180 likes | 306 Views
DG MOVE. Study to support an impact assessment of the Urban Mobility Package on SUMPs. CoR Meeting June 13. Structure. Public consultation Impact Assessment Questions. Public Consultation: SUMPs.
E N D
DG MOVE Study to support an impact assessment of the Urban Mobility Package on SUMPs CoR Meeting June 13
Structure • Public consultation • Impact Assessment • Questions
Public Consultation: SUMPs • A vast majority of respondents (87%) think that there is a lack of coordination between authorities and other actors and that integrated urban mobility planning could be an answer to tackle this issue. • A vast majority of respondents (91%) agree that integrated urban mobility planning is a useful tool for promoting coordination at local and regional levels • A vast majority of respondents (86%) see that EU-support for the development of Sustainable Urban Mobility Plans (SUMPs) would contribute to the broader take-up of SUMP in urban areas
Which support should be provided at EU level to facilitate the development of Sustainable Urban Mobility Plans?
Public Consultation: SUMPs and EU funding of urban transport projects • A majority of respondents (67%) are in favour of linking the access to EU funding for urban transport projects to the existence of Sustainable Urban Mobility Plans (SUMPs) in order to provide a safeguard that supported projects are in line with relevant local, national and EU policies. • Almost 60% of the respondents would like to see financial support for development of SUMPs
Impact Assessment on SUMPs I Problem • Overall: the urban transport systems in EU are not competitive and resource efficient • Specific: not meeting EU objectives, such as on road safety, GHG, air quality, noise Solution to the problem • More integrated urban mobility approach in the form of sustainable urban mobility plans Status on integrated urban mobility approach • European cities are on the move towards SUMP • Not black or white - few if any of the cities implement ‘perfect’ SUMP-practices while almost all cities do something • Cities in new member states are generally less advanced in SUMP-planning
Impact Assessment on SUMPs II How to move forward? Define what a "benchmark" concept for an integrated urban mobility approach should include Define alternative policy options • Elements included in the SUMP (level of ambition) • Type of instrument • Size of cities to be covered Assess and compare alternative policy options
Impact Assessment on SUMPs III What should a benchmark concept for an integrated urban mobility approach include? Content and scope • Minimum requirements • Comprehensive requirements Process and procedures • Minimum requirements • Comprehensive requirements
Impact Assessment on SUMPs IV • Minimum Requirements on content and scope: • Addresses both freight and passenger transport • Addresses all transport modes • Addresses the following topics: • public transport services • non-motorised transport • city logistics • mobility management • integration of transport modes (multi-modality) • the road network and motorised transport (including moving and stationary traffic) Horizontal integration of road safety, ITS, mobility for all in topics
Impact Assessment on SUMPs V • Comprehensive Requirements on content and scope: • Address the following "promising" measures and instruments: • low emission zones • urban road user charging/congestion charging • parking pricing • public transport pricing • Introduction of clean technologies and alternative fuels • Ensures interoperability and/or consistency in use of instruments across the EU
Impact Assessment on SUMPs VI • Minimum Requirements on processes and procedures: • Contains pledge to sustainability (economic, social and environmental) • Includes or is built on long-term strategy • Identifies objectives and sets targets in line with EU policy objectives • Includes baseline (reference) analysis including performance audit of present situation • Includes impact assessment on proposed measures • Provides short-term implementation plan (timetable and budget plan; allocation of responsibilities) • Considers all transport to, through and within the urban agglomeration area and coordination between different authority levels
Impact Assessment on SUMPs VII • Minimum Requirements on processes and procedures: • Is developed in a participatory approach • Integrates different relevant policy areas, in particular land use and transport planning • Is based on integrated planning and implementation • Includes mechanisms for monitoring of the performance in the Member States • Include mechanisms for review in the Member States • Includes mechanisms for certification in the Member States
Impact Assessment on SUMPs VIII • Comprehensive Requirements on processes and procedures: • Identifies objectives and sets targets in line with EU policy objectives, including mandatory targets on urban mobility performance • Foresees mechanisms for monitoring at EU level • Foresees mechanisms for review at EU level • Is certified by an independent body at EU level
Impact Assessment on SUMPs IX • Policy options: • 1. The existing programmes continue to provide • exchange of best practises • information sharing platform • funding of pilot projects and SUMP development • awareness raising • training
Impact Assessment on SUMPs X • Policy options: • 2. Recommendations (3 alternatives) • Recommendations by the EU for a SUMP framework (based on the comprehensive elements), • Recommendations, but adding voluntary benchmarking of urban mobility performance, • Recommendations, but adding a requirement to do a SUMP as a condition for receiving EU funding for urban transport projects.
Impact Assessment on SUMPs XI • Policy options: • 3. Framework directive (2 alternatives) • A mandatory SUMP framework based on the minimum requirements on content and scope • A mandatory SUMP framework based on the comprehensive requirements on content and scope. • For each alternative: 4 alternative coverage definitions: • MS decide on city size in line with reaching EU objectives • cities with more 100,000 inhabitants • cities with more 250,000 inhabitants • cities with more 1,000,000 inhabitants and capitals (TEN-T urban nodes)
Questions for debate on SUMPs • What support should be provided at EU level to facilitate the development and implementation of SUMPs in the MS? • Would linking the access to EU funding for urban transport projects to the existence of SUMPs provide a safeguard that supported projects are in line with relevant local, national and EU policy objectives? • What is your opinion of the different policy options in the Impact • Assessment? • What is your opinion about the potential advantages and disadvantages of the alternative policy options?