Discussion meetings Workshop 1. How do we get to Kullaberg? Analysis of traffic, parking places and accessibility

Kullaberg Nature Reserve Sustainable Mobility Plan

Kullaberg Nature Reserve

Länsstyrelsen Skåne

21 September 2017

INDEX

INTRODUCTION ...................................................................................................................... 3

WORKSHOP RESULTS .......................................................................................................... 3

DETAILED CONTRIBUTIONS OF PARTICIPANTS ........................................................... 5

COMMENTS TOWARDS THE ENTRANCE DESIGNS. .................................................... 9

LIST OF PARTICIPANTS ..................................................................................................... 10

PRESENTATION .................................................................................................................... 11

Introduction

The meeting started with a brief introduction done by Daniel Åberg, site manager of Kullaberg Nature Reserve. He welcomed the participants and introduced the consultant team from Gea 21, which is developing the Sustainable Mobility Plan for Kullaberg Nature Reserve.

Daniel Martínez Suárez from Gea 21, made a presentation of the proposals developed to reorganize the mobility inside Kullaberg Nature Reserve. These proposals are based on the results of studies and data collected during the past few years. The presentation is attached to this document.

After this presentation the participants were divided in two groups and were asked to analyse two different questions:

x The necessity to establish a parking and service area (Kullaberg Gate) outside Kullaberg.

x The intensity of regulations. How much should the traffic in Kullaberg be reduced.

Both groups had papers to write down their opinions and observations, and a panel to organize all these papers to present their analysis.

At the end of the meeting, Laura Parsons, landscape architect of Kullaberg Nature Reserve, made a presentation of the sketches and proposals to redesign the entrance to the west side of the Nature Reserve.

Workshop results

Question 1: What is the best way to apply the regulation measures?

Is a well-organized and designed Parking and service area (Kullaberg Gate) needed to take cars out of the Reserve and organize the access.

SUMMARY

All the members of the group prefer alternative 2, Regulation with Kullaberg Gate.

They gave their arguments to support this option. According to their opinion, such area is needed to improve the traffic conditions in Kullaberg and Mölle.

They also gave some suggestions for the services in the service area and described some problems that must be addressed regarding the regulation of the access and the impacts of bus traffic.

Question 2: Thinking in long term Scenarios for Kullaberg access in peak period:

How intense should be the regulation to reduce the number of cars driving into Kullaberg

SUMMARY

All the participants agreed that a significant reduction of the number of cars is desirable, they emphasized the risk of a soft regulation being not enough to solve the problems.

The reasons they give are related to the conservation of the nature in the area, the wellbeing of the neighbours and the quality of the visitors experience.

Some of the participants think that the option of restricting the cars in Kullaberg is the best in the long term, but some others alert that the access system has to be very well managed, and even then it could lead to a reduction of the number of visitors.

Detailed contributions of participants

Between quotation marks are the transcriptions of the comments of the participants

Question 1: What is the best way to apply the regulation measures?

Choose the best and the worse of the two alternatives, give reasons.

– Alternative 1. Without Kullaberg Gate.

– Alternative 2. With Kullaberg Gate.

Reasons to choose Alternative 2, Regulation with KG:

Reasons concerning Mölle:

x “Less cars through Mölle” x “Less traffic leads to more nice experience in Mölle and Nature

Reserve”

Reasons concerning the Reserve:

x “It´s better for the environment of Kullaberg” x “Less traffic creates a better environment and visit”

Recommendations about the service Area:

x “Access to toilets” x “Lot of information, maybe Naturum” x “Bus will increase availability, understanding” x “Possible for companies in Mölle to “salu form” on a sign at the

place” x “Possibility to move Naturum to Kullaberg Gate and create a new

hot spot there” x “Move a lot of Picnic, BBQ, ice cream visits to KG instead of the

nature reserve. Less garbage and littering” x “Service and Information of how you can walk or bike where the bus

starts” x “Good services at the bus stop and protected parking site” x “Possibility to give the visitors Info on the bus. Give them new

impulses”

Reasons to avoid Alternative 1

x “Too many cars at Kullaberg” x “People parking in Mölle”

Problems with Kullaberg Gate:

x “Kullaberg Gate doesn´t reduce “light seeing traffic” x “Will cause parking chaos at streets closed to the Nature Reserve” x “How to “get rid of” the cars that just drive up and back or stop for

5 minutes…Will parking fee solve this?” x “With bus: If no extra values on the bus, there is a risk they will

take the car. Do the inhabitants accept a higher bus traffic?” x “You must have a system to select cars permitted to access Mölle

and/or Kullaberg”

Question 2: Thinking in long term Scenarios for Kullaberg access in peak period:

Choose the best and the worse alternative, give reasons.

x Alternative 1: Minimum reduction of cars. 20% x A significant reduction of cars in Kullaberg. 50% x Kullaberg without cars (only special groups). 90%

1. Minimum reduction of cars 20%. Think to control the overflow of cars,

preventing the damage to the nature resources.

Arguments on favour: none

Arguments against:

1. There will still be impacts on the environment and the life quality of Mölle population.

x “Too few, not enough. Impacts” x “Will still be too many cars” x “Don´t solve any problem” x “All problems we have today will not be solved”

2. The singularity of the place may be lost. x “We risk to lose the uniqueness of Kullaberg”

3. Is better not to do anything. x “Prefer not regulate cars, not enough with 20%”

2. Significant reduction of cars 50%. Reduce the impacts of traffic over

the environment and the life quality of local population. Increase the quality of the visit.

Arguments on favour:

2. Better environmental conditions.

x “Less cars, more animals?” x “Better for nature” x 2 x “Better for nature”, the price should be higher to discourage people

to use the car. x “Better for the environment in Nature Reserve”

3. Better quality visit.

x “Better experience for the visitors” x 3 x “Safer and more quiet for the visitors” x “Quieter in the Reserve”

4. Improve the urban quality in Mölle. x “Quieter in Mölle” x “Better for Traffic in Mölle” x “Safer and more quiet for the residents in Mölle”

Arguments against: None

3. Access restricted, Reduction of a 90%. Remove the problems caused by traffic. Only people using businesses and services inside the reserve and people with impaired mobility will be able to access by car.

Arguments in favour:

1. Better environmental conditions x “Less littering on the nature reserve” x “Taking good care of nature and the environment” x “Better for Nature” x “Reduce the kind of people only interested in speeding and that

don´t bother about the environment” x “Best for environment, safety and health”

2. Improve the urban quality in Mölle. x “Better for traffic” x “Better for Mölle neighbours “

3. “Free bus service is enough to serve everyone”

Arguments against:

x “Less visitors” x “Big impact for Mölle if not managed properly”.

Other Proposals:

x The regulation of cars should be gradual: x “A significant reduction of car as step 1 and Kullaberg without cars

as step 2”.

x “Remove the big Parking lot before the Lighthouse” x “Set a fee for the cars to park in Mölle” x “Charging the cars to access to Kullaberg and not only to park” x “Allow parking in Mölle only in marked spaces”

Comments towards the entrance designs.

Entrance from Mölle:

x Important for changing the perception of the visitor as they arrive that they need to slow down and that it is not just a road for car users but also cyclists and hikers.

x In general people were more in favour of the naturalistic look, which they felt was better achieved with the grus or gatsien.

x The gatsien is more controlled and better for maintenance, plus it is reminiscent of Skåne.

x Narrowing the road is a good idea to reduce the car dominance and slow people down.

x Feeling that today the entrance is not very welcoming and so the new design and signage would change that and be a welcome improvement.

List of participants

Emma Sandler Berlin Länsstyrelsen, Söderåsen NP

Kristofer Håkansson Möllebo

Maria Fahlström-Andersson Privat, boende på Kullaberg

Mats Jönsson Mölle By- och Kulturförening

Peter Nyström Höganäs kommun

Peter Reelfs Hållbarhetskonsult

Peter Tublén Mölle Golfklubb

Stefan Alexandersson Sport & Health promotion AB

Tina Rydberg Mölle kultur och byförening

Åsa Lundqvist Peyron Höganäs kommun

Maja Arborelius Länsstyrelsen, Praktik

Anta Werner Privat

Marie-Louise Lindström Privat

Magnus Lindström Privat

Arthur Olin Privat

Göran Cewers Möllebo

Petruska Rogmark Möllebo

Ros-Mari Paulsson Kullaledens Vänner

Jimena Castillo Länsstyrelsen Skåne/KNR

Daniel Åberg Länsstyrelsen Skåne/KNR

Laura Parsons Länsstyrelsen Skåne/KNR

Juan José Martínez Marín Consultant GEA 21

Daniel Martínez Suárez Consultant GEA 21

Presentation

Kullaberg Nature Reserve

Sustainable Mobility Plan Workshop 1. How to access Kullaberg.

Presentation notes. September 21, 2017

Following the indications of the European Charter for Sustainable Tourism, in this Plan it must be carefully defined, according to sustainability principles, the organization of the mobility inside Kullaberg Nature Reserve, as well as the access conditions to it.

PEAK 1.400-1.600

cars/day

PEAK PERIOD 1 july to 15 august

0

200

400

600

800

1000

1200

1400

1600

1800

Cars per day April-September 2017 West Kullaberg

0

200

400

600

800

1000

1200

1400

1600

July August

20162017

Average number of cars in July and August 2016-2017

1.667 cars 15 July 2017

Kullaberg Nature Reserve. Mobility Conflicts.

CONFLICTS IN PEAK PERIOD With residents in Mölle:

Noise. Traffic problems. Too many cars moving and parking in Mölle. Pedestrians and bikes going along or crossing the street.

With the preservation of the NR:

Impacts in the lichens (Lars Salomon_2016), Impacts on the paths. Ecological carrying capacity of the trails in Kullaberg nature reserve (Sweden) (Perez & Sagra 2016). Seasonal parking areas

The quality of the visit, for everyone, loses value because of:

Too many cars moving Too many cars in the parking areas. Cars incorrectly parked outside authorized areas.

THE POSITION OF THE NATURE RESERVE MANAGERS • It´s necessary to regulate the access of cars. In order to

preserve the NR and also to have a better quality visit, it´s needed to ensure a progressive decrease of the amount of cars in Kullaberg West during the peak season.

• The managers want to ensure the public use of the NR providing alternative access modes.

• Every measure adopted must be conceived in order to do not

cause trouble or even to improve the urban quality in Mölle.

IDEAS TO REDUCE THE CONFLICTS: 1. SERVICE AND PARKING AREA OUT OF NR. “KULLABERG GATE”. 2. PEDESTRIAN ROUTES TO GET INSIDE THE RESERVE FROM THIS POINT. 3. DESIGN AND PROMOTION OF BUS SERVICES.

4. DESIGN AND PROMOTION OF BIKE ROUTES TO GET IN AND ACROSS THE RESERVE.

5. ACCESS RESTRICTION POLICIES INCLUDING PRICING SCHEMES. Introducing a fee for cars entering the NR in peak season.

• Different places must be studied.

• Visit to the Nature Reserve starts here.

• The visitors will receive information about the different ways to access the NR and how to enjoy a better experience combining walking trails and bus and visiting west and east Kullaberg.

• They will be encouraged to leave the car at this point.

1. SERVICE AND PARKING AREA. KULLABERG GATE (I)

1. SERVICE AND PARKING AREA. KULLABERG GATE (III)

How large? 7.500 m2 Parking area. (3.000 m2) 2.500 m2 Service area. (1.000 m2)

Where? Before Mölle Easy connection with Nature Reserve

Possible services? Bus stop Tourist services Information Toilets Entrance tickets Coffe shop (opt)

2. PEDESTRIAN ROUTES TO GET INSIDE THE AREA FROM THIS POINT.

3. DESIGN AND PROMOTION OF BUS SERVICES.

4. DESIGN AND PROMOTION OF BIKE ROUTES TO GET IN AND ACROSS THE RESERVE.

5. ACCESS WITH CARS INTO THE NR REGULATION POLICIES Leaving your car in Kullaberg Gate is a good option for the quality of the visit and also to preserve the environment. Visitors can choose to access into the NR by car. But they will be required to pay. The visitor must perceive that acceding by car is the most expensive alternative

• Revenues from the pricing schemes should be applied to support buses services.

• Parking in Kullaberg Gate and bus must be free.

EXPECTED RESULTS OF REGULATION APLICATION OF ENTRANCE REGULATION:

• Environmental advantages in NR • Qualified visit • A new kind of visitor • Less cars throughout Mölle and in NR • Good conditions to visit walking + bus

ALTERNATIVE 1. WITHOUT KULLABERG GATE

• Many cars try to park in Mölle and surroundings

ALTERNATIVE 2. WITH KULLABERG GATE • Kullaberg Gate is essential. 150 (300) cars use it • Easy access to bus service • Better conditions in Mölle public areas

Agreement between stakeholders is needed. Impacts and opportunities for Mölle must be studied.

What would the visitors do?

We asked them: Stated preference survey.

It is wanted to reduce the entrance of cars in Kullaberg west significantly by regulating the traffic access during the Peak Period. For this goal, a free parking lot in Mölle

should be provided, with pedestrian paths and a Bus service every 15-20 minutes to get into the Reserve.

Which option would you choose?

□ OPTION 1.- ACCEDING WITH THE CAR TO KULLABERG AND PAYING 50 KR FOR IT.

□ OPTION 2.- LEAVING THE CAR IN MOLLE, IN A FREE P AND ACCESS TO KULLABERG WEST WITH ALTERNATIVE MODES

□ OPTION 3.- □ NO, thanks, I will not come or return in Low Season.

3%

44%

53%

0%

20%

40%

60%

80%

100%

120%If they have to pay 50 KR

Leave the car in aparking area

Enter Kullaberg NR bycar

Wouldn´t come

What would the visitors do?

They would access using:

35%

87%

66%

20%

29%

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%

Walking Free bus Combining Own Bike Rent bike

What would the visitors do?

If they have to pay a higher fee…

3% 8%

12% 13%

44%

24% 7% 1%

53%

68%

81% 86%

0%

20%

40%

60%

80%

100%

120%

If they have to pay 50KR If they have to pay 100 KR If they have to pay 150 KR RESTRICTED

Leave the car ina parking area

Enter KullabergNR by car

Wouldn´t come

What would the visitors do?

They perceive too many cars

Most visitors prefer to have a regulation.

They think it is a problem for the environment.

Most visitors prefer to have a regulation.

Most visitors prefer to have a regulation.

Q1. What is the best way to apply the regulation measures? – Alternative 1. Without Kullaberg Gate. – Alternative 2. With Kullaberg Gate.

Alternative 2 is more complex. It requires commitment and institutional and citizen participation.

What makes alternative 2 preferable is that without Kullaberg Gate, access

restriction in Kullaberg NR can cause problems in Mölle.

Questions to be analyzed in this workshop

Questions to be analyzed in this workshop

Q1. Could Kullaberg Gate be an opportunity to increase the urban quality in Mölle?

Q2. Thinking in long term Scenarios for Kullaberg access in peak period:

• Minimum reduction of cars. 20% • A significant reduction of cars in Kullaberg. 50% • Kullaberg without cars (only special groups). 90%

Questions to be analyzed in this workshop

Thank you very much for your attention