The relationship City-Port

1
The relationship City-Port

• by
• Roberta Sparvieri
• Forum of Adriatic and Ionian Cities and Towns

2
Relationship City-Port
Institutional Agreements signed between Cities
and Ports

• 5 Institutional Agreements between Cities
  Ports
• 10 partners without any Institutional Agreement
• 3 data missing (not available or irrelevant
  information )

3
City and Port Agreements

• Ancona
• Venice
• Gioia Tauro
• Pescara
• Koper

4
Venice
The City of Venice and the Venice P.A. have
agreed on a general level. According to act n.
84/1994 of the Italian parliament, the port
planning has not to disagree with the city
planning. In addition, since 1994, some
agreements on defined projects have been signed
(e.g. an agreement for the development of the
commercial area in porto marghera, on the
mainland). (Venice P.A.)
5
Ancona
The Municipality of Ancona and the local port
Authority jointly elaborated and approved their
Detailed Plan for the Development of the Port
Area (urban plannig area).
6
Gioia Tauro
They signed an institutional agreement on general
terms the city and the port agree to increase
employment and development in the area. (Gioia
Tauro P.A.)
7
Koper
The Municipality of Koper is 6 owner of the
port. Port and Municipality signed a specific
agreement on the estabilishment of a terminal for
passengers. (Koper)
8
Pescara
The City and the Port set up a Work Group
composed by representatives of others public
corporate bodies and public institutions for the
analysis of the potentialities of the harbour and
the study of its expansion.
9
Common priorities
11 partners claimed common priorities.
4 partners claimed there isnt any common
priority (Gioia Tauro P.A. Venice
P.A.Thessaloniki P.A. and Bar).
4 partners didnt provide any answer (Venice,
Thessaloniki, Vienna, and Koper P.A.).
10
Common priorities

• They are
• congestion of access roads to and from the port
  and city centre (Split P.A. Split and Pescara)
• solution of the problems originated by the port
  traffic -freights and passengers (Ancona and
  Dubrovnik)
• restoration of structural links between the old
  city and the port area (Ancona)
• urban development (Durres)
• land acquisition of further areas for the
  harbour-office, through the recover of old market
  areas (Pescara)
• land use in the port area and Tax regulations
  (Bar P.A.)

11

• the dredging of the canal harbour (Pescara)
• individualization of a site for the deposit of
  the dredged material (Pescara)
• the fifth corridor and a terminal for passangers
  (Koper)
• the EU integration process and EU policies
  (Durres P.A.)
• economic growth and tourist development
  (Dubrovnik)

12
Port-City relationship
2 Municipalities consider it as fairly poor
(Ancona and Split) 3 Port Authorities consider it
as faily poor (Dubrovnik, Split, and Venice) 3
Municipalities consider it it as fair (Bar,
Venice, and Durres) 4 Port Authorities consider
it as fair (Bar, Durres, Gioia Tauro, and
Thessaloniki)
13
Common projects
Only 3 partners developed city-port projects
(Ancona, Venice, and Bar) 8 partners have no
city-port projects 6 partners didnt provide any
answer.
14
Thank you