Transcript Support to sustainable development of urban growth poles

Cities of Tomorrow: how to make it happen
Governance challenges
and policy implications
Iván Tosics
Metropolitan Research Institute, Budapest
DG Regio Conference
20-21 December 2010
Brussels
Challenges for urban development
• Challenges are more or less known: climate-change and
energy-problems, problems of the globalizing economy,
demographic changes, increasing migration and
sharpening social inequalities.
• Separate analyses of them lead to different apocalyptic
views:
– collapse of the normal functioning of the climate
– unmanageable problems of the ageing societies and of the
potential migrant flows,
– sharp conflicts due to growing inequalities between social and
ethnic strata and/or different areas.
• The potential answers to address these problems oneby-one create conflicting interactions: the easiest
answer on any of the problems usually makes things
worse regarding the others.
EU2020: contradicting goals
• One-sided emphasis on economic efficiency might lead to
threatening examples of “left behind” cities (e.g. Detroit,
mono-industrial Russian cities). It is already proved that
EU2020 will cause sprawl in peri-urban areas (PLUREL).
• Costly investments into CCS technologies or overambitious environmental aims might crowding out financial
means for economic development and social inclusion.
Zero-carbon new construction is many times more
expensive than energy-saving through renewal of existing
buildings.
• Concentration on affordable policies might lead to richer
people leaving the cities. Improving living conditions within
ghettoes or building new social housing leads in many
cases to the final exclusion of the poor groups from the
mainstream society.
The challenge for us: to prove that urban
areas are crucial for EU2020
• The integration of the three goals of EU2020 can best be
assured on broader urban level (functional urban
regions, metropolitan areas, city-regions, rural-urban
regions) where economic, environmental and social
challenges can best be addressed at once (to handle
new investments, sprawl, traffic congestion, exclusion of
migrant and minority population groups).
• Functional urban regions are usually weak in
administrative-political sense. Europe has 21st century
economy, 20th century governments, 19th century
territorial systems. The latter have to be changed or at
least incentives should be given that innovative
developments happen in the functional urban areas.
Defining City-regions
There is no universal agreement, neither on the
term (metropolitan area, functional urban
zone…) nor on its content. Two potential
definitions:
• ‘The concept of the City-Region can be
understood as a functionally inter-related
geographical area comprising a central, or Core
City, as part of a network of centres and rural
hinterlands.’ (ODPM, 2005).
• ‘The concept of [the] City-Region covers not only
the commuting hinterland of the city but also the
whole area which is economically, socially and
culturally dominated by the city’ (Davoudi, 2003).
Potential ways to delimit city regions
Parameters for definition may be grouped as follows
(SURF study):
• Labour-market definitions. Predominantly focused on
TTW.
• Economic activity-based definitions. Besides access to
labour markets other factors might also be important
(e.g. the supply chain)
• Housing-market definitions: the city-region might be
defined as the area in which households search for
residential locations
• Service-district definitions. For example retail
catchments, access to hospitals, theatres, international
airports etc.
• Administrative definitions.
Basic definitions and data
• The regional level can be defined in different
ways. The Committee of Regions believes in the
administrative regions, Metrex deals with the
Functional Urban Regions and Areas while new
approaches emphasize creative and flexible
governance.
• There are in the wider Europe some 120
metropolitan regions and areas, which have 500
thousand or more population in contiguous
urban areas. Such regions contain 60%, appr
280 million of the 470 million population.
ESPON data on European functional areas
• ESPON has identified in the enlarged Europe 1595 FUAs with over 50 th population, 149 groups of FUA’s and 64
Metropolitan Growth Areas.
• The 64 MEGA’s consist of the following categories:
–
–
–
–
–
Global nodes: 2 (Paris and London)
European engines: 13 (Munich … Stuttgart)
Strong MEGA’s: 10 (Stockholm … Gothenburg)
Potential MEGA’s: 23 (Lyon … Bratislava)
Weak MEGA’s: 16 (Naples …Valetta)
• ESPON results suggest that there are probably some
150 to 180 metropolitan FUA’s, that have many strategic
issues in common. Of these, perhaps 40 to 60 are of
particular significance for the wider European economy.
1) METREX: There is a need for effective
metropolitan governance
• European spatial planning objectives can most
effectively realised on the metropolitan level.
Both sustainability and polycentricity need
effective metropolitan governance, based on
integrated economic, social, environmental and
spatial actions on metropolitan level.
• For effective metropolitan spatial planning
metropolitan regions need the necessary
– competencies (authority to adopt, implement and
safeguard a metropolitan spatial strategy),
– capabilities (knowledge and understanding to take
informed decisions)
– processes (means to regularly monitor, review and
update the strategy).
Metropolitan competencies
In order to be able to adopt, implement and
safeguard a metropolitan spatial strategy, the
metropolitan authority needs the following
competencies:
• National Spatial Plan availability
• Formal terms of reference for the planning body
• Powers to take decisions on conflicts of interests
• Coherence of area (covering commuting,
housing, retail catchment area)
• Power to implement and safeguard a strategy
Metropolitan capabilities
The metropolitan authority needs to have the
capabilities to plan, monitor, review, safeguard
and implement the metropolitan strategy:
• Professional resources
• Survey and data collection
• Projections and forecasts
• Assessment of urban development capacity
• Policy analysis at the metropolitan level
• Capability to prepare strategic scenarios and an
integrated strategy for the metropolitan area
Effective metropolitan planning
process
The ongoing process of planning, regular
monitoring and review will sustain a metropolitan
strategy
• A pro-active, inclusive and transparent approach
(assure possibility for public participation,
including the general public)
• Implementation, monitoring and review (formal
partnership agreements with key stakeholders,
regular review taking the necessary revisions of
programmes and projects)
The basic forms of effective
metropolitan governance
Three different forms of effective metropolitan
governance can be defined:
• Elected metropolitan authorities with
comprehensive range of social, economic,
infrastructural, enviromental and spatial planning
powers
• Elected or appointed metropolitan authorities
with selected core powers to address key issues
• Appointed metropolitan agencies or joint bodies
with strategic planning responsibilities and
advisory implementation functions
Examples on the three forms of
regional authorities
• Elected metropolitan authorities: former Scottish
Regional Councils, Hannover
• Elected or appointed metropolitan authorities
with selected core powers: Verband Region
Stuttgart, Area Metropolitana de Lisboa, Helsinki
Metropolitan Area Council, Conseil Regional
d’Ile-de-France
• Voluntary model: Glasgow-Clyde Valley
Structure Plan Committee, Öresund Committee,
Zürich, München, Berlin-Brandenburg
Metrex Practice Benchmark
One of the main results of the 1999-2005 Metrex work is
the “Metrex Practice Benchmark”, defining 29
benchmarks, grouped in the following way:
• Competence benchmarks (8): to what extent has the
region the powers to approve, implement and safeguard
a metropolitan strategy
• Capability benchmarks (13): to what extent has the
region the knowledge to take informed spatial planning
and development decisions
• Process benchmarks (8): to what extent has the region
in place the means to monitor, review, consult on and roll
forward a metropolitan strategy.
Metrex’s political statement: the need for
European Agenda for Metropolitan Europe
• Urban competitiveness and cohesion can be progressed
most effectively through the establishment of effective
means for strategic decision making and action over
Functional Urban Regions and Areas and, in particular,
those of metropolitan significance. This is the
metropolitan dimension to European affairs.
• A top-down initiative is urgently required to stimulate and
sustain progress with a European Agenda for
Metropolitan Europe.
• A partnership of the European Commission and the
European Economic and Social Committee (EESC),
supported by METREX, should be progressed through
the agenda of the Informal Council of Ministers
responsible for Regional Planning during the
Luxembourg and UK Presidencies in 2005.
2) Creative city region governance: a
more flexible approach to city regions
• Creative city region governance is a new phenomena,
based on recent publications, among others the papers
of Klaus Kunzmann and Italian colleagues (Balducci,
Alessandro; Kunzmann, Klaus R.; Sartorio, Francesca S.
Towards creative city region governance in Italy and
Germany. DISP [Zurich] No. 158. 2004.)
• This approach differs significantly from the approach of
Metrex, as the starting point is that top-down attempts to
give unified definition to city regions usually fail to
achieve their original aims, and that city regions with
flexible boundaries and with flexible arrangements (but
guarantees for longer term commitment) might work
better. In this context creativity, innovation gains ground.
The difficulties of regional cooperation
• No valid European model exists so far for regional
cooperation, which addresses the manifold challenges
city regions are facing in different parts of Europe. Each
city region has to find its own solution how to organize
regional cooperation.
• Government attempts to give unified definition (Italy
1990: defining ten “Cittá Metroplitana”, Germany 1997:
defining seven “metropolitan regions”) usually fail to
achieve their original aims, but might have positive
effects on bottom-up developments.
• Defining city-region boundaries is usually a long and
controversial process, both in top-down or bottom-up
way. Boundaries might be more flexible if the city region
is less institutionalized. The best might be to connect
flexible boundaries of a city region with flexible
arrangements, but maintaining political stability and
guaranteeing for longer term commitment.
Framing concept: creative governance
• Agreements for variable geometries, coexistence of soft
and hard forms of institutionalization
• Improving communication on regional level, initiating
inclusive policies towards all actors in the region
• Developing alternative scenarios for the future to
enhance more creative dimensions of the regional
development process
• Identifying and involving creative actors (e.g. regional
civil society) to overcome administrative and political
routine and clientelism.
• Selecting unusual catalyst projects for enhancing identity
building, using the symbolic and imaginative role of
projects
• Identifying new, creative instruments for financing, e.g.
private funds, cost sharing.
An Agenda for Creative Governance in
City Regions (Kunzmann)
• Internationally competitive cities have to overcome the
difficulties of negotiations with the expanding hinterland
about all development possibilities (airport, highway,
commercial and leisure developments, high income
housing). At the same time they have to face growing
inner polarization.
• German examples: only Hanover, Stuttgart and Bonn
can be labelled as “successful”, while the others, like the
city states (Hamburg, Bremen), the Ruhr association (too
weak association of 12 million people area), the BerlinBrandenburg, Frankfurt attempts are much more
controversial.
Ten suggestions for innovative
governance in city regions
• Allow flexible functional boundaries (based on a willingness of
cooperation, guided by rules of participation and withdrawal), as
these have to be changed over time and might differ from function to
function.
• Build up regional information system to avoid prejudice and biased
opinion, and plug-in all important stakeholders for the preparation of
joint thinking.
• Develop a regional vision in the form of a concise policy paper,
suggesting the direction to go and the principles on which future
political decisions should be based.
• Promote city-region identity: to build up interior identification with a
well-established regional identity, based on the exterior image of the
area (through presenting good cases, showing outside competitors,
building up common foreign policy, …)
• Strengthen regional innovation networks: to overcome the
pragmatism and lethargic approach of established institutions and
committees, ad-hoc networks of innovative regional actors and
regional think-tanks are needed.
• Support the Third sector (intermediate organizations,
institutions and community groups), which can partly
replace the weakening public sector and the selfinterested private sector in raising regional social and
environmental awareness.
• Design catalyst projects for intra-regional cooperation, to
bring public and private actors together, and to establish
personal networks.
• Create opportunities for public and private actors to
meet, even if no concrete actions are decided, no
documents are signed.
• Communicate neighbourhood success stories across the
city region, with the use of the regional media and the
internet.
• Establish trust in regional cooperation, for all potential
actors, to overcome sensitivities and communication
deficits.
Strong leadership, creative processes and
creative financing needed
• Creative institutions and creative actors: only newly
established institutions with new persons in leading positions
might have the momentum to cope with the new challenges.
• Sometimes the establishment of regional alliances for a
limited time period with handpicked personalities from the
region and the encouragement of a regional civil society may
be appropriate.
• Creative strategies and processes: to leave behind routine
procedures of decision-making often require the initiative and
financing of higher tear government. The German City 2030
programme or the EU Interreg programme are good
examples.
• Creative financing: the costs of regional initiatives have to be
shared among larger number of contributors. Fees, city
development funds, contributions from potential
beneficiaries, local tax exemptions might be among the
innovative ideas.
Creativity and Urban Governance
(Patsy Healey)
City region governance and creativity – alternative
meanings
• Creativity as innovation, promoting
competitiveness with new means (e.g.
development agency fostering new clusters)
• Creativity as enriching human existence, valuing
aesthetic qualities of urban life (e.g.
development of a music centre of excellence)
• Creativity as a process of making a new product
(e.g. engage the public into a new development
to become icon for the city or region)
Novelties of the new type of
governance
Such new type of governance is very
different from the old, rule-bound
administrative approach, insofar it
• aims to encourage innovation in a context
of dynamic complexity,
• allows experimentation with the chance for
failures,
• introduces evaluation culture instead of
precisely determined outcomes.
Different approaches to increase the
significance of territorial cooperation
• Committee of the Regions: more power to the
administrative regions!
• Metrex: more power to the functional urban
regions!
• Creative governance: instead of unified
definition to city regions with fixed boundaries,
flexible arrangements (with guarantees for
longer term commitment) create better ground
for creativity, innovation.
URBACT 1 Metrogov results
• The co-operation between the cities and their
surrounding had ups in the 1970s and 1980s,
downs since then, and is at the beginning of the
21st century in upswing again
• The new city-region co-operation period will be
different from the earlier one. The earlier
abolished entities are unlikely to be reintroduced
because of the general fear that any new stable
entities would soon become too rigid, working on
their self-interest.
• Therefore co-operation models are the most
likely way today how larger territorial units can
be created.
• In the new co-operation period new types of cooperation are likely to develop, putting more
emphasis on governance, on network-like
structures and flexibility.
• The new units will not have overall decision
making power but aim to serve as a discussion
platform for the participating municipalities, how to
create co-operation and public service
agreements in the Functional Urban Area for
those municipalities, who agree to do so.
• The city-regions have double task: to address the
internal conflicts within the functional urban area
and to fully explore the potentials of economic cooperation in the broader urban area. These tasks
need different approaches.
Two-tier approach to city-regions
The two different approaches, the structured and
pre-defined city-regions vs. the flexible approach
should be applied simultaneously but on
different spatial levels
• The problems emerging in the functional urban
area can be addressed through co-operation in
a wide range of public services (special purpose
entities in flexible or set spatial set-up) and in
land use planning, in a fixed area
• The opportunities emerging for a much larger
area can be acquired through economic
planning and through cooperation in some public
services (transport, etc) in flexible bottom-up
partnership.
No unified solutions exist
• Due to local differences everyone has to build the cityregion in their own way, building up the narrow and
broader area of co-operation, according to the
relationship between the administrative and the
morphological areas, and the Functional Urban Area.
• Both levels of city-regions have to be built up of local
governments, aiming at stronger leadership and more
fomalised institutional structure on the narrow level,
while looser leadership and less fomalised institutional
structure on the broader level.
• Leadership for the city-region level can be separately
established for city-region, or can be the region itself,
depending of local context. Conditions have to be
created that private actors do not compete against each
other and against the public sector in the city region.
1) Government and
planning system
The strength of the government system
• The description of the system of territorial governments: the
size of the different units (local municipalities, supra-local
entities such as counties, regions), the power that rests with
them: which levels play the most important role in land-use
change
• Comparison of the size (population number) of the RuralUrban Regions with the size of the administrative levels which
have decisive role in land-use change.
The potential control over land-use
changes resulting from the national
government and planning systems
Value
Countries
7
6
Denmark, The Netherlands, Portugal, United Kingdom
5
Belgium, Cyprus,
Lithuania
4
Italy, Spain, Sweden
3
Austria, Bulgaria, Finland
2
Estonia, Latvia, Luxembourg, Malta, Poland, Slovenia
1
Czech Republic, Hungary, Romania, Slovakia
France,
Germany,
Greece,
Ireland,
2) Instruments indirectly
affecting the regulation of
peri-urban land uses
The local government financing system (from where and
according to which parameters the local governments receive
their revenues)
The taxation system (the existence of different types of taxes
the local governments are allowed to levy and the spatially
relevant consequences of these taxes)
Sectoral policies (infrastructure, economic development,
transport, housing), regulations and subsidy systems
Regulations applied on new land developments
• Growth management (e.g. balance between jobs and homes,
transport services, physical and social infrastructure
requirements)
• Financial regulations: possibilities for the public sector to
recapture some part of land value increase; taxes on green
field investments, subsidies for brown field redeveloment
Municipal finance
• Local government finance: low share of local
revenues, high share of upper level grants
(mainly conditional, not general purpose).
Consequence: no local government direct
interest to increase population.
• Financing of public services: upper level
financing covers the costs of public services.
Consequence: no inter-jurisdictional spill-over
effects.
• Special financial subsidies: no financial
subsidy forms with the effect to strengthen
urban sprawl
Taxation
• Taxation system: low share of local taxes
and/or weak local government control over
the conditions of taxes. Consequence: no or
very little tax competition between
neighbouring municipalities.
• Special taxation forms expressing public
values: no taxation forms with effect to
strengthen urban sprawl.
• Correction policies: efficient upper level public
regulation efforts against tax competition.
Economic development
and infrastructure
• Supra-local administrative or functional
bodies control economic development
and the development of infrastructure
within the RUR area
• Local governments within the RUR area
do not compete with each other for
economic development opportunities
• No public subsidies, given to
infrastructure or economic
development, exist which have the
effect to strengthen urban sprawl
Transport in urban –
periurban areas
• The share of public transport use in the urban, peri urban
and rural areas is high
• There are financial contribution and other special public
subsidies given to encourage the use of public transport
• There any no transport-linked public subsidies which
strengthen urban sprawl (such as tax deduction of travel-towork costs by car)
• The RUR area is covered by public transport associations
• There are efforts to ensure the internalization of external
costs of transport
• Mobility management tools are considered in the most
dense urban areas in order to reduce congestions and
improve the environmental conditions of transport
Housing
development
• There are supra-local (regional,
national) regulations, prescriptions
existing, which influence local housing
policy
• There are no housing-linked public
subsidies with the effect to strengthen
urban sprawl
• There is cooperation between the
municipalities of the RUR area (or
smaller subsets of it) regarding housing
policy
Steering new land
development
• Across the RUR region a substantial share of
developable (already re-zoned) and
potentially developable (agricultural, which
could easily be rezoned if demand increases)
land is in the ownership of the public sector
• Local governments can re-capture some
portion of land value increase, due to rezoning
of land or issuing building permission, from
private actors
• Local municipalities can be influenced by
higher level public actors in their decisions
regarding rezoning of land or issuing building
permission
Comparison of the A) national
government/planning and the
B) local instruments/policies
aspects
Value
Countries
7
6
Denmark, The Netherlands (I), Portugal, United Kingdom (I)
5
Belgium, Cyprus, France (I), Germany (I), Greece (II), Ireland,
Lithuania
4
Italy (I), Spain, Sweden
3
Austria, Bulgaria, Finland
2
Estonia, Latvia, Luxembourg, Malta, Poland (III), Slovenia (II)
1
Czech Republic, Hungary (III), Romania, Slovakia
Connection between the
national and regional-local
level of anti-sprawl analysis
• In countries with weak formal government system and
planning framework potential (values 1-2) the analysed
regions face financial and sectoral policies which usually
create favourable conditions towards urban sprawl, and
local authorities in these regions (with the exception of
Koper) have only very limited tools to control urban sprawl.
• In countries with high national level control potential
(values 5-6) regions are subject of financial and sectoral
policies which are potentially against urban sprawl, and
local authorities in these regions (with the exception of
Thessaloniki) have strong tools to control urban sprawl.
Two extreme types of
countries
Strong public control over land market processes
• The Netherlands, UK and France: potentially strong control assured
by the formal government system and planning policies over RUR
processes, underpinned by the financial, taxation and sectoral
policies and regulatory tools which are used in practice. Result: good
chances to control peri-urban developments and avoid urban sprawl
– especially if also informal governance agreements can be reached
among the partners into this direction.
Weak public control over land market processes
• Mainly new EU member states: formal government institutions and
planning policies are weak; the practically used financial, taxation
and sectoral policies and regulatory tools are also weak. Most likely
consequence: extensive urban sprawl.
The German Metropolitan Regions
• Approved by the „Ministerkonferenz für
raumordnung”
• Aim: to enhance the economic development of
urban areas around large cities towards better
European competitiveness
• Method: more integrated development in order
to answer the globalization, climate and
demographic challenges
• From 1997 first 7 regions, since 2005 the
number increased to 11 approved regions
New ideas for integrated planning
Iván Tosics
• New territorial levels of planning (Jacquier)
• The Hungarian Integrated Urban Development
Plans
• The Romanian Growth Pole method:
metropolitan planning required
• The Polish dilemma and the Silesian
innovation
JACQUIER: Multilevel : yesterday, today and may be tomorrow
A building process : the role of urban and regional policies
Then
Vectors
Former Organisation
New organisation
Polarized Spaces
Homogeneous spaces
Sustainable Urban
Development
Until now
"Hardware" Policies
Now
Transition
"Software" Policies
European Union
Integrated Policies
as operators for transition
Social Cohesion Policy
SDEC, INTERREG
CIP URBAN, URBACT
Central State
Transborder
Regions
National Regions
Regional Politicies
DOCUP OP
Interreg
Province
Metropolitan
Areas
National IPSUD
(Big Cities programme
Politique de la ville,
Soziale Stadt, ...)
CIP Urban
Commune
Neighbourhoods
Area-based approaches
55
Integrated Urban Development Strategy (IUDS)
ROP 2007-2013 – compulsory requirement for all
larger cities
• Based on long-term goals (15-20 years, cityregion wide)
• The IUDS is a medium term (7-8 years) strategic
document, with sectoral and territorial aims,
oriented to implementation
• Necessary to revise every 3-5 years
• To be discussed and approved by a resolution of
the municipal assembly to ensure legitimacy
Chapters of the IUDS
1. Analysis (the city in the settlement network, the inner structure of the city,
economy, society, environment, public services, experience gained in
respect of the developments of the previous period, segregation analysis)
2. Strategy
• The vision of the city
• Development objectives for the city and city districts
• Interventions - designation of action areas
• Sustainability aspects: horizontal program for the environment and antisegregation program
• External and internal correlation of the strategy
• Major risks in implementing the strategy
3. Implementation tools
• Municipal activities of non-investment nature to achieve the objective
• Organisational requirements related to the implementation
• Mechanism for inter-settlement coordination
• Elaboration of the real estate management concept
• Partnership and monitoring
Assignment of action areas
• Indicative assignment of all action areas,
including SF supported 1) Function-enhancing
urban rehabilitation (extension of the functions of
city centres or sub-centres) and 2) Social urban
regeneration of deteriorated urban areas
• Municipality must be in initiating and influencing
role
• Details about the realistically do-able programs
–
–
–
–
Budget
Assessment of resources
Priorization
Alternative scenarios
Anti-segregation plan (horizontal)
Status assessment (included in the IUDS):
• Delimitation of segregated areas and areas threatened by
deterioration and segregation (indicators)
• Status assessment of the delimited areas
• Assessment of the segregational impacts of envisaged
developments and individual sectoral policies
Anti-segregation programmes (interventions)
• Defines a vision for the degraded area whether it will be
eliminated or will be integrated into the urban fabric by way of
rehabilitation, determines the main directions of interventions
• Objectives: decreasing the degree of segregation and avoid
increase of it somewhere else as a result of intervention
• Complex system of tools: housing, education, social care,
health care (soft programmes)
• Mobilisation programme: elaboration of guidelines
The Urban Dimension of Romania’s Cohesion Policy
REGIONAL OPERATIONAL PROGRAMME 2007-2013
Gabriel FRIPTU
Head of the Managing Authority
for Regional Operational Programme
Ministry of Regional Development and Housing
“Support to sustainable development of urban growth poles”
- Objective & key area of intervention Allocated funds: 1.4 bill. Euro (30% in ROP financial allocation)
Objective:
To increase the quality of life and to create new jobs in cities, by
rehabilitating the urban infrastructure, improving services, including
social services, as well as by developing business support structures
and entrepreneurship.
Key area of intervention:
Integrated Urban Development Plans implemented through projects
addressing the following issues :
A. Rehabilitation of the urban infrastructure and improvement of urban
services, including urban transport;
B. Development of sustainable business environment;
C. Rehabilitation of social infrastructure, including social housing and
improvement of social services.
“Support to sustainable development of urban growth poles”
- Urban growth poles Three types of urban growth poles identified:
 Growth poles - 7 large urban centers and their hinterland, designated
by Government Decision: Iasi, Constanţa, Ploieşti, Craiova, Timişoara,
Cluj-Napoca and Braşov;
 Urban development poles – 13 cities, designated by Government
Decision: Suceava, Bacău, Brăila, Galaţi, Piteşti, Râmnicu Vâlcea,
Arad, Deva, Satu Mare, Baia Mare, Oradea, Sibiu and Târgu Mureş;
 Urban centers - towns over 10.000 inhabitants, other than growth
poles and urban development poles.
“Support to sustainable development of urban growth poles”
Growth poles - implementation arrangements (I)


Seven coordinators, one for each growth pole;
Association for Intercommunity Development (AID) created; for each
growth pole; it comprises the city identified as urban core of growth
poles and territorial administrative units in their hinterlands (towns,
communes). County Councils may also be members of this Association;

Establishes the geographical area of the growth pole;

Ensure the setting up of the technical team(s) of experts at the
level of each growth pole, having the task to elaborate, monitore and
implement the Integrated Urban Development Plan;

Set up the decision-making mechanisms for each growth pole;

Agree the Integrated Development Plans, including an action plan
containing a list of projects set up by AIDs;
“Support to sustainable development of urban growth poles”
Growth poles - implementation arrangements (II)

Projects are financed from all operational programmes of NSRF,
National Programme for Rural Development, as well as from national
programmes and other sources: EIB, EBRD, etc;

Priority given by other Managing Authorities for SOPs to projects
promoted by growth poles;

Regional Operational Programme allocates up to 50% (about 630 mil.
Euro) from the financial allocation of ROP Priority Axis 1.
“Support to sustainable development of urban growth poles”
Urban development poles - implementation arrangements
 The projects are implemented within the administrative borders of
cities designated as urban development poles;
 Integrated Development Plans, including an action plan with a list of
projects are set up by municipalities; they should contain at least two
types of projects out of the three eligible categories of activities: urban
infrastructure, business structures and social infrastructure;

The projects are financed from the funds allocated to ROP Priority
Axis 1 (up to 20% - about 253 mil. Euro), as well as from national
programmes, private sources etc.
“Support to sustainable development of urban growth poles”
Urban centers - implementation arrangements
 Urban centers are small and medium sized towns with over 10,000
inhabitants;
 Integrated Urban Development Plans, including an action plan with a
list of projects are set up by municipalities; they should contain at least
two types of projects out of the three eligible categories of activities:
urban infrastructure, business structures and social infrastructure;
 Integrated urban development plans are implemented in “urban actions
zones” with at list 10.000 inhabitants, geographically delineated within
urban centers;

The projects are financed from the funds allocated to ROP Priority
Axis 1 (up to 30% - about 503 mil. Euro), as well as from other
sources.
“Support to sustainable development of urban growth poles”
- Implementation system -
A. Growth poles
 Submission of the Integrated Urban Development Plans (IUDP) to
the ROP MA for endorsement;
 Submission of the projects included in IUDP’s action plan to the IBs
of MA for ROP – in the case of projects financed under ROP and to
the MA for SOPs – in the case of projects financed under other
operational programmes for evaluation.
B. Urban development poles and urban centers
 Submission of the integrated development plans together with the
projects included in IUDP’s action plan to the IBs of MA for ROP for
evaluation.
Polii de creştere din România
Iasi
Ploiesti
Constanta
Brasov
Cluj
Timisoara
Craiova
Adrian Mariciuc
Coordonator Pol Timișoara,
ADR Vest
Finanţarea polilor de creştere
Identificare
Aria de influenţă
urbană
INFRASTRUCTURĂ
Elaborare
Plan integrat
STRUCTURI DE AFACERI
Elaborare
Proiecte Individuale
SOCIAL
Polul de creştere Timişoara - componenţa
GROWTH POLE TIMISOARA
- BASIC DATA o
Population:
380.000
inhabitants(100%)
- core city:
330.000 inhabitants (87%)
- influence area: 50.000 inhabitants (13%)
o
Surface:
108.000 ha (100%)
- core city:
13.000 ha (12%)
- influence area: 95.000 ha (88%)
o
Economic turnover (2003-2006):
- core city:
- influence area:
91,4%
8,6%
100,0%
The Polish dilemma and the
Silesian innovation
ESPON meeting – 15 December
2010
Levels of
strategic and planning documents
level
Strategic document
Planning document
national / state
(Poland)
National Development Strategy
2007-2015
National Strategy of the Regional
Development, 2010
National
Spatial Arrangement Policy
regional
(Voivodeship)
Voivodeship Development Strategy
Voivodeship Spatial Development
Plan
local
(municipality)
Municipal Development Strategy
Study of conditions and spatial
development directions of the
municipality
Local land use plans - local law
(for particular areas of municipality or it
entire territory)
There is no metropolitan level of the adminstration
ESPON meeting – 15 December
2010
Legal context:
metropolitan spatial planning
DEFINITION OF METROPOLIS (METROPOLITAN AREA)
(Act on the Land Use and Spatial Development)
• art.2 p.2: The area of a great city and its direct functional area, appointed
in the National Spatial Development Policy
LEGAL BASIS OF METROPOLITAN LAND USE PLAN
(Act on the Land Use and Spatial Development)
• art. 39, ust. 3: Metropolitan areas are included in the voivodeship spatial
development plan;
• art. 39, ust. 6: A metropolitan spatial development plan is prepared for
metropolitan area;
ESPON meeting – 15 December
2010
National level:
Poland’s spatial development (1)
National Spatial Arrangement Policy, 2001 - currently obligatory
planning document - prepared in the other legal system (invalid today)
and Poland wasn’t a member of EU.
Project of National Spatial Arrangement Policy 2030 – in the
preparatory phase:
– It is a main government strategic document defying the guidelines of
the national spatial policy for 30 years;
– It combines components of spatial planning and socio-economic
development aspects;
It presents a spatial development vision based on the functional
network of national growth centers, which create a polycentric
network metropolis (comprising of the biggest cities and other
sub-regional and peripheral centers related to them) - open to the
influence of the European metropolitan centers (it is a new approach
to the spatial development vision of Poland than in the document from
2001)
ESPON meeting – 15 December
2010
Regional level:
Voivodeship Spatial Development Plan, 2004 (1)
EXISTING STATUS – the reference
Agglomeration („Silesia” Metropolis):
to
Silesian
– Silesian Agglomeration (14 cities - boroughs) showing the
tendency of: polycentric development and the migration of
the population beyond the Agglomeration’s area (the
development of the neighboring areas);
– Katowice is the biggest city of Agglomeration and the
administrative capital of the Voivodeship;
Its periodical evaluation form2006
ESPON meeting – 15 December
2010
Regional level:
Voivodeship Spatial Development Plan, 2004 (2)
Consolidated Silesian Metropolitan Area
Northern Metropolitan Area
Central Metropolitan Area
Western Metropolitan Area
Southern Metropolitan Area
VISION - elements of the of the spatial structure:
– 4 metropolitan areas with the centers in particular
agglomerations (Silesian, Częstochowska, Rybnicka,
Bielska Agglomerations) = they make Consolidated
Sileisain Metroplitan Area (being a part of Silesian
and Cracow Europolis);
– Multifunctional zones (of agricultural and residential,
recreational and forest, agricultural and truism type,
etc.) with local centers – evenly distributed in the entire
Consolidated Silesian Metropolitan Areas;
– Development bands (transport and settlement
corridors) – connected functionally with metropolitan
areas and economically stimulated by location the
development t and environmental friendly functions;
ESPON meeting – 15 December
2010
Regional level:
Voivodeship Spatial Development Plan, 2004 (3)
The concept of the spatial structure
THE SPLANNED PATIAL STRUCTURE - reference to
Silesian Agglomeration („Silesia” Metropolis):
– Silesian Agglomeration (consisting of 24 cities) is a
center of the main metropolitan area of the European
significance (along with Agglomerations of: Rybnik,
Częstochowa, Bielsko-Biała - which are the centers of
remaining of supportive metropolitan areas)
– Cities of the Agglomeration make one integrated area in
terms of transport, economic and technical connections,
which as a whole needs concentrated revitalization and
restructuring actions.
The border of the Consolidated Silesian Metropolitan Area
The border of the Metropolitan Area
Agglomerations
Agglomeration of the European status (an element of
Europolis)
European center
National center
Supra local center
Local center
Centers supporting the agglomeration’s development
European and national development bands
ESPON meeting – 15 December
2010
35 km
Introduction – „Silesia” Metropolis
http://pl.wikipedia.org/wiki/Katowice
60 km
Basic data
„Silesia”
Metropolis
[%]
The Silesia
Voivodeship
[%]
area
1218 sq km
10%
12 334 sq km
100%
population
2 mln
43%
4,6 mln
100%
Summary on innovative solutions
• The Hungarian Integrated Urban
Development Plans: to include social
aspect into integrated planning
• The Romanian Growth Pole method: to
delimit metropolitan area in which planning
is required
• The Polish metropolitan dilemma and the
Silesian innovation: to cover the
administrative region with four functional
areas