Guidelines. of the Ministry for Regional Development. for essential principles in preparation, evaluation and approval of an

Transcription

1 Ref. No / Guidelines of the Ministry for Regional Development for essential principles in preparation, evaluation and approval of an Integrated Urban Development Plan (pursuant to Resolution No. 883 of the Government of the Czech Republic, dated 13 August 2007)

2 CONTENTS: 1. Goals and Basic Assumptions of the IUDP 1.1 General Introduction 1.2 Integrated Urban Development Plan Definition 1.3 Target Group of Cities 1.4 Basic Conditions for an IUDP IUDP Contents and Structure IUDP Types and Zone Selection Criteria IUDP Comprehensiveness and Synergy 1.5 IUDP Preparation and Implementation Procedures and Principles Management of IUDP Preparation, Production and Implementation 2. IUDP Evaluation and Approval Procedure 2.1 Invitation for IUDP Submission 2.2 IUDP Evaluation Procedure and Evaluation Method IUDP Evaluation Criteria 2.3 IUDP Approval 3. IUDP Implementation 3.1 Selection and Approval of Projects by the City 3.2 Submission of Projects for the OP 3.3 Implementation of IUDP / Projects Included in the IUDP 4. Monitoring IUDP Implementation 4.1 Submission of Monitoring Reports by the City 4.2 Evaluation of OP MA Monitoring Reports

3 1. Goals and Basic Assumptions of the IUDP 1.1 General Introduction This guideline is issued in order to achieve unified procedures for the preparation, evaluation, approval and implementation of an Integrated Urban Development Plan (IUDP). The IUDP is an effective urban policy tool that ensures coordination of sector and zoning policies in cities. It is also a tool for drawing upon finances from structural funds (SF), whose goal is to ensure synergy between individual interventions supporting designated cities as regional development foci, through the concentration of financial allocations into geographically defined city zones or within the scope of finding solutions to the key issue of city development. During the programme period, the IUDP is one of the most important coordinating mechanisms for intervention of Regional Operating Programmes (ROP), Thematic Operating Programmes (TOP) and the Integrated Operating Programme (IOP), focused on development of cities. Projects included in the IUDP will be supported primarily through the ROP, in the case of residential issues through the IOP, and additionally also from the TOP. This ensures the synergistic effect of individual activities that implement the city's strategic development goals and priorities, and permit the achievement of a significant concentration of investments. In conjunction with the National Strategic Reference Framework for the Czech Republic, activities within the scope of the IUDP will be interconnected. Some examples include development and adaptation of initial education and strengthening of human resources in research and development (Operating Programme "Education for Competitiveness"), attracting and keeping talented and highly qualified workers in urban areas and addressing problems in the area of social integration in deprived city areas (Operating Programme "Human Resources and Employment"), improving the state of individual elements of the environment (OP "Environment"), development of entrepreneurship and supporting business services in cities (OP "Enterprise and Innovation"), development of innovative potential in cities (OP "Research and Development for Innovation"), and improving the physical residential environment (Integrated Operating Programme). The goal of the IUDP is to coordinate activities and focus resources in order to resolve the most serious identified problems and to utilize the economic and other development potential of cities. Its effectiveness lies primarily in meaningful linkages and synergy between individual activities and measures. This integrated approach brings a significant multiplicative effect that mobilizes both public and private resources. 1.2 Integrated Urban Development Plan Definition An Integrated Urban Development Plan is understood to be a set of content-wise and time-wise interrelated actions that are implemented within a defined territory or within the scope of a thematic approach in cities, and whose aim is to achieve a common goal or goals of a city, municipality or locale. They can be supported by one or more operational programmes. An Integrated Urban Development Plan is a fundamental coordinating framework linked to an overall city development vision and strategy, and whose purpose is to identify and resolve problems of developing city areas in relation to using support from structural funds in the programme period. 1.3 Target Group of Cities 1) For cities with a population of over 50,000 and Mladá Boleslav (i.e. cities placed on the list of IUDP bearers within the scope of the ROP), an IUDP is required to be able to receive funds within the scope of the urban priority axis/rop support area.

4 Table: List of IUDP bearers within the scope of the ROP: NUTS II Central Bohemia Southwest Northwest Northeast Southeast Central Moravia Moravia-Silesia Cities Kladno, Mladá Boleslav Plzeň, České Budějovice Ústí nad Labem, Most, Děčín, Teplice, Karlovy Vary, Chomutov Hradec Králové, Liberec, Pardubice Brno, Jihlava, Olomouc, Zlín Ostrava, Havířov, Karviná, Frýdek Místek, Opava 2) IUDP submitters for the 5.2 IOP intervention area can be cities with a population of over 20,000; if they do not submit an IUDP, they will not be able to receive funds from this intervention area. Table: List of IUDP bearers within the scope of the IOP: NUTS II Central Bohemia Southwest Northwest Northeast Southeast Central Moravia Moravia-Silesia Cities Kladno, Mladá Boleslav, Příbram, Kolín, Kutná Hora, České Budějovice, Tábor, Písek, Strakonice, Jindřichův Hradec, Plzeň, Klatovy Karlovy Vary, Sokolov, Děčín, Chomutov, Most, Teplice, Ústí nad Labem, Litvínov, Litoměřice, Jirkov Liberec, Jablonec nad Nisou, Česká Lípa, Hradec Králové, Trutnov, Náchod, Pardubice, Chrudim Jihlava, Třebíč, Havlíčkův Brod, Žďár nad Sázavou, Brno, Znojmo, Hodonín, Břeclav, Vyškov, Blansko Olomouc, Prostějov, Přerov, Šumperk, Zlín, Kroměříž, Vsetín, Valašské Meziříčí, Uherské Hradiště Frýdek Místek, Havířov, Karviná, Opava, Ostrava, Třinec, Orlová, Nový Jičín, Český Těšín, Krnov, Kopřivnice, Bohumín 3) Cities with a population of up to 50,000 can receive OP funds via an IUDP if the rules of that OP permit it. 1.4 Basic Conditions for an IUDP 1) An IUDP is produced by the city that is responsible for its implementation, 2) an IUDP must be based on the city's strategic and development documentation, 3) the city respects the principles of partnership and public participation in all phases of IUDP preparation, production and implementation, 4) an IUDP must be an integrated solution that will achieve synergistic effects, 5) an IUDP must correspond to the contents and structure defined by these guidelines, supply mandatory appendices, and also vouch for the following of principles for the preparation and production of an IUDP, 6) the zone defined for an IUDP must meet the criteria set out by these guidelines, 7) in the case of an IUDP being submitted within the scope of an ROP, the minimum ROP financial share of the entire amount of IUDP funds is 10 million EUR,

5 8) in the case of an IUDP being submitted within the scope of an IOP, the minimum IOP financial share of the entire amount of IUDP funds is 3 million EUR for cities with a population of over 50,000, and 2 million EUR for cities with a population of between 20,000 and 50, IUDP Contents and Structure 1) Presentation of conformance with overarching strategic documentation of the city, including its zoning plan, 2) an analysis of the current economic and social situation of the city, and a SWOT analysis. Based on these, city zones or thematic areas where intervention shall be focused will be identified and defined, 3) justification of the zone/theme selection based on the city's development strategy and analyses of the city's economic and social situation, 4) a description of the zone/theme, an analysis of the socio-economic situation of the zone (theme) territorial analysis, 5) a description of the problems that need to be addressed within the territory, setting of goals and solution strategies, taking into account the priorities of operating programmes, 6) a description of measures and activities that lead to achieving the goals of the IUDP in individual priority areas a list of project aims, including proposals for identification of relevant OP, priority axes and measures, 7) a description of expected results and outputs including relevant indicators, 8) a time schedule and linkages between individual activities, 9) a financial plan, including a description of the manner of financing, which besides interventions from structural funds will also include other financial resources, 10) a description of administrative capacity and IUDP management methods (including an organizational chart), 11) a description of the realization of partnerships, and the participation of partners in the creation and implementation of the IUDP, 12) a description of a transparent method of selection of project aims within the scope of individual activities into the IUDP, 13) proving the city is capable of implementing the IUDP co-financing obligation, 14) influence of the IUDP on horizontal themes, 15) risk analysis, 16) a territorial map of the entire city with clearly marked zones, IUDP Types and Zone Selection Criteria Based on a socio-economic analysis and its priorities, the city defines zones/themes in its IUDP. From this standpoint the following IUDP types exist: 1) IUDP for addressing problems of zones characterized as: a) deprived territories, b) territories for residential intervention within the scope of the 5.2 IOP intervention area, c) territories with a high growth potential. 2) IUDP for addressing a thematic problem. A geographically defined zone for IUDP implementation is a contiguous area within city limits, defined on the basis of the following indices: re 1) a) Criteria for selection of a deprived territory A deprived territory exhibits unfavourable values, in relation to average city values or in a regional context, in at least two of the following indices:

6 1. a high level of poverty and exclusion, 2. a high level of long-term unemployment, 3. unsatisfactory demographic evolution, 4. an especially contaminated environment, 5. a low level of economic activity, 6. a significant number of immigrants, ethnic groups, members of minorities, or refugees, 7. a low standard of education, significant deficiencies in the area of skills, and a large number of pupils that leave school prematurely, 8. high crime and delinquency rates, 9. relatively low real estate values, 10. low energy efficiency of buildings re 1) b) Criteria for the selection of territories for residential intervention within the scope of the 5.2 IOP intervention area If the IUDP includes intervention for the improvement of housing, the criteria in point 1) a) shall apply, but the zone must meet at least three of the criteria listed in Commission Regulation (EC) 1828/2006, Article 47, of which two must be criteria listed under letters a) to h) of this article. re 1) c) Criteria for the selection of territories with a high growth potential A territory with a high growth potential must be characterized by some of the following indices: 1. a high concentration of economic activity 2. a high potential for the stimulation of business and development of services, 3. a high concentration of educational activities, 4. great importance in the transportation system, which enables the mobility of residents and is of benefit to the city's development, 5. great importance in the meeting of health, social, cultural and educational needs of residents increasing the quality of life in cities, 6. prominent application of service and administrative functions, 7. a high potential for innovation, especially in relation to development of the business sector and educational institutions, focused on the mutual synergy of their development. re 2) For a thematically defined IUDP, the city shall choose indices that justify the need for intervention IUDP Comprehensiveness and Synergy An IUDP must concern itself with benefits within the scope of at least 3 of 6 priority areas. For a thematic approach and for an IUDP aimed at the area of 5.2 IOP intervention, the IUDP may concern itself with only one of the priority areas. The following is a list of IUDP priority areas: 1) Economic Development a) support of small and medium-sized businesses and small entrepreneurs including usage of financial engineering tools, b) strengthening research, development and innovation capacities in cities, c) a comprehensive solution for support of innovative businesses and technology transfer,

7 d) support for cooperation between the public and private sectors in research and development e) investment preparation of the territory for business and construction of business real estate f) support for education in relation to employment, g) increasing workforce quality, h) improving conditions for the tourism industry in cities adding cultural, sports and/or entertainment infrastructure in city centres or in relation to existing tourist destinations/historical monuments. 2) Social Integration a) battling high and long-term unemployment, b) better employment levels via increased quality of education and professional preparation, c) preparation of workers for a knowledge-based economy, d) adding capacities and increasing the quality of all stages of the educational infrastructure, e) support for social integration and equal opportunity, f) a service infrastructure for those with physical and orientation disabilities, g) infrastructure for the prevention of socio-pathological phenomena (especially in young people) h) creation of social service systems in cities (tied to community planning) i) building barrier-free cities, creating equal mobility conditions for all, j) measures for the integration of disadvantaged groups of residents into the employment market and into society, k) infrastructure to increase the safety of citizens. 3) The Environment a) protection of the air, b) protection of water, c) protection from noise, d) increasing the quality of the urbanized landscape, e) adding and/or increasing the quality of urban vegetation in cities, f) individual founding and renovation of parks and other permanent non-forest vegetation, g) measures for the protection of nature in cities and their immediate area, h) building waste management systems, i) utilizing renewable energy sources in cities, j) optimizing energy management (increasing energy efficiency), k) anti-flood measures, l) increasing the quality of crisis management and risk prevention. 4) Attractive Cities a) renewal of neglected city areas for business and/or services, b) alteration and renovation of neglected or insufficiently utilized areas, c) increasing the quality of prominent public areas in cities, d) increasing the quality of residential and public service zones, e) building and/or increasing the quality of infrastructure for culture, recreation or tourism, f) protection and renovation of historical monuments and their utilization for culture, recreation or tourism.

8 5) Accessibility and Mobility a) calming traffic, b) increasing safety, increasing the efficiency and quality of public transit in cities, c) support for the use of "soft" forms of transport (bicycle, walking), d) support for ecological and more energy efficient forms of transport, e) building and strengthening integrated public transit systems in cities (intensification and expansion of IPT beyond city limits), f) investments into technical organizational measures for managing urban public transit, g) building transfer terminals, building Park & Go and Park & Ride systems, h) building and/or increasing the capacity of public transit routes connecting to important development areas in cities (residential as well as business), i) building and/or reconstructing technical facilities of public transit companies/organizations, j) connection of new residential, business, cultural or recreational zones via public transit k) addressing parking issues. 6) Public Affairs Governance a) "smart governance" of cities and regions, b) an integrated approach to the sustainable development of cities, c) civic participation, d) networks and the exchange of experiences. 1.5 IUDP Preparation and Implementation Procedures and Principles The city shall set up a managing IUDP committee for the preparation, production and implementation of the IUDP, while respecting the principle of partnership. The city can also set up working groups. Partners can be for example regional government bodies, state government bodies, representatives of business entities, non-profit organizations, universities and important institutions, etc. Potential partners will be approached through a public invitation, by way of an information campaign, or another effective and transparent method. Management of IUDP Preparation, Production and Implementation The city designates a manager for the IUDP, who will be responsible for the administrative arrangement of the preparation, production and implementation of the IUDP. Based on analyses, strategies and other source documents, the city produces its IUDP (selects zone/theme, sets IUDP goals and strategies to achieve them, engages partners, etc.). In a transparent fashion described in the IUDP and while respecting the rules of national and community law, the city then selects project goals that best meet the city's strategic aims and priorities defined in the IUDP. At the same time, the city will pay attention to effective drawing upon of SF, the public interest, preventing unjustified gains, and reaching a synergistic effect. The city shall lead a public discussion of IUDP proposals. It will inform on strategic aims, goals and priorities, and on areas of activities and participation possibilities in the IUDP preparation, production and implementation phases. The IUDP proposal is discussed and approved by city council. 2. IUDP Evaluation and Approval Procedure

9 2.1 Invitation for IUDP Submission A city submits its IUDP to the ROP Managing Authority upon being invited do so. An IUDP within the scope of a 5.2 IOP intervention area is submitted by the city based on an invitation by the IOP MA. The invitation is based on conditions defined by the ROP, or IOP as the case may be, and the IUDP guidelines. The length of time the invitation lasts is set by the ROP MA or the IOP MA. A city can submit one or more IUDP. 2.2 IUDP Evaluation Procedure and Evaluation Method IUDP submitted for the ROP are evaluated and approved by the ROP MA; for IUDP submitted within the scope of a 5.2 IOP intervention area, the IOP MA does so. An IUDP is evaluated as a whole; in this phase individual IUDP subprojects * are not evaluated. An IUDP is evaluated from three viewpoints: 1) assessment of formal aspects, 2) assessment of IUDP acceptability, 3) evaluation of IUDP quality with the help of selection criteria IUDP Evaluation Criteria re 1) Assessment of formal IUDP aspects The assessment of formal aspects is performed by the ROP MA, or IOP MA. Primarily the meeting of the following criteria is checked: a) completeness of the request, b) completeness of the appendices to the request. Incomplete requests shall be returned to the city, which will perform corrections in the given time limit. The failure to meet the formal aspect criterion is reason for the request's refusal. re 2) Assessment of IUDP acceptability An IUDP is acceptable if above all it: a) meets the definition of an IUDP according to these guidelines, b) project aims of the IUDP are in accordance with the goals of affected ROP, TOP and IOP support areas, c) it has no demonstrable negative effect on any of the horizontal themes, d) has a demonstrably complete or predominant effect on the given city, e) shall be implemented in accordance with the programme period time limits, f) is in accordance with relevant legislation of the Czech Republic and the European Union. The failure to meet the acceptability criteria is reason for refusal of an IUDP proposal. * Subprojects are understood to be individual projects included in the IUDP. re 3) Evaluation of IUDP quality with the help of selection criteria

10 IUDP quality is evaluated on the basis of selection criteria approved by individual monitoring committees. After approval by relevant monitoring committees, the selection criteria are published, no later than the announcement of the invitation to submit an IUDP. With the help of evaluation criteria, the following areas are primarily evaluated: a) socioeconomic analysis, b) zone/theme definition, c) accordance of IUDP with overarching documents, d) benefits of IUDP activities for priority areas (3 of 6) comprehensiveness and synergy, e) activity schedule, f) the suitability of expenditures to the proposed IUDP measures and goals, especially taking into account the meeting of indices, g) a description of administrative capacity (organization and management method), h) partnership building method, i) method used by the city to select project aims, j) risk analysis, k) horizontal themes. Based on the results of a point-based evaluation, the IUDP is given a rank. To prevent the dissipation of support provided, only the best IUDP from the competition shall be supported. 2.3 IUDP Approval An IUDP is approved by the managing authority of the relevant ROP (Regional Council Committee) or IOP MA upon recommendation by the evaluation committee. Evaluation committee members are representatives of affected OP, or the Ministry for Regional Development with an advisory vote.

11 3. IUDP Implementation 3.1 Selection and Approval of Projects by the City The city performs a selection of project aims in a transparent way, described in the IUDP, while respecting the rules of national and community law. At the same time, the city will pay attention to effective drawing upon of SF, the public interest, preventing unjustified gains, and reaching a synergistic effect. Selected project aims are refined into subprojects by the city or other recipients (the city's partners). The city confirms that he submitted project is part of and in accordance with the goals and priorities of the IUDP. 3.2 Submission of Projects for the OP After approval of the IUDP, the ROP (or IOP) MA regularly issues an invitation for submission of subprojects, or issues a permanent invitation. Subprojects completing the IUDP are submitted to the ROP (or IOP) Managing Authority on the basis of this invitation. Subprojects aiming for different ROP priority axes will be submitted as individual projects within the scope of standard invitations issued for these ROP priority axes. Subproject recipients can only be entities defined among the recipients in a given support area/rop priority axis. In the case of subprojects submitted by other recipients than the city the bearer of the IUDP, the ROP Managing Authority will ask the city the bearer of the IUDP for confirmation that the project is part of and in accordance with the IUDP. The city, or other partners within the scope of the IUDP, can submit projects included in the IUDP into the TOP as well, within the scope of standard invitations issued by TOP managing authorities for individual TOP support areas. Project recipients within the scope of TOP can only be entities defined among recipients of the given TOP support area. Projects are evaluated according to the rules of individual TOP. Based on Resolution of the Government of the Czech Republic No.883, dated 13 August 2007, regarding the main principles for IUDP preparation, approval and evaluation, projects receive a bonus in the amount of 10%. Projects within the scope of the urban priority axis/rop support area that pass the formal check and acceptability check and meet the minimum required qualitative evaluation will be approved. 3.3 Implementation of IUDP / Projects Included in the IUDP The city and other submitters of subprojects prepare and implement subprojects in accordance with the schedule defined in the IUDP. Using the IUDP management structure and IUDP manager, the city coordinates the activities of individual projects in such a way that the goals of the IUDP are met with maximum utilization of synergistic effects stemming from coordination among projects. The MA of individual OP perform checks and monitoring of individual projects in a standard fashion, and on the basis of proven expenditures provides payments to subproject recipients. 4. Monitoring IUDP Implementation

12 4.1 Submission of Monitoring Reports by the City Using the IUDP management structure and IUDP manager, the city coordinates the implementation of individual projects and the IUDP as a whole. At the same time, it monitors the overall IUDP context and can propose changes in the approved IUDP. Every year, the city produces a monitoring report in which it evaluates the progress of IUDP implementation. The monitoring report shall contain an evaluation of the overall IUDP context within the scope of the city and the region. The report shall contain a summary of approved and implemented projects and the meeting of IUDP conditions including meeting indicators, the schedule, and the financial plan. It will also contain subproject monitoring reports approved by individual managing authorities. Based on the evaluation of progress achieved in IUDP implementation and evaluation of the context within the scope of the city and region, the city can propose changes to the IUDP in the monitoring report. The report is subject to approval by city council. The city submits the report to the relevant ROP MA, IOP MA or TOP MA. 4.2 Evaluation of OP MA Monitoring Reports The OP (or IOP) MA, if needed in conjunction with the MA of relevant OP into which projects from the IUDP aim, performs evaluation of the IUDP implementation. In the event of unsatisfactory progress in IUDP implementation, the appropriate MA reports to other MA and can suspend the income of other projects of the relevant IUDP, or the financing of existing projects, until the city takes corrective action or proposes a suitable solution ensuring the achievement of the goals of the IUDP and relevant subprojects. The city can propose changes to the IUDP if they are in accordance with the conditions and provide to achieve the goals of the IUDP. If the changes are not related to IUDP financial allocations and if it is not a change that changes the nature of the IUDP in a fundamental way, the change can be made directly by the IUDP manager. Changes are subject to approval by the ROP (IOP) MA, if needed in cooperation with the TOP MA.

13 Temporary and Final Provisions The Ministry for Regional Development, in agreement with the MA of affected OP, coordinates a system of selection criteria for IUDP evaluation. In the event that through the discussion of these guidelines with the EC a change takes place, the MRD, in cooperation with the MA of affected OP, shall issue an addendum to this guideline. This guideline comes into force on the day of its signature. Prague,... September 2007 Jiří Čunek 1 st Deputy premier and Minister for Regional Development