[sustran] Re: [NewMobilityCafe] Difficulties that Pedestrians andPublic Ro ad Transport face

[Kisan Mehta]

Thank you for drawing my attention to an apparant anomaly.    Urbanisation
is related to the number of people residing urban areas. In India, human
settlements having a population of 5,000 and more are designated as urban.

Mumbai had a population of 11.91 milion on 31 March 2001 ( Census of India
2001) but occupied only 434 sq km of land.  I have been telling that Mumbai
has 1.2%  of India's population but only 0.001% of India's landmass.

Cities and now megacities are considered to provide economies of scale
where human activities are concentrated.   I am definite that cities do not
provide satisfaction to
humans compared to non-urban areas yet we find them huddling in cities. Best
wishes.

Kisan Mehta
Tel: 00 91 22 2414 9688
----- Original Message -----
From: "Wetzel Dave" <Davewetzel at tfl.gov.uk>
To: <NewMobilityCafe at yahoogroups.com>; "Asia and the Pacific sustainable
transport" <sustran-discuss at list.jca.apc.org>
Cc: <indianenvironment at yahoogroups.co.in>; "Harshad J. Kamdar"
<hjk at rincon.co.in>; <bombaynet at yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Monday, June 28, 2004 1:41 PM
Subject: [sustran] Re: [NewMobilityCafe] Difficulties that Pedestrians
andPublic Ro ad Transport face


> I note the following.
>
> "While the following from the Telegraph, UK covers urban areas (UK is 70%
> urbanised), "
>
> nb    It is not true that UK is 70% urbanised by area.
>
> A quick search of the web indicates that less than 11% of land area is
urban
> (with 70% agriculture and 9% forestry). However, almost 90% of the UK's
> population live in urban settlements of over 1500 population.
>
> Dave
> Dave Wetzel; Vice-Chair; Transport for London.
> Windsor House. 42-50 Victoria Street. London. SW1H 0TL. UK
> Tel: 020 7941 4200
> >
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Kisan Mehta [mailto:kisansbc at vsnl.com]
> Sent: 28 June 2004 03:01
> To: Asia and the Pacific sustainable transport; NewMobilityCafe
> Cc: Harshad J. Kamdar; indianenvironment at yahoogroups.co.in;
> bombaynet at yahoogroups.com
> Subject: [NewMobilityCafe] Difficulties that Pedestrians and Public Road
> Transport face
> >
> Dear Colleagues,
>
> The UK authorities has started sensing problem created to pedestrians
> and public transport from ever increasing presence of 4X4 Drives, SUVs
> (Sport Utility Vehicles) and Station Wagons on roads.
>
> While the following from the Telegraph, UK covers urban areas (UK is 70%
> urbanised), the problem is more threatening in rural areas both in the
> developed and developing (poor) countries where widening roads are
> hardly 5-9 metre wide with residences opening out directly to the narrow
> road  (I(ndia is less than 30% urbanised with many villages having no
> motorable road access from outside).    Srill SUVs etc have invaded
> remote villages covering the entire width creating movement problems to
> humans and animals.
>
> Do we in the poor countries need to curb these status symbols of the rich,
> guzzlers of petrol and more polluting diesel, generators of pollution?
> They have certainly no role in the developing (poor) countries however
> the authorities encourage more of them to come on the roads.  Best wishes.
>
> Kisan Mehta
> Tel: 00 91 22 2414 9688
>
>
>
>
> Urban 4x4 drivers should pay more tax, says transport chief
>
>
> By Terri Judd
>
>
> 28 June 2004
>
>
>
> The Government's most senior adviser on transport hit out at the owners of
> urban four-wheel-drive vehicles yesterday, branding them irresponsible and
> dangerous.
>
> Professor David Begg suggested that their drivers should pay higher car
tax
> and congestion charges. "If people want to cause damage to the
environment,
> create congestion and continue to threaten the safety of other road users
by
> driving these vehicles around then they should be made to pay for it," the
> chairman of the Commission for Integrated Transport said.
>
> Falling prices and cheap finance deals have led to a record number of 4x4s
> being sold in Britain, with more than 77,000 bought in the first five
months
> of this year, compared with 67,000 in the same period in 2003.
>
> Opposition to the bulky vehicles, which can weigh up to two tonnes, has
> grown in tandem with the boom, as environmentalists and road safety
> campaigners voice their opposition. Only last month the Mayor of London,
Ken
> Livingstone, branded parents using these "status symbols" for school trips
> as complete idiots.
>
> Late last year the first study of its type showed that four-wheel-drive
cars
> were three times more likely to kill a pedestrian than smaller vehicles.
> Researchers found that their height led to fatal head injuries, whereas
> saloon cars usually caused leg wounds. Motorists involved in side-impact
> collisions with 4x4s are 27 times more likely to die than those struck by
> other cars.
>
> Mr Begg said: "Whilst driving off-road in the countryside might be
suitable
> for 4x4 vehicles, there is no doubt that the same cannot be said for
driving
> through our towns and cities. They're polluters, they're space-occupiers,
> and they're more dangerous for pedestrians, cyclists and other motorists."
>
> The vehicles emitted four times as much carbon dioxide as more
> environmentally friendly cars, he said. "Owners should pay a higher rate
of
> car tax to reflect the damage they cause. In conditions like London's
> congestion charging zones, 4x4 drivers should also pay more."
>
> Mr Begg is not alone in that view. Norman Baker, the Liberal Democrat
> environment spokesman, has led a campaign against the spread of off-road
> vehicles. His report, A Programme for Change, recommends higher excise
duty
> on such vehicles.
>
> >From next year French purchasers of 4x4s face a higher purchase tax and
> Parisian councillors have proposed banning them from the capital.
>
> A spokesman for the Treasury said that it kept taxes under review, but an
> increase seems unlikely. Only two years ago the Government rejected the
idea
> of "punitive" rates, choosing instead to offer "incentive" decreases for
> smaller cars.
>
> The Society of Motor Manufacturers and Traders said 4x4 drivers should not
> be vilified. The risks had been exaggerated, while drivers liked the high
> driving position, visibility and perceived safety.
>
>   28 June 2004 06:49
>
>
>   <http://news.independent.co.uk/img/furniture/trans.gif>
>
>
<http://www.moneysupermarket.com/Link.asp?Source=INDEPENDENT&Section=compare
> loans>
>   <http://news.independent.co.uk/img/furniture/trans.gif>
>
>
>
****************************************************************************
****