USEAct Urban Sustainable Environmental Actions

Fifth Meeting I Implementation Phase

Riga Planning Region | Latvia

25th I 26th September 2014

INTERVENTIONS ON “REUSE” OF URBAN REFITTING AND REGENERATING INHABITED BUILDINGS AND AREAS

Lead Partner Host Partner

USEAct Riga Planning Region Fifth meeting Report Urban Sustainable Environmental Actions 2

Lead Partner City of Naples Urban Planning Department

URBACT Projects_and Networks on Integrated Urban Development Policies - Central Direction Urban Planning and Management - UNESCO Site

Gaetano Mollura USEAct Project coordinator Anna Arena Finance officer Maria Luna Nobile Communication officer Vincenzo Fusco LSG coordinator

Contacts: phone +39 081 7958932 - 34 - 17 email [email protected] [email protected]

Lead Expert Vittorio Alberto Torbianelli USEAct Project Lead Expert Contacts: email [email protected]

Thematic Expert Pauline Geoghegan USEAct Project Thematic Expert Contacts: email [email protected]

www.urbact.eu www.urbact.eu/useact

The report written by the thematic expert Pauline Geoghegan NB. this report refers to the seminar work, with Should be read in contributions of Gaetano Mollura conjunction with the Lead partner, Vittorio Torbianelli Power Points Lead expert and USEAct partners presented during the meeting, that attended the meeting. Anna which you can Arena, Maria Luna Nobile and download here Vincenzo Fusco, Lead partner team contributed to the editing of this report.

Cover picture: View of Riga city © Riga Planning Region All the photos are taken by the USEAct Team. And images are taken from the ppt presented during the seminar.

Contents

1. Introduction and Concept paper 4 3 1.1 Introduction 1.2 Concept paper 1.3 The USEAct Issues of the Fifth Thematic Seminar 2. Riga Planning Region - the host partner 6 2.1 Welcome of the host partner 2.2 Riga Planning Region Sustainable Development Strategy 2014-2030 and Development Programme 2014-2020 2.3 Urban regeneration- challenges in Riga City 2.4 Riga Planning Region Local Action Plan 2.5 Andrejsala - background and development 2.6 Creative Incubator, Rihards Zariņš, Director of Creative Incubator 2.7 Empty spaces = Public Spaces? The Free Riga movement - a new cultural approach towards urbanity? 3. The USEAct theme: Refitting and regenerating inhabited buildings and areas 13 3.1 Introduction 3.2 USEAct Case studies 3.3 Case study 1: Studies and analysis on the definition of Urban Regeneration: Urban Social and economic indicators 3.4 Case study 2 Naples: the Si.Re.Na. Project 3.5 Case study 3 Viladecans: Urban remodelling of residential Ponent, polygon and renewal of the extension of the Montserratina 4. The life of the network 23 4.1 URBACTII next steps of the programme 4.2 USEAct Local Action Planning 4.2.1 Framework and Improvement of the Local Action Plan Implementation 4.2.2 The EU urban landscape 4.2.3 LAPs Review Cafè 4.3 USEAct future planning and administration 4.3.1 A proposal: New Heroes and USEACT cooperation 4.3.2 Administrative and financial issues and feedbacks on the Project Reprogramming 4.3.3 General issues of the Network Management - Next steps 4.4 USEAct Bilateral/Trilateral meetings 4.4.1 Second B/T meeting “Differentiating Interventions: Real Estate developments based on innovation and knowledge based activities” 4.4.2 Third B/T meeting: “Differentiating Interventions: Urban uses and textures” 4.4.3 The Fourth B/T meeting “Smart data and visualization tools” 4.4.4 Planning the fifth and sixth B/T meeting in Dublin 4.4.5 Capitalisation of the B/T meetings

Appendix 1 programme of the meeting and meeting participants 41

4

FIFTH THEMATIC SEMINAR IMPLEMENTATION PHASE

INTERVENTIONS ON “REUSE” OF URBAN REFITTING AND REGENERATING INHABITED BUILDINGS AND AREAS

Fourth meeting participants 1.INTRODUCTION AND Dagnis Straubergs Chairman of Riga Planning Region CONCEPT PAPER Development Council Jānis Miezeris, Head of Administration of Riga Planning Region, Agnese Bīdermane USEAct Project Coordinator,Riga Planning 1.1 Introduction Region Rūdolfs Cimdiņš Riga Planning Region Guntars Ruskuls Head of Strategic Planning Division The fifth USEAct thematic meeting of City Development Department of Riga City took place in the city of Riga, at the Uldis Apinis, Spatial Planner of Building Board of Ogre heart of the Riga Planning Region, City Edgars Pārpucis Spatial Planner of Building Board of Ogre City ULSG member Dace Grīsle Acting Head of focusing on the theme of residential Development Department of Ogre City Iveta Zālīte buildings in the heart of our cities, Spatial Planner of Spatial Planning Department of often in poor conditions: how to create Ķekava ULSG member Zane Koroļa Urban Planner regeneration strategies and on of Tukums ULSG member Pēteris Šķiņķis University of involving residents in refitting Latvia Gunta Lukstiņa Expert Sandra Plēpe Expert Valters Māziņš “Riga Development Company” strategies through energy efficiency. Rihards Zariņš Director of Creative Incubator In addition to thematic presentations and relevant Jonas Buechel Director of Urban Institute | Gaetano case studies provided by the USEAct partners, the Mollura USEAct Coordinator | Vittorio Torbianelli meeting was enriched by contributions by guest Lead Expert | Pauline Geoghegan Thematic Expert | expert Germana di Falco, expert advisor on Germana Di Falco Ad hoc Expert | Ivan Tosics URBACT Structural funds and Local Action Plans, who Secretariat | Paul Pece, Baia Mare Metropolitan Area provided the network partners with valuable Association | John O’ Hara, Kehinde Olowatosin City guidance on approaching key issues of funding. Other participants to the meeting were Wouter of Dublin | Álvaro Cerezo Ibarrondo, City of Barakaldo | Goedheer, who presented ‘New Heroes’, and Ivan Jim Sims , Buckinghamshire Business First | Štefan Tosics, URBACT Thematic Pole Manager who gave Lancarič , USEAct coordinator, Kamila Gejdosova, an update on the present and future URBACT National URBACT Authority, Ministry of Transport City of programme as well as timely pointers to potential Nitra | Linda Iren K. Duffy, Local Coordinator, Østfold County | Michela Crevatin Trieste City Council | Enric Serra del Castillo, Sonia Dominguez City of Viladecans | Wouter Goedheer, New Heroes

EU funding sources, and the participants and other strategies, mainly through promoting energy experts from Riga city and region who presented the efficiency or in overall “property management” issues facing the city and its surrounding areas. improvements. Literature is full of “case studies” On the former industrial site at Andrejsala, a port about successful (and unsuccessful) attempts to 5 area close to the city centre, participants visited a structurally modernize inhabited buildings. Several creative business incubator site where many new factors appear to be crucial, such as: small businesses receive support and fruitful -identifying the right “scale” of interventions, networking. There they were challenged by inputs avoiding both an excessively small scale – e.g. a on the Free Riga movement, a community based single building – or a too large one; NGO promoting new forms of communication within -developing the capacity to correctly identify the “a the city sphere. priori” economic/financial break-even point of the The Riga meeting was the last of the USEAct redevelopment process and the likely availability of thematic seminars: the next meeting, in public and private funds, given that renovation costs Buckinghamshire, UK, in January 2015, will focus for such kind of interventions, are very relevant (with on involving Managing Authorities, as well as a high risk of not being affordable if compared to other solutions); finalising the Local Action Plans in each partner -the capacity to couple the best fitting technology area. This will entail preparing exhibitions in each (in terms of “value for money”) with effective long- partner city as well as during the final conference in term financial and facility management frameworks; April, in Naples. In the meantime bi/tri-lateral -a strong engagement of inhabitants and citizens, meetings continue to take place, with the last ones also through securing clear financial returns. due to happen in Dublin. Outcomes from four bi/trilateral meetings that had taken place in All these above mentioned targets require Viladecans and Naples were shared in Riga. innovative approaches either from the technical, financial and facility management point of view (e.g. 1.2 Concept Paper through new “operators” and partnership models) or USEAct Lead Expert, Vittorio Alberto Torbianelli from the social and cultural perspective. During the UseAct meeting, opportunities and challenges but The USEAct thematic seminar in Riga also limits and difficulties related to interventions in "occupied" buildings were discussed, also through was dedicated to “occupied” cases studies from other cities. Special attention residential buildings, seen as a was given to engaging the inhabitant, which is a potential resource to be optimized and very sensitive aspect. With reference to all the adapted to the requirements of current above mentioned topics, partners were invited to demand, to reduce the need to build provide information and comments about each local context. new residential settlements with negative land-take consequences. 1.3 The USEAct issues of the Fifth Existing buildings placed in historic areas of the Thematic Seminar cities (or in more recently built urban areas - e.g. USEAct Lead Expert, Vittorio Torbianelli developed during the fifties or sixties) that, because

of their age or bad physical conditions, are losing The importance of the integrated approach was appeal, can potentially represent important emphasised, focussing on improving housing in the resources from which to start urban regeneration city centre and energy questions. Specific actions processes. Frequently, however, the physical use existing housing stocks and identify small areas conditions of the buildings are just a part of the to focus on. Reducing land take also means an problem: the physical and/or social qualities of the equilibrium between government policies and small surrounding areas and public spaces in which the scale policies. The meeting was particularly buildings are located are often not good enough to important for the Local Action Plans, supported by break the process of deterioration of the buildings the contributed of an external expert. themselves. The Riga seminar aimed to tackle this general issue by focusing on two specific aspects. The first was about how to develop «regeneration-oriented" public strategies through refitting and maintenance of existing buildings in the urban fabric, whilst at the same time paying attention to the physical/social conditions of the neighbourhood. The second is on involving flat-owners in integrated refitting

million, population change -1,0 % (2008-2013), coastline 185 km, population density 105 inh./km². 2. THE HOST PARTNER: Riga region is a capital region, with an overall stable RIGA PLANNING population: there is an increase in Riga city 6 agglomeration and a decrease in Riga city and REGION peripheral areas of the region. The Region’s natural values are the coast of Gulf of Riga and inland waters. Estimated population change in the region 2.1 Welcome by the Hosting Partner during next 5-10 years: Riga city -10%, Riga region Dagnis Straubergs, Chairman of Riga Planning 0%, agglomeration +15%. Planning documents Region Development Council include a sustainable development strategy 2014- 2030 and a development programme 2014-2020. Dagnis Straubergs, Chairman of Riga Planning Public discussions are taking place until the end of Region Development Council welcomed the October involving politicians and planners from local participants to Riga, confirming the wish of the municipalities, students, entrepreneurs and other region that the exchanges should not only be stakeholders. theoretical but also should aim to be realised. The vision and overall objective of the sustainable Chairman expressed importance of knowledge and development strategy is quality in all spheres of life, best practice exchanged in the project network. becoming humanly attractive, effective, open- minded and tolerant and competitive region in the 2.2 Riga Planning Region Sustainable global arena, human life and social environment, Development Strategy 2014-2030 and economic activities and products, physical space Development Programme 2014-2020 quality. Rūdolfs Cimdiņš, Riga Planning Region Development pillars/drivers are: a targeted collaborative process, Riga with metropolis, Key figures of Riga planning region: area 10 437 significant agents (stakeholders) of the strategy km², GDP € 11 690 per capita, population 1,1 implementation, excellent companies and institutions, education and research.

Strategic framework

Priorities 2014-2030 = priorities 2014-2020: Spatial development mobility: N-S and E-W connections, differentiated public transport systems. Priority 1 natural increase and migration, actions: Time minimisation, quality, hubs fertility promotion strategies, immigration policy and Spatial development: landscapes: coastal areas, 7 qualified workforce. valley areas Priority 2 Communities and self sufficiency: social planning, local initiatives, territorial communities, USEAct issues linked to the priorities are: urban social and energy and self-sufficiency. sprawl, industrial areas, allotments and ‘meadow’ Priority 3 Flexible and excellent education: villages, and resort areas. infrastructure for physical activities, professional Development programme solutions include an urban education and lifelong learning, innovative business, transformation action plan of Riga Metropolitan Area excellent research and higher education linkage. (LAP), policies and tools for urban growth Priority 4 Globally competitive industries: support for management, suggestions for projects and knowledge and technology export, niche products proposals for actions/interventions in pilot areas, with international attention, culture and creative and coordination of urban growth management and industries, tourism and marketing strategies knowledge dissemination. Priority 5 High quality transport and logistics: integrated public transport network, connections A North South rail line is planned from Helsinki to with international importance, coastal and inland Berlin: discussions are taking place on how to waterways, urban light transport and cycling. connect this with the airport, to minimise the time of Priority 6 Municipalities a driving force for transfer from car to public transport (including development: responsibility and financial self- parking). This is mainly a state competency, sufficiency, specialized and diverse territories, role however transport planning could be a regional role. of different development actors, sustainable and Riga has an important role in relation to the whole effective service systems country. Priority 7 Sustainable living: maintaining balance of spatial structure, urban growth management and 2.3 Urban regeneration- challenges in regeneration, energy systems based on renewable Riga City resources, housing and public space network Guntars Ruskuls, Riga City Council City (needs-based). Development Department Prority 8 Smart development: specializationof riga region: smart …Economy competitiveness), People Riga is a good communication platform: however (social capital) , Governance (participation), Mobility the population in the city centre is declining.The (transport & ICT), Environment (resources), and agglomeration of Riga (2012) covers 7 297,6 km², living (life quality). with a population of 1 168 453. Spatial development structure: specalisation of

territories, profiled development centres, Riga

metropolis, coastline, specific territories.

People are buying private houses outside Riga. city: the historical city centre is declared as a There is a free labour market, and a bad forecast, UNESCO site, with restrictive building regulations, yet Riga is the biggest city in the Baltics, with a so other development poles are needed; there is population of 1 168 453. The economic engine has also a need for a new bridge across the river 8 changed from industry (from 22% to 10%): a typical Daugava. With the crisis the polycentric model has service city; it has a big port, and transportation is not been working. Green areas cover 40% of the important. There is now a need to transfer to new territory but are not linked together. At the same activities, but it has not been successful in attracting time a lot of forestry belongs to the municipality. businesses. National industry policy is linked to IT policy. It needs an international dimension, for Regarding housing there is a need to diversify the example there is a new library, but no new football offer, within a walkable distance to the city centre. stadium or international congress hall. A 60% live in the suburbs, in housing that is in bad comfortable urban environment will make the city shape. House are needed near the waterfront. more attractive to its citizens. Andrejsala is an area close to the city centre, in a There was a policy for polycentric planning in the former port area. The port area is moving to the north of the city. The population lives in a poor quality environment, hence it is a priority to improve this environment.They are also seeking a new location for the station in the city centre (referring to the experience of Lille).

Participative planning is popular “Create Riga”, is led by Architects and planners without work during the crisis. It is important to make projects together, using local people, for example the reconstruction of the market place in Agenskalns, and “Radi Rigu” a shared space approach. For the revitalisation of depressed area in the historical area: infrastructure improvements are needed in parallel with private owners.

Riga 2030 structural plan

For the revitalization of the Spīķeri Block in a The Local Action Plan therefore covers four themes: depressed area, part of the historical centre of Old urban sprawl areas, allotments/ garden villages, Riga, where buildings are privately owned, with industrial areas and deprived former resort areas. passive social and cultural facilities, there are 9 proposals for lighting installations, planting, skate Case study areas park construction, placement of benches and the “Meadow” villages: after land reform, owners got establishment of a cycle path. The success of this their land back, investors came, when land prices project will depend on effective public-private were not high. Agricultural land was divided into partnership, a strategic approach, expert advice, residential plots without roads or shared services wider public involvement and a step-by-step (playgropunds etc). Garden villages were collective approach units for recreation during the socialist period. Now Another project has been the strengthening of the in areas near the city or the sea collective areas are tourism potential, for example in Grīziņkalns which changing to residential uses: in some areas there is has a strong cultural and historical heritage: EU 70% residential use. Rapid development of new money will go towards maintaining historical wooden residential dwellings is taking place in former buildings and Art Nouveau architecture. There is gardening allotments located close to the city limits now a wooden architecture centre to learn how to and near the sea. restore wooden houses. As for industrial areas, huge factories were built, and are now lying empty, as are the small businesses around them. These big buildings need new uses. Riga was the third biggest industrial city in Czarist Russia. Previous ‘resort’ areas were on a direct train line from Moscow city. There was a sanatorium with 1200 beds in Jamala, plus the Siguida castle complex. The former hotel “Liva” is the property of a bank, but following the insolvency of the owner, there is no information about the actual condition of the building, or its potential danger, now used as an extreme place for youth “entertainment”.

2.4 Riga Planning Region Local Action The strategic target of the Local Action Plan is to Plan enhance cooperation, by developing a joint platform and understanding of the need for Urban Growth Gunta Lukstiņa,Riga Planning Region Management for Riga, and to encourage a Background: at the beginning of 21th century new participatory and transformation process of pilot residential housing expanded on previous areas on alocal level. agricultural land. This trend if not adequately

managed could further/is exacerbating some key problems such as chaotic layout of sprawled urban Expected outcomes are: acquired knowledge and areas („meadow villages”) in most cases with lack of a cooperation platform for elaboration of an UGM appropriate infrastructure, a low rate of facilities, and plan and further actions on regional level; local allotment/garden villages illegally and legally turning municipalities have identified necessary partnership into residential areas without appropriate for elaboration of the Local Action Plan; suggestions infrastructure or planning. A number of formerly for development for pilot areas have been prepared industrial sites abandoned after the Soviet Period - along four project themes: industrial, urban sprawl degraded, vacant or partly vacant areas, need to be areas, allotments/garden villages and resort areas, re-used, plus former resort areas, popular during Soviet times. and recommendations for future policies and the actions included in Riga Planning Region (RPR) Huge areas are planned for building: some are built, Sustainable Development Strategy and some remain half built and others have not been Development Programme. built on at all. Between 2007 and 2013 some

municipalities were growing and others were shrinking. Riga city was declining but the The Local Action Plan general structure is based municipality was growing. 85% of the inhabitants of on 3 pillars: Ķekava municipality live close to the Riga City border; thus twelve villages have merged to form 1. Urban Growth Management – knowledge part of Riga agglomeration. transfer, promotion of UGM and tools,

implementation of UGM principles in RPR strategy and program. Addressed to Objective 1,3 A survey has been carried out on priorities along the 2. Cooperation – promotion of cooperation between four themes in 16 municipalities: 4 ULSG partners, RPR local governments. Addressed to Objective 1,2 4 ULSG partners/ members of Pieriga Municipal 10 3. Enhance transformation - foster elaboration of Cooperation Commision, 6 members of Pieriga LAP`s for pilot areas. Addressed to Objective 2 Municipal Cooperation Commision and 2 RPR other Two implementation timelines have been agreed: municipalities. The themes and priority actions started and carried out during project and problem/opportunity areas emerging are industrial, actions to be carried out after the project. urban sprawl, allotments/garden villages, and resort areas. Objective 1: Policies and tools for urban growth management (UGM) As for the Local Action Plan elaboration process ULSG and site visits have involved ULSG meetings Objective 2: Elaboration and suggestions for LAP in Riga, and ULSG meetings and site visits hosted projects, proposals for actions/interventions for pilot by ULSG partners to Ogre town in July, Jurmala city areas in September and to Kekava municipality in November. Objective 3: Coordination of UGM and knowledge dissemination

2.5 Andrejsala - background and 2.6 Creative Incubator development Rihards Zariņš, Director of Creative Incubator Valters Māziņš, Member of Board, “Riga 11 Development Company” The Creative Industries business incubator has been in the building for four years, bringing in A concrete fence divided Andrejsala from the city. tenants, who are companies who have changed the The aim now is to regenerate the area to become area, and only helping creative companies. part of the city. The history of the area is linked to the port. Business Incubators started in the US in 1959. In Latvia there had not been much experience. The Drawings were prepared for planning expansion of first were in 1993, with a cultural programme for the port buildings but never built. The grain elevator 2009-October 2014. Finance will continue until was the first building on the site, but was destroyed 2015/16. There are now seven Business Incubators during World War 2. Rain from the old town still runs in Latvia, with the aim of helping entrepreneurship. through the old drainage tunnel. By 2006 port Business Incubators in Latvia are only for creative activities were limited. Discussions took place on the industries, starting in 2010: 2.5M: mainly ERDF plus future of the area: 36 hectares “Riga port city”, when Latvian co finance (15%). Dutch experts and Ove Arup were invited to do a They offer environment, services, and opportunities study on how to connect the area to the city. A for cooperation (moral support is often necessary, “conceptual” vision for planning analysed how to re- as they are small businesses often started at home. use existing buildings. For example it was proposed Here they can create their company and grow their to re-use a power plant for a museum plus a vision business and provide space (workshops). They for a transportation plan. Development concepts contract with the Latvian Investment company, were drawn up, e.g. for water canals etc. which has a commitment to support companies, provide facilities and external services such as The phase 1 was an initial vision, which was accounting, business advice, photocopying, compared with attitudes and feelings of citizens; this marketing, export promotion and corporate identity. led to the creation of a basic structure in 2009, with Nothing is free of charge but they cover part of the a description for developers, then a physical model costs: 85% in the first year, 55% in the second year with maximum outside use. This was a functional and 30% in the third year. After three years they concept, over 50 years, with 67% residential usage, should be able to work on their own. There is over and preparing the land began. In 2006 the water 25 000 m² of space. It is now full after four years. front area was opened up to citizens. The water is They also organise social events, such as concerts, now used partly for port activities, partly for leisure and other events. The main challenges are ideas, activities. However, people are not using the the team, sharing information, and creative waterfront so much. Proposals included an art people/creative thinking (the need to explain the museum (PPP), re-use of old buildings, re-use of an administrative processes). Rental costs are €5/m² old railway station, for a city library (in Riga libraries for the top floor, plus utilities costs of 15%. are the most visited places after the supermarket), and keeping part of the port structure for cruise 2.7 Empty spaces = Public Spaces? ships (they are now closer to the city centre and can The Free Riga movement - a new access it on foot). This was a proposal for a phased development, starting with the middle section and cultural approach towards urbanity? calculated how much investment was needed.2007- Jonas Buechel, Director of the Urban Institute 2010 was a period booming with activities, with artists exhibitions etc. on the site. The Urban Institute is three years old, bringing together academics and practitioners to find ways of They are now getting the ownership together, with a shifting society. They deal mainly with physical lot of public contribution. The dream is that it will not space, and society, through community work and go bankrupt with the first owner. Investors are democracy, with academics and activists/anarchists. beginning to come, and like the area.The vision is a They train community workers in rural and urban model and planners have to work with developers. communities, and are connected to the Urban Planning regulations are in place and will not allow Institute for campaigns, e.g. “occupy me” yellow some things. stickers on abandoned sites or buildings, and projects for using abandoned spaces. Their first project was “empty spaces-public spaces”.City = life

+ culture + community. ‘Community’ is a difficult working together towards temporary residential word in Latvian (confusion with ‘communism’…). uses. There is less and less communication in cities, e.g. cities say “we have told them, that is enough”. 12 Space means having mental space in and around us. Space is the “final frontier”, we don’t know what to do with development… “where is the devil in this?”. Development only achieves what developers (and city) want to do. “We don’t have to develop”. “Don’t be rude to the environment”.

Language is important: people have expressions of

fear so we must communicate in a different way, to create life experiments, where everything does not have to work. There is a lot of life in culture: culture allows itself to be experimental: communication, curiosity, detail. Start to see things I hadn’t seen before: interact with my environment. Create space: communication “space is dependent on light”. Find a story who creates cities? Performers? Who conducts space? Collaborative space making. “The city is in the hands of an architect”

Riga is European Capital of Culture but there is no space, while 15-20% of buildings are abandoned…

is this the “European Capital of Empty Space”? The “Free Riga” NGO was started to find ways to deal with abandoned buildings, for example the Bolshevist building used for culture. We ask questions: who needs the city? Who coordinates public spaces? Who plays the city? How to ensure sustainable thinking? Urban development is social cultural life. “A city which does not hate itself cannot love itself”. “HAVE FUN!”

They are also working on the quality of spaces in Riga, and have been reaching out to banks etc if they are interested in temporary uses. In the Leipzig model Saxony, the private sector and NGOs are

Dealing with energy: in the UK despite measures to 3. THE USEACT THEME: improve the energy efficiency of dwellings, over the REFITTING AND last 40 years the overall household energy consumption has increased by about 12.5%. 13 REGENERATING Heating is still the dominant energy use in housing; however, in recent years there is an indication of a INHABITED BUILDINGS reduction in heating energy demand. Improvements in heating energy efficiency have been offset by AND AREAS increases in indoor air temperatures, with a shift to whole-house heating (but there is also a 3.1 Introduction. considerable increase in electrical demand for Vittorio Torbianelli, USEAct Lead Expert lighting and appliances which affects costs). If the savings through insulation and heating Retrofitting at building and city level efficiency improvements from 1970 onwards had not Within the context of the built been made, then energy consumption would be environment, the term ‘retrofit’ has around twice the current levels…In general, measures have included loft insulation, double- been used to imply substantive glazing and more efficient boilers, measures that physical changes to a building or can be regarded as easy tasks (often colloquially buildings (normally, mitigation referred to as ‘low hanging fruit’) and natural activities to improve energy efficiency), replacement. These are measures where occupants and often linked to the concept of can generally see cost-effective real benefits, not only in greater energy efficiency, but also in ‘adaptation’ (i.e. intervention to adjust, increased thermal comfort. Measures can be reuse or upgrade a building to suit implemented at an ‘elemental’ approach: individual new conditions or requirements). measures, such as cavity-wall insulation, or a ‘whole However, at a city level it can be argued that the house’ approach, which integrates a number of term ‘retrofit’ is distinguishable because the defining measures tailored to the specific property. The trend characteristics of urban retrofitting are: (1) its in cost increase associated with going from comprehensive nature and large scale; (2) its relatively simple elemental ‘shallow retrofit’ integrated nature. measures to a multifaceted whole-house ‘deep retrofit’ approach is heavy.

Deep retrofit costs: multiple measures tend to follow the sum of savings from individual measures. An the law of diminishing returns, where energy saving important factor is the ability to predict at a large- from a combination of measures is not necessarily scale the impact (costs included!) of retrofitting with

energy-saving measures. Of particular concern is All householders participating in the scheme were identifying the most appropriate package of also eligible to request free benefits advice relating measures to be applied to specific cases. to government financial support (they were offered a In order to assess the impact of upgrading the home visit and help with the application 14 performance of existing housing energy, process).The Warm Wales programme of work environmental and cost prediction are required. For included the installation of cavity-wall insulation, example a prediction model (EEP) was used in EWI*, loft insulation (and loft ‘top-ups’) and hot Neath Port Talbot as a test-bed for its application. water cylinder insulation jackets. It also included a EEP is based around a ‘geographical information replacement boiler or full central heating system and system’ (GIS), which contains information on all the external wall Insulation. housing within a local authority area. It uses an Starting with a Whole House approach….ARBED is embedded sub-model for predicting domestic an another regeneration programme developed by energy use, based on the UK Standard. the Welsh government. Standard Assessment Procedures “are needed to http://wales.gov.uk/topics/environmentcountryside/e categorize buildings. A large programme of energy- nergy/efficiency/arbed/?lang=en efficiency retrofitting of existing housing was carried It also aimed to generate employment opportunities out in Neath Port Talbot between 2004 and 2007. for Welsh residents and economic opportunities for This programme was carried out by Warm Wales Welsh businesses.The ARBED scheme was initially Ltd, a ‘not for profit’ community-interest company set up to take a ‘whole house’ approach to install that delivers home energy-saving measures, energy-efficiency measures and building integrated http://www.warmwales.org.uk/. It particularly targets renewable energy supply systems. Around £60 the poorer sectors of the community, and in many million of funding was raised from a range of cases provides help for those who would otherwise sources, including the government, and direct not be eligible for financial support.The main funding funding from Registered Social Landlords and local was obtained through the utility company National authorities. Twenty-eight projects took place across Grid (electricity and gas suppliers were obligated by Wales with work on site starting in April 2010 (more government to achieve targets in domestic energy than 6000 homes). efficiency). Other funding sources included the local authority.

Costs and benefits….»Whole House» or «elemental shallow» retrofit?

…but at the end an elemental approach prevailed. measures (the majority adopted only one measure!) Although the scheme initially aimed to take a whole- –the law of diminishing returns! house approach, the projects within the Warm Pay-backs: as the cost of measures rise in relation Wales programme took more of an elemental to predicted savings (partly due to the easy approach, improving many properties with fewer measures having already been applied), reasonable paybacks, assuming some sort of (current) loan

system, become difficult to achieve. It is unlikely to technological solutions. A call for more rigorous comply with strong targets (e.g. a 80% reduction in inspections and improved workmanship is required. CO2 emissions) – “right retrofit standard targets” There is a need to focus on convincing people: have to be established.Moreover, calculations do retrofitting is a part of a very complex system, with 15 not reflect ‘take back’ due to higher temperatures, or lots of moving parts. And it is not easily reduced to ‘in use’ factors resulting in underperformance, both simple explanations (e.g. ‘it’s technology not people’ of which would reduce the energy savings in or ‘people are selfish’) or simply policy approaches practice and make payback even more problematic. (e.g. ‘just get the prices right’ or ‘it’s just that financial incentives are needed’) (Lutzenhiser, 2008, Lessons from the Wales experience are that: it is p. 3). Often householders opt for increased important to be able to target the most beneficial temperatures rather than greater energy and cost combination of packages of energy-saving savings. This suggests that people prioritize their measures and renewable energy supply, for specific comfort, convenience and aesthetics.It could be said house types or units (no “general approach”); It is that ‘carbon’ does not show up for some people and important to adopt models for prediction framework cannot, therefore, be a concern… and conversely, (appropriate packages of measures can be targeted things that are important to occupants are often for specific house types) to achieve maximum neglected. A research on feelings towards retrofit savings in relation to costs, but it is not easy! There showed that main concerns were related are ‘in-use’ factors now being applied, to account for to:providing access to belongings and clothes lack of predicted performance in practice, especially (which were stored offsite!) and potential damage to solid-wall insulation (better assessment of carpets! performance in use are needed); wider benefits of The phenomenological concepts of breakdown and large scale activities should be accounted; there are ready-to-hand are key elements of the disruption the additional benefits from whole-house retrofitting occupants experienced during retrofit. Energy is not including improving the general aspects and quality a priority matter for many families! of the building (improved quality of life – not only money). Retrofit is a significant ‘moment of change’ when the occupants’ activities and perceptions can shift Many programmes demonstrate the importance of dramatically. They serve as windows of opportunity including other socio-economic activities, such as to reconfigure the complex relations between job creation, start-up companies, training and inhabitants and the built environment but they have benefits advice, within large-scale retrofit to be considered and managed. The social practices programmes, taking advantage of the opportunities approach is particularly useful in recognizing that provided through large-scale interventions.The retrofit is neither simple nor can it be solved with a cost–benefits from these additional activities are not ‘one-size-fits-all’ approach. Also the “sociological” generally accounted for in retrofit programmes, but perspective suggest that is important to provide they might be used to better target government customized solutions to domestic retrofit that follow support funding. a community-based social practice approach.The Many retrofits tend to demonstrate a continuing complexity of the retrofit problem means that performance gap between predicted energy savings solutions need to be specifically tailored to the and actual energy savings. Challenges include: building or group of buildings in question, through highly variegated housing stock, a low rate of community based partnerships (Stafford et al., property turnover, disruption and inconvenience to 2011). occupants, undesirable payback periods, lack of Development and realization of customized occupant interest in energy efficiency, and lack of a solutions to local groups of houses can be through knowledgeable and competent workforce to advise facilitated engagement between occupants, housing homeowners and implement energy-efficiency providers, community groups, local authorities and strategies. construction professionals. It is difficult to standardize processes… every offsite The focus is on changes in the existing socio- house still has to land on a real site, with mucky technical configuration of materials, competences ground works and inclement weather. Building and images of domestic energy practices. construction in a place is always contingent on local Information provision and incentive programmes are climate, natural surroundings, neighbours, history, an important part of these programmes, but they are culture and customs. complemented in socio-technical programs by There is nothing worse than a backlash of public surveys (in families) and consultations with opinion against poorly executed building industry homeowners and occupants, community events and initiatives. Such a backlash risks undermining policy activities, cost estimates and energy models at and loss of public confidence in potentially good “area” level, coordination of building work and

feedback with the occupants during works and after and determining financing/insurance conditions) with the work is completed, and long-term performance the need to integrate sustainability aspects. Banks monitoring. and institutional investors have not yet created the financial instruments and infrastructure to provide 16 Community Based retrofit: a larger example of external capital with easy access to investments in innovation through community learning is “UK Warm energy efficiency retrofits of commercial buildings. Zones”, a not-for-profit subsidiary of National Energy Action (Warm Zones, 2013). Financial stakeholders’ engagement will likely http://www.warmzones.co.uk/. A «Warm Zone” is a increase in the coming years in order to meet their local or regional partnership that includes the local very own interests and goals – at least this is the authority, energy suppliers, housing companies and authors’ assumption. However, the shifting of more other organizations from various sectors to sustainable practices into mainstream operation coordinate and target domestic energy-efficiency cannot be expected to happen overnight! First of all, strategies. capital will only flow at acceptable terms and price Policy frameworks are currently fragmented, with into sustainable building-related activities if financial different regulations, incentives and programmes. stakeholders can identify, price and/or mitigate Large-scale urban retrofitting requires systemic associated investment. This requires not only the change in the organization of built environment and further development of appropriate methods and infrastructure, and the integration of socio-technical processes for risk assessment and valuation, but knowledge, capacity and responses. In this sense, a also their widespread adoption and application in focus purely on “buildings” leads to lack of strategic practice, which is a longer-term process. focus, in the long term. Existing infrastructure and the built environment tend to change very slowly Key final messages because of ‘sunk’ investments that create path Refitting is not an easy task (failures are frequent!). dependencies that can only be adjusted through Existing incentives are fragmented and do not strong and high-level governance and supporting always get succesfull results. policies. A strategic question is What scale for «energy saving» policies? Right predictions and right «refitting packages» are required, with “In reality it is impossible to deal with deep “energy improvements of «in use» strategies” related to buildings without implementation on broad areas. Very simultaneously tackling energy issues not only at high local-case customization is the neighbourhood but also at city levels, if there is to be any sense of coherence across energy required, but a broad scale (city level policies.” (Stevenson, 2103). Coordination between but also governmental) is definetly energy policies at different scales has been strategic – integrating different levels. hampered by political, operational and incentives Paybacks remain a problem: strong regimes! Development of a complete new integrated public involvement is still required. A perspective on long-term deep socio-technological systems innovation is required = a socio technical socio-technical approach is needed, transition. through community based retrofitting programs; understanding “disruption” The financial challenge: there is a need for is important. Financial markets are not realistic loan systems, for example: the use of fully ready for the challenge: ‘lifetime mortgages’ funded through a ‘green innovation (and time) is required to investment bank’; personal carbon allowances combined with local authority-run ‘Low Carbon “connect” financial operators with the Zone’ improvement areas; the difficulty is that such issue (assessing risks, etc.). Structural solutions require substantial government systemic «transition» (long term!) is intervention and upfront investment for “energy needed to get more substantial targets related” infrastructures (funds?). The real challenge at city level and at financial level. here, is how to deliver these initiatives more

effectively through the private sector or public– URBACT and other sources can be found in the private partnerships. The Australian ‘Green Lease’ Power Point presentation linked to this input on the scheme is a good example. Generally, the financial USEAct web page. sector has not yet linked its existing processes for

both commercial and residential buildings (e.g. risk management, assessing buildings’ lending values

3.2 USEAct Partners CASE STUDIES regeneration interventions to be defined (energy efficiency, accessibility, underground use of land, 3.2.1 Case study 1 Barakaldo building maintenance duties, public services and Studies and analysis on the definition facilities). 17 of Urban Regeneration: Urban Social and economic indicators Alvaro Cerezo, Barakaldo USEAct Project Coordinator Integrated regeneration oriented public strategies through refitting and maintenance of existing building includes analysis and diagnostic of vulnerable urban areas, the neighbourhood of Llano in Barakaldo (CEUERS Project, University of Deusto), and quality standards of the urban environment (existing building and urban area).

12 ULSG working groups were defined, with the following particularly relevant to the topic of the case study: ULGS 1: Definition of the general framework. (On going process). ULGS 2: Studies and analysis on the definition of the Urban Regeneration Interventions: Urban, social and economic indicators. Questions for debate: which methodology allows the definition and helps to limit the Urban Regeneration Interventions? Which is the right scale to limit the Urban Regeneration area? How should be defined the priorities and how should be focused the efforts and resources of the Urban Regeneration Interventions? ULGS 6: Quality standards of the urban environment (existing building and urban area).

Other questions to be debated are: which should be the existing building standards? Which should be the urban spaces and equipment standards? Is it possible to measure the real state assets value increase, due to the improvement of the building and urban quality standards?

The research Project covers the analysis and

diagnostic of vulnerable urban areas, the The research project process neighbourhood of Llano in Barakaldo (CEUERs 1. Definition of the different ULSG members and Project, University of Deusto). their thematic scope, under the new legal terms and concepts introduced by recent legal changes in The scope of the research Project involved: Spain (Urban Restoration, Regeneration and definition of vulnerable urban areas (methodology Renovation Law, L3R). and indicators), pilot case diagnosis (Llano 2. Setting the framework of the research project of neighbourhood), definition of initial intervention the CEUERS course in two of the ULSG and setting proposal, analysis of the proposed interventions the questions for the debate or analysis. (before and after analysis) and study of the 3. Provision of all the available data at the local economic viability of the proposal. The hope was to offices and identifying the most suitable city officers have results that could be helpful to study the rest of as stakeholders in the process. pilot cases proposed and for the definition of 4. Research into the different methodologies and Barakaldo’s Local Action Plan (also for any Basque sort of indicators available and its adaptation to Country urban area). Therefore, these results would Basque Country town-area specific conditions. allow the working procedure for future urban

5. Field work and development of the selected administration to face the intervention, financial methodologies and indicators and establishing the shortage in the market and among the owners. first results of the analysis. Two scales of analysis Opportunities include the possibility of gathering all were used: town scale (general analysis) and the basement retail spaces, the public 18 neighbourhood scale (urban interventions). administration idea of studying, analyzing and 6.Definition of an integral urban intervention managing new ways for urban restoration and proposal in the area of Llano and application of the regeneration interventions, the owners’ interest and previous methodology to the proposal, to verify the willingness to consider previous operations in other improvements and its validity (as analytical and areas (if there was no cost to them), new finance practical Methodology). possibilities, considering other possible agents 7.Echanging the methodology and indicators with involved (Energy Supply Companies and the city officers with a view to their acceptance for contractors-promoters), national subsidies future urban analysis and research projects on programme related to the National Restoring, already built areas. Regenerating and Renovating Plan, the Basque The previous situation of the area was that: the Government subsidies programme through the general condition of the urban space is correct, Basque Energy Entity for existing urban areas. there is a shortage of public facilities (cultural, social and sport), there is no covered facility in the area for Analysis of the proposal: once the proposal was community activities; the quality of public space is made a new analysis was carried out according to poor (due to wind exposure, humidity, lack of sun), the Second Methodology for neighbourhood scale lack of green urban areas, lack of commercial (described in the Study Case Nº1). This second activity and empty basements of the residential methodology established five categories of blocks, the general condition of the buildings is vulnerability on the neighbourhood scale, correct (structural stability), low energy efficiency considering before/after inputs of compared analysis rate of the buildings, urban space and building to determine the benefits of the possible proposals. accessibility problems, and a homogeneous social The categories were: urbanism, environment, profile: old population, highly dependent, low income building, social, economic. Parallel to the analysis of and low social status index. the improvement in the neighborhood, a possible planning was defined and also an economic viability Proposals: study was made, considering all the possible costs, Urban space quality and facilities: Sports facility wages, incomes and benefits. The economic roof covering and the surrounding urban space viability study was made according to new legal intervention (cultural, social and sport facilities) night regulations defined in the Urban Restoration, time public lighting improvement for security Regeneration and Renovation Law –L3R. reasons and energy efficiency improvement; transformation of hard spaces into urban green Conclusions area; redefinition of the parking spots in the area. 1. The urban regeneration interventions are viable Building quality: Solutions to accessibility considering the new legal definitions. This viability is problems in residential blocks (lifts and removal of possible due to the legal mandatory incomes for the accessibility barriers) and improvement of the building conservation (up to 50% of the construction energy efficiency rate, with special consideration value) that make the interventions possible, and prevalence to the improvement on the building including the urban renewal cost, without any public core. subsidies (only necessary if there is a high rate of Economic activities and social tissue: spatial building demolition in order to create new urban transformation and change of use of the actual spaces). commercial retail spaces; promotion of business 2. The balance between the costs, wages and activities considering the local companies and incomes is negative. But if we add the benefits, it is professionals; urban garden self-management positive, due to the restored buildings and empty programme; a new apartment block for medical plot value increase. But in any case, all the possible students, linked to the University Hospital located in solutions imply a certain amount of solidarity among the surrounding area (with a mix of social profiles the owners. and ages); construction and structural viability; 3. From the technical point of view the new Law energy efficiency; building and population density. allows this type of intervention to be enhanced. But Barriers and opportunities: the questions are: are the politicians ready to face Barriers: according to the local survey, the residents the political cost of implementing these types of and owners were unlikely to afford the cost of the strategies, instruments and policies? Are the owners intervention, the lack of funds of the local public ready to face their duties (being an owner implies more than paying a mortgage, there are some

private and collective duties to be fulfilled)? Is it Naples are to preserve the cultural identity of the worth investing in your own property and in the area and its soul and to rehabilitate the historical urban space surrounding your home? The answers centre. might be “Yes”, but there is still a long way to go in 19 promoting and wide spreading the awareness in the Background and reason of the Si.Re.Na project: necessity and benefits of this type of interventions. the Municipality assigned to the public sector the task to define rules and control methods, identify the 3.2.2 Case study 2 Naples strategic actions and the incentives formulas. Tasks The Si.Re.Na. Project that have been assigned to SI.RE.NA. (a non – Gaetano Mollura, USEAct Lead Partner profit public and private partnership Company) are to promote interventions, establish connections Town planning variations from 1998 to 2001 between the administration and building owners and extended the Historical Centre from 730 to 1 917 ha. organise the information offices and companies, to Immediate action is one of the principal aims: 97% promote Protocols of Understanding with sector of building interventions can be directly realized, experts, banks and insurance companies in order to without executive plans. offer to those involved some measures to ease the interventions.

The strategies are 1. To stimulate the active participation of citizens though the use of easy procedures, with an information desk, advertising campaigns and meetings with citizens and operators. 2. To optimise services offered by different operators through: agreements with Banks, Insurance enterprises and Professional Associations, an agreement with the Joint Territorial Committee for Safety to check the safety standards of the building sites, and the “Eurecho Project” for the collection and disposal of construction waste at a cut rate and at controlled dumps 3. Diffusion of the ‘culture of legality’ in the construction industry: transparency in the technical SIRENA started its activity preparing and promoting and economic running of a building site, monitoring the Programme to Restore Common Parts of of the safety standards of a building site, and Buildings in the Old Town Areas of Naples and verification that welfare and employment regulations outskirts, known as the Sirena Project. In this way a are being respected by the company. widespread restoration of the architectural heritage 4. Assessment of the construction work through of Naples began. The investment of the members of promotion and assessment of the construction the S.I.RE.NA amounts to the following: Città company, access to contracts for all the companies Storica S.C.p.A.(Naples City Council): 53,460%, that respect the norms, by creating an open Regione Campania 31,470%, the Association of directory and assistance to companies during the Building Contractors of the Province of Naples execution of their work. 5. To encourage the spread of urban maintenance 9,520%, Manufacturers’ Association 1,320%, through adoption of the Building Maintenance Chamber of Commerce 4,230%. Manual.

The Context : 80% of the buildings of the historic The contribution granted by Campania Region and center are private properties; the buildings are Naples City Council amounts to up to 37% of the fragmented in several apartments which are mostly comprehensive intervention amount. A further rented; the majority of the properties indicated are contribution of up to 3% is granted to those who “controlled“ rental agreements (very old contracts), adopt the Building Maintenance Manual. The grant therefore the apartment owners have low income cannot exceed the threshold of 130 000.00/160 and not sufficient to invest in rehabilitation of the 000.00 euros for each building. Moreover this buildings; the rental populations of this area also contribution is cumulative with further incentives and create its cultural identity that must be preserved; /or easing granted by the Public Authorities. most of the private buildings of the historic centre need to be rehabilitated. Buildings are degraded in a During the period 2003/2014: 1 260 building sites social as well as a physical way. The problem is to were financed by the City Council of Naples, 80 avoid ‘gentrification’. The grants that do exist only million euros of public contribution were assigned, cover common parts, facades etc, of a building.The 190 million euros was spent (1/3 public funds and priorities of the UNESCO Historical Center of 2/3 private funds i.e. owners of apartment buildings),

1200 building sites were opened, 800 building sites were 100% completed, mostly in the UNESCO 3.2.3 Case study 3 Viladecans area, 200 building sites were more than 50% completed and 200 building sites were less than Urban remodelling of residential 50% complete, 500 enterprises were involved and Ponent, polygon and renewal of the 20 about 1000 technicians, wide participation of extension of the Montserratina inhabitants and 3000 building sites were checked/ inspected by S.I.RE.NA. Enric Serra, USEAct Viladecans Project coordinator The recovery of the Italian quarter in Tianjin In October 2004, Sirena began collaborating with The Law of Improvement of Neighbourhoods the Tianjin City Council on the renewal of the Italian and Urban Areas Requiring Special Attention is a quarter. With Sirena as consultants, restoration has begun of the main streets and 26 buildings have new policy of public intervention answering one of been opened to date. Among them are two the priorities of the Government of Catalonia: the important public buildings: the Italian Barracks comprehensive rehabilitation of neighbourhoods to “Caserma Carlotto” and the Meng Joss House, the avoid risks and to improve conditions for the people city’s first guest house. At the request of the Tianjin living in these areas. The law, promoted by the City Council, Sirena has also become the consultant Government and approved by the Catalan for quality control in relation to other restoration Parliament in May 2004, provides for the creation of works, not directly planned by Sirena. Sirena has related its experience in Tianjin in various a fund available to municipalities, which finances exhibitions both in Italy and abroad. In September, comprehensive intervention projects aimed at the 2006, the permanent exhibition of the history and urban improvement, social and economic, of restoration of the Italian quarter, housed in the neighbourhoods that require special attention. Carlotto barracks, was inaugurated in the presence From the start the Law presented neighbourhoods of Prime Minister Prodi. with a new way of intervening in the districts by the government. The fact that the implementing instruments were common and will shelter under the umbrella of a law has allowed it to be extended throughout Catalonia and has driven improvement in operations in all districts, equitably distributing resources to municipalities in need. However, this improvement of the situation of neighbourhoods not only refers to urban or housing. To encouragecross-intervention, the Law requires that beneficiaries’ projects to include standards in a number of areas, such as the removal of architectural barriers, social programmes, neighbourhood improvement, improvement of energy and environmental infrastructure, incorporating communication technologies, Conclusions improvements to common elements of buildings, Sirena has been an important tool to renovate the public facilities and improvement of public space. private buildings but unfortunately the project didn’t Moreover, the implementation of the Law has been focus on deprived (material and immaterial) the catalyst to attract more investment and stimulate buildings as expected. It has also suffered from the public private entities to invest in rehabilitation, global economic crisis and reduction of public widening the range of the programme districts. In resources. The actual situation is that the Sirena this sense, an increase in housing prices induced Project has not been confirmed and financed; the investment or other administrations can be building projects just financed are under completion. observed. With the aim of stimulating cooperation The next challenges for Naples City Council will be between administrations, the neighbourhoods Law to improve the governance of Sirena in such a way was written with the belief that it had to be the as to obtain the wide rehabilitation of the UNESCO councils themselves, closer to the citizens, which historical centre avoiding gentrification. will design and implement the programme directly. The positive aspect of this system is demonstrated USEACT/URBACT and the implementation of the in studies that confirm the convergence between Local Action Plan in Naples has included a urban and real estate of neighbourhoods and there laboratory on the governance of the rehabilitation reference municipalities. private buidings promoting innovative policy on In 2009, a new era began: with the sixth round of the Neighbourhoods Act, has begun a new phase social housing, and the B/T meeting on “Real Estate that reflects the will of the Government to ensure Investments Trust for Housing”. continuity of the programme while maintaining the

high degree of specific and careful currently plan of the center of arts and culture and local engaged in each case. Furthermore the first draft workshops related to the construction of the Center neighbourhoods are a reality and both outcomes for the Arts; and the Ponent Open Centre and future needs can be evaluated. That is why, programme and playroom. from the sixth round of research, the Act is divided 21 into three distinct lines, which allow us to respond to Monitoring committee: twenty institutions, various situations of municipalities: one for new associations and residents of the Ponent sector are comprehensive intervention projects, one for part of the Monitoring Commission for the municipalities with fewer than 10,000 inhabitants, Comprehensive Improvement Plan. Since January and another to accompany those who have already 2008, the committee meets regularly to assess the completed their projects (neighbourhood contracts). development and implementation of the plan with Since 2004 calls have been issued for support the participation of experts and representatives of under the Neighbourhoods Act. The award of grants educational, neighbourhood, commercial, cultural under the seventh edition of the Law of and social institutions Ponent neighbourhoods. neighbourhoods has gone from the 117 to the 143 Objectives are to involve citizens and organizations districts with comprehensive regeneration projects underway and the first neighbourhood contracts. in the project to improve the Ponent sector, identify Among the seven calls, €1 330 M of public the main citizens' needs and to obtain views on the investment has been committed to the overall activities and programs carried out. Functions are improvement of neighborhoods throughout monitoring and evaluating the development of the Catalonia. plan, and to make proposals on the definition of the various projects. Urban remodeling of the Ponent residential polygon: The area comprising the western districts consists of various types like: low quality urban housing estates, the need to promote social buildings in disrepair and a high concentration of population profiles at risk of social exclusion. These neighbourhoods are Can Sellares, Poblat Roca, Hispanitat and Comerç. However, it can also be differentiated by the type of building and the nature of the promotion, the number of plants and homes. In this sense, the West sector is characterized by buildings in poor condition, a significant demographic decline, a significant incidence of Renewal of the extension of the Montserratina elderly population, a breakdown of commercial The Monserratina is a large urban area, near the activity, employment issues and a lack of specific center of Viladecans, considered to be the type of facilities for the district. old recent creation, geographically central to the The comprehensive intervention project is to town neighbourhoods, each with its local identity increase the principal axes of urban and social and own centrality. The project aims to provide the cohesion and create a central urban area in the basic Montserratina centrality, connectivity and Ponent sector. Furthermore, it is proposed to quality of life through the promotion of the provide the area with new services, facilities and commercial revitalization, the generation of green public spaces, improve roads and rehabilitate areas and open spaces of attracting young families, buildings. All these processes are social and support for the elderly and dependent, enhancement participatory. As for the actions presented in the of the legacy of participatory residents of the comprehensive intervention project they include the neighborhood, and finally a powerful network of development of Dr. Fleming Av. which aims to social and cultural facilities to assume a leading role regenerate the urban space to encourage support in the economic and cultural life of Viladecans. That social relations and open a boulevard to consolidate is why the city model which works with the city of the sector West and to have a better connectivity Viladecans, based on the distribution on the territory between neighborhoods and Can Sellares and of several central areas general and local Poblat Roca; the extension to Can Palmer Center enhancement of the Constitution Square and the for Political Equality, which aims to create a new Can Ginestar Park a local centrality area, enhance point of care services for children and adolescents, the centrality of the municipality. comprehensive services for women and services for The fields covered are: Improving public space and neighborhood organizations; the construction of the provision of green spaces, Rehabilitation and Center for the Arts, to promote access to public art equipment of collective elements of buildings, with exhibitions and educational activities; a Provision of equipment for collective use, programme of cultural revitalization, a functional Incorporating information technologies in buildings,

Promoting the sustainability of urban development, It has an ongoing relationship with the Llei Barris Gender Equity, Development of programs involving technical office. The monitoring committee is social, urban and economic improvement. informed of the progress of the various projects, performances and interventions that are made 22 The Monitoring Committee is a permanent within the Llei Barris. It works closely with the Llei framework for dialogue between the authorities and Barris technical office in all participatory processes neighbors whom they represent on the one hand are in place and carried out. It provides information and on the other hand the City of Viladecans, between City Council and neighbourhood residents represented in this case by the technical office of and vice versa, extending to other members of the neighbourhoods Plan. The monitoring committee neighbourhood organizations and citizens in has to be a dialogue tool which is more flexible and general, the progress of the various projects and closer to neighbouring institutions and the performances. It also collects the opinion of the Monitoring and Evaluation Committee. It has lead members of the organizations and citizens, respect the development of the participation Plan and the the actions and projects to be carried to term and assessment team activities for the smooth running passed this onto the engineering department. of all activities that make up the Neighbourhood Plan. The aim of the commission is that the The Barris Llei includes the creation of residents have the information on what will be done a Monitoring and Evaluation and that there is the widest possible consensus on all projects. The members of the monitoring Committee, composed of committee are citizens who are part of representatives of local government, Neighbourhood organizations or individual citizens the Government of Catalonia and by because of their activity, whether professional or representatives of the vecindarias particular level have a special significance in the life institutions, economic and social of the neighborhood. partners, and civic associations.

sustainable urban policies in cities and to ensure 4 THE LIFE OF THE that practitioners and decision-makers at all levels USEACT NETWORK have access to knowledge & share know-how on all aspects of sustainable urban policies.

23 70% of the exchange budget is to be dedicated to 4.1 URBACTII next steps of the five Thematic Objectives: strengthening research, programme technological development & innovation (TO1), Ivan Tosics,Thematic Pole Expert Urbact Secretariat supporting shift towards low-carbon economy in all sectors (TO4), protecting environment and The STATE OF PLAY: NETWORKING promoting resource efficiency (T06), promoting 15 ongoing networks were approved under the 3rd social inclusion and combating poverty (T09) and call, with 150 partner cities working on urban promoting employment and supporting labour challenges and designing Local Action Plans. mobility (T08). The remaining 30% will be available Partners from completed networks are now for all other themes based on a bottom up approach. implementing their respective Local Action Plans. Upcoming URBACT eventsduring the Open Days of From call 1, one year later, 90% declare that their the Regions, in Brussels, in October include Local Action Plan is being implemented; from call 2, theURBACT seminar on Integrated approaches and three months later, 75% declare that their Local how to make best use of new territorial instruments Action Plans are being implemented.Two new types – ITI and CLLD [Code:08A11], and the „Off” meeting of networks are being piloted: Pilot Delivery on Workstreams: “URBACT sharing event”. networks ofcities implementing integrated action TheUrban Development Network seminar, on 9 plans, and Pilot Transfer networks of cities re-using October can acceptup to 350 registrations. Over 300 a good practice. people are registered. Registrations close on The 2014-2015 capitalisation themes include local October 2nd. urban economies, more & better jobs for young The URBACT Conference on 6-8 May 2015 in Riga people, social innovation, and sustainable will celebrate the end and beginning of URBACT regeneration of urban areas. programmes, with slots for networks: a ’festival of ideas’. The URBACT III programme is expected to be approved by the end of 2014, with national seminars 4.2 USEAct Local Action Planning between October and December 2014, and the URBACT Conference planned for May 2015. The 4.2.1 Framework and Improvement of programme coincides with the programme planning the Local Action Plan Implementation periods and will benefit from an increased budget. Germana Di Falco, Guest Thematic expert The first draft was completed in February 2014, with

consultation via the website until the end of April 2014, submission to the European Commission was in June 2014; final approval by the European Commission is expected during the last quarter of 2014; URBACT III infodays are being held at the end of 2014, with the first call for projects due in February 2015, and the URBACT conference inMay 2015. URBACT III shall promote «the exchange of experience concerning the identification, transfer and dissemination of good practice on sustainable “What is most important is not what but why.” urban and rural development» (Article 2 (3) b) ETC

regulation). The budget has been increased from By mid October/November it will be important that 53m€ to over 74m€ ERDF. Over 50% of the budget the stakeholders be able to present the Local Action will be committed to exchange activity lead by cities Plans during the national training seminars. i.e. networks. The remaining budget will go towards Regarding finance this is very general so far in the indirect support to cities through expertise, capacity Local Action Plans: these needs to be more building, capitalisation and dissemination. complete: you need something ‘perfect’ to generate Draft objectives of the new programme will be to funding: improve the capacity of cities to manage sustainable

urban policies in an integrated and participative way, to improve the design of sustainable urban policies Pertinence in cities, to improve the implementation of Effective

Relevance CLLD (Article 32-35 of the Common Functionality Provisions Regulation) is a specific tool for use at sub-regional level. It is based on the Efficiency LEADER experience on community-led local 24 Competency development put in place from the early 90s, Technology which had been an efficient instrument in the delivery of development policies. This tool is based on a bottom-up approach, Seek funding not only where ‘urban’ is mentioned, aims to strengthen synergies between local for example the LIFE programme on social actors, both public and private, and will innovation, or HORIZON re smart and new match the particular needs of the local area. materials. ‘Break the fence’. The Local Action Plan ITI (Article 36 of the Common Provisions needs to describe the project as the best project: the Regulation) will be a key element when Commission is a clever investor, so needs to implementing integrated territorial strategies measure outcomes. Up to now Europe supported a as it allows bundling the funding from lot of programmes: now “be at the frontier”. several priority axes of one or more Capitalisation is important to be relevant: create Operational Programmes. ITI can deliver something new! Avoid a project expiring at the end actions in any geographical area with similar of a funding programme: it needs to continue. Be territorial features; including in cross-border efficient in using resources. Use new technologies areas in the context of European Territorial for communication: something perfect! The budget Cooperation. is €776 billion total of structural funds, of which 60%

for thematic programmes (of which URBACT is Thematic programmes are HORIZON 2020 : smart part). cities challenges, LIFE (deadline October 15),

COSME: competitiveness of skills: a framework programme, for industrial conversion, regeneration of industrial sites, and clusters of excellence, connecting urban strategies with economic excellence, EASI : on social innovation, especially for Young people and the disadvantaged and ERASMUS + KEY ACTION 2: study open sources, common knowledge involving citizens.Stop considering the Local Action Plan as only urban, find a project pipeline. You will need: clear ideas and

actions, a well structured technical proposal. Managing Authorities can negotiate integrated strategies. As the Operational Programmes are Focus on seven building blocks 1. Firstly: define mission, vision and targets: almost defined, discuss how to turn the Local Action sometimes these can be confused! Plan into CLDD or ITI, before the end of the year. ITI 2. Rationale, background and challenges ‘(SWOT is a new way of improving effectiveness in analysis) cooperation. There are also thematic programmes 3. Be consistent with your strategies: inernal and which have opened a call. For example the external: feasibility, upstreaming, how concrete is HORIZON 2020 smart cities challenges. The LIFE the Local Action Plan to go further? Involve th deadline is October 15 . stakeholders, invest in communication, have a With the current programming period 2014-2020 of strategy to get people to fall in love with the Local the Cohesion Policy two new instruments have been Action Plan! Rational investors need to feel safe, so introduced in order to achieve the territorial need external consensus. cohesion objective: Community-Led Local 4. Action, outputs, resources: need to be credible; Development (CLLD) and Integrated Territorial actions generate outputs, so outputs need to be Investments (ITI). They concern all the Funds visible; a feasibility study is an output. If you can see covered by the Common Strategic Framework and touch it this is an output! Public investors love (European Regional Development Fund, European ‘candies’. Put input into the organisdation in order to Social Fund, European Agricultural Fund for transform it: you need concrete evidence that the Regional Development, European Maritime and output can affect someone. Fisheries Fund and Cohesion Fund) which is 5. Outcomes, impacts and risks: outputs and included as an annex of the Common Provision outcomes are under your influence: they need to be Regulations seen. Outcomes can lead to impacts: be aware that

external risk can affect the link between outcomes objectives towards a common objective. A vision is and impacts. not a mission. 6. Stakeholders, partners and particpation: A group’s shared vision communicates a sense of stakeholders include everyone affected by the Local purpose, expresses what is important and why, Action Plan, includinjg people with a high level of 25 focuses on the future, reflects the shared values of influence. group members and uses pictures, images and 7. Going further... words to bring the vision to life.The shared vision A pathway leading to results statement should be clear and concise, and create a visual image in the mind of the reader. It may be as 1. Create a shared vision brief as a few words or a more detailed collection of points that create the desired visual image. 2. Develop a mission statement 3. Identify goals Blueprint for a Shared Vision. Materials required: blank paper, markers, colored pencils, etc. and wall 4. Set objectives space to display group work. Take a moment to visualize what your school community would look 5. Determine projects and activities like if the school had a community garden (fresh 6. Establish a plan of action produce, outdoor classroom, etc.); draw a picture or list descriptive words that represent your community 7. Create a detailed work plan vision; display all work on an open wall; briefly 8. Assign resources explain your vision to the community; identify common themes; use themes to craft a shared 9. Implement work plan vision statement. 10. Evaluate results Developing a Mission Statement (the what and 11. Report accomplishments why). How will your group reach a shared vision? The mission statement could tell us this. For 12. Review mission example the vision is “my dream is…”. The Mission 13. Reaffirm mission is “…so I want to have a vision, for example to make young people the core of my strategy”, not a list of 14. Repeat from Step 3. actions. The Mission Statement serves as a tool to The basic underlying foundation for both the vision communicate the group’s purpose to others. It tells and mission are core values. These are the people what you do, for whom do you do it and how principles and standards at the very center of our you will get it done. A Mission Statement sets the character, and from which we will not budge or group’s direction is clear and concise is realistic stray. Core values form the basis for our beliefs reflects the values and beliefs of the group about life, ourselves and those around us, and the demonstrates a commitment to serving others; it is human potential of ourselves and others. Values inspirational, action-oriented. and beliefs form our attitudes and guide our behavior.The behaviors we engage in are what Examples of Mission Statements: American people around us see, along with our skills and Community Gardening Association: “To build actions. community by increasing and enhancing community How have you involved the Local Support Group? gardening and greening across the United States What are the common values? and Canada”; Huntington Community Gardens The vision… (dream): “The vision embodies “Create community gardens from vacant dilapidated people’s highest values and aspirations. It inspires lots, gardens that foster opportunities for community people to reach for what could be and to rise above engagement, education, and support, as well as their fears and preoccupations with current reality. economic empowerment, to return the community ”Create a shared vision. Be aware of the power of and its resources to the people”. dreams: who you want to be in the future. Single Blueprint for Mission Statement: write a mission statement using the example below as a guide:

Group Name What you do For whom do How you will get it done you do it

26 University • Improve lives • Maine • Through an educational • Focus on issues people process and needs • By using research-based knowledge

Mission To help people improve their lives through an educational process that uses Statement: research-based knowledge focused on issues and needs.

Identifying goals, objectives, projects & activities: a Having well developed goals and objectives also Group goal is a broad statement of something that helps maintain focus and perspective, establish the group expects to attain or achieve. Goals may priorities, lead to greater job satisfaction and be short, intermediate, or long-term in nature. Well- improve contributors’ performance. Objectives must written goals are believable, attainable, and based be within your sphere of influence, and should be a on identified needs. “Think football!”. Inside the goal bit challenging, but not too much since frustrating if are the objectives. not reachable. Level of performance is highest when Objectives are statements of specific, measurable, Goals are clearly stated and contain specific and attainable outcomes that contribute to the objectives, Goals are challenging but not achievement of a particular goal. Outcome-based unreasonable, Stakeholders accept their goals with objectives focus on changing people’s behavior or a true sense of ownership, Stakeholders participate circumstances, changing something about the in setting and reviewing the goal. community or establishing a process for achieving a particular goal. Examples of Goals Huntington Community Gardens: “Create safe Goals & Objectives are about how much of what spaces for community interaction and fun across all will be accomplished by when. Mission and vision ages, cultures, and incomes;Create local are brief statements, broad, encompassing and far- sustainable food sources for area residence, food reaching. Goals and objectives create the “bite size” banks and missions; create spaces of beauty by pieces, the road map and manageable stepping encouraging the creation of a variety of garden stones to achieve the mission, make the vision a types including Flower, Desert & Rock, Art, Butterfly, reality, and navigate the course we have set for our and Senior/Challenged Accessible;Engage and coalition. Goals are all-encompassing; objectives educate the public on nutrition, environment, are the small steps through which we achieve our stewardship, diversity, and civic responsibility in goals: SMART: cooperation with local schools, libraries, and other Specific- they tell how much (e.g. 40%) of area organizations; help beautify Huntington to what is to be achieved (what behavior of attract new citizens and businesses to the area. whom or what outcome) by when (e.g., by 2014)? Three types of objectives: Measurable- Information concerning the 1.Behavioral objectives: look at changing the objective can be collected, detected, or behaviors of people (what are they doing and obtained from records (at least potentially) saying) and the products (or results) of their Attainable- Not only are objectives behaviors. Example: a neighborhood themselves possible, it is likely that your improvement group might develop an objective coalition will be able to pull them off. for having an increased amount of home repair taking place (the behavior) and of improved Relevant- Your coalition has a clear housing (the result). understanding of how these objectives fit in with the overall vision and mission of the 2.Community-level outcome objectives: product group. or result of behavior change in many people. Timed- Your coalition has developed a More focused on a community level instead of an timeline (a portion of which is made clear in individual level. For example: The same the objectives_ by which they will be neighborhood group might have an objective of achieved. increasing the percentage of people living in the + Challenging- They stretch the group to set community with adequate housing as a its aims on significant improvements that are community-level outcome objective. (behavior important to members of the community. change in lots of people)

3.Process objectives: provide the groundwork or Blueprint for Objectives implementation necessary to achieve your other Consider one of your group’s goals. Write a specific, objectives. Example: the group might adopt a measurable, attainable objective related to the comprehensive plan for improving neighborhood group goal you selected. housing. In this case, adoption of the plan itself is 27 the objective.

Use the example below as a guide. Goal Do what To what extent To whom By when

Improve the in- Install grab bars In 30% of the For adults By the end of this calendar home safety of for bathtubs homes in a 60 years year older adults given town of age or older

Specific, By the end of this calendar year, 30% of homes inhabited by residents 60 years of age measurable, or older in our town will have bathtub grab bars. obtainable objective:

Developing an action plan (what change will 3. Research possible projects or happen; who will do what by when to make it activities to address goals and happen). An action planning process helps groups objectives; see the “big picture: focus on vision, mission, goals 4. Evaluate the pros and cons for each and objectives; build consensus around planned possibility; actions; work more efficiently; attract human and financial resources; and establish short-, 5. Select the most appropriate intermediate-, and long-term plans.A nine-step possibility(ies) to implement; action planning process can help your group 6. Detail the tasks that are required to generate the information it needs to develop a plan accomplish the project/activity; of action. 1. Describe the goal to be achieved or 7. Establish a timeline; the problem to be solved; 8. Allocate resources; 2. Define specific, measurable and attainable outcome-based 9. Assign responsibilities objectives;

Blueprint for detailed work plan: a work plan format can include Project/activity description

Task(s) to be done

Who is/are the responsible person(s)

Task(s) to be completed by when?

Resources required:

Other:

Once the plan is complete, projects or activities can background, challenges should be linked: describe be staffed, implemented, and evaluated. Shared the ‘big why’... the ‘fil rouge’ to face the vision and mission develop the foundation your challenges.Consistency, feasibility, up-streaming: group needs to productively move into the future. manage the gap: the action plan must be realistic. 28 Periodically develop or review group goals, The Local Action Plan has to be consistent with objectives, projects and activities to keep everyone external strategies, which may be pulling in different headed in the same direction. Rationale, directions: actions, outputs and resources:

Deliverables can be checked. Avoid confusion between outcomes and outputs! Inputs, activities, and outputs are under your control. Outdome is how they perceive the benefits. Impact you cannot control.

Stakeholders, partners, participation: stakeholder expectations, assumptions, and Cooperation is in our nature: Given some of the attitudes about the project. It’s that analysis that unscrupulous, self-centered activities in business project managers can use to open (or reopen in over the years, it might be hard to believe that it’s some cases) dialogue with stakeholders about the actually human nature to work together. A study project objectives and deliverables. It lets noted in a recent edition of Scientific American stakeholders know you’ve given consideration for magazine found that of all species humans can be what they are thinking and care enough to explore considered “super-cooperators.” It’s this cooperation their thoughts with them which creates an that has perpetuated the human race. For example: opportunity for cooperation over authoritarian while we compete to “climb the corporate ladder,” direction. we still work together to make sure the company Stakeholder group identification: for each objective succeeds against competitors. While we work to ask the questions below. Each time a stakeholder is provide for our families, we are still very repeated as an answer, place an asterisk next to the philanthropic. When a crisis occurs, we think nothing name. This will establish stakeholder group priority. of dropping our priorities and even sacrificing our Who will receive the product or service delivered by personal well-being to help others. meeting this objective? Who will use it? Who will The tool to engage and influence: using tools such approve it? Who provides input to the deliverables? as Stakeholder Mapping throughout the project Who is accountable for the deliverables? Who could gives project teams an opportunity to assess and kill this project or significantly slow it down? Who validate the scope and assumptions of the project to should be committed early in order to sell the project date. It also gives project teams a chance to assess

to others? Are there any projects underway that of the population but there is a danger of uninformed should be considered as a stakeholders? comment. Suggestion boxes: at point of service, in village shops for instance. All have their uses but Go further, for example public meetings: politicians there is a constantly expanding range of more 29 like them but only the vociferous participate and can creative approaches. Other methods include lead to conflict. Questionnaires and surveys are interactive displays, street stalls, gaming (street useful for getting views of a representative sample theatre, role plays…), or reconnaissance trips.

Outcomes, impacts, risks

4.2.2 The EU urban landscape development strategy; a package of actions to be Ivan Tosics,Thematic Pole Expert Urbact Secretariat implemented; governance arrangements to manage the ITI. CLLD can be part of an ITI (the other way Compulsory urban allocation: the round would not happen). How does it work? ERDF shall support sustainable urban Bundle funding from different priority axes and development with at least 5 % of the programmes (ERDF, ESF, CF, not EFARD), for implementing integrated territorial/ urban ERDF resources allocated at national development strategy, for a functional area at the level through strategies that set out appropriate territorial scale (e.g. at the level of integrated actions to tackle the neighbourhoods, cities, city-regions, metropolitan economic, environmental, climate, areas, rural areas, functional areas), with possible demographic and social challenges delegation of the management to one or more intermediate bodies (compulsory to delegate for affecting urban areas. (ERDF cities in case of 5% for sustainable urban regulation Article 7) development). Decision on package of operations Sustainable urban development shall be undertaken for integrated strategy – predictability for through Integrated territorial investment, or through implementation. a specific operational programme, or through a specific priority axis. Cities, sub-regional or local Article 7 – national examples bodies responsible for implementing sustainable Germany: all potential tools are included in the PA. urban strategies ("urban authorities") shall be Thus the Lander can use those tools for Art 7 which responsible for tasks relating, at least, to the they consider the best. Negotiations between selection of operations. For in this each Member Lander and EC are going on, no approved OP exists State shall establish the principles for the selection yet. In the last period 8% of ERDF (1.1 bn eur) was of urban areas where integrated actions for dedicated to integrated urban development. For the sustainable urban development are to be next period 11% of ERDF is planned (1.4 bn eur). implemented and an indicative allocation for those Nearly all Lander use Art 7, in most cases in form of actions at national level. mixed priority axis. Only 2 Lander will use ITI. ITI: Integrated Territorial Investment: a designated territory and an integrated territorial

Italy: a dedicated chapter in PA for Art 7. Dedicated The question of delegation: it is only the urban axis is the main form (only one region will use Netherlands where full delegation to the local level ITI, Sicily). No OP-s are approved yet. The national is a usual approach (there is no „delefobia”). The programme will exist for the 14 largest cities, these Czech Republic also plans substantial delegation. In 30 cities will be Intermediate Bodies within this Poland project selectionis the minimum of required dedicated axis with a more focused approach than delegation. ITI association is formed, led by the core in the past. Content: services to the citizens, social city. Project ranking, each project has to affect at inclusion, the national programme will be built up least 2 municipalities, has to have soft and hard together with the cities. items. ITI strategy has to be the starting point. In England there is one national programme, only one Poland: ITI will be the tool to implement for Art 7, IB, London. Core cities were lobbying for some this choice was made quite early. Compulsory FUA delegation with little success. approach regarding the capitals of the 16 regions. Over 5% of ERDF and ESF is transferred to the National structures for article 7 are mostly ROP from which the ITI-s will be financed. There are oriented towards large cities (except for England), also examples for sub-regional level ITI-s. Wroclaw: with explicit requirement to include the FUA level: in letter of intent signed in 2013 with 15 local France and Poland. There is full delegation in the governments. Four different bodies: steering Netherlands, project selection by metropolitan committee, presidium, board, ITI office. Joint associations in Poland, and no delegation at all in strategy is prepared which is part of the ROP of the Germany and England. They are thematically broad region. in England and Poland, narrow (deprived areas) in France and Germany. Czech Republic: ITI will be the tool to implement Another angle of analysis is RURBAN, Rural-urban Art 7. Central government selected the 7 largest links can take different forms: conventional cities for ITIs. € 2,5 bn will be allocated among the contiguous city-hinterland forms: morphological, metropolitan areas of these cities, taking the quality functional area, broader economic area, urban-rural of the ITI strategy into account. The cities will be region including also the rural hinterland, or A- responsible for the ITI, which has to be adopted on spatial forms (Andrew Copus): generic areas: not metropolitan area level. This means that the cities requiring contiguity in urban-rural links, or organized will be the Intermediate Bodies. No sub-regional proximity: translocal globalization of rural business level ITI-s are allowed. for which proximity is irrelevant. The OECD study on RURBAN discusses only the first forms. The France: the new Contract de Ville includes the traditional concepts of cities and rural areas, based integrated urban approach. Municipalities have to on administrative boundaries, are no longer define theirdeprived areas on the basis of coherent with the actual economic and social nationwide indicators. 10% of ERDF (and 1.8% of organization of the territory. From a socio-economic ESF) will be dedicated to Art 7. Regional authorities point of view, territory is organized in functional will become the MA-s (this is decentralization in regions. France!). Subsidiarity: the inter-municipality level Other EU tools for metropolitan cooperation include gets a large role. In the PA it is not specified EGTC as a bottom-up cooperation form. Since 2007 whether ITI or urban axis – it is a choice for the the EGTC is an European legal instrument designed regional level. There is no multi-fund financing. In to facilitate and promote cross-border, transnational Ile-de-France: Article 7 will be implemented through and interregional cooperation. As a legal entity the ITI, concentrating on sensitive urban areas. 20% of EGTC enables regional and local authorities and ERDF+ESF will be devoted to urban areas. 10-12 other public bodies from different member states to ITI-s will be implemented with a minimum budget of team up and deliver joint services, without requiring 5 million € for each ITI. a prior international agreement to be signed and ratified by national parliaments. Member States Netherlands: the ITI will be focused on the must however agree to the participation of potential Randstad area. This focus is needed as the ERDF members in their respective countries. Some budget is 40% lower than earlier. The cities can countries are particularly active in supporting EGTC- select their focus according to their needs. Multi- s. In France there is a French ministerial institution fund approach. 25% of money delegated to cities (MOT) to help cross-border cooperations to become has to go for ITI. Rotterdam is the IB and the MA at EGTC. From 39 existing EGTC-s officially accepted the same time for the Randstad case. With the West by today 15 are established with the participation of programme: 4 cities and 4 provincesdevelop one Hungary. Only one exists in the Centrope area joint OP. (Győr).

4.2.3 USEACT Local Activities The LAP is looking at “land take” and reuse issues WORKSHOP “LAPs Review Cafè!” in urban sprawl areas, garden villages, industrial Vittorio Torbianelli, USEAct Lead Expert and resort areas. Work is going on according these 31 four themes in pilot areas of the USLG member Partners are reminded that by October it is municipalities. The current task is to continue pilot important to complete the road maps for the Local area site visits - ULSG partner meetings in Action Plans, and that they should take into November, December (urban sprawl – Ķekava consideration the national training days in their municipality, garden villages – Olaine municipality). respective countries to encourage members of their Closer studies done preparing these site visits Local Support Groups to attend. Definitive versions promote USLG members common understanding of of the Local Action Plans should be ready to present problems in each place. More precise actions, during the meeting in January in Buckinghamshire, interventions enhancing pilot area transformation in view of the final conference in April. can be included in the LAP (under objective 2).

The LAP Template: partners are asked for ULSG and experts have defined recommendations feedback to the latest proposal for the template for for future policies and actions concerning the urban Local Action Plans, which is based on proposals growth management. These recommendations are from the URBACT secretariat. Information on included in Riga Planning Region Strategy and funding is very important, as is the definition of Development Program (documents are in final indicators of success. Stakeholders should refer to stage). those who are involved in the Local Action Plan but also those who are affected by it.

LAP discussion Baia Mare: Need a policy for efficiency of land use. Studying a common vision, and recommendations on land use. The vision is an industrial park for Baia Mare. Arguing that a stronger framework for metropolitan areas is needed, using potential EU funding as an incentive. More is needed on tools. Viladecans: aiming at a common vision. In November a plenary to approve the Local Action Plan. December: finalise Local Action Plan, with presentation and looking for new funding. Possibly Buckinghamshire: Aimed at defining new models focusing on energy issues. How to phase objectives, of collaboration and shared plans between the and working towards excellence. economic, environmental partners for delivering Riga: The general structure of LAP has based on sustainable economic development. In today’s three pillars: urban growth management (UGM) - current tight financial environment ‘traditional’ knowledge transfer, promotion of UGM tools, models of collaboration are no longer fit for purpose implementation of UGM policies in Riga Planning and Buckinghamshire needs to find new ways of Region (RPR) Strategy and Development Program; supporting partners to collaborate on the improved cooperation between RPR local achievement of shared goals. governments; enhanced transformation of pilot Dublin: The aim is enhancement of uses of uses areas. and buildings along the tram transport corridor, The strategic target of the LAP is to enhance increase the engagement of elected members, and cooperation developing joint platform and more members in the Local Support Group. A understanding of common UGM necessity for Riga proposal for a vacant land levy is getting support. Metropolitan Area (RMA), encourage participatory Policy on the development plan is for a “compact and transformation process of pilot areas on local city”. Sites and building have been identified. The level. LAP has three objectives: policies and tools Local Support Group includes market traders, parks for urban growth management; suggestions, department and owners of heritage buildings. Need proposals for actions/interventions for pilot areas; to expand outcomes, outputs and impacts. coordination of urban growth management and The Art Tunnel involved installations on a waste knowledge dissemination. The implementation of site. Students from an art college in the US held a the LAP actions will be under responsibility of Riga virtual consultation on using the space: 50 tweets Planning Region administration and local were analysed with feedback to the council. Also municipalities.

used the city website to get feedback. The vacant Viladecans: The LAP is being defined through four sites project will also use this feedback. strategic lines to define and identify actions that Nitra: Aim to improve city centre, with a pedestrian should guide the transformation of Polygon Center. zone, transport modes, and uses for vacant plots. These lines concerning infrastructures, the 32 Goals need to be restructured into a pyramid: need integration in the city, economic activity and more ‘Smart’ objectives, involve the university in the sustainability, still need further definition to improve Local support group SWOT analysis, and use their service to the comprehensive project to newsletters. Synergy between natural programmes transform the sector. to get feedback to USEAct: a book of ideas. “Urban intervention” was invented by an architect’s studio to Germana recalls that the Local Action Plan is a mix, communicate the challenges faced by the not a book, of dreams… for every action, identify at municipality, regarding problems, and upload least one source of funding! feasibility/case study of the place: collected 54 design proposals and inspirations, placed on the map and open to the public for feedback. From the voting they got a clear feedback of popularity of interventions, though it is not possible to do everything, due to ownership issues etc. Examples of proposals are flower beds, a pedestrian bridge across a busy road, and a space for physical exercise. Naples: aiming for tools for rejuvenation, avoiding gentrification. Seven Smart objectives, in an area with 9/10 social deprivation. Need to reduce overlap in objectives; in future they plan to obtain endorsement from local representatives. All members of the Local Support Group have met: a bottom up approach is emerging, including artists, youth and the church, and there is now more energy and excitement. Goals are Ok. To be improved: reduce overlap in objectives, more concrete feedback from politicians, and more planning policy. Regarding involving stakeholders, the website promotes the city through the eyes of its inhabitants: working with the Local Action Plan to create a map of the area, with proposals for action and asking stakeholders to describe their ideas: an interactive tool is needed Trieste: a participation process has been designed. Goals are OK. Some actions may need to be redefined, may need to decide how to apply guidelines. LSG activities may need to be more defined. Østfold: more regional, aiming at more growth and less sprawl. Good and coherent; some doubt, as municipalities are competing. The difficulty is to know how they can apply for funds; the Local Support group members are all involved in the Local Action Plan, with a busy schedule. Barakaldo: Need to redefine the targets in the Local Action Plan, identify methodology, and set out interventions. Potential: new law must be implemented. SWOT to relate targets to analysis. Also need to reshape outcomes and output etc, and identify funds to implement the Local Action Plan. The Local Support Group involves public authorities and citizens.

4.3 General issues of the Network 4.3.2 Administrative and financial Management. USEAct future planning issues and feedbacks on the Project and administration Reprogramming 33 Gaetano Mollura, LP City Council of Naples 4.3.1 A proposal: New Heroes and USEACT cooperation Activities carried out from June to September 2014 Managing Director Wouter Goedheer have included the closure of the Mid Term review procedure, submission of Reprogrammed The aim of involving New Heroes in the USEAct Application From on July 11, and ERDF II quota: project is to find new tools to explain the Local transfers.The reporting session is now in progress Action Plans, and to give visibility to USEAct, and a with the financial documents (Certificates, Payment way to organise an exhibition of all the Local Action claim, Financial Contributions Summary) and the Plans around all the partner cities. progress Report of the activities implemented from New Heroes develops creative concepts to create January to June 2014. encounters between people, for example in Skopje, the “burning question”, “we light Amsterdam” and At the end of the year if not enough has been “Project Eye” in Den Bosch. In the “Sketch” project, spent, spending will be cut!! artists asked people what they missed; the Seismic project dealt with social innovation needs. In each The URBACT II Monitoring Committee has officially city they research sketch artists to become approved the re-programming request submitted involved, and for example draw places that are arising from the Mid Term Review. Changes needed or wanted. included in the Approved Reprogramming submitted The partners are asked to consider what on July 2014 were changes in the total budget for 2 collaboration with URBACT/USEAct could entail, for Partners (Naples and Trieste) and changes in the example visualising the Local Action Plans. breakdown per budget category at project level (as result of the modifications in the individual partner budget agreed during the Mid Term Review process). Modifications to the Joint Convention, considering the following Session 18 of the Joint Convention: “18.2 Modifications to the project (time schedule, budget) that have been approved by the Monitoring Committee can be carried out without amending this agreement.” If there are partners who request it, the Lead Partner will send an official letter describing the agreed modifications on the individual partner budget. See the NEW breakdown per year and budget category in attached powerpoint.

3rd Reporting Session.

Activities already carried out include uploading the incurred costs, validation and certification. Next steps include the deadline of 30th September 2014 for the Submission of the following documents, for the LP: Progress Report of all the activities implemented from January to June 2014; Partners Certificates; Payment Claim;Financial Contributions Summary. 3rd Reporting Financial Session: certified costs: an overview of the shared costs included in this 3rd Payment Claim will be sent to all partners as soon as the FLC of the LP will certify them (by September 30th 2014). Partners are strongly reminded that all documents are to be archived until 2020 for Audit.

Shall be considered eligible to be refunded with focussed on our own activities and the second day ERDF only expenditures linked to activities with the Managing Authorities. The Managing implemented between the project’s starting date and Authorities represent a dedicated access for the closing date (as indicated in the application transnational cooperation: present the project as an 34 form) i.e. 30 April 2015, together with exceptionally, opportunity to invest and to find out how to find costs to cover participation to the URBACT Riga funding. Also ask someone to come from Brussels? event (6-8 May 2015), and staff/external expertise It would also be helpful if partners could inform on costs linked to administrative closure within the 2 how successful they are regarding funding months following the project closing date i.e. 30 opportunities. June 2015. Partners are reminded about the national training All costs must be paid within the 2 months seminars: in Italy: 13-14 November in Rome, for following the project closing date i.e. 30 JUNE Latvia: 23-24 October in Riga, for Norway 25 2015. We have to keep in mind that it's better to November in Oslo, for Romania: 29-30 October in try to have everything (or as much as possible) Bucharest, for Slovakia: 20-21 January, 2015, paid by April!!! Spain: 24-25 November in Madrid and for UK and Ireland: 02-03 February, London. At the end of 2014 the projects that did not fully spend could have a small reduction in the budget For the Final conference it is suggested to invite operated by the Secretariat. Within the next months the director of the programme which we would like the possibility will be evaluated of transferring the to be financed, maybe knit together common underused amounts from the partners who are threads across the Local Action Plans. In any case spending worse (lower %) to the partners who are for this we need to share the final version of the spending better in order not to lose possible further Local Action Plans, within the next one or two European co-financing! months. Partners are reminded to share their ideas on 4.3.3 General issues of the Network dissemination: how and when? Meetings should Management - Next steps also take place with stakeholders to get feedback. Local Action Plan local exhibitions: two panels for Lead Expert, Lead Partner the final conference but more than two are possible

for the local exhibition. In order to have a common The fourth meeting report and newsletter are online, graphic across the partners, the lead partner will plus the first bilateral meeting report, the first send a proposal for the layout of the panels by the thematic paper and the draft second thematic paper end of October. on “Interventions to reuse urban areas:

management partnership funding function”, and The budget available for the communication case studies. activities (with the exception of some differences

and changes made by individual adjustments at Four bilateral/trilateral meetings have already taken partner level.) is as follows: place and the last two will be held in Dublin.

Under the €2.500 Budget line for "communication During the next seminar we will discuss how to and dissemination tools" (Budget category organise the final conference: we need to define the "Communication and Dissemination") the following Local Action Plans wherever possible, as well as costs can be reported: explain the work in progress. To create dialogue for Intermediate local outputs: providing a website with Managing Authorities, partners are page/blog/social network in local language, printing encouraged to invite Managing Authorities to attend the USEAct INITIAL brochure in local language and the January meeting (for which they have a budget printing the USEACT FINAL brochure in English and line in the project budget). local language. It is important to understand how Managing The final brochure will include some information Authorities are involved in this issue. In previous about each partner’s LAP (Nov- Dec 2014) programmes Managing Authorities made some Possible printing of other project outputs for your recommendations on the URBACT programme. local dissemination events (if you think that can be

useful for you): Newsletters, Meeting Reports, Also we need to organise dissemination of the Thematic Papers, Bilateral meeting reports (you can Local Action Plans to the media at national level, find all the produced documents on the Project for example, organise an event with stakeholders, to minisite) Providing possible local newsletters (you highlight the Local Action Plan. The January can see here an example: meeting could be organised with the first day

http://urbact.eu/fileadmin/Projects/USE_ACT/outputs_media/ The USEAct LAP exhibition is an opportunity to def_f_1_localnews_10.13.pdf ). involve politicians and media and local citizens so Under the €2.500 Budget line "COMMUNICATION AND DISSEMINATION TOOLS" (Budget category  organize a PRESS CONFERENCE! 35 "Communication and Dissemination"), for the Final local outputs: in order to disseminate the Project It is planned that the exhibition material will consist results, you must print enough copies of your Local of 2 general panels, drafted by the Lead Partner and Action Plans (once concluded) in English (and in to be eventually translated by each partner in their Local Languages if you want), particularly for your own national language, describing the URBACT II Final Local Dissemination Meeting! Please also Programme (the first one) and the USEAct project consider that we need 15 copies of your LAP (the second one), 1 or 2 panels for each partner document for the FINAL Conference. Copies of the describing strategy aim and results of their Local general USEAct final outputs will be provided by the Action Plan and Urbact Local Support Group. For LP the Final Exhibition in Naples, a description of the Under the €2000 Budget line "TRASLATION" partner’s context and priorities / Description of LAP (Budget category "Communication and methodology, objectives through maps/ photos/ Dissemination") each partner has at his own infographics, LSG members, and main disposal an amount for translating the project results/actions implemented. documents (mainly the, USEACT final brochure and Format: a common graphic code and layout LAP posters for the Exhibition). framework will be sent to the partners at the end of To disseminate the results of the Project and to October 2014. Partners are asked to prepare the share your LAP you have at your disposal the panels or eventually other communication materials following budget the €500,00 Euros Budget line (for example video). Deadline for final panel layout: "FINAL DISSEMINATION MEETING" (Budget January 2015 (7th Capitalization meeting). The category "Meeting organization"). This meeting must partners’ exhibition will be held in your own city be held after the Buckinghamshire meeting (January between February and April 2015 (before the Final 2015) and before the Final Conference in Naples Conference). A general Exhibition of the Local (April 2015). The budget line can include costs for Action Plans will be held during final conference in the meeting venue, catering, possible printing of Naples on 23-24 April 2014. working documents… Don’t forget that all project documents must have The €600,00 Budget Line "LAP EXHIBITION" the USEAct LOGO and URBACT LOGO! We (Budget category "Communication and recommend you to keep us updated about your Dissemination") must include all the costs for communication activities! printing the posters of your LAP and all communication tools for your Exhibition (to be NB: in case of exceptional new changes from organized in occasion of the Final Local one category to another (more than 20%) a Dissemination Meeting). reprogramming exercise is possible.

USEAct next Bilateral Trilateral meetings calendar

ACTIVITY PARTICIPANTS THEME OUTPUTS

5th b/t meeting Dublin/ Nitra/Riga/ NEW USES FOR b/t meeting Report Dublin (IRELAND) Buckinghamshire HERITAGE (residential) 4th-5th Nov ’14 BUILDINGS

6th b/t meeting Baia Mare/Dublin/ “(UP FRONT) b/t meeting Report Dublin (IRELAND) Buckinghamshire INFRASTRUCTURES 5th-6th Nov ’14 FINANCING

USEAct next transnational meetings calendar ACTIVITY THEME and FORMAT MAIN OUTPUTS

36 Capitalization and MAs FORMAT: Steering committee and MAs/ Capitalization and Workshop management contents and LAP results MAs Workshop Buckinghamshire (UK) Report 26th -26th Jan 2015

Final Conference FORMAT: Open meeting / dissemination event Final Conference Naples (ITALY) Report 23th 24th April 2015

4.4 USEAct Bilateral/Trilateral The Influence of the structure of the system of open meetings spaces in the transformation of urban environments. By Enric Batlle: From the detailed analysis from the local study area (Sector Centre) compared with new 4.4.1 Second B/T meeting areas in the city and in the surroundings (22@BCN), “Differentiating Interventions: Real we can establish some rules to guide the new Estate Developments based on patterns for the urban renewal. The open spaces will innovation and knowledge based contribute to renewing the urban landscape and also activities” allow improving the infrastructures and the mobility. The main difficulty is how to compact the current Viladecans, 25th June 2014 Baia Mare land consumption to obtain enough public space. It Metropolitan Area, Østfold, Viladecans will be very important to attract new uses and Alvaro Cerezo, Barakaldo Local Coordinator companies to improve the current mix. The work Related to the 2nd Bi-Trilateral Meeting topic (Real with the USLG and the LAP are also valued tools to Estate), we must address the efforts to focus how to enrich the discussion and also the solutions. It will attract investors and funds to renewal works. It will allow us to introduce other very important issues be very interesting to know innovative approaches such as energy topic (we are fostering a near Zero such as KPMG’s Competitive Alternative (2014). We Energy District) and a RIS3 process (see further must study their Guide to International Business explanation below) to attract new business. Location Costs and perhaps we will try to apply this Partners’ contributions were: Baia Mare method to evaluate our current situation. Metropolitan area association by Marius Ecea and (http://www.competitivealternatives.com/). Østfold County Council by Linda Duffy, in a workshop on comparing the strategies of partner Host city partner contribution cities to attract business, and a workshop on how Learning from unsuccessful proposals: The could we link the outcomes of the meeting with the Aerospatial Park in Viladecans presented by Enric Local Action Plans and Workshop/3 – Reporting the Serra: In order to find high value added uses to meeting to the USEAct Community. attract, the Municipality worked together with the Regional government and also the Chamber of Other considerations, especially for economic Commerce, Industry and to find an economical activity development: it will be useful to know and sector with this profile. It was the aerospatiale and study the Guide on Research and Innovation mobility industry. The goal was to settle a cluster for Strategies for Smart Specialisation (RIS3 Guide). these companies in a new urban area. All the Briefly, Smart Specialisation or RIS3 (Research and technical work was done: urban planning, Innovation strategies for Smart Specialisation) is a infrastructure projects … But both the economic strategic approach to economic development crisis and an excessive up-down process led to the through targeted support for research and breakdown of the initiative. An early conclusion is innovation. It involves a process of developing a that in spite of the fact all the process has not been vision, identifying the place-based areas of greatest evaluated yet, there are several aspects to manage strategic potential, developing multi-stakeholder to avoid failure: work in a more co-participative governance mechanisms, setting strategic priorities process or establish more subsidies in case of top- and using smart policies to maximize the down process (bonus taxes…). knowledge-based development potential of a region, The Spanish context / Contribution on the theme regardless of whether it is strong or weak, high-tech or low-tech. RIS3 is the core for Cohesion policy

2014-2020. The Council of the European Union period 2014- formally adopted in December 2013 the new rules 2020.(http://s3platform.jrc.ec.europa.eu/ris3faq). and legislation governing the next round of To go deeper we prepared a SWOT about the investment of cohesion policy of the EU for the theme 37 SWOT Strengths Weaknesses • Strategic Location • Good availability of • Low profile of economic • Few incentives for related BCN analyses and documentation situation establishing the businesses • Strong political • Strong legal framework • Lack of funds private/ we want, where we want leadership • Good location public them • Problem situation • Good development in • Very complex legal • Lack of communication shared with other some central sectors framework to establishing between planning and municipalities around • Some finance through businesses business development, not • Hard work done related infrastructure packages • Stiffness of the planning speaking the same language to analyses and • Resources in the local regulations in front of the • Lack of vision, not documentation communities changing needs of economic thinking big/international • Involvement of activities • Low level of education stakeholders • Few incentives for by comparison to establishing businesses neighbouring regions • Difficulty to attract big • Weak culture for companies (most are small or entrepreneurship very small companies) • Lack of a specific city- policy on the regional level Opportunities Threats • Tensile capacity of the • “the attraction project” • The national government • The new government new upcoming areas: conducted with research policies don’t support some of leaving more area policy up Business Park, New retail institute-Telemarksforskning European goals to the municipalities area… • The “rewards for better • Complex political • Competition between • Several co-funding public transport” and City- situation. Next year elections the municipalities programs to improve the package funding new can create ineffective local • Political current situation in declining infrastructure with impact on governments shortsightedness and areas development and • Difficulty aligning local alliances with local • Facing the new attractiveness. objectives with the objectives developers challenges of sustainability: • Government part-funding of the different • Ruling by giving energy vector, green of new business strategy for administrations supra (in dispensation and economy…. Moss Viladecans case: we have 3 exemptions because plans • Facing the challenges • Cooperation vertically supralocal administrations + are not flexible enough of smart city: ICT and horizontally across regional level + national level • Turning into dormitory infrastructures, innovative municipalities and sectors + European level) towns for Oslo management… • The new government • Social stability on the • The new government focusing on business survival of the middle classes focusing on business development and functional and the recovery of development and functional city-regions consumption city-regions

Questions to explore further Viladecans Østfold • Flexible design in terms of urban planning to attract new • Working locally to attract business in an international business market • Tools to push public/private initiatives • Regional policy to differentiate business development • Tools to appear in external markets from the local initiatives between municipalities • Proper subsidies to push the urban renewals in a integrate • Incentives to encourage business development and an innovative watch • Using traditional knowledge/skills in the area in new ways • “Thematizing” and specialization are the only outlets for the • Creating visions for development renovation of the city? • How to develop a culture for entrepreneurship • Preservation of traditional (critical) values of each city • Creative ways to use infrastructure investments to promote business development Relevance to the Local Action Plans Viladecans Østfold • The complexity of the renovation of Sector Centre has been • Working locally to attract business in an international set the LAP through the definition of four lines of objectives. market These lines have their own dynamics that form an integral part • Regional policy to differentiate business development of the stated renewal (urban integration, infrastructures, between municipalities business, energy). • Incentives to encourage business development • One of them is precisely the attraction of business through • Using traditional knowledge/skills in the area in new ways the strategy RIS3 consensual tool at European framework. For • Creating visions for development this reason there is a close relationship between the content of • How to develop a culture for entrepreneurship the LAP and the issue of Real State and the new areas of • Creative ways to use infrastructure investments to promote economic activity operator engaged in the whole process: business development planning, design and construction. • Therefore, a thorough understanding of the framework of public private partnership is required to collect sufficient funds to undertake the entire renewal

4.4.2 Third USEAct bilateral meeting: in the intermediate cities. Comparison between the standards of the urban projects. Adequacy to the urban uses and textures requirements of urban quality due to acceptable Viladecans, 26th June 2014 Baia Mare costs. Citizens' perception in relation to them. Metropolitan Area, Østfold, Viladecans 38 Alvaro Cerezo, Barakaldo Project Coordinator Synthesis and proposals for each partner. Baia Mare: any planning or building activity must be Related to the 3rd Bi-Trilateral Meeting topic (Urban driven by some kind of public control and Uses and Textures), we must address the scale as authorization in order to preserve the public the key factor to analyze the different solutions and interests and the balanced urban growth. Regional approaches for each partner. Therefore, we have or metropolitan planning should define the main regional planning scale (Baia Mare), general guidelines and constrains for the general municipal planning scale (Trieste) and intervention planning planning. Public participation must be addressed at scale (Barakaldo and Viladecans). every stage of the planning process. The integrated approach to the urban development must be the key Thematic presentations: issue for analysing features: strategic development Industrial land studies. Some cases: Barcelona and vision for the urban sprawl control, mixed and San Francisco. Miquel Pybus. Some examples to alternative uses of land, management of resources, study and characterization of the industries of sustainable mobility and heritage preservation. economic activity in Barcelona and San Francisco. Trieste´s General Town Plan approach proposes to Both cases focused on the analysis and planning overcome the classic zoning definition and to apply proposal through new ways of organizing an overlapping system approach. Therefore, they applications activity in the city. In early 2000’s during have defined a public participation process to the .com boom, San Francisco decided to protect its identify the general interest, address the planning primary industrial land in front of the pressure of management tools and procedures from the early other uses (residential, commercial, etc…) stages of the process, with a flexible tool to redefine BCN Constrains and approaches. Stigmatitzation of the city planning for the future needs, economy and the industrial areas (specially the primary industrial sustainability as the key issues for the planning areas). Need for new methodological approaches. viability. So that planning cannot be foreseen as Understanding the economic metabolism of the something static, but just the opposite, the “time” urban system. Generic solutions are needeed concept must cross the processes and the results of SFO define a new relation between city and industry the dynamic planning. through the definition of the PDR (Production, Barakaldo´s intervention plan is focused on urban Distribution, Repair) approach, a new methodology renewal versus regeneration processes. These to understand the economic functions located in the types of interventions require the enhancement of industrial areas of the city, to redefine the land use the PPP mechanisms to overcome the public vs. code of the city (from industrial to PDR), to rezone private duality, such as expropriation with the whole industrial area of the Eastern beneficiary management models, considering the Neighborhood. economy and sustainability as the key issues for the planning viability, to introduce the city transformation Urban residential project in the transformation of sustainability debate in the decision taking Intermediate (middle size) cities in Spain (1980- processes, a deep knowledge of the pre-existing city 2010). Jaume Peremiquel. Study in the period between 1980-2010 residential urban interventions and built areas, the definition of the built areas and and describe its fundamental characteristics. Typify urban spaces quality standards (the “city minimum”), different strategies, the nature of the projects and considering the integrated sustainability (physical, the instruments used in their development and the environmental, social and economic integrated incorporation of strategies aimed at the optimization approach), the definition of proper and flexible urban of energy consumption and to the limitation of planning determinations, applied financial tools, environmental impacts. Evaluate the transformation redefinition of public participation processes, not derived in the cities, the effect on the change of only based on public budget distribution but also on scale of them, and the increase in consumption, both public and private. The fit of the operations with the private and direct economic contributions of the the pre-existing supports and their environments. citizens, under a collective agreement and Evaluation of the impact on the energy consumption addressing public Social Housing policies. of the urban form resulting, establish useful Viladecans’s intervention plan is focused to taxonomies referring to, in any case, the individuality maintain at least the same ability to accommodate of the cases and situations. economic activity today. Encouraging the Systematization of structural and urban introduction of a mix of uses (housing, commercial, configuration related to the shape of the residential office) in addition to industrial one is a strategy that urban fabric in the processes of urban development promotes integration in the city of this sector in

process of degeneration. The urban tranformation of Baia Mare had a more general approach, Trieste this type are rare because operators prefer to have had a new approach, with a flexible time line. plans with a less complex mixture of uses. It should Barakaldo’s case was summarised in the Case generate new building types capable of building in Study: not so much renewing, more regenerating, 39 the same ground various compatible uses sharing defining quality standards, and the economic the built space. It is a very interesting challenge to relation of planning and decision-making. deepen these approaches.

4.4.3 The Fourth B/T meeting leadership & a desire to work with others! ‘Down- “Smart data and visualization tools” stream’ consumer model – issues about free vs ‘paid for’ data (driven by regulations, Open Data Participants: Buckinghamshire, Naples, Riga, LE Jim Sims, Buckinghamshire Business First Initiative etc)

Procuring the solution? Single Procurement – Issues addressed concerned the lack of skills and only 1 in 1000 Apps succeed! Open Innovation funds to improve the sector, and priorities: the aim ‘Platform’. must be not only to attract investors but also to

create value. What visualisation tools will we use? 2D Place-based data/visualisation tools have a strong Modelling, 3D Modelling, 4D Modelling potential role to play in understanding where to

intervene, driving better outcomes, Implementation Challenges include the important informing/communicating with the public, interrelationships between spatial and social data; democratizing the planning process, improving professionals needing a new mindset; professionals regulatory enforcement, improving development needing new skills: organisations needing to learn to design, and understanding biodiversity & habitat collaborate; the Public Sector often needs to link impacts. these developments to service transformation However, at present GIS’ use in planning is largely models; business models often need a strong ‘invest related to producing thematic maps and simple to save’ approach; organisations often need to think analyses, though there is some small use for public in a cross disciplinary way (energy, planning, land participation and special projects; availability of use etc.); organisations need to identify use cases utilities and understanding. Because of this, the with strong cost/benefit returns; organisations need benefits of GIS for planning are often not easily to find ways of monetizing peoples interaction with quantified. But the model is changing ...: it is not these new systems. necessarily about 2D, 3D of 4D visualisation: it’s

about building ‘Data Warehouses’ (Big Data), It’s Case Study: Designing a one-M2M-based Open about understanding how the relationship between Eco-system for Transport Modal Shift. Funding data-sets and building business cases for new Opportunities could be: service models (Developing Use Cases), working

with public/private partners and residents to develop H2020-REFLECTIVE-7-2014: Reflective IT platforms which can deliver new service societies: cultural heritage and European models/benefits/financial models. The challenge is identities. Deadline 30-09-2014. keeping the old model going while developing a new Budget€14,000,000. Topic: Advanced 3D model. modelling for accessing and understanding An evolving model: European cultural assets The key data sources are Data Warehouses, Secondary Data - GIS, Boundary Data, LIDAR etc, H2020-SCC-2015: CALL – SMART CITIES Primary Data - Space Syntax, Sentiment Analysis, AND COMMUNITIES . Deadline 03-03- Smart Meters etc. 2015.Total Call Budget €108,180,000. Topic: Smart Cities and Communities What benefit are we seeking to deliver? How can solutions integrating energy, transport, ICT sectors through lighthouse (large scale different data sets combine to improve residents’ demonstration - first of the kind) projects lives? How can we find new ways of using IT to transform public services? How can we build H2020-EURO-SOCIETY-2015: Overcoming stronger feedback loops into service delivery and the Crisis: New Ideas, Strategies and incentivise behaviours? Governance Structures for Europe. Deadline 07-01-2015. Total Call Budget The new financial Model? ‘Upstream’ Government €5,000,000 Topic: ERA-NET on Smart Grant – a broken model? Partnering – requires Urban Futures

H2020-EURO-6-2015: Overcoming the space…“public realm” financing could be useful? Crisis: New Ideas, Strategies and Also a model to counter large shopping centres Governance Structures for Europe. outside the city centre. Deadline 21-04-2015 Total Call Budget €12,000,000 Topic: Meeting new societal 40 needs by using emerging technologies in 4.4.5 Capitalisation of the Bilateral and the public sector trilateral meetings

• ESIF There was discussion on how to work more on the • INTERREG IVC subjects of the bi and trilateral meetings? For example in Horizon 2020? The lead expert and lead • URBACT partner wish to hear from the partners about the • ESPON interesting subjects emerging from this project that they would wish to follow up, for example: 4.4.4 Planning the fifth and sixth trilateral meetings in Dublin: • Use of data for future activities • Innovation in social housing, a very political issue: connect with the New uses for heritage buildings: Commission, and involve them in a Dublin have their own expert. A second person will meeting, maybe before the January present the grant systems in Ireland: the “Living city” meeting. initiative, with workshops. • Interreg 5C: can involve all of Europe. • Trailblazing SMART cities? Upfront infrastructure financing: with Dublin, Baia Mare and Buckinghamshire: we can discuss the Focus on the governance of the process, find ways problems. What models such a PPOPs? Each of working with financial institutions, start from partner will need to identify the contribution from innovation in financial tools. Need to find common each partner; it is important to connect the subject to issues. Send ideas, to share agreement on what we the Local Action Plans: a contribution from a high want. For example one day before the quality research could be useful. An example could Buckinghamshire meeting, invite Germana, all ideas be the NAMA model for releasing funds in areas that welcome. are half built. Models of maintenance of open

41

APPENDIX 1 PROGRAM OF THE MEETING AND LIST OF PARTICIPANTS

42

USEAct Thematic Network

Fifth Thematic Seminar Refitting and regenerating inhabited buildings and areas Implementation Phase Riga Planning Region (Latvia)

25th 26th September 2014

USEAct partners

Riga Planning Region (Latvia) hosting partner City of Naples (Italy) / Lead Partner Baia Mare Metropolitan Area (Romania) City of Barakaldo (Spain) Buckinghamshire Business First (UK) City of Dublin (Ireland) City of Nitra (Slovak Republic) Østfold County (Norway) City of Trieste (Italy) City of Viladecans (Spain) Istanbul Metropolitan Municipality BIMTAS/IMP (Turkey) observer partner

24th September 2014 43 Arrival of participants Hotel “Gutenbergs” Doma laukums 1, Riga; www.gutenbergs.eu

19:30 Meet and greet in the lobby Informal dinner

25th September 2014 Meeting Venue: Hotel “Gutenbergs”

09:00 Welcome of the hosting partner Dagnis Straubergs, Chairman of Riga Planning Region Development Council 09:15 Introduction USEAct Thematic Network: presentation of the programme and outline of network activities Gaetano Mollura, City of Naples, USEAct Lead Partner

09:30 URBACTII next steps of the programme Ivan Tosics,Thematic Pole Expert Urbact Secretariat

09:45 The USEAct issues of the Fifth Thematic Seminar Vittorio Torbianelli, USEAct Lead Expert 10:00 – 11:00 Focus on host partner Riga Planning Region Sustainable Development Strategy 2014-2030 and Development Programme 2014-2020 Rūdolfs Cimdiņš, Head of Spatial Planning Division of Riga Planning Region Peteris Sķiņķis, University of Latvia

Topical Issues of the Riga City Development and Urban regeneration Guntars Ruskuls, Head of Strategic Planning Division of City Development Department of Riga City

Riga Planning Region Local action Plan Gunta Lukstiņa, expert

Discussion with ULSG members / Riga LAP and the network led by Vittorio Torbianelli, Lead Expert

11:00 Coffee break

11:15 VISIT ON THE SITE: ANDREJSALA (20 min. walk) 11:40 – 12.10 Andrejsala - background and development Valters Māziņš, Member of Board, “Riga Development Company” 12:10 – 12:40 Creative Incubator Rihards Zariņš, Director of Creative Incubator 12:40 – 13:30 Site visit

13:30 Lunch break

14:15 – 14:30 Empty spaces = Public Spaces? The Free Riga movement - a new cultural approach towards urbanity? Jonas Buechel, Director of Urban Institute

14:30 Fifth THEMATIC WORKSHOP - PLENARY WORKING SESSION: Moderator : Vittorio Torbianelli. Lead Expert 14:30 Interventions on “Refitting and regenerating inhabited buildings and areas” Vittorio Torbianelli, Lead Expert Discussion with the network Led by Pauline Geoghegan, Thematic Expert 15:00 Focus on the Fourth USEACT Seminar Theme and related partners case studies Barakaldo: Quality Standards of the urban environment (existing building and urban areas) CUERs Project (10 min)

Naples: Sirena Project (10 min) Viladecans: Urban remodeling of residential Ponent, polygon and Renewal of the extension of the Montserratina (10 min)

44 Discussion with the network led by the Lead Expert, Vittorio Torbianelli

15: 45 Coffee break

16:00– 17:30 PLENARY WORKING SESSION

16:00 Waiting for the final seminar / ideas for capitalisation and sissemination local activities Gaetano Mollura, LP City Council of Naples, Vittorio Torbianelli, LE

16:15 A proposal: New Heroes and USEACT cooperation Managing Director Wouter Goedheer http://companynewheroes.com/about-company-new-heroes/

Discussion with the network led by the TE Pauline Geogheganl

16:45 Administrative and financial issues and feedbacks on the Project Reprogramming Gaetano Mollura, LP City Council of Naples Discussion with the network 17:30 End of the first day 20:00 Meeting in lobby Dinner

26th September 2014: Meeting Venue: Hotel “Gutenbergs”

09:00 – 13:00 PLENARY WORKING SESSION: “LAPs Review Cafè” group

09:00 Introduction second day USEACt seminar - Gaetano Mollura , Lead partner

09:10 Presentation of the LAP Template - Vittorio Torbianelli , Lead expert

09:20 Framework and Improvement of the LAP Implementation - Germana Di Falco ,Guest Thematic expert

10:00 – 12:15 PARALLEL WORKSHOPS : USEACT Local Activities WORKSHOP “LAPs Review Cafè!” (guidelines to follow). Moderators TE Germana Di Falco, 3 tables ( clouds) lead by Vittorio Torbianelli , Pauline Geoghegan, Gaetano Mollura; cross tables review Thematic Pole expert Ivan Tosics

12:15 – 12:45 PLENARY WORKING SESSION: Reporting feedbacks of each “LAPs Review Cafè” group Rapporteurs and outputs of the workshop (15 minutes each) 12:45 – 13:00 Lap Session Feedbacks Ivan Tosics, Thematic Pole Expert

13:00 Lunch break 14:00 – 15:20 PLENARY WORKING Bi/Trilateral Meetings SESSION: OUTCOMES outcomes of the Viladecans and Naples meetings by Partner rapporteurs

14:00 Vittorio A. Torbianelli - USEAct Lead Expert: Recalling the targets of second, third and fourth B/T meetings 14:20 Enric Serra de Castillo (Viladecans Municipality) - Main results of the Second B/T meeting (10 min) “Differentiating Interventions: Real Estate Developments Based On Innovation And Knowledge Based Activities” Participants: Baia Mare, Viladecans, Østfold, LP, LE

14:30 Discussion with the network (10 minutes)

14:40 Alvaro Cerezo (Barakaldo Municipality) - Main results of the Third B/T meeting (10 min) “Differentiating Interventions: Urban Uses and Textures” 45 Participants: Baia Mare, Barakaldo, Viladecans, Trieste, LP, LE 14:50 discussion with the network (10 minutes)

15:00 Jim Sims (Buckinghamshire Business First)- Main results of the Fourth B/T meeting (10 min) “Smart data and visualization tools” Participants: Buckinghamshire, Naples, Riga, L E

15:10 discussion with the network and conclusion (10 minutes) 15:20 Next steps Lead Expert

15:30 Coffee break

15:45 – 16:45 PARALLEL WORKSHOPS - Bi/ Trilateral Meetings , Programming , capitalization , next steps

One group: Programming next Fifth and Sixth B/T Meetings on ”New uses for heritage and buildings” – and “Up Front Infrastructure Financing”. Session organized by Dublin City Four groups ( First, Second Third Fourth B/T Meeting): next steps , capitalization and dissemination results.

16:45 PLENARY WORKING - Further general issues of the Network Management - Next steps Lead Expert, Lead Partner 17:15 Closure of the USEACT Fifth seminar

List of participants

Thematic Experts Vittorio A.Torbianelli, USEAct Lead Expert 46 Pauline Geoghegan, USEAct Thematic Expert Germana Di Falco, USEAct Guest Expert Ivan Tosics, Thematic Pole Expert Urbact Secretariat City of Naples (Italy) - Lead Partner Gaetano Mollura USEAct Lead Partner, Coordinator of URBACT Projects and Network on Integrated Urban Development Policies Unit, City Council of Naples Wouter Goedheer, Company New Heroes, Managing Director Baia Mare Metropolitan Area (Romania) Paul Pece, USEAct Project Coordinator, Baia Mare Metropolitan Area Association City of Barakaldo (Spain) Álvaro Cerezo Ibarrondo – USEAct ULSG Coordinator Municipality of Barakaldo Buckinghamshire Business First (UK) Jim Sims, USEAct Project Coordinator, Buckinghamshire Business First City of Dublin (Ireland) John O’Hara, Planning Department, Dublin City Council Kehinde Oluwatosin, Planning Department, Dublin City Council City of Trieste (Italy) Michela Crevatin, ULSG Member, Municipality of Trieste City of Nitra (Slovak Republic) Štefan Lančarič, USEAct Project Coordinator, City architect Department, Conception of City Greenery, Municipality of Nitra Kamila Gejdosova, National URBACT Authority, Ministry of Transport, Construction and Regional Development of the Slovak Republic DG Housing Policy and Urban Development Østfold County (Norway) Hosting Partner Linda Iren K. Duffy, Local Coordinator Østfold County Council Marianne Aune, ULSG Member Østfold County Council City of Viladecans (Spain) Enric Serra del Castillo, USEAct Project Coordinator, Municipality of Viladecans Sonia Dominguez, Local coordinator, Municipality of Viladecans Riga Planning Region Hosting Partner (Latvia) Dagnis Straubergs, Chairman of Riga Planning Region Development Council Jānis Miezeris, Head of Administration of Riga Planning Region Agnese Bīdermane, USEAct Project Coordinator, Riga Planning Region Rūdolfs Cimdiņš, Head of Spatial Planning Division of Riga Planning Region, ULSG member Guntars Ruskuls, Head of Strategic Planning Division of City Development Department of Riga City, ULSG member Uldis Apinis, Spatial Planner of Building Board of Ogre City, ULSG member Edgars Pārpucis, Spatial Planner of Building Board of Ogre City, ULSG member Dace Grīsle, Acting Head of Development Department of Ogre City Iveta Zālīte, Spatial Planner of Spatial Planning Department of Ķekava, ULSG member Zane Koroļa, Urban Planner of Tukums, ULSG member Pēteris Šķiņķis, University of Latvia Gunta Lukstiņa, Expert Sandra Plēpe, Expert Valters Māziņš, Member of Board, “Riga Development Company” Rihards Zariņš, Director of Creative Incubator Jonas Buechel, Director of Urban Institute

URBACT is a European exchange and learning programme promoting sustainable urban development.

It enables cities to work together to develop solutions to major urban challenges, reaffirming the key role they play in facing increasingly complex societal changes. URBACT helps cites to develop pragmatic solutions that are new and sustainable, and that integrate economic, social and environmental dimensions. It enables cities to share good practices and lessons learned with all professionals involved in urban policy throughout Europe. URBACT is 500 cities, 29 countries, and 7,000 active participants. URBACT is jointly financed by ERDF and the Member States.

www.urbact.eu/useact