WPD ’s work ing steps

1. The  planning simulation workshop in Slovenia:process and results Aljaž Plevnik, Urban Planning Institute, Ljubljana, Slovenia

2. WPD’s workingsteps • State of the art review • Analysis & cross-national comparison • Planning simulation workshops • Recommendations & guidelines • Final conference in Cracow, September 2009

3. Planning simulation workshops: 5 local developments • Ljubljana – Slovenia • Rožna dolina: new university campus • Getafe – Spain • Los Molinos: new residential district • Vilnius – Lithuania • VELGA: multi-use site (shopping, offices, residential) • Cracow – Poland • Czyżyny-Dąbie: exhibition & conference centre • Dortmund – Germany • Phoenix-West: new business & technology park

4. Planning simulation workshop at UIRS, Ljubljana,11th of June, 2008 • scope to explore possible integration of MM into planning process of a new university complex in Ljubljana • best MM measures for university buildings in EU were selected and their transferability discussed photo: Jani Kozina, UIRS

5. Ljubljana, Slovenia • capital, regional centre • 278.000 inh. (0,5 mio region) • 60.000 students • good bus network • high cycling potential

6. Source: EC, 2007

7. Modal split in Ljubljana 1994 – 2003 Source:MOL, 2004

8. Preconditions - LUP and transport integration • fast changing planning system, • weak planning vs. development pressure, • functional disintegration between transport and land-use planning, • sustainable transport recognised as objective of planning systembut rarely put into practice, • low political willingness for sustainable transport solutions, • accessibility with sustainable modes neglected in the planning proces, • SUTP and MM are relatively unknown concepts,

9. source: GURS, 2008

10. 2 faculties • 3500 students • 350 employees • 40.000 m2 netto source: 4M architects, 2006

11. limited car access • 350 parkings • 400 m to bus stop • bus fq. 10 min • poor access for nonmotorised modes author: Jani Kozina, UIRS

12. Simulation’s background • unfavourable preconditions for integration of MM into LUP in Slovenia, • considerable traffic problems are expected at the simulation site – bad access on foot and with PT, lack of parking spaces • participants were aware of the predicted problems and were anxious to cooperate.

13. Participants - invited National level • Ministry of Environment and Physical Planning of the Republic of Slovenia - The Spatial Planning Directorate • Ministry of Environment and Physical Planning of the Republic of Slovenia - The Environment Directorate Local level • City of Ljubljana • Ljubljana public transport • Ljubljana Cyclists' Network – NGO

14. Participants - invited Site level – developers • University of Ljubljana – Department of Investment Management Site level – users • University of Ljubljana –Faculty of chemistry and chemical technology • University of Ljubljana –Faculty of computer and information science • Student representatives from both faculties Site level – constructors

15. 4 groups of MM meassures presented • parking policy: • maximum parking standards, • parking charges and passes, • parking management in the neighbourhood, • cross-financing from parking to alternative modes, • parking priority for carsharing and carpooling. • PT improvements: • improved access by PT, • developer’s co-financing of improved PT access, • promotional PT tickets and info package for the opening of new faculties and for new students,

16. 4 groups of MM meassures presented • cycling and walking: • improved access for cycling and walking, • cycle parking standards, • showers and lockers for nonmotorised travellers, • promotion of cycling and walking, • mobility plan for faculties: • transport impact assessment as a basis for a mobility plan, • information, • promotion.

17. Simulation results – general • difficult to limit discussion to questions related to MM measures (focus on preconditions and hard measures), • numerous questions about integration of MM measures are irrelevant in such status of preconditions, • most of the discussed MM measures considered as interesting and useful, yet they only got relevant after the improvement of preconditions or implementation of hard measures.

18. Acceptance for Mobility Management • unawarness of possibilities offered by soft measures to solve transport problems, most participants in the planning process lack education, awarness and information about MM, • no confidence expressed in the effectiveness of MM measures introduced as separate measures, • MM measures considered as an occasion to moderate predicted transport problems at the new location, • for participants an important element of soft measures seamed to be the possibility of their prompt implementation, which would slow down the aggravation of problems.

19. Simulation as method • very applicable when novelties in the planning process are introduced, • key element for the success is the use of the actual example in discussion, • problem was a too big amount of the discussed MM measures, • good solution proved to be the presentation of the problem at the meetings of participants before the simulation.

20. THANK YOU! Aljaž Plevnik Urban Planning InstituteTrnovski pristan 2 Ljubljana, Slovenia aljazp@uirs.si www.uirs.si