Nordic experience-sharing on support and policy instruments for sustainable Nordic cities, focusing on climate-smart mobility Nordic experience-sharing on support and policy instruments for sustainable Nordic cities, focusing on climate-smart mobility.
Programme: 11 April 2019 at the Grand Hotel in Lund, Sweden 09:00 Assembly and light refreshments
09:30–09:45 Short welcome speech (K2)
09:45–10:00 Support and policy instruments for sustainable mobility – a Nordic comparison (Ulrik Berggren, K2)
10:00–10:30 Urban growth agreements in Norway – Tools for zero growth (Alberte Ruud, The Norwegian Public Roads Administration)
10:30–11:00 Policy instruments for sustainable mobility in Finland (Tytti Viinikainen, Finnish Transport and Communications Agency)
11:00–11:15 Short break
11:15–11:45 Cooperation between national and local level in Denmark – To achieve sustainable mobility (Susanne Krawack, City of Aarhus)
11:45–12:15 Urban environment agreements in Sweden – Do they make a difference? (Malena Möller, Swedish Transport Administration)
12:15–13:15 Lunch
13:15–13:35 What is required and what is possible? Panel discussion with a politician and a civil servant (Karin Svensson Smith, politician and Håkan Johansson, Swedish Transport Administration)
13:35–15:15 Workshop: Support and policy instruments for sustainable mobility – Opportunities and challenges What can we learn from the different Nordic countries? What joint recommendations do we want to give?
14:30 Coffee during the workshop
15:15–15:30 Summing-up and formulation of recommendations
15:30 End of the day
16:00–17:00 Study visit for those interested to the Lund Tramway Nordic experiences of support and policy instruments for sustainable mobility – a tentative overview Ulrik Berggren K2 – The Swedish Knowledge Centre for Public Transport What could be regarded as “sustainable mobility”?
• Trips using the low-emission modes walk, bicycle and public transport
• Sometimes also the absence of trips, or the minimising of trip lengths Policy and support instruments (in this context)
• Grants/economic subsidies for infrastructure (and sometimes operations of public transport services) – National government regional/local authorities
• Conditions apply (any of many of…)! – Co-funding – “Quid pro quo:s” – Stated local/regional targets approved – Approval of (systematic) “work” procedures (planning, exercise of authority, operations, etc) Types of instruments applied
• Comprehensive agreements involving conditions on urban planning and housing, legally binding (Norway, Finland) • Support schemes with application procedure (Sweden, Denmark) • Pure operational support for improvement of urban public transport supply (Iceland) Types of overarching objectives
• Urban attractiveness and competitiveness (Finland)
• Shift towards increasing trip share with sustainable modes (Sweden, Norway, Iceland)
• Housing provision and Improved co-ordination with infrastructure planning (Sweden, Norway, Finland)
• Improved attractiveness (service quality) in public transport, reducing CO2 emissions (Denmark) – Level of service (eg priority) – Smoother transfers “Avtalets centrala mål är en enhetlig samhällsstruktur, solidariskt ansvar inom bostadspolitiken och fungerande trafikarrangemang i hela den funktionella stadsregionen.”
Helsingforsregionens MBT-avtal Degree of funding
• In general: Up to half of the cost for new infrastructure (Sweden, new agreements in Norway, Denmark – also for operations)
• 30% for tramway investments (Finland)
• In Finland, the government also supports other “cost efficient” transport measures through the scheme Receivers of grants
• Public transport operators (Denmark, Iceland)
• Regions and municipalities (Denmark, Norway, Finland, Sweden) Occurrence of “quid-pro-quo” and other conditions
• Most pronounced in Norway (Byvekstavtaler) – Predicted results to fulfil central objectives – Mandatory restrictions on car traffic – Urban planning • Also in Finland – Measures should support national and regional plans (road tolls in Helsinki) • Slightly weaker in Sweden and Denmark – Fulfil a few (Sweden) or at least one of optional requirements (Denmark) Types of measures (eligible for grants)
• Sweden and Norway: Cycleways, public transport stops, busways and tramways and other priority measures • Finland: Tramway, road infrastructure, bike and walk measures, housing • Denmark: Busways/other priority measures, cycleways, innovative solutions, multimodal facilities at bus/train stops, stop improvements, start-up costs for rural bus lines • Iceland: Improvements of bus operations (incl vehicles) Total spending (“comparing apples and pears”?)
• Denmark: 477 MDKK (2017)
• Finland: €52M (smaller measures during 2016-2019)
• Norway (in total for current agreements): ~20 000 MNOK
• Iceland: 900 MISK per year during 10 years
• Sweden: 1 700 MSEK for three rounds of projects Evaluation
• Mandatory in most cases • Most rigorous in Norway (also ex-ante) • Evaluation reports to be handed in by applicants (Sweden – ex post, Norway) • General ex post evaluations made (Finland, Iceland, Denmark) Common traits
• Sustainability agenda • Better efficiency in transport system as a whole, and in particular public transport • Attractiveness
Urban growth agreements in Norway – Tools for Zero Growth
Alberte Ruud - Norwegian Public Roads Administration Elisabeth Dahle - Ministry of Local Government and Modernisation
12.04.2019 How did the initiative arise?
Launching of the Zero Growth Target (ZGT) ● National Transport Plan 2014-2023: Joint proposal from the transport agencies, approved by Parliament in the White Paper on the National Transport Plan ● The agreement on climate policy in Parliament (Storting) 2012
Urban Growth Agreements to follow-up ZGT ● Framework described in the National Transport Plan 2014- 2023 and in the current plan (2018-2029) – Main features are the same, but more focus on land-use planning
12.04.2019 Transport policy objectives The Aim: Zero growth in car traffic
● Reduce negative consequences of urban transport – Investments in sustainable transport (public transport, cycling and walking) – Measures that restrict the use of cars (parking, tolls) – Co-ordinated land-use and transport planning
The growth in passenger transport in urban areas is to be covered by public transport, cycling and walking
Foto: Knut Opeide
12.04.2019 Available in nine main urban areas
1. Oslo* Oslo urban area 1 287 494 2. Bergen* Bergen urbane area 370 950 3. Trondheim* Trondheim urban area 247 847 4. Stavanger & Sandnes* Stavanger area 246 704 5. Kristiansand Kristiansand urban area 134 841 6. Drammen Drammen urban area 138 536 7. Skien & Porsgrunn Grenland 107 135 8. Fredrikstad & Sarpsborg Nedre Glomma 136 520 9. Tromsø Tromsø 75 638
- 500 000 1 000 000 1 500 000 *Signed agreements Population size in the urban area. 2016 Urban Growth Agreements (1)
● A new way of organizing the collaboration between central, regional and local authorities in major urban areas
● All parties are equal during negotiations (National government, County Administration, Municipality)
● The agreement enables infrastructure investments in urban areas, in order to achieve the Zero Growth Target
● Local parties commit to land-use that contributes to increased benefit of investments in public transport etc.
12/04/2019 Urban Growth Agreements - financial framework
NOK 66 billion in government funds in a twelve year period (2018-2029)
● NOK 24 billion: Public transport infrastructure of national interest - the four main cities • Metro in Oslo (Fornebubanen) • Light rail in Bergen • Bus Rapid Transit in Trondheim and Stavanger area ● NOK 24 billion: Investments to increase walking, cycling and public transport use – national roads ● NOK17 billion: Reward scheme for public transport use – More flexible use: Can also be spent on county and municipal roads, as well as on public transport operation. ● NOK 1 billion: Development of stations and hubs as part of the negotiation pot.
12/04/2019 Local commitments
● Implement measures to reach the Zero Growth Target – restrictive measures if necessary ● Financial balance in the project portefolio
● Spatial planning (both local and national)
12.04.2019 Spatial planning
The agreements include commitments to concentrated land-use planning based on the regional plans for coordinated land use and transport.
12.04.2019 National contributions
● Financing scheme through the National Transport Plan 2018 – 2029 with high priority to urban transport.
● Transport-intensive services to be located in connection to public transport.
● State planning in accordance with regional plans for land-use and transport. Contributions from local authorities in urban areas
● Land-use policy that supports investments to improve public transport, bikeability and walkability.
● Densification at the designated public transport nodes.
● Ensure construction within the building zones close to public transport hubs. Urban Growth Agreement: Bybanen – Bergen Light Rail
Bilde: Bergens Tidende
Regional land-use and transport plan Hordaland County
Zones for growth and concentrated land use Urban Growth Agreements - the Process
Invitation from Ministry of Transport and Communications (MTC) and Ministry of Local Government and Modernisation (MLGM)
● Political steering group - headed by the State secretary of the MTC – Other national government representative: State Secretary of the MLGM – The city regions: Municipalities and County Council (mostly Mayors)
● Negotiations are headed by the Norwegian Public Roads Administration - by mandate from the MTC and the MLGM – Other national government representatives: County Governor and Norwegian Railway Directorate – The city regions: Municipalities and County Council (mostly Mayors)
12.04.2019 Urban Growth Agreements - the Follow-up
● Political steering group - headed by the State secretary of the MTC – Other national government representative: State secretary of the MLGM – The city regions: Municipalities and County Council (mostly Mayors) ● 1-2 meetings per year (annual budgets, four-year action programmes)
● Coordination group - headed by the Norwegian Public Roads Administration – Other national government representatives: County Governor and the Norwegian Railway Directorate – The city regions: Municipalities and County Council (mostly Mayors) ● Monthly meetings
12.04.2019 Experience so far – some reflections
● The Zero Growth Target is well known and accepted ● Increased dialogue, cooperation and coordination between national and local level - especially on land use
● Political game unavoidable – From a local perspective: The national government has too much power – threat to local self- government – From a national government perspective: The local parties take the financial contribution from the national government for granted
12.04.2019 Thank you for your attention!
Knut Opeide Policy instruments for sustainable mobility in Finland
Tytti Viinikainen Finnish Transport and Communications Agency (Traficom)
Lund 11 April 2019 Several incentive systems for municipalities
• Agreements on land use, housing and transport (in Finnish: MAL)
• State subsidies for public transport operation • State subsidies for walking and cycling investments • State subsidies for mobility management Agreements on land use, housing and transport Parties
The state concludes Agreements on land use, housing and transport with four regions: Helsinki, Tampere, Turku, Oulu • Latest agreements: 2016-2019 • Existing since 2010 • In each city region all the municipalities of the region sign the agreement
The state parties • Ministry of Environment • Ministry of Transport and Communications • Ministry of Economic Affairs and Employment • Housing Finance and Development Centre Finnish Transport Infrastructure Agency • Regional Centre for Economic Development, Transport and the Environment Objectives
• To enhance strategic regional planning, as well as coordination between the municipalities in the region • To coordinate land use, housing and transport planning as a whole (-> especially counteracting urban sprawl) • To support the regional and national goals concerning sustainability and housing provision • To strengthen the region’s competitiveness and attractiveness in general Contents
The agreements specify the objectives for • land use and housing production in the coming years • the main development projects of the transport network
-> All parties agree to promote these objectives, depending of their available resources • to support housing construction so that it fosters the dense city structure • to take part in financing transport & other infrastructure investments Funding
The agreements do include transport investments, but part of those are in fact financed through other instruments • They are however mentioned in these agreements because considered important for the region’s general aims • Example: state funding for big railway or tramway investments (30%) The actual new state funding (50%) is directed to ”small, cost-effective transport projects” • State funding in 2016-2019: 30 million euros (total sum for the four-year period), of which 15 million to Helsinki region and 5 million to Tampere, Turku and Oulu respectively • Process: in each region, these small transport projects are selected in co- operation with several parties (regional group for transport system planning). The list is reviewed yearly. State funding, Municipalities, total of 2016-2019 total of 2016-2019 Helsinki region 15 million 15 million Tampere region 5 million 5 million Turku region 5 million 5 million
Oulu region 5 million 5 million Continuation
• MAL-agreements are not mandated in any law -> each new government decides about their continuation (general election in Finland: April 14th 2019) • There are discussions about extending the agreements to some new city regions, like Jyväskylä, Kuopio, Lahti – nothing decided so far
In addition: the first parliamentary 4-year transport system plan is to be approved in spring 2020 -> support mechanisms for municipalities and regions (e.g. MAL-agreements) should be part of the plan Results mid-term evaluation of the period 2016-2019
• In all four city regions, the agreements have lead to densified city structure, and the goals for housing construction have been met (both in numbers and by location) • Transport investments and other measures have mainly been implemented, but there is no increase in modal share of sustainable modes -> no substantial change in CO2 emissions • Co-operation between municipalities inside the region, as well as between the region and the state, has visibly strengthened
Experiences (Rand 2018, link to publication in Finnish)
• In the city regions, large state-funded transport investments are considered significant, and it is considered important to include these in the agreements. • The “small cost-effective transport projects” are considered to have only a minor effect on regional goals (as they are so small…), but they do lead to the right direction. The most important feature of this money is considered to be that it gets parties to co-operate. • From the point of view of effectiveness, it would be important to also allocate this funding also to the street network (= city’s network), not only to the state network State subsidies for public transport operation Subsidies for public transport operation (allocated every year)
To four big cities (Helsinki, Tampere, Turku, Oulu): 2019 a total of 13,2 million • These subsidies are also included (=mentioned) in MAL-agreements • Despite of these subsidies, cities finance most of their public transport operation themselves
To ten mid-size cities, 2019 a total of 8,2 million State subsidies for walking and cycling investments Subsidies for walking and cycling investments
• Unlike the money for MAL-agreements, this funding is actually directed to the municipal network, not to the state network • 2018: 3,5 million; 2019: 3,5 million • 50% state funding, 50% from the municipality • In 2018 we received 67 applications from municipalities; 15 were funded • New instrument, but so far good experiences (good applications!) State subsidies for mobility management Subsidies for mobility management
• Yearly sum: 0,9 million • 75% state funding, 25% from the municipality • NOT for investments • Applications/funded 2015: 27/20 2016: 44/22 2017: 42/29 2018: 50/31 2019: 61/31 Has been a very good instrument in spreading mobility management initiatives around the country! “Worth more than the money” Conclusions Experiences (comments from Association of Finnish Local and Regional Authorities)
• All instruments mentioned above are important and a good way to support and encourage municipalities • Especially partnerships and co-operation are desirable, so MAL-agreements are a very good instrument • In addition, it is good that the various subsidies and funding instruments only set goals and general frameworks, but let municipalities and regions decide the concrete measures www.tbst.dk 12. april Planning for rail and bike in 2019 Denmark
Jan Jørgensen, Public Transport Office www.tbst.dk A few numbers to start with… 12. april 2019 1,1 1,6 ~100 www.tbst.dk BRT - Aalborg 12. april 2019 www.tbst.dk Light Rail - Aarhus 12. april 2019 www.tbst.dk Light Rail – Odense 12. april 2019 More railways in Copenhagen www.tbst.dk 12. april - serving new urban areas 2019 www.tbst.dk Long term efforts 12. april 2019
-Spatial plan -Bike infrastructure -Bike+Train www.tbst.dk 12. april 2019 Fingerplan 1947
Controlling urban growth in the rail- oriented city www.tbst.dk 12. april 2019 S-trains along the urban fingers www.tbst.dk 12. april 2019 Fingerplan 2013
Same principle – but longer and broader fingers www.tbst.dk 12. april Planning 2019 principle since 1989
Large offices must be close to stations (within 600 metres)
But many offices are located far from stations… www.tbst.dk Workplaces close to stations 12. april strengthens public transport 2019
25%
20%
15%
10%
5%
0% under 500 m 500-1000 m 1-2 km over 2 km www.tbst.dk Modal split – Copenhagen Region 12. april 2019 www.tbst.dk 12. april 2019 www.tbst.dk New planning – Flintholm station 12. april 2019 www.tbst.dk 12. april 2019
Planned Cycle Super Highways
Copenhagen Region www.tbst.dk 12. april 2019 Seperate bike lanes in Copenhagen
60% bike to work www.tbst.dk Bike bridges - Bryggebroen 12. april 2019
Connecting the city for bikes Connecting the city for bikes - Cykelslangen www.tbst.dk 12. april 2019 www.tbst.dk Connecting the city for bikes - Cirkelbroen 12. april 2019 Connecting the city for bikes – ”Kyssenes www.tbst.dk 12. april bro” Inderhavnsbroen 2019 Connecting the city for bikes – new bridge www.tbst.dk 12. april (planned opening 2018) 2019 www.tbst.dk Bike+train: 30% of train passengers 12. april 2019 www.tbst.dk From 2010 free to bring bike in S-train 12. april 2019 www.tbst.dk Challenge: More bikes in the S-trains 12. april 2019 www.tbst.dk 12. april Maybe… the worlds best bicycle bridge?2019 www.tbst.dk Train passengers development 12. april 2019 www.tbst.dk Modal split – Danish regions 12. april 2019 TMALL 0143 Presentation(2015:579) Government engelsk v 1.0 Administration Swedish Transport Malena Möller SWEDEN AGREEMENTS IN ENVIRONMENT URBAN bill Challenges
• The cities face major challenges
• Cities need to be planned and developed with priority in the order, pedestrians, bicycles, public transport, commercial transport and, finally, the car.
• Climate goal - car traffic is reduced, especially in cities.
2 Urban environment agreements
• 2013 Commission on fossil free road transport proposal based on idea from Norway • 2015 Government mandate Transport Administration proposal on regulation • 2015 First call • 2016-2017 Call 2-4
65 applications granted in total 1.7 billion SEK (€170M)
3 The National Transport Plan 2018-2029
The UEA is now part of the long-term transport planning In total SEK 12 billion (€1,2 billion) SEK 1 billion a year (€100M)
The total sum set aside for the 2015-2018 period is SEK 2,75 billion (€275M)
4 Increased share of urban transport by public transport and cycling Energy effective solutions with a low rate of greenhouse gas emission Innovative, capacity strong and resource effective solutions Good built environment Increased building of houses and flats Increased share of sustainable transports
Urban Environment Agreement
Collectively financed Services-in-return Other measures measures Follow-up and evaluation
5 Who can apply for support and how much?
• Local and regional authorities • Joint applications are recommended • Government financing can be allocated but not more than 50 per cent of the total costs
6 Government support is allocated for
• Investments in structures for local and regional public transport and bicycles. • New transport solutions to demonstrate and test.
But • Measures cannot start before the application is submitted. • Measures and services-in-return must be finished no later than the end of 2029.
7 Measures that can be granted support
• Roads and streets designed for public transport, railroads and trams, platforms, bus stops, stations, and quays etc • Bicycle paths, bicycle parking etc.
**** • Support is not allocated for commuter car parking, vehicles and operating measures • Support is not allocated for planning costs
8 Examples of measures
• Bus lanes • BRT concepts • Stations and other changing points • Signal priority for public transport and/or cyclist • Electrified buses • Pram lines • Bicycle lanes • Bicycle garages • Bicycle parking
9 Services-in-return
• Services-in-return are measures other than those that the government support is intended for. • Services-in-return shall contribute to an increased share of sustainable transports or increased sustainable urban development.
10 Examples of services-in-return
• Development of centrally situated houses and flats • Measures for public transport, cyclists and pedestrians in addition to those financed by the agreement • Adjust speed on urban streets with regard to pedestrians, cyclists, and public transport • Adjust parking strategies, parking numbers, and parking fees in order to decrease urban traffic • Others (such as mobility management, transport strategies)
11 Applications and allocated recourses 2015-2017
• Four calls were conducted • 126 applications • 65 applications were granted support • About SEK 1,7 billion (€170M) • 90 percent to municipalities >50 000 inhab. Over 200 measures and nearly 600 services-in- return
Conditions for first four calls especially: • Finished by 2018 • Measures for bicycle added in call 4, change in the regulation 2017.
12 Tram - Lund
Services in return • Densification along the tram line • Development at the Brunnshög area • Remodeling of Lund Central Station at the Clementstorget stop • Development of the city bus network • Development of four defined cycle tracks • Other measures for public transport • Change of speed limits in the city • Mobility managment during the construction time of the tramway Total cost 746 mSEK, granted support 298 mSEK Source: Lund municipality
14 Bus Rapid Transit -Helsingborg
Total cost 196 mSEK, granted support 98 mSEK
Service in return - Upgrading of weather protection in city traffic - Straightning of a line - Extension of cycle path - Speed adjustment throughout the central area - Parking management, adjustment of minimum parking requriements and review of parking fees - Urban Plan which identifies areas of densification and clarifies public transport as the backbone of urban development - At least three new plans for densification along the BRT route
Source: Helsingborg municipality
15 Charging infrastructure - Östersund
Services in return - Pedestrian- and bicycleroad Fältjägränd - Express bike paths, 6.5 km - Lower the parking standards and introduce flexible parking rates - Bus stop in the area Remonthagen - Housing construction, about 1200 residential Total cost 6.4 millon SEK, Granted support on 3.2 units million SEK Charging station for extended bus line and updated bus stops along line Source: Östersund municipality
17 Follow-up and evaluation accounts
Local and regional authorities are obliged to • Submit a plan for follow-up and evaluation within six months after a positive decision has been given • Annually account for the costs and the realization of the approved measures and services-in-return • Measure traveling and its modal share (private cars, public transport, pedestrians, bicycles) for relevant areas before and after the realization • Submit a final report with – Financial account – Account of the effects on traveling and its modal share – Account of the local authorities work for a sustainable urban environment, and how the measures and services-in-return have attributed to a sustainable urban environment
18 Evaluation of UEAs The Swedish Transport Administration is responsible for the complete evaluation with the support of the Swedish Knowledge Centre for Public Transport (K2).
• Process • Effect of agreements • Comparative study of UEA in Norway
The prime target of the evaluation is to increase the knowledge of the UEA as a means of promoting sustainable urban environments where a higher degree of traveling is undertaken by public transport and cycling.
19 Urban freight logistics a part of urban environment agreements
• Government strategy on freight transport from June 2018 - urban freight logistics a part of urban environment agreements. • Infrastructure to support coordinated urban freight logistics including freight by bike.
• Waiting for the regulation
20 Evaluation K2 – Results so far
How would the measure have been completed without the urban environment agreement? 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 When should the measure have been 0 completed without the urban environment The same A little less Much less Not at all agreement? 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 At the same time Slightly later Much later
21 Any questions? Thank you!
22
Tramway Lund C - ESS
Lund 11 April, 2019 Nordic experience-sharing Tramway Lund C - ESS
You will receive four questions answered: What make us to start a discussion about a new tramway system? What role does the tram have in the urban development? How financed we the tramway? What is the status of the project today? Background City of Lund • 121,000 inhabitants
• Lund University, one of Scandinavias largest institutions for education and research
• Lund want to be a pioneer and role model in sustainable planning. “City of Lund shall take responsibility for ensuring that growth is balanced and sustainable”
Carbon dioxide emissions in Lund The Öresund region
Intense commuting traffic to Lund
Sweden - 34 000 incoming per day - 18 000 outgoing
Denmark Commuting by car is still most common
Källa: RVU 2007 Modal split per trip
Comprehensive plan 2018 “All increase in traffic in Lund 8 % shall be in terms of pedestrians, cyclists or public transport” Total travel, taking into account growth
INDEX Traveller with Skånetrafiken - Lund C
Numbers of borders/disembarking per workday 50000 40000 30000 20000 10000 0 2000 2002 2004 2006 2008 2010 2012 2014 Today 45 000 workplaces, 25 000 students ESS Tomorrow + 50 000 new workplaces and inhabitants Lund C – ESS the region’s largest workplace
Development area
LUND C The Lund Link
Think tram, drive bus!
BRT-solution Built 1998 - 2003
Political steering group
A united project Manage- organization ment team
Project manage- ment
Infra- Custumer Commu- Vehicle Operations Depot structure service nication The project
• 5,5 kilometers • 9 stops • 30 m long trams • Traffic every 7.5 min in rush hour • Travelling time 14.5 min • Total cost for infrastructure 80 M € • Traffic will start in spring / summer 2020 The tramway as a driving force for urban development The tramway have never been a goal, its a steppin stone to achieve goals The tramway as a driving force for urban development
Targeting strategy
At least two thirds of the overall traffic should be public transport or cycling. Only a third of the traffic should be by car.
30 % of Lunds expansion should be in the tramway influence area. The tramway as a driving force for urban development
• Many workplaces along the line have a strong base in science. • 60 % of the workplaces in Lund are situated along the line. 60% The tramway as a driving force for urban development
Brunnshög development
Densification LTH / IDEON
New Lund C The tramway as a driving force for urban development
Brunnshög
• The tramline is the central road – the brickbone
• A long term guarantee of high quality public transport The tramway as a driving force for urban development
Every node is today a matter for urban densification or urban expansion. Financing Economy – City of Lund
An important issue has been Brunnshög: 225 hectares the holding of land.
Benefits: Power to control and regulate land use
Increase of land value. 1 000 000 m2 BTA Infrastructure funding
The National Negotiation Urban agreement On Housing And Infrastructure 10 %
City of The government decided 2015 to introduce a new type of subsidies Urban Lund that was essential for the project. agreement 50 % 40 % Economy – City of Lund
Costs Income
Construction of Land development agreements with real infrastructure 40 M € property unit owners (PBL) 8 M €
Maintenance of Voluntary contributions from stakeholders infrastructure 0,6 M € 8 M € per year. Increase of land value 40-200 M € Challenges
Negative cash flow, a lot of other investment requirements in municipalitys- ”debt ceiling”
Start the traffic of trams a little bit early. Subsidies? The project
Some photos removed. Clemenstorget Getingevägen Sölvegatan
We could use the expected increase of land value as a stepping stone in the local discussions. Status January – April 2019
Some photos removed. 7 trams - CAF Urbos 100 Length 33 m 100 % low floor Total capacity of around 200 persons, of which 40 seated Thank you!
www.sparvaglund.se www.facebook.com/sparvaglund www.instagram.com/sparvaglund