periodic activity report - trimis · 2015. 7. 3. · description please see periodic activity...

TCA5-CT-2006-031490

TRANSPOWER

Supervised Implementation of

Sustainable Urban Transport Concepts FP6 – Coordinated Action

Thematic Priority 1.6 Sustainable Development, Global Change and Ecosystems

Periodic Activity Report III

Period covered: from 15 August 2008 to 14 August 2009 Date of preparation: 25th Sept. 2009

Start date of project: 15 August 2006

Duration: 36 months

Project coordinator name: Julia Jesson

Project coordinator organisation name: GTZ

2

Table of Content Section 1 – Project Objectives and major achievements during the reporting period ........................... 5

Section 2 – Work packages progress of the period ............................................................................. 8

1. Work package No 1 – Kick-off and Project set-up ......................................................................... 8

2. Work package No 2 – Assessment of current situation and determination of thematic working groups ................................................................................................................................................. 8

3. Work package No 3 – Mid-term Conference ................................................................................. 8

4. Work package No 4 – Public Transport (PT) ................................................................................. 9

5. Work package No 5 – Integrated Planning (IP) ........................................................................... 14

6. Work package No 6 – Traffic Management (TM) ......................................................................... 19

7. Work package No 7 – Non-Motorised Transport (NMT) / Human Powered Mobility ..................... 25

8. Work package No 8 – Mobility Management ............................................................................... 30

9. Work package No 9 – Debriefing and Reporting ......................................................................... 36

10. Work package 10 – Final Conference ......................................................................................... 37

11. Work package 11 – Management activities ................................................................................. 43

Section 3 – Consortium Management ................................................................................................46

1. Description Management of the TRANSPOWER consortium ...................................................... 46

2. Timetable as implemented and planned activities ....................................................................... 50

List of Abbreviations

BBP Best and Bad Practice

CS City Solution (was renamed from Best and Bad Practice)

CT Competence Team

MCS Municipal Case Study

NMT Non-motorized transport

MIR Ministry for Infrastructure and Spatial Planning of the Land Brandenburg

PT Public Transport

TF Traffic Management

TWG Thematic Workshop (previous Technical Working Group)

WP Work package

List of Partner Abbreviations

GTZ Deutsche Gesellschaft für Technische Zusammenarbeit GmbH

EBP Ernst Basler + Partner Ltd.

PTV PTV Planung Transport Verkehr AG

AMOR Forschungsgesellschaft Mobilität Graz

EA.UE European Academy for the Urban Environment

4

ANEM SA Development Company of Magnesia

UNIAQ University of L’Aquila

STMK Regional Government of Styria

NIS City of Niš

PMS City of Sibiu

PMT Municipality of Timisoara

GRAZ City of Graz

ROEZ City of Groningen

CAQU City of L’Aquila

HAL Municipality of Halandri

SKJ City of Skopje

5

Section 1 – Project Objectives and major achievemen ts during the reporting period

Mobility of people and goods is a guarantee for the development of communities and enables the

individual to shape his or her life in a flexible manner. But efforts to meet the needs for ever more mobility

meet more and more often the limits. Especially in areas of high population density and at peak times the

capacities of traffic systems are highly challenged and sometimes exhausted. The consequences are well-

known: Pollution, noise, accidents and traffic jam are negative effects of our mobility behaviour. Therefore

it can be stated that transportation policy has to be discussed as an integrative constituent of the

economic and societal development.

Avoidance of traffic, shifting to other modes of transport and environmentally conscious design – these are

the main objectives of the participating medium-sized cities of TRANSPOWER – are thus high on the

political agenda and successfully promoted and supported in various stages of implementation of

TRANSPOWER.

Besides the global developments, the TRANSPOWER partner cities, especially the new member states in

Eastern Europe, are facing problems related to the improved living standards of their citizens. The

ongoing economic development, the subsequent increase of income and ongoing urbanisation process

causes significant traffic problems, which brings to light the capacity problems in all areas of traffic and

transportation. The public interest in the TRANSPOWER cities is enormous and positively promotes the

dissemination of the project objectives and results at least in the countries concerned. Subsequent to the

further improvement of the network between the participating cities and on the other hand initiating the in-

depth exchange of the partners during and besides workshops on the thematic work packages Non-

Motorized-Transport (No.7) and Traffic Management (No. 6) during the second reporting period, the major

achievements of the third reporting period were two outstanding thematic workshops (work package No.

5 “Integrated Planning” and No. 8 “Mobility Management) which took place within the third year of project

implementation. The work package No. 4 “Public Transport” has been identified as a cross-cutting-theme.

TRANSPOWER continued to focus on assisting other working groups and provided further input/feedback

instead of pursuing a single workshop under the umbrella of this work package. Moreover, the MCS have

been finalised by all cities. The final results have been compiled within the Best Practice Report as well as

the City Profiles.

The first thematic workshop was carried out in L’Aquila, Italy from 21st to 23rd of October 2008. The aim

of the workshop was to focus the cities problems on the topic Mobility Management and to discuss on

possible solutions. The topic was introduced by the respective competence team member. Mobility

Management are soft measures, like e.g. campaigns and promotion activities that improve the

effectiveness of hard measures, like e.g. new public transport lines, new bike lanes etc. discussion and a

role play were initiated. The city of L’Aquila presented its own issues regarding mobility management.

Recommendations were given to them from the competence team and the TRANSPOWER partner cities.

6

The second thematic workshop was carried out in the city of Groningen on March 11th-13th, 2009. The

objective of the workshop was to focus on the topic “Integrated Planning” and to discuss possible

approaches, measures and solutions. In specific, the workshop emphasized the experiences and

improved measures, cooperations and results of the hosting City of Groningen as well as the cooperation

between the region of Styria and the City of Graz. The main findings of the workshop regarding the

integration of regional and traffic planning, as well as the integration of demographic as well as gender

issues in the planning process are the following:

� The extent of the demographic and social change for urban mobility needs to be communicated

more intensively. Regarding forecasts and strategies, it is possible to revert to the experiences of

the eastern German states.

� The “adequate” spatial settlement of shopping malls and housing offers the greatest potential of

traffic reduction and control.

� A stronger cooperation between city and neighbouring municipalities in the field of regional

development and mobility is especially in the East European cities urgent.

� EU-projects could demonstrate methods and successes, which could be the basis for a better

planning coordination between city and neighbouring municipalities.

� Mobility needs do not come from statistical population groups, but are the display of social roles.

The satisfaction of these needs implies a more intensive investigation and enquiry within the

cities.

� The issue “cycling” showed that there is a major gap between the “culture” in Groningen

compared to those in many other cities. The process of a successive strengthening the cycle and

pedestrian traffic should take place within future EU-projects in cities, which had to deal with a

certain learning process and made specific experiences.

The final conference was held in Graz from July 8th-10th. Objective of this final conference was to resume

the results of TRANSPOWER and to build the floor for the project partners to present their project results.

Besides the TRANSPOWER consortium the final conference was also addressed to the political

stakeholder of the partner cities in order to raise awareness for the problems of the cities. Political

stakeholders from Graz, the Region of Styria, Volos, Timisoara and Potsdam (Advisory Board) attended

the conference and gave their input during the panel discussion. Moreover the final conference was the

official project farewell event. All the partners presented the results of their Municipal Case Studies and

their City solutions (was renamed from Good and Best Practices, due to problems in categorization) in the

“Market of Ideas”. The most important topic discussed at the final conference was the relation between

traffic planning and sustainability. The following questions were raised:

The questions were: Are there indicators which could define the sustainability of transports systems in

European cities? What could be measurable and what is comparable? During the penal discussion the

participants tried to define indicators for the question: What is sustainability? The answers were manifold

and the conference participants came to the conclusion that tailor-made solutions have to be found for the

specific situation of a specific city.

7

At the end of the conference, the participants were asked to evaluate their experience in the project. The

participants came to the following conclusions:

� The internships were the best instrument for the exchange of know-how.

� The coordination and organisation and the consortium was very good and enabled all participants

to learn from each other.

� The project had a rather long start. There should be more activities and more meetings in the first

phase in order to get to know each other much faster and better.

� The Partners would like to apply for another project dealing more in-depth with one of the topics of

TRANSPOWER.

Furthermore, the project brochure “TRANSPOWER – Supervised Implementation of Sustainable Urban

Transport Concepts” was published in this last reporting period. It contains information on all participating

cities, as well as a CD-Rom with the Municipal Case Studies and the City solutions and gives a general

overview about the profile of the partners and the idea behind the project. The brochure was very much

appreciated by all stakeholders and assures the dissemination of the City Solutions and Municipal Case

Studies to a broader public. Subsequently the final TRANSPOWER brochure accompanied by the CD

ROM with all results serves the function of the Final Publishable Activity Report of the project. 5 Examples

are provided with this final and 3rd reporting accordingly.

Annexed to the technical project reporting of the 3rd Period please find all relevant supporting documents

as “Annex Report No.3 – Compiled Annexes ”

8

Section 2 – Work packages progress of the period

This section provides an overview of the actions that have been carried out during reporting period I, by

providing that were active or planned to be active during the period.

1. Work package No 1 – Kick-off and Project set-up

Workpackage 1 – Kick-off and Project set-up was completed during reporting period I. For a detailed

description please see Periodic Activity Report I and related deliverables.

2. Work package No 2 – Assessment of current situat ion and determination of thematic working groups

Workpackage 2 – Assessment of current situation and determination of thematic working groups was

completed during reporting period I. For a detailed description please see Periodic Activity Report I and

related deliverables.

3. Work package No 3 – Mid-term Conference

Workpackage 3 – Mid-term Conference was completed during reporting period I. For a detailed

description please see Periodic Activity Report I and related deliverables.

9

4. Work package No 4 – Public Transport (PT)

Work package objectives and starting point of work at the beginning of each reporting period

• To increase awareness of stakeholders of public transport stakeholders on public transport

options and to increase communication efforts on the complete range of PT aspects including

technical solutions (system approach, operation and vehicles), financial models (financing and

pricing), organisational structures (public responsibility, public or private operators, competition,

unique tariff systems)

• To supervise the (further) implementation of (existing) municipal case studies and to evaluate

them regarding their effectiveness, sustainability etc.

Work package leader: GTZ

Deliverables and milestones:

• Inventory and Best Practice Report as part of the overall Inventory Report (D10)

• Report on solutions and their applicability in the partner cities for potential follow-up activities as

part of overall Project Report (D11)

• Implementation plan for each participating city including general recommendations, conclusions

and policy advice notes for decision makers as part of the overall Implementation Report (D12)

Progress towards objectives – tasks worked on and achievements made with reference to planned

objectives, identify contractors involved

The global financial crises has (re)-increased the pressure on public budgets – with tremendous potential

implications for public transport systems, both in terms of investments and provision of services. On the

other hand, the international and European debate on Public Transport continued to centre on the

implementation and further evolvement of modern bus and rail-based systems (BRT, LRT) reflecting both

the volatility in international fuel prices the continued efforts in preparation of the world climate

negotiations in Copenhagen in December 2009. GTZ has in this context initiated with partners such as

UITP, TRL and Veolia Transport the initiative “Bridging the Gap: Pathways for transport in Post 2012

process (more on http://www.sutp.org/bridgingthegap) – the results and proceedings of this process are

continuously shared with the TRANSPOWER-group.

As part of its wider activities in this field GTZ published a Reading List on Public Transport Integration.

This document aims at providing the reader with an overview of relevant literature on Public Transport

Integration. Issues range from organizational and institutional aspects – e.g. how an integration of different

operators can be achieved and which role authorities may play – to more technical aspects, such as the

development of integrated ticketing systems. The reading list is organized as follows:

• General literature

10

• Case studies including includes City Solutions and projects from countries around the world

• Links to related projects, organizations and selected actors in the field of Public Transport

Integration

The reading list is available on:

http://www.sutp.org/index.php?option=com_docman&task=doc_download&gid=425

Other relevant new publications include:

- Transportation Demand Management Training Course

- "Cycling-inclusive Policy Development: A Handbook"

These publications were disseminated to all TRANSPOWER partners and are available on www.sutp.org .

Public transport remains also in the TRANSPOWER cities high on the agenda. In the framework of

workpackage No. 4 “Public Transport”, the partners continued to work on the following issues:

• Review of City Solutions and Municipal Case Studies

• Provision of informal input to workshops in Groningen and Graz

• Continuous dissemination of information on Public Transport through TRANSPOWER-newsgroup

The following best and bad practices are covering Public Transport-related issues:

− City Solution: Terminal Bus Parking ”Lorenzo Natali” – L’Aquila

− City Solution: Clean Urban Transport in the City of Volos with the use of coleseed as fuel

− City Solution: Municipal Bus Network - Halandri

− City Solution: Bio diesel in the city of Graz

− City Solution: Rehabilitation of Tram Line - Timisoara

The following case study (draft versions) is covering Public Transport-related issues:

− Public Transport in Skopje : New Concepts for Better Quality of Service

Through the established TRANSPOWER-mail group ([email protected] ) and the

SUTCEA group (www.sutp.org/suteca ; [email protected] ) the WP4 – Public Transport – work

package leader continued to share and disseminate information on a variety of sustainable mobility

related issues, including mobility management and public transport. A main source of information are the

rapidly evolving EU-platforms ELTIS and CIVITAS as well as GTZ’s work on the Sustainable Urban

Transport Project. The pick-up of this information however is difficult to assess.

Deviations from the project work programme, and corrective actions taken/suggested:

11

The elaborated draft Municipal Case Studies (MCS) and City Solutions (CS) are reconfirming that public

transport challenges are of cross-cutting nature and that TRANSPOWER-coordinators are not necessarily

directly involved in PT planning but they can influence framework conditions for PT (positively and

negatively). Hence the work package has been identified as a cross-cutting-theme. TRANSPOWER

continued to focus on assisting other working groups (TWG) in shaping their policies in order to ensure

suitable operating conditions for PT as well as on taking part in municipal case studies and provide

input/feedback instead of pursuing a single workshop under the umbrella of this work package.

As a member of the Competence Team steering group, GTZ chaired and prepared consultations on

further Steps to be undertaken to optimize the work in progress in the cities.

Del.

No.

Deliverable name

Work

packa

ge

no.

Date due Actual /

Forecast

delivery

date

Estimated

indicative

person

months

Used

indicative

person

months

Lead

contractor

D10 PT Inventory and

Best Practice

Report as part of

the overall

Inventory Report

WP4 Month 31 Month 31 7,7 1,000 GTZ and

competenc

e team

D11 Report on PT

solutions and their

applicability in the

partner cities for

potential follow-up

activities as part of

overall Project

Report


competenc

e team

12

D12 Implementation

plan for each

participating city

including general

recommendations,

conclusions and

policy notes for

decision makers as

part of the overall

Implementation

Report


competenc

e team

D13 Internship report WP4 Month 26 Month 26 0,35 0,150 GTZ

D14 Minutes of TWG

meeting(s)

WP4 Month 26 Covered by

four other

TWGs

0,5 0,211 GTZ

13

Milestone

No.

Milestone

name

Work

package

No.

Date due Actual/Forecast

delivery date

Lead

contractor

10 PT Inventory

and Best

Practice Report

as part of the

overall

Inventory

Report

WP4 Month 31 Month 36 (with

final report

GTZ and

competence

team

11 Report on PT

solutions and

their

applicability in

the partner

cities for

potential follow-

up activities as

part of overall

Project Report


final report

GTZ and

competence

team

12 Internship report WP4 Month 28 Month 36 (with

final report

GTZ and

competence

team

13 Minutes of TWG

Meeting(s)


final report)

GTZ

14

5. Work package No 5 – Integrated Planning (IP)


• To facilitate a shift from sectoral to integrated planning which leads to the establishment of an

integrated planning culture



Work package leader: EBP









The focus during the third period was furthermore the deepening of the approach, experience and present

challenges of integrated planning, on the basis of the reflections and discussions in the Thematic

Workshops in L’Aquila and Groningen.

The theme of integrated planning over the full spectrum of the cities is a central theme. Even for cities with

a proven planning culture and integrated planning methods, such as Groningen and Graz, the

understanding of planning which incorporates the whole region needs to be strengthened. On the other

hand, in the emerging Eastern and European cities, a planning process has been set in motion which is

strongly sectoral and aimed at preparation for extremely urgently-needed infrastructure investment. Here

there is the chance to develop and establish integrated planning and communications structures within the

planning processes which are still in an early stage of development.

The definition and understanding of integrated planning varies widely. Often, integrated approaches are

limited to purely project-related plans, while at the relevant strategic planning levels, regionally-effective

action is neither methodical nor communication-related.

Within also in the third period it became more apparent that the topic of integrated planning is an

interdisciplinary subject for all planning subjects in the transport sector and all the technical workpackages

in TRANSPOWER.

15

Additionally the topic of demographic change related to a sustainable oriented transportation policy was

focussed in the third period. The ongoing excess of age will lead to tough changes in the demand on

transportation. Especially in eastern European cities this is not part of the agenda by now. New planning

proceedings and planning projects currently operate in the cities of Skopje, Sibiu, Nis Timisoara and

L’Aquila. An exchange of experiences in these proceedings and projects was the key issue of the

workshops.

The Case Study Integrated Masterplan of Timisoara plays a decisive role for the WP5. The current

challenges are characteristic of dynamic medium-sized and large cities in Eastern Europe. All problems of

Integrated Planning may be reflected here. There is a lack of basic understanding concerning

interdisciplinary analyses, strategies und planning appendage. This lack results also from the absence of

efficiently educated employees in the city and in Romania respectively. Starting 2007/2008, against the

background of current EU municipal politics focussing on metropolitan regions, Romania started likewise

to define metropolitan areas. As one of the metropolitan regions in Romania Timisoara must therefore

initiate and accomplish all proceedings concerning coordination and planning. This additional challenge

has been integrated in the provided Case Study Integrated Masterplanning. The implementation of this

central case study has therefore been delayed. An abstract of the Case Study Integrated Masterplanning

was compiled in August 2008 and made available to the city.

And so, also in the third period, the significance of integrated planning could both be argued effectively

and demonstrated by the use of successful best practices (e.g. Graz and Groningen).

All cities have also in the third period an interest in intensifying the exchanges on integrated planning. This

involves, on the one hand, concrete recommendations on planning methods and communication, and in

addition further support is expected for determining necessity and possible effects of integrated

processes.

The main focus of the third period was the comprehensive preparation of the final workshop in Groningen.

This workshop is used to demonstrate all relevant dimensions of integrated planning and to foster the

discussion by the usage of tangible examples.

Deviations from the project work programme, and corrective actions taken/suggested: identify the nature

and the reason for the problem, identify contractors involved

There were no immediate deviations from the work programme.

Ongoing voting procedures with and particularly among the cities are still complicated and extensive. In

particular this applies to the coordination with the city Timisoara. During a local workshop a considerable

improvement in the vote on the Case Study Integrated Masterplanning could be achieved here.

Communication via Emailing and other correspondence, however, is still very slow and time-consuming,

even with the strong support by the coordinator GTZ. As part of the third period, another in situ workshop

at April 2009 in Timisoara was necessary. In the workshop local experiences and methods of planning

were examined. For the preparation of the final workshop on integrated planning in Groningen,

questionnaires were worked out and sent to all cities. By using this method, requirements according to

16

special topics and focal points got explored. By these preparations with regard to contents it got clear that

the workshops could be organized more intensively by the partners from the learning cities to get a

maximized input and solutions for the problems of their cities. Moreover, not all stakeholders, in particular

the cities majors don’t get included directly into the discussions. The participating stakeholders therefore

have to change their behaviour. Useful ways of participation of stakeholder and for the activation of

citizens were comprehensively shown at the workshop in Groningen. The extensive preparations of the

workshop in Groningen and the additional workshop in Timisoara has gone ahead with additional

expenses in the work package of the third period and for that reason has lead to higher costs of the total

currency.

Table 1 Deliverable List WP 5

Del.

No.

Deliverable name

Work

packa

ge

no.

Date

due

Actual /

Forecast

delivery

date

Estimated

indicative

person

months

Used

indicative

person

months

Lead

contractor

See

D10

IP Inventory and

Best Practice

Report as part of

the overall

Inventory Report

(see D10)

WP5 Month

31

Month 31 7,7 1,566 GTZ and

competenc

e team

See

D11

Report on IP

solutions and their


partner cities for

potential follow-up


overall Project

Report (see D11)

WP5 Month

31

Month 31 7,7 0,250

GTZ and

competenc

e team

See

D12

Implementation

plan for each

participating city

including general

recommendations,

conclusions and

WP5 Month

31


competenc

e team

17

policy notes for

decision makers as

part of the overall

Implementation

Report

D14 Minutes of TWG

meeting(s)

WP5 Month

26

Month 26 0,5 0,00 GTZ

18

Table 2 List of Milestones WP5

Milestone

No.

Milestone name Work

package

No.


delivery date

Lead

contractor

14 IP Inventory and

Best Practice

Report as part of

the overall

Inventory Report

WP5

Month 31 Month 36 (with

final report

GTZ and

competence

team

15 Report on IP

solutions and their


partner cities for

potential follow-up

activities as part

of overall Project

Report

WP5


final report

GTZ and

competence

team

16 Implementation

plan for each

participating city

including general

recommendations,

conclusions and

policy advice

notes for decision

makers as part of

the overall

Implementation

Report

WP5


final report

GTZ and

competence

team

17 Minutes of TWG

Meeting(s)

WP5


final report

GTZ

19

6. Work package No 6 – Traffic Management (TM)


• To transfer experience and downsize TM solutions from bigger cities.



Work package leader: PTV









In order to fulfil the objectives of this work package the following steps have been undertaken:

• During the working group meetings in L’Aquila in September 2008 and in Groningen in March

2009 mainly the representative of the city of Nis has been given extensive advice on preparing the

city solutions and the municipal case study.

• To finalise the case study, in April 2009 a student expert of PTV has visited Nis to coordinate

traffic counts and to collect all kind of data necessary for substantiating the traffic study.

• A representative of the city of Nis has visited the city of Groningen for an internship. PTV has

given some advice for fulfilling the internship report.

• In November 2008 a work package leader meeting took place in Berlin. The main topics of this

meeting were to prepare the final conference and the final brochure.

• Because of political changes in Skopje, the city solutions and the municipal case study needed to

be revised. Because of the close collaboration of PTV and the city of Skopje, experts of PTV have

given aid not only for examples related to traffic management but also for examples about non-

motorised and public transport.

• All city examples and municipal case studies of the cities of Nis and Skopje have been prepared

for being published in the final brochure.

20

The results of the work package Traffic Management can be summarised as follows:

The implementation of traffic management is an additional dimension of transport planning. It adds the

aspect of operation to the aspects of strategic planning and general provision of road infrastructure. Traffic

management ensures the (more) efficient use of the existing and the future networks in cities; it is crucial

to make the maximum use of investments both in road infrastructure and Public transport. Therefore it is

recommended to give the same priority to traffic management measures as to common infrastructure

measures. This comprises as well the recommendation to integrate the traffic management strategy into

the overall transport planning strategy and to ensure the coordination between planning and operation.

In many cases, medium-size cities have a very large potential for improvement by traffic management and

control. Additionally, if traffic management is downsized to the requirements of smaller communalities,

even these surely have good chances for improvement by using elements of traffic management.

Examples for traffic management elements are traffic control and safety, information and guidance on

urban and interurban highways and parking management including information and guidance as well as

fee management. It is essential to regard strategic planning and traffic management as undividable

elements of one acting strategy. Basic conditions to achieve a good standard of traffic management are

the formulation of concepts, the selected soft- and hardware and the political and administrative

framework.

Traffic management measures can be divided into three time lines:

• Short term: standard traffic management measures whose implementation should start immediately

• Medium term: measures of enhanced traffic management who need infrastructure implemented by

short term measures and certain prerequisites that have to be developed within the traffic

management strategy with a time horizon of five years

• Long term: traffic management measures based on comprehensive traffic and transport demand

management approaches for the management of the future infrastructure, which need a time horizon

of about 10 to 15 years to be implemented

In many cases, even the short term activities are connected with the necessity of introduction of a central

traffic management unit in order to monitor the network, collect the traffic information, to coordinate the

traffic control by remote. Therefore, the following steps are necessary:

• Definition of a comprehensive traffic management strategy

• Improvement of intersection control (hardware and software) towards adaptive control and priorisation

of Public Transport vehicles

• Introduction of detection devices (loop detectors, infra-red and other technology)

• developing a technical standard for priorisation (definition of common rules for all intersections)

• Traffic light pre-emption devices

21

• Introduction of a traffic management centre (monitoring, controlling, guiding) dealing integrative with

road management, park management, public transport operation and emergency services

• Central traffic control units and communication infrastructure (connecting junction control and

measurement devices to centre)

In a second phase enhanced traffic management measures should be implemented which will enable the

management of the network with dynamic guidance (based on traffic volumes, incidents, events and

parking space management. Also link control and dynamic lane management should be part of the

measures set, in detail based on the state-of-the-art which is available at ten years time but in principle

based on the overall traffic management strategy to be defined in the next one to two years.

The second phase of traffic management will have to comprise also measures for Public Transport.

Although it is a matter of the Public Transport operators to introduce vehicle equipment and stop side

information, there are important interfaces with the road operation in terms of traffic control

(communication between PT vehicles and controllers) and in terms of mutual management, since PT is

using the road space as well. Therefore an integrated management is useful and recommended. There

are major elements such as

• Automatic vehicle location systems

• Communication infrastructure

• Passenger Information systems

• Operation centre (integrated in traffic management centre)

Transport demand behaviour such as mode choice, route choice, departure time choice and to some

extent also destination choice is based on users’ information. With a growing motorisation the degree of

freedom of choice will grow and the number of captive users of Public Transport will decrease. Information

is a key factor for management of traffic. With a dense network of detection and a comprehensive

monitoring of network an information platform should be provided serving as information centre (via

Internet, TMC, Digital radio, Mobile phone etc.) both for end users and traffic operators by e.g.

• Collecting all relevant information (traffic state, incidents, traffic volumes etc.)

• providing information to road users (forecasts, warnings, recommendations)

• providing information to the traffic management centre

• Providing multimodal information (routing on road and on public transport).

The following project results are covering Traffic Management-related issues:

� City Solution: Street Design of Dimitrija Tucovica Street – Nis

� City Solution: “PUC” Parking Service – Nis

� City Solution: City-wide 30 km/h speed limit – Graz

22

� City Solution: “GSM – Parking” – Groningen

� City Solution: Bicycle-friendly Traffic lights – Groningen

The following case studies are covering Traffic Management -related issues:

� Traffic Management in Skopje

� Traffic flow and traffic safety along Boulevard 12 February Nis


There are no deviations from the work programme.

Table 3 List of Deliverables WP6

Del.

No.

Deliverable name

Work

packa

ge

no.

Date

due

Actual /

Forecast

delivery

date

Estimated

indicative

person

months

Used

indicative

person

months

Lead

contractor

See

D10

TM Inventory and

Best Practice

Report as part of

the overall

Inventory Report

(see D10)

WP6 Month

31


competenc

e team

See

D11

Report on TM

solutions and their


partner cities for

potential follow-up


overall Project

Report (see D11)

WP6 Month

31


competenc

e team

See

D12

Implementation

plan for each

participating city

including general

recommendations,

conclusions and

WP6 Month

31


competenc

e team

23

policy notes for

decision makers as

part of the overall

Implementation

Report (see D12)

D14 Minutes of TWG

meeting(s)

WP6 Month

26

Month 26 0,5 1,200 GTZ

24


Milestone

No.

Milestone name Work

package

No.


delivery date

Lead

contractor

18 TM Inventory and

Best Practice

Report as part of

the overall

Inventory Report

WP6


final report

GTZ and

competence

team

19 Report on TM

solutions and their


partner cities for

potential follow-up

activities as part

of overall Project

Report

WP6


final report

GTZ and

competence

team

20 Implementation

plan for each

participating city

including general

recommendations,

conclusions and

policy advice

notes for decision

makers as part of

the overall

Implementation

Report

WP6


final report

GTZ and

competence

team

21 Minutes of TWG

Meeting(s)

WP6

Month 26 Month 26 GTZ

25

7. Work package No 7 – Non-Motorised Transport (NMT ) / Human Powered Mobility


• To exchange information on ideas and concepts that show possibilities for integrating NMT /

human powered mobility in urban and transport planning processes – also within the context of

least-cost transportation planning

• To show that NMT is not an obstacle to individualisation and personal mobility



Work package leader: European Academy of the Urban Environment







Point of Departure:

One of the aims of the workshop in Sibiu (main topic: NMT, 2nd reporting period) was to identify the needs

of those local authority bodies represented in the project with respect to NMT, so that these needs could

be taken into account in subsequent steps in the project development. In particular, Sibiu, Volos and

Skopje were working at this time on concepts/ideas for inner-city bicycle traffic and transport and had the

intention to further develop these during the 3rd reporting period.

During the reporting period the following steps were taken which were designed in order to prepare to fulfil

the objectives of this work package and to perform the deliverables:

Tasks worked on and achievements:

• During the workshops in L'Aquila (21 - 23 October 2008) and Groningen (11 - 13 March 2009),

aspects of NMT were intensively discussed with the other project partners, and in particular with

representatives of the local authorities from Sibiu and Volos. In particular in Groningen, - probably

the 'Cycle City' of Europe, it proved possible to discuss through concrete case studies or

examples transferable solutions in furthering NMT in partner towns and cities. These meetings

were also used to continue preparing the Municipal Case Studies (MCS) and the City Solutions

(CS) directly with the representatives from Sibiu and Volos.

26

• Supporting Volos and Sibiu in compiling the MCS and CS: the MCS and CS were, like the City

Profiles, intensively re-written and correspondingly discussed with the city partners

(cp. below).

• An expert visit to the city of Sibiu (8 - 9 October 2008): to discuss a plan for a bicycle path from

the railway station to the existing recreational cycling lane and to give further advice in creating a

bicycle network. The result of this visit was that the then proposed lane was deemed not suitable

(mainly for safety reasons) and a new proposed route was sketched out, and then subsequently

elaborated in detail.

• An expert visit of the WP7 leader plus colleagues from the city of Groningen to Sibiu (24 - 29 June

2009): in order to further elaborate the cycle track concept. This visit was organised as part of the

internship activities within the TRANSPOWER project. In order to support Sibiu in practical ways,

where the planning has comparatively speaking advanced to some considerable extent, it proved

to be very sensible to arrange an as it were 'reverse' internship.

Amongst the most important outcomes of these steps (besides the above-mentioned deliverables), the

following points are to be noted from the thematic point of view:

• Sibiu thus now has available to it two alternative planning proposals (setting up bus lanes which

will be opened to bicycle traffic / routing the cycle track in the main between the two (inner and

outer) city walls), where at this stage a political decision needs to be taken. Using both solutions -

and permitting cycling in the pedestrian zone – means the city will be able to lay the foundations

for further development of their cycle path network.

• Fundamental recommendations for improving NMT in the project partner towns and cities were

able to be elaborated and can be summarised as follows:

i. Overcoming fragmented decision making and planning: in most municipalities, planning

processes are not integrated. Environmental planning, town planning and traffic and

transport planning are normally located in different departments with specific subject-based

interests. Integrating non-motorised planning into all transport and land use planning

activities is a pre-condition for an advanced and sustainable mobility policy. It requires the

political will to do this, and also further education and training (in-house training for instance)

in non-motorised transport planning principles for all transport professionals and spatial

planners.

ii. Overcoming psychological barriers: public campaigns and other activities (bicycle days, car

free days, bicycle training in schools etc.) can contribute to development of a "bicycle culture"

and can help to overcome prejudices and anxiety (cycling is unsafe, takes too much time

etc.). However, all these activities will come to nothing unless NMT is given priority in the real

world as well.

iii. Give way to non-motorised transport: non-motorised transport planning should at least be

funded at a comparable rate as other travel modes. When and wherever possible, pedestrian

27

and bicycle traffic should receive priority - and right of way - over and above or in front of

other modes of transport. In order to implement this, there are numerous technical and

planning solutions (waiting spaces for cyclists at traffic lights; give way rules; traffic calming

etc.) which shorten travelling times. Closing certain parts of urban areas (for example, the

city centre) to (private) motorised traffic encourages NMT and furthermore increases

attractiveness and amenity values in these areas.

iv. Enhancing accessibility for NMT means: important and/or frequently used institutions need to

be easily accessible on foot or by bicycle, urban sub-areas and districts need to be linked by

means of footpaths and cycle paths (this does not necessarily require separate and

dedicated paths or tracks, but, for example, can be achieved by permitting bicycling in

pedestrian zones). It should be ensured that that all roads are suitable for walking and

cycling unless these modes are not possible for safety reasons, for instance. In these cases

suitable alternatives should be available.

v. Overcoming the separation of transport means: towns and cities in which bicycle transport is

well-connected to other modes of transport generally have a modal split with a higher

proportion for NMT. Thus, for example, in some municipalities it is permitted to take a bicycle

on public transport vehicles (in some instances even in a bus), cyclists have available secure

bicycle parking facilities (or even multi-storey cycle parks) at all important traffic and

transport locations.

vi. Overcoming the separation of thoroughfares: separate cycle tracks or paths which are

divided away from a road have frequently proved - especially at road junctions – to be

conducive to traffic accidents. Very often these systems are rejected by cyclists, because the

normal roadways often enable the shortest connections to be used. Generally speaking, it

has proved to be advisable (including from the road safety aspect) to insert cycle tracks or

lanes on to road surfaces or to have bus lanes which cyclists are allowed to use. These

solutions not only give value for money, they also usually increase road safety and

acceptability. With only very few exceptions (in a limited area), all pedestrian zones should

be opened up to cycling. This has the effect not only of improving accessibility, but also in

general assists in increasing road safety (many cyclists use these pedestrian zones despite

prohibitions, and because this is not anticipated accidents may be higher). In those cases

where it is intended still to permit some motorised traffic, in some sub-areas in particular in

towns and cities in the Netherlands, the concept of shared space has proved effective. This

increases communication between all road users or travellers, reduces the forest of road

traffic signs in our towns and cities and helps to increase amenity value and road safety.

28


Del.

No.

Deliverable name

Work

packa

ge

no.

Date

due

Actual /

Forecast

delivery

date

Estimated

indicative

person

months

Used

indicative

person

months

Lead

contractor

See

D10

NMT Inventory and

Best Practice

Report as part of

the overall

Inventory Report

(see D10)

WP7 Month

31


competenc

e team

See

D11

Report on NMT

solutions and their


partner cities for

potential follow-up


overall Project

Report (see D11)

WP7 Month

31


competenc

e team

See

D12

Implementation

plan for each

participating city

including general

recommendations,

conclusions and

policy notes for

decision makers as

part of the overall

Implementation

Report (see D12)

WP7 Month

31


competenc

e team

D13 Internship report WP7 Month

28

Month 28 0,35 0,200 GTZ

D14 Minutes of TWG

meeting(s)

WP7 Month

26

Month 26 0,5 0,00 GTZ

29


Milestone

No.

Milestone name Work

package

No.


delivery date

Lead

contractor

22 NMT Inventory

and Best Practice

Report as part of

the overall

Inventory Report

WP7

Month 31 Month 36 (final

report)

GTZ and

competence

team

23 Report on NMT

solutions and their


partner cities for

potential follow-up

activities as part

of overall Project

Report

WP7


report)

GTZ and

competence

team

24 Implementation

plan for each

participating city

including general

recommendations,

conclusions and

policy advice

notes for decision

makers as part of

the overall

Implementation

Report

WP7


report)

GTZ and

competence

team

25 Internship report WP7 Month 28 Month 36 (final

report)

GTZ

26 Minutes of TWG

Meeting(s)

WP7


report)

GTZ

30

8. Work package No 8 – Mobility Management

Work package leader: AMOR


• Set up a workshop on Mobility Management in L’Aquila, Italy

• Motivate partner cities for implementations and plans for implementations incl. barriers and

success factors

• Support partner cities in their implementations

• Disseminate TRANSPOWER results to the rest of the world.









MM Workshop in L’Aquila:

The core activity in this period was the organisation of the Mobility management Workshop for the

TRANSPOWER Consortium in L’Aquila. A first preparation workshop with the involved hosts was carried

out in summer 2008. The workshop for the consortium was organised from 21st – 24th of October 2008.

The workshop contained several presentations of local and regional representatives as well as more

practical oriented workshop parts such as discussion rounds, role plays and practical sessions. The

workshop was finished with a study visit in L’Aquila.

As a result of the presentation of the PUM (Plano Urbano Mobilidad) the following discussion points came

up / activities were suggested.

1. Paid parking + enforcement seems to be a better solution for the city centre of L’Aquila that the

building of new underground parking spaces (as there exist a city-near parking garage which is

not very much used).

2. It would make sense to have a closer look (analysis) on short distance car trips which might be

easily shifted to other modes of transport.

31

3. The strategy of push & pull should be implemented which means on the one hand to foster

environmental friendly traffic behaviour and on the other hand to make access for e.g. solo car

trips more difficult.

4. The modelling activities should take up the demand of all user groups and not only of those ones

of the car users. In the presentation of the PUM only the traffic flow and the demand on parking

was presented (maybe the other demands have been analysed but weren’t presented).

5. Several motivation programs could be implemented to “test new behaviour”. In this connection the

idea of a “parents stop” has been mentioned. This parents stop means a place were parents can

deliver their children when driving them to school but which enables them to walk the last e.g. 300

m alone (instead of bringing them directly to the entrance of the school).

6. To change (mental) deficiencies in information and estimation is in many cases much cheaper

than making changes in the objective / actual situation. E.g. if people think that the use of public

transport takes much longer than the use of the car one should first check if the estimation is

correct before starting an acceleration of public transport. To inform people and raise awareness

is cheaper and easier that to implement technical solutions (which one anyway have to inform the

potential users about).

The two role plays and discussion rounds brought very different results. While the one on mobility

management for schools went quite well and resulted in a good compromise among all roles / functions

the one on MM for companies failed on the complete different point of few regarding the costs of space in

the new member countries.

From both role plays the participants could learn a lot of different arguments (pro / con) – incl. the experts.

The study visit to the parking garage and its access to the city centre would be perfect for a good practise

case study. The non-use of this garage (although there is a pt-terminal connected) isn’t easy to be

understood. Mobility management could bring perfect solutions for this case if the frame conditions in the

city centre will be designed so that environmental and social friendly solutions have a chance to be

accepted.

On part of the workshop was the motivation of the partner cities to plan and implement a small activity

concerning Mobility Management until the end of the project.

The moderators encouraged the cities to agree on small concrete measures to raiseawareness towards

mobility management within their cities. The cities agreed on the implementation of specific measures as

follows:

32

City Is interested

in MM Action (y/n)

What kind of Activity

L’Aquila Yes Park Outside the City Day

Walkers day – Strollers Day

Halandri Yes School related activity

(e.g. Traffic Snake Game

Sibiu Yes Car free historical centre

(idea competition)

Volos Yes Bicycle Day – Tour around the city

(e.g. Don’t be a douky

Don’t park on bicycle lanes)

Skopje Yes

Graz Yes

Three different options: 22 April

World Earth Day

7 April

World Health Day

5 June

Environmental

Protection Day

Of those cities that were willing to implement a small campaign only Graz and Volos really carried out their

plans. In L’Aquila the disastrous earthquake changed all plans. Halandri and Sibiu couldn’t be motivated

to be active.

Below one can find a short description on what happened in Volos and Graz:

“Bicycle Day” event organised by the Prefecture of Magnesia, Greece

The city of Volos is a relatively small city in Greece with approximately 85.000 inhabitants. It’s got a

temperate climate and it’s built on a flat surface. Furthermore, the distances that the inhabitants have to

travel everyday are short due to the small extent that the city has. But the city’s most popular mean of

transportation, even in the centre of the town, is the automobile. Given these facts, it is clear that an

immediate solution to Volos’ traffic problems could be the use of bicycles, especially for movement in the

centre of the city. But nowadays, the use of bicycle tends to be abandoned. The use of bicycles by the

inhabitants, in replacement to their private cars, would be a part for the solution of the problem

immediately and effectively. For this reason the Prefecture of Magnesia in cooperation with other

environmental organizations and with the Development Company of Magnesia (ANEM S.A.) organized an

event on 28 March 2009 to celebrate the formal initiation of a new action which includes free bicycle use.

33

The main activity was a city tour by bike together with politicians, local authorities and representatives of

environmental organisations. About 150 people participated. The "test new behaviour" tour was combined

with an awarding ceremony for high school students that dealt with environmental issues within a

campaign named "Ecomobility". During this tour people used their own bike or were offered a rental bike

for free use which was placed on different spots of the city. They issue a card with a unique number and

their details and they could use this card to take the bicycles. After this event the free to use bikes (for up

to two hours) will remain for rental and since the demand is higher than the supply there are plans to add

additional bikes. The reaction of the users was mainly positive.

Action Day for cyclists and pedestrians in Graz, Au stria

Encouraged by the activities of TRANSPOWER the City of Graz organised an Action Day for cyclists and

pedestrians on the 8th of May 2009. Accompanied by the publication of a new cycle map and the opening

of parts of the pedestrian zone for cyclists it was the main objective to award cyclists and pedestrians as

users of clean and sustainable modes of transport. Therefore on two different hot spots of the city (main

railway station where the bicycle parking garage is situated and on the biggest bridge which is the

entrance to the inner city centre) party events for the citizens were organised. These events contained

bicycle coding activities, winning games, the dissemination of gadgets (bicycle bells in the form of a lady

bird) and information material (e.g. the brand new bicycle map), music, eating and drinking. A main focus

has been set on the peaceful-co-existence of cyclists and pedestrians as the opening of parts of the

pedestrian zones for cyclists might cause a potential of conflicts between these two groups.

During the Workshop in Groningen, The Netherlands in spring 2009 several MM measures have been

presented – especially those promoting cycling in the city.

The final Workshop in Graz also gave the opportunity to show implementations related to mobility

management and Travel Awareness – e.g. the Mobility Centre, the paid parking system or the city-wide

speed reduction.

Mobility Management related activities of TRANSPOWER have been presented and promoted at several

events / conferences and educations such as the CIVITAS Forum 2008 in Bologna where the Sibiu

Implementation on parking in the historical city centre has been awarded or during university courses in

Graz. Selected TRANSPOWER case Studies have been uploaded to the ELTIS database – the biggest

information portal on urban transport in the world.

34


Del.

No.

Deliverable name

Work

packa

ge

no.

Date

due

Actual /

Forecast

delivery

date

Estimated

indicative

person

months

Used

indicative

person

months

Lead

contractor

See

D10

MM Inventory and

Best Practice

Report as part of

the overall

Inventory Report

(see D10)

WP8 Month

31


competenc

e team

See

D11

Report on MM

solutions and their


partner cities for

potential follow-up


overall Project

Report (see D11)

WP8 Month

31


competenc

e team

See

D12

Implementation

plan for each

participating city

including general

recommendations,

conclusions and

policy notes for

decision makers as

part of the overall

Implementation

Report (see D12)

WP8 Month

31


competenc

e team

D14 Minutes of TWG

meeting(s)

WP8 Month

26

Month 26 0,5 0,000 GTZ

35


Milestone

No.

Milestone name Work

package

No.


delivery date

Lead

contractor

27 NMT Inventory

and Best Practice

Report as part of

the overall

Inventory Report

WP8


final report

GTZ and

competence

team

28 Report on NMT

solutions and their


partner cities for

potential follow-up

activities as part

of overall Project

Report

WP8


final report

GTZ and

competence

team

29 Implementation

plan for each

participating city

including general

recommendations,

conclusions and

policy advice

notes for decision

makers as part of

the overall

Implementation

Report

WP8


final report

GTZ and

competence

team

30 Minutes of TWG

Meeting(s)

WP8


final report

GTZ

36

9. Work package No 9 – Debriefing and Reporting


• To assess the work of all thematic working groups

• To merge the results of the TWG’s work.

• To debrief project concepts regarding their impact and transferability.

Workpackage Leader: GTZ

In order to assess the results of the foregoing Thematic Workshops and the work with the partners on

their respective Municipal Case Studies and City Solutions (was Best Practices) a Meeting of the

Competence Team and the Coordinator took place in Berlin. The Competence Team assessed which

measures still have to be undertaken to finalize and to prepare the results for the final city profiles in each

city and decided on the responsibilities accordingly. Further on the agenda was to decide on the final

event and in this context how to use and disseminate the results effectively until the end the project. As

the final conference of the project will be hosted by the city of Graz, Mr. Gerhard Ablasser from the City of

Graz attend the meeting as well.

Regarding the final reporting the Competence Team members agreed on the structure of the final Overall

Inventory and Project Report and the final City Implementation report. As the final publishable summary of

the project activities and results the consortium decided on a final project brochure, which is the most

appropriate channel for dissemination of the project results. Further it was decided, that GTZ will

coordinate the contents and the production of the brochure and that it will be published in the project

language English. This was decided by aspects of applicability, as it is quite expensive and not realistic to

produce the contents in all partner city languages. Moreover to ensure the visibility criteria as well as the

design formats, the handling was decided accordingly. All project partners agreed on this solution during

the Workshop in Groningen.

Table17 List of Deliverables WP 9

Del.

No.

Deliverable name

Work

packa

ge

no.

Date due Actual /

Forecast

delivery

date

Estimated

indicative

person

months

Used

indicative

person

months

Lead

contractor

D 15 Debriefing and

Reporting


competenc

e team

37


Milestone

No.

Milestone

name

Work

package

No.


delivery date

Lead

contractor

31 Assessment

Report

WP 9


final report

GTZ and

competence

team

10. Work package 10 – Final Conference


The task was preparing a high-level conference (3 days/ 2 participants per partner) which will bring the

involved project partners together with policy-makers and other stakeholders in policy formulation. This

will help to raise the public awareness and project visibility, to ensure the transfer of the research results

to the key policy-makers, and to create a possibility for feedback by the policy-makers into research.

Presentations are held by each partner and the competence team during a poster session, which will be

attended by political stakeholders, the further interested audience and the consortium. Future cooperation

will be discussed and if possible initiated. The prepared city profiles which describe the current status

including weaknesses and strengths, city solutions as well as policy recommendations will be printed as

the so called Final TRANSPOWER brochure and made available.




Between 8 and 10 July 2009, the Final Conference of TRANSPOWER took place. The conference’s

objective was to resume the results of TRANSPOWER and to prepare the ground for the project partners

to present their project results. Besides to the TRANSPOWER consortium, the final conference was also

addressed to the political stakeholders of the partner cities in order to raise awareness for the problems of

the cities. Political stakeholders from Graz, the Region of Styria, Volos, Timisoara and the member of the

German Advisory Board of the project Mr. Wilfried Laboor, Ministry for Infrastructure and Spatial Planning

of the Land Brandenburg (MIR) attended the conference and gave their input during the panel discussion.

Moreover, the final conference was the official project farewell event. All the partners presented the results

of their Municipal Case Studies and their City solutions (was renamed from Good and Best Practices, due

to problems in categorization) in the “Market of Ideas”. The most important topic discussed at the final

conference was the relation between traffic planning and sustainability. The following questions were

raised:

38

The questions were: Are there indicators which could define the sustainability of transports systems in

European cities? What could be measurable and what is comparable? During the penal discussion the

participants tried to define indicators for the question: What is sustainability? The answers were manifold

and the conference participants came to the conclusion that tailor-made solutions have to be found for the

specific situation of a specific city.

Organizer/ Host

The Final Conference was hosted by the city of Graz. As host, the city of Gray was responsible for all the

administrative and organisational tasks required to ensure the conference’s successful preparation and

implementation. Representatives of the city of Graz were furthermore actively involved as speakers as

well as guides during the various panels and events of the conference. Thus, the opening of the

conference was amongst others chaired by Ms Lisa Rücker – Vice Mayor Graz. Representing the city of

Graz, Mr. Gerhard Ablasser guided the conference participants on the promenade in the historic City

39

Centre of Graz and Mr. Fischer – Coordinator for Superior Traffic and Transport Projects city of Graz –

held a presentation on the topic of “European Conference on Mobility Management”. Furthermore,

representatives of the city of Graz were among those partners involved in the official project closure at the

conference and attended the Farewell Dinner which was hosted by the city of Graz.

Support

For the final conference, GTZ supported the City of Graz in general preparatory activities such as

preparing the agenda and the list of participants, organisational tasks and inviting the partners and other

political stakeholders as well as the Advisory Board of the project. GTZ furthermore drafted, agreed on

and finally provided the template for the respective presentations to be prepared by some partners for the

workshop. Moreover, GTZ chaired the Steering Committee as well as the Competence Team meeting. A

project evaluation was furthermore prepared and implemented within the scope of the conference. In

addition to administrative and organisational tasks relating to the workshop, GTZ was responsible for the

preparation of the workshop minutes.

Partners

The following partners participated in/attended the Final Conference.

The representatives of the partner cities presented their results to the audience during a Poster Session.

The city of Skopje unfortunately could not be represented at the conference, wherefore the results of that

city were instead presented by a representative of the responsible Competence Team partner, Mr.

Schwarzmann from PTV.

Partner No. Partner Name Participating Individuals

1 GTZ Julia Jesson

Stefanie Schmidt

Andrea Donath

Armin Wagner

2 EBP Stephan Kathke

Andree Dörthe

3 PTV Rainer Schwarzmann

Nicola Lehnhoff

4 AMOR Robert Pressl

5 EAUE Hans Uve Schwedler

40

6 ANEM Kaltsoudi Anastasia

Chorozidis Dimitris

Charalampos Skyrgianni

Pantelis Mastrogiannis

7 UNIAQ Trizio Ilaria

8 STMK Daniel Kampus

Andrea Teschinegg

9 NIS Vojinović Nikola

10 PMS Cretu Ilie

Mihailescu Ioana

Lucian Dumitru Vizantie

12 PMT Culita Chis

Adrian Colojoara

Daniela Ghinea

16 GRAZ Gerhard Ablasser

Heike Falk

17 ROEZ Valkema Jaap

Hans Vissers

18 CAQU Abrusca Salvatori Guiseppe

Renzo Parisse

19 HAL Alexander Cappos

Alexandra Alexandropoulou

20 SKJ -

The final conference was held in Graz from July 8th-10th. Objective of this final conference was to resume

the results of TRANSPOWER and to build the floor for the project partners to present their project results.

Besides the TRANSPOWER consortium the final conference was also addressed to the political

41

stakeholder of the partner cities in order to raise awareness for the problems of the cities. Political

stakeholders from Graz, the Region of Styria, Volos, Timisoara and Potsdam (Advisory Board) attended

the conference and gave their input during the panel discussion. Moreover the final conference was the

official project farewell event.

Those partner institutions that could not be represented at the Final Conference were kept updated by

GTZ about the conference’s contents, findings and results. Furthermore, GTZ provided those partners

with the conference’s agenda and minutes.

Internship in Graz

Also in the combination of the final conference in Graz and on special request of the cities a further

internship was planned and organized in Graz. This exchange of personnel (3 days stay) will complement

the achievements of the respective WP by deepening the knowledge and build further capacity. Moreover

the correlation between the partners will be strengthened beyond the termination and the scope of the

project.

City Dates Host Participants Subject

Graz 6.-8.07.2009 Gerhard Ablasser

Daniela Ghinea (PMT) ,

Nikola Vojinovic (Nis) ,


(Volos), Charalampos

Skyrgianni (Volos)

WP7 NMT,

WP4 PT,

WP8 MM,

WP5 IP

The participants of the internship in Graz were briefed in depth by different members of the traffic

department of the city of Graz on several topics regarding sustainable urban transport and innovative

mobility concepts and policies. Mainly impressing for the participants from the learning cities Nis, Volos

and Timisoara were the concepts to reduce traffic in the city centre, the shared spaces policies as well as

the mobility concepts in the city. Several presentations and conversations with specialists and politicians

on various fields, as well as site visits took place. The reports and the agenda of the Internship can be

found under Project Deliverable 13 on the Final Reporting CD ROM.

Table 19 List of Deliverables WP 10

Del.

No.

Deliverable name

Work

packa

ge

no.

Date due Actual /

Forecast

delivery

date

Estimated

indicative

person

months

Used

indicative

person

months

Lead

contractor

42

D 16 Press Release 10 Month 36 Month 36 0,2 0,200 GTZ and

competenc

e team

D 17 Technical Final

Report incl. Plans

for further

cooperation

10 Month 36 Month 36 4 1,471 GTZ and

competenc

e team

D 18 City Profiles 10 Month 36 Month 36 3 3,000 GTZ and

competenc

e team

Table 20 List of Milestones WP 10

Milestone

No.

Milestone

name

Work

package

No.


delivery date

Lead

contractor

32 Press Release WP 10

Month 36 Month 36 GTZ and

competence

team

33 Cooperation

Plan

WP 10


competence

team

34 City Profiles WP 10


competence

team

43

11. Work package 11 – Management activities


• To ensure a smooth technical, organisational and financial management as well as controlling of

the project and coordination and elaboration of the final reporting

• Controlling the travel budget of the project to ensure most efficient use of resources

• To prepare the closure of the project and to led the consortium to a function sustainable network

• To organize the final documentation of the project results

• Ensuring that good communications are maintained between project partners and particularly

between work packages;

• Organising project meetings and conferences together with the local partners


• Technical Final and Annual Reporting of the 3rd year

• Elaboration and Coordination of all Deliverables incl.:

o Inventory and Best Practice Report as part of the overall Inventory Report (D10)

o Report on solutions and their applicability in the partner cities for potential follow-up

activities as part of overall Project Report (D11)

o Implementation plan for each participating city including general recommendations,

conclusions and policy advice notes for decision makers as part of the overall

Implementation Report (D12)

o Final Project Brochure (Final Publishable Activity Report)


Please note, that the overall management and coordination tasks and actions during the respective period

are described in more detail below (cf. Section 3 – Consortium Management)



In order to ensure a smooth management of the consortium the management tasks within the second

reporting period have predominantly been:

44

� Communication - Briefing of all partners about the latest developments in project implementation,

deadlines of deliverables etc.

� Preparation, organisation and follow-up of the two thematic workshops in l’Aquila, Groningen and

the final Conference in graz

� Competence Team Meeting on Project Assessment

� Chairing Steering Committees accompanied by presentations and financial briefings

� Preparation, conception and production of the final results equal to the final project brochure

Hosting the website and providing relevant information and downloads for the partners

The coordinator/management strived to increase the use of the website, to promote and optimise the

network character and the information flow between the partners and cities in particular, which succeed

within this period (cf. Annex Web-statistic Server Cluster) This was reached by continuously making the

partners aware of the new developments, available on the website per e-mail.

� Providing and developing forms and templates for the reporting

� Providing forms and templates for the deliverables (e.g. Best/Bad practices and MCS)

� Providing and management of consultation

� Annual reporting

� Answering various requests on administrative and financial issues (e.g. Invitations for visa

purchase, official letters for cities concerning participations of partners etc.)

� Distribution of the financial EC contribution

In order to ensure a smooth management within the last project period and to maximize the project

outcome major tasks for the next period will be:

� Navigation of the project budget

� Maximize the dissemination of outcomes and reportable actions

� Improve a sustainable network between the partners

� Envisaged evaluation of the management performance and the methodology

Internships

Within the 3rd Reporting Period the internships of TRANSPOWER took place as described in detail below.

The Agendas and further information can be found under Deliverable 13. The Internships were organized

and initiated by the coordinator GTZ. GTZ also held the funds available within the project and supervised

the expenditures and procedures. The planning and implementation in detail was provided by the project

partners from the hosting cities.

45

Internship in Graz


Graz 6.-8.07.2009 Gerhard Ablasser

Daniela Ghinea (PMT) ,

Nikola Vojinovic (Nis) ,


(Volos), Charalampos

Skyrgianni (Volos)

WP7 NMT,

WP4 PT,

WP8 MM,

WP5 IP

Internship in Groningen


Groningen 9.-11.03.2009

Jaap Valkema, Hans

Vissers

Mr. Nikola Vojinović

(NIS), Giuseppe

Abrusca (lAquila).

WP7 NMT,

WP4 PT,

WP8 MM,

WP5 IP


Table 21 List of Deliverables WP 11

Del.

No.

Deliverable name

Work

packa

ge

no.

Date due Actual /

Forecast

delivery

date

Estimated

indicative

person

months

Used

indicative

person

months

Lead

contractor

D 19 Annual Reports WP 11 Month

12; 24

Month 12;

24

1,4 0,1,033 GTZ and

competence

team

46

Table 22 List of Milestones WP 11

Milestone

No.

Milestone

name

Work

package

No.


delivery date

Lead

contractor

35 Annual Reports WP 11

Month 12;24 Month 12; 24 GTZ and

competence

team

36 Technical Final

Report

WP 11


competence

team

Section 3 – Consortium Management

1. Description Management of the TRANSPOWER consort ium

During the entire project duration the coordination and management tasks within the consortium were

highly demanding. Reasons are that the project was build of a consortium with a quite high number of

partners, that participated the Framework Programme for the first time. A high number of thematic

workpackages, a high number of experts in various fields and a very heterogeneous group of cities

required a highly extensive communication and supervision input which was extraordinary time

consuming. The coordinator had to provide a very intense and individual support to each partner.

Furthermore the coordinator had to elaborate a various number of templates and formats for the

workshops and the final project deliverables as published within the final brochure.

In order to ensure a smooth management of the consortium the management tasks within the third

reporting period have predominantly been:

� Communication - Briefing of all partners about the latest developments in project implementation,

deadlines of deliverables etc.

� Preparation, organisation and follow-up of the two thematic workshops and the final conference in

Graz

� Steering of the Competence Team

� Preparation and Chairing of Steering Committees accompanied by presentations, deliverables

and financial briefings and preparation of templates and procedures

47

� Hosting the website and providing relevant information and downloads for the partners

The coordinator/management of TRANSPOWER strived to increase the use of the website, to

promote and optimise the network character and the information flow between the partners and

cities in particular, which succeeded within this period. It was reached by continuously making the

partners aware of the new developments and availability of documents on the website per e-mail.

� Providing and developing forms and templates for the reporting

� Providing forms and templates for the deliverables (e.g. Best/Bad practices and MCS)

� Annual and final reporting

� Answering various requests on administrative and financial issues (e.g. Invitations for visa

purchase, official letters for cities concerning participations of partners etc.)

� Distribution of the financial EC contribution

� Collecting the contents, elaboration and production of the final project brochure

The final project brochure is the final publishing result of the project and contains the main

deliverables of the project by each city. The final brochure was presented during the final conference

in Graz by July 2009. Funds were held by the coordinator. The production was subcontracted to

‘Riversite’.

� Internships

Within the 3rd Reporting Period the internships of Transpower took place as described in detail below.

The Agendas and further information can be found under Deliverable 13. The Internships were

organized and initiated by the coordinator GTZ. GTZ also held the funds available within the project

and supervised the expenditures and procedures. The planning and implementation in detail was

provided by the project partners from the hosting cities.

General measures in order to coordinate the respons ibilities and activities of the project partners

The coordinator GTZ made use of the following tools:

As the Project Co-ordinator GTZ is responsible for ensuring TRANSPOWER meeting its

objectives on time and within the budget. Following assignments are covered by the responsibility

of the GTZ: (i) Liaison to EU and partners, overall Project coordination; (ii) Monitoring the work

packages to ensure that outcomes and deliverables comply with state-of-the art requirements; (iii)

Annual and final reporting to the EU Commission in cooperation with the project management and

the work package leaders; (iv) Chairing the Steering Committee and reporting to it; (v) Preparing,

agreeing and managing the budget (in coordination with the project management).

The Project Manager, a task also covered by GTZ as mentioned above, will ensure the day-to-day

management of TRANSPOWER and support the project coordination. The Project Manager has

to perform following tasks: (i) Secretariat for the Project Co-ordinator and the Steering Committee;

(ii) Ensuring that work packages and deliverables are achieved on time; (iii) Organising project

48

meetings and conferences with the regional partners; (iv) Controlling the travel budget of the

project; (v) Elaborating annual and final reports (in cooperation with the Project Coordinator and

the work package leaders).

The Steering Committee involves all project partners and is the key mechanism to ensure the

participation of TRANSPOWER´s partners in Project Co-ordination. The Steering Committee has

to review the Project’s progress according to the operation plan and to suggest any necessary

changes in project implementation to TRANSPOWER’s management. Moreover the SC has to

optimise the dissemination of project outcomes and thus the project’s impact on the concepts

delivered. Regular SC meetings will take place at the event of each conference and thematic

workshop (TWG) to discuss financial, technical and administrative issues. All in all 7 ordinary SC

sessions will be held during the overall TRANSPOWER implementation phase. Since the kick-off

meeting, the Steering Committee functions as decision making and conflict solving body.

Finally the Advisory Board (AB) provides an external review of the project’s implementation

process and its outcomes. The AB has to fulfil tasks and responsibilities as follows: (i) Monitoring

TRANSPOWER’s implementation and the quality of outcomes; (ii) Reviewing the annual and final

reports to the European Commission; (iii); (iv) Providing suitable solutions to improve

TRANSPOWER’s implementation and the quality of outcomes and (v) Participating in

TRANSPOWER’s kick-off session and the final conference.

To ensure a sound and effective project implementat ion

The following tools have been utilised:

• A web-based Knowledge Management System has been established

(http://www.TRANSPOWER-rp6.org). It has a public part with information on the project and

functions most of all as dissemination and public relations tool granting also visibility of EU’s

contribution. But for the consortium management the internal part is the core element of this

system. It is a communication and working platform with a common document management for all

project partners. The major part of the internal area concerns the project implementation and is

therefore detailed in phases and work packages. Besides there is a forum site to deal with

questions and answers from the partners. Another folder contains adminstrative and financial

information which can be downloaded. A last folder contains photos of the workshops. Access to

the internal part of the website is given to the contact persons within the partner organisations, to

advisory board members and to representatives of the European Commission. Additional persons/

institutions can be granted access to the internal part upon decision of the Steering Committee.

• Even though the website is the central tool for an effective project implementation the

administrative communication with all partners and the compilation of partners’ input via e-mails

and phone calls is indispensable.

To meet EU financial and reporting requirements

49

The project management informed about the rules to follow during the reporting period. During the

workshop in Skopje an overview about the current expenditure as well as a briefing for the second

reporting period was held by the GTZ financial management of the project. Additionally, the

partners were informed via e-mail and on the website.

Minutes of the respective thematic workshops in Sibiu and Skopje are attached to this report and

can, together with all pictures and presentations, be found on the website as well. This Activity

Report will be put on the project website after the Commission’s approval.

2. Timetable as implemented and planned activities

Activities undertaken (timing of the work packages, workshops and management committee meetings) (Gant Chart)

WP/Month 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36

Phase I

1

2

3

Phase II S1 S21

4 C1

5 S3

6 C2

7

8

Phase III

9

10 S4 S5 S6

T12 T23 T3 S7

1 S2 Did not take place due to smooth project implementation

P Management

T4 C3

11

Year 1 2 3

S – Steering Committee

T – Meeting of TWG

C1 – Kick-off conference, C2 – Mid-term coference, C3 – Final conference

2 T1 is first thematic workshop WP 7 (NMT) in Sibiu (cf. TWG as per Annex I) 3 T2 is second thematic workshop WP 6 (TM) in Skopje (cf. TWG as per Annex I)

periodic activity report - trimis · 2015. 7. 3. · description please see periodic activity...

Documents