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 D2.2: Current state of urban mobility Work package: WP 2 - Understanding transition in urban mobility Geert te Boveldt, Imre Keseru, Sara Tori, Cathy Macharis, Authors: (VUB), Beatriz Royo, Teresa de la Cruz (ZLC) 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) Status: Final version 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. D2.2: Current state of urban mobility 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 D2.2: Current state of urban mobility Table of Contents 1 Executive Summary ......................................................................... 10 2 Introduction ...................................................................................... 11 SPROUT project introduction and aims ................................................... 11 Aim of the deliverable ............................................................................... 12 How this deliverable relates to other deliverables .................................. 12 Structure of the deliverable ...................................................................... 13 3 Methodological guidance for cities and local scientific partners 14 Data-driven approach ................................................................................ 14 Guidance to cities ...................................................................................... 14 4 Current state of mobility in 1st-layer SPROUT cities .................... 16 Valencia (Spain) ......................................................................................... 16 Introduction ...................................................................................... 16 Main factors indicating a change is currently in progress in the city’s urban mobility environment .................................................................... 17 Main impacts which are currently unclear and therefore are not being addressed (or are inadequately addressed) by the current urban policy elements/instruments ............................................................................. 19 Conclusion ....................................................................................... 19 Padua (Italy) ............................................................................................... 20 Introduction ...................................................................................... 20 Main factors indicating a change is currently in progress in the city’s urban mobility environment .................................................................... 21 Main impacts which are currently unclear and therefore are not being addressed (or are inadequately addressed) by the current urban policy elements/instruments ............................................................................. 21 Conclusion ....................................................................................... 22 Kalisz (Poland) ........................................................................................... 22 Introduction ...................................................................................... 22 Main factors indicating a change is currently in progress in the city’s urban mobility environment .................................................................... 23 4 D2.2: Current state of urban mobility Main impacts which are currently unclear and therefore are not being addressed (or are inadequately addressed) by the current urban policy elements/instruments ............................................................................. 24 Conclusion ....................................................................................... 25 Budapest (Hungary) .................................................................................. 25 Introduction ...................................................................................... 25 Main factors indicating a change is currently in progress in the city’s urban mobility environment .................................................................... 26 Main impacts which are currently unclear and therefore are not being addressed (or are inadequately addressed) by the current urban policy elements/instruments) ............................................................................ 28 Conclusion ....................................................................................... 28 Tel Aviv (Israel) .......................................................................................... 28 Introduction ...................................................................................... 28 Main factors indicating a change is currently in progress in the city’s urban mobility environment .................................................................... 29 Main impacts which are currently unclear and therefore are not being addressed (or are inadequately addressed) by the current urban policy elements/instruments ............................................................................. 30 Conclusion ....................................................................................... 31 Summary overview of 1st layer cities’ challenges ................................... 32 5 Current State of Mobility in 2nd - layer SPROUT cities ................. 33 Ioannina (Greece) ...................................................................................... 33 Introduction ...................................................................................... 33 Description of the urban mobility landscape ..................................... 34 Conclusion ....................................................................................... 35 Gothenburg (Sweden) ............................................................................... 35 Introduction ...................................................................................... 35 Description of the urban mobility landscape ..................................... 36 Conclusion ....................................................................................... 37 Arad (Romania) .......................................................................................... 38 Introduction ...................................................................................... 38 Description of the urban mobility landscape ..................................... 38 Conclusion ....................................................................................... 39 Mechelen (Belgium) ................................................................................... 40 5 D2.2: Current state of urban mobility Introduction ...................................................................................... 40 Description of the urban mobility landscape ..................................... 40 Conclusion ....................................................................................... 41 Ile-de-France / Agglomeration Paris (France) .......................................... 41 Introduction ...................................................................................... 41 Description of the urban mobility landscape ..................................... 42 Conclusion ....................................................................................... 43 Birmingham (United Kingdom) ................................................................. 44 Introduction ...................................................................................... 44 Description of the urban mobility landscape ..................................... 44 Conclusion ....................................................................................... 45 Minneapolis (United States of America) ................................................... 45 Introduction ...................................................................................... 45 Description of the urban mobility landscape ..................................... 46 Conclusion ....................................................................................... 46 Almada (Portugal) ...................................................................................... 47 Introduction ...................................................................................... 47 Description of the urban mobility landscape ..................................... 48 Conclusion ....................................................................................... 49 ‘s-Hertogenbosch (Netherlands) .............................................................. 49 Introduction ...................................................................................... 49 Description of the urban