Are European cities becoming similar?

The paper discusses city specific development patterns to overcome todays transport problems. The results are based on recent andongoing research activities at TUW-IVV and ITS. At previous CORP-conferences, we presented the basics and the development of aplanning support tool to find optimal policy packages in urban transport and land use (Emberger, 1998), (Pfaffenbichler, Emberger, 2001). The core of this planning support tool is a dynamic land use and transport interaction model. This model, which we refer to as Sketch Planning Model (SPM), is embedded into an appraisal and optimisation framework. The SPM and this framework were developed in the recently finished European Union funded research project PROSPECTS1. Case studies with this planning supporttool were performed within PROSPECTS for the cities Edinburgh, Helsinki, Madrid, Oslo, Stockholm and Vienna. These cities are principally comparable in regards of their status (capitals and major business and education centres), but different in their size, population density, transport system etc. A set of policy instruments like public transport improvements, car traffic restrictions, and infrastructure provision was available to formulate strategies to reduce negative impacts of transport and to increase welfare. The overall objective was a sustainable development of the city. Although the instruments and the goals are similar in all investigatedcites, different solutions were adequate. The solutions vary in regard of spatial implementation, implementation time and level of implementation. The paper will highlight some reasons for the different development paths of the cities. As well the comparison of the do nothing scenario as the comparison of the most feasible policy strategies shows that European cities are different, need different solutions for their problems and will stay different in the future