Issuu on Google+


THE BORDER REGIME FOR JERUSALEM IN PEACE An Israeli - Palestinian proposal

Contributors: Research and Concept: SAYA - Arch. Yehuda Greenfield-Gilat, Arch. Karen Lee Bar-Sinai and Chen Farkas ECPD

www.sayarch.com

ECPD-Ramallah

Graphic Consultant: Harel Schreiber Prepared for: ECF (Economic Cooperation Foundation), Tel Aviv PDF (Peace and Democracy Forum), Jerusalem Funded by: Ministry of Foreign Affairs of Denmark, 2010


CONTENT

Why a Tourism Based Border Regime? I. Introduction Preface Scope Context Tourism Changing Trends The Financial Potential of Tourism Resolution Context From “Jerusalem” to West Jerusalem (“Yerushalaim”) and East Jerusalem (“Al-Quds”) II. The Spatial Structure Of Tourism In Jerusalem Main Touristic Sites Areas of Interest by Religion Tourism Facilities and Infrastructure Superimposition III. A Tourism Based Border Regime Crossing Facilities Layout Main Routes of Access Crossing Facilities Operation Old City Gates: Operation and Security

6

10 10 12 16 31 34

36

44 48 54 60

64 66 68 69


IV. Tourism Routes And Scenarios Visitors - Types and Scenarios Routes and Patterns of Visit in Jerusalem V. Tourist Traffic At Border Crossings Unknown Future Volumes Estimating Volumes Volume Over Time Volume in Crossings VI. Accompanying Infrastructure & Policy A Border Tourism Coordination Authority The�Jerusalem Pass� The Shuttle Service Parking Facilities Tourism Oriented Urban Development VII. Summary How Will a Tourist Cross Jerusalem? Conclusions and Recommendations Issues for Further Discussion

74 82

100 101 120 122

126 127 128 131 132

138 140 143


6-

7 6

WHY A TOURISM BASED BORDER REGIME? This project is based on the assumption of an overall final status agreement between Palestinians and Israelis. West Jerusalem (Yerushalaim) and East Jerusalem (Al-Quds) would serve as the hearts and capitals of these states respectively. Therefore, Jerusalem would undergo a territorial and sovereignty division in line with proposals such as the Geneva Accord. Upon separation, a crucial need for a functional integration between the city parts will arise. A well-designed system of connections can serve as the foundation of a sustainable transformation period. A high level of cooperation and easy flow through the border crossings would marginalize the negative effects of territorial separation, and assist maintaining the city’s soul as a common holy place. The basic assumption of this study is that despite division of sovereignty in the city, many mechanisms of former Jerusalem (such as movement of labor, goods, infrastructure, etc.) will continue to function in an interconnected fashion, hence requiring an adaptive mediating system to keep them in place and maintain their validity. This system will cover not only the physical aspects of the division such as the process of division, infrastructure and security, but will also relate to the areas in which the two cities will continue to interface in the near and distant future. Setting the basic system of border crossings, and situating them in the most suitable location for connection is one major focus of this study, and is pertinent to any type of movement occurring through these crossings- whether local (workers, goods), or international (tourists, diplomats). Our estimation is that one of the greatest challenges that will arise in times of peace will be tourism. Approaching this particular component of the border crossing movement in focus also holds the potential for shedding light on the crossing system as a whole. Tourism is not only the most measurable indicator of crossings, but also a “micro-system� of the border crossing- it entails different types of passengers, spread throughout the day, with peak seasons and a direct and measurable link to the surrounding urban infrastructure. For many millions of tourists around the world, the urge to visit Jerusalem knows no boundaries, yet they can not do so today. We, therefore, believe that tourism will not only bring the greatest volume of people to the border


crossings, but will also be the type of flow for which both sides share a similar interest in sustaining. After the system of crossings has been laid out, managing bigger volumes of labor and goods is only a matter of capacity adjustments. In contrast, creating and facilitating massive tourism flow will require a vision, accompanying infrastructure and a high level of joint cooperation in order to support, as much as possible, a fluid movement between the two cities. This will allow both economies to benefit from the overwhelming amount of visitors anticipated once an agreement is achieved. Beyond this, we believe tourism to be a measurable indicator for the additional types of border crossing flows, and thoroughly exploring it will allow for better approaching other challenges. It is clear to the writers of this study, that wherever the demarcation lines are going to be, the vision for Jerusalem’s development shall not stop at the sides of these lines, but influence the core of the Israeli and Palestinian capitals, and the lives of their respective inhabitants. Establishing a well-designed system of connections, as well as a sound backbone of cooperation between the two sides will assist Jerusalem’s transformation into a global scale center.


I.


THE BORDER REGIME FOR JERUSALEM IN PEACE: INTRODUCTION

• Preface • Scope • Context • Tourism Changing Trends • The Financial Potential of Tourism • Resolution Context • From “Jerusalem” to West Jerusalem (“Yerushalaim”) and East Jerusalem (“Al-Quds”)


10 - 10 11

PREFACE

SCOPE Jerusalem - from an end destination to a regional tourism Epicenter

This project is an additional step in a series of projects carried out by ECF and PDF, designed to describe in detail the future foundations of a final status agreement between Israelis and Palestinians in Jerusalem. In that sense, the future scenarios presented here are based on the assumption of two equal and sovereign states with East Jerusalem (Al-Quds) and West Jerusalem (Yerushalaim) serving as their capitals, with territorial allocations based on the Geneva Accord outline. This project, aspiring to study the anticipated future tourism industry in Jerusalem and its interface with the overall IsraeliPalestinian border regime needs to respond to the challenges of Jerusalem as the heart of the future states and a common border area simultaneously. This means balancing a paradoxical relationship between the concepts of separating the two sovereignties and their corresponding territories, while hosting a multi-ethnic, vibrant array of communities cultures and lifestyles and preserving the prospect of future change in the border regime when circumstances allow it. The study aims, therefore, to extract a set of policies and recommendations regarding East and West Jerusalem which will enhance future touristic activity on both sides, maintaining their nature as a common holy place, and a unique, significant location on the global scale.

These assumptions lead to the necessity of developing a comprehensive border regime study, which will develop scenarios for tourism in the context of Yerushalaim and Al-Quds and simulate the tourists’ (passengers’) movement in the city. The study will explore current trends and numbers of visitors to West and East Jerusalem, analyze the different types of tourists and their destinations, and assess the future numbers and trends that might develop subsequent to an overall agreement. This study can also serve as a model study for further border regime applications between the Palestinian and the Israeli states, such as crossing of goods, labor, etc. The touristic “master plan” which will be presented in the third section of the study aims to secure Jerusalem’s authentic role as a city of connectivity, where cultural, economical, and social bridges have to be constructed in order to support the crucial mediating role of a zone hosting both Palestinian and Israeli sovereignties. The plan will aim to conserve the full experience of Jerusalem as a multi-ethnic international space, and to change the city’s future from an end destination city with clear cut borders to a major connection between the two states.


INTRODUCTION

>

Europe

Turky

Cyprus

Syria

*Beirut Lebanon *Damascus

Iraq

West Bank *Amman Ramallah Jerusalem ** *Bethlehem

Tel Aviv * Gaza

Saudi Arabia *Petra Israel

*Cairo

Jordan

Egypt

Eilat Taba* * *Aqaba

>

Sharem El Sheikh *

Al Madinah


12 - 12 13

CONTEXT A future joint between East and West

Israel and future Palestine are located in the midst of the fertile crescent, presenting the opportunity to become an East-West, as well as North-South global encounter point. The geographical location of East and West Jerusalem holds the same potential on the urban scale. In that sense, Jerusalem and Al-Quds bare the potential to become a global East-West joint, providing a gateway from Europe to the near Asia and from the Arab league countries to the Mediterranean. In this context, the question of tourism as an economic and social stimulator in the region becomes a main concern of the future border regime. While the tourism potential of the Old City and the Historic Basin can be compared to the potential of the Vatican City, Paris or Mecca, the future border and security implications threat to inhibit the flourishing trends of tourism in years to come. It is this study’s aim, therefore, to propose methods and means that will secure the ability of both capitals to manage and develop the tourism sector, despite the border between them, and thus fulfil the region’s potential to become a true joint of peace and cooperation.


INTRODUCTION

Palestine

Israel


14 - 14 15


INTRODUCTION

The Church of Saint Mary Magdalene in the Garden of Gethsemane


16 - 16 17

TOURISM CHANGING TRENDS The past decade has shown a significant increase in international tourism to Israel and the Palestinian Territories Total Visitors (=Tourists + Cruise Passengers) Arrivals to Israel (about 1/3 of them also visited the Palestinian Territories), 1998-2009*

3,034,300

2,700,000

2,672,000 2,566,000 2,293,700

2,200,000

1,916,000 1,833,900 1,505,700 1,218,800

1,063,400

862,200

1998

1999

2000

2001

2002

2003

2004

2005

2006

2007

2008

2009

*Data Source: Central Bureau of Statistics, Tourism and Hotel Services Statistics Quarterly, vol. 37, 2009, Table 2, pp.25-27. http//www.cbs.gov.il/reader/newhodaot/hodaa_template.html?hodaa=201028004


INTRODUCTION

Despite a decline during some years of the previous decade, the past few years have been characterized by a consistent increase in the number of tourists visiting Israel and the Palestinian Territories annually. This chapter aims so explore the major changes in the local tourism market in order to highlight its main trends and respond to them.

Year

Total Visitors

1998

2,200,000

1999

2,566,000

2000

2,672,000

> Millennium year and Pope visit

2001

1,218,800

> The 9/11 terrorist attack

2002

862,200

2003

1,063,400

2004

1,505,700

2005

1,916,000

2006

1,833,900

2007

2,293,700

2008

3,034,300

> Peak tourism year

2009

2,700,000

> The operation in Gaza (January 09), and the global financial crisis

> The Second Lebanon War (June 06)

For the purpose of this study , 2008 - being a peak tourism year - will be the reference and source of analysis and forecast of future tourism trends.


18 - 18 19

Total visitor arrivals in 2008 = ~3,034,300 of them~2,988,100 tourists (98.5%)* and ~46,200 cruise passengers** (1.5%)

Allenby 4.9% Jordan River 1.8%

Arava 3.5%

Eilat-Taba 16.4%

Eilat 1.7%

Ben Gurion 71.7%

~2,988,100 tourists, the majority of visitors, entered by air and land (=100%) of them entered by air: 73.4%= ~2,190,800 Ben Gurion 71.7%= ~2,141,200 Eilat 1.7%= ~ 49,600 of them entered by land: ~26.6%= ~ 797,300 Eilat-Taba 16.4%= ~ 490,600 Rafiah 0% Jordan river 1.8%= ~54,400 Allenby 4.9%= ~146,800 Arava 3.5%= ~ 105,300 * Tourist = A foreign national entering Israel on a tourist visa (and exiting on a different date than he entered), who is not an immigrant, a citizen, a potential immigrant, a temporary resident, or a cruise passenger. This definition includes diplomats. ** Cruise passenger = a tourist on a cruise entering Israel for a day or two and returning to the ship at night, including personnel or military ships. *** Day visitor = A foreign national entering and exiting Israel on the same date.


The Geneva Accord

INTRODUCTION

Syria Sea of Galilee

Haifa

1.8%

Jenin

Jordan River

Mediterranean Sea

Tel Aviv Palestine Ramallah

71.7%

Jerusalem

Ben Gurion

4.9%

Allenby Bridge

Israel Gaza

Hebron

Palestine Dead Sea

0%

Rafiah

Beer Sheva Jorden

Egypt

Data Source: Central Bureau of Statistics, Tourism and Hotel Services Statistics Quarterly, vol.

Eilat 1.7%

37, 2009, Table 2, p.25-27. http//www.cbs.gov.il/reader/newhodaot/hodaa_ template.html?hodaa=201028004

Israeli

Palestinian

Taba 16.4%

= 2% =~50,000

3.5%

Arava


20 - 20 21

Current (2008*) Arrivals to Israel & the Palestinian territories (by main country\ continent of citizenship)

EUROPE = 1,845,731

North & South

AMERICA = 799,453

*Data Source: Central Bureau of Statistics, Tourism and Hotel Services Statistics Quarterly, vol. 37, 2009, Table 3, p.28-29.

62%

27%


INTRODUCTION

Palestine

0.005% = 16,807 = JORDAN 0.0008% = 2,572 = EGYPT Israel


22 - 22 23

Future potential: Massive growth in international tourism to Israel & Palestine both for the Western & the Arab world

WEST ?% ?% WEST

Pales Rafiah

Egy

> Tourism from the Western world Mostly Christian (mainly to Bethlehem and Jerusalem) Christian pilgrims, Visitors of the Vatican city, Leisure tourism, etc.

*Data Source: Central Bureau of Statistics, Tourism and Hotel Services Statistics Quarterly, vol. 37, 2009, Table 3, p.28-29.


INTRODUCTION

Lebanon

Syria Sea of Galilee

Haifa

Nablus Tel Aviv

Palestine Ramalla

?%

Yerushalaim

Al-Quds Bethlehem

Israel Gaza

EAST

Hebron

stine

Beer Sheva

Jordan

ypt

Muslim and Arab world potential tourism < Jordan, Egypt,Turkey, Saudi Arabia, UAE, Malaysia, Pakistan, India, Indonesia, Bangladesh, etc.

Eilat


24 - 24 25

Current (2008*) major tourism trend: the significant increase of christian pilgrimage organized tours 1. Total tourist trends 2004-2008 comparisons, by religion (Average no. of persons) \ From mostly Jewish to mostly Christian 46%

52% 43%

43%

47%

44%

40%

33%

10% 9%

9% 6.5%

3%

3%

2%

2004

2%

2005

1,916,000

2% 1.5

2006

1,833,900

2% 2%

2007


INTRODUCTION

61%

47%

40%

28%

Jewish 9%

8%

6.5%

Christian Muslim

1.5

2% 2%

1% 2%

Other No affiliation

2007

2,293,700

2008

3,034,300

*Data Source: Inbound Tourism Survey, Annual Report 2008, by GEOCARTOGRAPHY, published July 2009, p.12.


26 - 26 27

2. Total tourist trends comparisons, by purpose of visit 2004-2008 From mostly VFR (Visit Friends & Family) to mostly pilgrimage (% of average no. of persons) Health Treatment Convention Research Leisure, Recreation

Business, Government

1% 1% 3%

1% 1% 3%

12% 180,684

15% 225,855

1% 1% 2%

10% 191,600

13% 249,080

9% 165,051

10% 183,390

10% 183,390 15% 287,400

Touring, Sightseeing

Pilgrimage

9% 206,433

13% 298,181

1% 1% 1% 11% 333,773

1% 1% 1% 11%

11% 333,773

11%

17% 515,831

17%

36% 1,092,348

36%

19% 576,517

19%

22% 403,458

12% 180,684

11% 165,627

1% 1% 2% 13% 298,181

24% 550,488 17% 325,720

43% 788,577

Visit Friends & Relatives

39% 587,223

37% 708,920

36% 825,732

3,034,300

2008

2,293,700

2007

1,833,900

2006

1,916,000

2005

1,505,700

2004


1% 1% 2% 13%

9%

13%

INTRODUCTION

3. Total tourist trends comparisons, by travel organization 2004-2008 From mostly FIT (Frequent Individual Tourists) to mostly organized tours (% of average No. of persons)

1% 1% 1% 11%

FIT = Frequent Individual Tourists

77% 1,159,389

70% 1,341,200

65% 1,192,035

63% 1,445,031

37% 1,122,691

11%

17%

22% 667,546

24% 36%

7% 128,373

36% 9% 172,440

Package Deal

10% 150,570

19%

Organized Tour

28% 513,492

6% 137,622 31% 711,047

21% 402,360

14% 210,789

3,034,300

published July 2009, p.12.

2008

2,293,700

2007

1,833,900

2006

1,916,000

2005

1,505,700

2004

*Data Source: Inbound Tourism Survey, Annual Report 2008, by GEOCARTOGRAPHY,

41% 1,244,063


The Geneva Accord

28 - 28 29

Haifa

4. The Relative Popularity of Jerusalem Among Tourists in 2008 Natanya Herziliya Tel Aviv

Palestine West Bank Jericho Jerusalem

Israel

63%

37%

Ashdod

Herziliya Haifa

Netanya

37%

Bethlehem

Palestine Gaza

1%

2%

3%

1%

3%

Eilat

5%

Tel Aviv - Jaffa

14%

19%

41% 6%

31%

Eilat *Primary destination in Israel, 2008 (%)

Israeli

Palestinian


INTRODUCTION

37%

1%

33% (=833,000) of the tourists who visited Israel also visited the Palestinian territories in 2008 (%)*

2%

63%

37%

63%

37%

1% 3%

2% 3%

1%

1% 3% 5%

37%

2% 3%

1%

3% 5%

37%

41%

19%

Other

3%

1%

14%

Jerusalem 5%

37%

41%

Jericho

19%

14%

19%

14%

6%

31% 41%

6%

Bethlehem

31%

46%

32%

46%

32%

46%

32%

*Data Source: Inbound Tourism Survey, Annual Report 2008, by GEOCARTOGRAPHY, published July 2009, p.89-90.


30 - 30 31

In conclusion, the main tourism trends that impact the planning of the border regime: Increase of organized groups vs. individual tourists. Increase of Christian tourism vs. steady (with a slight decrease) Jewish tourism. Increase in religious pilgrimage vs. decrease of VFR (Visiting Friends & Relatives). These conclusions are a crucial component of the future tourism regime and its supporting infrastructure

3,000,000 2,700,000 2,400,000 2,100,000 1,800,000 1,500,000 1,200,000 900,000 600,000 300,000 0

2004

Total tourists Muslim FIT

2005

2006 VFR Jewish Package Deal

2007

2008 Pilgrimage Christian Organized Tour


INTRODUCTION

THE ISRAELI-PALESTINIAN TOURISM MARKET POTENTIAL Since data on the current Palestinian tourism market is less accessible, we estimate the general potential of the Palestinian and Israeli tourism markets via the Israeli data prism, serving here as an indicator for the larger picture. The 2008 tourism market in Israel added up to NIS 7.83 billion, of which only NIS 3.38 billion was generated from foreign tourism. As Israel’s GDP in 2008 was NIS 615 billion, the overall tourism market in Israel is approximately 1.2% of GDP. The share of foreign tourism in the GDP is even smaller- only 0.5% of GDP. This number is very low in proportional measures to other countries in the region. Greece, for instance, held a GDP of $357.5 billion in 2008 (about 1340 billion NIS), of which the tourism market was about 17.2%, or $61.5 billion (NIS 230 billion). It could be assumed that the Israeli and Palestinian tourism potential markets as share of GDP are close to other similar Mediterranean markets. Assuming that in ten years the Israeli tourism market will, in times of peace, increase to a level of 5% share of GDP while the overall growth of Israel’s economy will grow in an annual rate of 3%, the potential of the tourism market grows to NIS 41.2 billion annually. A tourism market that will capture 10% of GDP in ten years will generate NIS 82.4 billion annually. Perhaps a more modest way to estimate the potential for the tourism market in the region is by simply estimating the rate of annual growth of the current market in the next decade. While an annual growth of 3.5 percent can be considered quite conservative in an industry with such growth potential, this rate will yield a market of NIS 11.04 billion by 2020. A growth rate of 7% will end up with 15.40 billion in 2020 (which still will be only 1.8% of Israel’s GDP in 2020). If we assume that the domestic tourism market is reaching its limits and will grow at a slower rate (2.2% annually), while the foreign tourism industry will grow at a more aggressive rate (8%), then by 2020, we can expect a tourism market of NIS 12.81 billion annually. In both scenarios it is clear that the tourism market will mostly depend on the region’s stability and peace process, the economies of the two states and the amount of investments in the field. These factors, if combined successfully, bear the potential to transform tourism into one of Palestine’s and Israel’s dominant growth factors. Sources: Israel’s Central Bureau of Statistics, CIA Fact Book, http://www.indexmundi.com


Assuming that in 10 years the Israeli tourism market will, in times of peace, increase to a level of 5% share of GDP while the overall growth of Israelâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s economy will grow at an annual rate of 3%, the potential for the tourism market grows to 41.2 billion NIS annually.


Also, one could only assume that the annual growth rate of the Palestinian economy and its tourism market will be even greater in times of peace.

View of the Old city wall and mt. Zion


34 - 34 35

RESOLUTION CONTEXT The Green Line 1949-1967

Jerusalem Municipal Boundaries

The Green Line in Jerusalem refers to the April 1949 Armistice lines established between Israel and Jordan in 1949. Following the 1948 Arab-Israeli War, Jerusalem was divided into two parts – the western portion, populated primarily by Jews, came under Israeli rule, while the eastern portion, populated mainly by Arabs, came under Jordanian rule. During that period the Green Line separated Israel not only from the West Bank, but from East Jerusalem and the Old City- which Israel would later capture in the 1967 Six Day War. Its name is derived from the green ink used to draw the line on the map during the talks. In March 1949, as East Jerusalem positions remained under control of Jordanian rule, the Green Line was established as a basic benchmark to any future Israeli-Palestinian negotiation on Jerusalem.

The term “East Jerusalem” in this study refers to the area under Jordanian rule between 1949 and 1967 which was incorporated into the municipality of Jerusalem after 1967, covering about 70 km2 (27 sq mils). Following the 1967 Six Day War, the eastern part of Jerusalem came under Israeli rule and was merged with the western municipality together with some neighboring West Bank villages, forming the present municipal borders of the city. In 1980, the Israeli Knesset passed “The Jerusalem Law” which declared that “Jerusalem, complete and united, is the capital of Israel”. This law ,however, did not specify the city’s new boundaries.


INTRODUCTION

Demographic Spread

The Geneva Accord Line, 2003

A census conducted by the Israeli authorities after the 1967 war registered 66,000 Palestinian residents, accounting for 44,000 residing in pre- 1967 East Jerusalem and 22,000, in the West Bank area annexed to Jerusalem. By June 1993, a Jewish majority was established in East Jerusalem: 155,000 Jews were officially-registered residents, housed in the new Israeli neighborhoods constructed in East Jerusalem compared to 150,000 Palestinians. As of 2008, the population of East Jerusalem was about 428,000, comprising 59.5% of Jerusalem’s 720,000 residents. Of the East Jerusalem population, 179,000 (42%) are Jews living in the neighborhoods built east of the Green Line, (comprising 39% of the 465,000 Jewish population of Jerusalem as a whole), and 249,000 (58%) are Arabs.

The Geneva accords concluded that “The parties shall have their mutually recognized capitals in the areas of Jerusalem under their respective sovereignty.” The theoretical layout of this sovereignty line aligns with Pres. Clinton’s parameters suggesting that “Arab areas are Palestinian and Jewish ones are Israeli”, creating a rather complicated sovereignty line which will be the future border. As the proposed line places the vast majority of Jews and Arabs in their prospective capitals, it creates a challenge to a future border regime that will enhance the cooperation and coexistence between Yerushalaim and Al-Quds.

Green line Geneva Accord line

Ge

Separetion barrier

S

Old City Jerusalem Municipality

Jerusa

Palestinian demography

Palestin

Israeli demography

Isr


36 - 36 37

A Regional Peace Plan

FROM “JERUSALEM” TO WEST JERUSALEM (“YERUSHALAIM”) AND EAST JERUSALEM (“AL- QUDS”)

nning Challenges in Jerusalem

of the Geneva Accord border (or any other permanent status border) in ating the The twoimplementation halves of Jerusalem according to the current Israeli Jerusalem has to uphold two parallel aims: Jerusalem’s evolution into two cities and their estinian connection demographic two large to each spread other. Thewill first form aim is to ensure thatmetropolitan the separation of the city forms Yerushalayim" (West)urban andunits, "Al-Quds" (East). two functioning underscoring and proposing solutions to the crucial planning challenges raised by the border layout. The second aim is to ensure viable connectivity between the two future cities in terms of transportation, infrastructure, economy and tourism. In that sense, understanding the origins of the Jerusalem spatial condition since 1948 is crucial to gaining a better understanding of the proposed future attitudes towards the two cities and the seam area.

halayim

Giv'at Ze'ev Pisgat Ze'ev Ramot French Hill

1 to Tel Aviv

Old City

4

Giv'at Hananya (Abu Tor)

60

Ma'ale Adumim


erusalem

Al-Quds

INTRODUCTION

Introduction

In the future Israeli-Palestinian geographical setting, Jerusalem will become an Israeli endpoint, unless the connections with Palestine and Al-Quds are convenient and welcoming. The Palestinian geographical setting finds Al-Quds in the middle of its metropolitan area that ranges from Nablus to Ramallah in the north to Bethlehem and Hebron in the south. In that sense, Al-Quds is a perfect link between the northern and southern parts of the Palestinian state. This implies that it is Israel’s clear interest to make the future border regime as mutual and cooperative as possible.

60 (old) to Ramallah

443 437

Shu’afat

to Jericho Shu’afat - refugee camp

Old City

Sheih Jarrah Abu Tur

417

389 to Bethlehem


38 - 38 39

West Jerusalem (Yerushalaim) in the Israeli Context: Jerusalem as Eastern Frontier

20 Tel Aviv

6

443

Modiâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;in

1 Yerushalaim


INTRODUCTION

East Jerusalem (=Al-Quds) in the Palestine Context: Part of a Chain of Cities on the Mountain Ridge

To Nablus, Jenin

Salfit

60

90

Ramallah

Jericho

1

443 Al-Quds

Bethlehem

60

Allenby


Tourism can become the main crossborder activity, and generate mutual economic growth and development


View of Dome of the Rock and mt. of Olives


II.


THE SPATIAL STRUCTURE OF TOURISM IN JERUSALEM

• Main Touristic Sites • Areas of Interest by Religion • Tourism Facilities and Infrastructure • Superimposition


44 - 44 45

MAIN TOURISTIC SITES

1. WESTERN WALL A part of the wall around the Holy Temple and for the Jewish people

1

(Superimposed with the Geneva Accords’ proposed border) Developing a tourism oriented border regime requires an understanding of the current structure of tourism in the city. Its core - the main, prominent sites and points of interest- is the basis of this analysis, and will later serve as a platform to evaluate future tourist routes in the two capitals.

2. JEWISH QUARTER Jews had settled the Jewish Quarter by the 8th BCE.

2

3. CHURCH OF THE HOLY SPULCHER The Church of the Holy Sepulcher is where the stations of the ‘’Via Dolorosa’’ are.

3

4. VIA DLOROZA The way that Jesus was taken, bearing his cro back to the place of his crucifixion.

4 5. MOUNT OF OLIVES

5

6. TOWER OF DAVID \ SALAH AL-DIN CITADEL The Tower of David Museum traces Jerusalem history through displaysand exhibits.

6 7. “YAD VASHEM” The Holocaust and Heroism Museum

7

8

8. HARAM AL-SHAREEF \ TEMPLE MOUNT Considerd The site of the 1st and 2nd Temples there are over 100 structures from many differ periods on the Mount, the most famous of whi the (Gold) Dome of the Rock and the Al-Aksa M


THE SPATIAL STRUCTURE OF TOURISM IN JERUSALEM


46 - 46 47

Sites Index

1. Western Wall \ Al Buraq 2. The Jewish Quarter 3. The Church of the Holy Sepulcher 4. Via Dolorosa 5. Mt. of Olives 6. Tower of David \ Salah Al-din Citadel 7. Yad Va-Shem 8. Haram Al-Shareef \ Temple Mount 9. Israel Museum 10. Western Wall Tunnels 11. Dome of the Rock 12. Islamic Museum 13. Old City Markets 14. Santa Anna Church 15. The Cardo 16. Hurvah Synagogue 17. Herodion Quarter 18. Four Sephardi Synagogues 19. St. James Cathedral 20. Mt. Zion 21. Dormition Abbey 22. Holocaust Chamber 23. David’s Tomb 24. The Last Supper Room - Cenaculum 25. (To) the Dead Sea 26. Ammunition Hill 27. Mt. Scopus 28. The Mormon University 29. Rockefeller Museum 30. The Tomb Garden 31. St. George’s Cathedral 32. St. Simon’s\ “Shim’on’s” Tomb 33. Me’ah She’arim Neighborhood 34. Tomb of Mary Church 35. Gethesemane

36 .The Jewish Cemetery 37. Church of Dominos Flevit 38. St. Peter’s Church 39. Warren’s Shaft 40. Zedekiah’s Cave 41. City of David 42. Sultan’s Pool 43. Sherover - Haas Promenade 44. (To) Bethlehem 45. King David Street 46. The Great Synagogue 47. Zion Square 48. Nachalat She’va & Ben Yehuda Street 49. Yafo Street & Machaneh Yehuda Market 50. Supreme Court of Israel 51. The Knesset 52. Science Museum 53. The Bible Lands Museum 54. Shrine of the Book 55. Mt. Herzl 56. Rabin’s Grave 57. Jerusalem War Cemetery 58. (To) Ein Karem 59. Chagall Windows 60. Model of Jerusalem (2nd Temple period) 61. (To) Malcha Mall 62. (To) the Biblical Zoo 63. Mamila-Elrov Mall & Parking 64. Al Chanakah Mosque 65. Dome of the Ascension Mosque 66. Iron Gate \ Bab Al- Hadid 67. Salman Al-Parsi Mosque 68. The Muslim Quarter 69. Tomb of Hulda the Prophetess\ Raba-ah Al-Quidaya... 70. Omar Mosque 71. Tomb of Zechariah 72. Muslim Cemetery 73. Al Sahaba Cemetery (Islamic cemetery of Prophet Muhammad’s accompaniers) 74. The Umayad Palaces


THE SPATIAL STRUCTURE OF TOURISM IN JERUSALEM

41

21

5

71

39

74

20


48 - 48 49

DEFINING THE “AREAS OF INTEREST” OF EACH RELIGION The ability to track the inner patterns of touristic "usage" in Jerusalem will shed light on the geographical selectivities that will be part of the future tourist regime and administration. This section, therefore, tries to map the territories of an average typed tourist in order to form a map of geographical interests*.

1. Religious Christian Sites 3. The Church of the Holy Sepulcher 4. Via Dolorosa 5. Mt. of Olives 14. Santa Anna Church 19. St. James Cathedral 20. Mt. Zion 21. Dormition Abbey 24. The Last Supper Room - Cenaculum 28. The Mormon University 31. St. George’s Cathedral 34. Tomb of Mary Church 35. Gethesemane 37. Church of Dominos Flevit 38. St. Peter’s Church 44. (To) Bethlehem

* Based on: Shoval, Noam, Segmented and Overlapping Tourist Spaces: Jerusalem and Tel-Aviv Case Studies, Thesis, The Hebrew University of Jerusalem, September 2000.


THE SPATIAL STRUCTURE OF TOURISM IN JERUSALEM

Mt. of Olives

OLD CITY

Mt. Zion


50 - 50 51

2. Religious Muslim Sites

The most important Muslim sites* are relatively close to each other, creating a rather small but dominant geographical area. Moreover, part of the Old City (especially the Muslim Quarter) is perceived as Umayad ,Fatmi Ottoman, a living cadastral heritage of many Islamic periods.

1. Al Buraq \ The Western Wall 5. Mt. of Olives 6. Salah Al-din Citadel \ Tower of David 8. Haram Al-Shareef \ Temple Mount 11. Dome of the Rock 12. Islamic Museum 13. Old City Markets 44. (To) Bethlehem 64. Al Chanakah Mosque 65. Dome of the Ascension Mosque 67. Salman Al-Parsi Mosque 68. The Muslim Quarter 69. Raba-ah Al-Quidaya...\ Tomb of Hulda the Prophetess 70. Omar Mosque 71. Tomb of Zechariah 72. Muslim Cemetery 73. Al Sahaba Cemetery (Islamic cemetery of Prophet Muhammadâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s accompaniers) 74. The Umayad Palaces * There is no official study or listing of the Muslim sites and places of interest; the list was assembled by the project team.


THE SPATIAL STRUCTURE OF TOURISM IN JERUSALEM

OLD CITY

Mt. of Olives


52 - 52 53

3. Religious Jewish and National Sites The important Jewish sites extend to the western city, creating patterns of usage that focus mostly on West Jerusalem. 1. Western Wall \ Al Buraq 2. The Jewish Quarter 5. Mt. of Olives 6. Tower of David \ Salah Al-din Citadel 7. Yad Va-Shem 8. Temple Mount 10. Western Wall Tunnels 16. Hurvah Synagogue 17. Herodion Quarter 18. Four Sephardi Synagogues 20. Mt. Zion 23. David’s Tomb 26. Ammunition Hill 27. Mt. Scopus 32. Shim’on’s Tomb \ St. Simon 36 .The Jewish Cemetery 40. Zedekiah’s Cave 41. City of David 44. (To) Bethlehem 46. The Great Synagogue 51. The Knesset 55. Mt. Herzl 57. Jerusalem War Cemetery

Mt. Herzl


THE SPATIAL STRUCTURE OF TOURISM IN JERUSALEM

47-48 OLD CITY Kiryat Hale’om Mt. of Olives

Mt. Zion


54 - 54 55

TOURISM FACILITIES & INFRASTRUCTURE General Tourism Sites 2. The Jewish Quarter 6. Tower of David \ Salah Al-din Citadel 7. Yad Va-Shem 9. Israel Museum 10. Western Wall Tunnels 12. Islamic Museum 13. Old City Markets 15. The Cardo 20. Mt. Zion 25. (To) the Dead Sea 27. Mt. Scopus 29. Rockefeller Museum 33. Me’ah She’arim Neighborhood 41. City of David 42. Sultan’s Pool 43. Sherover - Haas Promenade 44. (To) Bethlehem 45. King David Street 47. Zion Square 48. Nachalat She’va & Ben Yehuda Street 49. Yafo Street & Machaneh Yehuda Market 50. Supreme Court of Israel 51. The Knesset 52. Science Museum 53. The Bible Lands Museum 54. Shrine of the Book 55. Mt. Herzl 56. Rabin’s Grave 57. Jerusalem War Cemetery 58. (To) Ein Karem 60. Model of Jerusalem (2nd Temple period) 61. (To) Malcha Mall 62. (To) the Biblical Zoo 63. Mamila-Elrov Mall & Parking

Museums Mt. Herzl


THE SPATIAL STRUCTURE OF TOURISM IN JERUSALEM

47-48

Sheikh Jarah

Yafo st, City Center

OLD CITY

Kiryat Hale’om

Mt. Zion


56 - 56 57

Hotels and Rooms By the end of 2008, there were 69 hotels in Jerusalem - 38 in West Jerusalem and 31 in East Jerusalem. With a total of 9,283 rooms - 7,343 in West Jerusalem and 1,940 in East Jerusalem*. Most hotels and tourism services are located in the vicinity of the Old City**. After a permanent status agreement is set, these will become a major part of the border and tourism backbone - two parallel city centers hosting the various tourist populations visiting the city.

* Central Bureau of Statistics, Tourism and Hotel Services Statistics Quarterly, VOL 37, 2009, Table 23, p.63. ** Based on: Shoval, Noam, Segmented and Overlapping Tourist Spaces: Jerusalem and Tel-Aviv Case Studies, Thesis, The Hebrew University of Jerusalem, September 2000, p.155.


THE SPATIAL STRUCTURE OF TOURISM IN JERUSALEM

City Entrance

East Jerusalem &Old City

Yafo St.

City Center

Luxury Hotels


58 - 58 59

1

Main Access & Transportation routes

City Entrance

The two main roads leading to Jerusalem/ Al-Quds happen to cross on the edge of the tourist regime interest area. While Road 1 carries passengers from Tel Aviv (West) as well as from Jericho (East), Road 60 is the north-south road linking Hebron and Bethlehem to Ramallah and Nablus, 118 The Geneva Initiative through Al-Quds. Road 60 also becomes the urban road, Road 1, linking northern Jerusalem to the Old City basin.

to Tel Aviv & Modiâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;in

To Mt. Herzl

60 (old) to the West Bank

443

447 to Jericho

9 1 to Tel Aviv

1 4

OLD CITY

417

389


THE SPATIAL STRUCTURE OF TOURISM IN JERUSALEM

To French Hill

60

Yafo St. Sheikh Jarah

Kiryat Hale’om City Center

OLD CITY

Museums

60


60 - 60 61

1

Superimposition City Entrance

A superimposition of all of the above elements reveals the density and geography of the tourism district that will be shared by the two capitals. Although the tourism master plan must relate to the greater cities, its main focus will be aimed on area. The main area of the tourism zone in the two capitals will require rethinking and developing the urban infrastructure around it. In particular, the transportation routes and means will need to be reconsidered in order to provide efficient accessibility to visitors and tourists. Additional considerations for development will be hotels, commercial areas and crossing facilities on the seam line.

Geneva Accord border line

Light rail route

To Mt. Herzl

Parking

Bus


THE SPATIAL STRUCTURE OF TOURISM IN JERUSALEM

60

Yafo St. .

Sheikh Jarah

Kiryat Hale’om City Center

OLD CITY

Museums

60

Christian Interest

Jewish Interest

Muslim Interest

Hotel Area


III.


A TOURISM BASED BORDER REGIME

• Crossing Facilities Layout • Main Routes of Access • Crossing Facilities Operation • Old City Gates: Operation and Security


64 - 64 65

CROSSING FACILITIES LAYOUT

In order to simplify the geographical setting of Israel-Palestine and Jerusalem - Al-Quds, we have reduced the geography to a scheme representing the two future states. The outer couture of the circle represents the international borders of the two states, while the inner red line represents the border Israel and Palestine will share. Jerusalem and Al-Quds fit in to this setting as a part of their sovereign states- an arrangement that does not include the Old City which is considered in this study as part of a special regime. For matters of simplicity, this regime enables entrance and exit of both sides into the Old City - each from their respective side only. The final factor of the scheme is the crossing facilities: The international borders hold, of course, international crossing facilities, airports, harbors, etc. The Palestinian- Israeli border contains both national crossing facilities such as the Maccabim crossing near Jerusalem, as well as local border crossings such as French Hill junction. While these crossings enable the movement of tourists, goods and labor from side to side, the Old City gates are gateways into the special regime only. These gates provide the opportunity to enter the Old City through both sides, contingent on the return through that very same side.

Israel

Yerushalaim

OLD CITY

Al-Quds

Palestine


A TOURISM BASED BORDER REGIME

Sheikh Hussain

e'

lam

Ja

Adam Bridge

m

aii Efr

Haifa

im

b ca

Ma

ch

n Fre

Ben-Gurion International

West bank International*

ill

H

Allenby Bridge (King Hussein)

y

n ca

ri me

n olo

C

A

.

sG

cu

s ma

Da

Israel

Yerushalaim

te

Ga

G.

's

d ero

H

n's he te Step a n G St. te Zio Ga ng u D

ffa

Ja

Abdalla Bridge (Not open)

OLD CITY

Al-Quds

or uT

Ashdod

Ab

ez Er

i

Gaza*** Gaza International**

l

ne

n em Tu eh m thl lehe e B th e +B a mi rku a T

rn

Qa

Palestine

r

ita

Me

Rafiah

Ein

di

Ge

Arava Eilat-Taba Eilat Eilat International

Geneva Accord border line Crossing Facilities

Israeli International border

Palestinian International border

*,**,*** - Palestine future facilities (after a permanent status agreement) - airports and harbor.


66 - 66 67

MAIN ROUTES OF ACCESS Main Routes to\ from Jerusalem - Today:

Sheikh Hussain

Adam Bridge

Haifa 60 1

443 90

443

1

Ben-Gurion International

Allenby Bridge (King Hussein)

1 60 Begin Road

Abdalla Bridge (Not open)

417

39

Ashdod

90 Vadi Nar Road

60

Rafiah

90

Arava Eilat-Taba Eilat Eilat International


A TOURISM BASED BORDER REGIME

Main Routes to\ from Jerusalem - Upon the Implementation of a Permanent Status Agreement: Sheikh Sheikh me' la Hussain Hussain Ja Haifa

m

aii Efr

Haifa

1

443

443

60

1

ch

n Fre

1 60 60

Begin Road Begin Road

h nc Fre y 1 lon Co

n 60 ca 60

A

60

90

443

l Hil

ri me

im

b ca

Ma

443

Ben-Gurion Ben-Gurion International International

Adam Bridge

m

im

Ma

Adam Bridge

aii Efr

b ca

1

e'

lam

Ja

ill

H

ny

olo

nC

ca eri

Am

West bank West bank 90 International* International*

417

Allenby Bridge Allenby Bridge (King Hussein) (King Hussein)

1

417

Abdalla Abdalla Bridge (Not open) Bridge (Not open)

.

sG

G. G. s 'asscu d G. o er m d's o te HDa r a Yerushalaim Jaffa G OLD CITYGate enH'se Al-Quds h CITY Yerushalaim atJeaffa tepOLD n's he S G p . e t t Ste n S e a o t i Z GnaG St. te nZgio Ga Du ng 39 Du cu

s ma

Da

Israel Israel 39

Ashdod

Ashdod ez Er

Palestine Palestine

or uT

orl u nTe m ATbun e el nn leh em em Tu ethhleh 90 h B60 e m et thl he +B Be thleVadi Nar Road e Vadi Nar Road ia +B um k r ia Ta m u rk60 Ta r a 60 t i Me ar t i Me di e G Ein di Ge Ein

Ab

ez Er

60

i

rn Qa Gaza*** Gaza*** Gaza International** Gaza

Al-Quds

i

rn

Qa

Corridor to\from Gaza

Corridor to\from Gaza

International** Rafiah

90

Rafiah Arava

90

90

Arava Eilat-Taba

1

Eilat Eilat Eilat-Taba International Eilat Eilat 1 P parking lot road shuttle public transportation International Israeli - Palestinian Israeli International border border 1 1 PPalestine road border shuttle public transportation parkingInternational lot

Israeli - Palestinian border

Israeli International border

Palestine International border


68 - 68 69

OPERATION OF CROSSING FACILITIES

private vehicles buses pedestrians groups

Scale of terminal im

b cca

Ma

ill

hH

nc Fre

ny

olo

C an ric

e

Am

OLD CITY

or uT

u (Ab

)

r Tu

Ab

0)

Be

e thl

m he

(30


A TOURISM BASED BORDER REGIME

OLD CITY GATES: OPERATION AND SECURITY The entrance and exit procedure of tourists into the Old City is constantly under policy debate. There is room, due to its sensitive nature, for imposing security checks on those entering the Old City. The exits on the contrary, will require monitoring to assure that only those who entered through a certain side can come back that way.

sb -A

Al te \

Ga s

n' ha

at

re h

ah

te \

's ro d

te p

St

.S

He eh

Al

te Ga

te em Ga

Ga

ch Sh

ew N id ra b ha M ag

\A lte

Ga ng

Zi

av

tD he

ro p \P

on

Ga

te

Ja

ffa

Ga

te

\H eb

ro n

OLD CITY

Du

This study reflects the attempt to imagine all options and assess their urban implications. We therefore suggest three scenarios, although we recommend only one: a free entrance and monitored exit, a secured entrance and a monitored entrance, and the â&#x20AC;&#x153;CITYPASSâ&#x20AC;? option which brings flexibility to the process (see schemes on the next page).

-S

\D

am

as

cu

s

On the other hand, meticulous security checks upon entrance will sabotage the free flow of tourists and inhabitants into the city. This will be a severe burden upon economic activity and everyday life in the Old City.


70 - 70 71

There are two main security schemes for the Old City area. The illustrations below details their implications in terms of tourist movement in the Old City. Scenario

Old City divided

WJ OLD CITY EJ

Reference

Old City as a separate entity

WJ OLD CITY EJ

As proposed by the Geneva Accords, 2003

Implications

Tourists would be abke to freely access the side of the Old City from which they arrived. Crossing to the other side would be allowed through the major crossings only.

Tourists would enter the Old City from either side and exit from the side which they have entered.


s

A TOURISM BASED BORDER REGIME

This set of illustrations demonstrates possible security arrangements for the Old City gates in the two scenarios Old City divided

WJ OLD CITY EJ

Old City as a separate entity

WJ OLD CITY EJ

Security arrangements

Inspection upon entering & exiting

x x

x

x

x x

x Inspection upon exiting

No security inspection

x

High

x

Level of border coordination required High

* * * *

x

* * *

x

x

Random security inspection upon entering & exiting x

Level of security

x

x

* *

x

Low

*

Low


IV.


TOURISM ROUTES AND SCENARIOS

• Visitors - Types and Scenarios • Routes and Patterns of Visit in Jerusalem


74 - 74 75

VISITORS - TYPES AND SCENARIOS

Tourist ID: Classifying the different types of future visitors to Jerusalem This chapter seeks to define the different types of tourists and tourist groups which are expected to visit Jerusalem in the future*. This classification will divide the incoming tourists into the most common visitor types, and link the details relating to their visit- their country of origin; coordination process; arrival point; chosen accommodation area and sites of interest- with the geography and operation of the border facilities. Understanding the intersection between the future visitorsâ&#x20AC;&#x2122; types and the border and tourism facilities facilitates speculations about their future paths in the city. Superimposed, these joint paths will highlight the anticipated bottlenecks and allow us to draw policy conclusions in preparation for the future. The policy aim should be to allow a smooth and easy crossing between the two sides, with minimum obstacles, and maximum cooperation between the two sides. Thus, an effective system would encourage tourists not to limit their visit to one side or another, and encourage them to tour East and West Jerusalem during their stay. The main types of tourist are: 1. Religion oriented tourist (Muslim, Christian or Jewish). 2. Traditional\ general tourism - for purposes of business, leisure, etc. 3. Day visitors. See the following pages for schematic description of their typical routes and visit habits.

* Based on: Shoval, Noam, Segmented and Overlapping Tourist spaces: Jerusalem and Tel-Aviv Case Studies, Thesis, The Hebrew University of Jerusalem, September 2000; And on interviews with tourist operators,Jerusalem, December 2009.


TOURISM ROUTES AND SCENARIOS

Prior Arrangements Group \ Independent Tourist Israeli\ Palestinian\ Other Coordination\ Package

Jerusalem Joint Tourism Adminstration

Length of visit

Route Components Arrival Hotel & Accommodations Old City West Jerusalem «Yerushalaim»

Israel

East Jerusalem «Al-Qudes»

Palestine

Departure

*


76 - 76 77

Religion Oriented Tourist

The most common tourism to Jerusalem is for religious and pilgrimage reasons. As of today, most tourists are either Jewish* or Christian, but it is assumed that upon ratification of a permanent status agreement there will be a great increase in Muslim oriented tourism. One of the main challenges of the border regime is to enable easy and safe access to all religious and heritage sites on both sides of the city. This is especially important when dealing with Christian tourists, since the Christian sites are widely dispersed throughout both sides of the city.

Pales

Israeli Interest

Jewish Tourist

Birthright Israel

Christian/ Christian Pilgrimage General Tourist group

* Many of the Jewish groups are Taglit - Birthright Israel tours which provide educational, first time trips to Israel for Jewish young adults ages 18 to 26.

\


TOURISM ROUTES AND SCENARIOS

Palestinian Palestinian InterestInterest

Muslim Tourist Muslim Tourist Muslim group Muslim group

Christian\Christian\ Christian Pilgrimage Christian Pilgrimage General Touristgroup General Tourist group

\

\


78 - 78 79

General/ Traditional Tourist (Business, Leisure, etc.)

General visitor may have various purposes for their visit. They may choose to have a daily trip to Jerusalem and arrange for accommodations in a different city, be it in Israel, Palestine or one of the neighboring countries.

Israeli Interest

\ Jerusalem

Tel Aviv \ Eilat \ other

\

Tel Aviv \ Eilat \ other

Jerusalem


TOURISM ROUTES AND SCENARIOS

Palestinian Interest

\ Jerusalem

Bethlehem \ Jericho \ Rammalla\ Other

\

Bethlehem \ Jericho \ Rammalla\ Other

\

Bethlehem \ Jericho \ Other Amman \ Taba \ Other


80 - 80 81

Day Visitors

A recent phenomenon: visitors arriving by a cruise ship, flight or through a land crossing for a daily organized tour of the main sites, including Jerusalem.

Type of Tourist

Coordination

Arrival/ Accomodations Departure + Route + Visit Length

Palestinian In

Israeli Interest \ Jerusalem

Turkey \ other Jewish Tourist

Birthright Israel

\

Cruise Ship

Ideal Tourist Scenario - Joint Interest

Christian/ Christian Pilgrimage General Tourist group

Upon ratification of a permanent status agreement Israel and Palestine will share a mutual interest that tourists arriving to the region will visit and stay on both sides of the border and enjoy Jerusalem as a whole. To facilitate that, we propose the tourism based border regime (Chapter III) and also accompanying infrastructure & policy (Chapter VI).

\

*


TOURISM ROUTES AND SCENARIOS

Accomodations + Route + Visit Length

Arrival/ Coordination Departure

Type of Tourist

Palestinian Interest

*

\

Amman \ Taba \ Other

Muslim Tourist

Muslim group

Christian\ Christian Pilgrimage General Tourist group

*

\


82 - 82 83

ROUTES AND PATTERNS OF VISIT IN JERUSALEM The following pages demonstrate how the most common tourist groups to Jerusalem will be able to visit all their relevant locations after the implementation of a permanent status agreement.

‫מרחבי תיירות רא‬

By analyzing itineraries of different tourist groups, we have designed profiles of typical Christian/Jewish and Muslim trips, in various time frames.

Crossing Facilities

<56 <55 <7

53

<58

54

<59

60

62

61

Geneva Accord border line

51

52

<

The current infrastructure situation in East Jerusalem still causes a challenge to those who wish to continue from AlQuds to visit Bethlehem without either travelling through problematic roads (Wadi Nar) or returning to Israel. Future solutions include the planned Eastern Ring Road that is supposed to provide a high speed road network between Al Quds and Bethlehem, or the transforming of the Tunnel Road leading to Gush Etzion into a binational road. The infrastructure problem is discussed as one of the major future challenges of southern Al-Quds, yet it does not hold an efficient solution to be presented in this context.

50

<57

<

It is important to note that many unaffiliated tourists carry different routes within the city which are not mentioned here due to their randomness. This document does not imply that these tourists are less important or relevant to the future tourism industry.

Light rail route

9

Shuttle Bus route


TOURISM ROUTES AND SCENARIOS

26

27 32

31

28

33

49

30

29

40

47

72 14

48

68

70 3 13 63

46

6 19 20 21

45

23

34

4

64

66

73 11

10 15 1 8 16 2 12 17 74 18 41

35

65

67 69

71 37 5 36

39

22 24 38 42

25 >

Parking

Bus

43 <

<

44

Arrival \ Departure

Day 1

Day 2

Day 3


ture ay 1 ay 2 ay 3 port

84 - 84 85

Christian Group / 3 Day Trip Visiting the Old City by foot on the first day, entering and exiting through Jaffa Gate

<57 <56

H

<55

52

<7

53

<58

54 60

9

shuttle Foot/ shuttle bus Taxi

Crossing Facilities

Geneva Accord border line

62

61 <

otel

International

<

ction

From

Light rail route

Shuttle Bus route


TOURISM ROUTES AND SCENARIOS

27

31

28

33

49

29 47

50

14

48

4

51

35

3

2

6

15

37 12

19

45

20 21

11

10

13 63

34

5

41

24 38 42 25 >

Parking

Bus

43 <

<

44

Arrival \ Departure

Day 1

Day 2

Day 3


86 - 86 87

Christian Group / 1 Day Trip Entering East Jerusalem through French Hill, Visiting the Old City, Mt. of Olives and Bethlehem, then crossing back to West Jerusalem through the 300 Crossing

departure day 1 day 2 day 3 transport

<56

H

<55

52

<7

53

<58

54 60

shuttle Foot/ shuttle bus Taxi

Crossing Facilities

Geneva Accord border line

62

61 <

hotel

<57

<

inspection

Light rail route

Shuttle Bus route


TOURISM ROUTES AND SCENARIOS

27

31

28

33

49

29 47

50

14

48

4

51

35

3

2

6

4

15

37 12

19

45

20 21

9

11

10

13 63

34

5

41

24 38 42

Parking

Bus

44

43

<

<

25 >

Arrival \ Departure

Day 1


ture ay 1 ay 2 ay 3 port

<57 <56

H

<55

52

<7

53

<58

54 60

9

shuttle Foot/ shuttle bus Taxi

Crossing Facilities

Geneva Accord border line

62

61 <

otel

Christian Visitor / 3 Day Trip

<

ction

88 - 88 89

Light rail route

Shuttle Bus route


TOURISM ROUTES AND SCENARIOS

27

31

28

33

49

29 47

50

14

48

4

51

35

3

2

6

15

37 12

19

45

20 21

11

10

13 63

34

5

41

24 38 42 25 >

Parking

Bus

43 <

<

44

Arrival \ Departure

Day 1

Day 2

Day 3


90 - 90 91

Muslim group / 1 Day Trip

ure y1 y2 y3

50

<57 <56 <55

51

52

<7

53

<58

54

Crossing Facilities

Geneva Accord border line

62

61

<

<

60

Light rail route

9

Shuttle Bus route


TOURISM ROUTES AND SCENARIOS

27

31

28

33

49

29 47 14

48

4

35

3

2

6

15

37 12

19

45

20 21

11

10

13 63

34

5

41

24 38 42 25 >

Parking

Bus

43 <

<

44

Arrival \ Departure

Day 1

Arrival \ dep Day 1


92 - 92 93

Muslim group / 3 Day Trip

rture ay 1 ay 2 ay 3

<57 <56 <55

52

<7

53

<58

54

Crossing Facilities

Geneva Accord border line

62

61

<

<

60

Light rail route

9

Shuttle Bus route


TOURISM ROUTES AND SCENARIOS

27

31

28

33

49

29 47

50

14

48

4

51

35

3

2

6

15

37 12

19

45

20 21

11

10

13 63

34

5

41

24 38 42 25 >

Parking

Bus

43 <

<

44

Arrival \ Departure

Day 1

Day 2

Day 3


ture ay 1 ay 2 ay 3 port

Visiting the Old City by foot on the first day, entering and exiting through Jaffa Gate

<57 <56

H

<55

52

<7

53

<58

54 60

9

shuttle Foot/ shuttle bus Taxi

Crossing Facilities

Geneva Accord border line

62

61 <

otel

Jewish Group / 3 Day Trip

<

ction

94 - 94 95

Light rail route

Shuttle Bus route


TOURISM ROUTES AND SCENARIOS

27

31

28

33

49

29 47

50

14

48

4

51

35

3

2

6

15

37 12

19

45

20 21

11

10

13 63

34

5

41

24 38 42 25 >

Parking

Bus

43 <

<

44

Arrival \ Departure

Day 1

Day 2

Day 3


ture ay 1 ay 2 ay 3 port

Visiting the Old City by foot on the first day, entering and exiting through Jaffa Gate

<57 <56

H

<55

52

<7

53

<58

54 60

9

shuttle Foot/ shuttle bus Taxi

Crossing Facilities

Geneva Accord border line

62

61 <

otel

Jewish Visitor / 3 Day Trip

<

ction

96 - 96 97

Light rail route

Shuttle Bus route


TOURISM ROUTES AND SCENARIOS

27

31

28

33

49

29 47

50

14

48

4

51

35

3

2

6

15

37 12

19

45

20 21

11

10

13 63

34

5

41

24 38 42 25 >

Parking

Bus

43 <

<

44

Arrival \ Departure

Day 1

Day 2

Day 3


V.


TOURIST TRAFFIC AT BORDER CROSSINGS

• Unknown Future Volumes • Estimating Volumes • Volume over Time • Volume at Crossings


100 - 100 101

UNKNOWN FUTURE VOLUMES

The main uncertainties related to volume of tourist: 1. The number of tourists anticipated per year 2. The number of tourists anticipated at peak times throughout the year 3. The way the volume of tourist will spread across the different crossings

? ? Jan

Feb

Mar

Apr

?

? May

? Jun

Jul

Aug

Sep

2010 Muslim pilgrims

2010 Christian pilgrims

2010 Jewish pilgrims

2010 General tourists

total

Oct

Nov

Dec


TOURIST TRAFFIC AT BORDER CROSSINGS

ESTIMATING VOLUMES

Estimating the future numbers of tourists in East and West Jerusalem The actual number of future tourists to the region in times of peace, as well as the peak demand seasons in the city are unknown. Hence, this study developed several speculations and assumptions in order to estimate future tourism traffic on the urban infrastructure. 1. It is assumed that apart from the usual 800,000 Jewish annually tourists that arrive on the Israeli side through Ben-Gurion airport, the main future sources of tourism will be as follows: A. Some percentage of the 8.2 million Muslim tourists who make their way to Mecca every year during the Hajj and the Omrah (the festivals that require Muslims to visit Mecca), who are assumed to continue their journey and visit the Muslim holy sites in Jerusalem. B. Some percentage of the 4.2 million Christian tourists that make their way to the Vatican every year, who are assumed to visit the Christian holy sites in Jerusalem, Nazareth and Bethlehem. C. Some percentage of the 8.8 million general tourists who visit the region (Syria, Lebanon, Egypt, Jordan, Iraq) annually, who are assumed to add Jerusalem to their itinerary. The low, medium and high scenarios presented in the coming pages are based on the percentage estimation of each group that is likely to visit the two cities in the future. 2. The projection of the peak seasons throughout the year is based on the 2010 calender, in which the Muslim Ramadan falls in August while the Jewish Passover arrives in April and Christmas is celebrated in December. The three religious schedules construct the overall traffic map of each month. This estimation, nevertheless, is problematic. First, while the Muslim calendar is purely lunar and the Christian one is


102 - 102 103

solar, the Hebrew calendar has motifs from both systems. Due to the changing positions of all three calendars, the dates of the different holidays shift each year, requiring a specific estimation for each year individually. Second, the different monthly distributions as percentage of the overall amount of tourists is also based on estimations rather than actual facts, due to lack of substantive data on the subject. Therefore,the scenarios presented here should be considered more as a framework for discussing the issue rather than as an actual base of information. In order to assess the actual trends and traffic of 2017 for example, the authorities will need to study that calendar year and suggest the probable traffic schedule. For matters of simplicity, and in order to get the “big picture” we propose to see the year 2010 as a basis point for overall traffic calculations and multiply it by a growth factor of 1.1% for each year thereafter. This, of course, will not suffice to describe a “peak of peaks” scenario in which Muslim and Christian holidays fall in the same month.


TOURIST TRAFFIC AT BORDER CROSSINGS

Distribution (factor) of tourists (%) - estimation for the year 2010 Distribution factors are based on a surveying sample at Ben Gurion Airport in 2008. The distribution factors are modified according to religious occasions for the year 2010 and are based primarily on assumptions. Month Jan. Feb. Mar Apr. May Jun. Jul. Aug. Sept. Oct. Nov. Dec. Total

Muslim% 5.0% 5.0% 5.0% 6.0% 8.3% 8.3% 8.3% 20.0% 3.0% 3.3% 20.0% 6.7% 98.90%

Christian% 12.3% 3.9% 5.1% 13.1% 11.0% 6.4% 5.0% 7.1% 8.2% 4.2% 4.2% 18.2% 98.70%

Jewish% 6.1% 6.1% 11.9% 14.9% 7.1% 6.2% 5.3% 6.2% 8.5% 17.0% 5.0% 5.1% 99.40%

20.0% 18.0% 16.0% 14.0% 12.0% 10.0% 8.0% 6.0% 4.0% 2.0% 0%

Jan

Feb

Mar

Apr

May

Jun

Muslim distribution factor% Jewish distribution factor%

Jul

Aug Sep

Oct

Nov

Dec

Christian distribution factor%


Muslims visiting Mecca for Hajj 2009: 3,247,000. Altogether tourism to Mecca estimated around 18 Million where 46% (8,28 Million) is for religious purposes*


* Muslim numbers based on: http://www.saudiembassy.net/latest_news/news11290904.aspx Image by: dutchb0y / Eric Verspoor as posted on Flicker.com (http://www.flickr.com/photos/pixelbuffer/106652895/sizes/o/) - The Photographer does not endorse this work (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0/)


The number of visitors to Vatican city was 4,200,000 in 2006*.


INTRODUCTION

* Source: The NY Times http://travel.nytimes.com/2007/02/18/travel/18journeys.html.


The average number of Jewish tourists per year from 2004-2009 was 800,000. We assume that this rate will remain steady due to the limited number of Jews in the world*.

* Inbound Tourism Survey Geocatography Institute July 2009. and Israelâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s Central Bureau of Statistics, CIA Fact Book, http://www.indexmundi.com/ . Image: View of the Western Wall (Al Buraq)


The average number for traditional tourism to surrounding countries is estimated at 8,800,000*.

* Based on the WTOâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s forecast for tourist arrivals in Jordan by 2010. Source: The World Tourism Organization; Tourism 2020 Vision; Madrid 2000


INTRODUCTION

Image: The Giza Pyramids in Egypt; image by: vipeldo / V Manninen as posted on Flicker.com (http://www.flickr.com/photos/vippe/2744339260/sizes/l/T) - The Photographer does not endorse this work (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0/)


Due to lack of information, it is assumed that general tourists are evenly distributed throughout the year.

Image: Tel Aviv Beach;image by: upyernoz as posted on Flicker.com http://www.flickr.com/photos/upyernoz/4145097531/) - The Photographer does not endorse this work (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0/)


INTRODUCTION


114 - 114 115

Scenario 1 - Low

Predictions in numbers of tourists to visit the Palestine-Israel region in 2010 and 1.1% annual increase Low scenario (20% of Muslims visiting Mecca and 20% of Christians visiting Vatican, all current Jewish visitors and 20% of the average general tourism to surrounding countries)

0.60 0.90 0.54 0.81 0.48 0.72 0.42 0.63 0.36 0.54 0.30 0.45 0.24 0.36 0.18 0.27 0.18 0.12 0.09 0.06

00 Jan JanFeb Feb MarMar AprApr May May

Jun Jun

Jul Jul

Aug Aug

Sep Sep

2010 Muslim pilgrims

2010 Christian pilgrims

2010 Jewish pilgrims total

2010 General tourists

1,630,000 Muslim pilgrims 840,000 Christian pilgrims 730,000 Jewish pilgrims 1,670,000 General tourists Total 4,870,000 tourists >

Oct Oct

Nov DecDec Nov


TOURIST TRAFFIC AT BORDER CROSSINGS

Number of tourists expected to cross the international border in both directions Based on 2010, 50% of Muslim pilgrims, 80% of Christian pilgrims, 60% of Jewish pilgrims and 80% of general tourists are expected to cross the international border in both directions.

0.80 0.60 0.72 0.54 0.64 0.48 0.56 0.42 0.48 0.36 0.40 0.30 0.32 0.24 0.24 0.18 0.16 0.12 0.08 0.06 00 Jan

Feb Jan

Mar Feb

Apr Mar

May MayJun Jun Jul Jul AugAug SepSep Apr

Muslim pilgrims

Christian pilgrims

Jewish pilgrims

General tourists

Oct Oct

Nov Nov

Total

50% > 650,000 Muslim pilgrims 80% > 670,000 Christian pilgrims 60% > 440,000 Jewish pilgrims 80% > 13,400,000 General tourists Total: 3,100,000 tourists expected to cross

Dec Dec


116 - 116 117

Scenario 2 - Medium

Predictions in numbers of tourists to visit the Palestine-Israel region in 2010 and 1.1% annual increase Medium scenario (35% of Muslims visiting Mecca and 30% of Christians visiting Vatican, all current Jewish visitors and 30% of the average general tourism to surrounding countries)

1.0 0.9

0.90

0.81 0.8 0.72

0.7 0.63 0.6 0.54 0.5 0.45 0.4 0.36 0.3 0.27 0.2 0.18 0.1 0.09 0 0 Jan

Feb Jan

Mar Feb

Apr Apr May May JunJun JulJul Mar

Aug Aug

Sep Sep

2010 Muslim pilgrims

2010 Christian pilgrims

2010 Jewish pilgrims total

2010 General tourists

2,860,000 Muslim pilgrims 1,240,000 Christian pilgrims 730,000 Jewish pilgrims 2,640,000 General tourists Total: 7,480,000 Tourists >

Oct Nov Nov DecDec Oct


TOURIST TRAFFIC AT BORDER CROSSINGS

Number of tourists expected to cross the international border on both directions 50% of 2010 Muslims pilgrims , 80% of 2010 Christian pilgrims, 60% of 2010 Jewish pilgrims and 80% of 2010 traditional tourists are expected to cross the international border on both directions.

0.80 0.60 0.72 0.54 0.64 0.48 0.56 0.42 0.48 0.36 0.40 0.30 0.32 0.24 0.24 0.18 0.16 0.12 0.08 0.06 0 0 Jan

Feb Jan

Mar Feb MarApr AprMayMay JunJun JulJul

Aug Aug

Muslim pilgrims

Christian pilgrims

Jewish pilgrims

General tourists

Sep Sep

Oct Oct

Nov Nov

Total

50% > 1,140,000 Muslim pilgrims 80% > 990,000 Christian pilgrims 60% > 440,000 Jewish pilgrims 80% > 2,110,000 General tourists Total: 4,690,000 tourists expected to cross

Dec Dec


118 - 118 119

Scenario 3 - High

Predictions of numbers of tourists to visit the Palestine-Israel region in 2010 and 1.1% annual increase High scenario (50% of Muslims visiting Mecca* and 40% of Christians visiting Vatican**, all current Jewish visitors*** and 40% of the average traditional tourism to surrounding countries****)

1.30 0.90 1.17 0.81 1.04 0.72 0.91 0.63 0.78 0.54 0.65 0.45 0.36 0.52 0.27 0.39 0.18 0.26 0.09 0.13 00 Jan

Feb FebMar MarApr Apr MayMay Jun Jan Jun

Jul Jul

Aug Aug

Sep Sep

2010 Muslim pilgrims

2010 Christian pilgrims

2010 Jewish pilgrims total

2010 General tourists

2,860,000 Muslim pilgrims 1,24,000 Christian pilgrims 730,000 Jewish pilgrims 2,640,000 General tourists Total: 10,010,000 tourists >

Oct Oct

Nov Dec Dec Nov


TOURIST TRAFFIC AT BORDER CROSSINGS

Number of tourists expected to cross the international border in both directions Based on 2101, 50% of Muslim pilgrims , 80% of Christian pilgrims, 60% of Jewish pilgrims and 80% of general tourists are expected to cross the international border in both directions.

0.80 0.90 0.72 0.81 0.64 0.72 0.56 0.63 0.48 0.54 0.40 0.45 0.32 0.36 0.24 0.27 0.16 0.18 0.08 0.09 00 Jan

Feb Feb Mar MarApr Apr May Jan May Jun Jun

Jul Jul

Aug Aug

Sep Sep

Muslim pilgrims

Christian pilgrims

Jewish pilgrims

General tourists

OctOct NovNov Dec Dec

Total

50% > 2,160,000 Muslim pilgrims 80% > 1,330,000 Christian pilgrims 60% > 590,000 Jewish pilgrims 80% > 2,820,000 General tourists Total: 6,890,000 tourists expected to cross


120 - 120 121

VOLUME OVER TIME An anticipated spread of Jerusalemâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s tourism throughout the year based on the combination of religious holidays and world tourism peaks, 2010 In addition to general world tourism peaks (around December and August), we anticipate that the Jewish and Muslim holidays (namely Ramadan, Passover and Eid Al Adha) will add to the volume of tourism at the times of year when they occur. In order to handle these peaks efficiently at the border crossings, planning and special arrangements may be required. In case the numbers of tourists exceed the capacity of the different sites, a system of allocating visitor passes (*similar to the procedure in Mecca) might be applied partly or fully.

New Yearsâ&#x20AC;&#x2122; Eve

Passover Easter

[As Jewish and Muslim holidays occur at slightly different time of the year each year, the graph should be re-evaluated according to the respective changes.]

0 Jan

Feb

Mar

Apr

May


TOURIST TRAFFIC AT BORDER CROSSINGS

Ramadan

Eid Al Fiter

Rosh Hashana + Yom Kippur, etc...

Eid Al Adha

Christmas

3- High

2- Med 1- Low

Jun

Jul

Aug

Sep

Oct

Nov

Dec


Anticipated122 loads - 122 123on the future border crossings Anticipated loads on the future border crossings

The illustration below demonstrates the estimated relative monthly loads on the border crossings and on theThe Oldillustration City gates,below in a low-volume scenario of 3 million Israeli and 3loads Million Palestinian tourists and demonstrates the estimated relative monthly on the border crossings per year. on the Old City gates, in a low-volume scenario of 3 million Israeli and 3 Million Palestinian tourists

VOLUME AT CROSSINGS

per year. *The estimation regarding the relative popularity of the Old City gates is based on a field survey, *The estimation regarding the relative popularity of the Old City gates is based on a field survey, conducted by Dr. Yaakov (SP?) Garb....... ref Anticipated traffic at the date.... future border crossings conducted by Dr. Yaakov (SP?) Garb....... date.... ref

800K 400K 200K 100K 50K 25K

800K 400K 200K 100K 50K 25K

25K 50K 100K 200K 400K 800K

25K 50K 100K 200K 400K 800K

l Hil ll ch h Hi n c Fre Fren 55%55% 60% y 60% lon ny Co Colo n ca an eri ric Am Ame 15% 15%10% 10%10% 10%

. . sG sG cu ascu s G. G. ma m 's 's Da Daate arteod erod G a HGe H . ffa aff OLD CITYs G. 's G ' en Ja J OLDeCITY e n t h e a at G ph ep n G ion te . St te Zio ZSt. S St Gatge Ga n g u n Du D or oru T l) u TAb l) he b A 10% hReac c ( 10% a 10% 10% m h(R em ehle h t e e thlB Be

20% 20% 20% 20%

Pedestrian

Buses and public transport

Vehicles

Border crossing

Old City gate

Pedestrian and public transportRelative Vehicles crossing Relative Oldpopularity City gate of Old City gate RelativeBuses % crossing to Israel % crossing to Border Palestine Relative % crossing to Israel

Relative % crossing to Palestine

Relative popularity of Old City gate


TOURIST TRAFFIC AT BORDER CROSSINGS

The illustration demonstrates the estimated relative monthly traffic at the border crossings and on the Old City gates, in a medium volume scenario of about 4.69 million tourists crossing from one side to another annually. It is assumed that the major East-West crossing facility will be located near French Hill and will deal with 55% - 60% of the crossing tourists who visit the cities. The reason for this location’s superiority is its proximity to the Old City and the Historic Basin, the relatively vacant land resources in the area, the fact that it is located by a major East-West road network (Road 1) and that it has a direct path to the Old City (Road 60). The two pedestrian crossings are estimated to deal with 10% -15% of tourists crossings each. These will be composed mostly from individual tourists who wish to visit the Historic Basin, and have seen the Old City on another occasion (and hence will not approach the Old City gates). The Bethlehem crossing is assumed to deal with the rest of the crossing tourists, focusing mostly on groups which plan to visit Bethlehem and Hebron.

*The estimation regarding the relative popularity of the Old City gates is based on a field survey, conducted by Dr. Yaakov Garb in: Yehuda Greenfield-Gilat and Karen Lee Bar-Sinai (SAYA) “Jaffa Gate Border Station- a Spatial Study”, February 2007.

To French Hill American Colony

Damascus Gate

Herod’s Gate

St. Stephen’s Gate

Jaffa Gate

Zion Gate

Abu Tor To Bethlehem

Dung Gate


VI.


ACCOMPANYING INFRASTRUCTURE & POLICY

• A Border Tourism Coordination Authority • The”Jerusalem Pass” • The Shuttle Service • Parking Facilities • Tourism Oriented Urban Development


126 - 126 127

Beyond border crossings, there are several more components recommended in order to facilitate movement and minimize disruptions to tourist flows in Jerusalem.

A BORDER TOURISM COORDINATION AUTHORITY (BTCA) Anticipated traffic at the future border crossings

In order to make the experience and crossing of tourists as smooth and easy as possible, it is recommended here to establish an Authority dedicated to the matter. By conducting the actions proposed below, the BTCA can minimize the time and the effort tourists would have to spend on crossing between Yerushalaim and Al-Quds.

Policy recommendation: A Border Tourism Coordination Authority (BTCA)

*

In order to make the experience and crossing of tourists as smooth and easy as possible, it is recommended here to establish an authority dedicated to the matter. By holding the activities proposed below, the BTCA can minimze the time and the effort touirsts would have to spend on crossing between Yerushalyim and Al-Quds.

*

Responsibilities Responsibilities Pre Arrival

Arrival

At border crossings

i

JERUSALEM PASS

Group Coordinating group crossing in advance

Issuing “Jerusalem Pass”for tourists seeking a quick method of crossing within the City

During visit

Operating a shuttle system between the border crossings and the main tourist attractions

Operating information points across Jerusalem, at the border crossings and around main tourist attractions

? Issuing special permits for tourist groups’ buses

Assisting tourists with crossing information and directing them to the least busy crossing points

Monitoring and balancing the volumes of people between the different crossings

On site representatives assisting tourists at the crossings,and around the main tourist sites


d Al-Quds.

es

ACCOMPANYING INFRASTRUCTURE & POLICY

Arrival

At border crossings

During visit

THE JERUSALEM FREEPASS ZONE

i

JERUSALEM PASS

crossing

Issuing “Jerusalem Pass”for tourists seeking a quick method of crossing within the bimCity a ac

Operating a shuttle system between the border crossings and the main tourist attractions

“JERUSALEM PASS”

M

ch

n Fre

Operating information points across Jerusalem, at the border crossings and around main tourist attractions

l

Hil

Inloorder to make the crossing between East ny Co n ca and West Jerusalem as quick and smooth eri Am as possible, it is proposed to develop te Ga usspecial e c t a crossing-card for tourists. The s Assisting tourists with Monitoring and balancing mits for Ga ma e 'sinformationatand d Dacrossing the volumes of people s o G “Jerusalem Pass”a biometric based r He n'sthe least directing themheto between the different p card- can be issued for a e t busyidentification crossing points crossings S . St pre-defined time for tourists by the BTCA. The “Jerusalem Pass” will allow tourists to cross between the sides with minimum que or effort. It will also give the border authorities greater knowledge regarding ) ur u T identity and crossing patterns of the b the A ( or uT ) different Ab 00 users.

?

3 h(

ru

ut So m e l The “Jerusalem Pass” might also be sa

Je

?

considered for daily workers, special permit holders, or even ordinary Israeli and Palestinian citizens seeking to cross often and efficiently. Special group passes may also be considered in order to give priority to large group crossings and manage them efficiently.

l

Hil

ny

olo

C an ric

e

Am

On site representatives assisting tourists at the crossings,and around the main tourist sites

ate

sG

u sc

ma

Da

's

d ero

H

St.

te

Ga

ate

G ffa Ja

n Zio

te

Ga

ng

Du

)

ur uT

te Ga

b r (A

o uT

Ab

0)

m he

(30

e thl

Be

's en

ph

Ste

OLD CITY

OLD CITY

te

ch

n Fre

JERUSALEM PASS

te

Ga


ort touirsts would have to spend on crossing between

â&#x20AC;?for

n

nd ast

128 - 128 129 At border crossings

During visit

i Operating a shuttle system between the border crossings and the main tourist attractions

Operating information points across Jerusalem, at the border crossings and around main tourist attractions

THE SHUTTLE SERVICE

A complementary shuttle system separated from and parallel to the existing transport system, dedicated to the border and tourism backbone and to the â&#x20AC;&#x153;Jerusalem Passâ&#x20AC;? holders and other tourists. Major stations will be located adjacent to all the crossings as well as to the Old City gates and major religious and tourist sites.

?

Monitoring and balancing the volumes of people between the different crossings

On site representatives assisting tourists at the crossings,and around the main tourist sites


ACCOMPANYING INFRASTRUCTURE & POLICY

'

me

la Ja

m

aii Efr

e'

am ilm aJba

60

c

Ma

443

m

aii Efr

443

bim ca l MaHil

ch

443

n Fre

1 1

443

ch

60 60

n Fre

n ca

eri A60m60

Begin Road

City Center

G.

us

c as

1 y

lon

o nC

1

417 417

.

. sG

.

' d's G rteod Hero e a s ate ffH a G OLD CITY 'shen' a G OLD Ja CITY f f ep te hSetn Ja a te n G eSpt. e Ga Zito. St g Gat n S nte o i u Z GDa ng u D r m Da

Yerushalaim

ny

lo Co

e

sG

cu

s ma

l

Hil

a ric

Am

Begin Road

City Center

60

Yerushalaim 39

39

Da

Al-Quds

Al-Quds

o uT

Ab

60

60

Corridor to\from Gaza

el

nn

or hem Tu u T thle hem

Ab

Be thle el e +B m unn Vadi Nar Road e T eh mia thl lerhkuem e B thTa e 60 Vadi Nar Road +B r ita e M ia

um

rk Ta

Corridor to\from Gaza

Ein

90

di

Ge

ar eit

60

M

1

1

road

shuttle

Israeli - Palestinian border

90 public transportation

i

ed

G Ein P

Israeli International border

parking lot Palestine International border


130 - 130 131

PARKING FACILITIES

'

me

la Ja

Enhancing the tourism oriented infrastructure will include designating existing and future parking lots for the use of tourists visiting the area and crossing at the border points.

m

aii Efr

im

b ca Ma

443

60

443

h nc

P

1

Fre

ny

60 60 Begin Road

n ca

ri me

A

ma

Da

Yerushalaim 39

ffa

Ja

P Mamila Parking

G

Sultan

's

OLD CITY

P

u Ab

P Talpiot

60

P

Ras El

P Amud

r To Ras El

P Amud em

eh m thl he Be thle e +B a P mi u k r Ta ar eit

M

90

Al-Quds

n he te Step a n G St. te Zio Ga g n Du

Mt. Zion

Corridor to\from Gaza

417

P Suleiman

. sG

'

rod

He

ate

1

Bab El

.

sG

u sc

lo Co

P Zahara

City Center

P

l

Hil

Ein

di

Ge

l

ne

n Tu

Vadi Nar Road

60


ACCOMPANYING INFRASTRUCTURE & POLICY

Sheikh Hussain

lam

Ja

m

1

im

ab ac

im

M

443

443

1 P

Ben-Gurion International

ch

n Fre

Begin Road

City Center

P

Da

Israel

Yerushalaim Yerushalaim 39

39

Ashdod

a aff

J

P Mamila Parking

rDo

i Corridor to\from Gaza

Corridor to\from Gaza

el

An Tu

r Ta60

Ei

60

r

a eit

M

di

e nG

90

Ein

90

Arava

Ras El Amud

r To bnuel

Ras El

P Amud em

r ita Me

Gaza International** Rafiah

Palestine Al-Quds

nn eh m em Tu thl lehe 90 lehhem Be 60 h h t t e Be tVadi hle Nar Road +B e Vadi Nar Road +B a P mi u a k i r m Ta ku

60

P

Gaza***

Sultan

H

or uT

Ab

Abdalla Bridge (Not open)

P Suleiman G.

d's ero

ph

P

rn

.

sG

ate

J

P

Qa

417

417

Bab El

ph te e ate . Ste Ga t. St G n t e S n t S tPe Zio ZGioa Ga ng ng u Du D

Talpiot

Allenby Bridge (King Hussein)

1

e

Am

cu

ny

olo

C an ric

West bank International*

's 's a G OLD OLD CITY aff en CITYAl-Quds en

Mt. Zion

ez Er

Co

P Zahara

as. sG da'm

He

te

Ga

n ca

.

sG

cu

s ma

n Fre

H

eri

Am

City Center

H ch

ill

y 60 60lon 1

60 60

Begin Road

90

ill

443

1

60

M 60

ab ac

443

Adam Bridge

m

aii Efr

aii Efr

Haifa

e'

lam

Ja

e'

di

Ge

Eilat-Taba

1

1

road

shuttle

Israeli - Palestinian border 1

1

Eilat Eilat International public transportation

road

shuttle

Israeli - Palestinian border

P

Israeli International border

parking lot

public transportation

Palestine International border P

Israeli International border

parking lot

Palestine International border


132 - 132 133

TOURISM ORIENTED URBAN DEVELOPMENT A vision for a border-tourism backbone: The proposed infrastructure, parking lots and shuttle systems according to their planned layout

To Mt. Herzl

Geneva Accord border line

Light rail route

Shuttle Bus route

Museums

Parking

Bus


ACCOMPANYING INFRASTRUCTURE & POLICY

Sheikh Jarah

Kiryat Haleâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;om

OLD CITY

City Center

Mt. of Olives

Mt. Zion

Christian Interest

Jewish Interest

Muslim Interest

Hotel Area


134 - 134 135

View from the Sherover - Haas Promenade


INTRODUCTION


VII.


SUMMARY

• How Will a Tourist Cross Jerusalem? • Conclusions and Recommendations • Issues for Further Discussion


138 - 138 139

HOW WILL A TOURIST CROSS JERUSALEM?

These illustrations demonstrate the crossing procedure a tourist would undergo when coming from each of the sides. Although coordination of tourist groups with the BTCA is utterly critical for a smooth trip between East and West Jerusalem, individual tourists will find the BTCA useful to. The organized group will do best to pre-register the group, the bus company and plate numbers with the BTCA prior to arrival. The registration will be used at the border crossing as a travel permit on the other side and as an entrance pass for the bus to the Old City (if possible). The registration will smoothen the crossing process, requiring only that the bus return through the very same crossing, unless otherwise arranged. The individual tourist will be able to register in BTCA upon arrival. The registration, which will contain screening of the passport will include obtaining the “Jerusalem Pass”- a free passage card that will enable tourists to cross the Old City from an Israeli gate to a Palestinian one or vice versa, visit the other side and return to the original entry point at the end of the journey.

Visitors to Israel Entity

Pre arrival

Arrival French Hill / Bethlehem

Group

Registration

*

Old City

(crossing the border with the group bus) Entity

Pre arrival

Arrival French Hill / Bethlehem American Colony / Abu Tor

Individual

*

Registration PASS

Old City

(crossing as pedestrians and using the “Jerusalem Pass”)


lehem

lehem Abu Tor

S

SUMMARY

Visitors to Palestine Arrival Pre arrival

Entity

French Hill / Bethlehem

Group

Registration

*

Old City

Arrival Pre arrival

Entity

French Hill / Bethlehem American Colony / Abu Tor

*

Registration PASS

Old City

Individual


140 - 140 141

CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS This study, which explored a vision for the future Jerusalem border in peace, has not only aimed to support the cityâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s transition to being the capital of two states, but also to envision its transformation in to a global scale center. The future border was therefore not approached from the functional point of view, but rather has been laid out to form a backbone of cooperation and mutual understanding between the two peoples. The crossing points were situated to effectively link to the surrounding urban, national and regional infrastructure, towards the creation of a well connected and easy flow seam line. Such conditions are hoped to pave the way to the preservation of Jerusalemâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s stature and maximize its future binational potential. In order to fully grasp the potential of the border regime, one of its main sub fields, the tourism industry, was chosen to serve as the main prism for exploring the proposed border system. Through this prism, different types of users, their crossing patterns and various crossing and visiting scenarios were tested and demonstrated simultaneously. This has allowed us to devote attention to the challenges arising from the new functions of the urban border and to address them in advance with planning and policy tools. Trapped deep in conflict, Jerusalem of today is far from reaching the potential it holds as a center on a global scale. Under peaceful circumstances, Jerusalem will surely transform from a conflict core to an energetic joint between east and west, and become a sought after religious and touristic city. Nevertheless, this transition will be a challenging one, as millions of additional tourists arrive in the city, cross between East and West, and rely on the local infrastructure. In order for tourism to really become a catalyst for the development of both Palestine and Israel, the border crossings need to facilitate, rather than hinder in any way, the smooth flow of visitors between the different sites of the city. To this end, the study has addressed several issues. Firstly, it has analyzed the current tourism trends on local and global scales to reveal the emergence of two important phenomena. The first, the increasing presence of pilgrimage and religious tourism, which we believe will further strengthen in times of peace. The second, the growing tendency to travel in group-based tours. This form is proving increasingly popular and effective in similar locations like the Vatican City in Rome, and may well indicate the future form of tourism in Jerusalem.


SUMMARY

These two realizations were important factors in designing operations for the border crossings operation form, as well as their accompanying infrastructure. The following task was understanding the spatial form tourism takes in Jerusalem, the main points of interest, and the greater areas of interest such sites form together. These definitions were then linked directly to planning the locations of the border crossings, and for the proposed border shuttle system. They also served as the basis for imagining different types of touristsâ&#x20AC;&#x2122; visits to the city, and understanding the interface each type of visitor will have with the border system. A great deal of attention was given to currently nonexistent tourist types (particularly Muslim visitors) which hold great potential in terms of volume yet due to their inability to visit the area today, their visiting paths are a matter of speculation. On the basis of these various layers of data, a tourism based border regime has been developed to facilitate all types of movements. As noted, it is predicted that a stable peace environment will encourage greater numbers of tourists and create new categories of tourism; mainly Islamic pilgrims. Although there is no way to come up with accurate estimations for future tourism volume, it was important to explore the capacities of the proposed system in terms of volume and anticipate the spread of traffic across it. To achieve this, several assumptions have been made based on current sizes and growth rates of tourism flows in the region and similar sites such as the Vatican. Three scenarios were defined according to numbers for 2010: Low- with approximately 4.87 million visitors, medium, and high- exploring a possibility of 10.01 million tourists a year. Whichever scenario should actually develop, it is clear to us that local tourism will grow immensely. Moreover, a significant number of visitors are expected to cross from Palestine to Israel or vice versa at least once, hence interfacing with the proposed border system. As tourists add to the local flow through the crossings (labor, goods, diplomats, etc.), huge demands might occur at peak times. The border regime should be able to handle massive flows whether they are individuals, groups or any other related traffic. It should aim to be as seamless as possible, and introduce â&#x20AC;&#x153;friendlyâ&#x20AC;? crossing mechanisms whilst ensuring security measures are


142 - 142 143

adequately met. The proposed “Jerusalem Pass”,a biometric based crossing card issued for limited time and use for visiting individuals or groups can assist achieving this goal with relatively high efficiency. Additionally, in order for the border regime not to present an obstacle or a constraint for tourism and its development, a great deal of coordination will be required between the sides. The “Border Tourism Cooperation Authority” (BTCA) , is proposed to address this exact need. As a jointly run authority, it will facilitate such coordination, and be the address for all tourist needs, queries and assistance. While this work has devoted great attention to the future needs of tourism, it has limited itself to focusing on the border regime and orientating it to become as efficient and tourism-friendly as possible. There is yet a need to conduct a thorough study focusing on needs assessment of future tourism in Jerusalem, and understand the costs and scope of this development. Such a study, referring to tourism infrastructure, hotels, transportation, parking, recreation, tourist paths and so forth will complement this study and further develop it into a thorough “Tourism Master Plan for Jerusalem in a Time of Peace”. This body of work adjoins several past studies envisioning the future Jerusalem in peaceful times, and the ways to transform it into a global scale center. We strongly believe that addressing the future border beyond a functional system of separation and connection points, as a backbone of cooperation and mutual interests, can shift the way decisions are made, and the day-after reality of their implementation. Strengthening the level of trust and cooperation through proper design and policy tools will allow for tourism as well as border cooperation to become true catalysts for growth and development for the two sides.


SUMMARY

ISSUES FOR FURTHER DISCUSSION

1. The Peak of Peaks: when Ramadan coincides with Passover/Easter a particularly large crowd is expected in East and West Jerusalem. The authorities and infrastructure management of the two cities must plan the proper policies to face these circumstances, ranging from special attention to infrastructure to imposing traveler quotas at peak time (as done in Mecca). 2. Supporting Infrastructures: a comprehensive study regarding the infrastructures required to support large numbers of tourists must be conducted. This study will not limit itself to the number of buses needed in the shuttle service, but will relate to many aspects of the tourism industry, such as: the required width of access roads; the sewage and water systems needed to support a million tourists visiting the area at once; the number of hotel rooms that should be developed and their preferred locations; etc. 3. The Road Network: While the shuttle system seems essential on both sides, it may be probable on the west side only due to severe lack of transportation routes in the southeastern part of Jerusalem, leading from the Old City south to Bethlehem. Understanding the future options of road network development in East Jerusalem and planning the shuttle system accordingly is extremely important to the overall tourist regime scheme. 4. The Complete BTCA Study: Understanding and delineating the different responsibilities, challenges and operations associated with the Border Tourism Administration Authority of Jerusalem. A comprehensive study that will propose solutions to registration, traffic distribution, communications with official entities and with tourists and so on.



THE BORDER REGIME FOR JERUSALEM IN PEACE