1 / 21

Andrea BALLARIN Veneto Region

Integrating major transport infrastructures in complex territories: a weighted programmatic approach. Andrea BALLARIN Veneto Region. Ljubljana – 16 October 2013. Tool description 1/2. STARTING QUESTION.

shellie-farmer
Download Presentation

Andrea BALLARIN Veneto Region

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Integrating major transport infrastructures in complex territories: a weighted programmatic approach Andrea BALLARIN Veneto Region Ljubljana – 16 October 2013

  2. Tool description 1/2 STARTING QUESTION Supposing that the decision of realizing a new track is already made, how public decision makers may be helped in determining the most suitable way to realize and shape the infrastructure in harmony with that territory maximizing its integration from the point of view of landscape and environment? AIM Realizing a tool to support public decision makers in defining the best choice in terms of how to manage environmental and landscape criticism derived from the passage of a linear MTI.

  3. Tool description 2/2 ASSUMPTIONS We are talking about linear transport infrastructures; We are thinking about the utilization phase of the MTI; We’ve used a multi-criterial and weighed analysis approach; CONTEXTUALIZATION We focused on the area of the Province of Venice which should be interested by the realization of a HS/HC train line from Venice to Trieste.

  4. Main tool objective 1/2(Why tool is needed?) Working on a PROGRAMMATIC APPROACH before thinking to the realization of a MTI. MAIN ASSUMPTION Procedure already known and ruled by law ? Needed because working on a field that has actually no specific rules or well determined procedures to follow and may help in determining priorities before starting up with a project, potentially reducing the risks of future problems.

  5. Main tool objective 2/2(How’s going to work?) INPUTS OUTPUTS Environmental and landscapeCRITICISM MAPin relation to the characteristics of the territory TERRITORIAL BASE KNOLEDGE SPECIFIC KNOLEDGE OF TERRITORY Best options for MITIGATION/ATTENTION MEASURES avoiding or reducing the impacts REVEALED INTERVENTION PRIORITIES

  6. Target Groups (Who is supposed to use the tool) TERRITORIAL STAKEHOLDERS 1 Local administrators (Representatives of Provinces, Municipalities, Associations of municipalities…) 2 Public associations and local development promoters (LAC, Committees …) 3 Association of citizens or similar Giving reasoned advices/comments to the upper level of decision makers

  7. Methodology 1/3 (How was the tool built?) 1st TERRITORIAL ANALISYS NATURAL Starting from Corine Land Cover indicators, macro categories of territory were identified and then 4 selected as more representative AGRICULTURAL SPRAWL CONSOLIDATED

  8. Methodology 2/3 (How was the tool built?) 2nd IMPACTS ANALISYS (Impacts matrix) Literature review of impacts derived from the passage of an MTI on the different macro categories of territory onenvironment and landscape and of impacts indicators (ALFA MATRIX). Verifying with internal evaluation and with Focus Group 1 with experts the coherence, relevance and redundancy of impacts (BETA MATRIX). Weighting with internal evaluation and with Panel Group with experts the coherence, relevance and redundancy of impacts (COUPLE MATRIX). Verifying with internal evaluation and with Focus Group 2with experts the best available choices in terms of mitigation measures and technical solutions to avoid/reduce impacts (GAMMA MATRIX). Verifying with internal evaluation and with Focus Group 3 with experts the economical/financial/social level of feasibility of the best solutions individuated (DELTA MATRIX).

  9. Methodology 3/3 (Outputs) B A

  10. Methodology 3/3 (Outputs) B Natural Agricult. Sprawl Consolid. ALFA MATRIX A

  11. Methodology 3/3 (Outputs) B LAYER 1 – Impact on FRAGMENTATION of the territory BETA MATRIX A

  12. Methodology 3/3 (Outputs) B LAYER 2 – Impact on HISTORICAL & CULTURAL legibility BETA MATRIX A

  13. Methodology 3/3 (Outputs) B LAYER 2 LAYER 1 COUPLE MATRIX A

  14. Methodology 3/3 (Outputs) B LAYER 2 LAYER 1 PROGRAMMATIC APPROACH A

  15. Methodology 3/3 (Outputs) B LAYER 2 LAYER 1 PROGRAMMATIC APPROACH A

  16. PROGRAMMATIC APPROACH - Result Methodology 3/3 (Outputs) B • We did not start from a specific track option, but we individuated in a programmatic way: • a sort of corridor to suggest to developers; • advices on specific attention/mitigation measures to adopt • in order to optimize integration and avoid potential conflicts suggesting either A

  17. GAMMA & DELTA MATRIX (Ex. 1) Methodology 3/3 (Outputs) B Area: AGRICULTURALBest attention measure: GRADE LEVELBest mitigation measure:POLYSPECIFIC HEDGE INFO on their technical and financial FEASIBILITY A

  18. GAMMA & DELTA MATRIX (Ex. 2) Methodology 3/3 (Outputs) B Area: SPRAWLBest attention measure: VIADUCTBest mitigation measure:SOUNDPROOF BARRIERS INFO on their technical and financial FEASIBILITY A

  19. Beneficiaries and Stakeholders (Who will benefit from the tool application?) POLICY MAKERS will benefit from avoiding potential conflicts with stakeholders CITIZENS will benefit from a sharedapproach to the idealization of the MTI SUSTAINABLEMTI ENVIROMENT / LANDSCAPE will benefit from a low impact MTI

  20. Next Steps WP6 Study verifying the feasibility of the best choices in terms of attention and mitigation measures individuated by the matrix’s tool tested on a specific area. WP7 Guidelines on how to approach the problem of how to integrate MTI in different contexts and on how to propose solutions also for different kind of infrastructures. Tender procedure for this service just completed.

  21. Thanks for your attention Andrea BALLARIN andrea.ballarin@regione.veneto.it +39 041 279 3258 +39 327 1675323 Ljubljana – 16 October 2013

More Related