[sustran] Re: [UTSG] reducing interests in vehicular travel by getting rid of the fun in the driving

[Wetzel Dave]

Todd wrote:
"One of the best features of pricing is that rates can be adjusted to
reflect changes in demand and planning objectives. To manage congestion,
rates should be higher during peak periods and lower during off-peak
periods, and can increase over time as demand grows, ....."

I visited Minneapolis last month during the Presidential elections.
Next Spring they are going to introduce charging on the High Occupancy
Vehicle Lane (HOV, Diamond Lane) for single occupant vehicles on one of
their Interstate Highways.

This lane, in the middle of the highway, alternates for peak flows.
It is currently well under-occupied by HOVs.

They intend to charge up to $8 for single occupant vehicles to enter the
lane.
The congestion will be measured every six minutes - and the price adjusted
accordingly, every six minutes.
You only pay as you join through one of six entry points.
If the lane is congested at $8 then it will be closed to non-HOV traffic
completely.

I think something similar already exists elsewhere in the USA.


Dave
Dave Wetzel; Vice-Chair; Transport for London. 

-----Original Message-----
From: Todd Alexander Litman [mailto:litman at VTPI.ORG]
Sent: 29 November 2004 14:57
To: UTSG at JISCMAIL.AC.UK
Subject: Re: [UTSG] reducing interests in vehicular travel by getting
rid of the fun in the driving


At 10:56 AM 11/29/2004 +0000, Sanjay Rana wrote:
>How does the congestion charging model incorporate the increased flow of
>traffic in future - perhaps by increasing the congestion charge or adding
>some other form of charge?

One of the best features of pricing is that rates can be adjusted to
reflect changes in demand and planning objectives. To manage congestion,
rates should be higher during peak periods and lower during off-peak
periods, and can increase over time as demand grows, or if a city wants to
reduce road or parking supply, for example, by converting some traffic
lanes to pedestrian space.


>Are there any research on the type of traffic that have
>disappeared/migrated? Was it the cross-london traffic or just some one from
>Kensington avoiding to go to shopping to oxford street?

The London congestion pricing evaluation program is looking carefully at
the travel changes that have resulted
(www.tfl.gov.uk/tfl/cc_monitoring.shtml), and yes, much of the reduced
traffic is from avoided cross-town trips, rather than trips to the center
area, and some are reduced shopping trips. Some businesses have complained
of substantial reductions in traffic, although I suspect they are
exaggerating the impacts.


>Another (and perhaps impractical) idea - How about setting up a website
>where all vehicle owners i.e. households and companies can submit,
>anonymously, the following information to a national survey:
>For each car or a set of cars owned:
>
>- postcodes of starting point and end point of journey
>- journeys per week
>- time of each journey (i.e. AM,PM etc.)
>
>This could be a small project, advertised on relevant websites such as AA,
>banks, DVLA, etc. in UK and similar ones elsewhere and also perhaps via
>postal ballot.

This is called "Ridesharing" (http://www.vtpi.org/tdm/tdm34.htm), and such
websites are implemented in many cities. Most are intended for predictable
commute trips, others are dynamic, that is, they are intended for
individual trips.

The challenge we face is not a lack of travel alternatives, it is a lack of
incentives to use those alternatives. Ridesharing, public transit, cycling,
walking, telework (using telecommunications to substitute for physical
travel) and flextime (allowing employees greater flexibility in when they
work) are all transportation options that can substantially reduce private
automobile travel. Most travelers could shift mode for some trips without
too much effort, but they lack an incentive to do so. Most vehicle costs
are fixed: motorists pay thousands of dollars/euros annually to own a car
regardless of how much it is used. The marginal cost of driving seems low.
Vehicles owners feel that they need to maximize their driving in order to
get a fair return on their fixed costs (particularly since automobiles are
status goods, so many consumers spend more than they really need to), and
public transit/rideshare vehicles are generally stuck in traffic as well as
private cars. As a result, the current transportation market gives
travelers little incentive to shift mode when possible (for example, for a
commuter to use public transit when they don't need their car for errands
after work, or to cycle during good weather).

Note, by the way, that physically and economically disadvantaged people
tend to benefit most from pricing incentives, particularly if revenues are
used to improve travel options such as public transit and nonmotorized
travel conditions, because many already use alternative modes and they
value the opportunity to save money, for example, by Parking Cash Out
(commuters are given a choice between receiving free parking or the cash
equivalent). The claim that pricing is always harmful to the poor is simply
inaccurate.



Sincerely,
Todd Litman, Director
Victoria Transport Policy Institute
"Efficiency - Equity - Clarity"
1250 Rudlin Street
Victoria, BC, V8V 3R7, Canada
Phone & Fax: 250-360-1560
Email: litman at vtpi.org
Website: http://www.vtpi.org


***********************************************************************************
The contents of the e-mail and any transmitted files are confidential and intended solely for the use of the individual or entity to whom they are addressed. Transport for London hereby exclude any warranty and any liability as to the quality or accuracy of the contents of this email and any attached transmitted files. If you are not the intended recipient be advised that you have received this email in error and that any use, dissemination, forwarding, printing or copying of this email is strictly prohibited.

If you have received this email in error please notify postmaster at tfl.gov.uk.

This footnote also confirms that this email message has been swept for the presence of computer viruses.
***********************************************************************************