Download
slide1 n.
Skip this Video
Loading SlideShow in 5 Seconds..
Stuttgart Region in Europe PowerPoint Presentation
Download Presentation
Stuttgart Region in Europe

Stuttgart Region in Europe

185 Views Download Presentation
Download Presentation

Stuttgart Region in Europe

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - E N D - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Presentation Transcript

  1. Stuttgart Region in Europe

  2. Verband Region Stuttgart: • an association of 179 municipalities • 2,67 million inhabitants (from 170 countries) • 3.654 square kilometers Hamburg Munich

  3. Verband Region Stuttgart: A public authority for regioanl tasks Regional land use planning Infrastructure Transportation Regional transportation Suburban railways and busses Promotion of economic development Tourism marketing Economy Environment Landscape planning / climate protectionGarbage disposal (partial) Promotion of culture, sports, congresses Optional tasks

  4. Freiraum unter Druck

  5. Freiraum unter Druck

  6. Freiraum unter Druck

  7. Freiraum unter Druck

  8. The Regional Landscape Park Concept Since 1999 the VRS isauthorisedbylawtodevelopconceptsfortheLandscape Park. Concepts  Masterplans Content: Analysis anddiscriptionofthelandscape-relatedsituation Main goalstobeachieved Proposalsforactionsandprojects Since2004 weare also authorizedtorealizeprojects Implementation  Co-Financingof Projects

  9. Basic conditionforfundinggreenprojects: Based on legal provisionsthe VRS is not allowedto implementinvestments in greeninfrastructure on hisown. Project realizationisonlypossible in cooperation withcommunities. Solution: the Co-financing Programme

  10. Co-financing Projects - how does it work? Competition VRS announcesco-financingmoneyfor landscapeparkprojectsonce a year. Municipalities– referingtothemasterplans - makeproposalsforprojects (about 30 to 40 eachyear). A jury picks out the best projects (about15 to20 eachyear). Funding VRS fundsupto 50 % oftheelectedmunicipalitanprojects. Only municipalities can take part in this competition, neither private persons nor other public organisations.

  11. Criteria and Requests for the selection of projects • Contribution to the concept of regional landscape parks • Realisation in the following year • A wide range of possible kinds of projects; Typical projects are dealing with

  12. Criteria and Requests • Contribution to the concept of regional landscape parks • Realisation in the following year • A wide range of possible kinds of projects; Typical projects are dealing with • - hiking trails or bicycle paths of regional importance

  13. Criteria and Requests • Contribution to the concept of regional landscape parks • Realisation in the following year • A wide range of possible kinds of projects; Typical projects are dealing with • - hiking trails or bicycle paths of regional importance - integrated systems ofbiotopes

  14. Criteria and Requests • Contribution to the concept of regional landscape parks • Realisation in the following year • A wide range of possible kinds of projects; Typical projects are dealing with • - hiking trails or bicycle paths of regional importance - integrated systems of biotopes, - landmarks, locations or buildings of special interest

  15. Criteria and Requests • Contribution to the concept of regional landscape parks • Realisation in the following year • A wide range of possible kinds of projects; Typical projects are dealing with • - hiking trails or bicycle paths of regional importance - integrated systems of biotopes, - landmarks, locations or buildings of special interest, - or projects to get people in touch with nature.

  16. VRS-budget other expenses Million Euro Trade fair 2004 – 2007 Landscape park

  17. Annual VRS-budget for green projects 2005: 250.000 € 2006: 250.000 € 2007: 500.000 € 2008: 1.500.000 € 2009: 1.500.000 € 2010: 1.500.000 € 2011: 1.500.000 € 2012: 1.500.000 €

  18. Funded Projects 2005 - 2012 Backnang

  19. Conclusions (1): The numberofprojectsfundedbythe VRS shows: improvementofgreeninfrastructureispossible • whentheresponsiblegovernmentisconvincedoftheimportanceas a locationalfactorandforthequalityoflifeforthepeopleliving in theregion • andwhenthegovernmentisfirmlydeterminedtoinvest in greenprojects. • In the end it‘s a questionofpoliticalpriorities. • The stategovernmenthaslaunched a specialprogramtofinanceprojectsregardingtheriver Neckar.

  20. morepartners allow: -biggerprojects -higherinvest -betterresults Example: Renaturationof Banks ofthe Neckar in Ludwigsburg before…

  21. after renaturation • Planingandfunding in cooprationbetween • municipality • waterwaysadministra-tion • and VRS

  22. near-natural bypass waterways and an ascending aids for fish 5 partners involved: two cities power plant waterways authority VRS

  23. VALUE-pilot Cycle-path Esslingen • co-fundedby: • cityof Esslingen • waterwaysauthority • EU • VRS

  24. Inter-municipal State Garden Exhibition - Remstal 2 regions 3 counties 16 municipalities Aim: develop the green, blue and grey infrastructure of a river valley from source to mouth

  25. Inter-municipal State Garden Exhibition - Remstal • A wide range of different projects depending on the following aims: • Enhancement ecological passageways, creation of retention basins and enriched recreational use of the river Rems • Urban development in combination with green spaces • Closinggaps in the Rems cycling route • Improvementofrailline • strengthening regional identity, preserving and developing the cultural landscape and safeguarding a multifunctional living and recreation area • … • Combination of different sources of finance (national, federal, region, communal): • Regional Co-Financing program for GI projects • State Garden Exhibition program for GI projects • Urban development promotion program • Financial support for the implementation of the Water Framework Directive • FundingaccordingtotheFinancing Act for Communal Traffic • … State garden exhibitions allow to bundle and prioritize funding from different public financial sources of the Federal State for a certain timeframe

  26. Conclusions: • In ourexperience private enterpriseareshowingonly limited willingnesstoprticipate in co-financinggreenprojects. • unless a certainprojectisofmajorinterestto a companyitselfbecauseofexpectedownbenefits • To find partnersthemainquestionis: Who couldbeinterested in a certainproject?Respectively: In wich kindofprojectcould a certainorganisation / institutionbeinterested? • Finallycomprehensiveinformationand a bitofcreativityisrequiredtofigure out all possiblesourcesoffinance: publicfundingprograms, EU-funding, specialchanceslikethegardenfestivalexampleasmentioned.

  27. Conclusions: • Tohave a clearstrategieand a widerangeofprojectideasmightbehelpfultocomeupwiththerightprojectattherightmoment. • The europeanwaterframeworkdirective e.g. is a greatchancetoconnectrecreationalprojectswithrenaturationofrivers. • An adequate development of this “green infrastructure” can only be achieved • in a coordinated approach • using mandatory instruments, • economical incentives • and a close co-operation of all relevant stakeholders.

  28. Final Conclusions: Though an attractivelandscapeandleasurefacilities aresaidtobeimportantlocotionfactors greenprojectsnormalydon‘thave top priority. In manycasestheyaresomething „nicetohave“. Fundingthefutureorfightingwithfinance?

  29. Final Conclusion: Though an attractivelandscapeandleasurefacilities aresaidtobeimportantlocationfactors greenprojectsnormalydon‘thave top priority. In manycasestheyaresomething „nicetohave“. Fundingthefutureorfightingwithfinance? Nofundingthefuturewithoutfightingforfinance!

  30. ManyThanksforyour Attention