Questionnaire for Pilot Sites Collection of Facts and Information of Pilot Sites

Questionnaire for pilot sites

Collection of facts and information of pilot sites for building a comparative, transnational typology of alpine territories

For project partners: Please fill in the predefined gaps and boxes and try to answer all the questions clearly and completely. Use the predefined boxes and stick to the space limitations. If space isn’t enough, please use the attached document to add more information. The questionnaire will be

transferred directly into a kind of factsheet of your pilot site. Therefor please try to give clear information and formulate it well, so that it can be used for presenting your pilot site. If you have questions concerning the filling in, the meaning of a question or anything else, do not hesitate to contact us (iSpace – Dagmar Lahnsteiner, [email protected], CEREMA – David Caubel, [email protected])

Name and type of the territory: Saint-Marcellin-Vercors-Isère, inter-municipality

Location (political district / region, federal province, country, other relevant position information): Located in Auvergne-Rhône-Alpes Region, in Isère department, between the urban areas of Grenoble and Valence.

- PART A: MAIN TERRITORIAL FEATURES -

Factor Description Please fill in… Population Number of inhabitants (main residence) and year About 45 000 inhabitants - shares by age groups (INSEE, 2013)

- share of working population About 18 300 workers Area Total area of the municipality in km² About 650 km² Pop. density Number of inhabitants per km² (year) About 75 inhab/km² Settlement Number of inhabitants per km² settlement area/ In Saint-Marcellin (the main density theoretically inhabitable area (year) town-centre) : 1033 inhab/km², and Vinay (another centre) : 258 inhab/km² Elevation Height above mean sea level in m Between 100m and 800m to the highest altitude Settlement Sprawled settlements or mainly compact? Satellite The main town-centre : Saint- structure areas around a centre or more disconnected Marcellin centres/settlements? Physical barriers? The other centres : Vinay, Chatte, Pont-en-Royans Topography of Is it flat land / hilly terrain/ alpine valley and basin Flat land but a part of the pilot settlement area landscape? Other? site is included in a natural mountainous park (Vercors) Functional Are there any characteristics describing special -Residential function characteristics functions of the municipality (e.g.: popular tourist -Services, commercial destination, concentration of jobs, school centre, function, economic activities regional centre, winter sport resort, economically concentrated in 3 main attractive, isolated/ central/ interconnected to,..) centres Jobs Number of workplaces and employees within the About 13 500 jobs municipality (year)

Commuter Number of working population commuting to outside 7 400 workers (40%) (2012) balance the municipality (year) Number of people commuting from outside into the About 2000 workers from municipality (year) outside (2012)

- PART B: MOBILITY SUPPLY AND DEMAND-

1. Modal split: Please insert the smallest-scale modal split values of traffic volume available for the municipality/territory adding also the scale, source, and year (= percentage of travellers using a particular type of transportation).

Scale, source, year EMD (2010) Share by foot value in % By foot 76,00% Share bicycle value in % By bicycle 1,00% Share MIV value in % By MIV 15,00% Share PT value in % By PT 6,00% Share other/n.s. value in % Other 3,00%

2. Public transport - Existing offer: Please describe the existing mobility offer in the municipality/ territory. - Which means of transport do exist?

☐ Local bus ☒ Regional bus ☒ Local train

☒ Long-distance train ☐ Urban railways (S-Bahn) ☐ Tramway

☐ Metro ☐ Other:

- Frequency of public transport services: what is the shortest interval?

☐ < 5 minutes ☒ 5 - 15 min. ☐ 15 - 30 min. ☐ 30 – 60 min. ☐ > 60 minutes

- How long is the travel time to the next regional/national centre?

☐ < 15 min OR the next centre is within the pilot site /municipality ☐ 15 – 30 minutes

☒ 30 – 60 minutes ☐ > 60 minutes

- Is there a multi/intermodal hub? If yes, of which services does it consist (in the case of several hubs, choose a representative/ the best developed one)?

☐ No ☒ Yes, consisting of:

☒ Bus/tram station ☒ Railway station ☐ Metro station ☒ Park & Ride area

☒ Bicycle parking ☐ E-bike charging ☐ E-car charging ☒ Car sharing

☐ Bike rental ☐ Taxi rank ☐ Other:

3. Public transport - incentives: What is done to make public transport attractive?

☒ Dedicated tariff system (discounted tickets, annual passes, combined/integrated tickets for different means of transport, special offers, etc.) ☒ Dedicated information (websites, smartphone apps, campaigns etc.)

☒ Other (max.150 characters): -Platform “Covoit’oura” to promote car-sharing -Platform for car-sharing in the territory

4. Supplementary mobility offer and initiatives: Please give a brief description (+ year of implementation, owner/ operator) of supplementary public transport systems and innovative initiatives in the municipality/territory which assist the PT or help to reduce private car use (Park & Ride areas, Carpooling/ Carsharing initiatives, bus-on-demand / call bus, share taxi, Secure hitchhiking, etc.). (max. 5 listings with max. 300 characters each)

Car-sharing with the platform « Covoit’oura » The Association “Mobil’Emploi” proposes car rental and other mobility solutions for workers (especially to support social inclusion)

5. Conditions for non-motorized private transport:

How is the situation for biking and walking within the Are there additional offers like (free) (electric) bicycle municipality/territory?(max. 500 characters) rental, bike sharing or special measures/initiatives for pedestrians? (max. 500 characters) -Bicycle lanes to access to train stations -Secured lockers for bicycles in train stations

6. Local mobility knowledge:

Which kind of data or studies are used or gathered on local mobility knowledge? Is there any kind of observation system in place to enhance the information about current and forecast local mobility needs, practices and CO2 impacts? (max. 5 listings with max. 300 characters each) EMD 2010 Diagnostic SCOT RUG Study to promote Electric bicycles Studies by the AURG (Urbanism Agency of ‘Région Grenobloise’)

7. Mobility needs and demands:

Do inhabitants or local stakeholders express mobility needs or gaps with regard to the current situation and territorial issues? If yes, what are the major ones? (max. 5 listings with max. 200 characters each) An improved railway network service between Valence and Grenoble (for example : more places for bicycles in trains)

- PART C: MOBILITY AND SPATIAL PLANNING BACKGROUND -

1. Planning authorities: Please give an overview of the responsibilities concerning mobility and spatial/housing planning in the municipality/territory. Are there also authorities combining the spatial and mobility planning aspect?

Mobility planning (max. 800 characters) Spatial/housing planning (max. 800 characters) National level : National level : -French State -French State -SNCF Regional level : Regional level : -Auvergne-Rhône-Alpes Region -Auvergne-Rhône-Alpes Region Departmental level : Departmental level : -Conseil Départemental de l’Isère -Conseil Départemental de l’Isère -EPFL Dauphiné

Local level : Local level : -CC Saint-Marcellin-Vercors-Isère Communauté -CC Saint-Marcellin-Vercors-Isère Communauté -Etablissement Public du SCoT de la Région Urbaine -Etablissement Public du SCoT de la Région Urbaine de Grenoble de Grenoble

2. Planning instruments: Which planning instruments and strategic documents influence /control spatial/housing and mobility planning in the municipality/territory THE MOST? In which way, at what time and territorial scale do they act? Are they obligatory? Think of any programmes, concepts, regulation, strategic processes etc. (max. 5 listings with max 400 characters each)

SCoT Région Grenobloise PLU (Local Urban Planning documents) per municipality Charte PNR Vercors

3. Main objectives: What are current and forecast main objectives and guiding principles for the municipality/territory, linked with mobility issues(+ sources)? Think of local, regional and national scale. (max. 5 listings with max 200 characters each)

Urban planning around train stations (for example housing projects) Density in town-centres and other centres To balance between town-centres/villages/etc. in terms of jobs, services supply, etc. To reinforce some town-centres roles at a larger scale

4. Planning measures: What are concrete planning measures already in use within the municipality/ territory, helping to reduce CO2 and foster/push the usage and implementation of public transport and other low CO2 mobility options? E.g. car- reduced building projects, precautionary land use (saving areas next to public transport infrastructure for building compact settlements), subsidy for compact settlements, strengthening of town centres, regulation of residential densities next to public transport stops (max. 5 listings with max.300 characters each)

Densify town-centres Land use under control

Strategic areas for urban planning Car-pool parking spaces

-PART D: STRENGTHS AND WEAKNESSES –

In conclusion, regarding requirements, offer, planning and implementation of low CO2 mobility and related issues, what are: (max. 800 charcters each)

- strengths & benefits of the municipality/territory? - weaknesses & problems of the municip./ territory? - 4 train stations - Concentration of jobs more in Grenoble - High frequency of trains than in the pilot site : which generates - Proximity with next regional centres mobility - Multimodal transport supply around train - Property pressure due to agriculture stations - Scattered dwellings - Land use under control - No intern transport supply - Agriculture and industry : two economic sectors that resist in the pilot site - opportunities & challenges of the municip./territory? - threats & restrictions of the municipality/territory? - Developing car-sharing - Lack of coordination in actions and - Developing electric bicycle measures - Developing bicycle infrastructures : for example to improve connections with “Green Lanes” : bicycle tracks which are connecting main town-centres in Auvergne-Rhône-Alpes- Region (Grenoble, Valence, Chambéry, Lyon, Annecy, etc.)

-PART E: BEST PRACTICES AND EXPERIENCES TO SHARE-

Are there best practices or experiences examples (maybe yet mentioned) of reduced CO2 mobility offers / projects or initiatives:

- WITHIN THE MUNICIPALITY/TERRITORY OR THE REGION which work very well and can be recommended to other municipalities with similar conditions?

Examples with short explanations (max. 5 listings with Weblink or contact for further information max.300 characters each) -To access train stations : the second transport mode used by inhabitants is walking (the first is car)

- from OTHER MUNICIPALITIES/TERRITORIES which would be a good solution for the municipality/territory under review?

Examples with short explanations (max. 5 listings with Weblink or contact for further information max.300 characters) -Car-sharing : in Britain for example, departments have created about 30 car-sharing areas that are well used by inhabitants -Car-pooling : the intermunicipality “Massif du Vercors” (in the Natural Park of Vercors) has begun to experiment

during the summer 2014 car-pooling with the society “CitéLib” -To integrate enterprises in mobility actions: to permit to employees to come together by car, by starting their workdays at the same hours. In the same department, the municipality of Saint-Quentin-Fallavier has experimented this solution. -Free touristic buses : in Cagnes-sur-Mer (near Nice in the south of France) a free touristic bus has been created to connect train station with town-centre

Are there lessons learned from less successful or failed experiences that could be shared in order to improve forthcoming actions in municipalities with similar conditions? (max. 500 characters)

-PART F: TOOLS FOR MOBILITY AND SPATIAL PLANNING –

Are there any tools/ software products your local authority uses to model effects on land-use and/or transport (e.g. low carbon scenarios) within the process of mobility or spatial planning? Please name them (+ Link and contact Person if available).

-EP SCoT RUG : the structure has a tool to follow land use and its evolutions per municipality. It calculates the number of constructions and hectares urbanised since 2013. It permits to adapt land use possibilities for the future.

Do you make any tools for estimating effects of individual mobility behaviour and/or location choice available to your citizens? Or do you provide any information or links about such tools on your homepage? Please name them (+ Link and contact Person if available).

If you could wish for a (software) tool for sustainable land-use and/or transport decision making, what would it be like? Please name important characteristics, input, output, geographical scale and target groups.