1 / 57

Modelling Urban Sustainability: The PROPOLIS Experience Michael Wegener SOLUTIONS 2004 Symposium

Modelling Urban Sustainability: The PROPOLIS Experience Michael Wegener SOLUTIONS 2004 Symposium Cambridge, 15 December 2004. The PROPOLIS Project. PROPOLIS (2000-2004) PROPOLIS ( P lanning and R esearch o f Pol icies for Land

haley
Télécharger la présentation

Modelling Urban Sustainability: The PROPOLIS Experience Michael Wegener SOLUTIONS 2004 Symposium

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

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Modelling Urban Sustainability: The PROPOLIS Experience Michael Wegener SOLUTIONS 2004 Symposium Cambridge, 15 December 2004

  2. The PROPOLIS Project

  3. PROPOLIS (2000-2004) PROPOLIS (Planning and Research of Policies for Land Use and Transport for Increasing Urban Sustainability) was a project of the Key Action “City of the Tomorrow” of the 5th RTD Framework of the European Commission. Objectives - to research, develop and test integrated land use and transport policy assessment tools and methodologies - to define sustainableurban strategies and to demon-strate their long-term effects

  4. PROPOLIS Partners • - LT Consultants Ltd., Helsinki (Coordinator) • Institute of Spatial Planning, University of Dortmund • Spiekermann & Wegener (S&W), Dortmund • University College London, London • Marcial Echenique & Partners Ltd., Cambridge • Trasporti e Territorio srl, Milan • Marcial Echenique y Compañia SA, Bilbao • STRATEC S.A., Brussels.

  5. MEPLAN MEPLAN MEPLAN MEPLAN TRANUS TRANUS IRPUD PROPOLIS Case study cities/models

  6. 0 5 km Bilbao 1.1 million pop.

  7. 0 5 km Brussels 2.9 million pop

  8. 0 5 km Dortmund 2.6 million pop

  9. 0 5 km Helsinki 0.9 million pop

  10. 0 5 km Inverness 0.1 million pop

  11. 0 5 km Naples 3.0 million pop

  12. 0 5 km Vicenza 0.8 million pop

  13. The Dortmund Region

  14. The Dortmund region

  15. The Reference Scenario

  16. Scenarios

  17. Scenarios (1) 000 Reference scenario 111-112 Local investment scenarios 111 Public transport investments 112 'Dortmund project' 211-219 Car operating costs 211 Car operating costs +25% 212 Car operating costs +50% 213 Car operating costs +100% 214 Car operating costs +75% 219 Car operating costs +300% 221-222 Parking costs 221 Parking costs +50% 222 Parking costs +100% 231-232 Cordon pricing 231 Cordon pricing 2 € 232 Cordon pricing 6 €

  18. Scenarios (2) 311-321 Speed limits 311 Maximum speed –10% on all roads 321 Maximum speed –20% on local roads 411-421 PT speed and fares 411 PT travel time –10% 412 PT travel time –5% 421 PT fares –50% 511-541 Land use 511 Compact city scenario 521 Polycentric development 541 Urban growth boundary 711-719 Combination scenarios 711 Scenarios 214+421 712 Scenarios 214+412+421 713 Scenarios 214+412+421+521 719 Scenarios 219+412+421+541

  19. Compact city scenario

  20. Polycentric scenario

  21. Urban growth boundary scenario

  22. Scenario Comparison

  23. Scenario Difference to Reference Scenario in 2021 (%) No. of trips Trip length Pct public Pct car Car- km No. of cars CO2 214 Car operating costs +75% 412 Public transport travel time –5% 421 Public transport fares –50% 521 Polycentric devel- opment –2.78 0.00 +0.75 +0.01 –14.77 +0.02 +2.49 –1.43 +6.49 +1.15 +11.84 +1.01 –3.61 –0.06 –0.42 –0.01 –20.98 –0.12 –0.68 –0.46 –6.24 –0.05 +1.95 +0.01 –18.89 –0.04 +1.62 –0.35 Total –2.02 –13.69 +20.19 –4.10 –21.32 –4.33 –17.66 713 (214+412+421+521) –1.93 –11.56 +27.45 –4.96 –23.28 –3.81 –17.61 Synergies +7.26 –0.86 –1.96 Synergies between policies

  24. Environmental Impacts

  25. ILUMASS PROPOLIS Modelling urban sustainability No spatial disaggregation Spatial disaggregation of output Spatial disaggregation of input Zonal data Zonal data Zonal data Aggregate land-use transport model Aggregate land-use transport model Aggregate land-use transport model Aggregate land-use transport model Spatial disaggregation Zonal environmental impact model Spatial disaggregation Microsimulation land-use transport model Disaggregate environmental impact model Disaggregate environmental impact model Few impacts Limited feedback All impacts Limited feedback All impacts All feedbacks

  26. Microdatabase For the synthetic microdatabase zonal data are allocated to raster cells. Two steps are performed: (1) Conversion of polygons to raster cells The polygons of a land-use map are converted to raster cells and each raster cell is assigned a land-use category. Land-use categories Residential high-density Residential low density Industrial Open Space

  27. Population

  28. Employment

  29. Exposure above guidelines: 9.0 percent of SEG 1 9.2 percent of SEG 2 8.0 percent of SEG 3 Exposure to air pollution

  30. Disturbed by traffic noise: 39.8 percent of SEG 1 34.1 percent of SEG 2 31.2 percent of SEG 3 Exposure to traffic noise

  31. Difference in traffic noise in Reference Scenario 2021 v. 2001

  32. Difference in traffic noise in Scenario 713 v. Reference Scenario in 2021

  33. Evaluation

  34. Sustainability In PROPOLIS, sustainable development consists of three interconnected components: - ecological or environmental sustainability - social or human sustainability - economic efficiency

  35. Sustainability Indicators Environmental Global climate change Air pollution Consumption of natural resources Environmental quality SocialHealth Equity Opportunities Accessibility and traffic EconomicTotal net benefit from transport

  36. Environmental Indicators Global climateGreenhouse gases from transport change Air pollutionAcidifying gases from transport Volatile organic compounds from transport Natural Consumption of mineral oil products resourcesLand coverage Need for additional new construction EnvironmentalFragmentation of open space qualityQuality of open space

  37. Social Indicators Health Exposure to PM from transport at housing Exposure to NO2 at housing Exposure to traffic noise Traffic fatalities Traffic injuries EquityJustice of distribution of economic benefits Justice of exposure to PM Justice of exposure to NO2 Justice of exposure to noise Segregation Opportunities Housing standard Vitality of city centre Vitality of surrounding region Productivity gain from land use Accessibility Total time spent in traffic and traffic LOS of public transport and slow modes Accessibility to city centre Accessibility to services Accessibility to open space

  38. Economic Indicators Total net benefit Transport investment costs from transport Transport user benefits Transport operator benefits Government benefits from transport Transport external accident costs Transport external emissions costs Transport external greenhouse gases costs Transport external noise costs

  39. Indicator weights Theme weights Environmen- tal index Policy alternatives Evaluation The USE-IT module

  40. Environmental quality Natural resources Air pollution Global climate change Reference scenario in 2021 Reference Local Car costs Parking Toll Speed PT Land use Combination

  41. Accessibility Opportunity Equity Health Reference scenario in 2021 Reference Local Car costs Parking Toll Speed PT Land use Combination

  42. TRT Economic Evaluation Economic evaluations are made in a special module

  43. Reference Local Car costs Parking Toll Speed PT Land use Combination

  44. Conclusions

More Related