[sustran] Re: [NewMobilityCafe] Pico y placa Bogotá- the evolution and further comments

Oscar Edmundo Diaz diazoe at aolpremium.com
Fri Nov 25 07:54:53 JST 2005


Dear All,
Some clarifications about the system below in CAPS
Best regards,
 
Oscar Edmundo Diaz
Executive Director
Por el País que Queremos Foundation
Avenida 13 Nº 100-12, Oficina 1101              
Bogotá,  DC, COLOMBIA                            
Tel: +(57-1) 635-1571/49/38 - Fax: +(57-1) 635-1649 - US Mobile: (1-917)
892-2056
URL:  <http://www.porelpaisquequeremos.com/> www.porelpaisquequeremos.com -
Alternate e-mail:   <mailto:diazoe at itdp.org> diazoe at itdp.org
  _____  

From: NewMobilityCafe at yahoogroups.com [mailto:NewMobilityCafe at yahoogroups.com]
On Behalf Of Carlos F. Pardo
Sent: Tuesday, November 22, 2005 11:59 AM
To: 'Asia and the Pacific sustainable transport'
Cc: NewMobilityCafe at yahoogroups.com
Subject: [NewMobilityCafe] Pico y placa Bogotá- the evolution and further
comments
 
The pico y placa in Bogotá is a good idea as long as it is properly managed. The
complete evolution of the idea and its consequences is the following:
 
General rule: Cars will be banned from peak hour traffic depending on the day of
the week and the last number of their license plate.
1.	First exercise: cars are banned from 7:00- 9:00 am and 5:00-7:00 pm from
Monday through Friday, according to the following rule:
a.	Monday: license plates that end in 1-2-3-4
b.	Tuesday: license plates that end in 5-6-7-8
c.	Wednesday: license plates that end in 9-0-1-2
d.	Thursday: license plates that end in 3-4-5-6
e.	Friday: license plates that end in 7-8-9-0
 
Consequences of the first exercise:
i.                     Car volumes are redistributed  throughout the hours
adjacent to peak hours, balancing all-day traffic (this is why they made it on
peak hours only)
[OED] ACTUALLY THE MAIN REASON TO DO IT ONLY AT PEAK HOURS, WAS TO AVOID PEOPLE
BUY A SECOND CAR.  WHEN CAR RESTRICTIONS ARE FOR THE ENTIRE DAY PEOPLE BUY A
SECOND CAR, THIS IS WHAT HAPPENED IN MEXICO, SAO PAULO, SANTIAGO, ETC. BEFORE WE
STRUCTURED THE PICO Y PLACA WE DID RESEARCH OF OTHER EXPERIENCES, THAT HELPED US
COME WITH THIS SCHEME
ii.                   Illegal vendors would sell black stickers to turn 3’s into
8’s, 1’s into 4,s ,etc (those were quickly taken out of the street) 
[OED] I HAVE NEVER HEARD OF THIS, AT THE BEGINNING AND THINKING THAT THESE LIKE
THIS COULD HAPPEN, THE SCHEME WAS PROTECTED WITH A STICKER THAT HAS TO BE PLACED
IN THE FRONT 
iii.                  When citizens would buy a car, they would negotiate with
the car dealer to get a license plate that would not end in 7-8-9-0 (Friday,
partytime). 
 
2.	First reformulation of the exercise: some minor changes:
a.	License plate numbers are not negotiable for new cars.
b.	Numbers for each day are shifted two spots (e.g. Monday is 3-4-5-6,
Tuesday 7-8-9-0, etc), and the rule changes every certain time (I’m not sure, I
think it changes every month or two). People with their Friday-I-can-ride
license plates are angry.
[OED] THE SHIFT IS MADE ANNUALLY AND EVEN THOUGH PEOPLE THAT GET IT ON FRIDAY
COMPLAINS A LITTLE, AT THE THIS SHIFT MAKES THE SCHEME MORE EQUAL
c.	Since a significant number of cars in Bogotá are registered outside of
the city (e.g. taxes are given to suburbs instead of the city where they are
being used), cars registered outside of Bogotá are banned from 6:30- 9:00 am and
4:30- 7:00 pm (this results in a rapid increase of vehicles registered in
Bogotá).
 
3.	Second reformulation of the exercise:
a.	The banning is expanded to vehicles one hour more (e.g.
Bogotá-registered vehicles are banned 6:00-9:00 am, others from 5:30!!). 
 
I guess few people have known this evolution. In my opinion, most ideas were
great and regulation of the activity has been properly made, EXCEPT in the last
change (banning from 6 am, 5:30 am). This hour shift was ridiculously excessive
and did not redistribute the car volumes to “earlier than the peak hour”, but
all to “later than peak hour” doubling the volumes and actually shifting the
peak hour to after 9am (all this is better explained through a graph of daily
volumes).
 
Also, another problem with the pico y placa was the perverse effect: congestion
-> pico y placa -> less congestion -> more cars were bought -> congestion WITH
pico y placa -> what to do? What I mean with this is that the pico y placa was
merely implemented since the beginning as an economic instrument but never
explained to the public properly. People still feel that the idea behind traffic
management is to move faster in any mode, instead of restricting unsustainable
modes’ circulation and shifting people towards other modes of transport. For
example, if the pico y placa would have been well explained, the expansion of
the ban to 6:00 am would have moved car users to TransMilenio or bicycles (which
it didn’t).
[OED] I ABSOLUTELY DISAGREE WITH THESE TWO COMMENTS:
- OUR GOAL IS THAT BY THE YEAR 2015 ALL CARS ARE BANNED DURING PEAK HOURS, THREE
HOURS IN THE MORNING AND THREE HOURS IN THE AFTERNOON.  WE EVEN PASSED A
REFERENDUM ASKING PEOPLE IF THEY WANTED ALL CARS BANNED BY THE YEAR 2015, EVEN
THOUGH THE MAJORITY VOTED IN FAVOR, THERE IS STILL A LEGAL DISCUSSION IF IT GOT
ENOUGH VOTES TO BE VALID.  
- THERE IS NO PROOF THAT PEOPLE HAVE BOUGHT A SECOND CAR TO AVOID PICO Y PLACA,
WHAT HA HAPPENED IS THAT TRANSMILENIO HAS GOTTEN MORE PASSENGERS, TODAY 20% OF
TRANSMILENIO USERS OWN A CAR. 10% OF THEM PERMANENTLY LEAVE THE CAR AT HOME AND
THE OTHER 10% DO IT WHEN THEY HAVE PICO Y PLACA.  MANY PEOPLE ALSO BIKE WHEN
THEY HAVE PICO Y PLACA
- YOU CAN TELL THE SUCCESS OF PICO Y PLACA WHEN YOU TRY TO DRIVE ON A SATURDAY,
TRAFFIC IS REALLY BAD, EXTREMELY CONGESTED, AND YOU CAN TELL THAT IF PICO Y
PLACA HAD NOT BEEN IMPLEMENTED THAT WOULD BE THE TRAFFIC EVERYDAY.
- TRANSMILENIO OR THE BIKE PATHS BY THEMSELVES ARE NOT USEFUL, YOU NEED CAR
RESTRICTION MEASURES TO ENCOURAGE PEOPLE TO BIKE OR TAKE PUCLIC TRANSPORT, BUT
ALSO TRAFFIC JAMS ARE USEFUL TO DO ACHIEVE THESE GOALS.  WHEN MOTORISTS REALIZE
THAT IT IS FASTER TO TAKE TRANSMILENIO RATHER THAN BEING IN A TRAFFIC JAM, THEY
SHIFT.  MANY PEOPLE HAVE ALREADY REALIZED THAT AND DURING THE DAY WHEN THEY HAVE
TO GO FROM ONE PLACE TO ANOTHER THEY TAKE TRANSMILENIO BECAUSE IT’S FASTER THAN
DRIVING.
 
BEST,
OED
 
I hope all this is clear, as this is a great idea that needs some refinement.
Best regards,
 
 
Carlos F. Pardo
Coordinador de Proyecto
GTZ- Proyecto de Transporte Urbano Sostenible para América Latina y el Caribe-
SUTP LAC 
Cr. 14 # 94A-24 of. 409
Bogotá D.C., Colombia
Tel:  +57 (1) 635 9048
Fax: +57 (1) 236 2309 
Mobile: +57 (3) 15 296 0662
e-mail:  <mailto:carlos.pardo at sutp.org> carlos.pardo at sutp.org 
Página:  <http://www.sutp.org/> www.sutp.org
- Visite nuestra nueva sección de Latinoamérica y el Caribe en
<http://www.sutp.org/esp/espindex.htm> http://www.sutp.org/esp/espindex.htm 
- Únase al grupo de discusión de Transporte Sostenible en Latinoamérica en
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/sutp-lac/join
Web site novo em português  <http://www.sutp.org/PT/PTindex.htm>
http://www.sutp.org/PT/PTindex.htm
 
  _____  

De: sustran-discuss-bounces+carlos.pardo=sutp.org at list.jca.apc.org
[mailto:sustran-discuss-bounces+carlos.pardo=sutp.org at list.jca.apc.org] En
nombre de Eric Britton
Enviado el: Martes, 22 de Noviembre de 2005 11:30 a.m.
Para: Sustran-discuss at jca.apc.org
Asunto: [sustran] Talking New Moblity
 
Dear Wonderful Sustran Friends,
 
In truth I fret about sending on to you all – busy as you are – too much
information and too many messages from the lively café of our New Mobility
Agenda ( <http://www.newmobility.org/> http://www.newmobility.org).  Of course
they tend to be less focused in geographic terms, with all that implies, than
the concerns of our Sustran Network, but it’s my position that the two work
rather well together.  (In fact if you go to the Agenda, and click the Talking
New Moblity link on the left menu (toward the top), and from thence to More
Great Discussions, you will see that we have Sustran in a position of honor
right up top.  In this way, we are trying to make sure that the people who come
and spend some time with us, also have access to your good messages and
information.)
 
That said, I would like to encourage those of you who have not already done so
to check into the Café and to consider signing in. You will note that there is
an email option whereby you do not have to get all the individual messages, but
rather the Daily Digest.  This is quite handy and for me at least saves time. I
check it out daily when it comes in, just because it is very often just so very
interesting and useful.
 
There you have it. A few of you have already jumped on board, and if those of
you who have tried it have anything to share with the others about it, well that
would be most welcome. We do want to be useful.
 
*     *     *
 
By the way, we have just received a message in the café from a young Dutch
transportation organizer/activist Stefan Langeveld putting forth in a very few
words what I for one think is a brilliant bit of conceptual problem solving. He
builds on an on-going discussion of Congestion Charging, prop and con, (you’ll
see some of the latest on that after his note) and proposes a solution which I
find at the very least worth having your views on.  He honors in passing
Bogotá’s Pico y Placa (have a look at
http://ecoplan.org/carfreeday/bogota/pico.htm for some background on how that
works)—and then goes on to propose for our consideration. . . .
 
Well let me get out of the way here and turn the stage over to Stefan and the
“Langeveld Option”.
 
 
 
 
-----Original Message-----
From: NewMobilityCafe at yahoogroups.com [mailto:NewMobilityCafe at yahoogroups.com]
On Behalf Of Stefan Langeveld 
Sent: Tuesday, November 22, 2005 3:12 PM
To: NewMobilityCafe at yahoogroups.com
Subject: RE: [NewMobilityCafe] will congestion charge solve anything ?
 
At peak hours,  city roads cannot accommodate bikes, cars and buses and trams. 
 
Either you try to squeeze out the (less well off) car drivers by CC, or you look
for an effective approach. 
 
The governors of Bogota have solved the problem, in theory. Their Peak Time Ban
for Private Cars passed the referendum (51 % in favour , 34 against , oct '00). 
 
Here's my interpretation :
 
Ban car use during the peak period (30 - 45 or 60 mins.)
 
Exceptions: emergencies, bus, EV, and maybe any car with 4 or more people. 
Additional measure : traffic lights off. 
 
Let's have an experiment with this before considering a congestion charge. In
comparison, the PTB is far easier to implement (thus cheaper) and far more
effective.
 
Stefan Langeveld 
 
 
 
 
  _____  

From: NewMobilityCafe at yahoogroups.com [mailto:NewMobilityCafe at yahoogroups.com]
On Behalf Of Simon Norton
Sent: Monday, November 21, 2005 9:56 PM
To: newmobilitycafe at yahoogroups.com
Subject: [NewMobilityCafe] will congestion charge solve anything ?
Of course congestion charging in Stockholm or any other city isn't a magic wand
which will solve all problems. However the fact that something won't solve all
problems isn't a case for not doing it, as is implied in the article by James
Savage, and even more in Gabriel Roth's comment.

London's congestion charge is too limited both in space and time. Within the
last week I experienced near gridlock on a road in an area that is fairly
central, but outside not only the existing congestion charging zone but the
planned western extension. Then yesterday, a Sunday when the charge doesn't
operate, I experienced further holdups in Central London and nearly missed a key
connection as a result, which would have delayed me a whole hour.

As far as pollution issues are concerned, buying clean cars does NOT reduce
pollution. What reduces pollution is scrapping dirty cars.

And all cars of whatever type contribute to the degradation of the urban 
environment that discourages walking and cycling. This brings me to Alexandra
Hamilton's question.

I think that a useful rule of thumb is that it is reasonable to expect people to
walk up to 2 miles or to cycle up to 5 miles. But, as others have said, this
depends on conditions.

However, as far as I'm concerned, cycling in traffic-infested roads is akin to
walking through a safari park. That's my personal view, but I suspect that it is
shared by more people than cycling advocates think, and the latter will never
succeed in promoting cycling until they realise that many people don't want to
cycle in heavy traffic and it isn't reasonable to expect them to.

Walking is less of a problem because one's segregated from the traffic most of
the time. For an attractive off-road route I'd be willing to do more than 2
miles. But even 2 miles is too long
(a) When one has to stop frequently at intersections where motor traffic has
overall priority, or
(b) When one's tired.

(a) applies in many parts of London, though not in my home city (Cambridge),
where I live about 2 miles from the railway station. Normally I walk there from
my home -- partly because the bus link, though fairly frequent in the daytime,
is too slow to offer much advantage. But, because of (b), I strongly resent
those times when I have to walk back late at night because the evening buses are
so poor (last one is at 23.05, and before that they are only every half an
hour).

>From the station to my office is over 2 miles, and there isn't a direct bus.
During Monday to Friday until about 19.30 there's a bus which involves 13 
minutes walk at one end and 4 at the other. At other times the journey is
sufficiently tedious that I avoid it. There used to be a nice route through the
Botanic Gardens and college grounds, but nowadays it is blocked by locked gates.

If we managed to secure significant (50% is the target I like to quote)
reductions in traffic levels through congestion charging, or by any other means,
I am sure that many more people would start walking and cycling -- particularly
if some of the released roadspace was taken from motorists and reallocated to
these people.

Incidentally, the guidelines for schoolchildren in the UK are that they are
entitled to transport when the nearest school which has a place for them is
over 2 miles away, for younger children, and over 3 miles away for older ones (I
think that the critical age is 8).

Simon Norton

----
 
-----Original Message-----
From: Eric Britton [mailto:eric.britton at ecoplan.org] 
Sent: Saturday, November 19, 2005 1:16 PM
 Subject: Congestion charge will solve nothing
Published: 18th November 2005 -
http://www.thelocal.se/article.php?ID=2521&date=20051118

Congestion charge will solve nothing

Driving a car into central Stockholm is about to get expensive, and people
aren’t happy. Polls show that the majority of voters are against the trial of
congestion charging that starts in January, but there is surely a case for
encouraging people to use their cars less. Question is – why single out
Stockholmers?

There are plenty of reasons for introducing road tolls – reduced traffic on the
roads gives cleaner air, a more pleasant environment and makes it easier to get
around. 

But on a political level, they are being introduced in Stockholm because the
Green Party made it a condition for supporting the Sweden’s Social Democrat
government after the 2002 election.

Many here have compared the introduction of congestion charging in Stockholm to
the road tolls introduced in London in 2001. Mayor Annika Billström said she
wanted to learn from London’s experiences when starting to charge motorists in
the Swedish capital.

I moved to Stockholm from London just after congestion charges were introduced
there, and it’s worth pointing out two obvious but crucial differences between
the two cities. 

In Stockholm, rush hour is still what it says on the box – commuters face delays
for brief periods (and over short distances) in the morning and the evening; in
pre-toll central London, rush ‘hour’ seemed to last all day, with lines of slow
moving traffic continuing for mile after mile. 

Another difference is that Stockholm already has relatively efficient public
transport; London’s transport system was creaking at the seams.

But there is no doubt that less traffic is good for the environment, both at a
local and at a global level. We may like using our cars – indeed, many people
depend on them – but we need to drastically reduce their impact on the
environment, not least by reducing the amount of carbon dioxide they release
into the atmosphere.

This is not going to be tackled by singling out motorists in big cities – it is
something that needs to take in the bigger picture. 

Indeed, in some ways Sweden is ahead of the field in the way it deals with this.
At a recent European conference on clean fuels held in Stockholm, experts said
Sweden was at the cutting edge – 20,000 environmentally-friendly cars are
expected to be sold here next year, more per capita than any other European
country.

But perhaps if Sweden is really going to make its contribution to reducing the
impact of cars on the environment, it should look at another idea being floated
in the UK at the moment: road pricing across the country.

This idea, to tax people depending on how much they drive, could really make
people think about alternatives such as car sharing, and lead to increased
pressure for improved public transport. Greenpeace has suggested that drivers of
‘clean cars’ should get a reduction on the tax, while drivers of gas guzzling
4x4s (and Green Party activists in their 1970s Volkswagens) could pay extra.

So instead of slamming taxes on motorists in Stockholm, why not make everyone
pay for the real damage done to the environment?


The New Mobility Agenda is permanently at http://NewMobility.org 
To post messages to list: NewMobilityCafe at yahoogroups.com
To unsubscribe: NewMobilityCafe-unsubscribe at yahoogroups.com
Free group video/voice-conferencing via http://newmobilitypartners.org 






SPONSORED LINKS 

New
<http://groups.yahoo.com/gads?t=ms&k=New+mobility&w1=New+mobility&c=1&s=18&.sig=
2Wx3-4c1g97P45DpLHEUxg>  mobility 
 
  _____  

YAHOO! GROUPS LINKS 
 
*	 Visit your group "NewMobilityCafe
<http://groups.yahoo.com/group/NewMobilityCafe> " on the web.
  
*	 To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
 NewMobilityCafe-unsubscribe at yahoogroups.com
<mailto:NewMobilityCafe-unsubscribe at yahoogroups.com?subject=Unsubscribe> 
  
*	 Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo!
<http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/>  Terms of Service. 
 
  _____  

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://list.jca.apc.org/public/sustran-discuss/attachments/20051124/c3e0b002/attachment-0001.html


More information about the Sustran-discuss mailing list