From geobpa at nus.edu.sg Wed Jul 4 18:42:04 2001 From: geobpa at nus.edu.sg (Paul Barter) Date: Wed, 4 Jul 2001 17:42:04 +0800 Subject: [sustran] FW: How to assess local governments' transport policies Message-ID: <2C9E855D35B9D01198190020AFFBE8CB0B86F3F1@exs04.ex.nus.edu.sg> I am taking the liberty of fowarding this request which appeared on the UTSG list. The original author is not on the sustran-discuss list so please cc any replies to them too. Paul Dr Paul Barter Geography, National University of Singapore -----Original Message----- From: Sangjin Han [mailto:han@KOTI.RE.KR] Sent: Wednesday, 4 July 2001 2:17 To: UTSG@JISCMAIL.AC.UK Subject: How to assess local governments' transport policies Dear all I am Sangjin Han, working for Korea Transport Institute. Recently, I have been involved with the project, "Evaluation of local transport policies and thier implementation results". The project is devised to encourage local governments to follow central government's transport stragies and to introduce competition between local governments by scoring their tranport policies. We are planning to establish trees of transport policies according to hierarchies, and we will score each policies according to some numerical scales. Then we will make comprehensive score for each local government using AHP (Analytic Hierarchy Process). Possibly, the central government may consider this assessment score, when they allocate subsidies to local governments. This idea seems to be too strict to local government which should be assessed. Anyway, I need some documents, reports, books, web sites, or whatever, which show experience of assessing or evaluating local governments' transport policies. Thank you very much. SANGJIN HAN PhD in Transport Studies (BSc, MSc) Department of Transport Planning Korea Transport Institute 2311, Daewhadong, Ilsangu, Kyunggido Korea tel: +82-(0)31-910-3112 fax: +82-(0)31-910-3225 e-mail: han@koti.re.kr From geobpa at nus.edu.sg Thu Jul 5 12:32:22 2001 From: geobpa at nus.edu.sg (Paul Barter) Date: Thu, 5 Jul 2001 11:32:22 +0800 Subject: [sustran] re: How to assess local governments' transport policies Message-ID: <2C9E855D35B9D01198190020AFFBE8CB0B86F3F3@exs04.ex.nus.edu.sg> Also taking the liberty of forwarding a useful response to yesterday's query from Korea. Paul -----Original Message----- From: Todd Litman [mailto:litman@VTPI.ORG] Sent: Wednesday, 4 July 2001 10:41 To: UTSG@JISCMAIL.AC.UK Subject: Re: How to assess local governments' transport policies It is very important when developing such evaluation criteria that they be based on the goal of access (the ability to obtain desired goods and services, and reach desired activities), rather than treat mobility and traffic as an end in itself. Many actions that improve vehicle mobility reduce access overall by reducing pedestrian and bicycle mobility, and by encouraging more dispersed land use patterns. For example, when siting a school or business, the best location from a mobility perspective is on a busy highway at the urban fringe, where it is convenient to reach by car and there is land for abundant parking. But such a location reduces access, because it is difficult to reach by walking, cycling and public transit. Access is maximized by clustering major activity centers in a centralized area with good transit service. Evaluation criteria for access could include: * Average door-to-door travel time costs for residents in a region. * Average annual transportation expenditures for residents in a region. * Freight transportation delivery speeds. * Crashes and crash fatalities per capita. * Quality of transportation choices for non-drivers and lower-income people. * Quality of the pedestian and cycling environments. For more discussion see the "Measuring Transport" chapter of the VTPI Online TDM Encyclopedia, available at http://www.vtpi.org. At 07:16 AM 7/4/01 +0100, Sangjin Han wrote: >Dear all > >I am Sangjin Han, working for Korea Transport Institute. Recently, I have >been involved with the project, "Evaluation of local transport policies and >thier implementation results". The project is devised to encourage local >governments to follow central government's transport stragies and to >introduce competition between local governments by scoring their tranport >policies. We are planning to establish trees of transport policies >according to hierarchies, and we will score each policies according to some >numerical scales. Then we will make comprehensive score for each local >government using AHP (Analytic Hierarchy Process). Possibly, the central >government may consider this assessment score, when they allocate subsidies >to local governments. This idea seems to be too strict to local government >which should be assessed. > >Anyway, I need some documents, reports, books, web sites, or whatever, >which show experience of assessing or evaluating local governments' >transport policies. > >Thank you very much. > > >SANGJIN HAN > >PhD in Transport Studies (BSc, MSc) > >Department of Transport Planning >Korea Transport Institute >2311, Daewhadong, Ilsangu, Kyunggido >Korea > >tel: +82-(0)31-910-3112 >fax: +82-(0)31-910-3225 >e-mail: han@koti.re.kr > > > Sincerely, Todd Litman, Director Victoria Transport Policy Institute "Efficiency - Equity - Clarity" 1250 Rudlin Street Victoria, BC, V8V 3R7, Canada Phone & Fax: 250-360-1560 E-mail: litman@vtpi.org Website: http://www.vtpi.org From alaninthegulf at yahoo.co.uk Thu Jul 5 19:20:27 2001 From: alaninthegulf at yahoo.co.uk (=?iso-8859-1?q?Alan=20Howes?=) Date: Thu, 5 Jul 2001 11:20:27 +0100 (BST) Subject: [sustran] Assistance wanted - Bus Priority References Message-ID: <20010705102027.44182.qmail@web12703.mail.yahoo.com> [Reposted, with addition re. UTC - apologies for any duplication, but I fear the previous post from a diffeent address may have bounced.] I am looking for assistance in convincing our Roads Engineers that Bus Priority is not such a dreadful thing after all. More specifically, I am looking for references which show the range benefits to bus users, and disbenefits (if any - I hope they are small) to other road users as a result of giving buses early calls / extended greens etc. at traffic signals. By way of background - here in Dubai we have around 200 buses serving a population of 800,000 plus. Significant congestion at some times of day in some areas, heavy delays to buses. South California-style highway layouts, with lots of 4-phase traffic signals (heavy left [offside] turns, up to 5- or 6-lane approaches). Probably insufficient bus volumes to justify bus lanes as yet, at least in terms of current public opinion. There is a comprehensive UTC sytem, using SCOOT, which is apparently capable of implementing Selective Bus Detection. Our roads engineers, unfortunately, are also mostly West Coast trained, and as yet don't seem to realise that however many roads you build, they will only fill up with traffic - though some recent consultant reports have sounded the warning, and a feasibility study for LRT is currently under way. -- Alan Howes, "Transport Expert", Dubai Municipality Public Transport Department Dubai, United Arab Emirates alaninthegulf@yahoo.co.uk ____________________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Get your free @yahoo.co.uk address at http://mail.yahoo.co.uk or your free @yahoo.ie address at http://mail.yahoo.ie From alaninthegulf at yahoo.co.uk Thu Jul 5 19:23:02 2001 From: alaninthegulf at yahoo.co.uk (=?iso-8859-1?q?Alan=20Howes?=) Date: Thu, 5 Jul 2001 11:23:02 +0100 (BST) Subject: [sustran] Assistance wanted - Public Transport websites Message-ID: <20010705102302.46714.qmail@web12706.mail.yahoo.com> [Reposted, - apologies for any duplication, but I fear the previous post from a diffeent address may have bounced.] I am looking for recommendations for good urban Public Transport websites, to pass on to Microsoft (UAE) who may be designing one for our undertaking. For the record, Dubai Municipality Public Transport Department runs around 200 buses in a city of 800,000 plus inhabitants, mainly catering for the South Asian expatriate community. A lot of these will not have Internet access, but we are starting the task of attracting optional riders, including tourists. I know there are lots of websites out there, and have no doubt found some good ones myself in the past and promptly forgotten them. What we have in mind is a user-friendy site with an effective interactive journey planner ("I want to go from A to B at hh:mm today/Friday /whatever, and I would prefer lowest fare/ quickest journey/ least interchanges" sort of thing), and probably a useful map or two. Those are the difficult bits to get right - the words are easy! -- Alan Howes, "Transport Expert", Dubai Municipality Public Transport Department Dubai, United Arab Emirates alaninthegulf@yahoo.co.uk ===== -- Alan and Jacqui Howes, Dubai, UAE (alternatively Perthshire, Scotland) alaninthegulf@yahoo.co.uk (Alan) cybermog57@yahoo.co.uk (Jacqui) ____________________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Get your free @yahoo.co.uk address at http://mail.yahoo.co.uk or your free @yahoo.ie address at http://mail.yahoo.ie From wcox at publicpurpose.com Thu Jul 5 20:38:00 2001 From: wcox at publicpurpose.com (Wendell Cox) Date: Thu, 5 Jul 2001 06:38:00 -0500 Subject: [sustran] [sustran] re: How to assess local governments' transport policies References: <2C9E855D35B9D01198190020AFFBE8CB0B86F3F3@exs04.ex.nus.edu.sg> Message-ID: <003301c10547$0723fb20$ed782e3f@y8f2e> A not altogether unreasonable definition. However, Todd Litman's last evaluation criteria indicates a bias against drivers. I would also have some concern about how to measure "quality," but objective measures should be possible. The criteria would be more appropriate as follows... > * Quality of the transport environment, including all modes (this would include pedestian and cycling, which could be listed along with cars, public transport, etc.). Moreover the following criteria would be more effective if stated in terms of an index of some sort. Perhaps it would be be > * Extent of transportation choices for non-drivers and lower-income people. Best regards, Wendell Cox DEMOGRAPHIA & THE PUBLIC PURPOSE (Wendell Cox Consultancy) http://www.demographia.com (Demographics & Land Use) http://www.publicpurpose.com (Public Policy & Transport)) Telephone: +1.618.632.8507 - Facsimile: +1.810.821.8134 PO Box 841 - Belleville, IL 62222 USA ----- Original Message ----- From: Paul Barter To: Sent: Wednesday, 04 July, 2001 22:32 Subject: [sustran] re: How to assess local governments' transport policies > Also taking the liberty of forwarding a useful response to yesterday's query > from Korea. > Paul > > -----Original Message----- > From: Todd Litman [mailto:litman@VTPI.ORG] > Sent: Wednesday, 4 July 2001 10:41 > To: UTSG@JISCMAIL.AC.UK > Subject: Re: How to assess local governments' transport policies > > > It is very important when developing such evaluation criteria that they be > based on the goal of access (the ability to obtain desired goods and > services, and reach desired activities), rather than treat mobility and > traffic as an end in itself. Many actions that improve vehicle mobility > reduce access overall by reducing pedestrian and bicycle mobility, and by > encouraging more dispersed land use patterns. > > For example, when siting a school or business, the best location from a > mobility perspective is on a busy highway at the urban fringe, where it is > convenient to reach by car and there is land for abundant parking. But such > a location reduces access, because it is difficult to reach by walking, > cycling and public transit. Access is maximized by clustering major > activity centers in a centralized area with good transit service. > > Evaluation criteria for access could include: > * Average door-to-door travel time costs for residents in a region. > * Average annual transportation expenditures for residents in a region. > * Freight transportation delivery speeds. > * Crashes and crash fatalities per capita. > * Quality of transportation choices for non-drivers and lower-income people. > * Quality of the pedestian and cycling environments. > > > For more discussion see the "Measuring Transport" chapter of the VTPI > Online TDM Encyclopedia, available at http://www.vtpi.org. > > > At 07:16 AM 7/4/01 +0100, Sangjin Han wrote: > >Dear all > > > >I am Sangjin Han, working for Korea Transport Institute. Recently, I have > >been involved with the project, "Evaluation of local transport policies and > >thier implementation results". The project is devised to encourage local > >governments to follow central government's transport stragies and to > >introduce competition between local governments by scoring their tranport > >policies. We are planning to establish trees of transport policies > >according to hierarchies, and we will score each policies according to some > >numerical scales. Then we will make comprehensive score for each local > >government using AHP (Analytic Hierarchy Process). Possibly, the central > >government may consider this assessment score, when they allocate subsidies > >to local governments. This idea seems to be too strict to local government > >which should be assessed. > > > >Anyway, I need some documents, reports, books, web sites, or whatever, > >which show experience of assessing or evaluating local governments' > >transport policies. > > > >Thank you very much. > > > > > >SANGJIN HAN > > > >PhD in Transport Studies (BSc, MSc) > > > >Department of Transport Planning > >Korea Transport Institute > >2311, Daewhadong, Ilsangu, Kyunggido > >Korea > > > >tel: +82-(0)31-910-3112 > >fax: +82-(0)31-910-3225 > >e-mail: han@koti.re.kr > > > > > > > > Sincerely, > > Todd Litman, Director > Victoria Transport Policy Institute > "Efficiency - Equity - Clarity" > 1250 Rudlin Street > Victoria, BC, V8V 3R7, Canada > Phone & Fax: 250-360-1560 > E-mail: litman@vtpi.org > Website: http://www.vtpi.org From eric.britton at ecoplan.org Fri Jul 6 00:51:03 2001 From: eric.britton at ecoplan.org (eric.britton@ecoplan.org) Date: Thu, 5 Jul 2001 17:51:03 +0200 Subject: [sustran] a bias against drivers? In-Reply-To: <003301c10547$0723fb20$ed782e3f@y8f2e> Message-ID: Dear Wendell and group, Wendell, you have just written: "A not altogether unreasonable definition. However, Todd Litman's last evaluation criteria indicates a bias against drivers." As an inveterate driver myself, as someone who really likes his old car and is addicted to it as much as any other card carrying Republican and Yale graduate, I nonetheless thought that the fat lady had already sung on that and that indeed, if we are to move toward sustainability in our mobility patterns, then we have to introduce, quite precisely, a "bias against drivers." Or at the very least something closer to a level playing field for the majority that is not or should not be at the wheel. Since that's more clearly the case, I can't understand why we are correcting the diligent and most useful Mr. Litman. Someone explain to my why I may be wrong on this. I'm ready to read and think. Eric Britton The @New Mobility Forum is permanently at http://newmobility.org The Commons ___Sustainable Development and Social Justice___ Le Frene, 8/10 rue Joseph Bara, 75006 Paris, France Eric.Britton@NewMobility.org Tel: +331 4326 1323 From wcox at publicpurpose.com Fri Jul 6 00:55:00 2001 From: wcox at publicpurpose.com (Wendell Cox) Date: Thu, 5 Jul 2001 10:55:00 -0500 Subject: [sustran] Re: a bias against drivers? References: Message-ID: <00f701c1056a$da358f60$e97a2e3f@y8f2e> Eric.. Sorry. Not all of us have been converted to this view. With road pricing and improved pollution control, an auto based system may well be sustainable, at the appropriate densities. The issue has to do with overall objectives and there is no reason to introduce biases into the matter. I like Todd's criteria, if restated in unbiased terms. Let the evaluation determine the strategies. We dont need theologians, we need analysts. Best regards, Wendell DEMOGRAPHIA & THE PUBLIC PURPOSE (Wendell Cox Consultancy) http://www.demographia.com (Demographics & Land Use) http://www.publicpurpose.com (Public Policy & Transport)) Telephone: +1.618.632.8507 - Facsimile: +1.810.821.8134 PO Box 841 - Belleville, IL 62222 USA ----- Original Message ----- From: To: Cc: Wendell Cox ; Todd Litman Sent: Thursday, 05 July, 2001 10:51 Subject: a bias against drivers? > Dear Wendell and group, > > Wendell, you have just written: "A not altogether unreasonable definition. > However, Todd Litman's last evaluation criteria indicates a bias against > drivers." > > As an inveterate driver myself, as someone who really likes his old car and is > addicted to it as much as any other card carrying Republican and Yale graduate, > I nonetheless thought that the fat lady had already sung on that and that > indeed, if we are to move toward sustainability in our mobility patterns, then > we have to introduce, quite precisely, a "bias against drivers." Or at the very > least something closer to a level playing field for the majority that is not or > should not be at the wheel. > > Since that's more clearly the case, I can't understand why we are correcting the > diligent and most useful Mr. Litman. > > Someone explain to my why I may be wrong on this. I'm ready to read and think. > > Eric Britton > > The @New Mobility Forum is permanently at http://newmobility.org > The Commons ___Sustainable Development and Social Justice___ > Le Frene, 8/10 rue Joseph Bara, 75006 Paris, France > Eric.Britton@NewMobility.org Tel: +331 4326 1323 > > > > > > From a.j.plumbe at Bradford.ac.uk Fri Jul 6 03:03:36 2001 From: a.j.plumbe at Bradford.ac.uk (Antony J Plumbe) Date: Thu, 5 Jul 2001 19:03:36 +0100 Subject: [sustran] Assessment of Local Government Transport Policies Message-ID: Hello Sangjin and others, You may find digging into the UK Government website at the following URL yields some useful information: http://www.local-transport.dtlr.gov.uk/index.htm Tony Plumbe ---------------------- A. J. Plumbe, Co-ordinator M.Sc. in Project Planning and Management, email: a.j.plumbe@bradford.ac.uk Fax: International: +44-1274-235280 Domestic : 01274-235280 Phone: International : +44-1274-235264 Domestic : 01274-235264 Mailing Address: DPPC, Bradford University, Richmond Road, Bradford, West Yorkshire, U.K., BD7 1DP. From eric.britton at ecoplan.org Fri Jul 6 03:19:14 2001 From: eric.britton at ecoplan.org (eric.britton@ecoplan.org) Date: Thu, 5 Jul 2001 20:19:14 +0200 Subject: [sustran] "We dont need theologians, we need analysts." In-Reply-To: <00f701c1056a$da358f60$e97a2e3f@y8f2e> Message-ID: Hello Wendell, When you say "we need analysts", I can assure you that you will get no argument from here. A background in physics and economics makes one kind of interested in getting the sums right. But as the saying goes, context counts for something too. Which seems to be very much your problem here and perhaps elsewhere. Let's have a peek. Your heavily propagandized and egregiously subsidized auto-based system is going to have to cope with the following in its struggle to move up from grotesque (I don't think the word is too strong) un-sustainability to something significantly closer to what we need, and I for one would like to see how this is going to work. Let's take a quick look at some of the ballparks where we gotta get our numbers lined up on this: 1. Pollution control? We have some 700 million odd ICE vehicles out there on the world's roads these days. Let me ask you, about how long it will take to get most if not all of them converted to today's top of the line pollution standards? Including of course in Lagos, Cairo and Katmandu. 2. Road Pricing? I guess by this you mean electronic and other toll systems? Where do you see the conclusive evidence not only that this can work but that it is working in a way that will lead to ready replication in, say, my lifetime? Gee, if that was all there was to sustainability then I'd hate even to place my bets on the auto culture as making the needed in-roads on the necessary global scale in time to avert quite a number of eco and other catastrophes. Don't get me wrong, clean engines and clean fuels are useful steps, but they should not be confused with the main action on the sustainability wars. But of course, that's not the end of it. In fact, it's barely the beginning. We also must be prepared to factor in the critical basics on. . . 3. Road accidents? And the half a million people who are killed by autos each year? And the millions who are maimed and forced to live truncated lives (including my great uncle, the noted painter James Britton, who was turned from a happy productive artist, teacher and community leader into a depressive cripple and suicide, thanks to one of those sustainable vehicles? 4. Public health? 5. Urban tissue? 6. Sense of community? 7. Social justice? This is of course not the end of the list as our many qualified friends here in this good forum will I am sure be pleased to point out - and I am sorry that this is not the day for me to put aside my other pressing work to fill in the well known numbers here -- but do let me throw one more small qualifier that may also need to be brought into the analysis. First though, a quick aside. I think that I am a way above average driver. I am an athlete, in very good shape, have great eyesight, good peripheral vision, excellent flexibility in neck and torso, don't smoke, don't drink, never take my eyes off the road, have a steady unaggressive personality, am resoundingly polite an always give way to pedestrians and cyclists, maintain my car very carefully, don't use a cell phone in a car, use my ears and nose consistently to pick up alarm signals, have come up to car driving through a chain of knowledge and reflexes that took me from trikes and bikes and on through motor cycles and large trucks, refuse to go into heavy traffic, won't drive when tired, etc. I also make enough money so that I can afford to drive. A model citizen driver if I say so myself. (My sins and weaknesses express themselves in other ways as my friends and wife will gladly attest). I run you through this long and boring litany since based on three decades of careful observation and study, I am persuaded that, power steering, cruise control and the next latest help from the ITS crowd not excepted, at least half of the people out there on the road should definitely not be taking charge of a couple of tons of steel and rubber for all these reasons and more. THE REAL MAJORITY OF ALL PEOPLE SHOULD NOT BE DRIVING - AND THE ONLY REASONS THAT THEY ARE OUT THERE MENACING LIFE AND LIMB ON THE ROADS IS BECAUSE THE CAR CULTURE HAS LEFT THEM WITHOUT A CHOICE. So the trick is not to have a bias against drivers -- but a definite bias in favor of people, safety, economy (for all those who cannot really afford the car habit), access, neighborliness and all the rest. Which has most notably not been the case in the past and which, if we judge by the expenditures of our hard won taxpayer dollars continues to be the case in most places till this day. I know that the Bush administration has taken the position that global warming may be a problem but that we need more "analysis" to figure out what to do next. What can I say? Respectfully, Eric Eric Britton The @New Mobility Forum is permanently at http://newmobility.org The Commons ___Sustainable Development and Social Justice___ Le Frene, 8/10 rue Joseph Bara, 75006 Paris, France Eric.Britton@NewMobility.org Tel: +331 4326 1323 = = = = = -----Original Message----- From: owner-sustran-discuss@jca.ax.apc.org [mailto:owner-sustran-discuss@jca.ax.apc.org]On Behalf Of Wendell Cox Sent: Thursday, July 05, 2001 5:55 PM To: eric.britton@ecoplan.org; sustran-discuss@jca.ax.apc.org Cc: Todd Litman Subject: [sustran] Re: a bias against drivers? Eric.. Sorry. Not all of us have been converted to this view. With road pricing and improved pollution control, an auto based system may well be sustainable, at the appropriate densities. The issue has to do with overall objectives and there is no reason to introduce biases into the matter. I like Todd's criteria, if restated in unbiased terms. Let the evaluation determine the strategies. We dont need theologians, we need analysts. Best regards, Wendell From BruunB at aol.com Fri Jul 6 03:29:21 2001 From: BruunB at aol.com (BruunB@aol.com) Date: Thu, 05 Jul 2001 14:29:21 EDT Subject: [sustran] Re: a bias against drivers? Message-ID: <54.16e09751.28760c02@aol.com> Wendell, I would like to suggest that there is a reason to be biased against private transport. The benefits go primarily to the individual, but externalities go to the public at large. Nor can it ever be available to all age groups, all income groups, to people with disabilities, etc.. These people get none of the benefits but the same externalities. Public transport uses less space, creates fewer externalities, and doesn't exclude large portions of the population. I think the core of our difference is that we can't agree on how to evaluate these externalities, and what to do, if anything, about compensating for them. Eric Bruun From adhikar at hotmail.com Thu Jul 5 19:11:55 2001 From: adhikar at hotmail.com (sumit adhikari) Date: Thu, 05 Jul 2001 19:11:55 Subject: [sustran] Re: Assistance wanted - Public Transport websites Message-ID: Hi Alan, You can have a look at the following site: http://www.stcum.qc.ca/ All the best, Sumit Sumit Adhikari Graduate Student (PhD), Department of Geography, McGill University, 805 Sherbrooke Street West, Montreal, Quebec, Canada H3A 2K6 Tel:(514)-398-4111 Fax:(514)-398-7437 >From: Alan Howes >Reply-To: sustran-discuss@jca.ax.apc.org >To: sustran-discuss@jca.apc.org, transit-prof@yahoogroups.com, >UTSG@JISCMAIL.AC.UK >Subject: [sustran] Assistance wanted - Public Transport websites >Date: Thu, 5 Jul 2001 11:23:02 +0100 (BST) > >[Reposted, - apologies for any duplication, but I fear the previous >post from a diffeent address may have bounced.] > >I am looking for recommendations for good urban Public Transport >websites, to pass on to Microsoft (UAE) who may be designing one for >our undertaking. For the record, Dubai Municipality Public Transport >Department runs around 200 buses in a city of 800,000 plus >inhabitants, mainly catering for the South Asian expatriate community. >A lot of these will not have Internet access, but we are starting the >task of attracting optional riders, including tourists. > >I know there are lots of websites out there, and have no doubt found >some good ones myself in the past and promptly forgotten them. What we >have in mind is a user-friendy site with an effective interactive >journey planner ("I want to go from A to B at hh:mm today/Friday >/whatever, and I would prefer lowest fare/ quickest journey/ least >interchanges" sort of thing), and probably a useful map or two. Those >are the difficult bits to get right - the words are easy! > >-- >Alan Howes, "Transport Expert", >Dubai Municipality Public Transport Department >Dubai, United Arab Emirates >alaninthegulf@yahoo.co.uk > >===== >-- >Alan and Jacqui Howes, Dubai, UAE > (alternatively Perthshire, Scotland) >alaninthegulf@yahoo.co.uk (Alan) >cybermog57@yahoo.co.uk (Jacqui) > >____________________________________________________________ >Do You Yahoo!? >Get your free @yahoo.co.uk address at http://mail.yahoo.co.uk >or your free @yahoo.ie address at http://mail.yahoo.ie _________________________________________________________________________ Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com. From wcox at publicpurpose.com Fri Jul 6 07:26:05 2001 From: wcox at publicpurpose.com (Wendell Cox) Date: Thu, 5 Jul 2001 17:26:05 -0500 Subject: [sustran] Re: a bias against drivers? References: <54.16e09751.28760c02@aol.com> Message-ID: <002601c105a1$7ec1fb00$d97e2e3f@y8f2e> Actually, public transport excludes a much larger percentage of the people. Let us take the average American urbanized area of 1 million for example. Generally, the 95 percent or so of people with access to cars can get to 100 percent of the jobs --- we could call this an Auto Employment Access Index of 95 - this means 5 percent are excluded. Auto competitive transit service (let us say a 40 minute ride, nearly double that of the average auto commute) is available, on average, to less than 15 percent of jobs, assuming the average downtown employment share of 10 percent. On the assumption that 100 percent of the residences are within walking distance of transit (a highly optimistic assumption, since in Portland only 78 percent are), that gives us a Transit Employment Index of 15 --- this means 85 percent are excluded. Do the walk and cycle index and it wont even match that. With respect to the very few who dont have cars, perhaps the best approach is to follow the proposals of the Democratic Leadership Council, largely endorsed by President Clinton, that would implement financial incentives to universalize access to autos. For those not able to drive, we should provide good dial a ride systems. I suspect if you calculate modal Employment Access Indexes for European cities and for that matter affluent Asian cities, you will generally find the auto number considerably higher than the transit number. The comparison will be less stark than in the US, Canada and Australia, but it will still be generally stark. DEMOGRAPHIA & THE PUBLIC PURPOSE (Wendell Cox Consultancy) http://www.demographia.com (Demographics & Land Use) http://www.publicpurpose.com (Public Policy & Transport)) Telephone: +1.618.632.8507 - Facsimile: +1.810.821.8134 PO Box 841 - Belleville, IL 62222 USA ----- Original Message ----- From: To: ; ; Cc: Sent: Thursday, 05 July, 2001 13:29 Subject: [sustran] Re: a bias against drivers? > Wendell, > > I would like to suggest that there is a reason to be biased against private transport. The benefits go primarily to the individual, but externalities go to the public at large. Nor can it ever be available to all age groups, all income groups, to people with disabilities, etc.. These people get none of the benefits but the same externalities. > > Public transport uses less space, creates fewer externalities, and doesn't exclude large portions of the population. > > I think the core of our difference is that we can't agree on how to evaluate these externalities, and what to do, if anything, about compensating for them. > > Eric Bruun From wcox at publicpurpose.com Fri Jul 6 07:40:56 2001 From: wcox at publicpurpose.com (Wendell Cox) Date: Thu, 5 Jul 2001 17:40:56 -0500 Subject: [sustran] Re: "We dont need theologians, we need analysts." References: Message-ID: <005601c105a3$902163c0$d97e2e3f@y8f2e> Eric... Just a few comments, though it appears that we are in agreement that the matter simply comes down to getting the evaluation right and liberally constructed, you are simply arguing that you cannot believe the auto will do well in the evaluation. My response is, let's see. Meanwhile, no response is needed, since it appears clear that we could both spend hours on this exchange (that is not to discourage you from responding, only to suggest I have spent too much time on this exchange, as you hint you may have as well). Suffice it to say that there are two sides to this debate. Best, Wendell DEMOGRAPHIA & THE PUBLIC PURPOSE (Wendell Cox Consultancy) http://www.demographia.com (Demographics & Land Use) http://www.publicpurpose.com (Public Policy & Transport)) Telephone: +1.618.632.8507 - Facsimile: +1.810.821.8134 PO Box 841 - Belleville, IL 62222 USA ----- Original Message ----- From: To: ; Wendell Cox Cc: Todd Litman Sent: Thursday, 05 July, 2001 13:19 Subject: [sustran] "We dont need theologians, we need analysts." > Hello Wendell, > > When you say "we need analysts", I can assure you that you will get no argument > from here. A background in physics and economics makes one kind of interested > in getting the sums right. But as the saying goes, context counts for something > too. Which seems to be very much your problem here and perhaps elsewhere. > Let's have a peek. > > Your heavily propagandized and egregiously subsidized auto-based system is going > to have to cope with the following in its struggle to move up from grotesque (I > don't think the word is too strong) un-sustainability to something significantly > closer to what we need, and I for one would like to see how this is going to > work. Let's take a quick look at some of the ballparks where we gotta get our > numbers lined up on this: > > 1. Pollution control? We have some 700 million odd ICE vehicles out there on > the world's roads these days. Let me ask you, about how long it will take to get > most if not all of them converted to today's top of the line pollution > standards? Including of course in Lagos, Cairo and Katmandu. > The reality is that the auto is going to continue to be used, its use will expand and the rich nations should help the poor in converting fleets. It will take awhile, but my view is there is more reason for hope than for despair. > 2. Road Pricing? I guess by this you mean electronic and other toll systems? > Where do you see the conclusive evidence not only that this can work but that it > is working in a way that will lead to ready replication in, say, my lifetime? > > Gee, if that was all there was to sustainability then I'd hate even to place my > bets on the auto culture as making the needed in-roads on the necessary global > scale in time to avert quite a number of eco and other catastrophes. Don't get > me wrong, clean engines and clean fuels are useful steps, but they should not be > confused with the main action on the sustainability wars. But of course, that's > not the end of it. In fact, it's barely the beginning. We also must be prepared > to factor in the critical basics on. . . > > 3. Road accidents? And the half a million people who are killed by autos each > year? And the millions who are maimed and forced to live truncated lives > (including my great uncle, the noted painter James Britton, who was turned from > a happy productive artist, teacher and community leader into a depressive > cripple and suicide, thanks to one of those sustainable vehicles? > The advances in road safety have been stunning. US fatality totals are substantially the same as they were in the late 1950s, despite much higher driving levels. How many centuries will it take to reconfigure cities into the ville de Paris densities that are required to provide true transit choice? > 4. Public health? > Cleaner cars. > 5. Urban tissue? > ??? > 6. Sense of community? > What business is that of urban planners. We are getting into theology. Re sense of community, it used to be that the center of neighborhoods in the US was the neighborhood school. The social engineers destroyed that with forced busing in the 1970s, a period during which by far the greatest urban deconcentration occured as a result. > 7. Social justice? > My response to Eric Bruun deals with this issue. > This is of course not the end of the list as our many qualified friends here in > this good forum will I am sure be pleased to point out - and I am sorry that > this is not the day for me to put aside my other pressing work to fill in the > well known numbers here -- but do let me throw one more small qualifier that may > also need to be brought into the analysis. > > First though, a quick aside. I think that I am a way above average driver. I > am an athlete, in very good shape, have great eyesight, good peripheral vision, > excellent flexibility in neck and torso, don't smoke, don't drink, never take my > eyes off the road, have a steady unaggressive personality, am resoundingly > polite an always give way to pedestrians and cyclists, maintain my car very > carefully, don't use a cell phone in a car, use my ears and nose consistently to > pick up alarm signals, have come up to car driving through a chain of knowledge > and reflexes that took me from trikes and bikes and on through motor cycles and > large trucks, refuse to go into heavy traffic, won't drive when tired, etc. I > also make enough money so that I can afford to drive. A model citizen driver if > I say so myself. (My sins and weaknesses express themselves in other ways as my > friends and wife will gladly attest). > > I run you through this long and boring litany since based on three decades of > careful observation and study, I am persuaded that, power steering, cruise > control and the next latest help from the ITS crowd not excepted, at least half > of the people out there on the road should definitely not be taking charge of a > couple of tons of steel and rubber for all these reasons and more. THE REAL > MAJORITY OF ALL PEOPLE SHOULD NOT BE DRIVING - AND THE ONLY REASONS THAT THEY > ARE OUT THERE MENACING LIFE AND LIMB ON THE ROADS IS BECAUSE THE CAR CULTURE HAS > LEFT THEM WITHOUT A CHOICE. > An opinion I do not share. > So the trick is not to have a bias against drivers -- but a definite bias in > favor of people, safety, economy (for all those who cannot really afford the car > habit), access, neighborliness and all the rest. Which has most notably not > been the case in the past and which, if we judge by the expenditures of our hard > won taxpayer dollars continues to be the case in most places till this day. > In the United States virtually all intercity roads are paid for by highway user fees. I would happily privatize the whole thing tomorrow to make that even more obvious and to get the product at a lower price than government is able to provide. > I know that the Bush administration has taken the position that global warming > may be a problem but that we need more "analysis" to figure out what to do next. > What can I say? > > Respectfully, > > Eric > > Eric Britton > > The @New Mobility Forum is permanently at http://newmobility.org > The Commons ___Sustainable Development and Social Justice___ > Le Frene, 8/10 rue Joseph Bara, 75006 Paris, France > Eric.Britton@NewMobility.org Tel: +331 4326 1323 > > > = = = = = > -----Original Message----- > From: owner-sustran-discuss@jca.ax.apc.org > [mailto:owner-sustran-discuss@jca.ax.apc.org]On Behalf Of Wendell Cox > Sent: Thursday, July 05, 2001 5:55 PM > To: eric.britton@ecoplan.org; sustran-discuss@jca.ax.apc.org > Cc: Todd Litman > Subject: [sustran] Re: a bias against drivers? > > Eric.. > > Sorry. Not all of us have been converted to this view. With road pricing and > improved pollution control, an auto based system may well be sustainable, at > the appropriate densities. The issue has to do with overall objectives and > there is no reason to introduce biases into the matter. I like Todd's > criteria, if restated in unbiased terms. Let the evaluation determine the > strategies. We dont need theologians, we need analysts. > > Best regards, > Wendell > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > From robertc at uclink.berkeley.edu Fri Jul 6 08:14:38 2001 From: robertc at uclink.berkeley.edu (Robert Cervero) Date: Thu, 05 Jul 2001 16:14:38 -0700 Subject: [sustran] a bias against drivers? -- equity considerations? In-Reply-To: <002601c105a1$7ec1fb00$d97e2e3f@y8f2e> References: <54.16e09751.28760c02@aol.com> Message-ID: <4.3.1.2.20010705154222.00dbc2e0@uclink.berkeley.edu> >Actually, public transport excludes a much larger percentage of the people. Isn't this argument circular? That is, isn't a big reason US cities average such poor transit accessibility levels due to the fact that auto-centric development patterns (fueled in part by hidden subsidies to auto-motoring) lead to abysmal-quality transit services -- e.g., fixed-route buses that come by every 30 minutes for 10 hours a day, hardly a respectable mobility option for most car-owning folks. Thus the post-war history of transit in the US -- declining ridership begets more service cuts which begets declining ridership and so on. >Let us take the average American urbanized area of 1 million for example. >Generally, the 95 percent or so of people with access to cars can get to 100 >percent of the jobs Shouldn't this be a bit more inclusive, weighing accessibility not just for workers but for everyone? The 2000 census revealed that around 25% of Americans were below 17 years of age (thus too young to drive) and another 6% were 75 years of age or more (a goodly share pressing their abilities to drive). Among American in the 5-64 year age group that presumably represents prime driving ages, 17.3% had severe disabilities (sight/hearing/walking impaired). Auto-accessibility is great for the shrinking majority of Americans who are able to drive, but for the teenager stuck in the burbs without a car, the blind, and the many others we tend to overlook, it's pretty non-existent. Yes, a parent or friend can chauffeur such folks around, but surely there are costs (quality-of-life? "time pollution"?) associated with this form of auto-mobility. I buy into certain principles of "sustainable auto-mobility" (cleaner fuels, hybrid engines, etc.), however there's nothing we can do to tinker with vehicle designs and re-engineer the car to redress the inherent injustices and social inequities associated with car-dependent cityscapes. From wcox at publicpurpose.com Fri Jul 6 09:20:51 2001 From: wcox at publicpurpose.com (Wendell Cox) Date: Thu, 5 Jul 2001 19:20:51 -0500 Subject: [sustran] Re: a bias against drivers? -- equity considerations? References: <54.16e09751.28760c02@aol.com> <4.3.1.2.20010705154222.00dbc2e0@uclink.berkeley.edu> Message-ID: <00f701c105b1$845b22c0$d97e2e3f@y8f2e> Your point is well taken. Let's get the numbers. In the non-Asian cities, at least, the auto will generally exclude fewer than public transport does at this point (that is my assumption). And, of course, we should provide for those who are excluded... that's why I raised the issue of dial a ride systems. Also, not sure that there is a "shrinking majority" of people able to drive. But this would all be an interesting inquiry..... DEMOGRAPHIA & THE PUBLIC PURPOSE (Wendell Cox Consultancy) http://www.demographia.com (Demographics & Land Use) http://www.publicpurpose.com (Public Policy & Transport)) Telephone: +1.618.632.8507 - Facsimile: +1.810.821.8134 PO Box 841 - Belleville, IL 62222 USA ----- Original Message ----- From: Robert Cervero To: Sent: Thursday, 05 July, 2001 18:14 Subject: [sustran] a bias against drivers? -- equity considerations? > > >Actually, public transport excludes a much larger percentage of the people. > > Isn't this argument circular? That is, isn't a big reason US cities > average such poor > transit accessibility levels due to the fact that auto-centric development > patterns (fueled > in part by hidden subsidies to auto-motoring) lead to abysmal-quality > transit services -- e.g., > fixed-route buses that come by every 30 minutes for 10 hours a day, hardly > a respectable mobility > option for most car-owning folks. Thus the post-war history of transit in > the US -- declining ridership > begets more service cuts which begets declining ridership and so on. > > > >Let us take the average American urbanized area of 1 million for example. > >Generally, the 95 percent or so of people with access to cars can get to 100 > >percent of the jobs > > Shouldn't this be a bit more inclusive, weighing accessibility not just for > workers but for everyone? The 2000 census revealed that around 25% of > Americans were below 17 years of age (thus too young to drive) and another > 6% were 75 years of age or more (a goodly share pressing their abilities to > drive). Among American in the 5-64 year age group that presumably > represents prime driving ages, 17.3% had severe disabilities > (sight/hearing/walking impaired). Auto-accessibility is great for the > shrinking majority of Americans who are able to drive, but for the teenager > stuck in the burbs without a car, the blind, and the many others we tend to > overlook, it's pretty non-existent. Yes, a parent or friend can chauffeur > such folks around, but surely there are costs (quality-of-life? "time > pollution"?) associated with this form of auto-mobility. I buy into > certain principles of "sustainable auto-mobility" (cleaner fuels, hybrid > engines, etc.), however there's nothing we can do to tinker with vehicle > designs and re-engineer the car to redress the inherent injustices and > social inequities associated with car-dependent cityscapes. > From ajain at kcrc.com Fri Jul 6 12:04:29 2001 From: ajain at kcrc.com (Jain Alok) Date: Fri, 6 Jul 2001 11:04:29 +0800 Subject: [sustran] Re: Assistance wanted - Public Transport websites Message-ID: The following is the site for Hong Kong's Transport Department. This has links to the websites of all the public transport companies in HK. http://www.info.gov.hk/td/eng/td29_flash.html Alok Jain Hong Kong > -----Original Message----- > From: Alan Howes [mailto:alaninthegulf@yahoo.co.uk] > Sent: 05 July, 2001 6:23 PM > To: sustran-discuss@jca.apc.org; transit-prof@yahoogroups.com; > UTSG@JISCMAIL.AC.UK > Subject: [sustran] Assistance wanted - Public Transport websites > > > [Reposted, - apologies for any duplication, but I fear the previous > post from a diffeent address may have bounced.] > > I am looking for recommendations for good urban Public Transport > websites, to pass on to Microsoft (UAE) who may be designing one for > our undertaking. For the record, Dubai Municipality Public Transport > Department runs around 200 buses in a city of 800,000 plus > inhabitants, mainly catering for the South Asian expatriate community. > A lot of these will not have Internet access, but we are starting the > task of attracting optional riders, including tourists. > > I know there are lots of websites out there, and have no doubt found > some good ones myself in the past and promptly forgotten them. What we > have in mind is a user-friendy site with an effective interactive > journey planner ("I want to go from A to B at hh:mm today/Friday > /whatever, and I would prefer lowest fare/ quickest journey/ least > interchanges" sort of thing), and probably a useful map or two. Those > are the difficult bits to get right - the words are easy! > > -- > Alan Howes, "Transport Expert", > Dubai Municipality Public Transport Department > Dubai, United Arab Emirates > alaninthegulf@yahoo.co.uk > > ===== > -- > Alan and Jacqui Howes, Dubai, UAE > (alternatively Perthshire, Scotland) > alaninthegulf@yahoo.co.uk (Alan) > cybermog57@yahoo.co.uk (Jacqui) > > ____________________________________________________________ > Do You Yahoo!? > Get your free @yahoo.co.uk address at http://mail.yahoo.co.uk > or your free @yahoo.ie address at http://mail.yahoo.ie > This email and any attachment to it may contain confidential or proprietary information that are intended solely for the person / entity to whom it was originally addressed. If you are not the intended recipient, any disclosure, copying, distributing or any action taken or omitted to be taken in reliance on it, is prohibited and may be unlawful. Internet communications cannot be guaranteed to be secure or error-free as information could be intercepted, corrupted, lost, arrive late or contain viruses. The sender therefore does not accept liability for any errors or omissions in the context of this message which arise as a result of transmission over the Internet. No opinions contained herein shall be construed as being a formal disclosure or commitment of the Kowloon-Canton Railway Corporation unless specifically so stated. From bfinn at singnet.com.sg Fri Jul 6 14:23:06 2001 From: bfinn at singnet.com.sg (Brendan Finn) Date: Fri, 6 Jul 2001 13:23:06 +0800 Subject: [sustran] Public transport does NOT exclude people References: <54.16e09751.28760c02@aol.com> <002601c105a1$7ec1fb00$d97e2e3f@y8f2e> Message-ID: <004201c105dc$554df180$f5d115a5@bfinn> In reply to Wendell's statement : "Actually, public transport excludes a much larger percentage of the people". Public transport does NOT exclude people. It offers services to people needing mobility (or access, let's not get caught in the semantics). The extent to which it can meet the needs of the people in any given area can be linked to : a) The land use policies and activity location decisions (past and current) b) The degree of regulation on the public transport provision c) The extent to which public transport is allowed to meet the need d) The degree of underpricing of private transport in terms of full societal cost, and whether this is counterbalanced by financial support for public transport e) The culture of promotion of the car. Thus, we find that in some countries the public transport serves the people quite well, and in others it doesn't. In some countries, it USED to serve the people quite well, and then it has been : a) Starved of finances so that it deteriorates (e.g. republics of the Former Soviet Union) b) "Reformed" in a manner that destabilised the collective offer (e.g. Santiago, parts of the UK) c) Had its finances constrained so that it could not take on the growth opportunities (e.g. Dublin) d) Sidelined by a pro-car policy (e.g. Beijing) e) Prevented from new initiatives to protect the incumbent operators And, Surprise! Surprise! people turn to cars and the city planners respond. Where public transport does not meet the needs of the people, I don't think it is because public transport inherently excludes people. Let me finish with three remarks : 1) With respect, in such debates, can we please consider the USA as just one more country among the 250+ ? We can learn good and bad from it, but it is neither the only way nor the state of all nations. "The few that don't have cars" tend to be quite numerous in most parts of the world. 2) The difficulty for people without cars to access job opportunities reflects the placement of business at locations easy to access by car, which strongly reinforces the car dependency culture. But if we really want to talk about exclusion, then it is the non-work journeys that are relevant. 3) Eric Britton remarks that "the real majority of all people should not be driving". These are the many people who have once shown the core competence to make a vehicle stop, go, turn etc., but have neither the spatial/traffic awareness nor the self-control that can adequately manage the complex scenarios they are undertaking. Perhaps some may be better drivers with better tuition and stronger penalties. I would suggest, however, that the real reason they continue to drive is that society has effectively told them, "It's OK, we can live with the road kill. Live the dream and buy a car." So they tell themselves, "I'm fine, I've never (well almost never) had a smash I couldn't walk away from". Would you be as happy to have such a motley crew acting as, say, your surgeon, the button pushers at your local nuclear power plant, your defence lawyer, or even your cook ? When the large number of people who shouldn't be driving are finally taken off the road, they'll be mighty interested in what public transport has to offer them, and not just on a dial-a-ride basis with previous day booking. Yours sincerely, Brendan Finn. ______________________________________________________ Please note contact details as follows : Address : 28, Leonie Hill, #02-28 Leonie Towers, Singapore 239227 Mobile : +65.94332298 Tel : +65.7340260 Fax/Tel : +65.7340412 e-mail : bfinn@singnet.com.sg Website : http://www.europrojects.ie/etts ----- Original Message ----- From: "Wendell Cox" To: Sent: 06 July 2001 06:26 Subject: [sustran] Re: a bias against drivers? > Actually, public transport excludes a much larger percentage of the people. > > Let us take the average American urbanized area of 1 million for example. > Generally, the 95 percent or so of people with access to cars can get to 100 > percent of the jobs --- we could call this an Auto Employment Access Index > of 95 - this means 5 percent are excluded. Auto competitive transit service > (let us say a 40 minute ride, nearly double that of the average auto > commute) is available, on average, to less than 15 percent of jobs, assuming > the average downtown employment share of 10 percent. On the assumption that > 100 percent of the residences are within walking distance of transit (a > highly optimistic assumption, since in Portland only 78 percent are), that > gives us a Transit Employment Index of 15 --- this means 85 percent are > excluded. Do the walk and cycle index and it wont even match that. > > With respect to the very few who dont have cars, perhaps the best approach > is to follow the proposals of the Democratic Leadership Council, largely > endorsed by President Clinton, that would implement financial incentives to > universalize access to autos. For those not able to drive, we should provide > good dial a ride systems. > > I suspect if you calculate modal Employment Access Indexes for European > cities and for that matter affluent Asian cities, you will generally find > the auto number considerably higher than the transit number. The comparison > will be less stark than in the US, Canada and Australia, but it will still > be generally stark. > > > DEMOGRAPHIA & THE PUBLIC PURPOSE (Wendell Cox Consultancy) > http://www.demographia.com (Demographics & Land Use) > http://www.publicpurpose.com (Public Policy & Transport)) > Telephone: +1.618.632.8507 - Facsimile: +1.810.821.8134 > PO Box 841 - Belleville, IL 62222 USA From hjk at rincon.net Fri Jul 6 15:51:03 2001 From: hjk at rincon.net (Harshad Kamdar) Date: Fri, 6 Jul 2001 12:21:03 +0530 Subject: [sustran] Re: Assistance wanted - Public Transport websites In-Reply-To: <20010705102302.46714.qmail@web12706.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <001701c105e8$06e4e420$07c8c8c8@mercury> http://www.gcrta.org/ The Greater Cleveland Raaaaaaapid Transport Authority may be a site you may like to look at Kanu Kamdar -----Original Message----- From: owner-sustran-discuss@jca.ax.apc.org [mailto:owner-sustran-discuss@jca.ax.apc.org]On Behalf Of Alan Howes Sent: Thursday, July 05, 2001 15:53 To: sustran-discuss@jca.apc.org; transit-prof@yahoogroups.com; UTSG@JISCMAIL.AC.UK Subject: [sustran] Assistance wanted - Public Transport websites [Reposted, - apologies for any duplication, but I fear the previous post from a diffeent address may have bounced.] I am looking for recommendations for good urban Public Transport websites, to pass on to Microsoft (UAE) who may be designing one for our undertaking. For the record, Dubai Municipality Public Transport Department runs around 200 buses in a city of 800,000 plus inhabitants, mainly catering for the South Asian expatriate community. A lot of these will not have Internet access, but we are starting the task of attracting optional riders, including tourists. I know there are lots of websites out there, and have no doubt found some good ones myself in the past and promptly forgotten them. What we have in mind is a user-friendy site with an effective interactive journey planner ("I want to go from A to B at hh:mm today/Friday /whatever, and I would prefer lowest fare/ quickest journey/ least interchanges" sort of thing), and probably a useful map or two. Those are the difficult bits to get right - the words are easy! -- Alan Howes, "Transport Expert", Dubai Municipality Public Transport Department Dubai, United Arab Emirates alaninthegulf@yahoo.co.uk ===== -- Alan and Jacqui Howes, Dubai, UAE (alternatively Perthshire, Scotland) alaninthegulf@yahoo.co.uk (Alan) cybermog57@yahoo.co.uk (Jacqui) ____________________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Get your free @yahoo.co.uk address at http://mail.yahoo.co.uk or your free @yahoo.ie address at http://mail.yahoo.ie From subbuvincent at yahoo.com Fri Jul 6 16:02:09 2001 From: subbuvincent at yahoo.com (Subramaniam Vincent) Date: Fri, 6 Jul 2001 12:32:09 +0530 Subject: [sustran] Public transport - India - reference work needed In-Reply-To: <2C9E855D35B9D01198190020AFFBE8CB0B86F3F3@exs04.ex.nus.edu.sg> Message-ID: Hello: I run a public interest internet initiative called India Together - http://www.indiatogether.org. My apologies if this question has been posted before and replied to. I am looking for some resource URLs as well as articles that argue specific recommendations for implementing progressive public transport policies and systems in India - particularly within the metros. Case studies, and inter-sectoral analyses will be a great help. I am looking for some material, with the intention of publishing a series of articles on the website. Thanks Subbu Vincent http://www.indiatogether.org _________________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Get your free @yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com From bfinn at singnet.com.sg Fri Jul 6 17:18:41 2001 From: bfinn at singnet.com.sg (Brendan Finn) Date: Fri, 6 Jul 2001 16:18:41 +0800 Subject: [sustran] Re: Assistance wanted - Public Transport websites References: <20010705102302.46714.qmail@web12706.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <000601c105f4$452200e0$99d715a5@bfinn> Dear Alan, A few more websites to add to the collection : Singapore Mass Rapid Transit http://www.smrt.com.sg Singapore Land Transport Authority http://www.lta.gov.sg (link from there to the operators' home pages) Dublin Bus http://www.dublinbus.ie Helsinki is at http://www.hel.fi/HKL which has information in Finnish, Swedish and English Oslo is at http://www.trafikanten.no For a how do I get from here to there, there is a new one for the Ireland-Wales corridor, covering the different modes at http://www.travelwire.com For lowest fare, journey planners, I suggest the German cities. I don't have the web addresses to hand, but a lot of development was done under first the EVA project, and then dEVA (d=dynamic) which added real-time information to the timetable information. Munich may have been the first, but ultimately I think some 20 German cities were involved with links to each other. Yours sincerely, Brendan Finn. ____________________________________________________ Please note contact details as follows : Address : 28, Leonie Hill, #02-28 Leonie Towers, Singapore 239227 Mobile : +65.94332298 Tel : +65.7340260 Fax/Tel : +65.7340412 e-mail : bfinn@singnet.com.sg Website : http://www.europrojects.ie/etts ----- Original Message ----- From: "Alan Howes" To: ; ; Sent: 05 July 2001 18:23 Subject: [sustran] Assistance wanted - Public Transport websites > [Reposted, - apologies for any duplication, but I fear the previous > post from a diffeent address may have bounced.] > > I am looking for recommendations for good urban Public Transport > websites, to pass on to Microsoft (UAE) who may be designing one for > our undertaking. For the record, Dubai Municipality Public Transport > Department runs around 200 buses in a city of 800,000 plus > inhabitants, mainly catering for the South Asian expatriate community. > A lot of these will not have Internet access, but we are starting the > task of attracting optional riders, including tourists. > > I know there are lots of websites out there, and have no doubt found > some good ones myself in the past and promptly forgotten them. What we > have in mind is a user-friendy site with an effective interactive > journey planner ("I want to go from A to B at hh:mm today/Friday > /whatever, and I would prefer lowest fare/ quickest journey/ least > interchanges" sort of thing), and probably a useful map or two. Those > are the difficult bits to get right - the words are easy! > > -- > Alan Howes, "Transport Expert", > Dubai Municipality Public Transport Department > Dubai, United Arab Emirates > alaninthegulf@yahoo.co.uk > > ===== > -- > Alan and Jacqui Howes, Dubai, UAE > (alternatively Perthshire, Scotland) > alaninthegulf@yahoo.co.uk (Alan) > cybermog57@yahoo.co.uk (Jacqui) > > ____________________________________________________________ > Do You Yahoo!? > Get your free @yahoo.co.uk address at http://mail.yahoo.co.uk > or your free @yahoo.ie address at http://mail.yahoo.ie From wcox at publicpurpose.com Fri Jul 6 19:59:52 2001 From: wcox at publicpurpose.com (Wendell Cox) Date: Fri, 6 Jul 2001 05:59:52 -0500 Subject: [sustran] Re: Public transport does NOT exclude people References: <54.16e09751.28760c02@aol.com> <002601c105a1$7ec1fb00$d97e2e3f@y8f2e> <004201c105dc$554df180$f5d115a5@bfinn> Message-ID: <001e01c1060a$c9be0e00$2c7a2e3f@y8f2e> In short, by not being available to most, public transport does exclude people. And, by spending on overly ineffective high cost capital projects, especially in the US, it excludes many more who are denied service because the more efficient, expanded services that could be provided are not. . My comments relate largely to the developed world, not just the US, though obviously there are differences. As for those who should not be driving... strengthen licensing requirements. There are few major cities in the US (much less Europe or Japan) where it is not possible to live without a car. It is just that people want more than is available say, in downtown St. Louis, Cleveland or central Los Angeles. Recall also, that with the exception of Houston, American cities are the product of urban planning to a large degree. DEMOGRAPHIA & THE PUBLIC PURPOSE (Wendell Cox Consultancy) http://www.demographia.com (Demographics & Land Use) http://www.publicpurpose.com (Public Policy & Transport)) Telephone: +1.618.632.8507 - Facsimile: +1.810.821.8134 PO Box 841 - Belleville, IL 62222 USA ----- Original Message ----- From: Brendan Finn To: Sent: Friday, 06 July, 2001 00:23 Subject: [sustran] Public transport does NOT exclude people > In reply to Wendell's statement : > > "Actually, public transport excludes a much larger percentage of the > people". > > Public transport does NOT exclude people. It offers services to people > needing mobility (or access, let's not get caught in the semantics). The > extent to which it can meet the needs of the people in any given area can be > linked to : > > a) The land use policies and activity location decisions (past and current) > b) The degree of regulation on the public transport provision > c) The extent to which public transport is allowed to meet the need > d) The degree of underpricing of private transport in terms of full societal > cost, and whether this is counterbalanced by financial support for public > transport > e) The culture of promotion of the car. > > Thus, we find that in some countries the public transport serves the people > quite well, and in others it doesn't. In some countries, it USED to serve > the people quite well, and then it has been : > > a) Starved of finances so that it deteriorates (e.g. republics of the Former > Soviet Union) > b) "Reformed" in a manner that destabilised the collective offer (e.g. > Santiago, parts of the UK) > c) Had its finances constrained so that it could not take on the growth > opportunities (e.g. Dublin) > d) Sidelined by a pro-car policy (e.g. Beijing) > e) Prevented from new initiatives to protect the incumbent operators > > And, Surprise! Surprise! people turn to cars and the city planners respond. > > Where public transport does not meet the needs of the people, I don't think > it is because public transport inherently excludes people. > > Let me finish with three remarks : > > 1) With respect, in such debates, can we please consider the USA as just one > more country among the 250+ ? We can learn good and bad from it, but it is > neither the only way nor the state of all nations. "The few that don't have > cars" tend to be quite numerous in most parts of the world. > > 2) The difficulty for people without cars to access job opportunities > reflects the placement of business at locations easy to access by car, which > strongly reinforces the car dependency culture. But if we really want to > talk about exclusion, then it is the non-work journeys that are relevant. > > 3) Eric Britton remarks that "the real majority of all people should not be > driving". These are the many people who have once shown the core competence > to make a vehicle stop, go, turn etc., but have neither the spatial/traffic > awareness nor the self-control that can adequately manage the complex > scenarios they are undertaking. Perhaps some may be better drivers with > better tuition and stronger penalties. > > I would suggest, however, that the real reason they continue to drive is > that society has effectively told them, "It's OK, we can live with the road > kill. Live the dream and buy a car." So they tell themselves, "I'm fine, > I've never (well almost never) had a smash I couldn't walk away from". Would > you be as happy to have such a motley crew acting as, say, your surgeon, the > button pushers at your local nuclear power plant, your defence lawyer, or > even your cook ? > > When the large number of people who shouldn't be driving are finally taken > off the road, they'll be mighty interested in what public transport has to > offer them, and not just on a dial-a-ride basis with previous day booking. > > Yours sincerely, > > > > Brendan Finn. > ______________________________________________________ > > Please note contact details as follows : > > Address : 28, Leonie Hill, #02-28 Leonie Towers, Singapore 239227 > Mobile : +65.94332298 Tel : +65.7340260 Fax/Tel : +65.7340412 > e-mail : bfinn@singnet.com.sg Website : > http://www.europrojects.ie/etts > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Wendell Cox" > To: > Sent: 06 July 2001 06:26 > Subject: [sustran] Re: a bias against drivers? > > > > Actually, public transport excludes a much larger percentage of the > people. > > > > Let us take the average American urbanized area of 1 million for example. > > Generally, the 95 percent or so of people with access to cars can get to > 100 > > percent of the jobs --- we could call this an Auto Employment Access Index > > of 95 - this means 5 percent are excluded. Auto competitive transit > service > > (let us say a 40 minute ride, nearly double that of the average auto > > commute) is available, on average, to less than 15 percent of jobs, > assuming > > the average downtown employment share of 10 percent. On the assumption > that > > 100 percent of the residences are within walking distance of transit (a > > highly optimistic assumption, since in Portland only 78 percent are), that > > gives us a Transit Employment Index of 15 --- this means 85 percent are > > excluded. Do the walk and cycle index and it wont even match that. > > > > With respect to the very few who dont have cars, perhaps the best approach > > is to follow the proposals of the Democratic Leadership Council, largely > > endorsed by President Clinton, that would implement financial incentives > to > > universalize access to autos. For those not able to drive, we should > provide > > good dial a ride systems. > > > > I suspect if you calculate modal Employment Access Indexes for European > > cities and for that matter affluent Asian cities, you will generally find > > the auto number considerably higher than the transit number. The > comparison > > will be less stark than in the US, Canada and Australia, but it will still > > be generally stark. > > > > > > DEMOGRAPHIA & THE PUBLIC PURPOSE (Wendell Cox Consultancy) > > http://www.demographia.com (Demographics & Land Use) > > http://www.publicpurpose.com (Public Policy & Transport)) > > Telephone: +1.618.632.8507 - Facsimile: +1.810.821.8134 > > PO Box 841 - Belleville, IL 62222 USA > From sagaris at lake.cl Fri Jul 6 09:55:07 2001 From: sagaris at lake.cl (Lake Sagaris) Date: Thu, 05 Jul 2001 20:55:07 -0400 Subject: [sustran] Re: a bias against drivers? In-Reply-To: <002601c105a1$7ec1fb00$d97e2e3f@y8f2e> References: <54.16e09751.28760c02@aol.com> Message-ID: <5.1.0.14.2.20010705203316.00aa9a30@127.0.0.1> Hi all I've been following this debate with interest. Figures for Chile and most if not all of South America strongly contradict the figures for the US. I suspect Asian patterns are closer to the rest of the less developed world, given the high figures for poverty, which make car ownership prohibitive. In Santiago, where over one third of Chile's 14 million people live, year 2000, figures from SECTRA, the government body responsible for transport planning. Buses: 43.4%, 4.8 million trips daily Metro (subway): 7.2%, 0.8 million trips daily Car: 20.8%, 2.3 million trips daily Taxis: 1.4%, 0.16 million trips daily Foot/Bike: 27.1%, 3 million trips daily Total: 11 million trips daily. This is a country that has enjoyed strong growth (averaging 6%) over the past ten years or more and even with current economic troubles (employment almost 10%) is still growing at 3-5% annually. With high pollution and extensive urban sprawl, it would be extremely unwise to attempt to impose a car-oriented model here (although some are attempting this, among them the public works ministry). If they doubled the roads available in the city, as they expect the number of cars to do over the next ten years, there would be virtually no room left for houses, parks or most people. Developing -- favoring -- improvements to mass transit, biking and walking would help reduce Santiago's major air pollution. It would be cheaper, in a country with very limited resources, favor equality, reduce noise, reduce a severe green space deficit and improve the quality of life. Most of the world's people live in developing countries, with limited access to cars. Why build transportation -- or indeed, cities themselves -- around these inefficient, highly polluting (see World Bank figures for cars' hugely disproportionate contribution to Santiago's deadly smog) and elitist elements? The government's subsidy for the Costanera Norte urban highway project (US$120 million of a $480 million and rising budget) would be enough to replace 20% of Santiago's current buses with state-of-the-art models (heat, air conditioning, proper chassies, automatic transmissions, etc.), using better diesel (Chile doesn't meet international standards), and first-rate bus stop designs. This number of buses would carry as many passengers as the whole highway put together. And they would be people from much more varied income levels than the car-driving elite. Chile has a badly underfunded education system (no heat throughout 0 degree winters, for example, and no bathrooms unless parents themselves raise the funds for them, while teachers make a pittance) for 90% of Chileans and a luxury private system for the elite. It has a state-of-the-art health care system for the 15% covered by private health insurance, and 85% covered by the severely underfunded public system. One system for the rich; another for the rest of us. Cars/highways represent the same dichotomy within the transport system. Developing countries should build cities and transport systems to benefit the underprivileged majority. To me, that's democracy. Best Lake Living City Santiago, Chile At 05:26 PM 05/07/01 -0500, you wrote: >Actually, public transport excludes a much larger percentage of the people. > >Let us take the average American urbanized area of 1 million for example. >Generally, the 95 percent or so of people with access to cars can get to 100 >percent of the jobs --- we could call this an Auto Employment Access Index >of 95 - this means 5 percent are excluded. Auto competitive transit service >(let us say a 40 minute ride, nearly double that of the average auto >commute) is available, on average, to less than 15 percent of jobs, assuming >the average downtown employment share of 10 percent. On the assumption that >100 percent of the residences are within walking distance of transit (a >highly optimistic assumption, since in Portland only 78 percent are), that >gives us a Transit Employment Index of 15 --- this means 85 percent are >excluded. Do the walk and cycle index and it wont even match that. > >With respect to the very few who dont have cars, perhaps the best approach >is to follow the proposals of the Democratic Leadership Council, largely >endorsed by President Clinton, that would implement financial incentives to >universalize access to autos. For those not able to drive, we should provide >good dial a ride systems. > >I suspect if you calculate modal Employment Access Indexes for European >cities and for that matter affluent Asian cities, you will generally find >the auto number considerably higher than the transit number. The comparison >will be less stark than in the US, Canada and Australia, but it will still >be generally stark. > > >DEMOGRAPHIA & THE PUBLIC PURPOSE (Wendell Cox Consultancy) >http://www.demographia.com (Demographics & Land Use) >http://www.publicpurpose.com (Public Policy & Transport)) >Telephone: +1.618.632.8507 - Facsimile: +1.810.821.8134 >PO Box 841 - Belleville, IL 62222 USA >----- Original Message ----- >From: >To: ; ; > >Cc: >Sent: Thursday, 05 July, 2001 13:29 >Subject: [sustran] Re: a bias against drivers? > > > > Wendell, > > > > I would like to suggest that there is a reason to be biased against >private transport. The benefits go primarily to the individual, but >externalities go to the public at large. Nor can it ever be available to all >age groups, all income groups, to people with disabilities, etc.. These >people get none of the benefits but the same externalities. > > > > Public transport uses less space, creates fewer externalities, and doesn't >exclude large portions of the population. > > > > I think the core of our difference is that we can't agree on how to >evaluate these externalities, and what to do, if anything, about >compensating for them. > > > > Eric Bruun From wcox at publicpurpose.com Fri Jul 6 21:55:18 2001 From: wcox at publicpurpose.com (Wendell Cox) Date: Fri, 6 Jul 2001 07:55:18 -0500 Subject: [sustran] Re: a bias against drivers? References: <54.16e09751.28760c02@aol.com> <5.1.0.14.2.20010705203316.00aa9a30@127.0.0.1> Message-ID: <001301c1061a$f025a5c0$4b7a2e3f@y8f2e> Interesting and useful statistics. Point is well taken that much of the world is not as the US and Europe. I do not argue for imposition of an auto model, I argue for objectivity. One doesnt appropriately start the discussion by demonizing alternatives, alternatives are eliminated by evaluation. And, obviously, as Eric Bruun rightly points out, we do not all agree on all of the evaluation criteria. Meanwhile, the urban form of Santiago makes it possible for public transport to play such an important role, and largely without subsidy (at least with regard to buses). Where numbers of this magnitude are found, this is usually the model. Finally, to return European or American cities to similar urban forms cannot physically or politically be done in, as Eric Brittan put it, my lifetime (or that of my offspring). Best regards and thank you for the data. Wendell Cox DEMOGRAPHIA & THE PUBLIC PURPOSE (Wendell Cox Consultancy) http://www.demographia.com (Demographics & Land Use) http://www.publicpurpose.com (Public Policy & Transport)) Telephone: +1.618.632.8507 - Facsimile: +1.810.821.8134 PO Box 841 - Belleville, IL 62222 USA ----- Original Message ----- From: Lake Sagaris To: Sent: Thursday, 05 July, 2001 19:55 Subject: [sustran] Re: a bias against drivers? > Hi all > > I've been following this debate with interest. Figures for Chile and most > if not all of South America strongly contradict the figures for the US. I > suspect Asian patterns are closer to the rest of the less developed world, > given the high figures for poverty, which make car ownership prohibitive. > In Santiago, where over one third of Chile's 14 million people live, year > 2000, figures from SECTRA, the government body responsible for transport > planning. > > Buses: 43.4%, 4.8 million trips daily > Metro (subway): 7.2%, 0.8 million trips daily > Car: 20.8%, 2.3 million trips daily > Taxis: 1.4%, 0.16 million trips daily > Foot/Bike: 27.1%, 3 million trips daily > Total: 11 million trips daily. > > This is a country that has enjoyed strong growth (averaging 6%) over the > past ten years or more and even with current economic troubles (employment > almost 10%) is still growing at 3-5% annually. With high pollution and > extensive urban sprawl, it would be extremely unwise to attempt to impose a > car-oriented model here (although some are attempting this, among them the > public works ministry). If they doubled the roads available in the city, as > they expect the number of cars to do over the next ten years, there would > be virtually no room left for houses, parks or most people. > > Developing -- favoring -- improvements to mass transit, biking and walking > would help reduce Santiago's major air pollution. It would be cheaper, in a > country with very limited resources, favor equality, reduce noise, reduce a > severe green space deficit and improve the quality of life. > > Most of the world's people live in developing countries, with limited > access to cars. Why build transportation -- or indeed, cities themselves -- > around these inefficient, highly polluting (see World Bank figures for > cars' hugely disproportionate contribution to Santiago's deadly smog) and > elitist elements? The government's subsidy for the Costanera Norte urban > highway project (US$120 million of a $480 million and rising budget) would > be enough to replace 20% of Santiago's current buses with state-of-the-art > models (heat, air conditioning, proper chassies, automatic transmissions, > etc.), using better diesel (Chile doesn't meet international standards), > and first-rate bus stop designs. This number of buses would carry as many > passengers as the whole highway put together. And they would be people from > much more varied income levels than the car-driving elite. > > Chile has a badly underfunded education system (no heat throughout 0 degree > winters, for example, and no bathrooms unless parents themselves raise the > funds for them, while teachers make a pittance) for 90% of Chileans and a > luxury private system for the elite. It has a state-of-the-art health care > system for the 15% covered by private health insurance, and 85% covered by > the severely underfunded public system. One system for the rich; another > for the rest of us. Cars/highways represent the same dichotomy within the > transport system. > > Developing countries should build cities and transport systems to benefit > the underprivileged majority. To me, that's democracy. > > Best > Lake > > Living City > Santiago, Chile > > At 05:26 PM 05/07/01 -0500, you wrote: > >Actually, public transport excludes a much larger percentage of the people. > > > >Let us take the average American urbanized area of 1 million for example. > >Generally, the 95 percent or so of people with access to cars can get to 100 > >percent of the jobs --- we could call this an Auto Employment Access Index > >of 95 - this means 5 percent are excluded. Auto competitive transit service > >(let us say a 40 minute ride, nearly double that of the average auto > >commute) is available, on average, to less than 15 percent of jobs, assuming > >the average downtown employment share of 10 percent. On the assumption that > >100 percent of the residences are within walking distance of transit (a > >highly optimistic assumption, since in Portland only 78 percent are), that > >gives us a Transit Employment Index of 15 --- this means 85 percent are > >excluded. Do the walk and cycle index and it wont even match that. > > > >With respect to the very few who dont have cars, perhaps the best approach > >is to follow the proposals of the Democratic Leadership Council, largely > >endorsed by President Clinton, that would implement financial incentives to > >universalize access to autos. For those not able to drive, we should provide > >good dial a ride systems. > > > >I suspect if you calculate modal Employment Access Indexes for European > >cities and for that matter affluent Asian cities, you will generally find > >the auto number considerably higher than the transit number. The comparison > >will be less stark than in the US, Canada and Australia, but it will still > >be generally stark. > > > > > >DEMOGRAPHIA & THE PUBLIC PURPOSE (Wendell Cox Consultancy) > >http://www.demographia.com (Demographics & Land Use) > >http://www.publicpurpose.com (Public Policy & Transport)) > >Telephone: +1.618.632.8507 - Facsimile: +1.810.821.8134 > >PO Box 841 - Belleville, IL 62222 USA > >----- Original Message ----- > >From: > >To: ; ; > > > >Cc: > >Sent: Thursday, 05 July, 2001 13:29 > >Subject: [sustran] Re: a bias against drivers? > > > > > > > Wendell, > > > > > > I would like to suggest that there is a reason to be biased against > >private transport. The benefits go primarily to the individual, but > >externalities go to the public at large. Nor can it ever be available to all > >age groups, all income groups, to people with disabilities, etc.. These > >people get none of the benefits but the same externalities. > > > > > > Public transport uses less space, creates fewer externalities, and doesn't > >exclude large portions of the population. > > > > > > I think the core of our difference is that we can't agree on how to > >evaluate these externalities, and what to do, if anything, about > >compensating for them. > > > > > > Eric Bruun > From BruunB at aol.com Fri Jul 6 22:07:58 2001 From: BruunB at aol.com (BruunB@aol.com) Date: Fri, 6 Jul 2001 09:07:58 EDT Subject: [sustran] More on public transport does NOT exclude people Message-ID: <2b.17d00c33.2877122e@aol.com> Wendell, According to Newman, Kenworthy, Laube, et. al, the cities with the lowest total cost of transportation are the ones that have these "expensive" public transport systems. The ones with the highest costs are places like Houston and Atlanta that are severely sprawled, and have very limited public transport. A car based community is the most expensive, of all. Speaking of biases, there seems to be some kind of bias against public spending, even if it reduces private spending. Eric Bruun From wcox at publicpurpose.com Fri Jul 6 22:16:59 2001 From: wcox at publicpurpose.com (Wendell Cox) Date: Fri, 6 Jul 2001 08:16:59 -0500 Subject: [sustran] Re: More on public transport does NOT exclude people References: <2b.17d00c33.2877122e@aol.com> Message-ID: <004201c1061d$f0f830a0$4b7a2e3f@y8f2e> STPP came up with similar numbers in the US. Dont argue that transport costs are higher in auto based and less dense communities. But my article in Environment and Climate News shows, from the same data, that overall costs (housing and food added) are higher in the transit oriented cities. What is important is not the cost of transport, but rather the overall cost of living. As regards the KL numbers, havent reviewed them closely. But, beyond that, it is important to note that the costs of transport in auto based cities are largely private, voluntary costs. As I noted in an earlier posting, there are alternatives in virtually every large US city for people to rely more on transit, and coincidentally, reduce their transport costs. They are not forced to live in the suburbs, though seem to prefer to. At the same time, there is an encouraging trend toward revitatlization of US cores, with childless households moving in. Continued dismal performance of city schools, however, precludes households with kids. And, despite this trend being a very important reversal, the bulk of urban growth in US (and other developed nation) urban areas is outside the core areas (as the KL data also shows). DEMOGRAPHIA & THE PUBLIC PURPOSE (Wendell Cox Consultancy) http://www.demographia.com (Demographics & Land Use) http://www.publicpurpose.com (Public Policy & Transport)) Telephone: +1.618.632.8507 - Facsimile: +1.810.821.8134 PO Box 841 - Belleville, IL 62222 USA ----- Original Message ----- From: To: Sent: Friday, 06 July, 2001 08:07 Subject: [sustran] More on public transport does NOT exclude people > Wendell, > > According to Newman, Kenworthy, Laube, et. al, the cities with the lowest > total cost of transportation are the ones that have these "expensive" public > transport systems. The ones with the highest costs are places like Houston > and Atlanta that are severely sprawled, and have very limited public > transport. A car based community is the most expensive, of all. Speaking of > biases, there seems to be some kind of bias against public spending, even if > it reduces private spending. > > Eric Bruun From czegras at MIT.EDU Fri Jul 6 22:38:22 2001 From: czegras at MIT.EDU (Chris Zegras) Date: Fri, 06 Jul 2001 09:38:22 -0400 Subject: [sustran] Re: Bus Priority References Message-ID: <5.0.0.25.2.20010706093617.01ecaff8@po9.mit.edu> Hi Alan and others, Santiago Chile recently implemented a program of bus priority measures and related traffic management measures. Some results are available, but only in Spanish. I don't know if that is helpful or not; anyway, below is a press release from March that I was sent; it contains a summary of impacts as of march. More information can also be obtained from the web-site of SECTRA (www.sectra.cl), but again it is all in Spanish. Cheers, CZ Santiago, 31 de marzo de 2001 COMUNICADO DE PRENSA EVALUACION DE PRIMERA SEMANA DE APLICACI?N MEDIDAS INMEDIATAS ANTECEDENTES GENERALES Los primeros cinco d?as de aplicaci?n de las Medidas Inmediatas han permitido constatar, entre otros hechos: - Significativa disminuci?n en los tiempos de viaje de transporte p?blico y privado en las v?as exclusivas, reversibles y segregada. - Consolidaci?n de la Alameda como v?a segregada. - Aumento en el uso del transporte p?blico. - Se redujeron las emisiones de material particulado y gases de los veh?culos y se constat? una disminuci?n en las concentraciones de calidad de aire (lo que se respira). Las Medidas Inmediatas del Plan de Transporte Urbano est?n ligadas al Plan de Descontaminaci?n de Santiago que, para este a?o, considera las siguientes medidas: - Gasolina sin plomo para todo el parque automotor desde el pr?ximo s?bado 31 de marzo. - A contar del 15 de abril, ENAP vender? el llamado DIESEL CIUDAD que significar? una reducci?n de un 15 % en las emisiones de las fuentes m?viles. - Durante el 2001 se ampliar? la cobertura del programa de lavado y aspirado de calles. - Este a?o se pavimentar?n 200 kil?metros de calles y pasajes a trav?s del programa de pavimentos participativos. - El Gobierno regional destinar? 3000 millones de pesos para la forestaci?n y reforestaci?n que consideran la acci?n en cinco parques, comenzando con el Parque Amengual de Pudahuel, generando 2000 empleos directos. V?AS EXCLUSIVAS La aplicaci?n de las v?as exclusivas para el transporte p?blico durante la primera semana de las medidas inmediatas, ha mostrado un correcto funcionamiento. Antecedentes medidos en terreno por organismos t?cnicos de la autoridad, indican que el tiempo de desplazamiento de los buses se ha reducido en un promedio de un 15%, en el per?odo punta de la ma?ana. Los mayores tiempos de ahorro se registraron en San Pablo con un 24,3%, Recoleta con un 23,8% y Gran Avenida con un 16%. Evaluaci?n econ?mica v?as exclusivas Considerando la operaci?n de toda la red de v?as exclusivas en el per?odo punta ma?ana (7:30 10:00) durante el invierno (150 d?as): ? Los ahorros de tiempo de viaje y de combustible alcanzan un monto total anual de $ 1.040 millones (1,87 US$ millones). V?AS REVERSIBLES En la primera semana de operaci?n, las v?as reversibles para el transporte privado funcionaron de acuerdo a lo programado, registr?ndose disminuciones de los tiempos de viaje que en promedio alcanzaron un 43,48% respecto de un d?a normal. Es decir, en un viaje de una hora se ahorran 26 minutos. De esta forma, los mayores tiempos de ahorro se registraron en avenida El Cerro con un 62%, avenida Bascu?an con un 66% y avenida Portugal con un 54%. La evaluaci?n econ?mica de las v?as reversibles ( excluyendo San Ignacio) indica que los beneficios por ahorros de tiempos de viajes y de consumo de combustibles, ascienden a 1.847 millones de pesos (3.0 millones de d?lares). Esto permitir?a recuperar la inversi?n realizada en las v?as reversibles de Portugal, Salvador, Diagonal Oriente, Bascu??n, Mapocho y El Cerro (331 millones de pesos) en un plazo de 64 d?as de operaci?n de la medida. En t?rminos de tiempos de ahorro de viaje, podemos decir que la suma de minutos ahorrados durante un a?o por todos los usuarios de estas seis v?as reversibles es de 48 millones de minutos, lo que equivale a 800 mil horas y a 3,5 d?as. En un mes los usuarios ahorran 4 millones de minutos lo que equivale a 7,2 horas por persona. Esto significa que quienes utilizan estas v?as mensualmente pasan 7,2 horas menos conduciendo su autom?vil o en un bus de la locomoci?n colectiva. SEGREGACI?N DE LA ALAMEDA Los tiempos de viajes de bus en la Alameda en el sentido poniente-oriente se han reducido en un 34%, pasando de 33 minutos antes de la v?a segregada a 21,8 minutos durante la semana pasada. En el sentido oriente-poniente, el ahorro de tiempo de viaje de bus es todav?a m?s significativo, pasando desde 28 minutos, antes de la segregaci?n a 16,2 minutos la semana pasada. Es decir, el ahorro de tiempo alcanza a un 42%. Evaluaci?n econ?mica v?a segregada de la Alameda. Considerando la operaci?n de v?a segregada durante todo el d?a: Los ahorros de tiempo de viaje y de combustible alcanzan un monto total anual de $4.538 millones (8,1 US$ millones). Esto incluye ahorros provenientes de la operaci?n de los buses (tiempo y combustible) y eventuales ahorros y desahorros de los autom?viles. El costo total de las obras de la v?a segregada es de $ 280 millones. CONTROL EN V?AS SEGREGADA Y EXCLUSIVAS Para la v?a segregada de la Alameda se dispusieron puntos de control a lo largo del eje en ambos sentidos, entre Plaza Italia y Las Rejas. Durante esta semana los inspectores del Departamento de Fiscalizaci?n han registrado cerca de 5 mil placas patentes de veh?culos. Del mismo modo, en las v?as exclusivas -entre lunes y viernes- se han pasado 478 partes a automovilistas, los cuales deber?an ser sancionados en el juzgado de Polic?a Local con una multa de $21.100 (menos grave). En las v?as exclusivas tambi?n se han cursado 80 partes por exceso de velocidad de los buses. Tambi?n han sido infraccionados en forma directa 55 conductores de locomoci?n colectiva por circular con las puertas abiertas y otros 14 por no respetar las paradas diferidas de Alameda. Unidad de Prensa y Comunicaciones Subsecretar?a de Transportes -------------------------------------------------- Christopher Zegras Research Associate MIT * Laboratory for Energy & Environment * Room E40-468 1 Amherst Street * Cambridge, MA 02139 Tel: 617 258 6084 * Fax: 617 253 8013 From litman at vtpi.org Sat Jul 7 01:31:23 2001 From: litman at vtpi.org (Todd Litman) Date: Fri, 06 Jul 2001 09:31:23 -0700 Subject: [sustran] A bias against drivers? In-Reply-To: <001301c1061a$f025a5c0$4b7a2e3f@y8f2e> References: <54.16e09751.28760c02@aol.com> <5.1.0.14.2.20010705203316.00aa9a30@127.0.0.1> Message-ID: <3.0.5.32.20010706093123.01247cc0@pop.islandnet.com> Getting back to the starting point of this exchange, I am pleased that Mr. Cox considers my definition not altogether unreasonable, but I respectfully disagree that giving emphasis to the quality of the pedestrian environment reflects a bias against drivers. Walking is the most basic form of transportation which virtually everybody depends on, including people who think of themselves primarily as drivers. Admittedly, in a "perfect" suburban landscape with abundant off-street parking at every destination a motorist could travel for days without ever depending on public pedestrian facilities, but in practice, improving the pedestrian/cycle environment can be one of the most effective ways to benefit motorists, by providing more convenient access to a larger pool of parking spaces and by allowing us a wider range of travel choices (walking, cycling, transit), and for recreational walking (even in Texas, famous for being proudly automobile-dependent, the most popular tourist destination is now San Antonio's Riverwalk). I think it is wrong to suggest that investements in walking, cycling or public transit necessarily conflict with the interests of motorists. In many cases, such investments are the most cost effective way to improve transportation choices and reduce congestion (see "Least Cost Planning" and "Social Benefits of Public Transit" in our Online TDM Encyclopedik, available free at http://www.vtpi.org. It is interesting to consider to what degree current transportation choices and activities are affected by market distortions, and to what degree they would change in a more efficient and neutral market. I have written two papers that explore these issues: "Transportation Market Distortions - A Survey" and "Socially Optimal Transport Prices and Markets", both are also available at http://www.vtpi.org. I would love to get feedback on since I plan to prepare them for to submit to a journal over the next few weeks. Here are a few highlights from that analysis for the U.S: * Fuel taxes and registration fees only cover about 2/3 of total U.S. roadway expenese (local roads are locally funded). Fuel taxes would need to increase by about 42% just to cover these additional direct expenese, and more if other roadway services (traffic policing and emergency services) were charged to users. * Unpriced, off-street parking represents a cost estimated at about $250 billion annually in the U.S. * Failing to implement congestion charges tends to favor space-intensive modes (driving over ridesharing, transit, cycling and walking). * The practice of treating roadway land as having zero value (i.e., collecting no rent or property taxes from road users) represents a market distortion that favors space-intensive travel modes. Road user charges would need to more than double if users paid such rents. * Fixed vehicle insurance pricing practices tend to encourage automobile use. Distance-based insurance is justified on actuarial grounds and would reduce automobile use by 10% or greater. * A number of planning practices tend to encourage automobile-oriented transportation and land use patterns. These include dedicated funds and matching grants for roads (particularly if they are not transferable to other accounts) generous minimum road and parking requirements, utility pricing that does not reflect the higher cost of dispersed development, and filing to consider the full effects of generated traffic during transportation planning and modeling. * Some critics argue that market distortions favoring automobiles are counterbalanced by subsidies to transit, but there are orders of magnitude differences. Total U.S. transit subsidies are on the order of $20 billion, and about half of these are justified on purely equity grounds (e.g., special mobility services for people with disabilities, wheelchair lifts, transit service in lower-density areas). This is about the same amount that is spent just on automobile advertising, and less than a tenth off the amount devoted to parking subsidies. This analysis suggests that the "optimal" transportation system that would result from correcting market distortions would include personal automobile travel, but it would be at a significantly lower level (1/3 to 1/2 less) than what currently occurs. The result of such reforms would be that consumers would choose to drive less, use alternatives more, place a higher value on transportation-efficient land use, and be better off overall as a result. I don't think it is fair to suggest that this represents an "anti-driver" bias. It is simply basic market economics reflecting consumer sovereignty. If this analysis is wrong, please let me know why. Sincerely, Todd Litman, Director Victoria Transport Policy Institute "Efficiency - Equity - Clarity" 1250 Rudlin Street Victoria, BC, V8V 3R7, Canada Phone & Fax: 250-360-1560 E-mail: litman@vtpi.org Website: http://www.vtpi.org At 07:55 AM 7/6/01 -0500, you wrote: >A not altogether unreasonable definition. However, Todd Litman's last >evaluation criteria indicates a bias against drivers. I would also have some >concern about how to measure "quality," but objective measures should be >possible. The criteria would be more appropriate as follows... > * Quality of the transport environment, including all modes (this would include pedestian and cycling, which could be listed along with cars, public transport, etc.). >Moreover the following criteria would be more effective if stated in terms >of an index of some sort. Perhaps it would be be > * Extent of transportation choices for non-drivers and lower-income people. DEMOGRAPHIA & THE PUBLIC PURPOSE (Wendell Cox Consultancy) http://www.demographia.com (Demographics & Land Use) http://www.publicpurpose.com (Public Policy & Transport)) Telephone: +1.618.632.8507 - Facsimile: +1.810.821.8134 PO Box 841 - Belleville, IL 62222 USA ----- Original Message ----- From: Paul Barter To: Sent: Wednesday, 04 July, 2001 22:32 Subject: [sustran] re: How to assess local governments' transport policies > Also taking the liberty of forwarding a useful response to yesterday's query > from Korea. > Paul > > -----Original Message----- > From: Todd Litman [mailto:litman@VTPI.ORG] > Sent: Wednesday, 4 July 2001 10:41 > To: UTSG@JISCMAIL.AC.UK > Subject: Re: How to assess local governments' transport policies > > > It is very important when developing such evaluation criteria that they be > based on the goal of access (the ability to obtain desired goods and > services, and reach desired activities), rather than treat mobility and > traffic as an end in itself. Many actions that improve vehicle mobility > reduce access overall by reducing pedestrian and bicycle mobility, and by > encouraging more dispersed land use patterns. > > For example, when siting a school or business, the best location from a > mobility perspective is on a busy highway at the urban fringe, where it is > convenient to reach by car and there is land for abundant parking. But such > a location reduces access, because it is difficult to reach by walking, > cycling and public transit. Access is maximized by clustering major > activity centers in a centralized area with good transit service. > > Evaluation criteria for access could include: > * Average door-to-door travel time costs for residents in a region. > * Average annual transportation expenditures for residents in a region. > * Freight transportation delivery speeds. > * Crashes and crash fatalities per capita. > * Quality of transportation choices for non-drivers and lower-income people. > * Quality of the pedestian and cycling environments. > > > For more discussion see the "Measuring Transport" chapter of the VTPI > Online TDM Encyclopedia, available at http://www.vtpi.org. > Sincerely, Todd Litman, Director Victoria Transport Policy Institute "Efficiency - Equity - Clarity" 1250 Rudlin Street Victoria, BC, V8V 3R7, Canada Phone & Fax: 250-360-1560 E-mail: litman@vtpi.org Website: http://www.vtpi.org From wcox at publicpurpose.com Sat Jul 7 09:01:48 2001 From: wcox at publicpurpose.com (Wendell Cox) Date: Fri, 6 Jul 2001 19:01:48 -0500 Subject: [sustran] Re: A bias against drivers? References: <54.16e09751.28760c02@aol.com><5.1.0.14.2.20010705203316.00aa9a30@127.0.0.1> <3.0.5.32.20010706093123.01247cc0@pop.islandnet.com> Message-ID: <006b01c10678$05754c20$947e2e3f@y8f2e> My poiint is very simple. I was not claiming that investments in bicycling or walking take away from the auto system. I was only stating that the very nature of evaluation criteria is that they should be stated in objective terms. The one in question is not. Restating it that way would change no outcomes. Mine is a semantic argument. DEMOGRAPHIA & THE PUBLIC PURPOSE (Wendell Cox Consultancy) http://www.demographia.com (Demographics & Land Use) http://www.publicpurpose.com (Public Policy & Transport)) Telephone: +1.618.632.8507 - Facsimile: +1.810.821.8134 PO Box 841 - Belleville, IL 62222 USA ----- Original Message ----- From: Todd Litman To: Sent: Friday, 06 July, 2001 11:31 Subject: [sustran] A bias against drivers? > > Getting back to the starting point of this exchange, I am pleased that Mr. > Cox considers my definition not altogether unreasonable, but I respectfully > disagree that giving emphasis to the quality of the pedestrian environment > reflects a bias against drivers. Walking is the most basic form of > transportation which virtually everybody depends on, including people who > think of themselves primarily as drivers. Admittedly, in a "perfect" > suburban landscape with abundant off-street parking at every destination a > motorist could travel for days without ever depending on public pedestrian > facilities, but in practice, improving the pedestrian/cycle environment can > be one of the most effective ways to benefit motorists, by providing more > convenient access to a larger pool of parking spaces and by allowing us a > wider range of travel choices (walking, cycling, transit), and for > recreational walking (even in Texas, famous for being proudly > automobile-dependent, the most popular tourist destination is now San > Antonio's Riverwalk). > > I think it is wrong to suggest that investements in walking, cycling or > public transit necessarily conflict with the interests of motorists. In > many cases, such investments are the most cost effective way to improve > transportation choices and reduce congestion (see "Least Cost Planning" and > "Social Benefits of Public Transit" in our Online TDM Encyclopedik, > available free at http://www.vtpi.org. > > It is interesting to consider to what degree current transportation choices > and activities are affected by market distortions, and to what degree they > would change in a more efficient and neutral market. I have written two > papers that explore these issues: "Transportation Market Distortions - A > Survey" and "Socially Optimal Transport Prices and Markets", both are also > available at http://www.vtpi.org. I would love to get feedback on since I > plan to prepare them for to submit to a journal over the next few weeks. > Here are a few highlights from that analysis for the U.S: > > * Fuel taxes and registration fees only cover about 2/3 of total U.S. > roadway expenese (local roads are locally funded). Fuel taxes would need to > increase by about 42% just to cover these additional direct expenese, and > more if other roadway services (traffic policing and emergency services) > were charged to users. > > * Unpriced, off-street parking represents a cost estimated at about $250 > billion annually in the U.S. > > * Failing to implement congestion charges tends to favor space-intensive > modes (driving over ridesharing, transit, cycling and walking). > > * The practice of treating roadway land as having zero value (i.e., > collecting no rent or property taxes from road users) represents a market > distortion that favors space-intensive travel modes. Road user charges > would need to more than double if users paid such rents. > > * Fixed vehicle insurance pricing practices tend to encourage automobile > use. Distance-based insurance is justified on actuarial grounds and would > reduce automobile use by 10% or greater. > > * A number of planning practices tend to encourage automobile-oriented > transportation and land use patterns. These include dedicated funds and > matching grants for roads (particularly if they are not transferable to > other accounts) generous minimum road and parking requirements, utility > pricing that does not reflect the higher cost of dispersed development, and > filing to consider the full effects of generated traffic during > transportation planning and modeling. > > * Some critics argue that market distortions favoring automobiles are > counterbalanced by subsidies to transit, but there are orders of magnitude > differences. Total U.S. transit subsidies are on the order of $20 billion, > and about half of these are justified on purely equity grounds (e.g., > special mobility services for people with disabilities, wheelchair lifts, > transit service in lower-density areas). This is about the same amount that > is spent just on automobile advertising, and less than a tenth off the > amount devoted to parking subsidies. > > This analysis suggests that the "optimal" transportation system that would > result from correcting market distortions would include personal automobile > travel, but it would be at a significantly lower level (1/3 to 1/2 less) > than what currently occurs. The result of such reforms would be that > consumers would choose to drive less, use alternatives more, place a higher > value on transportation-efficient land use, and be better off overall as a > result. I don't think it is fair to suggest that this represents an > "anti-driver" bias. It is simply basic market economics reflecting consumer > sovereignty. If this analysis is wrong, please let me know why. > > > Sincerely, > > Todd Litman, Director > Victoria Transport Policy Institute > "Efficiency - Equity - Clarity" > 1250 Rudlin Street > Victoria, BC, V8V 3R7, Canada > Phone & Fax: 250-360-1560 > E-mail: litman@vtpi.org > Website: http://www.vtpi.org > > > > At 07:55 AM 7/6/01 -0500, you wrote: > >A not altogether unreasonable definition. However, Todd Litman's last > >evaluation criteria indicates a bias against drivers. I would also have some > >concern about how to measure "quality," but objective measures should be > >possible. The criteria would be more appropriate as follows... > > > * Quality of the transport environment, including all modes (this would > include pedestian and cycling, which could be listed along with cars, public > transport, etc.). > > >Moreover the following criteria would be more effective if stated in terms > >of an index of some sort. Perhaps it would be be > > > * Extent of transportation choices for non-drivers and lower-income > people. > > DEMOGRAPHIA & THE PUBLIC PURPOSE (Wendell Cox Consultancy) > http://www.demographia.com (Demographics & Land Use) > http://www.publicpurpose.com (Public Policy & Transport)) > Telephone: +1.618.632.8507 - Facsimile: +1.810.821.8134 > PO Box 841 - Belleville, IL 62222 USA > ----- Original Message ----- > From: Paul Barter > To: > Sent: Wednesday, 04 July, 2001 22:32 > Subject: [sustran] re: How to assess local governments' transport policies > > > > Also taking the liberty of forwarding a useful response to yesterday's > query > > from Korea. > > Paul > > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: Todd Litman [mailto:litman@VTPI.ORG] > > Sent: Wednesday, 4 July 2001 10:41 > > To: UTSG@JISCMAIL.AC.UK > > Subject: Re: How to assess local governments' transport policies > > > > > > It is very important when developing such evaluation criteria that they be > > based on the goal of access (the ability to obtain desired goods and > > services, and reach desired activities), rather than treat mobility and > > traffic as an end in itself. Many actions that improve vehicle mobility > > reduce access overall by reducing pedestrian and bicycle mobility, and by > > encouraging more dispersed land use patterns. > > > > For example, when siting a school or business, the best location from a > > mobility perspective is on a busy highway at the urban fringe, where it is > > convenient to reach by car and there is land for abundant parking. But > such > > a location reduces access, because it is difficult to reach by walking, > > cycling and public transit. Access is maximized by clustering major > > activity centers in a centralized area with good transit service. > > > > Evaluation criteria for access could include: > > * Average door-to-door travel time costs for residents in a region. > > * Average annual transportation expenditures for residents in a region. > > * Freight transportation delivery speeds. > > * Crashes and crash fatalities per capita. > > * Quality of transportation choices for non-drivers and lower-income > people. > > * Quality of the pedestian and cycling environments. > > > > > > For more discussion see the "Measuring Transport" chapter of the VTPI > > Online TDM Encyclopedia, available at http://www.vtpi.org. > > > > > Sincerely, > > Todd Litman, Director > Victoria Transport Policy Institute > "Efficiency - Equity - Clarity" > 1250 Rudlin Street > Victoria, BC, V8V 3R7, Canada > Phone & Fax: 250-360-1560 > E-mail: litman@vtpi.org > Website: http://www.vtpi.org From wcox at publicpurpose.com Sat Jul 7 09:02:58 2001 From: wcox at publicpurpose.com (Wendell Cox) Date: Fri, 6 Jul 2001 19:02:58 -0500 Subject: [sustran] Re: A bias against drivers? References: <54.16e09751.28760c02@aol.com><5.1.0.14.2.20010705203316.00aa9a30@127.0.0.1> <3.0.5.32.20010706093123.01247cc0@pop.islandnet.com> Message-ID: <007a01c10678$2fb02640$947e2e3f@y8f2e> >From the transport-groups mailing list.... Wendell, I suggest that you make this gentleman aware of the Delucchi article "Should we Try to Get the Costs Right?" and the University of Minnesota research paper referred to by Shef Lang "The Full Costs of Transportation in the Twin Cities Area". Point out the size of the externalities and the fact that 90-95% or more of the public on which externalities and government costs fall are drivers or those who ride in cars. That leaves only 1-2% of the overall costs to fall on those who don't drive or ride. Bruce Gaarder Saint Paul MN bruce_gaarder@acm.org > > > Wendell, > > > > > > I would like to suggest that there is a reason to be biased against > > private transport. The benefits go primarily to the individual, but > > externalities go to the public at large. Nor can it ever be available to > all > > age groups, all income groups, to people with disabilities, etc.. These > > people get none of the benefits but the same externalities. > > > > > > Public transport uses less space, creates fewer externalities, and > doesn't > > exclude large portions of the population. > > > > > > I think the core of our difference is that we can't agree on how to > > evaluate these externalities, and what to do, if anything, about > > compensating for them. > > > > > > Eric Bruun THE TRANSPORT POLICY DISCUSSION GROUP Sponsored by The Public Purpose http://www.publicpurpose.com Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/ From dmohan at cbme.iitd.ernet.in Sat Jul 7 16:08:16 2001 From: dmohan at cbme.iitd.ernet.in (Dinesh Mohan) Date: Sat, 07 Jul 2001 12:38:16 +0530 Subject: [sustran] A bias against drivers? References: <54.16e09751.28760c02@aol.com> <5.1.0.14.2.20010705203316.00aa9a30@127.0.0.1> <3.0.5.32.20010706093123.01247cc0@pop.islandnet.com> Message-ID: <3B46B560.AEB2598D@cbme.iitd.ernet.in> Maxie: You might find this interesting! Dinesh Todd Litman wrote: > I respectfully > disagree that giving emphasis to the quality of the pedestrian environment > reflects a bias against drivers. Walking is the most basic form of > transportation which virtually everybody depends on, including people who > think of themselves primarily as drivers. Admittedly, in a "perfect" > suburban landscape with abundant off-street parking at every destination a > motorist could travel for days without ever depending on public pedestrian > facilities, but in practice, improving the pedestrian/cycle environment can > be one of the most effective ways to benefit motorists, by providing more > convenient access to a larger pool of parking spaces and by allowing us a > wider range of travel choices (walking, cycling, transit), and for > recreational walking (even in Texas, famous for being proudly > automobile-dependent, the most popular tourist destination is now San > Antonio's Riverwalk). > > I think it is wrong to suggest that investements in walking, cycling or > public transit necessarily conflict with the interests of motorists. In > many cases, such investments are the most cost effective way to improve > transportation choices and reduce congestion (see "Least Cost Planning" and > "Social Benefits of Public Transit" in our Online TDM Encyclopedik, > available free at http://www.vtpi.org. > > It is interesting to consider to what degree current transportation choices > and activities are affected by market distortions, and to what degree they > would change in a more efficient and neutral market. I have written two > papers that explore these issues: "Transportation Market Distortions - A > Survey" and "Socially Optimal Transport Prices and Markets", both are also > available at http://www.vtpi.org. I would love to get feedback on since I > plan to prepare them for to submit to a journal over the next few weeks. > Here are a few highlights from that analysis for the U.S: > > * Fuel taxes and registration fees only cover about 2/3 of total U.S. > roadway expenese (local roads are locally funded). Fuel taxes would need to > increase by about 42% just to cover these additional direct expenese, and > more if other roadway services (traffic policing and emergency services) > were charged to users. > > * Unpriced, off-street parking represents a cost estimated at about $250 > billion annually in the U.S. > > * Failing to implement congestion charges tends to favor space-intensive > modes (driving over ridesharing, transit, cycling and walking). > > * The practice of treating roadway land as having zero value (i.e., > collecting no rent or property taxes from road users) represents a market > distortion that favors space-intensive travel modes. Road user charges > would need to more than double if users paid such rents. > > * Fixed vehicle insurance pricing practices tend to encourage automobile > use. Distance-based insurance is justified on actuarial grounds and would > reduce automobile use by 10% or greater. > > * A number of planning practices tend to encourage automobile-oriented > transportation and land use patterns. These include dedicated funds and > matching grants for roads (particularly if they are not transferable to > other accounts) generous minimum road and parking requirements, utility > pricing that does not reflect the higher cost of dispersed development, and > filing to consider the full effects of generated traffic during > transportation planning and modeling. > > * Some critics argue that market distortions favoring automobiles are > counterbalanced by subsidies to transit, but there are orders of magnitude > differences. Total U.S. transit subsidies are on the order of $20 billion, > and about half of these are justified on purely equity grounds (e.g., > special mobility services for people with disabilities, wheelchair lifts, > transit service in lower-density areas). This is about the same amount that > is spent just on automobile advertising, and less than a tenth off the > amount devoted to parking subsidies. > > This analysis suggests that the "optimal" transportation system that would > result from correcting market distortions would include personal automobile > travel, but it would be at a significantly lower level (1/3 to 1/2 less) > than what currently occurs. The result of such reforms would be that > consumers would choose to drive less, use alternatives more, place a higher > value on transportation-efficient land use, and be better off overall as a > result. I don't think it is fair to suggest that this represents an > "anti-driver" bias. It is simply basic market economics reflecting consumer > sovereignty. If this analysis is wrong, please let me know why. > > Sincerely, > > Todd Litman, Director > Victoria Transport Policy Institute > "Efficiency - Equity - Clarity" > 1250 Rudlin Street > Victoria, BC, V8V 3R7, Canada > Phone & Fax: 250-360-1560 > E-mail: litman@vtpi.org > Website: http://www.vtpi.org-- ======================================================================= Send your response to DRAFT CHARTER ON PEOPLE'S RIGHT TO SAFETY, GO TO TRIPP website http://www.iitd.ac.in/tripp/ [IMORTANT: if this server gives you trouble in sending a mail to me, you can use temporarily.] ======================================================================= Dinesh Mohan Henry Ford Professor for Biomechanics and Transportation Safety Transportation Research and Injury Prevention Programme Room MS 808, Main Building Indian Institute of Technology Hauz Khas New Delhi 110016 Phone: (+91 11) 659 1147 & 659 6361 FAX: (+91 11) 685 8703 & 685 1169 Home: (+91 11) 649 4910 Email: dmohan@cbme.iitd.ernet.in ======================================================================= From kerry.wood at paradise.net.nz Sun Jul 8 07:07:27 2001 From: kerry.wood at paradise.net.nz (Kerry Wood) Date: Sun, 08 Jul 2001 10:07:27 +1200 Subject: [sustran] A bias against NMM References: <54.16e09751.28760c02@aol.com><5.1.0.14.2.20010705203316.00aa9a30@127.0.0.1> <3.0.5.32.20010706093123.01247cc0@pop.islandnet.com> <007a01c10678$2fb02640$947e2e3f@y8f2e> Message-ID: <3B47881D.9E5CB614@paradise.net.nz> Oh Dear... > Point out the size of the externalities and the fact that 90-95% or > more of the public on which externalities and government costs fall > are drivers or those who ride in cars. That leaves only 1-2% of the > overall costs to fall on those who don't drive or ride. This reminds me of JK Galbraith's comment that economists are economical, amongst other things, with ideas. It has been known for centuries that free access to communal grazing land leads to over-grazing. If all the animals are half-starved each household will maximise their benefit by running (say) two beasts. They could gain still greater benefit if all households ran only one, well-fed, beast, but the difficulty was to get agreement and avoid cheating.. In the end, the solution was often to privatise the common land, without compensation. Another solution might have been to charge those with grazing rights by the beast, then share out the profits equally. Oh, and ear-tagging. If we are 'all' users of cars (despite the fact that no more than about two thirds of the population have driving licences, and fewer have cars), then it is even more true that we are all users of electricity. So why bother charging for the stuff? That this is a Marxist idea is neither here nor there: what matters is that it is inefficient, and that electricity - and cars - are used on such a huge scale that inefficiency really matters. We are talking subsidies here - big ones. Whether those subsidies are paid out by the government - the usual method - or are unpriced costs (clean air and water, deaths and injuries, resource depletion, 'free' parking and so on) makes no difference. Some of those subsidies/exteralities cannot be quantified accurately, but that makes no difference either: better to be 20% or 80% right - or whatever the figure is thought to be - than 100% wrong. If motor vehicle user were charged external costs, the first effects would be the cost of setting up the bureaucracy to run it all, and that poor people would find that they could not afford to go to work. But then the secondary effects would cut in: car sharing; trip chaining; more use of cycling, walking and public transport; less use of Urban Assault Vehicles; cleaner exhausts; less congestion (remember that small changes make a big difference) and so on. And in the longer term, perhaps even an assumption in passenger transport and urban planning, that transport users face their full costs. And the poor people who cannot get to work? That is a problem and it demands a solution, but a transport solution will subsidise the rich more than the poor. Taxation, social security or minimum wage solutions are all options. -- Kerry Wood Sustainable Transport Consulting Engineer 76 Virginia Road, Wanganui 5001, New Zealand Phone and fax (+64 6) 347 2307 Mobile 021 115 9346 From ktsourl at yahoo.com Mon Jul 9 04:48:21 2001 From: ktsourl at yahoo.com (Konstantinos Tsourlakis) Date: Sun, 8 Jul 2001 12:48:21 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [sustran] Re: a bias against drivers? Message-ID: <20010708194821.25660.qmail@web14503.mail.yahoo.com> There are two reasons why a bias against drivers is justified: The first reason for this bias (more accurately a pro pedestrian-friendly-modes-of-transport bias) is that walking is the natural way of transport and has to have priority over the rest modes of transport. It is actually a human right (the freedom of safe movement) and as such it has to be protected, and a bias in favor of it is justified, the same way as a bias for general education or a bias for public health is justified. The second reason for this bias (more accurately an anti pro-auto bias) is to counterbalance the ideology which created (and still creates in many countries) the present private auto centered transportation model. Once this model is established there is a positive feedback which reinforce it through the deterioration of public transit (and of non motorized ways of transport). In fact this model is not the outcome of market forces (in the sense of free choices), but the result of planned political actions. In Germany for example the private car was popularized by Hitler (Volkswagen) who also constructed the first freeways. In USA sprawling is also an outcome of urban planning. And in many Asian (and other developping) countries (among them huge ones like India and China) the private car is actively supported and presented as progress (in an attempt to follow the development path of North America and Europe), as is often reported in the present listserv. The way the GNP is measured helps this progress presentation: for example road accidents increase GNP (they increase demand for health services, insurances, lawyers, police e.t.c) though they are of course a disaster, while pollution and environment deterioration are not taken into account. __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Get personalized email addresses from Yahoo! Mail http://personal.mail.yahoo.com/ From kerry.wood at paradise.net.nz Sun Jul 8 14:19:26 2001 From: kerry.wood at paradise.net.nz (Kerry Wood) Date: Sun, 08 Jul 2001 17:19:26 +1200 Subject: [sustran] Re: Assistance wanted - Bus Priority References References: <20010705102027.44182.qmail@web12703.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <3B47ED5F.A9873374@paradise.net.nz> Alan You might find some of these papers useful Mogridge, MJH (1997) The self-defeating nature of urban road capacity policy. Transport Policy 4 (1) pp 5-23 I find this one crucial. What he says is that public transport effectively controls the speed of motor traffic, through the Downs-Thompson effect. Fast public transport encourages a switch away from car use on a large enough scale to reduce traffic, which also flows faster. It seems to work in many cities - but Dubai may not be one of them. Cairns, S; Hass-Klau, C and Goodwin, P (1998) Traffic impact of highway capacity reductions: assessment of the evidence. London: Landor Restricting traffic makes much less difference than you think, so making space for public transport (or pedestrianisation) is not the disaster it may seem. Heierli, R (1996) European Lecture: Public transport in Z?rich. Proc Instn Civil Engineers, Transport 117, November Another crucial one: these guys have done it! ISTP (1999) Information from the database held by the Institute for Science and Technology Policy, Murdoch University, Perth. Much of this is in Newman and Kenworthy (1999). I have pulled some useful supportive evidence for the Downs-Thompson effect from this data. Z?rich (quoted above and below) has the shortest journey-to-work travel times of any of the cities studied. Their figures also highlight the huge costs of car-based transport Joos, E (1990) Light rail to combat congestion. In North, BH (ed) Light Transit Systems, Institution of Civil Engineers, ISBN 0 7277 1590 9 This may not be easy to get hold of, so a quote might be helpful: > The speed-up programme (for Z?rich) concentrated on three separate objectives: > > a) Unhindered trips between junctions, without hold-ups caused by private traffic, to be achieved by building special (tram) lines and separate bus lanes. > > b) 'Zero' waiting time for public transport at light-controlled junctions, by developing a fully flexible control philosophy. > > c) Extension of the data-controlled operational control system, so that the operational control centre is always informed about deviations from the timetable and other programmes, and can remedy the situations or help by putting previously-designed measures into effect. Ott, R (1995) Conurbation Transport Policy in Zurich, Switzerland. Proc Instn Civil Engineers, Transport , 111, Aug, pp 225-33 Buchanan, C (1963) Traffic in Towns. London: HMSO Still some good stuff in here! I have a paper of my own in preparation, which seems to confirm the experience of Z?rich (and others), that taking space away from private vehicles to speed public transport STILL improves private vehicle speeds. So does this stuff apply in Dubai? I suggest that if more than about 70% of commuters travel by car, OR if public transport is already fast (which sounds unlikely from your backgrounder), the answer is probably 'yes'. I may as well end with another couple of quotes, as I have them handy: from Heierli: > The only way to reduce traffic problems is to promote public transport > Z?rich has... succeeded in giving its public transport operators the image of modern companies with a clear customer focus, which... results in a very positive image. The outcome of this is that there is no stigma attached to travelling by tram in Z?rich; indeed, anyone who does not use the tram tends to be regarded as out of touch... Our politicians make regular use of public transport (not just at election times) and leading figures from economic and academic life would not consider commuting in any other way. -- Kerry Wood Sustainable Transport Consulting Engineer 76 Virginia Road, Wanganui 5001, New Zealand Phone and fax (+64 6) 347 2307 Mobile 021 115 9346 Alan Howes wrote: > I am looking for assistance in convincing our Roads Engineers that Bus > Priority is not such a dreadful thing after all. More specifically, I > am looking for references which show the range benefits to bus users, > and disbenefits (if any - I hope they are small) to other road users > as a result of giving buses early calls / extended greens etc. at > traffic signals. > (snipped) From hduc at airmoon.epa.nsw.gov.au Mon Jul 9 12:25:09 2001 From: hduc at airmoon.epa.nsw.gov.au (Hiep Nguyen) Date: Mon, 9 Jul 2001 13:25:09 +1000 Subject: [sustran] Re: a bias against drivers? Message-ID: Hello Wendell and all, I find the recent debate quite interesting and informative. In Taipei where i visited last year, the auto based system is not sustainable and have caused huge social, economic problems. "A bias against drivers" was required, the result is a new MASS Rapid Transit (MRT) and many public transport initiatives. The MRT is very succesful and in the end benefits the auto drivers as well. Now many cities in Taiwan want to do the same. See the following articles for this experience and example in Asia Sustainable Subways The Long Way Round Railway or the Highway Road Warriors Parking in The City Cheers Hiep On Fri, 6 Jul 2001, Wendell Cox wrote: > Eric.. > > Sorry. Not all of us have been converted to this view. With road pricing and > improved pollution control, an auto based system may well be sustainable, at > the appropriate densities. The issue has to do with overall objectives and > there is no reason to introduce biases into the matter. I like Todd's > criteria, if restated in unbiased terms. Let the evaluation determine the > strategies. We dont need theologians, we need analysts. > > Best regards, > Wendell > > > > > > DEMOGRAPHIA & THE PUBLIC PURPOSE (Wendell Cox Consultancy) > http://www.demographia.com (Demographics & Land Use) > http://www.publicpurpose.com (Public Policy & Transport)) > Telephone: +1.618.632.8507 - Facsimile: +1.810.821.8134 > PO Box 841 - Belleville, IL 62222 USA From tpanswad at tei.or.th Mon Jul 9 13:00:45 2001 From: tpanswad at tei.or.th (Thongchai Panswad) Date: Mon, 9 Jul 2001 11:00:45 +0700 Subject: [sustran] Fw: rules, regulations and laws on bicycle Message-ID: <001501c1082b$c4980e80$cc739acb@tei.or.th> ----- Original Message ----- From: Thongchai Panswad To: sustran-discuss@jca.ax.apc.org Sent: Monday, July 09, 2001 8:54 AM Subject: rules, regulations and laws on bicycle dear Colleagues, In the capacity of the President of Thailand Cycling Club (TCC), I am doing a research on rules, regulations and laws on bicycle uses in Thailand and as many other countries as possible. Cycling is still a long way for every-day safe uses in urban cities in Thailand. TCC has been trying her best for the past 10 years to advocate this idea to the Thai public, politicians and the government. But we need some kind of legal supports to make it more attractive to the people. Can anybody help me on this matter of regulations, rules and laws in your countries, please? Thank you. Prof Thongchai PANSWAD President Thailand Environment Institute 210 Sukumvit 64 Pra Kanong, Bangkok 10260 Thailand tel 662-742-9641 to 50 ext 794 fax 662-742-9697 to 98 website: www.tei.or.th -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://list.jca.apc.org/manage/private/sustran-discuss/attachments/20010709/cf6a3700/attachment.htm From intlbike at ibike.org Mon Jul 9 14:35:18 2001 From: intlbike at ibike.org (David Mozer) Date: Sun, 8 Jul 2001 22:35:18 -0700 Subject: [sustran] Re: rules, regulations and laws on bicycle In-Reply-To: <001501c1082b$c4980e80$cc739acb@tei.or.th> Message-ID: Thongchai, We have a page on our website that will help you access regulations for bicycle use in most of the 50 United States, www.ibike.org/laws.htm If there are websites with bike related laws and regulations for other countries we would like to know of them. INTERNATIONAL BICYCLE FUND -- www.ibike.org, ibike@ibike.org Promoting sustainable transport and understanding worldwide. -----Original Message----- From: owner-sustran-discuss@jca.ax.apc.org [mailto:owner-sustran-discuss@jca.ax.apc.org]On Behalf Of Thongchai Panswad Sent: Sunday, July 08, 2001 9:01 PM To: sustran-discuss@jca.ax.apc.org Subject: [sustran] Fw: rules, regulations and laws on bicycle ----- Original Message ----- From: Thongchai Panswad To: sustran-discuss@jca.ax.apc.org Sent: Monday, July 09, 2001 8:54 AM Subject: rules, regulations and laws on bicycle dear Colleagues, In the capacity of the President of Thailand Cycling Club (TCC), I am doing a research on rules, regulations and laws on bicycle uses in Thailand and as many other countries as possible. Cycling is still a long way for every-day safe uses in urban cities in Thailand. TCC has been trying her best for the past 10 years to advocate this idea to the Thai public, politicians and the government. But we need some kind of legal supports to make it more attractive to the people. Can anybody help me on this matter of regulations, rules and laws in your countries, please? Thank you. Prof Thongchai PANSWAD President Thailand Environment Institute 210 Sukumvit 64 Pra Kanong, Bangkok 10260 Thailand tel 662-742-9641 to 50 ext 794 fax 662-742-9697 to 98 website: www.tei.or.th -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://list.jca.apc.org/manage/private/sustran-discuss/attachments/20010708/aae2993d/attachment.htm From bfinn at singnet.com.sg Mon Jul 9 14:46:32 2001 From: bfinn at singnet.com.sg (Brendan Finn) Date: Mon, 9 Jul 2001 13:46:32 +0800 Subject: [sustran] Rules, regulations and laws on bicycle References: <001501c1082b$c4980e80$cc739acb@tei.or.th> Message-ID: <000a01c1083a$82e73380$bbd215a5@bfinn> For Ireland, best source is to contact the Dublin Transportation Office, a public sector co-ordination entity. Website is http://www.dto.ie - note to other Sustrans list subscribers - this also has information on Dublin's traffic and public transport policy. It's a small unit, but quite expert and influential. The DTO has established a substantial cycleway network in Dublin since 1996, starting from a zero base and overcoming what was previously quite an uncaring approach by the traffic authorities. You will find information on the cycle strategy as well as the cycleway network under the Traffic Management section of the website. Until the late-60's, cycling was a very popular means of transport in Dublin due to low car ownership base, fairly quiet streets, few hills, and relatively short distances. The combined impacts of increased car ownership, busier streets, suburban development, and negative public attitudes meant that very few workers used bicycle by 1980 (the real damage was done in one decade) and not even very many students. From the late-1980's there has been something of a resurgence, since a typical 8km work trip to the city centre takes 40-60 minutes by car in the peak hour, but only 15-20 minutes by bicycle, and of course means that a family can remain as a one-car unit. However, you were literally taking your life in your hands, and very few work places had adequate storage or shower facilities. The positive attitude of the DTO has helped adult cyclists somewhat in safety terms, but the real beneficiaries are in the suburban areas where it is now very much safer for schoolchildren to use their bike to get to school. The real long-term win has been to put cycling back on the agenda as a transport mode which is worthy of its own infrastructure and traffic management measures. Contact person is Michael Ahern at micka@dto.ie - he should also be able to get you information on the regulations (which seem to be generally unknown to cyclists!!) since all such developments must take place within the relevant traffic laws, and have regard to the safety of cyclists and other road users, including pedestrians. Outside Dublin, I believe that there has been reasonable progress in Cork City, but unfortunately not very much in the rural areas where cycling is extremely important but highly dangerous. If this contact point cannot answer your queries, please revert to me directly and I'll try to find other channels for you. Brendan Finn. ______________________________________________________ Please note contact details as follows : Address : 28, Leonie Hill, #02-28 Leonie Towers, Singapore 239227 Mobile : +65.94332298 Tel : +65.7340260 Fax/Tel : +65.7340412 e-mail : bfinn@singnet.com.sg Website : http://www.europrojects.ie/etts ----- Original Message ----- From: Thongchai Panswad To: sustran-discuss@jca.ax.apc.org Sent: 09 July 2001 12:00 Subject: [sustran] Fw: rules, regulations and laws on bicycle ----- Original Message ----- From: Thongchai Panswad To: sustran-discuss@jca.ax.apc.org Sent: Monday, July 09, 2001 8:54 AM Subject: rules, regulations and laws on bicycle dear Colleagues, In the capacity of the President of Thailand Cycling Club (TCC), I am doing a research on rules, regulations and laws on bicycle uses in Thailand and as many other countries as possible. Cycling is still a long way for every-day safe uses in urban cities in Thailand. TCC has been trying her best for the past 10 years to advocate this idea to the Thai public, politicians and the government. But we need some kind of legal supports to make it more attractive to the people. Can anybody help me on this matter of regulations, rules and laws in your countries, please? Thank you. Prof Thongchai PANSWAD President Thailand Environment Institute 210 Sukumvit 64 Pra Kanong, Bangkok 10260 Thailand tel 662-742-9641 to 50 ext 794 fax 662-742-9697 to 98 website: www.tei.or.th -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://list.jca.apc.org/manage/private/sustran-discuss/attachments/20010709/4fee1489/attachment.htm From pascal at gn.apc.org Mon Jul 9 21:00:06 2001 From: pascal at gn.apc.org (Pascal Desmond) Date: Mon, 9 Jul 2001 12:00:06 +0000 Subject: [sustran] [sustran] Re: a bias against drivers? In-Reply-To: <20010708194821.25660.qmail@web14503.mail.yahoo.com> References: <20010708194821.25660.qmail@web14503.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: In the UK fundamentally the law is as follows... 'Pedestrians, horses and their riders, drovers or farmers with animals, and cyclists use the highway by right, motorists and vehicles use it by licence.' ... although this is rarely observed in practice. Given that in most countries you can drive only once society has granted you a licence, the fundamental law isn't very different. Anyway, the point I'm making is a very basic one: motorists do not have 'rights', they are granted 'privileges' by society. Unfortunately, society seems to have forgotten this. -- Kind regards Pascal Desmond From eric.britton at ecoplan.org Mon Jul 9 21:48:22 2001 From: eric.britton at ecoplan.org (eric.britton@ecoplan.org) Date: Mon, 9 Jul 2001 14:48:22 +0200 Subject: [sustran] a bias against drivers? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: I claim, based on nothing more than personal observation, intermittent study of various categories of related statistics in a number of countries and driving habitats, and my basic sense of smell in this matters after quite a number of years of work in the field as a consultant and advisor to government and industry, that a significant MAJORITY of people in most places do not have FAIR AND REASONABLE ACCESS to autos as drivers. In addition to the other categories that have been brought up in these discussions (many elderly, handicapped, all children, etc., but also including those who really cannot afford to own and operate their own cars in any reasonable scheme of things), there are also all those who really are not physically or psychologically competent to master the complexities of either high speed freeway driving nor that twisting and turning of crowded city streets. My own quick first guess on this last category is that something on the order of one licensed driver in two should not be out on the road. Being a good and safe driver is a very complicated, demanding business and is not just a matter of snuggling behind the wheel and letting the automatic transmission and power assisted steering compensate for your own motor in adequacies. To put this into perspective, I would like to share with you the first short paragraph that the investigative reporter Malcolm Gladwell opens a thought provoking investigative article in the New Yorker of 8 June under the title of "Wrong Turn: How the fight to make America's highways safe went off course". "Every two miles the average driver makes four hundred observations, forty decisions, and one mistake. Once ever five hundred miles, one of these mistakes leads to a near collision, and once every sixty-one thousand miles one of those mistakes leads to a crash. When people driver, in other words, mistakes are endemic and accidents inevitable." And this is an "average driver". I do not have at hand what the numbers look like for those over 65, those who are tired or not feeling all that well, teenagers, smokers, people with mobile phones in hand, under medication (or who should be), those with visual or flexibility problems, and the list goes on. There are plenty of numbers out there that help make this point, but the bottom line is that, given who we are, the idea of creating a society where the main mobility option is the private car is a quite mad, unfair and dangerous one. The proper place for the car is as a second-tier mobility option for those for whom it does the job fairly, safely and well. But that is a small minority, and not the majority. Once we have realized this and started taking it into account in both our policies and investments in the sector, we will be on the road to sustainability. Comments? Eric Britton The @New Mobility Forum is permanently at http://newmobility.org The Commons ___Sustainable Development and Social Justice___ Le Frene, 8/10 rue Joseph Bara, 75006 Paris, France Eric.Britton@NewMobility.org Tel: +331 4326 1323 From czegras at MIT.EDU Mon Jul 9 22:44:03 2001 From: czegras at MIT.EDU (Chris Zegras) Date: Mon, 09 Jul 2001 09:44:03 -0400 Subject: [sustran] Externalities Message-ID: <5.0.0.25.2.20010709093958.023752d8@po9.mit.edu> Regardless of the incidence of externalities, the point is that the marginal price paid does not equal the full marginal cost, so travel decisions are inefficient, investment decisions are inefficient, etc. We all lose - drivers or not. CZ Date: Fri, 6 Jul 2001 19:02:58 -0500 From: "Wendell Cox" Subject: [sustran] Re: A bias against drivers? From the transport-groups mailing list.... Wendell, I suggest that you make this gentleman aware of the Delucchi article "Should we Try to Get the Costs Right?" and the University of Minnesota research paper referred to by Shef Lang "The Full Costs of Transportation in the Twin Cities Area". Point out the size of the externalities and the fact that 90-95% or more of the public on which externalities and government costs fall are drivers or those who ride in cars. That leaves only 1-2% of the overall costs to fall on those who don't drive or ride. Bruce Gaarder Saint Paul MN bruce_gaarder@acm.org -------------------------------------------------- Christopher Zegras Research Associate MIT * Laboratory for Energy & Environment * Room E40-468 1 Amherst Street * Cambridge, MA 02139 Tel: 617 258 6084 * Fax: 617 253 8013 From pascal at gn.apc.org Mon Jul 9 22:39:00 2001 From: pascal at gn.apc.org (Pascal Desmond) Date: Mon, 9 Jul 2001 13:39:00 +0000 Subject: [sustran] Re: Rules, regulations and laws on bicycle In-Reply-To: <000a01c1083a$82e73380$bbd215a5@bfinn> References: <001501c1082b$c4980e80$cc739acb@tei.or.th> <000a01c1083a$82e73380$bbd215a5@bfinn> Message-ID: At 1:46 pm +0800 9/7/01, Brendan Finn wrote: Outside Dublin, I believe that there has been reasonable progress in Cork City, but unfortunately not very much in the rural areas where cycling is extremely important but highly dangerous. Just a semantic point, but cycling [and walking] is NOT "dangerous"; it exposes you to dangers created by motorists. -- Kind regards Pascal Desmond -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://list.jca.apc.org/manage/private/sustran-discuss/attachments/20010709/c0f1530c/attachment.htm From tk at thomaskrag.com Tue Jul 10 08:44:43 2001 From: tk at thomaskrag.com (Thomas Krag) Date: Tue, 10 Jul 2001 01:44:43 +0200 Subject: [sustran] Sv: [sustran] Fw: rules, regulations and laws on bicycle Message-ID: <008f01c108d8$22a9dc40$3ee6f2d4@oemcomputer> Dear Thongchai Panswad, rules, regulations and laws for bicycles basically reflect the cycling policy (or lack thereof) of the country in question. Moreover, regulations can be organised quite differently even in contries with similar cycling policies. A study was made by Gianni Catania for ECF (the European Cyclists' Federation) some 10-15 years ago. You can ask office@ecf.com for a copy (see also www.ecf.com for general information and position papers). The bicycle has a fairly strong position in Denmark, and the bicycle is the main means of transport in about 15% of all trips. In Denmark most rules and regulations with an impact on cycling is found in the traffic rules and in the so-called "road-rules", which is basically not rules but mainly guidelines and a few norms for road design. Basically the bicycle is regarded a vehicle and most rules applicable to cars are the same for bicycles as well. Main exceptions are that bicycle tracks, when present, shall be used by the cyclists, and that a left turn should be done indirectly by first cycling to the opposite corner and later - when this will not impede other road users - continue in the new direction. A supplement to the traffic law prescribes how the bicycle shall be equipped with brakes, reflectors, lights (when riding at dark) etc. This can be found (in Danish) at the Danish Cyclist Federation website www.dcf.dk . The "road-rules" is a huge collection mainly of guidelines for good practice but also some obligations to be used by local road authorities in their roadbuilding. Recommendations for the width of bicycle tracks and quite a big number of other design details of importance to cyclists are found here. Some of the "road-rules" are collestec in a series of booklets called "Traffic areas in towns" (in Danish: Byernes trafikarealer) and the most important of these have been issued also in an English version. They can be ordered at boghandel@vd.dk. Last year a catalogue of ideas for cycle planning - "Collection of Cycle Concepts" - was published by the Danish Road Directorate. It could be of relevance for you and can be ordered for free also at boghandel@vd.dk. More details on the above mentioned issues can be achieved from the Ministry of Transport (trm@trm.dk, www.trm.dk), from the so-called "Faerdselsstyrelsen" (part of the ministry dealing with vehicle standards, among these requirements to bicycles) (fstyr@fstyr.dk) and from the Road Directorate ("Vejdirektoratet", vd@vd.dk, www.vd.dk). Studying rules and regulations is one of several possible ways to enhance the recognition of cycling in a country. Still cycling is not regarded very seriously in a lot of countries. Summaries from a seminar about bicycle traffic held in Estonia - an example of such a country with only little recognition given to cycling - might inspire you of other approaches. See www.dcf.dk/estonia. Best regards Thomas Krag -- Thomas Krag Wilhelm Marstrands Gade 11 - DK-2100 København Ø tel +45 35 42 86 24, mobil +45 27 11 86 24 www.thomaskrag.com, email tk@thomaskrag.com -----Oprindelig meddelelse----- Fra: Thongchai Panswad Til: sustran-discuss@jca.ax.apc.org Dato: 9. juli 2001 06:01 Emne: [sustran] Fw: rules, regulations and laws on bicycle ----- Original Message ----- From: Thongchai Panswad To: sustran-discuss@jca.ax.apc.org Sent: Monday, July 09, 2001 8:54 AM Subject: rules, regulations and laws on bicycle dear Colleagues, In the capacity of the President of Thailand Cycling Club (TCC), I am doing a research on rules, regulations and laws on bicycle uses in Thailand and as many other countries as possible. Cycling is still a long way for every-day safe uses in urban cities in Thailand. TCC has been trying her best for the past 10 years to advocate this idea to the Thai public, politicians and the government. But we need some kind of legal supports to make it more attractive to the people. Can anybody help me on this matter of regulations, rules and laws in your countries, please? Thank you. Prof Thongchai PANSWAD President Thailand Environment Institute 210 Sukumvit 64 Pra Kanong, Bangkok 10260 Thailand tel 662-742-9641 to 50 ext 794 fax 662-742-9697 to 98 website: www.tei.or.th -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://list.jca.apc.org/manage/private/sustran-discuss/attachments/20010710/8983503e/attachment.htm From dmohan at cbme.iitd.ernet.in Tue Jul 10 12:53:36 2001 From: dmohan at cbme.iitd.ernet.in (Dinesh Mohan) Date: Tue, 10 Jul 2001 09:23:36 +0530 Subject: [sustran] Re: a bias against drivers? References: Message-ID: <3B4A7C3F.2A0BFA34@cbme.iitd.ernet.in> It appears there is nothing called a "family" in this discussion. There must be some car owning families out there where the number of licensed drivers is greater than the number of cars a family owns. What do the others do if one family member takes the car out? Dinesh Mohan eric.britton@ecoplan.org wrote: > I claim, based on nothing more than personal observation, intermittent study of > various categories of related statistics in a number of countries and driving > habitats, and my basic sense of smell in this matters after quite a number of > years of work in the field as a consultant and advisor to government and > industry, that a significant MAJORITY of people in most places do not have FAIR > AND REASONABLE ACCESS to autos as drivers. > > In addition to the other categories that have been brought up in these > discussions (many elderly, handicapped, all children, etc., but also including > those who really cannot afford to own and operate their own cars in any > reasonable scheme of things), there are also all those who really are not > physically or psychologically competent to master the complexities of either > high speed freeway driving nor that twisting and turning of crowded city > streets. > > My own quick first guess on this last category is that something on the order of > one licensed driver in two should not be out on the road. Being a good and safe > driver is a very complicated, demanding business and is not just a matter of > snuggling behind the wheel and letting the automatic transmission and power > assisted steering compensate for your own motor in adequacies. To put this into > perspective, I would like to share with you the first short paragraph that the > investigative reporter Malcolm Gladwell opens a thought provoking investigative > article in the New Yorker of 8 June under the title of "Wrong Turn: How the > fight to make America's highways safe went off course". > > "Every two miles the average driver makes four hundred observations, forty > decisions, and one mistake. Once ever five hundred miles, one of these mistakes > leads to a near collision, and once every sixty-one thousand miles one of those > mistakes leads to a crash. When people driver, in other words, mistakes are > endemic and accidents inevitable." > > And this is an "average driver". I do not have at hand what the numbers look > like for those over 65, those who are tired or not feeling all that well, > teenagers, smokers, people with mobile phones in hand, under medication (or who > should be), those with visual or flexibility problems, and the list goes on. > > There are plenty of numbers out there that help make this point, but the bottom > line is that, given who we are, the idea of creating a society where the main > mobility option is the private car is a quite mad, unfair and dangerous one. > The proper place for the car is as a second-tier mobility option for those for > whom it does the job fairly, safely and well. But that is a small minority, and > not the majority. > > Once we have realized this and started taking it into account in both our > policies and investments in the sector, we will be on the road to > sustainability. > > Comments? > > Eric Britton > > The @New Mobility Forum is permanently at http://newmobility.org > The Commons ___Sustainable Development and Social Justice___ > Le Frene, 8/10 rue Joseph Bara, 75006 Paris, France > Eric.Britton@NewMobility.org Tel: +331 4326 1323 -- ======================================================================= Send your response to DRAFT CHARTER ON PEOPLE'S RIGHT TO SAFETY, GO TO TRIPP website http://www.iitd.ac.in/tripp/ [IMORTANT: if this server gives you trouble in sending a mail to me, you can use temporarily.] ======================================================================= Dinesh Mohan Henry Ford Professor for Biomechanics and Transportation Safety Transportation Research and Injury Prevention Programme Room MS 808, Main Building Indian Institute of Technology Hauz Khas New Delhi 110016 Phone: (+91 11) 659 1147 & 659 6361 FAX: (+91 11) 685 8703 & 685 1169 Home: (+91 11) 649 4910 Email: dmohan@cbme.iitd.ernet.in ======================================================================= From craig_townsend at hotmail.com Tue Jul 10 14:43:52 2001 From: craig_townsend at hotmail.com (Craig Townsend) Date: Tue, 10 Jul 2001 13:43:52 +0800 Subject: [sustran] RE: rules, regulations and laws on bicycle Message-ID: An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://list.jca.apc.org/manage/private/sustran-discuss/attachments/20010710/5ea753ff/attachment.htm From johnrenne at hotmail.com Tue Jul 10 15:35:59 2001 From: johnrenne at hotmail.com (John Renne) Date: Tue, 10 Jul 2001 00:35:59 -0600 Subject: [sustran] Jane Jacobs and Land Use Message-ID: Dear Wendell and others, In Jane Jacobs's 'The Death and Life of Great American Cities' a powerful insight is provided about automobiles and cities (Chapter 18). Jacobs states about horses and cars, "The power of mechanized vehicles, and their greater speed than horses, can make it easier to reconcile great concentrations of people with efficient movement of people and goods... [the problem is that]...We went awry by replacing, in effect, each horse on the crowded city streets with half a dozen or so mechanized vehicles, instead of using each mechanized vehicle to replace half a dozen or so horses. The mechanized vehicles, in their overabundance, work slothfully and idle much. As one consequence of such low efficiency, the powerful and speedy vehicles, choked by their own redundancy, don't move much faster than horses." In her book she quoted the New York times stating, "The truth is that a horse and buggy could cross Los Angles almost as fast in 1900 as an automobile can make this trip at 5 p.m. today (1960)". This problem has not gotten better in our cities today. I feel this is due to the fact that we have one main limited resource and that is land. We need to work to promote sustainable transportation which means that different solutions will work in different places. We need to reassess our land uses first and then discuss the specific technologies of movement second. If you study the rest of her book and many other authors who have followed her, you can begin to understand the configurations of land uses that produce more sustainable outcomes for cities. Best, John Renne Visiting Scholar Institute for Sustainability and Technology Policy Murdoch University, Perth, Western Australia _________________________________________________________________ Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com From sagaris at lake.cl Tue Jul 10 23:36:06 2001 From: sagaris at lake.cl (Lake Sagaris) Date: Tue, 10 Jul 2001 10:36:06 -0400 Subject: [sustran] Re: Another contribution to Jane Jacobs and Land Use In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <5.1.0.14.2.20010710102845.00ab10f0@127.0.0.1> Hi folks For those who are interested, aside from a lot of fascinating examples of efforts throughout the US to revitalize limp downtowns, the book "Cities: Back from the Edge, New Life for Downtown", by Roberta Brandes Gratz with Norman Mintz, John Wiley and Sons, New York, 1998, in many ways picks up where Jane Jacobs left off (although of course she never really did leave off, as her wonderful influence on Toronto indicates). Interestingly, Brandes Gratz really puts transit issues at the centre of urban renewal, and in her last chapter The SoHo Syndrome and her conclusion: Back from the Edge, she cites multiple examples of where changes to a pedestrian-centred approach have been crucial to revitalizing urban centres. Interestingly, many of the examples of grassroots rebuilding of urban life/centres that she cites were led by citizens' groups born from fights against major highway projects. Even more oddly, for us, not only is this very much our background at Ciudad Viva (Living City) but her first book -- which we'd never heard of when we were in the process of deciding our name, is called "Living Cities". Anyway, for a good, provocative and well-documented read on the practical implications of urban transport policies, I recommend this book. Best, Lake PS We are looking for contacts in Bogota, Colombia, since two of our members have the chance of a four-day visit there later this month, and are very eager to have a first-hand look at everything they've been doing in terms of changes to the urban transportation system. Any recommendations?? At 12:35 AM 10/07/01 -0600, you wrote: >Dear Wendell and others, > >In Jane Jacobs's 'The Death and Life of Great American Cities' a powerful >insight is provided about automobiles and cities (Chapter 18). > >Jacobs states about horses and cars, "The power of mechanized vehicles, >and their greater speed than horses, can make it easier to reconcile great >concentrations of people with efficient movement of people and goods... >[the problem is that]...We went awry by replacing, in effect, each horse >on the crowded city streets with half a dozen or so mechanized vehicles, >instead of using each mechanized vehicle to replace half a dozen or so >horses. The mechanized vehicles, in their overabundance, work slothfully >and idle much. >As one consequence of such low efficiency, the powerful and speedy >vehicles, choked by their own redundancy, don't move much faster than >horses." In her book she quoted the New York times stating, "The truth is >that a horse and buggy could cross Los Angles almost as fast in 1900 as an >automobile can make this trip at 5 p.m. today (1960)". > >This problem has not gotten better in our cities today. I feel this is due >to the fact that we have one main limited resource and that is land. We >need to work to promote sustainable transportation which means that >different solutions will work in different places. We need to reassess our >land uses first and then discuss the specific technologies of movement second. > >If you study the rest of her book and many other authors who have followed >her, you can begin to understand the configurations of land uses that >produce more sustainable outcomes for cities. > >Best, > >John Renne >Visiting Scholar >Institute for Sustainability and Technology Policy >Murdoch University, Perth, Western Australia > >_________________________________________________________________ >Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com From a.j.plumbe at Bradford.ac.uk Wed Jul 11 02:36:24 2001 From: a.j.plumbe at Bradford.ac.uk (Antony J Plumbe) Date: Tue, 10 Jul 2001 18:36:24 +0100 Subject: [sustran] RE: rules, regulations and laws on bicycle Message-ID: Dear Professor Thongchai Panswad, Three websites that may help you with the position in the UK are: http://www.local-transport.dtlr.gov.uk/cgi-bin/htsearch http://www.sustrans.org.uk/ http://www.ctc.org.uk Best wishes. Tony Plumbe ---------------------- A. J. Plumbe, Co-ordinator M.Sc. in Project Planning and Management, email: a.j.plumbe@bradford.ac.uk Fax: International: +44-1274-235280 Domestic : 01274-235280 Phone: International : +44-1274-235264 Domestic : 01274-235264 Mailing Address: DPPC, Bradford University, Richmond Road, Bradford, West Yorkshire, U.K., BD7 1DP. From bayk at quickweb.com.ph Wed Jul 11 11:52:30 2001 From: bayk at quickweb.com.ph (Heckler) Date: Wed, 11 Jul 2001 10:52:30 +0800 Subject: [sustran] electric rickshaws Message-ID: <00d801c109bf$0c5ba260$0100a8c0@COMPUTER3> The recent spate of postings has been "interesting" even if it did fill up my mailbox that I now have to sweep clean. But on to a more practical matter -- I'm resubmitting an earlier query to which I received no responses so I am restating it in the hope of eliciting some feedback. Most of you are probably familiar with the pollution effects of motorized rickshaws that one sees all over Asia. The Philippine versions use two-stroke motorcycles burning up a low-cost mixture of gasoline and oil that sends clouds of emissions and tons of pollutants daily. I would like to know if there are people on the list with practical experience in converting these vehicles to low-polluting ones. (Of course the ideal would be to replace with pedal powered rickshaws and to encourage more walking and cycling but let's say that's not an option at this point for various reasons.) There is a clean air campaign for Metro Manila funded by the ADB and some people there are saying to replace the motorcycles with the four-stroke engined variety for less pollution. It seems to me that even in the short-term the better option would be to replace them with electric rickshaws. What are the issues we should be looking at? There is no local manufacturing of e-vehicles at the moment and the cost of these vehicles seems to be a big point against them (based on that article from India where they''ve already commercialized them) or is it? Is this why e-vehicles are doing poorly in India? There was also news last year about doing converting rickshaws in Bangkok and I was wondering what happened to that. Relatively low income people own and operate these rickshaws and use them as their primary means of livelihood. Is this even a viable option or would another stragety be better? Thanks in advance for any practical feedback. By the way, in response to Tongchai's query -- our laws don't cover bicycles as vhicles specifically so it's a live and let live situation. I now wonder if legally they are covered in the same way that pedestrian rights are covered (as in the UK case that's been pointed out here) but I'm no legal eagle -- for example, what happens when there are conflicts and during accidents? This is also a question we've been occasionally stumped by in our local advocacies. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://list.jca.apc.org/manage/private/sustran-discuss/attachments/20010711/48cb8561/attachment.htm From hjk at rincon.net Wed Jul 11 19:58:50 2001 From: hjk at rincon.net (Harshad Kamdar) Date: Wed, 11 Jul 2001 16:28:50 +0530 Subject: [sustran] Re: electric rickshaws In-Reply-To: <00d801c109bf$0c5ba260$0100a8c0@COMPUTER3> Message-ID: <000001c109f8$782032c0$07c8c8c8@mercury> I have no practical experience on this, but an idea strikes me as to why can we not convert Rickshaws into Solar powered battery operated units. If electricity is available dual charging can be done. It can operate for a limited haulage of say 25/40 Knms. Kanu H. J. Kamdar Prakruti an NGO based on Bombay Rincon India Solutions Pvt. Ltd., Phone +91 22 401 0041 Fax +91 22 402 1590 hjk@rincon.net -----Original Message----- From: owner-sustran-discuss@jca.ax.apc.org [mailto:owner-sustran-discuss@jca.ax.apc.org]On Behalf Of Heckler Sent: Wednesday, July 11, 2001 08:23 To: sustran-discuss@jca.ax.apc.org Subject: [sustran] electric rickshaws The recent spate of postings has been "interesting" even if it did fill up my mailbox that I now have to sweep clean. But on to a more practical matter -- I'm resubmitting an earlier query to which I received no responses so I am restating it in the hope of eliciting some feedback. Most of you are probably familiar with the pollution effects of motorized rickshaws that one sees all over Asia. The Philippine versions use two-stroke motorcycles burning up a low-cost mixture of gasoline and oil that sends clouds of emissions and tons of pollutants daily. I would like to know if there are people on the list with practical experience in converting these vehicles to low-polluting ones. (Of course the ideal would be to replace with pedal powered rickshaws and to encourage more walking and cycling but let's say that's not an option at this point for various reasons.) There is a clean air campaign for Metro Manila funded by the ADB and some people there are saying to replace the motorcycles with the four-stroke engined variety for less pollution. It seems to me that even in the short-term the better option would be to replace them with electric rickshaws. What are the issues we should be looking at? There is no local manufacturing of e-vehicles at the moment and the cost of these vehicles seems to be a big point against them (based on that article from India where they''ve already commercialized them) or is it? Is this why e-vehicles are doing poorly in India? There was also news last year about doing converting rickshaws in Bangkok and I was wondering what happened to that. Relatively low income people own and operate these rickshaws and use them as their primary means of livelihood. Is this even a viable option or would another stragety be better? Thanks in advance for any practical feedback. By the way, in response to Tongchai's query -- our laws don't cover bicycles as vhicles specifically so it's a live and let live situation. I now wonder if legally they are covered in the same way that pedestrian rights are covered (as in the UK case that's been pointed out here) but I'm no legal eagle -- for example, what happens when there are conflicts and during accidents? This is also a question we've been occasionally stumped by in our local advocacies. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://list.jca.apc.org/manage/private/sustran-discuss/attachments/20010711/5d6d3eec/attachment.htm From BruunB at aol.com Thu Jul 12 09:13:29 2001 From: BruunB at aol.com (BruunB@aol.com) Date: Wed, 11 Jul 2001 20:13:29 EDT Subject: [sustran] [sustran] Yet more on A bias against drivers? Message-ID: <11.16f37a38.287e45a9@aol.com> I have been away for a few days, but I didn't want this thread to end without one more comment. The passage below says "... drivers OR THOSE WHO RIDE IN CARS" to argue that very few people are unfairly receiving externalities, since they too receive benefits. If they have no other choice but to depend on autos for travel, because this is the reality of their urban form, then, yes, they too are auto users. This does not mean that they are equal beneficiaries, however. They may have very limited mobility, totally dependent upon others, and unable to even walk or bicycle since it is either impractical or unsafe. I would call being forced to be dependent on others for even limited mobility a huge externality. Eric Bruun In a message dated 7/6/01 8:09:12 PM Eastern Daylight Time, wcox@publicpurpose.com writes: << From the transport-groups mailing list.... Wendell, I suggest that you make this gentleman aware of the Delucchi article "Should we Try to Get the Costs Right?" and the University of Minnesota research paper referred to by Shef Lang "The Full Costs of Transportation in the Twin Cities Area". Point out the size of the externalities and the fact that 90-95% or more of the public on which externalities and government costs fall are drivers or those who ride in cars. That leaves only 1-2% of the overall costs to fall on those who don't drive or ride. Bruce Gaarder Saint Paul MN bruce_gaarder@acm.org > > > Wendell, > > > > > > I would like to suggest that there is a reason to be biased against private transport. The benefits go primarily to the individual, but externalities go to the public at large. Nor can it ever be available to > all age groups, all income groups, to people with disabilities, etc.. These people get none of the benefits but the same externalities. > > > > > > Public transport uses less space, creates fewer externalities, and doesn't exclude large portions of the population. > > > > > > I think the core of our difference is that we can't agree on how to evaluate these externalities, and what to do, if anything, about > > compensating for them. > > > > > > Eric Bruun THE TRANSPORT POLICY DISCUSSION GROUP Sponsored by The Public Purpose http://www.publicpurpose.com Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/ >> From geobpa at nus.edu.sg Fri Jul 13 12:58:23 2001 From: geobpa at nus.edu.sg (Paul Barter) Date: Fri, 13 Jul 2001 11:58:23 +0800 Subject: [sustran] FW: CODATU X Lome Call for Papers Message-ID: <2C9E855D35B9D01198190020AFFBE8CB0B86F411@exs04.ex.nus.edu.sg> Here is a slightly shortened and edited version of the Call for Papers for the tenth CODATU conference which will be held next year in West Africa. This is the premier conference series emphasising urban transport in lower and middle-income countries. CALL FOR PAPERS CODATU X LOME (TOGO) Urban Mobility For All Lome 12-15 november 2002 The central theme: Urban Mobility for all, various solutions depending the city size The main theme is: how to meet basic mobility needs for all urban dwellers, with a particular attention to the cities of intermediate size (one or two millions inhabitants). It is supposed that sustainability of cities depends on the degree of satisfaction of all social groups mobility, and also the eradication of urban poverty programs have to take into account mobility needs besides the classical needs of food, health, and housing. These statements are submitted to discussion, aiming at a more precise formulation, offering proposals of actions to decision makers and stakeholders, based on exchange of experiences from all regions in the world. Ten sub-themes are proposed for covering the central theme: ? Fight against poverty through transport policy. ? Institution building, decentralization and participation of the citizens. ? Public transport organisation, or how to manage various forms of transport for a better access to all social groups. ? Human resources capacity and urban transport skills ? Transport financing schemes and redistribution of benefits between social groups. ? Technological solutions for intermediate cities, the investment challenge. ? Role of low cost means of transport and traffic management. ? Individual motorized modes : efficiency or illusion? ? Mobility, poverty and environment issues: convergences and contradictions. ? Transport and sustainable livelihoods: mobility, access to urban facilities and urban structure. The conference will benefit from the work by the Codatu Technical Committees, which will be used as a basis for workshops. The CODATU Association The CODATU association (Cooperation for the continuing development of urban and suburban transportation) is an international association with the goal of furthering scientific, technical, economic and social activities and exchanges for the development and improvement of urban and suburban transportation based on shared experiences between developing and already industrialised countries. The 10th conference of CODATU will be held in Lome (TOGO) from 12 to 15 november 2002. It will follow on from the conferences already held on this subject in Dakar (1980), Caracas (1982), Cairo (1986), Jakarta (1988), Sao Paulo (1990), Tunis (1992) and New Delhi (1996), Cape Town (1998), Mexico (2000). Nature of papers ? Presentation of research work. ? Presentation of experiment or achievements. ? Presentation of possible policy initiatives. ? Presentation of problems arised and difficulties met with. ? Presentation of policies transport by institutions whether international, national, regional or local. ? Presentation of case studies. Selection of papers The selection of papers will be made on the following basis: ? papers must offer elements for developing cities in the broadest sense of the word, including those from emerging countries, or those already developed or in transition. ? papers of a theorical nature should also preferably demonstrate practical applications. ? comparative approaches, case studies, presentations of experiments and problems and difficulties that arise will be welcome. ? the pertinence of subject proposed with respect to the themes of the conference. ? the quality and originality of the proposed paper. ? the balance between the geographical and professional origin of the authors. Submission of proposals Proposals must include an abstract in English or French on a single page (no more than 400 words). The abstract will outline the subject and the main ideas of the proposed paper. A second page will introduce the author, outlining experience, function and postal, telephone and fax particulars. The international scientific committee will make the selection by january 15, 2002. The accepted papers must be finalised before april 15, 2002. Proposals must be submitted before October 15, 2002 to the following address: Mairie du 3i?me Arrondissement Monsieur Christian PHILIP CODATU X - Comit? Scientifique 215, rue Duguesclin 69003 LYON France Fax. : + 33 (0) 4.78.95.83.48 E-mail: veronique.reudet@mairie-lyon.fr From sagaris at lake.cl Tue Jul 17 04:41:06 2001 From: sagaris at lake.cl (Lake Sagaris) Date: Mon, 16 Jul 2001 15:41:06 -0400 Subject: [sustran] Thanks from Ciudad Viva (Living City) In-Reply-To: <2C9E855D35B9D01198190020AFFBE8CB0B86F411@exs04.ex.nus.edu. sg> Message-ID: <5.1.0.14.2.20010716153930.00a3cec0@127.0.0.1> Hi -- I would like to thank everyone who offered contactsand suggestions for our upcoming visit to Bogota. It seems to be coming together well. Perhaps we can offer a brief report to the list and the startup of a Latin American (Spanish-language) version of this list to indicate our appreciation of this assistance. All best Lake Lake Sagaris Communications, Ciudad Viva From geobpa at nus.edu.sg Tue Jul 17 14:57:42 2001 From: geobpa at nus.edu.sg (Paul Barter) Date: Tue, 17 Jul 2001 13:57:42 +0800 Subject: [sustran] FW: What's new at CSE, India Message-ID: <2C9E855D35B9D01198190020AFFBE8CB0B86F418@exs04.ex.nus.edu.sg> Forwarding transport-relevant items from the latest "What's new at CSE, India" bulletin. Paul. ------------- What's new at the Centre for Science and Environment (CSE), New Delhi, India. ... irrelevant stuff snipped ... POLLUTION FREE TRANSPORTATION The Global Environmental Facility has approved grants for the use of fuel cell buses (FCBs) in India and China. The formidable cost gap between the FCB and diesel bus is a major source of worry when the pollution free buses are heading for Delhi. More at... http://www.cseindia.org/html/dte/dte20010715/dte_srep.htm ... snip ... ------------------------------------------------- CITY'S WITHOUT CARS A utopian idea of the 1960s to drive out cars from the city centers is snowballing into a small movement in Europe. The movement aims to restore the inner cities, fight pollution and improve quality of urban life. http://www.cseindia.org/html/dte/dte20010715/dte_analy.htm ... snip ... ------------------------------------------------- A message from the Chairperson, Anil Agarwal: SPREADING MESSAGE COSMETIC CONCERN Petroleum minister Ram Naik typifies everything that is wrong with our political system today - a system which formulates public policies not because of public good but because of political lobbies. In the last few days, newspapers have carried articles by Ram Naik praising the use of ethanol as a blend for petrol and possibly even for diesel. This step will help sugar farmers, the sugar industry, foreign exchange outflows (by cutting down on imports) and will also be environment-friendly, Naik tells us as glibly as he can. Naik talks about Brazil having used ethanol in petrol since 1931. So why did the government not find all these virtues in ethanol before? Naik tells us that four committees and six technical studies have been at the subject since 1977. So what has changed so suddenly? Naik's foresight? The answer is simple: The sugar lobby has found a new ally in the Sangh Parivar which has been breathing down the necks of the petroleum ministry. And Naik and his babus have basically caved in to this lobby. Not that this good policy decision was taken on the basis of good judgement. Just convenient politics. At an official meeting, long before Naik decided to go public on ethanol, a joint secretary admitted that the use of ethanol now looked inevitable "because of the power of the sugar lobby". About six months ago, we had supported the use of ethanol in petrol because of environmental and public health reasons but had run into a wall. Unleaded, low benzene petrol needs an oxygenate to help the fuel burn smoothly. An oxygenate that Indian public sector oil companies, which have nothing but disdain for public health, are using is methyl tertiary butyl ether (MTBE). This substance has an extraordinary capacity to travel through groundwater. A teaspoon of MTBE put in an Olympic size swimming pool will make it stink within seconds. It has also been found to be a carcinogen in animals. Since its use started in the us nearly ten years ago, thousands of wells supplying drinking water have been contaminated with MTBE. California is the worst affected state - it uses the maximum petrol - and it was the first to ban the use of MTBE and now the Clean Air Act is being amended to ban it across the country. At a time when usa is banning MTBE, Indian public sector companies, with the blessings of the petroleum ministry babus, are promoting its use. This is what you call foresight in Indian babudom. The Centre for Science and Environment, therefore, raised this issue with the Ministry of Environment, especially as groundwater is a very important source of drinking water in India, and increasingly so even in cities. The then secretary of the ministry, Vishwanath Anand, asked us to make a presentation. The people present included the secretary himself, two additional secretaries, several joint secretaries and the chairperson of the Central Pollution Control Board. The meeting unanimously decided to recommend a ban on MTBE and use of ethanol, an excellent oxygenate which is being contemplated also for use in the us in place of MTBE. But the petroleum ministry dismissed the letter from the ministry of environment and continues to allow the use of MTBE. This further confirmed the belief, commonly shared by most people, that the Indian government does not function and public health can only be protected by court intervention. So what was the point of resistance? The price of ethanol and its uncertainty. At the moment, petrol prices are high so ethanol can compete - petrol prices need to be above Rs 20 per litre to allow ethanol blending at competitive prices - but what happens in the future? In addition, the petroleum babus argued that the price of MTBE is cheaper than ethanol and that the sugar industry could reduce prices further and was wanting to make a fast buck. Thus, for price reasons, the ministry was against the use of ethanol and was totally disregarding any concern for public health. This was less than six months ago. But now there is a somersault and Naik is even talking about the possibility of blending ethanol with the lowly-priced diesel to save foreign exchange. Won't this increase the price of holy diesel, which no politician wants to touch? It's amazing that all these wonderful arguments of saving foreign exchange and helping sugar farmers were as valid even then but it's just that the Sangh Parivar has now got into action as elections in Uttar Pradesh are nearing. Now the same ethanol has become so virtuous that minister Naik has to sing paeans about it himself in signed articles in newspapers. Good decision but for wrong reasons. And MTBE continues to be used. If this be the quality of leaders that Indian democracy is going to throw up, then God bless this billion people country called India. It really galls me to read Naik writing that "The added advantage of ethanol is that it is a renewable source of energy and also environment- friendly." This coming from a man whose ministry has done everything to sabotage the Supreme Court order to move Delhi's buses to CNG. Why can't Naik just be honest and say that ethanol use today is politically- friendly rather than giving us all this junk about farmer-friendliness and environment-friendliness which he cares two hoots about? But then when were politicians known for being straightforward. At a time when USA is banning MTBE, Indian public sector companies, with the blessings of the petroleum ministry babus, are promoting its use - Anil Agarwal (This article is also available online at http://www.cseindia.org/html/dte/dte20010715/dte_edit.htm ************************************************* Visit our website at www.cseindia.org and check out what's new. Our website carries our science and environment fortnightly Down To Earth, a daily environment news flash by subject categories, a catalog of books and publications that are available, and all of our recent press releases. We also give regular updates on all of our campaigns on topics like vehicular pollution, climate change, biodiversity, water resources, wildlife, forests, environment education etc. Our online library of books, journals, images and videos is searchable through a thesaurus of environmental keywords at http://data.cseindia.org ... snip ... Past archives of this bulletin are available at http://www.cseindia.org/html/au/au6.htm ************************************************* Sucheta Sharma Website Unit Centre for Science and Environment **************************************************************** CENTRE FOR SCIENCE AND ENVIRONMENT ( CSE ) 41, TUGHLAKABAD INSTITUTIONAL AREA, NEW DELHI- 110 062 TELE: 608 1110, 608 1124 608 3394, 608 6399 FAX : 91-11-608 5879 VISIT US AT: http://www.cseindia.org Email: webadmin@cseindia.org **************************************************************** From czegras at MIT.EDU Wed Jul 18 01:13:18 2001 From: czegras at MIT.EDU (Chris Zegras) Date: Tue, 17 Jul 2001 12:13:18 -0400 Subject: [sustran] Bus Rapid Transit in Boston Message-ID: <5.0.0.25.2.20010717121127.023ef390@po9.mit.edu> Interesting Story on the possibilities and challenges for BRT in Boston and other US cities. Good case of South-North Tech transfer. The following story appeared in The Globe Online: Headline: Trolleys or 'rapid' buses: Decision near in JP Date: 7/16/2001 Byline: " The next front in a national transportation policy war hinges on a stretch of rusty streetcar rails in Jamaica Plain - and a legal technicality: Is it ''infeasible'' for the MBTA to restore trolley service down narrow, congested Centre Street?" ____________________________________________________________ To read the entire story, click on the link below or cut and paste it into a Web browser: http://www.boston.com/dailyglobe2/197/metro/Trolleys_or_rapid_buses_Decision_near_in_JP+.shtml ____________________________________________________________ This message was sent by czegras@mit.edu [mailto:czegras@mit.edu] through Boston.com's email recommendation service. If you have questions or comments about this free service, please email us at feedback@boston.com. -------------------------------------------------- Christopher Zegras Research Associate MIT * Laboratory for Energy & Environment * Room E40-468 1 Amherst Street * Cambridge, MA 02139 Tel: 617 258 6084 * Fax: 617 253 8013 From sagaris at lake.cl Wed Jul 18 01:54:54 2001 From: sagaris at lake.cl (Lake Sagaris) Date: Tue, 17 Jul 2001 12:54:54 -0400 Subject: [sustran] Re: Bus Rapid Transit in Boston In-Reply-To: <5.0.0.25.2.20010717121127.023ef390@po9.mit.edu> Message-ID: <5.1.0.14.2.20010717125433.0362e3e0@127.0.0.1> Great story, Chris, just as we're trying to talk up streetcar possibilities for our neighborhoods in the centre of Santiago. All best, Lake At 12:13 PM 17/07/01 -0400, you wrote: >Interesting Story on the possibilities and challenges for BRT in Boston >and other US cities. Good case of South-North Tech transfer. > >The following story appeared in The Globe Online: >Headline: Trolleys or 'rapid' buses: Decision near in JP >Date: 7/16/2001 >Byline: >" The next front in a national transportation policy war hinges on a >stretch of rusty streetcar rails in Jamaica Plain - and a legal >technicality: Is it ''infeasible'' for the MBTA to restore trolley >service down narrow, congested Centre Street?" >____________________________________________________________ >To read the entire story, click on the link below or cut and paste it >into a Web browser: >http://www.boston.com/dailyglobe2/197/metro/Trolleys_or_rapid_buses_Decision_near_in_JP+.shtml > >____________________________________________________________ >This message was sent by czegras@mit.edu [mailto:czegras@mit.edu] >through Boston.com's email recommendation service. If you have questions >or comments about this free service, please email us at feedback@boston.com. > > >-------------------------------------------------- >Christopher Zegras >Research Associate >MIT * Laboratory for Energy & Environment * Room E40-468 >1 Amherst Street * Cambridge, MA 02139 >Tel: 617 258 6084 * Fax: 617 253 8013 From pascal at gn.apc.org Wed Jul 18 04:57:41 2001 From: pascal at gn.apc.org (Pascal Desmond) Date: Tue, 17 Jul 2001 19:57:41 +0000 Subject: [sustran] looking for an e-mail address Message-ID: Hello Everybody I am trying to contact Kristina Egan who used to work at IIEC, Bangkok and Peter du Pont who used to work at IIEC, Washington. Any information gratefully received. -- Kind regards Pascal Desmond From COLSZE at ntu.edu.sg Wed Jul 18 12:06:59 2001 From: COLSZE at ntu.edu.sg (Piotr Olszewski (Assoc Prof)) Date: Wed, 18 Jul 2001 11:06:59 +0800 Subject: [sustran] Call for papers - S2T Conference Message-ID: Dear Sustran friends, Below is a call for papers with my invitation to visit Singapore next year. ---------------------------------------------- Piotr Olszewski colsze@ntu.edu.sg Nanyang Technological University, Singapore ---------------------------------------------- CALL FOR PAPERS *************** International Conference on Seamless and Sustainable Transport -------------------------------------------------------------- 25 - 27 November 2002, Singapore -------------------------------- Featuring Singapore's new integrated Northeast Mass Rapid Transit Line Organised by: Centre for Transportation Studies, Nanyang Technological University. The conference theme - "Seamless and Sustainable Transport" - reflects the global concern of transportation professionals on how to promote seamless travel and at the same time ensure the sustainability of the system in the long run. The island-state of Singapore will provide an interesting backdrop for the conference - it is famous for its travel demand management (Electronic Road Pricing) and efforts in improving the public transport system. Under development is "i-Transport" - a real-time travel information system for commuters. The new Northeast MRT line will represent the latest development in integrating transit services to achieve "seamless" travel for the public. Call for Papers --------------- The Conference Organising Committee invites abstracts of papers to be presented at the conference. Abstract should be sufficiently detailed and indicate: the context, aim, methodology, results and main conclusions of the work to be reported. Abstracts must be written in English, 300-500 words in length and should reach the Conference Secretariat by 30 October 2001. Conference Topics ----------------- The conference sessions will cover the following major topics: - Traffic Management and Planning - Congestion Management - Infrastructure and Asset Management - ITS and Advanced Technologies - Public Transportation - Freight Transport - Policy and Economics - Environmental and Energy Use Issues - Intermodal Transport - Non-motorised Transport - Safety and Human Factors Further Information ------------------- For more information and updates, please visit the conference web page: http://www.ntu.edu.sg/cts/S2T You can also contact the Conference Secretariat by email: S2T@ntu.edu.sg From geobpa at nus.edu.sg Sat Jul 21 17:32:17 2001 From: geobpa at nus.edu.sg (Paul Barter) Date: Sat, 21 Jul 2001 16:32:17 +0800 Subject: [sustran] FW: Nigeria's mean streets Message-ID: <2C9E855D35B9D01198190020AFFBE8CB0B86F432@exs04.ex.nus.edu.sg> -----Original Message----- From: Craig Townsend [mailto:craig_townsend@hotmail.com] Sent: Saturday, 21 July 2001 3:22 To: geobpa@nus.edu.sg Subject: Nigeria's mean streets >From The Globe and Mail online edition, Friday, July 20 Nigeria's mean streeets Associated Press Abuja, Nigeria - Transport Minister Ojo Maduekwe hit an obstacle in his campaign to promote bbike-riding on Nigeria's mean streets: A bus hit him. "I thank God I'm alive," Mr. Maduekwe told reporters, showing off his unbruised head and hands and marveling at escaping without injury when two buses collided head-on, with him somewhere in the middle. The impact in Wednesday's crash knocked the bicycling minister into a ditch. Mr. Maduekwe had been pedalling to a weekly cabinet meeting in Abuja as part of his campaign to promote bike riding as a way to get around in traffic-clogged Nigeria. Nigeria's major cities are notorious for traffic jams, known as "go-slows," that last long, unmoving hours. Nigerians widely regard biking on their streets as a high-risk activity and Mr. Maduekwe's campaign as a stunt. After his accident, a newspaper thanked him for providing Nigerians with "something to laugh about." For his part, Mr. Maduekwe said he would keep on biking, but indicated security guards might flank him from now on. "Accidents can happen anywhere, on land, sea and air," the transport minister said, saying the real problem was not his bicycling but too many cars. From mobility at igc.org Tue Jul 24 01:02:09 2001 From: mobility at igc.org (mobility) Date: Mon, 23 Jul 2001 12:02:09 -0400 Subject: [sustran] critique of hernando de soto's new book Message-ID: <3B5C4A81.5A5E3388@igc.org> Dear Sustran folks, I'd be curious about reactions to a recent draft book review I wrote of Hernando De Soto's new book, the Mystery of Capitalism. Its making the rounds in DC in development circles and has some ramifications for urban sprawl. Its on our web-site at www.itdp.org (pdf download from menu page) if anyone's interested. also note, World Bank urban transport strategy and EBRD new property strategy are posted and open for comments. links also on itdp web site. best, walter From wcox at publicpurpose.com Tue Jul 24 01:21:18 2001 From: wcox at publicpurpose.com (Wendell Cox) Date: Mon, 23 Jul 2001 11:21:18 -0500 Subject: [sustran] Re: critique of hernando de soto's new book References: <3B5C4A81.5A5E3388@igc.org> Message-ID: <001701c11393$82671b00$627e2e3f@y8f2e> To add to the discussion, my review is at http://www.demographia.com/bk-desoto.htm DEMOGRAPHIA & THE PUBLIC PURPOSE (Wendell Cox Consultancy) http://www.demographia.com (Demographics & Land Use) http://www.publicpurpose.com (Public Policy & Transport)) Telephone: +1.618.632.8507 - Facsimile: +1.810.821.8134 PO Box 841 - Belleville, IL 62222 USA ----- Original Message ----- From: mobility To: Sent: Monday, 23 July, 2001 11:02 Subject: [sustran] critique of hernando de soto's new book > Dear Sustran folks, > > I'd be curious about reactions to a recent draft book review I wrote of > Hernando De Soto's new book, the Mystery of Capitalism. Its making the > rounds in DC in development circles and has some ramifications for urban > sprawl. Its on our web-site at www.itdp.org (pdf download from menu > page) if anyone's interested. > > also note, World Bank urban transport strategy and EBRD new property > strategy are posted and open for comments. links also on itdp web site. > > best, > walter From wcox at publicpurpose.com Tue Jul 24 01:22:59 2001 From: wcox at publicpurpose.com (Wendell Cox) Date: Mon, 23 Jul 2001 11:22:59 -0500 Subject: [sustran] Urban Growth Boundaries: Green Lining Minorities Out of the Housing Market: PLANETIZEN Oped by Wendell Cox References: <3B5C4A81.5A5E3388@igc.org> Message-ID: <002201c11393$bedf25a0$627e2e3f@y8f2e> http://www.planetizen.com/oped/item.php?id=26 DEMOGRAPHIA & THE PUBLIC PURPOSE (Wendell Cox Consultancy) http://www.demographia.com (Demographics & Land Use) http://www.publicpurpose.com (Public Policy & Transport)) Telephone: +1.618.632.8507 - Facsimile: +1.810.821.8134 PO Box 841 - Belleville, IL 62222 USA From contranscorp at hotmail.com Tue Jul 24 03:40:07 2001 From: contranscorp at hotmail.com (Contrans Consultants) Date: Mon, 23 Jul 2001 18:40:07 +0000 Subject: [sustran] Busways in Bangalore Message-ID: I went through some older postings and found a reference to the above projec, and I thought I might update you on this. The feasibility study designed a project in four phases and recommended the first phase to be undertaken as a pilot project in order to evaluate the concept in practice. There is considerable support in Bangalore for the project and financing is now being sought. Discussions are being held with Swedish Sida which financed the feasibility study. The Executive Summary can be downloaded from the net. Best regards Hans Orn CONTRANS _________________________________________________________________ Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com/intl.asp From geobpa at nus.edu.sg Wed Jul 25 20:05:06 2001 From: geobpa at nus.edu.sg (Paul Barter) Date: Wed, 25 Jul 2001 19:05:06 +0800 Subject: [sustran] FW: Re: WB Urban Transport Strategy Review Message-ID: <2C9E855D35B9D01198190020AFFBE8CB0B86F442@exs04.ex.nus.edu.sg> Forwarding this which bounced... from an address not zubscribed to the list. Paul ---------- Date: Wed, 25 Jul 2001 10:04:26 +0100 From: Jeff Turner To: sustran-discuss@jca.ax.apc.org Subject: Re: [sustran] WB Urban Transport Strategy Review Dear Colleagues At a glance the new strategy review does a lousy job of incorporating gender into urban transport. There appears to be no mention in Chapter 12 of actions to address the gender-biased nature of urban transport interventions.In fact I've found one paragraph in a 205 page report. The WB have a link to their web site on gender and transport from the urban transport strategy pages and are commissioning research on how to mainstream gender into WB lending activity. There is also siginificant technical help through such sites as: http://www.art.man.ac.uk/transres/genintro.htm and http://www.geocities.com/transport_and_society/genderedjourneys/ So as a result incorporating gender into this strategy review should not be too difficult. I wish the World Bank well in correcting this abberation Jeff Turner Research Fellow University of Manchester UK **************************************************************** This email and any files transmitted with it are confidential and intended solely for the use of the individual or entity to whom they are addressed. If you have received this email in error please notify support@stockport.gov.uk **************************************************************** From esg at bgl.vsnl.net.in Wed Jul 25 21:42:02 2001 From: esg at bgl.vsnl.net.in (ESG) Date: Wed, 25 Jul 2001 18:12:02 +0530 Subject: [sustran] Re: Busways in Bangalore In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <5.0.0.25.1.20010725180930.00a83680@202.54.12.47> Hans Orn, Could you please forward the link of the Exec Summary of the Bangalore study? Our Government has been extremely intransparent on any of the public transport initiatives. Leo Saldanha Environment Support Group Bangalore At 06:40 PM 7/23/01 +0000, Contrans Consultants wrote: >I went through some older postings and found a reference to the above >projec, and I thought I might update you on this. > >The feasibility study designed a project in four phases and recommended >the first phase to be undertaken as a pilot project in order to evaluate >the concept in practice. There is considerable support in Bangalore for >the project and financing is now being sought. Discussions are being held >with Swedish Sida which financed the feasibility study. The Executive >Summary can be downloaded from the net. > > >Best regards > >Hans Orn >CONTRANS > >_________________________________________________________________ >Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com/intl.asp > Environment Support Group (R) S-3, Rajashree Apartments 18/57, 1st Main, S. R. K. Gardens Jayanagar, Bannerghatta Road Bangalore 560 041. INDIA Telefax: 91-80-6341977 Fax: 91-80-6723926 (PP) Email: esg@bgl.vsnl.net.in From roland at actrix.gen.nz Wed Jul 25 02:43:20 2001 From: roland at actrix.gen.nz (Roland Sapsford) Date: Wed, 25 Jul 2001 05:43:20 +1200 Subject: [sustran] Successful campaigns againts roads - info request References: Message-ID: <3B5DB3B8.68483DCC@actrix.gen.nz> Hi Campaign for a Better City in Wellington New Zealand is collating information on successful public campaigns against major roading projects. We are aware of Portland in the US, Brisbane in Australia, and Toronto in Canada (though would appreciate any sources of detailed info on these) and are looking for other examples from around the globe. Any information or pointers to sources of information would be great. Thanks in anticipation Roland -- Roland Sapsford roland@actrix.gen.nz; (+64-4)934-1106;(+64-21)65-1105(m) PO Box 11-708, Manners St, Wellington, New Zealand "The most insidious form of ignorance is misplaced certainty" (Robert Costanza) From intlbike at ibike.org Fri Jul 27 03:13:24 2001 From: intlbike at ibike.org (David Mozer) Date: Thu, 26 Jul 2001 11:13:24 -0700 Subject: [sustran] Re: Successful campaigns against roads - info request In-Reply-To: <3B5DB3B8.68483DCC@actrix.gen.nz> Message-ID: Back in the 1960's the citizens of Seattle stopped the R.H. Thompson Expressway, which would have cut a huge swath through the city, including virtually destroying a large arboretum. -----Original Message----- From: owner-sustran-discuss@jca.ax.apc.org [mailto:owner-sustran-discuss@jca.ax.apc.org]On Behalf Of Roland Sapsford Sent: Tuesday, July 24, 2001 10:43 AM To: sustran-discuss@jca.ax.apc.org Subject: [sustran] Successful campaigns againts roads - info request Hi Campaign for a Better City in Wellington New Zealand is collating information on successful public campaigns against major roading projects. We are aware of Portland in the US, Brisbane in Australia, and Toronto in Canada (though would appreciate any sources of detailed info on these) and are looking for other examples from around the globe. Any information or pointers to sources of information would be great. Thanks in anticipation Roland -- Roland Sapsford roland@actrix.gen.nz; (+64-4)934-1106;(+64-21)65-1105(m) PO Box 11-708, Manners St, Wellington, New Zealand "The most insidious form of ignorance is misplaced certainty" (Robert Costanza) From ecologic at gn.apc.org Fri Jul 27 03:22:48 2001 From: ecologic at gn.apc.org (John Whitelegg) Date: Thu, 26 Jul 2001 19:22:48 +0100 Subject: [sustran] road campaigns Message-ID: <01C11608.6699F600@useral24.uk.uudial.com> Dear Sustran colleagues, I would add the campaign to stop the Lancaster Western Bypass. This is a horrible road, 6 miles long, costing at various times ?55-90 million (they keep changing the price tag). I've run this campaign at various times in the last 20 years. We keep winning and then they go away for 3-4 years to come back with another attack. We are currently in the middle of another attack. Have a look at the web site: www.stopthelancasterbypass.fsnet.co.uk very best wishes John Whitelegg From hertel at zedat.fu-berlin.de Fri Jul 27 03:41:06 2001 From: hertel at zedat.fu-berlin.de (Christof Hertel) Date: Thu, 26 Jul 2001 20:41:06 +0200 Subject: [sustran] Re: road campaigns In-Reply-To: <01C11608.6699F600@useral24.uk.uudial.com> Message-ID: Dear colleagues, I would add this linklist about various german campaigns against highways: http://cip.uni-trier.de/tbraun/b50neu/ and also www.umkehr.de is a helpful link. Unfortunatly in german language. Regards Christof From esg at bgl.vsnl.net.in Fri Jul 27 13:37:29 2001 From: esg at bgl.vsnl.net.in (ESG) Date: Fri, 27 Jul 2001 10:07:29 +0530 Subject: [sustran] Re: Successful campaigns againts roads - info request In-Reply-To: <3B5DB3B8.68483DCC@actrix.gen.nz> References: Message-ID: <5.0.0.25.1.20010727100313.00a52d50@202.54.12.47> Though still not a successful campaign, I could suggest that our effort to stop the Bangalore Mysore Infrastructure Corridor has at least succeeded in stalling what would otherwise been a rushed clearance mechanism, potentially affecting adversely over 200,000 people (about 170 villages). From documents available to us, we have done a thorough review and listed reasons why this project is against the public interest, social justice and the environment. Such information is available online at: http://www.indiatogether.org/campaigns/bmic Today the Indian inistry of Environment and Forest's Expert Committee will review the project based on the documentaition we have filed. Hopefully this will result in a sound decision. Leo Saldanha Environment Support Group, Bangalore, India At 05:43 AM 7/25/01 +1200, Roland Sapsford wrote: >Hi > >Campaign for a Better City in Wellington New Zealand is collating >information on >successful public campaigns against major roading projects. We are aware of >Portland in the US, Brisbane in Australia, and Toronto in Canada (though would >appreciate any sources of detailed info on these) and are looking for other >examples from around the globe. > >Any information or pointers to sources of information would be great. > >Thanks in anticipation >Roland > >-- >Roland Sapsford > >roland@actrix.gen.nz; (+64-4)934-1106;(+64-21)65-1105(m) >PO Box 11-708, Manners St, Wellington, New Zealand > >"The most insidious form of ignorance is misplaced certainty" >(Robert Costanza) Environment Support Group (R) S-3, Rajashree Apartments 18/57, 1st Main, S. R. K. Gardens Jayanagar, Bannerghatta Road Bangalore 560 041. INDIA Telefax: 91-80-6341977 Fax: 91-80-6723926 (PP) Email: esg@bgl.vsnl.net.in From debi at beag.net Mon Jul 30 13:39:38 2001 From: debi at beag.net (Debi Goenka) Date: Mon, 30 Jul 2001 10:09:38 +0530 Subject: [sustran] Fw: RajaramBojji invites you to join Sky Bus Metro solution, an MSN Community Message-ID: <007901c118b1$a5926f80$d903010a@www.powersurfer.net> This is an interesting Community list on the Skybus project. Worth joining! Cheers Debi ------------------------------------------------ Debi Goenka Bombay Environmental Action Group e-mail: debi@beag.net// debi.beag@softhome.net Environmental Education Office Kalbadevi Municipal School # 54, 2nd floor, Mumbai 400002 Tel:91-22-2423126 Tfax:91-22-2426385 Residence B 502 Glengate, Hiran Gardens Powai Mumbai 400076 Tel:91-22-5700638 Tfax:91-22-5701459 ---------------------------------------------- ----- Original Message ----- From: RajaramBojji To: debi@beag.net Sent: Sunday, July 29, 2001 5:06 PM Subject: RajaramBojji invites you to join Sky Bus Metro solution, an MSN Community Communities You're invited! RajaramBojji invites you to join Sky Bus Metro solution. Description: We believe that future urbanites will virtually travel free with improved quality of service!Technology break-through should be the basis for innovative infrastructure development to create value nad improve our quality of life! Join now RajaramBojji wrote you this personal note: Pls join ? Check it out! Visit Sky Bus Metro solution to see what you think. Add This Community to My Browser Favorites ? Join the community and you can: Post a message on the Message Board Add some photos to the Photo Album Personalize your Member Profile Join now For a listing of all the MSN Communities you belong to, check out My Communities! Also on MSN: Start Chatting | Listen to Music | House & Home | Try Online Dating | Daily Horoscopes Need more information? Learn more about MSN Communities at our Help Page or Contact Us for assistance. Need help signing in? If you need assistance with Passport sign in, go to Passport Help. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://list.jca.apc.org/manage/private/sustran-discuss/attachments/20010730/9eefa6b8/attachment.htm From geobpa at nus.edu.sg Mon Jul 30 13:57:23 2001 From: geobpa at nus.edu.sg (Paul Barter) Date: Mon, 30 Jul 2001 12:57:23 +0800 Subject: [sustran] fwd: Delhi fuel change hurts rickshaw drivers Message-ID: <2C9E855D35B9D01198190020AFFBE8CB0B86F451@exs04.ex.nus.edu.sg> [Note: There seems to have been a problem with the list this morning with messages not going through the system. If you tried to post to the list more than a few hours ago and your message did not appear then please try again now. Paul] The Straits Times JULY 30, 2001 Delhi fuel change hurts rickshaw drivers Many owners complain that although the Indian government wants them to switch to natural gas for cleaner air, there are just too few filling stations By Nirmal Ghosh INDIA CORRESPONDENT NEW DELHI - A. K. Massey, 55, perspiring on a sultry monsoon afternoon on a polluted Delhi street, pushes his auto rickshaw a few feet forward in the long line of vehicles inching towards a compressed natural gas (CNG) filling station. For Mr Massey and his compatriots, four-hour waits every other day in queues has become a fact of life, and it costs them between 100 and 400 rupees (S$4 and S$16) a day. They are paying the price for a cleaner city, but they blame the government squarely for the pain it entails. New Delhi, one of the most polluted cities in the world, is sweating under a Supreme Court-imposed deadline for the conversion of its entire public transport fleet to CNG fuel by September. see http://straitstimes.asia1.com.sg/world/story/0,1870,60632,00.html for the full story From kumuduk.UOC at mail.cmb.ac.lk Tue Jul 24 00:05:56 2001 From: kumuduk.UOC at mail.cmb.ac.lk (Kumudu Kusum Kumara) Date: Mon, 23 Jul 2001 21:05:56 +0600 Subject: [sustran] re: Public transport as a social phenomenon In-Reply-To: References: <2C9E855D35B9D01198190020AFFBE8CB0B86F48F@exs04.ex.nus.edu.sg> Message-ID: <4.3.1.0.20010723210324.00a7ebd0@mail.cmb.ac.lk> A student of ours is writing her dissertation on Urban Transport as a social phenomenon. she is examining the impact of poor urban transport facilities on the lives of ordinary women and men both while in transit and outside. I wonder whether you could direct us to some relevant literature on this. Thank you very much. Kumudu Kusum Kumara Dept of Sociology University of Colombo