Andrea BALLARIN Veneto Region Integrating major transport infrastructures in complex territories: a weighted programmatic approach a weighted programmatic approach Ljubljana – 16 October 2013

Tool description 1/2 AIM Realizing a tool to support public decision makers in defining the best choice in terms of how to manage environmental and landscape criticism derived from the passage of a linear MTI. STARTING QUESTION Supposing that the decision of realizing a new track is already made, how public decision makers may be helped in determining the most suitable way to realize and shape the infrastructure in harmony with that territory maximizing its integration from the point of view of landscape and environment?

Tool description 2/2 ASSUMPTIONS We are talking about linear transport infrastructures; We are thinking about the utilization phase of the MTI; We’ve used a multi-criterial and weighed analysis approach; CONTEXTUALIZATION We focused on the area of the Province of Venice which should be interested by the realization of a HS/HC train line from Venice to Trieste.

Main tool objective 1/2 (Why tool is needed?) MAIN ASSUMPTION Working on a PROGRAMMATIC APPROACH before thinking to the realization of a MTI. Feasibility study  Preliminary project  Definitive Project  Executive project ? ? Procedure already known and ruled by law Needed because working on a field that has actually no specific rules or well determined procedures to follow and may help in determining priorities before starting up with a project, potentially reducing the risks of future problems.

Main tool objective 2/2 (How’s going to work?) TERRITORIAL BASE KNOLEDGE INPUTSOUTPUTS SPECIFIC KNOLEDGE OF TERRITORY REVEALED INTERVENTION PRIORITIES Environmental and landscape CRITICISM MAP in relation to the characteristics of the territory Best options for MITIGATION/ATTENTION MEASURES avoiding or reducing the impacts

Target Groups (Who is supposed to use the tool) TERRITORIAL STAKEHOLDERS Local administrators (Representatives of Provinces, Municipalities, Associations of municipalities…) Public associations and local development promoters (LAC, Committees …) Association of citizens or similar Giving reasoned advices/comments to the upper level of decision makers

Methodology 1/3 (How was the tool built?) 1 st TERRITORIAL ANALISYS NATURAL AGRICULTURAL SPRAWL CONSOLIDATED Starting from Corine Land Cover indicators, macro categories of territory were identified and then 4 selected as more representative

Methodology 2/3 (How was the tool built?) 2 nd IMPACTS ANALISYS (Impacts matrix) Literature review of impacts derived from the passage of an MTI on the different macro categories of territory on environment and landscape and of impacts indicators (ALFA MATRIX). Verifying with internal evaluation and with Focus Group 1 with experts the coherence, relevance and redundancy of impacts (BETA MATRIX). Verifying with internal evaluation and with Focus Group 2 with experts the best available choices in terms of mitigation measures and technical solutions to avoid/reduce impacts (GAMMA MATRIX). Verifying with internal evaluation and with Focus Group 3 with experts the economical/financial/social level of feasibility of the best solutions individuated (DELTA MATRIX). Weighting with internal evaluation and with Panel Group with experts the coherence, relevance and redundancy of impacts (COUPLE MATRIX).

Methodology 3/3 (Outputs)

NaturalAgricult.SprawlConsolid. Methodology 3/3 (Outputs) ALFA MATRIX

LAYER 1 – Impact on FRAGMENTATION of the territory Methodology 3/3 (Outputs) BETA MATRIX

LAYER 2 – Impact on HISTORICAL & CULTURAL legibility Methodology 3/3 (Outputs) BETA MATRIX

LAYER 2 LAYER 1 Methodology 3/3 (Outputs) COUPLE MATRIX

Methodology 3/3 (Outputs) PROGRAMMATIC APPROACH LAYER 2 LAYER 1

Methodology 3/3 (Outputs) PROGRAMMATIC APPROACH LAYER 2 LAYER 1

Methodology 3/3 (Outputs) PROGRAMMATIC APPROACH - Result We did not start from a specific track option, but we individuated in a programmatic way: -a sort of corridor to suggest to developers; -advices on specific attention/mitigation measures to adopt in order to optimize integration and avoid potential conflicts suggesting either We did not start from a specific track option, but we individuated in a programmatic way: -a sort of corridor to suggest to developers; -advices on specific attention/mitigation measures to adopt in order to optimize integration and avoid potential conflicts suggesting either

Area: AGRICULTURAL Best attention measure: GRADE LEVEL Best mitigation measure: POLYSPECIFIC HEDGE Methodology 3/3 (Outputs) INFO on their technical and financial FEASIBILITY GAMMA & DELTA MATRIX (Ex. 1)

Area: SPRAWL Best attention measure: VIADUCT Best mitigation measure: SOUNDPROOF BARRIERS Methodology 3/3 (Outputs) INFO on their technical and financial FEASIBILITY GAMMA & DELTA MATRIX (Ex. 2)

Beneficiaries and Stakeholders (Who will benefit from the tool application?) ENVIROMENT / LANDSCAPE will benefit from a low impact MTI POLICY MAKERS will benefit from avoiding potential conflicts with stakeholders CITIZENS will benefit from a shared approach to the idealization of the MTI SUSTAINABLE MTI

Next Steps WP6 Study verifying the feasibility of the best choices in terms of attention and mitigation measures individuated by the matrix’s tool tested on a specific area. WP7 Guidelines on how to approach the problem of how to integrate MTI in different contexts and on how to propose solutions also for different kind of infrastructures. Tender procedure for this service just completed.

Andrea BALLARIN Thanks for your attention Ljubljana – 16 October 2013