Useact vii report napoli by URBACT Napoli / USEAct project

USEAct Urban Sustainable Environmental Actions

FINAL CONFERENCE 22ND 24TH APRIL 2015 “FROM URBAN SPRAWL TO ADAPTIVE REUSE: A SUSTAINABLE FUTURE FOR OUR CITIES”

Lead Partner

USEAct Naples Final Conference Report Urban Sustainable Environmental Actions 2 Lead Partner City of Naples Urban Planning Department URBACT Projects_and Networks on Integrated Urban Development Policies - Central Direction Urban Planning and Management - UNESCO Site Gaetano Mollura USEAct Project coordinator Anna Arena Finance officer Maria Luna Nobile Communication officer Vincenzo Fusco LSG coordinator Contacts: phone +39 081 7958932 - 34 - 17 email gaetano.mollura@comune.napoli.it urbactnapoli@comune.napoli.it Lead Expert Vittorio Alberto Torbianelli USEAct Project Lead Expert Contact: email vittorioalberto.torbianelli@arch.units.it Thematic Expert Pauline Geoghegan USEAct Project Thematic Expert Contact: email paulinegeoghegan@hotmail.com www.urbact.eu www.urbact.eu/useact The report written by the thematic expert Pauline Geoghegan refers to the seminar work, with contributions of Gaetano Mollura Lead partner, Vittorio Torbianelli Lead expert and USEAct partners that attended the meeting. Anna Arena, Maria Luna Nobile and Vincenzo Fusco, Lead partner team contributed to the editing of this report. Cover picture: live sketching during the Final Conference ÂŠ Mary Cinque All the photos are taken by the USEAct Team. And images are taken from the ppt presented during the seminar.

NB. this report Should be read in conjunction with the Power Points presented during the meeting, which you can download here

Contents

1. Introduction and Conference opening 4 1.1 Introduction 1.2 Conference opening 1.3 Introduction to the event by Gaetano Mollura, Lead Partner of USEAct 1.4 Round Table 1 Facing Urban sprawl: What role for Municipalities and other administrative levels, looking forward to “re-growth” 1.5 Round Table 2 Adaptive Reuse of Residential Heritage buildings in the cities: Opportunities and Criticism 2. Focus on the host city: Naples 6 2.1 USEACT/URBACT Naples Local Action Plan / ULSG members 3. The USEAct Partner’s Outputs 13 4. The life of the network 23 4.1 The USEAct Final report: outputs and recommendations 4.2 A point of view on the USEAct Network Results 4.3 Debates about sustainability in urban development 5. Managing Authorities and Financial opportunities for the URBACT Local Action Plans 6. Networking Networks

7. Conclusions Appendix 1 programme of the meeting and meeting participants

FINAL CONFERENCE

IMPLEMENTATION PHASE

“FROM URBAN SPRAWL TO ADAPTIVE-REUSE: A SUSTAINABLE FUTURE FOR OUR CITIES”

Final Conference participants Gaetano Mollura USEAct Project Coordinator, Anna Arena, Maria Luna Nobile, Vincenzo Fusco, USEAct Project officers, Vittorio Torbianelli Lead Expert, Pauline Geoghegan Thematic Expert, Germana Di Falco, Adolf Sotoca, Ad hoc Expert, Ivan Tosics, URBACT TPM, Jim Sims, Buckinghamshire Business First, Paul Pece, Marius Ecea, Baia Mare Metropolitan Area Association, John O’ Hara, Kehinde Oluwatosin City of Dublin, Luis Rodriguez, Álvaro Cerezo Ibarrondo, City of Barakaldo, Štefan Lancarič, Miroslava Hanakova City council of Nitra, Linda Iren K. Duffy, Østfold County, Ileana Toscano, Mario Vivian Trieste City Council, Enric Serra, Sonia Dominguez, Marina Jarque, City of Viladecans, Raffaele Barbato, URBACT Secretariat, Luigi de Magistris, Mayor of Naples, Carmine Piscopo Urban Planning Councillor, Gennaro Vitale ACEN, Michelangelo Russo, SIU, Dionisio Vianello, AUDIS, Roberta Amirante, DIARC Università Federico II, Sergio Russo Ermolli, DIARC Università Federico II, Maria Margherita Migliaccio, Alfonso Sperandeo, Daniela Patti, Levente Polyak, TUTUR, Fernando Barreiro, USER, Gabriele Guazzo, Cittalia, Francesco Chirico, Armando Coppola, Patricia Pulles, Franco Rendano, Franco Rotella, Grazia Paggetta, Danilo Capasso, Fabrizio Monticelli, Claudio Pellone, Naples ULSG

1.INTRODUCTION AND CONFERENCE OPENING 1.1 Introduction As described by USEAct lead Expert Vittorio Torbanielli in his introduction to the event, the final conference of the USEAct Project "From Urban Sprawl to Adaptive Reuse: a sustainable future for our cities” was the occasion to share within the USEAct community, including the Naples Municipality and its citizens, the outcomes of an "intricate although fascinating journey" of the USEAct project. The broad scope of the project (the implementation of policies for reducing the use of new urban land use and the sustainable reuse of the existing city) presented a challenge to provide a comprehensive picture of the activities and outcomes as well as lesson learned.

The difficulty of summarizing the issues perfectly reflects the complex morphology of the integrated policies for reducing land-take, and the reuse of the city. Diversity between local settings and partners clarified the need to trace an individual path towards reducing land use. The idea of "convergence" or "key words" and "certified" models, applicable to the entire European territory, is often not suitable for more complex issues. Despite this premise, some common and crosscutting key-messages emerged. They serve for the most part as indicators for strategic reflection, useful to drive on innovation and were presented during the meeting to be shared. The final meeting of the USEAct project was a unique occasion to share a unique message: that communities and leaders should be aware of the need of radically innovative approaches to the land use issue, trying, if possible, to bypass the recurrent constraints typical of the administrative and political level. Innovation formulas can be diverse, from place to place, but, in general, more creativity and an integrated approach seem to be needed. Freeing community and entrepreneurial energy, fighting commonplaces in the debate between developers and land-defenders, introducing new tools to extend debate outside the closed circles formed by "politicians/planners/developers" focusing on values to be created instead of on "rules" or "common praxis", and paying attention to new players (such as financing institutions) are just some examples. During the final conference, city administrators, experts, stakeholders, and project partners, came together to talk to each other to share ideas and knowledge about a specific topic of the USEACT Project, which is at the heart of cities concerns: during two thematic Round-Tables discussion was started by USEAct partners and continued by local administrators and urban planners. The First Round Table was dedicated to the theme of "Facing Urban sprawl: What role for Municipalities and other administrative levels, looking forward to "re-growth". The Second Round Table focused on "Adaptive Reuse of Residential Heritage buildings in cities, opportunities and Criticism". A Third Round Table, on “Managing Authorities and Financial opportunities for the URBACT Local Action Plans” was dedicated to a strategic aspect, also relevant for the next URBACT III programme: the need to finance and implement the Local Action Plans, through the involvement of local Managing Authorities, to guarantee successful practical outcomes of URBACT projects.

1.2

Conference Opening

Luigi de Magistris, Mayor of Naples

The mayor welcomed the participants on behalf of Naples for this important

initiative for the city, giving all the city partners the chance to communicate how urban space should be used. Development should not be along traditional lines but rather reconcile architecture with well-being. The goal must be to bring people into public spaces. Many people come into the narrow streets of Naples, so new concepts of community are needed for those who share these spaces, whether they are inhabitants or not. Citizens‟ participation is growing, developing a sense of belonging. The city believes that open space can be appropriated by citizens, ensuring a sense of responsibility: common good must prevail over the public good, and be respected. USEAct is working towards using public funding for the requalification of urban resources, taking into account the interest of citizens. The venue for the meeting (in a renovated former church complex) has come to life, as part of the historical heritage of the city. Places are respected if they are well known. Respect is lowered when buildings are left abandoned. In the midst of an economic down turn, people want to meet together, to „find a smile‟. When streets are occupied, and whenever citizens can access culture, crime levels lower. The idea of sharing public monuments and giving up private interests must be promoted; urban spaces must welcome everyone, not only those that can afford it, such as tourists, but everyone, regardless of income or origin.

1.3

Introduction to the event by Gaetano Mollura, Lead Partner of USEAct

is often not seen as being at the heart of the matter.

USEAct Lead Partner, Gaetano Mollura

Local Action Plans are developed from the bottom up, not top down. A great source of satisfaction is due to the local bottom up groups: often citizens do not trust each other. The conference is not only an internal seminar, but also aims to provide additional thoughts concerned with better use of land and of existing instruments. The network outcomes are based not only on transnational exchange experience but also on a number of bi and tri-lateral meetings. Ten Local Action Plans have been developed by the USEAct partners. Governance is important for the use of land, as well as political solutions: we must ask ourselves what Europe can do to reinforce this, when sustainability

Most Local Action Plans identified the need to invest in existing heritage, they also have discussed with builders and other stakeholders (developers etc.) on how to focus on existing, rather than new, building. The crisis may have contributed to a new openness. However the potential role of the Managing Authorities in supporting and advising cities appears to have failed, and as a result it is hoped that URBACT III will find a more effective way to involve the Managing Authorities. The variety of the USEAct partnership (cities, regions and other bodies) has been an effective way to discuss certain issues and make proposals. In addition involving ad hoc experts has been very useful to expand on the theme.

1.4 Round Table 1 Facing Urban sprawl: What role for Municipalities and other administrative levels, looking forward to “re-growth” Vittorio Torbianelli, Lead Expert Moderator

Jim Sims, Buckinghamshire Business First, UK: Local Economic Development and “Building activity”, stories from the UK The town planner is a “conductor”: yet in the UK there are no longer city architects, and planning has become a regulatory minimum. The role of the conductor is to get the orchestra to play a common tune. “The good, the bad and the ugly”: questions are about “what is good design”. Good urban planning, design and development should be about delivering improved outcomes/outputs/impact, wealth and prosperity, journey times & journey time reliability, health & wellbeing, social cohesion environment etc. .... at the level of the place. That process should allow urban planners to achieve an appropriate balance between population growth / housing demand, productivity/jobs growth, suitable infrastructure, land use planning etc. „Bad‟ urban planning, design and development can become a politically driven, mechanistic, regulatory „land use‟ allocation process, which is not sufficiently integrated into housing management & planning economic development, transport planning, green infrastructure planning etc.

The situation today in the UK is worsening. High Wycombe, a town known for tool-making, lost thousands of jobs, so a new industrial structure is needed, based on services, retail etc. Business feels how the town is changing, and problems are worsened by the inflexibility of the boundary. In some parts of the UK 50% of business rates (taxes) go to the local authority: in High Wycombe this only amounts to 16%. How is the municipality incentivised to produce a balanced economy? Costs increase, and government grants are reduced. Post crisis buildings are of poor quality, and there is not enough to maintain services „roads etc. Some potential solutions for Buckinghamshire are emerging: smart infrastructure, open data, productivity growth, not jobs growth, agglomerations of municipalities, innovative financial models (redefining the role of the state, devolution, local civic leadership, mutualism and community ownership), towards an integrated model, much thanks to the learning from USEAct colleagues.

Response by the Lead Expert, Vittorio Torbanielli This is the crisis of the „rigid model‟, linked to the creation of value but also financial aspects. Referring to the mayor who had said earlier that every time we have an asset that is not used by citizens the town should get to use it for public use: turn it into somethings interesting for the municipality. The question must be what are the most important themes for the new role of public administration, and how to put in place such a new process.

Carmine Piscopo, Urban Planning Councillor, City of Naples

THE FUTURE OF THE CITY: CITIES ALIVE, RETHINKING GREEN INFRASTRUCTURE ARUP (2014)

Welcoming towns working on common issues affecting all towns, Jim Sims‟s presentation showed progressive change from town planners as „conductors‟ to a new and different role, to face a greater complexity of issues and roles. We now live in a great degree of complexity. Some towns may still have funding, but in Naples transfers from central government to local government are no longer possible. The central government does not realise the implication of reducing funding, and the planners have to extend their role. There has been a long debate on building permits. Prevailing public interest is essential in the constitution. If the private player is given permission, and if they do not carry out the project, most recognise that the link between public and private has been destroyed. So measures are needed, such as public calls for proposals. Building heritage is experiencing major funding problems from central government. There is a need to be in line with the desires of local

communities, and look at towns as a social phenomenon that includes the public open spaces.

Dionisio Vianello, AUDIS Honorary President - Association of Urban Abandoned Areas The association was established in Turin in 1985 concerned with derelict areas, with Naples as one of the first members. They have followed the regeneration of industrial areas, for example, following the end of the tobacco industry. In 2007 the crisis stopped projects, considered by private owners as too costly. With architects and designers a „quality protocol‟ has been developed for guidance

Michelangelo Russo, SIU President, Italian Society of Urban Planners Urban planning runs the risk of being „mechanistic‟ if only based on land use. It must take back its place in the public debate, to focus on the integration of all concerned. Urban planning must aim at different contents and work on the content of policies and

for major projects, plus a protocol for local neighbourhoods. Both the private and public sectors have problems, regarding land use: the ministry for Culture is drafting a law on land use, and at the same time the Ministry for Infrastructure is developing a draft bill for developing towns, yet they do not talk to each other. Proposed solutions include a maximum amount of built volumes, following the German example: where planning proposals have been set aside, and tax measures introduced instead, sometimes leading to renewal of 20-30% of the existing town, where owners have to pay for the renewal.

plans. When boundaries are ignored, resources are impoverished. We can no longer grow as we used to, so we must aim at a different growth, and exploit the concept of „de-coupling‟ (the ability of an economy to grow without corresponding increases in environmental pressure). Development does not mean new land use, but more about treating the

area in a different way. Five issues for this different growth are:

 

Limits (unlimited growth as a non-value): Metabolism must be at the centre of the vision: a holistic approach to territory: values and functions, through an integrated approach. Multi-„scalarity‟: means looking at different scales, with new forms of governance Waste is related to everything to do with life: land, abandoned spaces… regeneration is not just to limit land use. Risks and mobility: consider resilience and territory as an organism with infrastructure. SMART urbanism: the technology tools of the planners.

Gennaro Vitale, ACEN Vice President - Association of Building Contractors of the Province of Naples, Italy The building industry is faced with the need to combine the effects of the downturn and efforts to support change. This means a change in the way that developers face their activities: they need to cooperate to meet the needs, and are favourable to a different use of land. A problem is the different national and local laws. So regulations need to be simplified, to have clear rules. Facing change is difficult with such complex regulations. Bureaucracy must also change, to be simplified: now up to 50 permits are needed for a simple project!

Concluding Closing the panel discussion, Vittorio Torbanielli agrees with the need to reform the core of our systems with an exhaustive reform: this maybe a task to be looked at by the next URBACT 3 programme.

1.5 Round Table 2 Adaptive Reuse of Residential Heritage buildings in the cities: Opportunities and Criticism Moderator Roberta Amirante, DiARC – Department of Architecture University of Naples Federico II

USEACT Partner Lecture: John O‟Hara, Dublin City Council (Ireland), Towards redeveloping Residential Heritage in Dublin challenges and tools Dublin has a rich stock of heritage buildings, essential to the character of the city. At the same time increased standards regarding fire, access for the disabled and safety, together with higher quality standards for apartments, create a challenge for the reuse of these buildings. Reuse is essential to avoid the „doughnut „effect which can result in using up rural land rather than concentrating development in the city centre, and increases the carbon footprint. More people living in the city centre like to be close to culture, work and restaurants. A living city is good for business and for protecting heritage. Dublin has good „protected‟ structures, but changes may be needed to make the regulations flexible for people to come back to live in the city.

pre 1915 buildings are in private ownership: later buildings owned by the local authority are not eligible for grants.

Dionisio Vianello, AUDIS Honorary President - Association of Urban Abandoned Areas Experiences of AUDIS regarding strategies to improve the city are only by the public sector to make it liveable for its citizens, since no private money is available, since productive facilities are closing. Many cites have produced changes to their city plan, but with no new strategies or methodology. No investors are seeking to invest. Municipalities need to facilitate the development process; the ministry‟s new bill aims to classify disused buildings of public interest, so that developers can cooperate on a plan. In this way responsibility is passed to the private sector. However, we lack promoters. Another question is who will manage the building, once it is developed? In some cities (Naples) there is a proposal for „facility managers‟ for whole neighbourhoods, with the aim of recovering investment by issuing service bills. The SPECIAL project, “Spatial planning and energy for communities in all landscapes” includes energy savings in town planning.

Sergio Russo Ermolli, DiARC Department of Architecture, University of Naples Federico II An integrated, multi-disciplinary approach can be a key to success of urban regeneration projects. Innovation is paramount when intervening in existing buildings. All variables must be harmonised (referring to the image of the conductor…): the structure, as well as consensus of the building users, bearing in mind the importance of timing and costs, and protecting the identity of buildings. For adaptive reuse technologies that are reversible can be adjusted according to future needs. This is most effective when combined with energy efficiency. Georgian houses typically have a basement and 3 or 4 floors above. With a minimum legal size of 55m² apartments must sometimes extend into other floors. They are now looking at how to use each floor, which typically is closer to 40m², with a principle of minimum intervention. Dublin has introduced tax relief to owner-occupiers for the refurbishment of historic (pre 1915) buildings in the core city centre: this area extends along access routes radiating out from the city centre due to their visual impact on arriving in the city, with the aim of converting upper floors for residential uses: up to 8000 apartments could be affected, to create a „liveable urbanism‟. However it is pointed out that tax relief can only work for people with income. Most

Gennaro Vitale, ACEN Vice President - Association of Building Contractors of the Province of Naples, Italy Many regulatory affairs need to be taken into account, as this affects conversion of buildings. In Naples there is no land available for new buildings. Requalification needs a lot of rules: the Dublin example (Georgian house conversion) could not work in Naples. We need to increase the safety of people. All buildings have life cycles. There is no culture of demolition in Naples. We need to create urban spaces to make cities more liveable: we already have density.

Carmine Piscopo, Urban Planning Councillor, City of Naples, Italy

Mt Piscopo repeated the need for new forms of governance. „We do not pull down buildings in Italy‟. The crisis is obliging us to re think. We don‟t have to think of buildings as standing for ever. We should find new ways of making cities safe (pollution, streetscape…). Adaptive re use means reconsidering built heritage, thinking of new uses, for example for new communities. What matters is the process. Money must be used to make sure that buildings are sustainable, so we must face a more complex reality: our heritage must be safe and secure, but also sustainable. More relaxed regulations allow heritage to be used in different ways. What is urgently needed is a „change in cultural perspective‟, together with flexibility.

Discussion Rules can be an obstacle to taking care of private heritage. Public bodies are thinking separately, to preserve one area against another. In the UK there is a national „Heritage Lottery fund‟. The private sector does not have the patience to work with public funds; on the other hand, the public sector is

not good at commercial developments: hence the need for public/private cooperation. In Naples due to the financial situation, some projects had to be abandoned; they set up the S.I.Re.Na. project because of the cuts, and have created some public private partnerships aimed at intervening, and tax incentives for private owners. There should be more focus more on „adaptive‟, not „reuse‟: flexibility is needed. Regenerated buildings can be reused, for example for housing, services, start ups, SMEs… it is suggested that adaptive re use could be a subject for an EU directive, and to allow public administrations to improve their energy effectiveness. The crisis can be the opportunity to open up spaces to communities. In the interest of the common good, not just a political solution, co working /cooperatives and working communities, can lead to new forms of economies. Lowering expectations can be a step forward, not back. The potential of Naples is huge: only 10% of its potential is exploited. The potential of state owned properties includes sports facilities, for example for football or fencing. Visions, with cultural and social viewpoints, will shape the future of our towns. In Naples, social housing is very important; public services can be used as a driver.

2. FOCUS ON THE HOST CITY: NAPLES 12 2.1

USEACT / URBACT Naples Local Action Plan / ULSG members.

Panel Moderators: Vittorio Torbianelli, Lead Expert, Germana Di Falco, Thematic Expert

Introduction, Gaetano Mollura USEAct LP Project Coordinator The Naples Local Action Plan is taking place in three neighbourhoods: Porta Capuana, Porta Medina and Piazza del Mercato, working from a bottom up approach, and coordinated by a City Councillor. Many stakeholders have been involved in creating the Local Action Plan: general stakeholders (univesrity, Mappina, construction companies etc) and three groups linked to the neighbourhoods concerned. The Local Action Plan is for the development of strategies for the existing city. The keyword is SUCRE: Smart renaissance, Urban identity, Creativity Hubs, Re use and Economic attractors. They want urban renaissance, starting from urban identity, and the re use of buildings. The three general goals are: to enhance context conditions for urban renewal, to renovate the public/private building heritage and urban infrastructures, and to promote economic and social development. It is characterised by actions specific to each neighbourhood. Action Laboratory work was carried out thanks to Germana di Falco, and a method was developed to be relevant to all partners. This included for each action: the title and brief description of the specific LAP Action, the body responsible (Institutions/Authorities in charge), estimated costs, legal/official planning framework, expected output and corresponding result Indicators (outcomes), and resources that could be found for funding the action. Cooperation with universities was important, as well as the involvement of SMEs and associations, who all shared their experience and views. Residents were involved in the improvement of their local areas. Total estimated costs of implementing the Local Action Plan are €70M, of which €20M have been found so far, thanks to EU funds. It is now hoped to communicate to investors what the project is about. The context of an EU project has made our work easier, since this makes the relationship between citizens and public authorities easier.

Armando Coppola, President of the Fourth Municipality council Naples is accustomed to reuse: in 1400 – 1500 four story buildings in Naples were built of „tufa‟, with no extensions possible, hence the densely built up area. Neighbourhoods were focused around gateways to the town. The Piazza Mercato dates from 1400. „Reuse is inherent in our DNA‟. Local Authorities were ruthless, from dormitory neighbourhoods, the town expanded: some areas could have been better used. Public and private buildings have been neglected. Rules should be changed, according to needs. Proposals must be coherent with history to become a reality. „A space with no content is a desert‟, so we must create an atmosphere for Porta Capuana, so that the whole area could become as vibrant as before, taking into account the needs of the market, apart from the public funds. Recovering the area could be a great opportunity to combine tradition with economic development to get rid of the neglect.

Francesco Chirico, President of the Second Municipality council The densely populated area, lacking action by local authorities, is now changing, with now a clear acknowledgement that no more land could be used. Deserted areas may be brought back to life. Participation has led to implementing projects and local action plans. Stakeholders have been active: young people, for example, have established contacts between citizens and the project team across the city.

The Naples Urbact Local Support Group Vincenzo Fusco (Naples LSG coordinator)

The voices from the LAB PORTA CAPUANA Stakeholders The Cultural Associations and the Private investors: Franco Rendano, “I love Porta Capuana” Network The Lanificio building, a historical complex dating th from the 15 century, previously used as a wool factory, combines a ancient monument with industrial archaeology. The famous Formiello river runs below it. It is now used by young people; the place is very lively, and organises guided tours in May during the Monuments‟ Open Doors festival. It was decided to open it to the whole neighbourhood, and a conference „Porta Capuana an Open Door‟ was held, with the „I love Porta Capuana‟ federation. There is now a research centre, and a Porta Capuana website. This is also supported by the institutions, including the city mayor. With the

USEAct project, the work has continued with schools, and their drawings will be exhibited in the Modern Art Museum. A tourist hub is planned at Porta Capuana; since the area is close to the station, metro, transfers to Sorrento, tourist coaches etc etc. The cultural Association: Franco Rotella, Associazione “I carbonari” One day it was decided to meet everyone who was tired of living in a neglected area. So they met and discussed the issues, such as shops closing etc… and discussed what to do to achieve an environment where public goods are respected. They began by highlighting the project very generally, starting with students, in a discussion on the „luminara‟, lighting systems, leading from one place to another. People thought it would be impossible but in three months it was done, described by the mass media as „the first cultivated and educated light system‟. They then did a second project on waste containers: this was the turn for the bins to become prestigious! It is time for Neapolitans to love their city, and for the local authority to intervene: we need something to believe in! A project could develop craftsmanship… “it is necessary to love what you live”!

The voices from the LAB PORTA MEDINA Stakeholders The Cultural Associations and the Private investors: Danilo Capasso, Cristina Di Stasio Quartiere Intelligente /Montesanto 3 Association The „Intelligent neighbourhood‟ started in 2013, as a result of the commitment of Cristina Di Stasio, in the Montesanto area close to the cable car and underground train station. Lots of people pass by through the transport hub, so regeneration is important. Big monumental stairs were built before the cable car by Prince Filangieri: their usage ceased after the cable car was built leading to th Bomero at the top, and in the 20 century the stairs disappeared, and with it the character of the open space. There was a disused shoe factory and a garden, preserved in the 60s and 70s. The complex was bought and has now been restored as a focus for the neighbourhood, and a garden created on a former derelict site. This triggered urban regeneration, as the area around the complex is very degraded. The building was a homeless shelter for 20 years, and actions to regenerate the stairs and buildings are being sought for start-ups, hubs etc., and public support is also needed, but there is a lack of coordination. The cultural/social Association: Grazia Pagetta/ Giuliana Sandulli, Le Scalze Network :

The network is named after the Le Scalze church, in Neapolitan baroque, used for a palace until it was used as a church. It hosts a number of associations dealing with disadvantage, transforming it from a space to a place. Activities are focused on young people: the „barefooted band‟ accompanies events. Another group involves migrants, associations for active citizenship, facing local problems; Architon works especially with women architects and parents; there is a theatre group and in house drama groups. USEAct gave them the chance to stop and reflect: the activities have been stabilised, with less improvising. It is now most important to regenerate and refurbish the premises in terms of safety etc: other projects have been studied for example regarding public safety, a library for children, and a historical archive for the neighbourhood, with photos of local people. Future work will involve extending the network to different people, such as shop keepers and other businesses.

The voices from the LAB PORTA DEL MERCATO Stakeholders The USEAct final conference programme provided the opportunity for the participants to get to know at first hand the neighbourhood projects and activities around which the Naples Local Action Plan is based. The visits to the Antico Borgo Orefici Consortium and the Antiche Botteghe Tessili Consortium, in the area around the Piazza Mercato on the eve of the conference set the scene for the discussions during the conference on valuing heritage as an important vector for enriching city centre activity, from an economic, social and cultural point of view. The private investors, Fabrizio Monticelli Consortium Antico Borgo Orefici and Claudio Pellone, of the Consortium Antiche Botteghe Tessili had presented their projects to USEAct partners: Fabrizio Monticelli, Project Manager of the Antico Borgo Orefici Consortium. The area had been famous for its crafts, especially goldsmiths, since the Middle Ages. As long ago as th the 14 century, Joanna of Anjou had created corporations of goldsmiths in the area. At its height, the goldsmiths‟ district included 250 businesses, employing hundreds of people. The Borgo Orefici Consortium, a consortium of jewellery makers, was formed In March 2000. The aim is to safeguard the heritage of jewellery making, to provide a service to small start-ups and to help craftspeople to create their collections. They have set up a training school, and help start-ups to get established. They have used models based on the th 14 „Bourbon‟ style and also have also drawn upon ancient designs from Pompeii and Paestum. They work with other materials such as ceramics from the

Capodimonte district of Naples. The Bulla building provides them with offices, training rooms, workshops spaces and an exhibition area. Small business incubators provide orientation, support and tutoring for small businesses. The „ABO‟ service is a trade company for the consortium and individual craftspeople. Claudio Pellone, Project Manager of the Antiche Botteghe Tessili Consortium The Piazza Mercato is an excellent location, close to the historical city centre, on a large flat area and with good access to public transport. There are close links to the work of the past: fabric, clothing, embroidery etc.; being close to the goldsmiths‟ area, they are all working together for renewal, developing a strong commercial profile, linked to cultural heritage, with programmes aimed at the requalification of the area, such as a „natural‟ shopping area. The aim is to make the Piazza Mercato a new destination to sell products, jewellery and textiles made in the area, expanding into the tourist area. The renovated Santa Croce church on the piazza will be opened, to create a „dialogue‟ with the square, providing space for conferences etc. It is also hoped to create facilities for the textile businesses similar to la Bulla for jewellery, possibly in existing disused shop facilities. Concentrating the textile artisans in one same street can give greater visibility to perfect handmade products, based on a strong community culture. They are also working with schools in the area. They hope to build on the skills of a tailor working in the area who has made thousands of costumes for films and theatre, by creating a museum of theatre costumes, to bring more employment and visitors to the area. Patricia Pulles, “Street Art Game upgiotto” initiative in the Piazza Mercato – Piazza Olivella – Porta Capuana Upgiotto is a game invented by A12 architects in Milan, giving the chance to children to use public open spaces, drawing on the ground with chalks, to illustrate stories that are presented to them on word cards: they first met the children in their schools; children are free to express themselves, and they have the feeling of re-appropriating the public spaces in their neighbourhoods which they otherwise do not use. This has been a great success and will be repeated in other squares across the city.

3.THE USEACT PARTNERS‟ OUTPUTS Moderators: Vittorio Torbianelli (Lead Partner), Germana Di Falco (Thematic Expert)

City of Trieste (Italy) Ileana Toscano The general strategic objective of the Trieste Local Action Plan is to provide an innovative strategy of urban renewal at different urban scales: from the upgrading of entire parts of the city to ordinary interventions of building renovation, with the aim to improve the energy-efficiency and to support the reactivation of the local economy. The Local Action Plan has been built strictly linked to the design of the new General Town Plan GTP (To be approved in the summer of 2015) and the Sustainable Energy Action Plan SEAP (approved in 2014), and it intends to present itself as a which effectively supports the Administration in the implementation of “city renovation projects”, through the proposal of a work methodology which provides innovative measures and processes of energy refitting of existing buildings and abandoned areas to incentive the reactivation of private resources not only in large operations (more affected by the crisis), but also in limited and ordinary interventions of building renovation and upgrading private houses. In other words to connect urban regeneration and the reactivation of local economy linked to the building sector is the challenge of Trieste Local Action Plan. The mission is to be adopted in the urban Plan is a toolkit for methodology, also a process of energy saving, for private and public bodies; a forum has been held on working and living in Trieste: on building renovation, parts of the city and neighbourhoods, and new skills and professions. Especially important are the „volume credits‟ over ten years. Promoting energy retrofit of public and private estates on different urban scales requires a

strong investment, both public and private, and in the time of economic crisis it may not be an easy task to reach; for citizens energy saving and green energy are not a priority in their value scale and daily expenditure. This operation needs to be supported by a strong local policy belief in the importance of urban retrofitting. Good local governance matched by the approval of new General Town Plan will be the right framework for managing the urban regeneration and energy retrofit of public and private property.

Riga Planning Region (Latvia) Rudolf Cimdinis The main outcomes have been plans and cooperation and pilot areas; some actions are complete. Thematic lines include urban sprawl, industrial areas, allotments etc.? In addition the municipalities have started developing their Local Support Groups and Local Action Plans. The general goal of the Local Action Plan is to enhance cooperation, developing a common platform of understanding of common Urban Growth Management necessity for Riga Metropolitan Area and initiate planning for the transformation of pilot areas in a participatory way. Outcomes will be the Urban Transformation Action Plan of Riga Metropolitan Area (the LAP), the Urban Local Support Group (ULSG), as a joint platform for further activities, USEAct issues within Riga Planning Region Sustainable Development Strategy 2030 and Program 2020, acquired knowledge of new planning and partnership approaches, gained

and shared experience in urban development issues.

City of Buckinghamshire (UK) Jim 16 Sims Continuing the earlier metaphor (of the orchestra conductor)… is the Local Action Plan the baton or the score…? The Local Action Plan represents the rehearsals: a plan of plans, to encourage greater coordination between partners, stimulating regeneration. Affordable housing is a key issue, with no funding tools and greater need. The 2 tier municipality is another challenge, with one level looking after land use and the other in charge of transport planning, the political system doesn‟t want to be the one „concreting‟ over the other! Some of the objectives and actions are under way: data programme, strategic economic and sectoral business plans, and plans on innovative tools. Stakeholders include the local enterprise partnership: Buckinghamshire Business First. A dissemination event will be held the following week. The problem is the lack of a spatial plan: they will try to agree the foundations on where development can take place… a visible „plan of plans‟.

dielivering two strategies: one on urban development and one on strategic planning: the URBACT process hs been very uiseful.

City of Baia Mare Metropolitan Area (Romania) Paul Pece The first analysis showed that there was no land use management policy. The „problem tree‟ has been useful to arrive at their objectives, which are: Integrated land use management, as part of territorial planning, for the localities members of the metropolitan area, and the reduction of green field land take and uncontrolled expansion of settlements, through the efficient use of vacant land and increasing the attractiveness of underused industrial land, in order to attract economic investments. A major part of the Local Action Plan is in the South industrial area of the city, where the plan proposes solutions to develop a business park.

Discussion Different actors working together is the best way to access available funds, underlining the interdependencies, to develop innovative projects. Trieste is working at different urban scales and engaging with local communities. Riga depends on the scale: a bottom up approach to a plan of plans. In Naples they have already secured funds on the basis of the Local Action Plan, and are seeking private investors as well as more public funds. In Buckinghamshire the plan of plans is attracting private money; when you start talking to entrepreneurs you need to have a picture of what is going on, and how important is their role for the overall strategy.

City of Nitra (Slovak Republic) Stefan Lancaric The general strategic target of the Nitra Local Actin Plan is to increase the quality of the city centre from the perspective of function, mobility, service offers, potential spatial reserves, quality of public spaces and urban safety and thus to contribute to the sustainability of the urban development in Nitra. The objectives are low budget short term solutions – and high budget strategic solutions ..... This needs to be discussed at regional level. Stakeholders include City of Nitra /Municipal Office in Nitra, local residents and community, local entrepreneurs , state and public administration and students, since Nitra has a high level of university population. Nitra is

The main result will be to define a set of recommendations to increase the efficiency of the land use, updating information for the land cadastre, which represent an interest in the development of investment projects. This would favour the maintenance of a real urban land deal on the real estate market; the land plots consisting of different owners may become attractive by associating these owners and formulating common goals, or by the municipality purchasing the land; the urban landscaping plans must relate to the existing situation, the real needs of the community and their development strategies; the urban planning of the localities part of the Baia Mare Metropolitan Area must move towards the use of vacant urban land, not to a policy of territorial expansion of the town; updating the land use category and correlating it with the destination set in urban planning documentations; upgrading municipal infrastructure increases the accessibility and attractiveness of urban land; proposing feasibility studies that target the use of each vacant land in town. These studies must be undertaken by a public-private partnership and should take into account both the interests of

potential investors and the community. The implementation of the LAP will have positive effects on the entire metropolitan area, such as the reuse of the existing lands, increasing residential and industrial density, reducing the consumption of agricultural land and increasing the responsibility of local administrations, in extending the inner areas.

City of Dublin (Ireland) Kehinde Oluwatosin Dublin is a capital city, with ½ million inhabitants. Very few developments have taken place in the area of the Local Action Plan, so we wanted to provide a strategy along the „Red‟ tram line. The general objective is to provide interventions that will revitalise the LUAS (tram) Red Line public transport, for it to become a corridor with a variety of uses and increase the residential population, employment, and cultural activity in the area, to create a framework, to engage the community and to create case studies along the line. It is hoped that the proposed vacant land levy will be included in the planning Act. Keywords are Regeneration, Communication, Participation, Sustainability, and Transferability. This will ensure the consolidation of the city and provide an area where residents can live and work in close proximity, thereby reducing urban sprawl and unsustainable travel patterns. Stakeholders have all th had their word; 17 April 2015 was the Launch of the Crowd Sourced G.I.S Application for the LAP area www.reusingdublin.ie. The LAP will be launched in May 2015. Other projects are „Art tunnel‟ project, for a community park, a virtual (Twitter) campaign „Smithfield says‟, and the Dublin House 2.0: a new project.

Discussion Views differ on whether a plan of plans is most useful for internal use, or whether it can present an active solution ready to be funded? For Nitra it wasn‟t the idea to put together actions to be funded, they focussed on local problems. For Baia Mare the Local Action Plan has little influence on the regulatory framework, but can influence more at local level, plus the administration can integrate recommendations for example on the Local Action Plan. The local Action Plan is about finding solutions to specific projects, not only about funding. In Dublin the main outcome is that people are talking together. They may not achieve funding but create energy, and engagement with the local community as a key output. Dublin is beginning to understand the funding streams, integrating the experience into their daily work. For example the Local support Group is integrated into the process of preparing the City Development Plan.

City of Viladecans (Spain) Enric Serra The changes in the economic situation have affected the city‟s physical structure, resulting in the obsolescence of production areas. The development of new areas of economic activity, close to that area, has precipitated the need to address its renewal in a comprehensive manner. This need has coincided time-wise with the USEAct Network, whose general objectives are fully compatible. The general strategic target of the Local Action Plan is to lead and guide the transformation of the “Centre” industrial zone to turn it to a Low Energy Industrial Urban Park with a high level economic activity located within the new City Centre boundaries. Through the various ULSG sessions the main problems of the area were analyzed. The participation of the various members of Local Support Group (entrepreneurs, investors, members of the City Council, etc.) allowed the incorporation of different perceptions, discussion and the reaching of a consensus on them, in view of developing a different city model. The final dissemination event, attended by 50 people, was the end of something beginning some next steps.

City of Barakaldo (Spain) Alvaro Cerezo The context for Barakaldo was the 1999 general urban plan, with a new general urban plan planned for 2016-2024. Barakaldo´s Local Action Plan focuses on the necessary urban integrated regeneration of neighbourhoods. Therefore it defines the methodologies and indicators for the urban regeneration strategic plan, under urban sustainable and integrated development principles (3R Act principles). For the project success we have had the support of the Basque Government (dMA) and the Construction Cluster of the Basque region (ERAIKUNE) who have brought a wide variety of agents to the project. Barakaldo´s LAP Results include new intervention methodology and indicators for urban integrated and definition of sustainable regeneration interventions, new governance model strategies (Barakaldo´s Urban School) and a new collaboration platform with all the agents involved in the process, achieving a methodology on both a municipal and a local scale. This was approved at the final event by the public authorities.

Østfold County Council (Norway) Linda Duffy A key role has been coordinating all local plans: strict guidelines are unpopular with municipalities so the challenge is how to get towns to cooperate on spatial planning. The aim of the Local Action Plan is

„More growth, less sprawl-Sustainable cities in Østfold‟. Objectives are to create coherent and shared strategies and targets between different levels of governance and between cities, developing and systemizing tools, strategies and incentives for urban transformation and densification, and communicating the benefits and importance of high quality interventions. The aim is to make a toolkit of good examples; there is a plan for training, to form an urban development network. People often focus on the negative aspects, so there is a need to focus on communication. The final dissemination event involved 29 participants: political reperesentatives, voluntary sector, university, planners, the national housing bank, public health professionals, county governor. It entailed the dissemination of USEAct project, and also the start of one of the activities in

the LAP- Inclusive Østfold, planning against social exclusion, and the «World premiére» of their USEAct film.

Discussion The Local Action Plan is rather a process than a local action plan, when it is necessary to target communication. The plan is not so important as planning, for example toolkits for planners. The methodology is also important for building up connections with cities, in such a way things will be arranged together. In Barakaldo specific results were part of the process, and led them to tackle plans in a different way, by bringing in citizens to get them involved.

4. THE USEACT PROJECT OUTPUTS 19 4.1 The USEAct Final report: outputs and recommendations Vittorio Torbianelli, USEAct Lead Expert; Pauline Geoghegan, USEAct Thematic Expert Vittorio Torbanielli, USEACT Lead Expert The „little red book‟ of USEAct… is not so much a report but more of a guide book, a door to enter the project. The key messages focus on key words, and links to the full reports, all on the website. Key issues are scale and governance, land use management, visualisation tools and quality: general, business and housing. The common thread, the „fil rouge‟, is the link between these different issues. Conclusions are presented in three different areas; strategy should be integrated along all aspects; suggestions to be taken into consideration, not as direct solutions. Governance is important especially EU efforts to modify governance. Voluntary participation is also positive. The role of regional authorities is important: such as for example the mix of regional authorities with cities within USEAct. An ideological approach to land take is also needed: what do you need to do to nurture the growth process? The thematic booklet is a most important reference, reflecting the three thematic papers produced during the life of the network. The First Thematic Paper is dedicated to the Theme "Planning tools and Planning governance for Urban growth management", the Second Thematic Paper is dedicated to the Theme "Interventions to reuse urban areas" and the Third Thematic Paper is dedicated to the Theme "Refitting and Regenerating buildings and urban areas". Partners are” reminded that all the USEAct outputs are contained in the CD enclosed in the final report document. Pauline Geoghegan, USEAct Thematic Expert The project has been a journey well-travelled, from a broad vision to clear outcomes, to conclusions and lessons learnt, on planning tools, intervention, refitting and regeneration. This was achieved through transnational exchange but also with the support of external inputs (Adolf and Ivan, and others), and also the „shock‟ of Istanbul, where heritage and modernity come face to face. The report is not only about integrated land management (spatial patterns, governance and capacity building), but also quality issues, as a key cross cutting element, through to new tools: Visualisation tools, GIS mapping, with heritage as a

core perspective. USEAct Local Action Plans are varied, from „plans of plans‟ to site specific issues. Last but not least the issue of participation is a common thread and a practice for the future. USEACT never stops, as partners move towards new journeys together, on affordable housing? Visualisation tools or other shared issues. Vittorio‟s text in final report sums up the essence of the project: “Reducing Land take cannot be reduced to an emotionless science, nor to rigid, unified “policies”! It is a social practice, subjected to real constraints, just as when we prepare food. Each region or city has its “usual” ingredients and recipes, but also each person or family can have specific needs, tastes or constraints (e.g. economic problems) in deciding how to prepare the daily meal. However, as in a healthy diet, prohibition – “no more land take”, as a principle, is in fact a secondary aspect of the solution, while a “positive, practicable and acceptable” diet, a metaphor for building sustainable developments, is at the core.” Thanks to our conductor, and all the orchestra!!

4.2 A point of view on the USEAct Network Results Adolf Sotoca, USEAct Ad hoc expert Adolf Sotoca demonstrated how the Local Action Plans by the USEAct partners are coherent with the „issues for urban growth‟ put forward earlier by Professor Michelangelo Russo: ReUse: “from a degraded area to a tourist hub”, Porta Capuana, Naples, the “efficient use of vacant land” (Baia Mare), “reshape Svätoplukovo námestie Square” (Nitra), “transform a degraded area to an activity pole” (Porta Medina, Naples), “regenerating the place” (Porta Mercato, Naples), “Re-Use Ellis Building” (Dublin), Rehabilitation, Regeneration, Renovation (Barakaldo); Scale: Coherent and shared strategies and targets between different levels of governance and between cities (Østfold), Art Tunnel Park Project (Dublin), the Dublín House 2.0 (Dublín), Transferability: “Transfer urban intervention solutions from the case study area to the wider Dublin City (Dublin); Environment: the Zero Energy District (Viladecans), “provide innovative measures and processes of energy retrofitting” (Trieste), housing Energy Efficiency (Barakaldo), Smart local water cycle system (Viladecans); Accessibility: “resolution of current infrastructure gaps” mobility plan “centre” areas (Viladecans), “increasing the quality of city center from the perspective of function and mobility”, “new concept of traffic solutions and mobility (Nitra), “pedonalità e

transporti” (Porta Medina, Naples), accessibility & mobility” (Barakaldo); “less mobility needs” (Østfold); Community “The children have taken over this place” (Porta Mercato, Naples), “The urban landscaping plans must relate to the existing situation, the real needs of the community and their development strategies” (Baia Mare), “leadership & partnership alignment” and “developing tools to enable communities to visualise the impact of a range of decisions” (Buckinghamshire), “improve the community for the individual” (Østfold), and “support community initiatives” (Dublin); We can add „reThink‟ to make „USEACT’… How reUSE is implemented along time? What about the process? What about existing use, to coexist with new ones? Is tranScalarity a question of SIZE? Urban Acupuncture, find the „points‟ that have an impact on infrastructure? Environment: why Urban Metabolism? More than Energy: waste management, water supply etc… Accessibility: increase investment in infrastructure: also diminishing needs for mobility… mix uses „Mix as a fix‟: work/home for example. Participation or Engagement? Beyond Consultation, distinguish between participation and engagement: want more than diagnosis and more decision-making and implementation.

4.3 Debates about sustainability in urban development Ivan Tosics – Thematic Pole Expert, URBACT II A ’sustainable city’ should meet the needs of the present without sacrificing the ability of future generations to meet their own needs. ‟Eco-city‟: is to rethink cities to make them more sustainable, with an end goal of achieving self-sustainability. Key principles are: renewable energies, thermal insulation, recovery and recycling of waste water, waste management. A ‟smart city‟ uses IT technologies to enhance performance and wellbeing, reduce costs and resource consumption, and to engage more effectively and actively with its citizens. Key 'smart' sectors include transport, energy, health care, water and waste. These are definitions mainly from environmental points of view.

1) Sustainable development in growing and rich cities: growing cities have to increase housing supply. If suburban development is unwanted, new supply must be created within the city. Many cities opt for concentrated new development: Vienna Aspern Seestadt is under construction for 20 thousand people, Stockholm Hammarby Sjöstad is almost finished for 25 thousand people, Munich Freiham is about to start for 20 thousand people. However, it is well known that concentrated new developments might become problematic. Innovative methods in Vienna urban planning inclde a geothermal plant and connection of Aspern Seestadt to the district heating grid of Vienna, car parking seriously limited to 0,7 car/flat norm; developers have to contribute with 1000 eur/flat to a Mobility Fund for rental bike system and car-sharing systems, out of 2500 flats (first phase) 1/3 are subsidised, new flats range between 35 and 110 square meters, ground floor level built for office, shop, art-workshop functions; renting out follows a specific process, through a dedicated company, to avoid shopping centers, with a strong emphasis on neighbourhood management, publicly controlled development company for urban planning and zoning. Are strict rules enough for sustainablity? Experiences from Hammarby Sjöstad: the original parking norm was between 0,4 and 0,55 car/apartment, which has been increased to 0,7 when the political leadership of the city has changed, originally 50% share was aimed for social rental flats but this was not achieved as building costs increased and social subsidies were gradually removed, The city imposed environmental measures on developers who pushed their prices up so that only wealthier and childless households can now afford to buy an apartment here. Some analysts call the outcome „bourgeois environmentalism‟. First signs of worry in Vienna are that it will be less carbon neutral than planned, the groundfloor zone is unaffordable on market prices for cultural functions, there is a discussion going on to turn some of the ground floor areas into flats, and there are growing protests against the low number of parking places. How to keep balanced sustainability? If economic and financial circumstances deteriorate, adaptation to the new circumstances are unavoidable. Large problems might emerge if the changes lead to the rearrangement of priorities between the basic principles (e.g. insisting to the highest environmental qualities leads to irreversible losses in the social targets). The balance between the economicenvironmental-inclusive principles has to be checked time to time during the whole period of the development of the new neighbourhood. The well established neighbourhood management team in Vienna might be a good basis to discover early

signs of emerging unbalances and call the attention of politicians and planners to intervene. 2) Sustainable development dilemmas in existing, problematic areas of cities: constructing large-scale housing estates was an architectural dream 70-80 years ago. The architects of such estates believed “… in the role of architecture as a weapon of social reform ... when everyone would live in cheap prefabricated flat-roofed multiple dwellings – heaven on earth.” (Philip Johnson, American architect). Their dream became partly true: many families, who could not afford to live elsewhere, moved into the prefabricated highrises. However, due to the concentration of poor (in many cases migrant) households, most estates became soon problematic. How to ensure sustainable development in large housing estates? The problem is substantial: many people live today on such estates: 50-60 million people in the EU15 countries (14% of the population), and 30-40 million people in the EU13 countries (34%). URBACT Re-Block network addressed the question of what can be done to improve the quality of life in such areas? The complexity of the situation can easily be illustrated with four cities, where there are huge differences in problems and actions: Södertalje and Malaga are growing cities, Magdeburg is shrinking while Budapest stagnating. There are also large differences in property relations: the Budapest estate is 95% owner occupied, Malaga is mixed while in Magdeburg and Södertalje housing associations dominate. There are different problems: in Södertalje and Malaga the social problems dominate, Magdeburg fights with empty spaces while Budapest with energy efficiency problems. There are also differences in financial circumstances and actions: Södertalje and Magdeburg are financially strong, having spent at least 15-20 th eur/flat for improvements or demolition. Compared to that Malaga and Budapest have insignificant financial resources. Lessons learnt: importance of governance: there are many different approaches to tackle the problems: tenants‟ association, neighbourhood management, local newspaper, attractive low-cost programmes for residents, efforts to create better public transport connections to the city, participative planning. Richer cities could learn from the cheap and simple solutions applied by the poorer cities while the latter could think about the advantages and disadvantages of the more costly interventions. The importance of Urban Governance has been crystallized. The problems of deprived areas cannot be solved without the involvement of minorities and disadvantaged groups into decision-making. Instead of hierarchical, top-down planning the idea of PPPP (public-private-people partnership - Pietro Elisei)

has been raised: enabling and inclusive approach, especially in service provision. Cities have to find the governance innovation which fits best their specificities. Innovative methods to involve residents include ecological renovation as a good way to include people and to boost their employment. Food-related activities (urban gardens, healthy food, local markets, exchange networks in food) are very good to include everyone… temporary use: places and actions to create new, temporary opportunities can bring large changes (e.g. Neukölln: 130 different nations – unused talents; in an area with unused land and buildings). URBACT projects show many examples on such innovative approaches, starting from ideas and actions by local governments and NGOs, based on the participation, long-term involvement of residents. The limits of participative planning: planners have a moral obligation to work towards the balanced/integrated understanding of sustainability. The involvement of the residents, participatory processes are of key importance. However, bottomup processes have limits to achieve long-term sustainable outcomes. Thus a new ‟governance of urbanization‟ is needed: innovative bottom-up approaches coupled with efforts to change the topdown redistributive systems towards more just allocation of resources.

Discussion The question arises as to how critical goals were changed? Should flexibility apply if the situation improves? If it is a good plan, circumstances may change. In the Stockholm example the environmental priority was maintained and other aspects reduced. Expectations need to be checked every year. Local Action Plans are a balance between environment, social etc. social infrastructure groups: all three aspects need to meet to discuss cooperation and may have to have second best solution. The financial situation has stopped things moving forward. In Northern Europe some issues are taken for granted, with focus on feasibility, others focus on previous stages. In Vienna lack of financial resources did not stop the process, but problems were anticipated: we ”have to cook with what we have got”; in southern countries community is strong but when the state withdraws money this is not enough; bottom up is not enough, but arguing for a more just framework is vital, to go alongside sustainability: what Europe do we want in 50 years?

5 ROUND TABLE 3 Managing Authorities and Financial 22 opportunities for the URBACT Local Action Plans USEACT Local Action Plans Moderator: Gaetano Mollura USEAct LP Project Coordinator / Germana Di Falco, USEAct Thematic Expert Managing Authorities are the first sources of funding, but there are other funding opportunities for the Local Action Plans. We want to move forward to URBACT 3 with several proposals: how best to manage this? As a town, projects should be starred/scored on funding potential, to prioritise quality projects for funding. URBACT could also be used to find a new governance system. National dissemination points, managing authorities and Urbact should be able to work more closely to ensure continuity. The Ministry should involve municipalities and encourage URBACT towns to meet non URBACT towns. Urbact municipalities could capitalise on consistency between Urbact results and new programmes: and should ask the ministry: all projects are based on a bottom up process, have been laboratories for future policies: social policies and support for business. Europe can be a catalyst for integrating budgets for infrastructure with social plans?.

Barbara Acreman, Ministry of Infrastructure and Transport- URBACT Monitoring Committee Member (Italy) At this stage cultural changes are taking place: the ministry is giving importance to the question of urban land, and are seeking to use EU funds. Involving all municipalities is difficult: we need to change who we work with. Achieving EU funding is useful but difficult, to identify the right calls. We know which municipalities are organised to take part, but not others: not all municipalities are able to produce a Local Action Plan. URBACT is an exchange of practices but also a good future for urban planning; if cities participate in URBACT there are more cities who can bid for funding. In the past few years early planning has been done: „we are looking for plans ready to be funded‟! Hundreds of projects and plans are ready but “kept in cabinets”. Wherever a programme for urban regeneration is launched, projects should be ready to start, but co funding also needs to be ready too, since regional/national funding needs to be combined with other funding sources. Soon there

will be a new call for tenders on declined and derelict areas, financed by the budget law: millions for the recovery of derelict areas: projects must be implementable, plus with other co-funding in place. The minister has changed the laws on the ground, knowing that only with the integrated approach, it is possible to talk about topics such as the integration of migrants etc. Some larger areas have been linked to surrounding areas. Our role is to manage networks of municipalities: we need to support the process of change, delivering information to all cities. We are now talking about small infrastructures etc. where there has been no integration/development.

Alfonso Sperandeo, City of Naples, Department Member for Labour and Productive Activities (Italy) Urban policy is important in the new EU funds. Big cities are no longer industrial areas, but other activities are located in the city centres: finance, culture etc.. In the funding for 2014-20 attention is on co planning with beneficiaries, who need to be involved in planning. Close cooperation between national authorities and municipality is needed. Naples municipality considers that planning is the most important factor. Smaller interventions can have more impact in a wider territory. Now are developing a more bottom up process, and want to involve stakeholders. In the past priorities led to oversized structures, often creating the opposite effect. Now with the Naples Underground train, the th 5 biggest in Europe, peripheral areas are now at the centre of new administrative government areas. Local authorities need to exploit all opportunities, and public private partnerships can be very important.

Discussion A good Local Action Plan can develop a clear context for development strategy: not only a stock of projects but also to attract private investment and public private partnerships. Raffaele Barbato agrees that it must be recognised that the biggest weakness in URBACT is the link with Managing Authorities. Managing Authorities are not on target: the new Operational Programmes make no mention of Managing Authorities. Cities are stuck at the level of projects because there is no bridge to funding. This is a failure for Managing Authorities, who are missing the opportunity to use the Local Action Plans. Some personal answers are proposed: rating projects by starring does not work as this can be „political‟. There are over 400 Managing Authorities in the EU; in Campania the budget for technical assistance is greater than the entire URBACT budget: we need to understand that a Local Action

Plan can allow a local Authority to spend money better. Regarding cooperation, an increased budget for information points and training can enlighten policy makers, but will not change the relationship with Managing Authorities. URBACT does not develop ideas, but puts forward ideas from the cities. Regarding the diversification of funding sources, municipalities should help citizens to identify funding. Times are changing: the role of system managers must be recognised. It is agreed that it depends on people/regional frameworks: mechanisms can be set up to reward municipalities acting in synergy, and to make sure that whatever funding support is available can be obtained. The EU has approved a partnership code to ensure that stakeholders can be heard; Naples‟ strategic plan starts with consultation with populations and microenterprise: URBACT has led us to this. In Italy following change at the head of the ministry for transport it is hoped that

metropolitan programmes will be altered to have everyone one around the table. The ministry states that it is „permeated by the bottom up approach‟, and now gives priority to suburbs and regenerated areas; the absent players must sit around the table. The minister‟s aim is also to raise awareness of the regions. For Jim it is about „risk, not power‟, i.e. how we deliver effectively. Ivan confirms that some countries are doing better, for example in Poland the ministry devoted money and power to the regional level for urban development: to develop strategic plans, and to cooperate. In Naples there are a lot of bottom up ides but the region does not take this into account. Germana adds that other ideas/resources could establish new relationships, taking into account loan networks of private stakeholders. Towns must be smart conductors of smart systems, so they need a driver…

6 NETWORKING NETWORKS 24 TUTUR (URBACT II), Daniela Patti (LP City of Rome) and Levente Polyak (PartnerCity of Budapest) TUTUR has looked at vacant properties as a common issue. For example Bremen is considered a city of good practice, with involving stakeholders a key issue. Work packages were created to engage users, to map vacant properties and to engage politicians. Rome has imported good practices from Bremen, in a different context. The planning department became the „urban transformation‟ department, with the aim of stopping the consumption of land, and with a focus on innovative uses. Reuse of space entails involving local inhabitants: „urban planning conferences‟ mapped „your space‟: so citizens know better what is available. Already plenty of citizens are mapping, especially the repetitivity of typologies: e.g. housing units, markets, green spaces, industrial areas, commercial units, infrastructure (roads etc.), cinemas, schools etc… they tested new uses, for example reviving a street market etc… and are now receiving money from the ministry. Policies have been developed: not a specific policy but included in existing regulations and resources: space and people with the district. With small budgets (e.g. 6000 – 10000) they have had an impact on local life, sometimes with temporary uses.

USER (URBACT II) Fernando Barreiro, Lead Expert USER deals with changes and conflicts in using public spaces: not urban space in itself but about the use of the open space: what conflicts arise? Cities were diverse, from a social and ethnic point of view. Open spaces should be considered as a dimension for social cohesion. The ways urban planners design open spaces are not coherent. USER highlights the human dimensions of public space, focusing on the relationship between people and places, taking into account users‟ needs, rights and meanings, rather than the physical qualities of the place. They are fostering convivial, mixed use, safe, accessible, inclusive, comfortable, relaxing, vibrant, and well maintained open spaces, involving all kind of users in the decision making process concerned with the improvement of public spaces. USER‟s key messages are that places can provide opportunities for social interaction, social mixing and social inclusion, and can facilitate the development of community ties, and that cities should integrate

users‟ knowledge into public space design and maintenance projects. It is only in doing this that public spaces will meet citizens‟ needs. Their findings include understanding uses and users as a main element in designing public open spaces. A typical conflict is between public and tourists; the need to understand the use of sidewalks and streets: different uses cannot be solved by regulations. Also unused/overused public open spaces, even when well maintained. There can be ambiguity with the generational conflict; not all users are present at one time; convivial interaction is important: spaces are shared by groups, so there is a need to respect the right to be in the public open space, for example in Copenhagen the homeless sleeping in the street. The importance of the feeling of belonging is a shared responsibility. Further solutions are now being tested.

SEISMIC (JPI Urban Europe), Gabriele Guazzo, Project Manager, ANCI - National Association of Italian Municipalities The SEiSMiC project, funded under the 7th EU framework programme on social innovation, aims at facilitating a process of mutual engagement and learning to identify and discuss needs for social urban innovation and their consequences for research and policy. Networks provide the basis for a transnational learning process, for an exchange of experience, good practice examples as well as pitfalls and failures, on ideas for social innovation and requirements for their realisation. SEiSMiC gives this transnational community a voice towards European policy and research strategies. The consolidation of national needs, ideas and requirements on a European level allows for carving out and communicating key issues to the European Commission, JPI Urban Europe and other stakeholders. This process is supported by the SEiSMiC Advisory Board which consists of urbanrelated or social innovation-related stakeholder organisations acting on European (policy) level. It is a network of networks: each country set up networks, with a consortium of partners. Most activities are at national level then transnational networking. The strength is the transnational platform, with thematic priorities, including public space. Based on global trends, European urban areas have to face a diverse set of challenges, problems and potentials for the next decades: austerity and financial constraints, climate change and resource scarcity, demography & urban dynamics, in- & outmigration, social dynamics, economic crisis, global shifts of markets & unemployment. Social innovation is seen as an important factor and means to the

tackle these challenges. Social innovation creates new social relations in cities. Initial findings on social innovation are that to tap the full potential of social innovation for urban transformation, development and economy a SIfriendly ecosystem has to be established and maintained, a proactive relationship management between the different actors, grassroots' initiatives and city administration is needed, capacity building and mutual learning of communities has to be supported strategically, issues such as unemployment, housing, livability and the involvement of minorities or the disadvantaged have to be jointly addressed. Areas for radical change in cities include: accessibility, with Smart solutions to the problems of mobility a future without cars, culture, by focusing on heritage, local economy, with the relocalization of economy, promotion of shared economy, urban agriculture, and better use of cultural heritage, public spaces, livable, accessible public space; citizens should have a strong voice, social inclusion, in the light of increased risk of marginalization of progressively wider categories: housing, welfare, health, and land use: counteracting urban sprawl is a widely shared priority emerging from the debate in SEISMIC.

Conclusions Naples USEAct LP team: Gaetano Mollura, Anna Arena, Vincenzo Fusco, Maria Luna Nobile The USEAct final conference closed with the showing of two films: „USEACT is‟ summarising the work of the network, and produced by the Naples Team, and „The very last USEACT presentation‟, a humorous vision of maybe (or maybe not…) a future joint project for the USEAct partners, prepared by Alvaro Cerezo in co-production with a group of partners of the network. The Lead Partner extended his thanks to all the partners and those who had taken part in the project, to the lead expert, thematic experts and ad hoc experts, to his team, Anna, Luna and Vincenzo, who had managed the project alongside him, as well as those who successfully staged the final event in such a beautiful heritage building in the heart of Naples, and especially to those local groups who had hosted the USEAct partners on each day of the final meeting to provide a vision of the ongoing Local Action Planning work in the neighbourhoods of Naples.

ANNEX 1 PROJECT MANAGEMENT ISSUES The USEAct Partners’ meeting on April 22nd Before the start of the main meeting the Project partners met for an updating on the dissemination and financial issues at local and project level, and an introduction to the seminar, with the USEAct Naples team. The topics touched on by the partners included preparations for the upcoming URBACT Festival in Riga, where two partner cities are invited to present their experience of participating in the USEAct project. Viladecans and either Østfold or Buckinghamshire will present their experience. Ten USEAct Local Action Plans are now completed, and partners were encouraged to present their activities on dissemination in their presentation to the USEAct conference, and to share as much material from these events as possible. The final network materials are complete, and will be distributed to all the partners.

Dissemination of the Final Outputs, Maria Luna Nobile, Capitalisation and Communication Officer Concerning USEAct final outputs and conclusions, the Thematic Booklet has been produced and printed in 100 copies, and the Final Report printed in 2000 copies, with the “all inclusive” USEAct CD also in 2000 copies. The Final LAP/ Brochure has been printed in 2000 copies. 10 Local Action Plans have been produced, and the Local Action Plans Exhibition is ready, with 20 + 3 Introductive Posters. Partners are thanked for their precious support. The dissemination event at programme level will be during the Riga Festival on May 6-8 2015. Partners are now organising their local final events and exhibitions: the Trieste local dissemination events took place on 8th October 2014, with a local th thematic meeting, and on 30 March 2015 with a local exhibition and dissemination meeting. Outputs include a local brochure, LAP Exhibition, a local meeting and a newsletter in Italian. The Barakaldo local dissemination event was on 11th December 2014, with a local exhibition and dissemination meeting. Outputs include a local brochure, LAP exhibition and a local meeting. The Riga Planning Region local dissemination event took place on 8th April 2015, with a local exhibition and dissemination meeting. Outputs include a LAP note-book, LAP Exhibition, Local meeting and LAP Sketches. The Viladecans local dissemination event took place in

April 2015, with a local exhibition and dissemination meeting. Outputs include a local brochure, LAP exhibition and a local meeting. The Naples local dissemination event took place on 23th-24th April 2015, with an exhibition and dissemination meeting. Outputs include a local Newsletter, the LAP Exhibition during April and May 2015, and another local event: #upgiotto for USEAct. Partners are strongly encouraged to send photos and reports of their dissemination events to the Naples team.

Financial issues, Anna Arena, Financial Officer The partners have received their third ERDF quota transfers. The URBACT Secretariat has apologised for this delay. It is necessary to add the date of receipt of the quota onto Presage as soon as possible in the section „Received Payments‟. For the last reporting session, covering the period from July 2014 up to the end of the project, only 2 months to close and pay, the deadline is 30th June 2015. This is the final opportunity to claim costs; otherwise they will be lost. Documents to be submitted are the Final Certificates of Expenditure by each Partner, and the Final Payment Claim, by the Lead Partner. The closure Documents are the Financial Contribution Summary by the Lead Partner, the Closure report (online survey) by the Lead Partner, and the CD rom/USB key with all outputs by the Lead Partner. Reminder of the eligible costs: the end date for the eligibility of expenditure is 30 June 2015. Shall be considered eligible to be refunded with ERDF only expenditure linked to activities implemented between the project‟s starting date and the closing date (as indicated in the application form) i.e. 30 April 2015, staff/external expertise costs linked to administrative closure within the 2 months following the project closing date i.e. 30 June 2015, costs to cover participation to the National Infodays (from Sept 2014 to Jan 2015) and, exceptionally, costs to cover participation in the Riga event (6-8 May 2015). Partners are reminded that: shall be considered eligible to be refunded with ERDF only expenditure actually paid and certified by the Partners/Lead Partner‟s institution and included in the certificate and statement of expenditures issued by the Lead Partner within the 2 months following the project closing date i.e. 30 June 2015 (expenditure is considered to be paid when amount is debited from the Partners/Lead Partner‟s institution‟s bank account. The payment is usually proven by the bank statements). Bear in mind: try to have everything (or as much as possible) paid by April because then you have only 2 months to make the closure (which

is one month less than usually) and the certification process can take a long time. Final payment general principles are that: all projects reporting documentation will be reviewed by the JTS within 6 weeks after submission deadline, payment requests require additional checks for official closure by the CA so can take a little longer than usual, LP and PP need to be reactive when responding to queries, aim to have all projects paid at latest end of September 2015 and 10% kept in case of audit – will be paid in early 2016 if not selected for audit. Next Steps/ Deadlines – internal road map: for the period July 2014 – April 2015, the deadline is June th 30 2015. By May 10th upload on PRESAGE the costs paid by 30th April, and by the end of May upload all the remaining costs, not later than the first week of June – at the latest! In case you need a different road map, you agree it with the Lead Partner by email. The deadlines must be respected! Once validated, the Expenditures are in the certification process and can be checked by the FLCs. attention! Your FLC has to select the option "final certificate”. Otherwise the certificate is not valid: the default option is "interim". It is suggested to also agree a road map with FLCs. The FLCs produce the draft version of the certificate (not yet submitted) not

later than 12th June. Partners are asked not to skip this step for this last certificate! After a quick check by Lead Partner, the certificate in three copies - can be signed by your FLC. The Partner will archive 1 copy send only 2 original signed copies of the certificate to the Lead Partner. The Lead Partner must receive two original copies of the certificates by 25th June. Documents to be archived until to 2020 for the Audit are: the contractual documents (including audit trail documents), all the Application Forms submitted, subsidy Contract and Last Amendment, bank account statements, original invoices in order to support all the incurred expenses, time records of personnel working for the project (including timesheets), copies of all contracts with external experts and/or service providers, documents relating to public procurement, information and publicity, proofs for delivery of services and goods (studies, brochures, newsletters, minutes of meetings, participants‟ lists, boarding passes, travel tickets, hotel invoices, etc.), calculation of administrative costs, records of costs included in overheads, etc. These documents can be requested for audit!

APPENDIX 1 PROGRAM OF THE MEETING AND LIST OF PARTICIPANTS

USEAct Thematic Network Final Conference | From Urban Sprawl to Adaptive Reuse: a sustainable future for our cities Naples (Italy) 22nd 23rd 24th April 2015 USEAct Partners

City of Naples (Italy) / Lead Partner Baia Mare Metropolitan Area (Romania) Buckinghamshire Business First (UK) City of Barakaldo (Spain) City of Dublin (Ireland) City of Nitra (Slovak Republic) Østfold County (Norway) Riga Planning Region (Latvia) City of Trieste (Italy) City of Viladecans (Spain) Istanbul BİMTAŞ /IMP (Turkey) - Observer Partner

30 Introduction to the conference “From Urban Sprawl to Adaptive Reuse : a sustainable future for our cities” 1.

Finalizing the UseACt Project

The "final conference" of the UseAct Project is a great occasion to share within the UseAct community, but even more with the "first proposers" of the UseAct project - the Naples Municipality and its citizens - the outcomes of an "intricate although fascinating journey" as the UseAct project was. The broad scope of the UseAct project (the implementation of policies foreducing new urban land use and the sustainable reuse of the existing city) makes it very challenging to provide a comprehensive picture of the activities and an "ultimate" list of outcomes and lesson learned. The difficulty of "summarizing the issues" perfectly reflects the complex morphology of the integrated policies for reducing land-take, and the reuse of the city. Diversity between local settings and partners, have clarified the need to trace an "individual" path towards reducing land use. The idea of "convergence" or "key words" and "certified" models, applicable to the entire European territory, is not suitable for more complex issues.Despite this premise, some common and crosscutting key-messages emerged . They serve for the most part as indicators for strategic reflection, useful to drive on innovation and will be presented during the meeting to be shared. However, the final meeting of the UseAct project is probably a unique occasion to share a unique message: communities and leaders should be aware of the need of radically "innovative approaches" to the "land use" issue, trying, if possible, to bypass the recurrent constraints typical of the "administrative" and "political" level. Innovation formulas can be diverse, from place to place, but, in general, more creativity and an integrated approach seem to be needed. Freeing community and entrepreneurial energy, fighting "commonplaces" in the debate between developers and land-defenders, introducing new "tools" to extend debate outside the closed circles formed by "politicians/planners/developers" focusing on values to be created instead of on "rules" or "common praxis", paying attention to new players (as financing institutions) are just some examples. 2.

The final conference program

During the final conference, city administrators, experts, stakeholders, and Project Partners, will have room to talk to each other to share ideas and knowledge about a specific topic of the USEAct Project, which is at the heart of cities concerns : "From Urban Sprawl to Adaptive Reuse : a sustainable future for our cities”.Two thematic Round-Tables are planned, with the participation of an Italian journalist. Discussion will be started by UseAct partners but local administrators and urban technicians will continue the debate. The First Round Table will be dedicated to the theme"Facing Urban sprawl : What role for Municipalities and other administrative levels, looking forward to "re-growth". The Second Round Table will focus on "Adaptive Reuse of Residential Heritage buildings in the cities. Opportunities and Criticism" A Third Round Table”Managing Authorities and Financial opportunities for the URBACT Local Action Plans” will be dedicated to a strategic aspect, also for the next URBACT III programme: the need to "finance and implement" the Local Action Plans, through the involvement of local managing authorities, which are essential to guarantee successful practical outcomes of the URBACT projects.

22nd April 2015 Steering Group Meeting Venue: “La Bulla” Incubator . Address: via Duca di S. Donato 73, Naples

15.00 - 15.20

Arrival of participants in Naples/registration Meeting point: piazza G. Bovio – Underground station Università (line 1)

15.20 - 15.45

Walking from piazza G. Bovio to “La Bulla“ Incubator

15.45 - 16.15

Internal round table of Project Partners: updating on the dissemination and financial issues at local and project level. Introduction to the seminar. Gaetano Mollura, USEAct LP Coordinator; Anna Arena, Maria Luna Nobile, USEAct LP Team

16.15 - 19.30 Mercato”

“Walkshop” through “Città Bassa District” / LAP site visit 1 –“LAB Porta del

LAP SITE VISIT 1: Visit to the Naples Local Action Plan areas/ LAB Porta del Mercato Meeting with stakeholders contributions: La Bulla Incubator/Piazza Mercato/Canzanella Atelier During the visit: EVENT 1 “Street Game #upgiotto” / piazza Mercato 19.30 Meeting point: bus from piazza Mercato to “Eccellenze Campane” Via Brin, 69 Napoli: reuse and regeneration of a disused industrial building. Case study /visit on the site/ dinner

23rd April 2015 USEAct Final Conference Venue: Complesso Monumentale di San Domenico Maggiore Sala del Capitolo. Address: Vico San Domenico Maggiore 18, Napoli. 8.30 - 9.00 Arrival of participants/registration CONFERENCE OPENING - Plenary session/First Day Cinque

Live sketcher Mary

9.00 - 9.40

Welcome to Italy from Naples, Host City Council and USEAct Lead Partner Luigi de Magistris, Mayor of Naples Attilio Auricchio, Chief of Cabinet Mayor of Naples

9.40 - 9.50

Introduction to the USEAct /URBACT II Final Conference Gaetano Mollura, USEAct Lead Partner Coordinator – City of Naples (Italy) From URBACT II to URBACT III - The European Programme for Urban Sustainable Development Raffaele Barbato - URBACT Senior Network and Capacity Building Officer

9.50 - 10.00

10.00 - 11.15

Round Table 1 Facing Urban sprawl : What role for Municipalities and other administrative levels, looking forward to “re-growth” Moderator Vittorio Torbianelli, Lead Expert USEAct Partner Lectures : Jim Sims, Buckinghamshire Business First (UK) - Local Economic Development and “Building activity” some stories from UK (5 minutes)  Carmine Piscopo, Councillor for Urban Policies, Urban Planning and Common Goods, City of Naples, Italy  Representative of Ministry for Infrastracture and Transport, Italy (tbc)  Gennaro Vitale , ACEN Vice President - Association of Building Contractors of the Province of Naples, Italy  Michelangelo Russo, SIU President, Italian Society of Urban Planners, Italy  Dionisio Vianello, AUDIS Honorary President - Association of Urban Abandoned Areas, Italy

11.15

- 11.45

USEAct LAPs EXHIBITION Carmine Piscopo, Councillor for Urban policies, Urban Planning and Common Goods, City of Naples, Italy

32 11.15 – 11.45 The USEAct Local Action Plans Exhibition Opening, focus on the Naples LAP and Coffee break 11.45 - 13.00

Round Table 2 Adaptive Reuse of Residential Heritage buildings in the cities: Opportunities and Criticism Moderator Roberta Amirante, DiARC – Department of architecture, University of Naples Federico II USEAct Partner Lectures : John O’Hara , Dublin City Council (Ireland), Towards to redeveloping Residential Heritage in Dublin (Ireland) - challenges and tools (5 minutes)  Carmine Piscopo, Councillor for Urban policies, Urban Planning and Common Goods, City of Naples, Italy  Francesco Scoppola, MIBAC - Director – Direz.ne Generale Belle Arti e Paesaggio, Italy  Mario Losasso, DIARC – Director, Department of Architecture, University of Naples Federico II, Italy  Sergio Russo Ermolli, DIARC - Department of Architecture, University of Naples Federico II, Italy  Gennaro Vitale, ACEN Vice President - Association of Building Contractors of the Province of Naples, Italy  Dionisio Vianello, AUDIS Onorary President - Association of Urban Abandoned Areas, Italy

13.00 - 14.00

Lunch Break

14.00 – 15.30 Panel

Focus on the Host City: USEAct/URBACT Naples Local Action Plan / ULSG members Moderator: Vittorio Torbianelli, Lead Expert; Germana Di Falco, Thematic Expert Introduction ( 10 min) Gaetano Mollura, USEAct Lead Partner Coordinator – City of Naples, Italy Cultural Policies and the Local Action Plan Implementation (10min) Gaetano Daniele, Culture Councillor, City of Naples The Mucipalities involved in the Local Action Plan (10 min) Francesco Chirico, President II Municipality /Armando Coppola, President IV

Municipality The “Street Art Game Upgiotto” iniziative in the LAP sites (5 min) Patricia Pulles, #upgiotto Gruppo A12 The Naples Urbact Local Support Group (5 min) Vincenzo Fusco, ULSG coordinator - USEAct Lead Partner Team The voices from the LAB PORTA CAPUANA, some territorial Stakeholders (10 min) : The private investors: Franco Rendano, “I love Porta Capuana” Network The cultural Association: Franco Rotella , “I Carbonari” Association The voices from the LAB PORTA MEDINA,some territorial Stakeholders: (10 minuti) The cultural/social Association: Grazia Pagetta/Giuliana Sandulli, Le Scalze Network The private investor: Cristina Di Stasio, Quartiere Intelligente/Montesanto 3 Association

The voices from the LAB PORTA DEL MERCATO: some territorial Stakeholders (10 minuti) The private investor: Fabrizio Monticelli, Consortium Borgo Orefici The private investor: Claudio Pellone, Consortium Antiche Botteghe Tessili

15.10 – 15 .30

Discussion

15.30 – 15.45

Coffee break

15.45 – 17.15

PRESENTATION OF THE USEACT PARTNERS OUTPUTS IN THREE PANELS Moderator: Vittorio Torbianelli (Lead Partner), Germana Di Falco (Thematic Expert)

15.45 - 16.15

Panel 1 - USEAct Partners - City of Trieste (Italy) Ileana Toscano, Mauro Vivian, - Riga Planning Region (Latvia) Agnese Bīdermane, Uldis Apinis, Rūdolfs Cimdiņš - Buckinghamshire Business First (UK) Jim Sims

16.15 - 16.45

Panel 2 - USEAct Partners - City of Nitra (Slovak Republic) Štefan Lančarič, Mirka Hanáková - Baia Mare Metropolitan Area (Romania) Paul Pece, Marius Ecea - City of Dublin (Ireland) John O’Hara, Kehinde Oluwatosin

16.45 - 17.15

Panel 3 - USEAct Partners - City of Viladecans (Spain) Enric Serra Del Castillo, Marina Jarque, Sonia Dominguez - City of Barakaldo (Spain) Luis Rodríguez O. de Zárate, Alvaro Cerezo Ibarrondo - Østfold County Council (Norway) Linda I. K. Duffy

18.00 - 20.00

“Walkshop” through “Montesanto district”: LAP site vist 2 - LAB Porta Medina

LAP SITE VISIT 2: Visit to the Naples Local Action Plan areas/ LAB Porta Medina Meeting with LAP stakeholders contributions: Montesanto 3 Association -Quartiere intelligente Le Scalze Network – S. Giuseppe delle Scalze a Pontecorvo/ Museo Hermann Nitsch During the visit: EVENT 2 “ Street Game Upgiotto”/ Piazzetta Olivella Dinner and networking with LSGs members at Hermann Nitsch Museum Address: Vico Lungo Pontecorvo 29/d - Napoli

24th April 2015 USEAct Final Conference Venue: Complesso Monumentale di San Domenico Maggiore Sala del Capitolo. Address: Vicolo San Domenico Maggiore 18, Napoli. 8.45 - 9.00

Arrival of participants/registration

CONFERENCE OPENING - Plenary session /Second day Cinque

Live sketcher Mary

9.00 - 9.15

Introducion to the second day conference Gaetano Mollura, USEAct Lead Partner Coordinator – City of Naples - Italy

9.15 - 10.00

The USEAct Final report: outputs and recommendations Vittorio Torbianelli, USEAct Lead Expert; Pauline Geoghegan, USEAct Thematic Expert

10.30 - 10.45

A point of view on the USEAct Network Results Adolf Sotoca, USEAct Ad Hoc expert

10.45 - 11.00

Debates about sustainability in urban development

Ivan Tosics, Thematic Pole Expert, URBACT II

11.00 - 11.45

Coffee break/USEAct Local Action Plan Exhibition break

11.45 - 13.00

Round Table 3 Managing Authorities and Financial opportunities for the URBACT Local Action Plans Moderator: Gaetano Molllura, USEAct LP; Germana Di Falco, USEAct Thematic Expert  Giulio Mastracchio, Campania Region - ERDF Managing Authority, Italy  Maria Margherita Migliaccio, Ministry of Infrastructure and Transport- URBACT Monitoring Committee Member, Italy  Alfonso Sperandeo, Department Member for Labor and Productive Activities, City of Naples, Italy

13.00 - 14.00

Lunch Break

14.00 - 15.15

Networking Networks Moderator: Pauline Geoghegan, USEAct Thematic Expert TUTUR (URBACT II) ,Daniela Patti (LP City of Rome) Levente Polyak(Partner City of Budapest) USER (URBACT II) Fernando Barreiro, Lead Expert SEISMIC (JPI Urban Europe), Gabriele Guazzo, Project Manager, ANCI - National Association of Italian Municipalities

15.15 - 15.30 Nobile

Conclusions / The USEAct Network Experience Naples USEAct LP Team: Gaetano Mollura, Anna Arena ,Vincenzo Fusco, Maria Luna with a special contribution by Alvaro Cerezo (City of Barakaldo)

15.30 – 16.00

SPECIAL ADDITIONAL EVENT : Visit to the exhibition “ Il Bello o il Vero” Neapolitan

Sculture second half XIX Century and early XX Century. 16.00 - 18.00 Capuana”

“Walkshop” through “Porta Capuana District”: visit on the site 3 –“LAB Porta

LAP SITE VISIT 3: Visit to the Naples Local Action Plan areas/LAB Porta Capuana Meeting with stakeholders contributions: Agorà Association archeological Site/I love Porta Capuana Network -Ex Lanificio/Made in Cloister During the visit: EVENT 3 “Street Game #upgiotto”: piazza Enrico de Nicola Visit to the Line 1 Underground Station “piazza Garibaldi” and return to the hotels. 20.30

Meeting point: piazza Bellini / Walking to the USEAct Closure Party: Studio Keller via Foria 106/I, Napoli

URBACT is a European exchange and learning programme

promoting

sustainable

urban

development. It enables cities to work together to develop solutions to major urban challenges, reaffirming the key role they play in facing increasingly complex societal changes. URBACT helps cites to develop pragmatic solutions that are new and sustainable, and

that

integrate

economic,

social

and

environmental dimensions. It enables cities to share good practices and lessons learned with all professionals involved in urban policy throughout Europe. URBACT is 500 cities, 29 countries, and 7,000

active

participants.

URBACT

financed by ERDF and the Member States.

www.urbact.eu/useact

jointly