Community Research and Development Information Service - CORDIS



Project ID: 649883
Funded under: H2020-EU.3.3.7.

Periodic Reporting for period 1 - URBAN LEARNING (Integrative energy planning of urban areas: collective learning for improved governance)

Reporting period: 2015-03-01 to 2016-08-31

Summary of the context and overall objectives of the project

The objective of the URBAN LEARNING project is to raise the profile for long-term energy planning and to integrate energy planning and urban planning in city administrations. The focus is on the governance processes related to the planning and development of urban sites in big cities. It is a project to enhance the capacity of local authorities.

Why this focus? Why now?

Cities play a key role in reducing greenhouse gas emissions: Around 60-70% of final energy consumption in cities is used for buildings and mobility. Ultimately cities should become largely fossil-free by 2050 as agreed in the Paris Climate Agreement. Ambitious urban (re-)developments such as Stockholm Royal Seaport, Vienna aspern Seestadt, Berlin Adlerhorst, Paris Clichy-Batignolles show the direction. A common lesson: the more ambitious the development projects the more important it is to design, plan and develop projects in an integrated manner.

Technological, economic and regulatory changes make new low-carbon solutions possible: In a few years nearly zero-energy buildings will become the standard. They need much less energy, might even produce energy, which allows new possibilities to supply those buildings and quarters (decentralised options, using on-site renewables, low-exergy district heating & cooling, smart grids, etc.). To realise new low-carbon options in dense, largely grid-connected cities requires considering energy supply alternatives at an early planning stage, which is currently not the case.

Liberalisation of energy markets has disconnected cities from energy planning: Where cities owned utilities, a lot of knowledge and responsibility for energy planning was outsourced/lost in the late 90ies when (local) energy companies had to be reorganised into unbundled separate legal entities due to the liberalisation of the European energy markets. Awareness of the need for long-term energy planning is nowadays again growing and relevant knowledge needs to be reinforced. An additional reason for this need is the expected shift from fossil-based transportation to e-mobility, which requires more attention for planning energy production and distribution at city level and brings energy and mobility issues closer together in the planning processes.

Growth of cities has accelerated: Many cities face enormous pressure to provide new homes and infrastructure, sustainable and affordable at the same time. Annual population growth rates between 1-2% mean that areas the size of small towns have to be built or refurbished each year. E.g. Vienna grew by 43.000 people in 2015. This puts not only pressure on urban planning processes, also all decisions taken now impact the energy and CO2 performance of 2050 as infrastructure built now will last beyond 2050 and thus needs to contribute to long-term CO2 reduction.

What does URBAN LEARNING do?

To meet these challenges URBAN LEARNING brings together the cities of Vienna, Berlin, Stockholm, Amsterdam/Zaanstad, Paris, Warsaw and Zagreb. This selection of cities with different climatic, economic and social conditions strengthens relevance and replicability of the results for many, also smaller, European cities. Some of these cities are frontrunners in the transformation towards sustainable, smart cities and have practical experience with larger-scale demonstration projects. Consequently, some bits and pieces towards integrative urban energy planning do exist, but are not yet incorporated into the standard governance processes related to the planning of urban development areas. Why not?

Two rather simple but all the more persistent factors can be identified across European cities despite existing willingness: (1) lack of time and resources in administrations to revisit processes and workflows, and (2) lack of common ground across city departments, disciplines and key stakeholders needed to plan in an integrative manner.

To overcome routines and habits URBAN LEARNING offers the decisive external stimulus for dedicating time to analyse relevant administrative processes, for doing this across departments and organisations, and for doing it in-depth, better and more cost-effective because of the exchange with other European cities and the provided funding. To do so, the cities work on establishing a trust building dialogue among the involved parties and enhance collective learning and capacity building to arrive at a comprehensive picture of existing and new technical, organisational and administrative options, including concrete and practical models for how to manage such governance processes. For that the cities and supporting agencies pool knowledge and share it thoroughly within each city as well as among the participating cities.

As results URBAN LEARNING aims to
• significantly increase dialogue and common understanding among key stakeholders (city administration, utility, developers) why integrative urban energy planning is important;
• enhance the institutional capacity of leading European cities to plan urban (re-)development areas in an integrated manner.
This should pave the way to
• improved planning coordination between the city, infrastructure providers and energy suppliers;
• 7-8 upgraded governance processes towards integrative energy planning with plans for their implementation;
• lasting structures for exchanges between the key stakeholders in the participating cities.
In addition the participating cities facilitate active learning with more cities in the involved countries and spread good practices and insights to another 150 cities.

It is expected that improving the governance processes around integrative energy planning for new areas will result in significant long-term energy impacts: energy savings of at least 1.700 GWh/a and an increased renewable energy production of at least 2.000 GWh/a for three million new inhabitants within the next 20 years.

Work performed from the beginning of the project to the end of the period covered by the report and main results achieved so far

As Part B of the periodic report requires a reporting of the performed work per work package the consortium decided to use the similar section of Part A to report the performed work – apart from a short overview – per city.

What have we learned and achieved so far?

In the first 18 months the cities and supporting agencies established in each city a trust-building local working group with members from different city departments and key stakeholders (Amsterdam and Zaanstad have a common group). They were tailored according to local circumstances and usually consist at least of staff members from the various departments involved in urban and energy planning of the cities. In some cities it also involves further departments, e.g. housing as well as related external stakeholders, e.g. distribution network operators or developers. These groups are the backbone of the project. The different set-up of the groups allows now drawing an even broader range of lessons.

The local working groups supported the in-depth analyses of the current governance processes and practices of energy and urban planning. In parallel, the current governance processes and relevant framework conditions were documented and intensively discussed and compared across the cities. The comparison between the cities surfaced a lot of differences between the participating cities/countries, particularly in the framework for energy and urban planning. This underlined the importance of the legal/political context and (planning) cultures and the importance of understanding those aspects well for coming up with suitable proposals for upgrading these processes. However, the cross-city exchanges also showed similarities e.g. in the principle levels and stages of urban planning – from the strategic planning down to the building regulation plan as well as in the principle steps of the urban planning processes. Different are again the details of these steps as well as used instruments and tools.

The analysis shows that currently all cities consider energy aspects related to the energy demand of buildings and some cities also have requirements regarding the use of renewable energies in buildings but none of the cities systematically yet considers energy planning at the level of whole areas (new or for refurbishment) or districts as part of the urban planning processes. In some cases this also lacks the necessary legal basis. In a next step, possible ways for integrating energy and urban planning are investigated and further developed. This step will be supported by study tours with the local working group.

Similarly, the current main instruments and tools for energy and urban planning were identified; good practices as well as gaps analysed and shared between the cities. Relevant examples of innovative low-carbon energy supply systems were collected and will next be analysed for their planning implications. The focus is on solutions to supply at least a group of houses or quarters and districts. Furthermore, an “inner circle” of 13 interested cities was established. Exchanges with these cities around the gained insights have started. They will last throughout the project and ensure an in-depth transfer of knowledge to more cities within the participating countries.

To sum up, the analysis work at the local level is largely completed while some cross-city analysis still is on-going. Subsequent steps, such as the development of proposals for improving the current governance processes or for improving the instruments and tools used in these processes as well as the presentation of good practices of instruments and tools have already started.
All project partners are communicating about the project and first findings in national and international networks and events. Furthermore, an “inner circle” of 13 interested cities was established and exchanges with these cities around the gained insights have started. With the local working groups the project involves more than 100 key stakeholders into an intensive dialogue on integrative energy planning issues and supports the institutional capacity building in the participating cities. With the inner circle cities this capacity building will soon reach out to further cities. In addition dedicated workshops on the topic of URBAN LEARNING were held in Berlin, Stockholm, Vienna and Zagreb. These activities in total reached already about 300 relevant stakeholders.

Overall about 45-50 % of the work is completed. Parts of the tasks were more time-consuming as well as more resource-intensive (in all details explained in Part B) and the consortium has some months delay in implementing the project so far.

The discussions in the local working groups so far confirm the importance of early cross-departmental collaboration on issues of energy planning as part of urban planning. They confirm also a huge need for knowledge transfer on energy issues to urban planners and the value of learning together. Generally, creating this trust-building basis takes time. Meanwhile the involved persons start to recognise the value and richness of different perspectives and profit from the exchanges.

Despite existing differences the exchanges between the cities – peer to peer – proves to be very valuable, to sharpen the understanding of one’s own situation as well as to receive new ideas. Site visits and involvement of local working group members during consortium meetings intensify learning from each other. A good example seen in one city was already taken up by another city - from Stockholm to Zaanstad.
The direct involvement of city officials enables immediate use of the insights gained through the common analysis in the daily work when windows of opportunities come up. Some examples:
• In Vienna, a new high-level working group with representatives of different city departments and external stakeholders was installed to discuss the energy supply of new urban areas at an early stage.
• Similarly in Paris, the energy choices often arrive late in the urban process whereas expectations and energetic requirements set by the City council for each project are great. URBAN LEARNING has led to the emergence of creating a committee dedicated to energy gathering political representatives and city departments to review each urban project and quickly fix the energy choices for each.
• In Amsterdam, the whole planning process is under review with members of the Amsterdam URBAN LEARNING team being involved and using insights gained in the project for introducing improvements. Zaanstad is following now.

In general the city teams confirm that URBAN LEARNING serves as a door opener to tackle challenges that are common in many European cities. More details of the work performed in the cities are provided in the following city chapters.

Amsterdam/Zaanstad's URBAN LEARNING project team consists of staff from both city administrations and their subcontractor Saskia Müller. They started the URBAN LEARNING project writing a specific action plan for Amsterdam and Zaanstad. In this plan, working together in The Netherlands specifically between the cities and within the cities was emphasized.

The project has been centered around 4 selected areas/projects for urban development. A local working group (LWG) was established with representatives of both cities, all project leaders in one of the areas, urban planners or energy/sustainability specialists. The LWG meets 5 times a year. Meetings are about progress in the development areas, relevant changes in legislation, political circumstances etc. Important aim is to mutually support each other, inspire and build a network of informed specialists for the future. Meetings are sometimes straightforward, sometimes alternative work forms (brown paper session, world café etc.) are used.

In general, participation in the LWG has brought about a notable increase of awareness about the need and the possibilities to prioritise energy as a topic in urban planning. Project leaders formerly focused on price and legal aspects of deals with developing parties, now pay more attention to energy in the contracts. At Hembrugterrein e.g., the exclusion of natural gas in the area is part of the developing contract (anterior contract).

The first international meeting of the consortium after the initial one in Vienna, was held in Zaanstad. The city of Zaanstad, Maria Santman in particular, organized this first international meeting after the initial one in Vienna. Both Amsterdam and Zaanstad showed development projects to the consortium members and discussed the characteristics of each of the four urban development projects.

An inner circle city has been found with Leiden. By 2018, a new law, the Omgevingswet, will come into force. This law will include the realm of some 27 existing laws dealing with spatial planning, environment, energy, nature conservation etc. Anticipating the coming into force of this law, some municipalities shave been appointed as experimenting partners. Leiden is one of them. Through this status, Leiden has achieved interesting, insider knowledge and views. Leiden has expressed its consent in sharing these experiences in the local working group.

In Amsterdam the complete urban planning process was reviewed and the review submitted for approval. Zaanstad is busy doing the same. Members of the Amsterdam/Zaanstad URBAN LEARNING team are involved in this process and contribute with lessons from the project. Just before URBAN LEARNING started, the city had already reformed: A major change was the abolishment of the city districts. Their political influence diminished. The cities’ civil service became one whole organization. The civil servants from the districts were included in the central organization. This was one of the reasons the process for city development reformed in 2015. A city planning unit (Ruimte voor de Stad; Koers 2025) was installed that became responsible for city-wide planning and the coordination of an investment agenda for different kinds of area transcending infrastructures. One cross-sectoral theme that came here on the agenda was sustainability, where sustainable energy is a very important subject. At the current stage, the recommendation is to install a Steering Group ‘Sustainability’ that advises the strategic city planning unit. This steering group should perform city wide thematic studies on sustainability. Proposed topics for 2017 are new sanitation, the phasing out of gas, the capacity of the electricity network, all in relation to the expansion of the housing stock.

The reorganization was also one of the reasons that the procedures for area development have been updated in concept (Plaberum). One of the changes is the introduction of the topic of sustainability as such in the process description. In the different formats for the planning documents a paragraph on sustainability is proposed, that includes the topic of energy. This should guarantee attention for sustainable energy from the first planning phase until the last.

Within the cities and at several external occasions, information was given on tools and instruments that have been discovered already, and the use of it. One of the meetings was organized around the so called Energy Atlas, meant to easily provide information on energy supply and demand in a given area as well as about the possible impact of several energy related developing options. The instrument will finally become available at a national level. The discussion brought about some useful and practical advice for further development.

In Zaanstad, the URBAN LEARNING team has actively followed both urban development projects (Hembrugterrein en Brokking). The team has actively both on demand and on its own account, advised the project managers about higher priorities for energy in the planning process. Both formal planning instruments and more informal ways of influencing the stakeholders have been used. Examples are: content for a letter to the City Council, content for an anterior contract regarding the Brokking premises, input for a chapter on sustainability in the Omgevingsplan, and a presentation in a workshop about sustainability for stakeholders at the Hembrugterrein. Not only planning instruments from public law, designed for this purpose, but also administrative and private law turn out to be of use for the city in its search for ways to increase the importance of energy as a topic in planning processes.

Berlin's URBAN LEARNING project team is led by Berlin Energy Agency in close cooperation with the city's Senate Department for Urban Development and the Environment. In Berlin, the main challenge with regard to urban energy planning is related to the building stock (main sector for emissions and energy consumption). Therefore the analysis for all work packages was strongly related to the building stock. Regarding WP2, the projects and innovative technologies which were selected by each city partner for analysis represent a range of different technologies such as power-2-heat, low-ex grids, waste heat, sustainable district heating supply and low energy housing approaches. For Berlin technologies such as low exergy systems were reviewed and analysed as innovative systems.

Within the local working group (LWG) consisting of members of the City of Berlin (as core group) and local stakeholders (wider participant group), a common understanding was achieved regarding the challenges to engage private stakeholders (building owners etc.). By choosing the respective quarter as the major planning scope, synergies will be created both on the level of refurbishing building ensembles, more efficient (decentralised) energy supply (including renewables) and energy distribution, as well as economies of scale in the implementation of measures. The majority of local stakeholders agreed that neighbourhood planning approaches (combined with other instruments such as Urban Development Funding Programmes) should be promoted and improved in Berlin in order to cope with the challenge of increasing renovation rates.
With regard to the challenges to cope with the city growth and becoming climate neutral until 2050, it is crucial to exchange with other cities within the consortium and beyond. Therefore, additional bilateral exchanges with partners from Vienna via online conferences have been held and a study tour to Manchester is being planned to get further input on integrative urban energy planning, in particular focusing on the building stock.

A special emphasis on close collaboration between city and district levels is required (success factor) to ensure an effective urban energy planning and implementation process in Berlin. The LWG meeting on 7th January and subsequent consultations highlighted the need for collaboration. One major result of the consultation process is that a supporting planning approach will be developed (“Innovative governance processes”, WP4) under the name “Service Point Energetic quarter development” to support district authorities in low carbon development in urban areas.

This approach includes ways of identifying urban areas with high potential for energetic refurbishment, including the relevant public and private stakeholders in the planning process at an early stage to identify optimal solutions both concerning low carbon development and socio-economic welfare (e.g. “affordable housing”).

In Paris the URBAN LEARNING project team consists of staff of the city's Urban Ecology Agency within the Directorate for Green Space and the Environment and the Paris Climate Agency. The participation of the City of Paris and Paris Climate Agency (APC) in the URBAN LEARNING project was related to the will of the general secretary’s energy mission (head of municipal administration) to have an energy management of urban projects, and respond to the request of the
deputy mayor in charge of urbanism and economic development to have energy scenarios for each urban project/building permit. With different departments involved in energy planning but none of them having the unique decision-making responsibility, the city of Paris had the intention, via URBAN LEARNING, to create a special energy unit, involving several departments of the city and capable to make final decisions.

URBAN LEARNING was the perfect opportunity to create this unit starting with a “local working group” (LWG). The Paris LWG is composed of different departments of the City Hall (urbanism, mobility, environment, housing, architecture) + Paris Climate Agency. The general secretary is willing to maintain this group after Urban Learning in order to have an expertise on all Parisian urban projects. The strong involvement from the general secretary is a good opportunity to create true synergies in our local working group. It is also testimony to a certain level of political awareness about energy integration. At this point of URBAN LEARNING project we are expecting to maintain our LWG until the end of the project but mostly after it.

10% of the Parisian territory is undergoing urban development. The different projects on these districts are mainly carried out with a process of “concerted urban planning area”, but other processes exist with multiple variants depending on each situation (allotment, public-private partnership…). Despite this diversity, we succeeded in mapping a “typical” (ordinary) Parisian urban development process with the LWG. It was the first time for the City of Paris. Everyone knows what to do in the process but nobody had drawn the global image. This task permitted to involve all the different departments and interview them about their usual missions in the process. It was a real cross learning. Thanks to this work, we identified the steps when energy can be taken into account in our process of urban development.

Regarding the many tools and instruments at different scale (national, regional, and city) available to integrate energy in urban planning in France, we are expecting a better knowledge of all existing tools in urban projects and their proper use. Two major conclusions of this analysis are that reporting and monitoring should be improved and governance is a missing aspect of our instruments and tools. In connection with WP4 we also observed a lack in governance with no dedicated project team throughout the development project. That why It is important for the city of Paris to keep the LWG after the project.

The expected results for the rest of the URBAN LEARNING project are focused on the sustainability of the process developed during the project. To be relevant, the process of developing an integrative energy strategy in urban planning must be implemented and this will be done during the next months. It has to be replicable so the work on blue prints in WP4 will be a good exercise to generalize integrative energy strategies in urban planning.

Another important expectation is to gather the different stakeholders outside of the city administration. It takes time to have a common understanding of the project and first results within the administration and now we have to exchange these results with our external partners on urban projects. Regarding the technical framework, we need to further develop our knowledge on existing tools and instruments and their practical use in urban planning processes.

In Stockholm the URBAN LEARNING team consists of member from the city's planning department. For Stockholm the internal report on the governance system in Stockholm (in Swedish) has proved to be a very important and necessary basis for the local work in WP 4 and for further communication with local stakeholders. It shows the general interrelationships between various planning processes and energy aspects when it comes to the building sector (energy production, distribution, use). The work of the Royal Seaport project is particularly regarded.

This work initiated by the URBAN LEARNING project has already had an influence on the formulation of the text for the new City Plan (comprehensive plan) that is in the process of being reformulated.
Another important achievement for the project in Stockholm is the collaboration with the EU-project SPECIAL (SPatial Planning and Energy for communities In All Landscapes, This collaboration lead to two dedicated workshops in the beginning of 2016 under the lead of SPECIAL experts. The outcome of the workshops will be a cornerstone for all local efforts to engage a wider group of planning and energy experts. Two new projects were started and funded by the Swedish energy agency as a result of the multidisciplinary discussions during the URBAN LEARNING_SPECIAL workshops; “Development of methods, energy issues on building level in the planning process” a feasibility study focusing on analysing the energy demand of buildings in an early stage of the urban planning process, and the “System analysis of energy systems in the Loudden project” a feasibility study with the aim to study two different choices of innovative circular system solutions for one of the upcoming districts under development in the SRS project.
In June 2016, Stockholm hosted the international project meeting, and it was a very successful event. During the first two days the meeting was held on location in the Stockholm Royal Seaport project starting on the first day with a study visit around the project followed by a boat tour to grasp the size of the project and to look at other new seaside development projects in the city. The Urban Learning team had the opportunity to visit two recently built multi-family housing projects. One of them, connected to the district heating system with a low energy demand due to choice of construction methods. The other one, not connected to the district heating grid, uses an innovative solution combining solar collectors and a geothermal heat pump. The last stop on the tour was a guided visit to the new biofuel CHP taken into operation the very same month by Fortum heat.

The local project manager Lukas Ljungqvist has since the beginning of September 2016 been assigned a new role as sustainability strategist for the planning department. This new position gives him and the URBAN LEARNING project a better opportunity to impose the Urban Learning objectives on the Stockholm administration.

In Vienna the project team consists of the city's Department for Energy Planning (MA 20) and the Energy Center at TINA Vienna. TINA Vienna operates as facilitator and is in charge of the local working group (LWG) while the city of Vienna leads the technical work.

The Vienna team has had six workshops with the local working group thus far. At the beginning, it was crucial that all participants got to know one another and established a good working basis to build upon, as for the topic of URBAN LEARNING the LWG setting was new to most of them. In the beginning ample time was dedicated to explain and discuss new energy solutions that could support the transformation towards a low-carbon energy system in Vienna. This understanding formed the basis for understanding why it is important to consider energy aspects early in the urban planning processes. Furthermore, based on available documents as well as interviews with staff from planning departments the Vienna’s URBAN LEARNING team generated an urban planning process map, which depicts the governance processes in Vienna. This was not only done with regard to the integration of energy aspects but also with regard to mobility and green space. This simplified process mapping was a very helpful tool for the discussions in the LWG and supported a common understanding of the processes at stake. It also helped to rethink different elements of the process and view them from different angles which instigated intensive discussions on e.g. the planning procedure in the starting phase of the project. The current situation was also described in an internal working paper (city report, 30p), which was intensively discussed with the main planning departments to improve its readability.

In meetings in April, May and June 2016 the LWG focused on finding ways to adapt the current governance process toward a more integrated energy planning process. Various possibilities were identified and as priority topics the group selected the generation of a GIS-based energy map as well as an integrated energy and spatial planning concept and came up with initial ideas, pro’s and con’s as well as barriers to realisation, which are currently further elaborated. Vienna’s study tours have also been chosen around these topics. A second promising possibility to be investigated is the instrument Städtebauliche Verträge (urban contracts between the city and the landowner/developer), recently introduced into the building code of Vienna.

The integrated energy and spatial planning concept is foreseen in Vienna’s Urban Development Plan (STEP 2025) and the work and lessons from URBAN LEARNING are directly feeding into its elaboration. Furthermore the capacity-building work of URBAN LEARNING paved the way for the constitution of a new high-level working group with representatives of different city departments and external stakeholders installed to discuss the energy supply of new urban areas at an early stage.

Members of Vienna’s URBAN LEARNING team also regularly attend energy planning meetings related to new urban developments at the Energy Planning Department and city-wide. They meet with energy providers to e.g. promote the use of renewables and their integration in new urban developments and discuss issues that arose during LWG meetings with relevant stakeholders. This ensures that developments, which take place at the level of city departments or e.g. energy providers are also fed into the project and vice versa and applied as URBAN LEARNING progresses.
Among the investigated instruments and tools the Vienna team chose the public property development competition as a best practice instrument as it proved to be of high interest also to several partner cities and is an effective instrument in the City of Vienna.

As inner circle cities Vienna chose Graz and Salzburg. Both cities are very interested to join the exchanges with URBAN LEARNING as they would like to see their governance systems improved and also have first ideas for exchange. Exchanges have also started with Munich and Hamburg.

In Warsaw the project team consists of member of the city's Department for Infrastructure.

The work undertaken in the Warsaw area during the first reporting period was connected mainly with WP1, WP4, WP6 and WP3, with only some preparatory work concerning WP5 - Models for replication.

The main results were connected with nominating employees of Infrastructure Department (URBAN LEARNING coordinator in Warsaw) dedicated to URBAN LEARNING tasks, creating the project structures – Project Team (i.e. Local Working Group and Steering Committee) and then work by the nominated people on specific project tasks, with also utilization of inputs coming from consortium meetings and other exchanges from consortium members. Some results were useful for the project purposes but also exceeded the project requirements as to work on specific tasks, described in Part B of this midterm report. We must mention here the following practical recommendations on our approach towards mobility/transportation we have created within the LWG:
• enhancing role of Warsaw Transport Authority during consultation process of local land development plans,
• for construction of transport-related facilities (e.g. depots and parking lots) – using construction materials limiting heat losses,
• construction of modern tramway and bus depots, utilizing renewable energy sources and energy-efficient solutions like use of rainwater for cleaning vehicles,
• utilizing roofs of both large (like depots) and small (like city bike stations) transport facilities for PV panels, delivering clean renewable electricity for both lighting purposes and other purposes, like charging cellular phones by citizens,
• more thorough utilization of the Vistula River as a transport corridor (e.g. ferries operating for the whole year – not like currently, during the touristic season – which limits traffic burden placed on traditional bridges,
• popularisation of more energy-efficient and environmentally-friendly means of transport (e.g. standard bikes, electric bikes, car-sharing schemes, electric cars).

As to the main stream of URBAN LEARNING project, the comparisons were conducted and conclusions drawn as to municipal planning processes and related to them instruments and tools, which are functioning or envisaged to function in the partner cities of the consortium. An important issue was to compare the systems of energy planning in the respective URBAN LEARNING cities. Compared to other cities, it turned out that Warsaw has a very different system of energy planning. This is mainly due to the specific national legal framework. Warsaw as the municipality is responsible for the security of supply of electricity, heat and gas to its citizens. Despite this responsibility, the city is not the actual owner of energy companies. The Polish Law on Energy states that the municipality's own tasks include planning and organizing the supply of heat, electricity and gas fuels at its area. Energy planning at local level is a two-step and two-pronged. Mayor of Warsaw prepares project of the assumptions for plan of supply with heat, electricity and gas fuels which is an inventory of all energy systems and forecast on energy demand. On the other hand energy companies prepare their own development plans. If the assumptions are not consistent with the development plans of enterprises, mayor of Warsaw is preparing plans for the supply of heat, electricity and gas for the specific areas for which energy companies will not provide the sufficient supply. In the current period the new assumptions are for plan of supply prepared and after its adoption the city will be checking whether energy companies development plans ensure implementation of the assumptions. This development is influenced by impact of URBAN LEARNING project and related recommendations on better integration and stricter control as to energy planning processes.

Another very interesting and inspiring exercise was the comparison of forms of planning instruments. It turned out that almost every country has its own different form of local plans. Inspired e.g. by a session on this topic held during the UL meeting in Stockholm, we continued in Warsaw a vivid discussion on the possibility of changes in the Polish law on spatial planning. In the local plans in Warsaw the text is their legally binding element, while the graphic part serves only as additional information. Quite the opposite solution functions e.g. in Amsterdam, where graphic part of the plan is the basis and the text serves as their additional explanation. In some other partner cities there are some in-between solutions adopted. The work within the URBAN LEARNING project influenced us as to creating a completely new concept of local plans, which could be entirely in the form of an electronic database, where a given defined are of the city would be described in tabular form, while using the parameters, which are mandated, prohibited or permitted at this area.

Zagreb's URBAN LEARNING project team consists of members of the city's Office of Energy, Environment and Sustainable Development and its Institute for Physical Planning as well as the national energy institute EIHP.

While recognized by all relevant actors as intertwined process, both urban and energy planning are still being done by se
parate institutions and administrative bodies. Currently, energy aspects are mostly incorporated in the process of urban planning through the question of access to energy infrastructure. The issue of combining energy and spatial planning is partially being tackled via the process of development of ZagrebPlan 2015 (main strategic development planning document).

Regarding General Urban Plan as the main planning (and binding) document there is possibility to integrate energy issue. It is important to separate old buildings and parts of the city from the new develop areas. It is very challenging matter because most of the stock is privatized.

The Local Working Group meeting of the City of Zagreb within the URBAN LEARNING project was appointed by the Mayor o

Progress beyond the state of the art and expected potential impact (including the socio-economic impact and the wider societal implications of the project so far)

The following paragraphs highlight the achievements that go beyond the state of the art thus far in several partner cities.

In Amsterdam/Zaanstad, the emphasis on energy in urban development projects in the LWG was very helpful to get it higher on the agenda. This is especially of importance in cases where the municipality is not the owner of the land and therefore cannot demand extras based on private law. An interesting exchange has taken place on where and how to stretch possibilities for demanding extra energy performance and more sustainable sources and solutions.

Berlin works on establishing an improved governance process to support the 12 district authorities in Berlin to prepare and identify district quarters, which have high potential for refurbishment and related energy actions. The approach seeks to engage local stakeholders within respective quarters at an early stage (e.g. building owners, energy supplier, businesses, associations). This is a planned pilot project for the next reporting period (project name “Service Point Energetic Quarter Development”). The results of testing and piloting this approach might be a base for decision-makers to continue the approach and institutionalise it in Berlin urban energy planning in the near future (after project completion). Additional governance innovations (e.g. City map for refurbishment quarters) will be followed up as well.

In Paris, the first issue was to map the whole process of urban planning. In France, some urban projects are described in the national urbanism law with the related milestones and achievements. But this refers only to large urban project so that most of the projects’ processes are not defined. Several sessions of our local working group were related to the process of mapping. We finally succeeded in mapping a general scheme, which could describe various urban projects.
Another issue was to gather the different stakeholders from the city departments involved in urban projects. A lot of departments are concerned with urban projects but they do not hold meetings on energy issues. Therefore, the local working group is a good opportunity to start a first global reflection on an energy strategy for urban planning.
The public consultation features an important impact on the urban planning process. Integrating energy issues during public consultation could therefore be a good opportunity to involve citizens and inhabitants of the neighborhood on the issue of energy supply. It also appears that URBAN LEARNING works and results make the Parisian politicians more aware of energy issues related to urban planning. Urban Learning progress during the past 18 months has increased political involvement so that the development of an energy strategy for urban planning projects at the level of the city is on track in meeting its stated goals.

In Vienna URBAN LEARNING paved the way for a new high-level working group with representatives of different city departments and external stakeholders. The group was installed in June 2016. It meets regularly and discusses the energy supply of all the bigger new urban areas at an early stage of the urban planning processes.

The municipal planning processes in Warsaw are quite dispersed and not sufficiently integrated with each other, which mirrors an overall legal situation in this field in Poland. Moreover, the territorial self-government (including cities) is lacking legal competences necessary for appropriate transformation in direction of low-carbon, energy-efficient economy, like competences as to imposing binding legal requirements on energy performance of buildings or installing on them renewable energy sources at a given area. Already during its first reporting period, the URBAN LEARNING gave the Warsaw participants a deep and varied insight into more comprehensive and integrated solutions in these categories that are already established or planned to introduce in the countries of our project partners. This insight (included e.g. in syntheses related to WP3 and WP4) will contribute to in-depth analyses – both within the framework of the project and beyond – formulating proposals on how to improve and integrate energy-related planning processes in Warsaw, alike in terms of actions possible to undertake in the current legal situation and of ideas how to improve this situation by amending appropriate legal provisions, in order to give municipalities more competences and more freedom in developing and implementing their climate and energy policies. It will in turn result in reducing energy consumption and related GHG emissions in Warsaw, which shall contribute to improving the state of natural environment and air quality in the capital city of Poland, therefore acting on behalf of welfare of its citizens.

Energy issues are not an integral part of the urban planning process. Nevertheless, the ZagrebPlan 2016 mentioned energy as one of six strategic objectives (linked with environmental protection and sustainability). It is possible to determine the energy system in the Spatial Plan and General Urban Plan, but more studies regarding energy issues are needed for it to be binding. The development area Campus Borongaj should be a lighthouse project for taking into account energy issues in the urban development process.

Related information

Follow us on: RSS Facebook Twitter YouTube Managed by the EU Publications Office Top