DOCSLIB.ORG

Urban Mobility Transition Drivers

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Urban Mobility Transition Drivers Project ID: 814910 LC-MG-1-3-2018 - Harnessing and understanding the impacts of changes in urban mobility on policy making by city-led innovation for sustainable urban mobility Sustainable Policy RespOnse to Urban mobility Transition D2.3: Urban Mobility Transition Drivers Work package: WP 2 - Understanding transition in urban mobility Geert te Boveldt, Sara Tori, Imre Keseru, Cathy Macharis Authors: (VUB) City of Almada, City of Arad, BKK Centre for Budapest Transport, City of Gothenburg, City of ‘s Hertogenbosch, City of Ioannina, City of Mechelen, City of Minneapolis, Contributors: City of Padova, City of Tel Aviv, City of Valencia, Region of Ile-de-France, Municipality of Kalisz, West Midlands Combined Authority, Aristos Halatsis (CERTH), Piero Valmassoi (Polis) Status: Final Date: Jan 30, 2020 Version: 1.0 Classification: PU-Public Disclaimer: The SPROUT project is co-funded by the European Commission under the Horizon 2020 Framework Programme. This document reflects only authors’ views. EC is not liable for any use that may be done of the information contained therein. D2.3: Urban Mobility Transition Drivers SPROUT Project Profile Project ID: 814910; H2020- LC-MG-1-3-2018 Acronym: SPROUT Title: Sustainable Policy RespOnse to Urban mobility Transition URL: Start Date: 01/09/2019 Duration: 36 Months 3 D2.3: Urban Mobility Transition Drivers Table of Contents 1 Executive Summary ......................................................................... 10 2 Introduction ...................................................................................... 11 SPROUT project introduction and aims ................................................... 11 Aim of the deliverable ............................................................................... 11 How this deliverable relates to other deliverables .................................. 12 Structure of the deliverable ...................................................................... 12 3 Methodology ..................................................................................... 13 Selection and assessment of the importance of drivers ........................ 13 Selection of stakeholders ......................................................................... 14 4 Urban mobility transition drivers in 1st - layer SPROUT cities .... 15 Valencia (Spain) ......................................................................................... 15 4.1.1 Drivers and stated level of importance ............................................. 15 4.1.2 Selected stakeholders ...................................................................... 17 4.1.3 Methods used .................................................................................. 20 Padua (Italy) ............................................................................................... 20 4.2.1 Drivers and stated level of importance ............................................. 20 4.2.2 Selected stakeholders ...................................................................... 22 4.2.1 Methods used .................................................................................. 25 Kalisz (Poland) ........................................................................................... 25 4.3.1 Drivers and stated level of importance ............................................. 25 4.3.2 Selected stakeholders ...................................................................... 27 4.3.3 Methods used .................................................................................. 29 Budapest (Hungary) .................................................................................. 29 4.4.1 Drivers and stated level of importance ............................................. 29 4.4.2 Selected stakeholders ...................................................................... 31 4.4.3 Methods used .................................................................................. 31 Tel Aviv (Israel) .......................................................................................... 31 4.5.1 Drivers and stated level of importance ............................................. 31 4.5.2 Selected stakeholders ...................................................................... 36 4.5.3 Methods used .................................................................................. 39 4 D2.3: Urban Mobility Transition Drivers 5 Urban mobility transition drivers in 2nd - layer SPROUT cities ... 41 Ioannina (Greece) ...................................................................................... 41 5.1.1 Drivers and stated level of importance ............................................. 41 5.1.2 Selected stakeholders ...................................................................... 43 5.1.3 Methods used .................................................................................. 45 Gothenburg (Sweden) ............................................................................... 45 5.2.1 Drivers and stated level of importance ............................................. 45 5.2.2 Selected stakeholders ...................................................................... 47 5.2.3 Methods used .................................................................................. 51 Arad (Romania) .......................................................................................... 52 5.3.1 Drivers and stated level of importance ............................................. 52 5.3.2 Selected stakeholders ...................................................................... 64 5.3.3 Methods used .................................................................................. 68 Mechelen (Belgium) ................................................................................... 69 5.4.1 Drivers and stated level of importance ............................................. 69 5.4.2 Selected stakeholders ...................................................................... 73 5.4.3 Methods used .................................................................................. 76 Ile-de-France (Paris) (France) ................................................................... 76 5.5.1 Drivers and stated level of importance ............................................. 76 5.5.2 Selected stakeholders ...................................................................... 78 5.5.3 Methods used .................................................................................. 82 West-Midlands (Birmingham) (United Kingdom) ..................................... 82 5.6.1 Drivers and stated level of importance ............................................. 82 5.6.2 Selected stakeholders ...................................................................... 84 5.6.3 Methods used .................................................................................. 86 Minneapolis (United States of America) ................................................... 86 5.7.1 Drivers and stated level of importance ............................................. 86 5.7.2 Selected stakeholders ...................................................................... 91 5.7.3 Methods used .................................................................................. 94 Almada (Portugal) ...................................................................................... 95 5.8.1 Drivers and stated level of importance ............................................. 95 5.8.2 Selected stakeholders ...................................................................... 97 5.8.3 Methods used .................................................................................. 99 5 D2.3: Urban Mobility Transition Drivers ‘s-Hertogenbosch (The Netherlands) ....................................................... 99 5.9.1 Drivers and stated level of importance ............................................. 99 5.9.2 Selected stakeholders .................................................................... 101 5.9.3 Methods used ................................................................................ 104 6 Conclusion ..................................................................................... 105 Annex A: Template sent to cities (drivers and stakeholders) ....... 108 6 D2.3: Urban Mobility Transition Drivers List of figures Figure 3.1.1. PESTEL categorisation of drivers. .................................................................. 13 List of tables Table 4.1. Drivers and stated level of importance Valencia ................................................. 15 Table 4.2. Selected stakeholders Valencia .......................................................................... 17 Table 4.3. Methods used Valencia ...................................................................................... 20 Table 4.4. Drivers and stated level of importance Padua. ................................................... 20 Table 4.5. Selected stakeholders Padua ............................................................................. 22 Table 4.6. Methods used Padua ......................................................................................... 25 Table 4.7. Drivers and stated level of importance Kalisz ..................................................... 25 Table 4.8. Selected stakeholders Kalisz .............................................................................. 27 Table 4.9. Methods used Kalisz .........................................................................................
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Conditions Générales De Vente Et D'utilisation Du Site
    Conditions Générales de Vente et d'Utilisation du site www.oui.sncf CONDITIONS GENERALES DE VENTE ET D'UTILISATION DU SITE WWW.OUI.SNCF ............................................ 1 PREAMBULE ..................................................................................................................................................... 3 CHAPITRE I GENERALITES ........................................................................................................................... 4 ARTICLE 1. DEFINITIONS ET CHAMP D'APPLICATION ...................................................................................... 4 1.1 DEFINITIONS ...................................................................................................................................... 4 1.2 CHAMP D'APPLICATION ..................................................................................................................... 4 ARTICLE 2. UTILISATION DU SITE WWW.OUI.SNCF .............................................................................................. 5 2.1 UTILISER L’ESPACE LOISIR .................................................................................................................. 5 Conditions d’utilisation ................................................................................................................................................ 5 Passation de Commandes ............................................................................................................................................ 6 Annulation
    [Show full text]
  • Rapport Annuel Transport Par Autocar Et Gares Routières 2018
    Sommaire SYNTHÈSE 05 03 Les gares routières et AVANT-PROPOS 11 autres aménagements de transport routier 64 AVERTISSEMENT 12 Les aménagements de transport routier 64 Les modalités d’accès aux aménagements 01 de transport routier 68 Les services librement organisés de transport par autocar ANNEXES 77 en 2018 13 Annexe 1 77 La couverture du territoire par les SLO Bilan de l’offre commercialisée par les SLO 13 Bilan de la fréquentation des SLO 26 Annexe 2 78 Caractéristiques des villes desservies par les SLO Résultats économiques et sociaux 31 Les services librement organisés sur des liaisons de Annexe 3 79 100 kilomètres ou moins 34 Les destinations directes au départ des villes desservies Annexe 4 80 02 Part des villes desservies sur les quatre trimestres Annexe 5 81 Analyse de la complémentarité Cartographie des aéroports desservis en 2018 des offres de transport interurbain 50 Annexe 6 82 Substituabilité de l’offre de transport routier Caractéristiques de l’offre de liaisons librement organisé avec des services de transport interurbain conventionnés Annexe 7 83 (routiers, ferroviaires et aériens) 50 Fréquence quotidienne Substituabilité de l’offre de transport routier librement organisé avec des services commerciaux 54 Annexe 8 85 Distance parcourue par les autocars L’offre de transport routier librement organisé sur les liaisons sans alternative modale 57 Annexe 9 86 Comparaison tarifaire des services de transport Caractéristiques de la demande interurbain (routiers, ferroviaires, aériens) 60 Complémentarité de l’offre de transport par
    [Show full text]
  • Edhec Business School, Lille Exchange Report Wong Chin1 Wai, Athena
    EXCHANGE REPORT, SPRING 2020 EDHEC BUSINESS SCHOOL, LILLE WONG CHIN WAI, ATHENA INFORMATION SYSTEMS & MARKETING, YEAR 3 TABLE OF CONTENTS Monthly Activity Log………………………………P2-7 General Exchange Information …………………P8-10 Items to Bring ………………………………………P11 Useful Links and Contacts …………………………P11 EDHEC BUSINESS SCHOOL, LILLE EXCHANGE REPORT WONG CHIN1 WAI, ATHENA Monthly Activity Log Late December 2019 Since some friends who went for exchange during Fall, 2019 invited me to go to London for a trip after their exchange and since we will be in Europe at the same time, I decided to ask my other EDHEC Business School exchange friend who would be studying in Nice to book a plane to fly to London first for a short trip with them before reaching France. We took the cheapest flight which requires 2 hours to Singapore, 9 hours stay at Changi Airport and 13 hours to London. Since it was during Christmas period, most restaurants and transports are closed. Fortunately, we found activities for us to do nearby at Hyde Park or within cycling distance. I really enjoyed our time at Winter Wonderland carnival at Hyde Park! After watching the Buckingham Palace march early in the morning, I hopped onto a previously booked London Heathrow Car to catch a flight to Cologne to meet my friend who also ended her Fall semester exchange there. I did not understand how the train ticket system works there at first and was able to enjoy a few free rides. Little did I know how lucky I was for not being caught as Germany is one of the strictest countries concerning fare dodging.
    [Show full text]
  • Guideline for Bike Rental Transdanube.Pearls Final Draft
    Transdanube.Pearls - Network for Sustainable Mobility along the Danube http://www.interreg-danube.eu/approved-projects/transdanube-pearls Guideline for bike rental Transdanube.Pearls Final Draft WP/Action 3.1 Author: Inštitút priestorového plánovania Version/Date 3.0, 23.11.2017 Document Revision/Approval Version Date Status Date Status 3.0 23/11/2017 Final draft xx.xx.xxxx final Contacts Coordinator: Bratislava Self-governing Region Sabinovská 16, P.O. Box 106 820 05 Bratislava web: www.region-bsk.sk Author: Inštitút priestorového plánovania Ľubľanská 1 831 02 Bratislava web: http://ipp.szm.com More information about Transdanube.Pearls project are available at www.interreg-danube.eu/approved-projects/transdanube-pearls Page 2 of 41 www.interreg-danube.eu/approved-projects/transdanube-pearls Abbreviations BSS Bike Sharing Scheme ECF European Cyclists´ Federation POI Point of Interest PT Public Transport Page 3 of 41 www.interreg-danube.eu/approved-projects/transdanube-pearls Table of content Contacts ..................................................................................................................................................................... 2 Bike Rental ................................................................................................................................................................ 5 Execuive summary ................................................................................................................................................. 5 1. Best practice examples from across
    [Show full text]
  • Vélib’ À Paris : on Change De Braquet !
    CYCLOCITY® LE SYSTEME DE VELOS EN LIBRE-SERVICE DE JCDECAUX Août 2012 Corporate Communications JCDECAUX EN CHIFFRES Chiffre d’affaires 2011 : 2 463 M€ / Chiffre d’affaires 1er semestre 2012 : 1 240,2 M€ JCDecaux est coté sur l'Eurolist d'Euronext Paris et fait partie des indices Euronext 100 et Dow Jones Sustainability. • No1 mondial du mobilier urbain avec 426 200 faces publicitaires • No1 mondial de la publicité dans les transports avec 175 aéroports et 280 contrats de transport dans les métros, bus, trains et tramways (367 800 faces publicitaires) o o • N 1 européen de l’affichage grand format avec 208 500 faces publicitaires • No1 de la communication extérieure en Asie-Pacifique avec 202 200 faces N 1 publicitaires • No1 mondial du vélo en libre service Présence dans 3 700 1 013 500 10 300 + de villes de faces collaborateurs10 300 + de 10 000 publicitaires 55 pays collaborateurs habitants Corporate Communications 2 CYCLOCITY® : LE CONCEPT Corporate Communications 3 JCDECAUX Nº1 MONDIAL DU VÉLO EN LIBRE-SERVICE •1ers développements du vélo en libre-service par JCDecaux 1999 •1ers vélos à Vienne (Autriche), Cordoue et Gijón (Espagne) 2003 •Lyon 2005 •Bruxelles (Belgique) 2006 •Paris, Marseille, Mulhouse, Besançon, Séville, Toulouse, Rouen… 2007 •Amiens, Luxembourg, Nantes, Nancy 2008 •Dublin (Irlande), Cergy Pontoise 2009 •Extension du contrat de Paris dans 31 communes limitrophes •Toyama (Japon), Valence (Espagne), Brisbane (Australie) 2010 •Ljubljana (Slovénie) 2011 mai2011 - •Namur (Belgique) 2012 Affiche Un parc de 47 000 vélos Près de 4 000 stations dans 65 villes dont 52 en France 2012 9 ans d’expérience en exploitation de vélos en libre-service Plus de 251 millions d’utilisations Corporate Communications 4 CYCLOCITY® : UN CONCEPT DE MOBILITÉ VALABLE DANS DE NOMBREUSES VILLES • Privilégier l’intermodalité grâce à une offre complémentaire aux transports en commun.
    [Show full text]
  • La Gare Mezzanine De Nantes
    OUVERTURE LE 20 LA GARE MEZZANINE NOV. 2020 DE NANTES, UNE ARCHITECTURE REMARQUABLE POUR UNE NOUVELLE GRANDE GARE EN FRANCE AU SERVICE D'UNE MOBILITÉ DURABLE DOSSIER DE PRESSE JEUDI 19 NOV. 2020 G RE DE NANTES CE PROJET EST COFINANCÉ PAR CIRCULONS MIEUX ECHANGEONS PLUS LE FONDS EUROPÉEN DE DÉVELOPPEMENT RÉGIONAL COMMUNIQUÉ DE PRESSE APRÈS TROIS ANS DE TRAVAUX SOUS MAÎTRISES D'OUVRAGE SNCF GARES & CONNEXIONS ET SNCF RÉSEAU, SANS AVOIR JAMAIS INTERROMPU LE TRAFIC FERROVIAIRE, LA NOUVELLE GARE MEZZANINE DE NANTES S’OUVRE AU GRAND PUBLIC VENDREDI 20 NOVEMBRE 2020. Avec près de 17 millions de visiteurs annuels, dont près de 12 millions de voyageurs*, la gare de Nantes se situe à la 6e place des gares les plus fréquentées de France (hors Île-de-France) et à la première de la région des Pays de la Loire. Au cœur d’un territoire dynamique - en termes démographiques et économiques - la gare avait besoin de s’agrandir, de se moderniser, de gagner en confort et en accessibilité pour le plus grand bénéfice des voyageurs et des passants. Ensemble, l’Europe, l’État, la Région des Pays de la Loire, le Département de Loire-Atlantique, Nantes Métropole et le groupe SNCF se sont concertés pour proposer un projet répondant à trois grands enjeux : Un enjeu d’urbanisme Signée de l’architecte international Rudy Ricciotti et construite par le pôle Construction de DEMATHIEU BARD dans le cadre d’un groupement interne réunissant l’agence Infrastructures – Génie Civil Ouest et André BTP, la gare de Nantes s’inscrit dans un vaste projet urbain de transformation de la centralité métropolitaine.
    [Show full text]
  • Bike Sharing: a Review of Evidence on Impacts and Processes of Implementation and Operation
    Research in Transportation Business & Management 15 (2015) 28–38 Contents lists available at ScienceDirect Research in Transportation Business & Management Bike sharing: A review of evidence on impacts and processes of implementation and operation Miriam Ricci ⁎ Centre for Transport & Society, Department of Geography and Environmental Management, University of the West of England, Bristol BS16 1QY, United Kingdom article info abstract Article history: Despite the popularity of bike sharing, there is a lack of evidence on existing schemes and whether they achieved Received 13 February 2015 their objectives. This paper is concerned with identifying and critically interpreting the available evidence on bike Received in revised form 29 March 2015 sharing to date, on both impacts and processes of implementation and operation. The existing evidence suggests Accepted 30 March 2015 that bike sharing can increase cycling levels but needs complementary pro-cycling measures and wider support Available online 17 April 2015 to sustainable urban mobility to thrive. Whilst predominantly enabling commuting, bike sharing allows users to fi Keywords: undertake other key economic, social and leisure activities. Bene ts include improved health, increased transport fi Bike sharing choice and convenience, reduced travel times and costs, and improved travel experience. These bene ts are un- Cycling policy equally distributed, since users are typically male, younger and in more advantaged socio-economic positions Evidence than average. There is no evidence that bike sharing significantly reduces traffic congestion, carbon emissions Evaluation and pollution. From a process perspective, bike sharing can be delivered through multiple governance models. A key challenge to operation is network rebalancing, while facilitating factors include partnership working and inclusive scheme promotion.
    [Show full text]
  • Balance General De La Bicicleta Pública En España Con La Colaboración De: Balance General De
    Balance General de la Bicicleta Pública en España CON LA COLABORACIÓN DE: Balance General de AGRADECIMIENTOS: A los expertos nacionales e internacionales por sus artícu- la Bicicleta Pública los: Benoît Beroud, Sebastian Buehrmann, Paul de Maio, Todd Edelman y Alfonso Sanz. A los Ayuntamientos que han participado en la encuesta en España de este estudio: Vinaròs, Aranjuez, Murcia, Salamanca, Va- lencia, Manc. de las marismas de Santoña, Victoria y Joyel, Aljaraque, Palencia, Burgos, Vic, Mahadahonda, Zaragoza, Granollers, Vilagarcía de Arousa, Ciudad Real, Leganés, Guadalajara, Alcázar de San Juan, Castellón de la Plana, Barcelona, Donostia - San Sebastian, Badajoz, Santander, Las Palmas de Gran Canaria, Aranda de Duero y Logroño. DIRECCIÓN Xavier Corominas Fundación ECA - BUREAU VERITAS AUTORES Esther Anaya Alberto Castro Excepto en los casos específicamente previstos por la Ley, cualquier reproduc- ción, distribución, comunicación pública o transformación de esta obra sólo puede ser realizada con la autorización de los titulares de los derechos que se indican en los créditos. Diríjanse al editor si desean obtener autorización para efectuarlos. Si necesita fotocopiar o escanear un fragmento de esta obra diríjase a CEDRO (Centro Español de Derechos Reprográficos www.cedro.org) Mayo 2012 Edita: Fundación ECA Bureau Veritas Fotocomposición: Curbet Edicions ISBN: 978-84-940098-7-7 © del texto: Esther Anaya y Alberto Castro Coordinación editorial: Curbet Edicions www.ccgedicions.cat Ap. de Correos 762 - 17080 Girona Tel. 972 200 084 Impreso en Publidisa Depósito legal: GI. 868-2012 Índice 0. PRÓLOGO 13 0 1 Benoît Beroud 13 0.2. Sebastian Buehrmann 17 0 3 Paul de Maio 22 0.4. Todd Edelman 25 0 5 Alfonso Sanz 31 1.
    [Show full text]
  • Identification of Enablers and Barriers for Public Bike Share System
    sustainability Article Identification of Enablers and Barriers for Public Bike Share System Adoption using Social Media and Statistical Models Ainhoa Serna 1,* , Tomas Ruiz 2, Jon Kepa Gerrikagoitia 3,* and Rosa Arroyo 2 1 Computer Science and Artificial Intelligence Department, University of the Basque Country UPV/EHU, 20018 Donostia-San Sebastián, Spain 2 Transport Department, School of Civil Engineering, Universitat Politècnica de Valencia, Camino de Vera s/n, 46022, Valencia, Spain; [email protected] (T.R.); [email protected] (R.A.) 3 IDEKO, ICT and Automation Research Group, Arriaga 2, 20870 Elgoibar, Spain * Correspondence: [email protected] (A.S.); [email protected] (J.K.G.) Received: 29 August 2019; Accepted: 5 November 2019; Published: 7 November 2019 Abstract: Public bike share (PBS) systems are meant to be a sustainable urban mobility solution in areas where different travel options and the practice of active transport modes can diminish the need on the vehicle and decrease greenhouse gas emission. Although PBS systems have been included in transportation plans in the last decades experiencing an important development and growth, it is crucial to know the main enablers and barriers that PBS systems are facing to reach their goals. In this paper, first, sentiment analysis techniques are applied to user generated content (UGC) in social media comments (Facebook, Twitter and TripAdvisor) to identify these enablers and barriers. This analysis provides a set of explanatory variables that are combined with data from official statistics and the PBS observatory in Spain. As a result, a statistical model that assesses the connection between PBS use and certain characteristics of the PBS systems, utilizing sociodemographic, climate, and positive and negative opinion data extracted from social media is developed.
    [Show full text]
  • Long Distance Coach Services in France and Germany: the New European Competition Between Flixbus and Blablabus Laurent Guihéry
    Long Distance Coach Services in France and Germany: the new European competition between Flixbus and BlaBlaBus Laurent Guihéry To cite this version: Laurent Guihéry. Long Distance Coach Services in France and Germany: the new European competi- tion between Flixbus and BlaBlaBus. Rivista di Economia e Politica dei Trasporti, Rivista pubblicata dalla Società Italiana di Economia dei Trasporti e della Logistica (SIET) 2019, Numero speciale su ”Il trasporto automobilistico di lunga distanza”, 1 (2019). halshs-02374703 HAL Id: halshs-02374703 https://halshs.archives-ouvertes.fr/halshs-02374703 Submitted on 27 Nov 2019 HAL is a multi-disciplinary open access L’archive ouverte pluridisciplinaire HAL, est archive for the deposit and dissemination of sci- destinée au dépôt et à la diffusion de documents entific research documents, whether they are pub- scientifiques de niveau recherche, publiés ou non, lished or not. The documents may come from émanant des établissements d’enseignement et de teaching and research institutions in France or recherche français ou étrangers, des laboratoires abroad, or from public or private research centers. publics ou privés. Long Distance Coach Services in France and Germany: the new European competition between Flixbus and BlaBlaBus Pagina | 1 Long Distance Coach Services in France and Germany: the new European competition between Flixbus and BlaBlaBus V.2 after referee – 15.09.2019 Laurent Guihéry1* 1 Professor, University of Cergy-Pontoise, MRTE, France Long distance passenger mobility is experiencing a huge structural change in France and Germany. Based on Internet technology and customer-oriented services, new entrants in interurban coach services are diversifying the options for the travelers and have been very successful.
    [Show full text]
  • Etat Des Lieux Régional
    SERVICE LOCALISATION ORGANISATEUR AUTRES DONNÉES Départe- MOA / porteur : Exploitant / ges- Public concerné / condi- Date de créa- ID Thématiques Mode Nom du service Description Type de territoire Portée MOA / porteur : nom Sources Commentaires ment type tionnaire tions tion Les MOA ont à 16 Maîtres d'ouvrage : Création : 1995- Près de 1000 km de routes touristiques cyclables aménagées (variantes et antennes charge l'entretien. tous les départements 2013 comprises) de Cuffy (proche de Nevers) à Saint-Brévin-les-Pins (Saint Nazaire). L’itiné- La réalisation : plu- Grand Public (positionne- Ajout 2016 INFRASTRUCTURES 18, 37, et les agglo (compé- Auj : rénovation, VÉLO sieurs organisations 1 ET AMÉNAGEMENTS La Loire à vélo raire traverse les régions Pays de la Loire (373 km) et Centre-Val de Loire (621 km). Tous Régionale CR + CD + CA tence voirie) ment famille qui devient de amélioration http://www.loireavelo.fr/ Mise à jour 2017 41, 45 (syndicats, maîtres Section ouest commune avec l'itinéraire de l’EuroVelo 6, la grande transversale cyclable plus en plus important). avec chacun des Mise à jour 2018 d'ouvrage ou proprié- européenne. Les deux régions grands MOA taires de voirie) Octroi d'une aide financière pour la mise en place de bornes de recharge sur leur terri- Dispositif d’aide visant à toire : Partenariat État- soutenir le déploiement des - SIEIL 37 (Syndicat intercommunal d’énergie d’Indre-et-Loire) 18, 28, Ademe (PIA de 2013 (appel à INFRASTRUCTURES l'État : pro- Syndicats des Syndicats des énergies / Ajout 2016 2 VOITURE infrastructures
    [Show full text]
  • Best Way to Go to Agen
    BEST WAY TO GO TO AGEN PARIS BORDEAUX Definitely the best way is to fly to TOULOUSE or BORDEAUX and get our TOULOUSE shuttle or to rent a car ! + We didn’t speak a lot AGEN about flying from your country to Agen/ or flying from Paris to Agen, because it’s quite difficult to get sure information so in advance for October 202120 about this line… GUIDE BOOK TRANSPORTS TO WORLD CHAMPIONSHIP 2021 IN AGEN Page 1 sur 7 HOW TO CONNECT AGEN BY TGV TRAIN PRICES POINT OF DEPARTURE MEANS OF TRANSPORT TIME APPROX. GROUP RESERVATION APPROX. En France • [email protected] DEPENDS ON WHERE IS THE 3H • Phone 0810 879 479 from Monday to friday 8h30 to 18h (0,40 €/minute) FROM SWISS TO “LYON SPECIAL TRAIN TO PARIS DEPARTURE TO • Groups 10 to 30 passengers : www.voyages-train-groupes.sncf.fr STATION” IN PARIS LYRYA AND HOW LONG IN AVANCE 4H 30€/70€/150€ • From SWISS Les gares CFF • https://agents-switzerland.mytraintravel.com • Groups 10 to 30 passengers www.voyages-train-groupes.sncf.fr CONNECTION FROM “LYON STATION” TO “MONTPARNASSE BY SUBWAY ≈22 minutes 1, 90€ By ticket in station or in subway STATION” IN PARIS • Paris – Bruxelles : from 29€ • Paris – Amsterdam : from 35€ • Paris – Cologne : from 35€ • Reservations are opened 4 months in advance for groups. The group offer is not saled DEPENDS ON WHERE IS THE FROM BELGIUM, 2H online. SPECIAL TRAIN TGV DEPARTURE NETHERLANDS, GERMANY TO TO • In France : + 33 8 10 87 94 79, THALYS AND HOW LONG IN AVANCE “NORD STATION” IN PARIS 3H30 30€/70€/150€ • [email protected] • fax au +33 8 10 87 54 75.
    [Show full text]