first meeting with the Core Group members for phase 2 of the project (Co-selection of measures) the participants will discuss about the measures that will be 1 Brainstorming/ February finally selected for implementation. 2019 Brainwalking February/ The moderator will explain the results of 4 Vote your favorite March 2019 phase 1 (Co –identification and Co-validati- What? on) and participants will express their views The goal of this activity is to start the and aspirations of which measures could be discussions between TheTA and the Muni- suitable for implementation in the form of a What? cipality of Thermi about possible measures group discussion. After having discussed on the proposed that can be implemented in Neo Rysio. by the Core Group measures for implementation, TheTA staff will present The preselection of eventual measures will the results coming from the discussions arise as a result of the outcomes of Phase1 2 How? with the Municipality of Thermi. TheTA of the project (Co-identification and Co- Roundtable discussions February/ • group discussion will also present the available budget for validation of problems and needs) and the March 2019 the measures and how much each of them competences and responsibilities that each Who? will cost. The measures will be divided in of the stakeholders (TheTA and Municipality) • Core Group members different colour categories and each of the have in order to implement these measures. What? measures will be represented by a colourful After activity 1, and during the same day card. meeting, the measures that have been selected through the brainstorming will Participants will be asked to classify and How? be discussed on a roundtable discussion prioritise the measures of their preference • TheTA staff and Municipality staff will be between all participants. according to what they think is meaningful divided in groups and each of the group for the settlement and with the limitation will discuss on a question that will be In this way maybe some of the ideas that that they have to select only measures that posed from a moderator. The ideas will are not likely to be implemented will be are within the available budget. be collected by the moderator and will be rejected by the group while the rest of presented to the participants them will be discussed on a next meeting with the Core Group Who? How? • Local administration • Voting
How? Who? • Roundtable discussion between all • Core Group members participants
Who? • Local administration - TheTA and Municipality of Thermi
42 Thessaloniki / Neo Rysio Thessaloniki / Neo Rysio 43
Which *support is 2.8 Data & Expertise available for future steps? Resources the city can offer
Technical experts Financial Resources from the Municipality available from the Technical which are well aware of the support programme of the community’s needs and Municipality beyond SUN- previous projects. Promotional activities RISE budget for the measu- from the Municipality res of their responsibility that has a press office. Data available from the Muni- cipality, measurements, conduction of recent surveys that have taken place
44 Thessaloniki / Neo Rysio Thessaloniki / Neo Rysio 45 3.0 Figures Cover: urbanista, 2019 Graphic of the ideal typical process of Co-Identification in SUNRISE with the different REFERENCES steps taken. : urbanista, 2019
Thessaloniki / Neo Rysio 47