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: Starnberg, Bavaria, Germany Location (political district / region, federal province, country, other relevant position information): county (14 municipalities) in Bavaria, Germany, part of the metropolitan area Munich (EMM)

- PART A: MAIN TERRITORIAL FEATURES -

Factor Description Please fill in… Population Number of inhabitants (main residence) and year 133,621 (2015) - shares by age groups - 14.68% under 15 years old 55.62% 15-64 years old 22.73% 65 and older - share of working population - 54.4% working population Area Total area of the municipality in km² 487.73 km² (Starnberg county) Pop. density Number of inhabitants per km² (year) 274 inhab./km² (2015) Settlement Number of inhabitants per km² settlement area/ 133621/70,33km² density theoretically inhabitable area (year) 1899.9 inhab./km² (2015) Elevation Height above mean sea level in m Highest point in Berndorfer Buchet with 750m, lowest point in Ampermoos with 533m Settlement Sprawled settlements or mainly compact? Satellite The county consists of 14 structure areas around a centre or more disconnected municipalities of which two, centres/settlements? Physical barriers? Starnberg and Gauting, are arranged in a star-shape. The Starnberger lake is a natural physical barrier for Starnberg towards the south. In the west are the rural areas of the municipalities Inning, Seefeld, Andechs and Herrsching which are physically bordered by the Wörthsee, Pilsensee and Ammersee. Topography of Is it flat land / hilly terrain/ alpine valley and basin The landscape of Starnberg settlement area landscape? Other? county was shaped by

1

glaciation. The Starnberger See, Ammersee, Wörthsee and Pilsensee are finger lakes which were created by deglaciation. Furthermore, the glacial period lead to a moraine landscape. This is also the case for Kloster Andechs which lies on a ridge. The presence of river Würm leads to the formation of further geological landscapes. This includes formation of lowland moors and valleys at Leustetten and Mühltal, respectively. Functional Are there any characteristics describing special - The county is located within characteristics functions of the municipality (e.g.: popular tourist the strong economic region destination, concentration of jobs, school centre, Oberbayern, south of the regional centre, winter sport resort, economically state capital Munich. attractive, isolated/ central/ interconnected to,..) - Oberbayern is an attractive tourist area. Starnberg Fünfseenland recorded 91,282 overnight stays in 2016. The number of day tourists would be a little higher since the inhabitants of Munich use the region as recreation area. - Around ten secondary schools, three vocational schools, one technical college and 18 primary schools can be found in Starnberg county Jobs Number of workplaces and employees within the 10,664 workplaces (2014) municipality (year) with 48,754 employees (2016) Commuter Number of working population commuting to outside 27,409 (2016) balance the municipality (year) Number of people commuting from outside into the 29,025 (2016) municipality (year)

2

- 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 At county level, study mobility in Germany (MiD), 2008, Share by foot value in % by foot 17% Share bicycle value in % bicycle 16% Share MIV value in % motorized individual transport 58% (driver & passenger) Share PT value in % public transport 8% Share other/n.s. value in % other / not specified 0%

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: Bike&Ride

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):

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) E-start initiative (2015, Starnberg district office). Installation of charging stations for e-vehicles 3

within the county “Regional management Munich southwest” Express Bus X900 Car sharing, Bike sharing

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) There is a 471 km biking road network, which is There is a free bicycle rental in Gauting organized by indicated by consistent VSGV signage. Within the a small initiative. They aim for a consistent rental municipalities, the much-frequented roads are system for bicycles. equipped with sidewalks. Plus, there are numerous hiking tracks through the Fünf-Seen-Land.

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) Each year a customer satisfaction index is provided for the area of MVV and for every single means of transport (S-Bahn, U-Bahn, tram, regional bus) MiD (Mobility in Germany) 2008 – a new one coming next year Regional database Real-time data collection of regional busses (Starnberg county commissioned MVV to carry out the project)

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) Dedicated personnel employed by Starnberg county as well as the MVV take care of the complaint management. Especially commuters and students ask for better coordinated MVV-Regionalbus schedules A smoothly working public transport network with good connections and transitions between traffic lines is most important to the inhabitants of the county. Numerous inquiries regarding the number of stops and their physical attributes have been received

- 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) Federal Ministry of Transport and Digital Federal Ministry for Environment, Nature Infrastructure: Planning of federal traffic routes Conservation, Building and Nuclear Safety: in coordination with every concerned nationwide guideline and objectives concerning administrative office at federal level. spatial and housing planning in coordination Interior Ministry of Bavaria for building and with every concerned administrative office at 4

transport: project planning at national level. federal level. Starnberg county: roads authority for supra- Interior Ministry of Bavaria for building and local road and bicycle lane planning, traffic transport: project planning based on the management; local transportation plan for guideline and objectives in coordination with Public Transport every concerned administrative office at Municipalities: planning and realization of national level. State development plan (LEP), mobility projects in the urban and municipal Regional plan areas. Starnberg county: conceptual planning, statement on the LEP, citizen information Municipalities: planning and realization of projects in the urban and municipal areas

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)

Local transportation plan (current one from 2007, new one in 2018) with a 10-year scale - requested but voluntary (former obligatory) LEP – at state level, obligatory Since 2013, development of the regional busses in the whole county. Completion in December 2017. Initiated by the new tendering of the (bus) lines, with a 8-year scale

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)

Local: - The public transport shall contribute significantly to the mobility of the population and develop further towards an integrated system. - Good connection between each municipality and Starnberg city as well as between each municipal district and the main municipality - East-West connections in the county have to be improved - Considering the interests of mobility-impaired persons in the planning of public transport Regional: - Tangential development through regional bus connections between different train lines - Reduce road congestion by reducing the individual traffic - Improved perception of bus line offer National: - Reducing the CO2-emission - Ensure basic public services

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 5

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) Development of the regional bus lines that connect different train axes Connection between every municipal district and main municipality with regional busses

-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? - Political and administrative player are very - Car affine population conscious about public transport - Partially heavy traffic loads, esp. in - Financial possibilities to develop the offer of Starnberg town public transport - Network development for e-mobility charging station - opportunities & challenges of the municip./territory? - threats & restrictions of the municipality/territory? - Population has high standards regarding the - Further development and promotion of public transport individual transport - Young people move away from the idea of - Promotion of public transport and e- owning a private car mobility could be terminated - MVV tariff structure improvement - No further development and adaptation to - Development of the central urban railway modern mobility concepts, especially line in Munich ticketing

-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) - Express bus X900 – express line which connects [email protected] the counties of Starnberg and Fürstenfeldbruck - E-start initiative – Sustainable promotion [email protected] of electric mobility in Starnberg county. Many players of the county were consolidated under one roof

- 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) “Simply mobile. Environmental-friendly mobility at Stadt Offenburg fair prices in Offenburg.” – A discount card for an Historisches Rathaus 6

affordable rental of bicycles, car sharing and Hauptstraße 90 pedelecs from external suppliers. As a result, four 77652 Offenburg stations near public transport stops have been installed.

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)

no

-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). no

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).

MVV cost calculator for housing and mobility

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.

Simplified potential assessment. Input: routes and stops, population. Output: required stops, potential users. Scale: municipalities. Target group: administration, MVV

7