5 th ACTIVITY REPORT I. GENERAL PROJECT DATA REPORTING PHASE

(1)

5

th

ACTIVITY REPORT

Please submit this Activity Report together with the Payment Claim for the same six-month Phase. Please enclose all supporting documents listed as annexes in your Activity Report.

I. GENERAL PROJECT DATA

Project Number: F125

Project Title: DIPCITY

Lead Partner Name: PORT OF BRUSSELS Country: BELGIUM Start Date: 03/05/2001 End Date: 30/06/2008

II. REPORTING PHASE

Activity Report Number: 5 Total Number of Phases: 8

Date of Submission:

Reference Date: 01/06/2006 – 30/11/2006

(2)

III. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

Boxes can be expanded, but please do not use more than two pages for the Executive Summary.

Summary of the main activities and outcomes. This section should also be used to report on the experience and added-value of working transnationally. It

should also include problems encountered and the ways they were overcome. During this reporting period the project partners continued their exchanges in the round table meetings. These were organised with a lot of enthusiasm and allowed also for some interesting visits to take place outside the DIPCITY partnership.

The cooperation in DIPCITY has allowed the project partners to strengthen the relations between the ports. New interesting relations have been established with other inland ports, sea ports, logistics companies, public authorities and port related networks.

Through the cooperation and the exchanges that are taking place, the efforts to develop new waterway projects by the project partners have been strengthened. DIPCITY also allows the project partners to have a more precise idea about the

acceptability and utility of the ports for the local authorities and the general public. This point is becoming increasingly important, especially in a highly urbanised environment. The involvement of local authorities and logistics managers to the visits and round tables of DIPCITY has created a platform of exchanges which strengthens the credibility of the projects that are being developed. Thus, these projects can proceed in a concrete way, particularly in the field of waste transport, city distribution and integration of the port in the city.

Some work was done by consultants (and is still continuing) to study how projects can be best realised ‘on the field’.

Publicity for the project was made through the publication of some articles in the regional press and through some information on the websites of European port networks. The DIPCITY project has received attention, through a presentation being made by the lead partner, on the International Ecoports conference in Genova, Italy on the 14th and 15th of December 2006. Thus a wide network of (mainly sea) ports has been reached.

Regarding the project management, a steering group meeting (comité de pilotage) took place on the 6th of October 2006 to discuss the progress of each project partner with the implementation of their respective actions. It became clear, that different subprojects are having delays due to pressure from local groups and decision makers on port projects. It was decided that a project extension would be asked to the

NWEsecretariat. Other point on the agenda were the project budget and the agenda of the round tables.

It is noticeable that the project has received a project extension until 30 June 2008. This extension was motivated through the delays that several project partners faced in the implementation of the actions which they engaged to realise. These actions often require long consultation processes with local authorities and other collectivities. The project has also received a budget line modification, since partner staff exceeded budget forecasts with more than 20%.

(3)

INTERREG IIIB Activity Report 3 the project leader by letter of 3rd of November 2006.

Finally, it was interesting to have the participation of representatives from the Interreg IIIB secretariat to one of the round tables (which took place on 7 December 2006 in Lille, and will be reported on in the next activity report). We valued the feedback and interest of the secretariat for the efforts that the DIPCITY partners are putting in the project. This involvement has feeded discussions about future potential transnational cooperation.

(4)

IV. IMPLEMENTATION OF THE ACTION PLAN

Please fill in one box per action as listed in the Action Plan of your Application Form. Copy and paste the boxes for as many actions as you have to report on. Boxes can be expanded, but please do not use more than 2 pages per action.

Action Number

Action Title

(according to the Action Plan)

Planned Results/Outcome (according to the Action Plan) 2.1 Organisation of round

tables

Exchange of best practices Description of how the action was implemented

During this reporting period, 3 DIPCITY round table meetings took place. Each project partner organised one of them and they took place in Belgium and the Netherlands. Working languages were French and English (for the round table in Utrecht, Netherlands).

All project partners appreciated very much the exchanges which took place, both the theoretical part with the presentations and the practical part with the visits.

Round tables took place for 4 project themes, of which 2 were combined in the first round table in Lommel (Belgium). The motivation for this combination is that the installation visited is a transhipment facility for multimodal transport, which could be well integrated into a urban environment (therefore it relates also to the integration of port infrastructure in the city). The input into these round tables was brought from the project partners, associated

stakeholders, experts and the plant managers of the visited installations (in Lommel, Liège and Utrecht).

The agenda of the round table meetings was as follows:

Round table date location Organiser Project theme(s)

Multimodal transport (transhipment facility for building materials)

20/09/2006 Lommel, Belgium Port de Bruxelles Port

attractiveness ; Multimodal transport Cleaning of polluted

soils

29/09/2006 Liège, Belgium Port de Liège Environment

City distribution (incl. visit to “beerboat”)

29/11/2006 Utrecht, Netherlands

Port de Paris City distribution

The final round table took place on 7th of December in Lille, France, on the theme of transport of waste and recycling products. Since this round table was organised in December, it will be reported in the next activity report.

Some representatives form the Interreg IIIB secretariat participated to this final round table and were able to evaluate how the exchanges took place. The project partners valued very much the feedback and interest from the secretariat in the DIPCITY project.

(5)

INTERREG IIIB Activity Report 5 In the round tables a lot of information was shared between the project partners and also valuable input was received from third parties (experts, managers from logistics companies and local authorities). The round tables during this reporting period covered 4 out of 5 project themes.

The involvement of local and regional decision makers to some of the round tables is important in order to gain support for the port development plans. It has proven to be a successful tool to give stakeholders a better knowledge of port development and of the issues at stake.

For each round table, the main outcomes were summarised in the minutes, which are also added as an annex to this report (Annex 1).

The round table of 7 December 2006 in Lille was the last of 11 round tables which took place between 29/6/2005 and December 2006. This last round table will be reported in the next payment claim.

Justification for any deviation from the original Action Plan

Supporting annexes (submitted with this report)

No. Title/Label Comment

Annex 1 Minutes and presentations of the round table meetings + steering committee meetings Annex 2 List of participants and experts round table

(6)

Action Title

Planned Results/Outcome (according to the Action Plan)

2.2 On-site visits Visits to innovative solutions in other ports Description of how the action was implemented

The visits to innovative solutions regarding the project themes were an essential component of each one of the round table meetings in this reporting period.

These visits took approximately ½ of the time of the round table meetings, which lasted on average a whole working day (approximately from 9 till 17hr, travel time not included). The visits were always accompanied by explanations from the plant manager (from either private or public bodies). The visits raised a lot of questions and thus there was some interesting interaction with the project partners.

Description of the concrete results/outcomes achieved

The visit to SCR Sibelco in Lommel (Belgium) on the 20th of June 2006 showed an interesting example of multimodal transport of building materials (sand) along the canal network in the Campine.

This visit was particularly interesting for the project because it showed a type of

transhipment facility (a conveyor belt with a movable transhipment capsule) that could be well integrated into an urban environment. Notably in Brussels, the implantation of a similar installation for the transhipment of cinders from the incineration plan is planned. The responsible person from the incineration plant in Brussels, as well as the consultant who is studying the feasibility of the project , were participating in the visit and were very enthusiastic about this installation.

At the round table in Liège (Belgium) on the 29 of September 2006, a visit was made to a waste treatment centre in the port of Liège.

The visit was hosted by the person in charge of the technical department of Intradel. On the occasion of the round table in Utrecht (the Netherlands) on the 29th of November 2006 a visit was made to the beerboat – a concept of distribution of drinks towards bars, restaurants and shops situated along the canals in Utrecht. Also household waste is collected in small barges (the garbage vessels). Both initiatives come from the

municipality of Utrecht. The example of Utrecht showed how restrictions for delivery by heavy road vehicles in cities go hand-in-hand with sustainable transport solutions. Similar practices are planned in the cities of Paris and Brussels.

During the last round table meeting, which took place in Lille (France) on the 7th of

December 2006, visits were made to a centre for recuperation of organic waste (currently under construction), to the wharf for the sorting-centre of waste (also under construction) and to the Container terminal of the port of Lille. The project partners were impressed by the innovative character of the centre for recuperation of organic waste, where the recuperated gases will be used to aliment the public transport (buses).

(7)

INTERREG IIIB Activity Report 7 Justification for any deviation from the original Action Plan

(8)

Action Title

2.3 Experts advice To give input to round tables from experts Description of how the action was implemented

Experts were invited to the round tables to give presentations about the project themes. These experts were either managers or directors from private and public companies, researchers, port managers or representatives from cities and regions.

The experts were either invited as speakers to the round table or as participants to the round table discussions and visits.

A list of the experts who participated in the different round tables is given in Annex 4. Description of the concrete results/outcomes achieved

The experts gave valuable input into the round table discussions by giving interesting presentation on the subject.

The presentations given by these experts were put on a cd-rom and distributed to all the partners after the meetings.

(9)

INTERREG IIIB Activity Report 9 Action

Number

Action Title

Planned Results/Outcome (according to the Action Plan) 2.4 External studies by

consultants

Additional studies to fill up knowledge gaps on specific issues

Description of how the action was implemented

Some of the work done by consultants was finalised during this reporting period:

- A landscaping study on the integration of the locks of Anderlecht and Molenbeek into their environment, contracted to COOPARCH as an addendum to the Masterplan (the long-term vision on port development) for the port of Brussels One study is being delayed as compared to the implementation schedule:

- A feasibility study on waste transport in the Brussels Region, contracted to the Community of Port Companies in Brussels.

This latter study will be finalised by March 2006.

A final report became available during this reporting period on the landscaping study for the 2 locks in the port of Brussels. This study has created a concept on how the locks could be better integrated into their urban environment, taking into account the important aspects of this integration: town-planning, architecture, mobility, visibility, security, acoustics.

The results of this study will be shared with the project partners (project theme port attractiveness). It fits well into the current discussions on opening the port for the city on the one hand, through the creation of qualitative public spaces, and the need to secure (and fence) certain port infrastructure. The concept developed is an exercise to balance these contradictory priorities.

The results of the study was waste transport, which is being delayed, wil be finalised in March 2007. Based on the conclusions of the study the port of Brussels will decide to implement the waste transport by barge in Brussels or not. The results will be shared with the project partners.

(10)

Action Title

Planned Results/Outcome (according to the Action Plan) 2.5 Interaction with other

projects/networks

Information exchange, creating a larger network Description of how the action was implemented

Interesting new contacts could be established through the organisation of round tables, notably with the Port of Utrecht, the City of Utrecht, the City of Paris, the Region Ile-de-France and several private and public companies who are interested and willing to cooperate in the projects developed by the DIPCITY partners.

Several organisations of ports and waterways, operating on a European scale, were in one way or another involved in DIPCITY:

Inland Navigation Europe (gave a presentation on one of the round tables),

the European Federation of Inland Ports (participation to one of the round tables) and the Ecoports foundation (presentation of DIPCITY on their International Conference in

Genova).

All project partners were able to establish new contacts through the DIPCITY project. Through the involvement of European organisations publicity could be made for the DIPCITY project and the Interreg IIIB programme. Some information was put on the websites of these organisations.

Several project partners started to make reflections about possible future cooperation projects.

A wide range of ports could be reached through the participation on the Ecoports Conference, which took place in Genova (Italy) on 14 + 15 December 2006. This will be reported in the next activity report.

(11)

Number

Action Title

Planned Results/Outcome (according to the Action Plan) 3.3 Actual investments Investments in partner ports Description of how the action was implemented

According to action 3.3, all project partners have to incur expenditure by investing in the development of their port. All investments must have a strong link with the themes discussed in the round table meetings and thus, be the result of a transnational cooperation.

The different sub-projects the partners are going to realise as a result of their cooperation are described in the application form. A large part of these sub-projects are match

funding operations, thus paid by the partners themselves. The partners engaged to realise for in total 10 million euros of investments related to the themes of the project. The sub-project from the port of Brussels to create a direct link between the incineration plant and the canal for the transhipment of cinders has been further looked into and the project coordinator made a visit to the incineration plant to have a better understanding of the technical aspects of the project. So far, no considerable progress has been made regarding this sub-project.

The project partners made progress with their respective investments as foreseen in the action plan.

The Port of Brussels invested in a better relation between port and city by finalising the new nautical centre in the outer harbour of Brussels. This centre offers new facilities for waterborne leisure activities for the population of the Brussels Region, such as a sailing school, scouting activities, courses for the marine cadets, and is an important new instrument to create a multi-purpose use of the waterway.

The Port of Liège prepared the requalification of the quai Vercour and the port de Monsin. The Port of Lille prepared the investment in a new intermodal platform in Halluin where containers will be transhipped, together with waste and recycling products.

The Port de Paris progressed with the requalification of the port d’Issy les Moulineaux and the port Victor. These ports will be used both for cargo traffic and for leisure

activities/passenger traffic. The integration of these platforms in their urban environment is an important aspect of these works.

(12)

Action Title

4.1 Diffusion to stakeholders Diffusion of results and promotion of the project Description of how the action was implemented

The lead partners is elaborating a project leaflet ; on which information will be put about the project in three languages (French/English/Dutch). The text and pictures for the leaflet have been prepared.

The leaflet will be financed partly on own resources of the lead partner, since not enough budget is remaining for publicity on the project.

The design of the leaflet will be ready in February 2007 and printed latest March 2007.

(13)

Number

Action Title

Planned Results/Outcome (according to the Action Plan) 4.2 Press release and press

actions

Diffusion of results and publicity for the project Description of how the action was implemented

Publicity for the project was made by the means of publication of press articles, by putting information on websites of stakeholder organisations and through the lead partner

website.

Some organisations also put information about the DIPCITY project on their website: this is the case for the International Association of Cities and Ports, Inland Navigation Europe, European Federation of Inland Ports, Institut Scientifique de Service public (ISSep).

During the reporting period 4 articles were published in different journals. All press articles from this reporting period are given in annex 5.

(14)

Action Title

4.3 Website info Diffusion of results and promotion of the project Description of how the action was implemented

The lead partner has dedicated part of its website to the DIPCITY project. This information is accessible in Dutch, French and English on three different links:

www.havenvanbrussel.be www.portdebruxelles.be www.portofbrussels.be.

The website was further updated with press articles, activity reports and a summary of the round tables and visits.

This website is an important tool in communicating the actions and objectives of the DIPCITY project to all stakeholders.

Some information about the project will also be posted on the website of the European federation of Inland Ports : www.inlandports.be.

(15)

INTERREG IIIB Activity Report 15

V. CHANGES IN THE IMPLEMENTATION SCHEDULE

If you had to depart from the Implementation Schedule as submitted with your finalised and approved Application Form, you must submit a revised version of your implementation schedule with your Activity Report. Please use the Implementation Schedule of your approved Application Form (Annex I and II) and indicate the changes on this form. Print it out and attach it to this Activity Report.

Please note that for more serious changes than the postponement of an action you might have to submit a revised application form. Please contact the Secretariat if such changes are foreseen (see Activity Report and Payment Claim Manual for further details).

Revised Implementation Schedule submitted (yes/no) no Comment/Justification:

The project has received a project extension until end of June 2008.

This extension was motivated through the delays that project partners faced in the implementation of respective investments which they engaged to realise. These delays are often due to opposition and constraints from local communities and decision makers towards port development projects.

The Interreg IIIB secretariat has approved the project extension in its letter of the 3rd of November 2006.

The final DIPCITY report with conclusions from the round tables (action 2.6) will be submitted by the end of 2007.

The report with strategies to be followed (action 3.1) will become an action plan on how to implement port project and how to communicate them to stakeholders. The report will be submitted by the end of 2007.

(16)

VI. PLANNED MILESTONES FOR THE FOLLOWING PHASE

Provide detailed planning for the next phase.

Title Validation of results

Strategic Focus

Implementation of new sustainable tools in the ports.

Synthesising the project outcomes in a report and diffusion of results. Stronger cooperation by using the network established through the project. Actions Involved (numbered as in the Action Plan) Actions 2.1, 2.2, 2.3, 2.4, 2.5, 2.6, 3.3, 4.1, 4.2, 4.3

Describe the major activities and main outputs of each month Month 19

December 2006

Last round table meeting in Lille, France. Theme: transport of waste and recycling products on the waterway. (action 2.1 and 2.2)

Preparation of 5th activity report and payment claim.

Further realisation and follow-up of the investments according to action 3.3.

Month 20 January 2007

Preparation of 5th activity report and payment claim.

Month 21 February 2007

Preparation of DIPCITY leaflet. (action 4.1)

Final report of study on potential project for waste transport in barges in Brussels. (action 2.4)

Month 22 March 2007

Participation of all DIPCITY project partners to the North West Europe territorial cooperation conference Lille on 5+6 March 2007. (action 2.5) Press action DIPCITY. (action 4.2)

DIPCITY steering committee.

Update of the lead partners website (action 4.3)

Month 23 April 2007

Preparation of final report DIPCITY with conclusions round table meetings. (action 2.6)

Month 24 May 2007

Preparation of final report DIPCITY with conclusions round table meetings. (action 2.6)

(17)

(18)

VII. MONITORING OF OUTPUT INDICATORS, EXPECTED

RESULTS AND IMPACTS

MEASURE 2.1

A: OUTPUTS

Assessment of outputs

General indicators - quantifiable

Target value for whole Measure Overall target value for project Cumulative value for project so far Attained value in this period a) no. of national, regional, and local

government authorities involved as formal partners as listed in AF

40 4 4 4

b) no. of other public bodies involved as

formal partners as listed in AF 6 0

c) no. of third sector (non-profit) organisations involved as formal partners (public research institutes, universities)

6 0

d) no. of private bodies involved as formal partners (private profit-making, private research)

7 0

e) no. of semi-public bodies or public-private partnerships involved as formal partners

7 0

f) volume of investments in firms (direct

financial aid or transfers/payments) 750,000 0 g) volume of investments in fixed capital

(physical production, operation or service capacity)

40,000,000 15.166.982 7.911.708 1.362.545 h) no. of press releases (national,

regional, local) 55 3 4 0

i) no. of workshops, seminars, colloquia

(excluding general partner meetings) 30 12 10 3

j) no. of events aimed at education, public participation, community engagement

30 8 3 0

k) no. of studies and databases increasing the knowledge base in the field

5 6 6 1

l) no. of strategy papers and reports that will directly influence wider policy

development.

5 2 0 0

Where asked to give a value of 1 or 0 (yes or no), relevant measure-specific output indicators will likely score 1 in each reporting period though the values can be secured gradually as the project evolves.

(19)

INTERREG IIIB Activity Report 19 whole Measure value for project project so far this period The transnational project…:

Objective 1:

a) improves external accessibility of NWE 8 0 NA 0

b) reduces the environmental footprint 8 1 NA 0

c) no. of administrative entities and other

actors to reduce environmental footprint 20 d) improves the sustainable character of

long-distance transportation 6 1 NA 0

Objective 2:

a) relates to the development of transnational networks improving the internal accessibility of NWE;

6 1 NA 1

b) improves the balance between

transport, environment and settlements in urban and rural areas as well as in the Eurocorridors;

6 1 NA 0

c) no. of road pricing schemes

implemented; 1 0

d) improves urban public transport; 4 1 NA 0

e) improves the accessibility of peripheral

and island areas; 4 0 NA 0

f) eliminates or reduces bottlenecks; 6 0 NA 0

g) improves freight traffic facilities across

NWE 4 1 NA 0

h) no. of transnational free-ways or

freightways initiated/developed; 3 0

i) no. of plans and concepts

developed/implemented for sustainable mobility

10 2 0

j) improves access in wider city-regions

between urban centres and rural areas 3 1 NA 0

Objective 3:

a) no. of comparative analyses related to transport, mobility and traffic planning structures, policies and procedures in NWE;

10 3 0

b) improves the knowledge base on

external accessibility in NWE; 2 0 NA 0

c) improves the knowledge base on

internal accessibility in NWE; 2 1 NA 1

Objective 4:

a) increases the involvement of the civil society in the management of sustainable mobility;

4 1 NA 1

b) improves co-operation procedures; 6 1 NA 1

c) no. of surveys and databases

developed relating to transportation; 4 d) improves coherence between EU

sectoral policies and objectives of the Measure.

6 1 NA 0

(20)

Assessment of results

Where asked to give a value of 1 or 0 (yes or no), all indicators might score 1 in each reporting period or the scores might be secured gradually as the project evolves. Unless asked to give precise figures, results indicators score a total maximum value of 1.

The project achieves or contributes to… Target value for whole Measure Overall target value for project Cumulative value for project so far Attained value in this period a) increased awareness and recognition of

the transnational dimension of transportation systems and of their territorial impacts

3 1 NA 1

b) increased consensus on critical development issues in transportation systems (congestion, lack of sustainability) requiring co-operative efforts

3 1 NA 1

c) development of spatial planning

strategies towards better integration of the objectives of the Measure, in particular in the fields of better spatial distribution of gateway functions, reduction of the environmental footprint of transport

functions, improved accessibility of remote areas, alternative location policies

3 0 NA 0

d) development of transnational and interregional co-operation resulting in transnational transportation schemes and concepts

3 0 NA 0

e) better co-ordination of the

implementation of EU sectoral policies (transport, telecommunication and

information society, research etc.) with the objectives of the Measure

3 1 NA 0,2

f) availability of a more consistent knowledge base on the transportation systems in NWE and on their territorial implications

3 1 NA 0,4

.

Possible quantitative indicators for results are largely covered by the general output indicators.

(21)

INTERREG IIIB Activity Report 21 C: IMPACTS Assessment of impacts: Measure-specific Impact indicators Target value for whole Measure Overall target value for project Cumulative value for project so far Attained value in this period a) no. of transport links

created/enhanced improving external accessibility

8 0 0

b) no. of transport links

created/enhanced improving internal accessibility

170 0 0

c) size of traffic shift for each transport mode (increase or decrease in vehicles)

AIR No target set ROAD No target set RAIL No target set WATER No target set +8%

d) reduction of CO2 emissions (measure?)

No target set

No target set e) volume of small-scale investment

realised 20,000,000 2.000 0

Comments/Justification/Calculation

The formal project partners have involved several actors, at local, regional, national and international level in the process of the project during this reporting period.

These can be considered as sub-partners to the project:

- International: the European Federation of Inland Ports (EFIP), Inland Navigation

Europe, EcoPorts Foundation;

- National: Bureau Voorlichting Binnenvaart (Netherlands)

- Regional:, Walloon Region (ISSEP ; SPAQUE), Région de Bruxelles-Capitale,

Région d’Ile-de-France, Direction Régionale de l’Equipement Ile-de-France, Agence Bruxelles-Propreté (ABP), Flemish Region (nv Waterwegen en Zeekanaal) ;

- Local or Private: Municipality of Utrecht, Municipality of Paris, Arcelor, Total

Belgium, Somef, Magemon, Intradel, DHL, LR Services (Mac Donald’s), BHV. The steering committee of the DIPCITY project has held 1 meeting during the reporting period: on 10/01/2006. The minutes of these meetings are given in annex 1.

(22)

(23)

INTERREG IIIB Activity Report 23

VIII. CONTACT DETAILS

Contact Details of the person responsible for this report:

Name: Anthony Callens

Institution: Port of Brussels

Address: Redersplein/Place des Armateurs 6 1000 Brussels

Country: Belgium

Phone Number: +32/2.421.66.57 Fax Number: +32/2.420.73.81

E-mail: acallens@haven.irisnet.be

IX. DATE AND SIGNATURE OF THE LEAD PARTNER

The information and documentation in this report and its attachments give a fair and correct description of the present implementation status of the project.

Date:

Signature:

Name (in capitals): Geneviève ORIGER