natgillin/translations-raw huggingface dataset:
9 Special Report No 6/2011 – Were ERDF co-financed tourism projects effective? 
9 Posebno poročilo št. 6/2011 – Ali so bili turistični projekti, sofinancirani iz ESRR, uspešni?
For the 2000–06 programme period, 7 994 million euro were allocated by the Structural Funds for tourism, including 4 623 million euro from the ERDF on physical investments (e.g. information centres, tourist accommodation, catering facilities). 
Za programsko obdobje 2000–2006 je bilo iz strukturnih skladov dodeljenih 7 994 milijonov EUR za turizem, vključno s 4 623 milijoni EUR iz ESRR za stvarne naložbe (npr. informacijski centri, turistične nastanitve, gostinski lokali).
The remaining 3 371 million euro related to non-physical investments (e.g. development and provision of tourist services, sporting, cultural and leisure activities, heritage), shared services and vocational training and was not included in the scope of this audit.9 Photo 2 — Construction of a new regional theatre (France) © European Union Source: European Court of Auditors, December 2009. 
Preostalih 3 371 milijonov EUR se je nanašalo na nestvarne naložbe (npr. razvoj in zagotavljanje turističnih storitev, športnih, kulturnih, prostočasnih dejavnosti, dediščina), skupne storitve in poklicno usposabljanje. Ta znesek ni bil vključen v obseg te revizije9. Fotografija 2 – Zgradba novega regionalnega gledališča (Francija) © Evropska unija Vir: Evropsko računsko sodišče, december 2009.
9 As of June 2009. 
9 Od junija 2009 naprej.
10 Special Report No 6/2011 – Were ERDF co-financed tourism projects effective? 
10 Posebno poročilo št. 6/2011 – Ali so bili turistični projekti, sofinancirani iz ESRR, uspešni?
11 THE AUDIT AUDIT SCOPE AND OBJECTIVES 9. 
11 REVIZIJA OBSEG IN CILJI REVIZIJE 9.
The Court audited tourism physical investment projects co-financed by the ERDF during the 2000–06 programme period. 
Sodišče je revidiralo projekte stvarnih naložb v turizmu, ki jih je v programskem obdobju 2000–2006 sofinanciral ESRR.
Tens of thousands of projects were co financed in this way, up to a maximum rate of 50 % in Objective 210 regions and 75 % in Objective 111 regions. 
Na ta način je bilo sofinanciranih več deset tisoč projektov, največ do ravni 50 % v regijah Cilja 210 in 75 % v regijah Cilja 111.
The number of operational programmes and amounts allocated per Member State is provided in Annex I. 10. 
Število operativnih programov in zneski, dodeljeni za posamezno državo članico, so navedeni v Prilogi I. 10.
The main objective of the audit was to assess whether tourism projects: (a) delivered the results expected of them; (b) have produced sustainable results; (c) were undertaken as a result of EU support. 
Glavni cilj revizije je bil oceniti, ali: (a) so turistični projekti prinesli pričakovane rezultate, (b) so bili rezultati turističnih projektov trajni, (c) so bili turistični projekti izvedeni kot rezultat podpore EU.
AUDIT METHODOLOGY 11. 
REVIZIJSKA METODOLOGIJA 11.
A survey (see Box 1) of 206 randomly sampled projects was undertaken in order to obtain a representative overview of the situation. 
Sodišče je izvedlo anketo (glej okvir 1) na vzorcu 206 naključno izbranih projektov, da bi dobilo reprezentativni pregled stanja.
The projects surveyed were contained in 26 programmes relevant to nine Member States, in regions which had funds allocated for tourism projects. 
Projekti, vključeni v anketo, so spadali v 26 programov in so se izvajali v devetih državah članicah v regijah, ki so dodelile sredstva za turistične projekte.
Details of the number of projects surveyed and visited, by Member State and operational programme, can be found in Annex II. 
Podrobni podatki o številu projektov, ki so bili vključeni v anketo in so si jih revizorji ogledali, so navedeni po državah članicah in operativnih programih v Prilogi II.
10 Objective 2 supports the economic and social conversion of areas facing structural difficulties. 
10 Cilj 2 podpira ekonomsko in socialno preobrazbo območij s strukturnimi težavami.
11 Objective 1 promotes the development and structural adjustment of regions whose development is lagging behind. 
11 Cilj 1 spodbuja razvoj in strukturno prilagajanje razvojno zaostalih regij.
BOX 1 STRUCTURE OF THE QUESTIONNAIRE USED FOR THE SURVEY General information on the project. 
OKVIR 1 STRUKTURA VPRAŠALNIKA, UPORABLJENEGA ZA ANKETO Splošne informacije o projektu.
Results of the project in terms of: ο direct jobs created or safeguarded ο tourist capacity ο volume of activity ο economic viability ο other. 
Rezultati projekta glede na: ο število ustvarjenih ali ohranjenih neposrednih delovnih mest, ο turistične zmogljivosti, ο obseg dejavnosti, ο rentabilnost, ο drugo.
Influence of EU or other aid on the project Factors for success or otherwise Special Report No 6/2011 – Were ERDF co-financed tourism projects effective? 
Vpliv pomoči EU in druge pomoči na projekt Dejavniki uspeha ali neuspeha Posebno poročilo št. 6/2011 – Ali so bili turistični projekti, sofinancirani iz ESRR, uspešni?
Responses were received from 98,5 % of project promoters surveyed and put into a Court database set up to allow analysis of the replies. 
Sodišče je prejelo odgovore 98,5 % predlagateljev projektov, ki so bili vključeni v anketo, in jih vneslo v podatkovno zbirko, vzpostavljeno za analizo odgovorov.
In order to check the accuracy of the promoters’ replies, the following actions were undertaken: (a) 52 projects (i.e. 25 % of the surveyed projects) from nine regions located in four Member States (France, Germany, Italy and Spain) were visited. (b) Managing authorities were asked to verify the accuracy of promoters’ replies for those projects not visited on the spot. (c) In addition, for all projects in the survey, there was a desk review of key documents obtained from managing authorities, such as grant applications, grant decisions and any existing evaluation reports. 
Za preverjanje točnosti odgovorov predlagateljev projektov so bile izvedene naslednje dejavnosti: (a) revizorji so si ogledali 52 projektov (tj. 25 % projektov, ki so bili vključeni v anketo) iz devetih regij v štirih državah članicah (Francija, Nemčija, Italija in Španija); (b) za projekte, ki si jih revizorji niso ogledali na kraju samem, so morali organi upravljanja potrditi točnost odgovorov predlagateljev projektov; (c) poleg tega je bila pri vseh projektih, vključenih v anketo, pregledana ključna dokumentacija, pridobljena od organov upravljanja, kot so vloge za donacije, sklepi o donacijah in vsa obstoječa poročila o vrednotenju.
Following the above actions, the database was updated with corrected answers. 
Po teh ukrepih je bila podatkovna zbirka posodobljena s popravljenimi odgovori.
The information contained in the database and the evidence from the project visits form the basis for the audit conclusions drawn. 
Informacije v podatkovni zbirki in podatki, pridobljeni z ogledi projektov, so osnova za zaključke revizije.
The audit was carried out between October 2009 and June 2010. 
Revizija je bila izvedena med oktobrom 2009 in junijem 2010.
Photo 3 — Pavement and railings at the coast to access historical site (Italy) © European Union Source: European Court of Auditors, December 2009. 
Fotografija 3 – Tlakovana pot in ograja ob obali, ki vodi do zgodovinskega spomenika (Italija) © Evropska unija Vir: Evropsko računsko sodišče, december 2009.
12 Special Report No 6/2011 – Were ERDF co-financed tourism projects effective? 
12 Posebno poročilo št. 6/2011 – Ali so bili turistični projekti, sofinancirani iz ESRR, uspešni?
THE TYPES OF PROJECT IN THE AUDIT SAMPLE 16. 
VRSTE PROJEKTOV V REVIZIJSKEM VZORCU 16.
The degree of diversity within the 206 projects sampled can be seen in Table 1, according to a classification developed by the Court for this audit. 
Raven raznolikosti 206 projektov v vzorcu glede na klasifikacijo, ki jo je Sodišče pripravilo za to revizijo, je razvidna iz tabele 1.
13 TABLE 1 Port, marina, boat moorings, seafront area Projects No %1 A. Infrastructure / public amenities 54 26 19 9,2 Access, paths, trails, cycle paths, roads, parking 19 9,2 Other 9 4,4 Beach improvement 4 1,9 Landscaping 3 1,5 B. Accommodation and catering 53 26 Hotel 38 18,4 Camp site 4 1,9 Other accommodation and catering 11 5,3 C. Museum and historical monuments 48 23 Museum / cultural site (archaeological centre...) 
13 TABELA 1 Pristanišče, marina, privez za čolne, morska obala Projekti št. v %1 A. Infrastruktura / javna infrastruktura 54 26 19 9,2 Dostop, poti, steze, kolesarske steze, ceste, parkirišča 19 9,2 Drugo 9 4,4 Ureditev plaže 4 1,9 Urejanje krajine 3 1,5 B. Nastanitveni objekti in gostinski lokali 53 26 Hotel 38 18,4 Kamp 4 1,9 Drugi nastanitveni objekti in gostinski lokali 11 5,3 C. Muzeji in zgodovinski spomeniki 48 23 Muzej/kulturni spomenik (arheološko središče ...)
Congress centre, event centre, multi-purpose facility 39 18,9 Historical monument / heritage (church, castle, palace...) 
Kongresno središče, središče za prireditve, večnamenski objekt 39 18,9 Zgodovinski spomenik/dediščina (cerkev, grad, palača ...)
9 4,4 D. Holiday and leisure centre 21 10 Leisure centre (theme park, swimming pool, zoo, aquarium...) 
9 4,4 D. Središča za počitnice in prosti čas 21 10 Središče za prosti čas (tematski park, bazen, živalski vrt, akvarij ...)
15 7,3 Holiday centre (which includes accommodation, catering and activities) 6 2,9 E. Other 30 15 9 4,4 Sports centre 2 1,0 Library, archive 2 1,0 Marketing, tourism centre, info points 6 2,9 Environmental education centre, natural reserve 4 1,9 Other 7 3,4 Total sampled projects 206 100 TYPES OF ACTIVITY RECEIVING ERDF GRANT 1 These figures reflect the percentage, in terms of number of projects, of the different types of activity within the sample (which is also representative of the percentage of ERDF expenditure for each type of activity in the population as a whole). 
15 7,3 Počitniško središče (vključno z nastanitvami, gostinskimi lokali in dejavnostmi) 6 2,9 E. Drugo 30 15 9 4,4 Športno središče 2 1,0 Knjižnica, arhiv 2 1,0 Trženje, turistično središče, informacijske točke 6 2,9 Središče za okoljsko izobraževanje, naravni rezervat 4 1,9 Drugo 7 3,4 Skupaj projektov v vzorcu 206 100 VRSTE DEJAVNOSTI, KI SO PREJELE DONACIJO ESRR 1 Te številke predstavljajo odstotek posameznih vrst dejavnosti, izraženih kot število projektov, v vzorcu (kar je reprezentativno tudi za odstotek odhodkov ESRR za posamezno vrsto dejavnosti v populaciji kot celoti).
Overall, 76 % of ERDF funding was allocated to public promoters. 
Skupaj je bilo 76 % sredstev ESRR dodeljenih predlagateljem projektov v javnem sektorju.
These projects are fully financed by public funds, with EU funding being complemented from national, regional or local authority sources. 
Ti projekti se v celoti financirajo z javnimi sredstvi, pri čemer sredstva EU dopolnjujejo viri nacionalnih, regionalnih ali lokalnih organov.
Figure 1 provides a breakdown of private and public projects according to a classification developed for this audit. 
V diagramu 1 so zasebni in javni projekti razčlenjeni glede na klasifikacijo, ki je bila pripravljena za to revizijo.
Photo 4 — New indoor seawater swimming pool used by tourists and the local population (Germany) © European Union Source: European Court of Auditors, February 2010. 
Fotografija 4 – Nov notranji bazen z morsko vodo, ki ga uporabljajo turisti in lokalni prebivalci (Nemčija) © Evropska unija Vir: Evropsko računsko sodišče, februar 2010.
14 FIGURE 1 100 % 4% 96% 17% 83% 24% 76% 73% 27% 24% 76% OJECTS BY TYPE OF ACTIVITY AND TYPE OF PROMOTER Infrastructure / public amenities (road...) 
14 DIAGRAM 1 100 % 4% 96% 17% 83% 24% 76% 73% 27% 24% 76% PROJEKTI PO VRSTI DEJAVNOSTI IN PREDLAGATELJEV PROJEKTOV Infrastruktura / javni objekti (cesta ...)
Museums and historical monuments Other Holiday and leisure centres Accommodation and catering ALL PROJECTS 0 % Projects run by private promoters 20 % 40 % 60 % Projects run by public promoters 100 % 80 % Special Report No 6/2011 – Were ERDF co-financed tourism projects effective? 15 OBSERVATIONS DID PROJECTS DELIVER THEIR EXPECTED RESULTS? 
Muzeji in zgodovinski spomeniki Drugo Središča za počitnice in prosti čas Nastanitveni objekti in gostinski lokali VSI PROJEKTI 0 % 20 % 40 % 60 % 80 % 100 % Projekti, ki jih vodijo predlagatelji projekta iz zasebnega sektorja Projekti, ki jih vodijo predlagatelji projekta iz javnega sektorja Posebno poročilo št. 6/2011 – Ali so bili turistični projekti, sofinancirani iz ESRR, uspešni?
As mentioned in paragraph 11, a survey was used to assess the extent to which projects had achieved their objectives. 
Kot je omenjeno v odstavku 11, je Sodišče za oceno obsega, v katerem so bili doseženi cilji projektov, uporabilo anketo.
The Court sent a questionnaire to the promoters of 206 projects, who had received in total 369 million euro from EU funds (just under one third of the total cost of the projects concerned). 
Sodišče je poslalo vprašalnike predlagateljem 206 projektov, ki so skupaj prejeli 369 milijonov EUR iz skladov EU (malo manj kot tretjina skupnih stroškov teh projektov).
The survey measured increases in tourism activity and capacity, as well as direct jobs created or maintained. 
Z anketo se je merilo povečanje turistične dejavnosti in zmogljivosti ter povečanje števila ustvarjenih ali ohranjenih neposrednih delovnih mest.
The Court examined funding applications and grant decisions which provide a description of what project promoters intend to achieve through their projects. 
Sodišče je pregledalo vloge za financiranje in sklepe o donacijah, v katerih so opisani cilji, ki jih želijo s projekti doseči njihovi predlagatelji.
The results indicated that 73 % of projects contributed to an increase in the annual volume of tourism, 74 % increased the capacity of an area to receive tourists and 58 % of the projects created or preserved direct jobs. 
Rezultati so pokazali, da je 73 % projektov prispevalo k povečanju letnega obsega turizma, 74 % jih je povečalo zmogljivosti nekega območja za sprejem turistov, 58 % pa jih je ustvarilo ali ohranilo neposredna delovna mesta.
44 % of projects had results in all three categories, whereas 8 % had results outside of the three categories mentioned. 
44 % projektov je dalo rezultate v vseh treh kategorijah, 8 % pa zunaj teh treh kategorij.
Photo 5 — Pathway designed for the use of walkers and cyclists (France) © European Union Source: European Court of Auditors, December 2009. Special Report No 6/2011 – Were ERDF co-financed tourism projects effective? 
Fotografija 5 – Sprehajalna in kolesarska pot (Francija) © Evropska unija Vir: Evropsko računsko sodišče, december 2009. Posebno poročilo št. 6/2011 – Ali so bili turistični projekti, sofinancirani iz ESRR, uspešni?
16 INCREASE IN TOURISM ACTIVITY 20. 
16 POVEČANJE TURISTIČNE DEJAVNOSTI 20.
An increase in tourism will normally have a positive impact on a local economy and on indirect employment, leading to the generation of economic growth. 
Rast turizma ima običajno pozitiven učinek na lokalno gospodarstvo in posredno zaposlovanje, kar vodi do gospodarske rasti.
The audit attempted to measure the volume of tourism activity directly generated by projects. 
Pri reviziji se je poskušalo izmeriti obseg turističnih dejavnosti, ki so neposreden rezultat projektov.
Volume can be expressed in a variety of ways, such as beds occupied in hotels, nights stayed on campsites, numbers of visitors for museums, etc. 21. 
Obseg se lahko izrazi na različne načine: kot zasedenost ležišč v hotelih, število nočitev v kampih, število obiskovalcev v muzejih itn. 21.
142 projects (70 %) included an objective of increasing tourism activity as part of their grant application and 111 of these projects were successful in doing this. 
142 projektov (70 %) je v svoje vloge za donacijo vključilo cilj povečanja turistične dejavnosti in 111 projektov je bilo pri tem uspešnih.
A further 34 projects increased activity without having set this as an objective, giving an overall total of 145 projects adding to tourist activity. 
Dodatnih 34 projektov je povečalo dejavnost, ne da bi si to zastavili kot cilj. Skupaj je tako 145 projektov povečalo turistično dejavnost.
In general, grants were paid whether objectives were achieved or not and the payment of the grant was only conditional on results for six of the projects sampled, five of which achieved their objectives. 
Na splošno so bile donacije izplačane ne glede na to, ali so bili cilji doseženi ali ne. Izplačilo donacije je bilo vezano na doseganje rezultatov le pri šestih projektih v vzorcu, od katerih jih je pet doseglo cilje.
A project in Germany to develop a seawater bath facility which formerly had one pool and one sauna added a wellness centre with additional saunas, an outdoor pool and other facilities (Photo 4).The total cost of the project was 16,9 million euro with 41 % coming from the ERDF. 
S projektom razvoja kopališkega objekta z morsko vodo v Nemčiji, ki je imel prej en bazen in eno savno, so objektu dodali center za zdravje in dobro počutje z dodatnimi savnami, zunanjim bazenom in drugimi objekti (fotografija 4).
The annual number of visitors rose from 92 000 to 129 000 after its completion. 
Po dokončanju objekta se je letno število obiskovalcev povečalo z 92 000 na 129 000.
A public project in France consisted in the modification of an old disused railway to create 26 km of lanes for the use of walkers and cyclists (Photo 5). 
Javni projekt v Franciji je vključeval spremembo stare odslužene železniške proge v 26-kilometrsko sprehajalno in kolesarsko pot (fotografija 5).
The number of users rose from zero in 2003 to 23 000 in 2008. 
Število uporabnikov je zrast-lo z nič leta 2003 na 23 000 leta 2008.
An electronic counting system registers use and numbers are submitted regularly to the local tourism office. 
Elektronski sistem za štetje beleži število uporabnikov, podatki pa se redno pošiljajo lokalnemu turističnemu uradu.
The total cost of the project was 1,6 million euro with 39 % coming from the ERDF. Special Report No 6/2011 – Were ERDF co-financed tourism projects effective? 
Skupni stroški projekta so znašali 1,6 milijona EUR, od katerih jih je bilo 39 % kritih iz sredstev ESRR. Posebno poročilo št. 6/2011 – Ali so bili turistični projekti, sofinancirani iz ESRR, uspešni?
Another German project to create a wooden bridge on a river to connect cycling and walking paths and build a dock for canoes (Photo 6) was successfully completed and has encouraged small cultural events to take place in the vicinity of the bridge, such as coffee afternoons in an old renovated barn. 
Drugi nemški projekt za izgradnjo lesenega mostu čez reko za povezavo kolesarskih in sprehajalnih stez ter priveza za kanuje (fotografija 6) je bil uspešno dokončan in je spodbudil organizacijo manjših kulturnih dogodkov v bližini mostu, npr. družabnih popoldnevov ob kavi v starem obnovljenem sked-nju.
However, its exact level of success remains unknown as there is no measurement of the level of activity resulting from this project. 
Vendar natančna raven uspešnosti še ni znana, ker se ne meri raven dejavnosti, ki so posledica tega projekta.
The total cost of the project was 139 426 euro with 49 % coming from the ERDF. 
Skupni stroški projekta so znašali 139 426 EUR, od katerih jih je bilo 49 % kritih iz sredstev ESRR.
A French project to purchase and refurbish a traditional house, converting it into a wine museum, was located in a historic village (Photo 7). 
Francoski projekt nakupa in obnove tradicionalne hiše in njenega preoblikovanja v vinski muzej se je izvajal v zgodovinsko zaščiteni vasi (fotografija 7).
The museum attracted 4 000 visitors in its first year but the number of vistors has since decreased to half of this and consequently it is now only open during the summer season. 
Muzej je v prvem letu privabil 4 000 obiskovalcev, vendar se je število obiskovalcev od takrat zmanjšalo za polovico, zato je muzej zdaj odprt samo še poleti.
When open, the museum plays a role in the promotion of regional produce and viticulture in general. 
Kadar je odprt, ima pomembno vlogo pri promociji regionalnih pridelkov in vinogradništva na splošno.
The total cost of the project was 0,8 million euro with 42 % coming from the ERDF. 
Skupni stroški projekta so znašali 0,8 milijona EUR, od katerega jih je bilo 42 % kritih iz sredstev ESRR.
Photo 6 — Wooden bridge on a river to connect cycling and walking paths and a dock for canoes (Germany) © European Union Source: European Court of Auditors, December 2009. 
Fotografija 6 – Lesen most čez reko za povezavo kolesarskih in sprehajalnih stez ter privez za kanuje (Nemčija) © Evropska unija Vir: Evropsko računsko sodišče, december 2009.
17 Special Report No 6/2011 – Were ERDF co-financed tourism projects effective? 
17 Posebno poročilo št. 6/2011 – Ali so bili turistični projekti, sofinancirani iz ESRR, uspešni?
18 ADDITIONAL TOURISM CAPACITY CREATED 26. 
18 USTVARJENE DODATNE TURISTIČNE ZMOGLJIVOSTI 26.
Many tourism projects are set up to augment capacity and thereby facilitate increases in tourism activity. 
Namen mnogih turističnih projektov je povečati zmogljivosti in s tem prispevati k povečanju turističnih dejavnosti.
Such increases directly created by a project can be expressed in a large variety of ways, such as extra rooms, beds (for hotels), linear kilometres (pathways and cycle lanes etc.), camping places, mooring places and seats (for theatres and catering facilities). 
Zmogljivosti, ki so neposreden rezultat projekta, so lahko zelo različne, npr. dodatne sobe, ležišča (v hotelih), dolžinski kilometri (poti, kolesarske steze itn.), število prostorov v kampih, privezi, sedeži (v gledališčih in gostinskih lokalih).
The 120 projects which had the stated objective of increasing tourism capacity achieved 93 % of their targeted increase. 
Pri 120 projektih, pri katerih je bilo kot cilj navedeno povečanje turistične zmogljivosti, je bilo doseženih 93 % želenega povečanja.
In addition to these, 32 projects did not have an objective in terms of capacity, but increased it anyway. 
Poleg tega so bile zmogljivosti povečane tudi pri 32 projektih, pri katerih se cilji niso nanašali na zmogljivosti.
One project in Spain had the objective of creating 30 double rooms as a former monastery was converted into a hotel (Photo 8). 
Cilj nekega projekta v Španiji je bil pridobiti 30 dvopos-teljnih sob s preureditvijo nekdanjega samostana v hotel (fotografija 8).
The overriding objective was to preserve a building with some importance to the architectural heritage of the locality and the local authority decided to put it to touristic use. 
Glavni cilj je bil zaščititi zgradbo, ki je pomemben del arhitekturne dediščine tega kraja. Lokalna oblast je sklenila, naj se zgradba uporablja za turizem.
In addition 20 direct jobs were created in the process. 
Poleg tega je bilo tako ustvarjenih 20 neposrednih delovnih mest.
The total cost of the project was 3,6 million euro with 75 % coming from the ERDF. 
Skupni stroški projekta so znašali 3,6 milijona EUR, od katerih jih je bilo 75 % kritih iz sredstev ESRR.
Not all projects had the objective of creating new capacity and some projects involved the refurbishment of what already existed. 
Ustvarjanje novih zmogljivosti pa ni bil cilj vseh projektov. Nekateri projekti so bili namenjeni obnovi že obstoječih zmogljivosti.
One French project consisted of the renovation of rooms in an existing hotel thereby preserving the existing level of activity (4 200 nights/year) and also maintaining 1,2 jobs. 
Neki francoski projekt je vključeval prenovo sob v obstoječem hotelu, s čimer sta bila ohranjena obseg dejavnosti (4 200 nočitev na leto) ter 1,2 delovnega mesta.
The total cost of the project was 253 254 euro with 14 % coming from the ERDF. 
Skupni stroški projekta so znašali 253 254 EUR, od katerih jih je bilo 14 % kritih iz sredstev ESRR.
Other projects concentrated on improving the infrastructural capacity of an area. 
Drugi projekti so se osredotočili na izboljšanje infrastrukture nekega območja.
In an Italian coastal region, a public project set out to create 37 km of road and 9 km of foot/cycle path, in addition to parking and rest areas and some panoramic viewing points. 
Na italijanskem obalnem območju je bil javni projekt namenjen izgradnji 37 km ceste, 9 km sprehajalnih in kolesarskih stez ter parkirišč, počivališč in razglednih točk.