From Eric.Britton at ecoplan.org Mon Jan 1 01:10:57 2007 From: Eric.Britton at ecoplan.org (Eric Britton (ChoiceMail)) Date: Sun, 31 Dec 2006 17:10:57 +0100 Subject: [sustran] Why do people speed? Message-ID: <015701c72cf6$43c10a50$6601a8c0@Home> Dear Dave, Lee, Peter and colleagues, As you all know, on the "how to" side this is well plowed terrain -- the rich literature and our best sources are chock full of all kinds of ways and stuff that works quite nicely in this context. Using parked cars to slow down moving vehicles is just one of many. At the leading edge we now have a solid thirty year track record of accomplishment and different ways to achieve this, and it can safely be said that the entire slow-street movement is steadily gaining in momentum and unimpeachable on-street results. But the crux of it all is what I and others keep calling the Politics of Transportation, and right behind that the firm grounding that we have in our multiple records of life experience on the street in many many settings, and right behind that in turn the work of a number of behavioral psychologists how have looked at all this quite cogently and with pretty much unanimous results as to the "why" part of this. My own preference is to take this in deliberate steps. Here is one possible succession: 1. Sell the idea to your highest local political authorities (and civil society who we shall need to have firmly behind us) that indeed this basic thesis is solid, i.e., (a) that drivers as a group will drive as fast as the conditions permit them to and with that (b) that the only way to get them moving at acceptable speeds is by modifying "street architecture" so that they simply cannot go beyond the speed which the community has adapted as safe on their streets. Now this is quite a sale, as you will see if you try it. It goes against the grain of policy and practice in the past, and unlearning is one thing that most people are not very good at. (Though a properly desperate politician or one who wants to win that next election may turn out to be a faster unlearner and hence a better partner for this kind of operation.) 2. Once they bite for that idea, there may be a push here and there to try to demonstrate how technique x or y can get some results. As long as this is done intelligently and with proper professionalism, it is better than nothing -- but for my part I think we need to see if we can possibly in parallel develop all this as part of a more radically revised comprehensive vision of our mobility system and its main components (again the Politics of Transportation, and if you want a bit more on that you might have a look at what I propose under the Philosophy link on the top menu of my recent "Letter to London" at http://www.newmobilityadvisory.org/tfl.htm. ). 3. Please do not take this as a plea for yet more studies and tergiversation. We collectively know what we need to know in this case, and the only thing that is needed here is to make sure that we bring the right people and competences into our demonstration projects. So if you really decided that you wanted to make a convincing high profile demonstration of these principles all you would need would be your couple of good shopping lists, the sense of priority that is need, the bit of budget that it would require, a locality that truly wishes to work with you to make this a success, and you have yourself a sure winner. (And I and others whom you know can help you build these shopping lists and get this process started within days.) To conclude with one quick question and one quick answer: * Question: How much is the life of a single Londoner worth these days? And * Answer: the cost of one cm. of a new metro system runs anywhere from $400 - $1k. Now what? Eric Britton -----Original Message----- From: Lee Schipper [mailto:SCHIPPER@wri.org] Sent: Sunday, December 31, 2006 4:50 PM To: eric.britton@ecoplan.org; eric.britton@free.fr; LotsLessCars@yahoogroups.com Subject: Re: [LotsLessCars] Why do people speed? This also leads to a speculation of mine Eric, so thanks. Is it possible that in a moped-based city, like Hanoi, that at least in the most crowded areas traffic is kind of self limiting in speed, people are so close to each other that they ARE on guard (despite horrible violations of lane discipline) and the whole things actually works... While in the outer reaches of Hanoi, or in Indian cities, there is so much room for speeding that the system doesn't really work? If I am right about the dense parts of Hanoi and the self-speed limiting nature of motorbike speeds in very dense cities, then not only might slow, low-powered mopes make sense, but electric bikes as well, which cannot go much over 10 km;/hour, could be the "next step" if it could be shown that they provide essential low emissions, low speed, low risk and low footprint mobility in combination with mass transit, and in place of cars? Happy Safe New Year to everyone lee -----Original Message----- From: Wetzel Dave To: 'eric.britton@ecoplan.org' Sent: Sun Dec 31 14:29:37 2006 Peter, Could we conduct an experiment on a road which has no bus routes but a bad safety record? Happy New Year, Best Wishes, Dave Dave Wetzel Vice-Chair TfL Tel: 020 7126 4200 -------------------------- -----Original Message----- From: Wetzel Dave To: 'eric.britton@ecoplan.org' Sent: Sun Dec 31 14:29:37 2006 Subject: Re: Why do people speed? CHEERS Eric, Perhaps we should allow more cars to park at kerbsides - this would reduce road width without any expensive engineering? Or how about lamp standards for street lighting being placed closer together so that drivers gain a feeling of greater speed? Happy New Year ! Best Wishes, Dave Dave Wetzel Vice-Chair TfL Tel: 020 7126 4200 -------------------------- -----Original Message----- From: eric.britton@free.fr To: eric.britton@free.fr Sent: Sun Dec 31 14:00:44 2006 Subject: Why do people speed? Dear Friends, Here is what we have observed on this subject over quite some years in city after city, road after road and study after study, in many places around the world: 1. The simple fact is that we need to understand without equivocation that some no trivial number of drivers (let's perhaps think of them as that dangerous 15% or so - not everyone at a wheel but enough such that we need to make them our protective design target) will drive as fast as they think they can without having an accident or hurting themselves. (This is as true of motorized two wheelers as that car you so love.) 2. This is a simply human condition - and indeed when any of us are behind the wheel, we develop a level of time impatience which is considerably beyond that which we feel in much of the rest of our daily lives. Thus cars by their very nature actually evoke impatience, and with that speed and risk. This you either understand or you do not. It is unequivocal and any responsible community leaders of active citizen must understand this and be prepared to act on it. (Many of us also like to zip right along on our bikes too, which also needs to be taken into account in a well designed street system (as you all know so well.)) 3. We must protect ourselves, our children and our communities from these very human but ultimately very dangerous modes of behaviour. 4. The best way - indeed I think the only way - to accomplish this surely and safely in cities is therefore to design our streets and roads for top speeds that are way way below what the traffic engineers have long worked with. The tools of this are well known and include the full gamut of stuff like undulating streets, no long stretches of straight road ahead, narrow streets, pavement surfaces, proper lighting, plenty of non-car users out there for all to see . . . and the long list goes on. 5. My own personal target for cars on most city streets is a max of 15 kph - a nice cycling speed, which also leads them to a point in which they can safely and civilly share the street with other users. On the other hand I would like to see 6. etc. etc. But if that is true - what do we do with it next? Eric Britton ---- -----Original Message----- From: Michael Wallwork [mailto:mjwallwork@comcast.net] Sent: Saturday, December 30, 2006 4:21 PM Subject: RE: The 85th Percentile A NEW program??? David Engwicht raised the issue of how people based their vehicle speed on their feel of the road many years ago and was able to demonstrate how drivers drive with a margin of safety irrespective of the posted speed. This is the underlying reason people speed. Michael Wallwork, P.E. President Alternate Street Design, P.A. (904) 269-1851 www.roundabouts.net ---- 85th percentile rule (From Wikipedia) In the United States, traffic engineers may rely on the 85th percentile rule[2] to establish speed limits. The speed limit should be set to the speed that separates the bottom 85% of vehicle speeds from the top 15%. The 85th percentile is slightly greater than a speed that is one standard deviation above the mean of a normal distribution . The theory is that traffic laws that reflect the behavior of the majority of motorists may have better compliance than laws that arbitrarily criminalize the majority of motorists and encourage violations. The latter kinds of laws lack public support and often fail to bring about desirable changes in driving behavior. An example is the federally-mandated 55 mph (90 km/h) speed limit that was scrapped in part because of notoriously low compliance. Traffic engineers observe that the majority of drivers drive in a safe and reasonable manner, as demonstrated by consistently favorable driving records. Studies have shown crash rates are lowest at around the 85th percentile. Vehicles traveling over the 85th percentile speed (or faster than the flow of traffic) have a significantly higher crash risk than vehicles traveling around or modestly below this speed. Most U.S. jurisdictions report using the 85th percentile speed as the basis for their speed limits, so the 85th-percentile speed and speed limits should be closely matched. However, a review of available speed studies demonstrates that the posted speed limit is almost always set well below the 85th-percentile speed by as much as 8 to 12 mph (see p.88) (13 to 19 km/h). Some reasons for this include: * Political or bureaucratic resistance to higher limits. * Statutes that restrict jurisdictions from posting limits higher than an arbitrary number. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://list.jca.apc.org/public/sustran-discuss/attachments/20061231/a05bc562/attachment.html From itdpasia at adelphia.net Mon Jan 1 23:48:53 2007 From: itdpasia at adelphia.net (John Ernst) Date: Mon, 01 Jan 2007 07:48:53 -0700 Subject: [sustran] Re: Why do people speed? In-Reply-To: <015701c72cf6$43c10a50$6601a8c0@Home> References: <015701c72cf6$43c10a50$6601a8c0@Home> Message-ID: <7.0.0.16.0.20070101074026.01cc98a0@adelphia.net> I wonder if the usual traffic calming techniques -- developed, I believe, primarily for car traffic -- will work well in cities with large numbers of motorcycles. We should have a test example in Jakarta within a few months as a traffic calming / pedestrian improvement attempt is now being built at Plaza Fatahillah - 100m north of the Kota BRT terminal. We need to see how it affects motorcycles, though it clearly will not be as effective as on cars -- judging from the fact that motorcycles were driving through the construction zone last month, despite numerous obstacles set out by the construction workers. There is another factor to consider: even low-speed motorcycles, as found in central Hanoi, are extremely hostile to pedestrian activity. It may not be fatal or even a serious injury to be hit by a 20km/hr motorcycle, but it certainly isn't pleasant either... and it's very common to at least be whacked by a mirror (in Jakarta, too). Best, John Ernst www.itdp.org At 09:10 AM 12/31/2006, Eric Britton (ChoiceMail) wrote: >Dear Dave, Lee, Peter and colleagues, > >As you all know, on the "how to" side this is well plowed terrain -- >the rich literature and our best sources are chock full of all kinds >of ways and stuff that works quite nicely in this context. Using >parked cars to slow down moving vehicles is just one of many. At the >leading edge we now have a solid thirty year track record of >accomplishment and different ways to achieve this, and it can safely >be said that the entire slow-street movement is steadily gaining in >momentum and unimpeachable on-street results. >... >Eric Britton > > > >-----Original Message----- >From: Lee Schipper [mailto:SCHIPPER@wri.org] >Sent: Sunday, December 31, 2006 4:50 PM >To: eric.britton@ecoplan.org; eric.britton@free.fr; >LotsLessCars@yahoogroups.com >Subject: Re: [LotsLessCars] Why do people speed? > >This also leads to a speculation of mine Eric, so thanks. >Is it possible that in a moped-based city, like Hanoi, that at least in >the most crowded areas traffic is kind of self limiting in speed, >people are so close to each other that they ARE on guard (despite >horrible violations of lane discipline) and the whole things actually >works... > >While in the outer reaches of Hanoi, or in Indian cities, there is so >much room for speeding that the system doesn't really work? > >If I am right about the dense parts of Hanoi and the self-speed >limiting nature of motorbike speeds in very dense cities, then not only >might slow, low-powered mopes make sense, but electric bikes as well, >which cannot go much over 10 km;/hour, could be the "next step" if it >could be shown that they provide essential low emissions, low speed, >low risk and low footprint mobility in combination with mass transit, >and in place of cars? > >Happy Safe New Year to everyone > >lee > ... From sri at giaspn01.vsnl.net.in Mon Jan 1 21:03:03 2007 From: sri at giaspn01.vsnl.net.in (Prof J G Krishnayya) Date: Mon, 01 Jan 2007 17:33:03 +0530 Subject: [sustran] Re: Small surprises. Getting messages across - Think about this In-Reply-To: <016b01c72bf6$df0a1e80$6601a8c0@Home> Message-ID: <009401c72d9c$e74e87a0$0e01a8c0@JGK> Dear Eric, What a nice way to start out the New Year! Many thanks, and may 2007 be another Breakthrough year for you and for all of us in Sustran!! I went over to the site, and took a look especially at Brainfood. It was most ingenious how you have incorporated YouTube into the site in a totally seamless manner. How you have made each video short enough to be seen in snatches, and also how you have sequenced the videos (for automatic display) in each department. I was particularly interested in the BRT series, and would like to say that the first one ? about Curitiba, Bogota and Brisbane was just excellent. However, I was less pleased with the lengthy Eindhoven video which appeared really to be too much of a PR job ? even though the technology described was impressive. What intrigued me was the comment from Brisbane that BRT could be built in ?just? three years, allowing for all the detailed planning and coordination with Police, Roads, Transportation authorities, with very strong Political support. Ironically, Pune city has proved that it can be done ? once and for all ? in 6 months, in a manner that will most probably kill off BRT and bring on Rail instead!! Thanks for creating an excellent site, for making full use of available (free) technology, and for your interesting introduction videos. Sincerely, J G Krishnayya =========== Prof J G Krishnayya Director, Systems Research Institute, 17-A Gultekdi, PUNE 411037, India www.sripune.org Tel +91-20-2426-0323 jkrishnayya@yahoo.com Res 020-2636-3930 sri@giaspn01.vsnl.net.in Fax +91-20-2444-7902 -----Original Message----- From: sustran-discuss-bounces+sri=pn1.vsnl.net.in@list.jca.apc.org [mailto:sustran-discuss-bounces+sri=pn1.vsnl.net.in@list.jca.apc.org] On Behalf Of eric.britton@free.fr Sent: Saturday, December 30, 2006 3:13 PM To: LotsLessCars@yahoogroups.com; NewMobilityCafe@yahoogroups.com; WorldTransport@yahoogroups.com; Sustran-discuss@jca.apc.org Cc: 'Robert St?ssi' Subject: [sustran] Small surprises. Getting messages across - Think about this A civil society ?project?: So our dear friend Robert Stussi goes to Groningen to spend a few ways with Hans Monderman last summer and at one point walks out onto the street, pulls out his ancient video camera, and films ninety seconds of unexpectedly commented street life in that wonderful place that has actually decided what kind of community it wants to be. But what to do with it? Well, Robert modestly pipes it over to me to have a look, and I say, terrific! let?s pop it over to both Google Video and YouTube, and then get out the word and set up a few links on the New Mobility Agenda site (you can check it out if you have not already seen it, via http://www.newmobility.org then Brainfood on the bottom left menu) and see what happens. Well before you can blink your eyes no less than (as of today) 1384 people visit the Google version and 465 from YouTube. Hmm. What?s the point? Well, here is one small almost costless move on the part of, I really think we can call it civil society ? Monderman, all those who he has managed to convince with his work over the years, Stussi, the two guys in the street, all those others out their walking and on their bikes, and even the drivers who nicely become part of a new fabric of society, and you and me -- and I just have to believe that it is going to have its own bit of impact. We have to do this one small step at a time. And here is one great example. Next? Eric Britton -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://list.jca.apc.org/public/sustran-discuss/attachments/20070101/e77a0eb0/attachment.html From Carlos.Pardo at sutp.org Wed Jan 3 00:36:22 2007 From: Carlos.Pardo at sutp.org (Carlos F. Pardo SUTP) Date: Tue, 2 Jan 2007 10:36:22 -0500 Subject: [sustran] Re: Question about a Bikes on BRT (?) scheme.... In-Reply-To: <24341.194.149.113.177.1167173462.squirrel@mail.smartweb.cz> References: <24341.194.149.113.177.1167173462.squirrel@mail.smartweb.cz> Message-ID: <007c01c72e83$c2327a70$46976f50$@Pardo@sutp.org> The shot is from the Brisbane Busway system. I once asked if this was possible in TransMilenio (Bogot?), and I was told that the stopping time of the bus (26 seconds) wouldn't allow it. Anyway, TransMilenio is betting on free bicycle parking so people can access the station by bicycle and walk when they arrive at the end station. Best regards, Carlos F. Pardo -----Original Message----- From: sustran-discuss-bounces+carlos.pardo=sutp.org@list.jca.apc.org [mailto:sustran-discuss-bounces+carlos.pardo=sutp.org@list.jca.apc.org] On Behalf Of Todd Edelman Sent: 26 December 2006 05:51 PM To: sustran-discuss@list.jca.apc.org Subject: [sustran] Question about a Bikes on BRT (?) scheme.... Hi, In the video: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jctlibmCssQ&mode=related&search= at 4:45 - a few seconds after Jaime Lerner says "guts" - there is a shot of a bus with what I think is a front-mounted bicycle rack. If anyone knows where the image was recorded and could provide contacts to the operator etc., it would be great. Being able to put bikes on the front of buses here would be a good thing - it is allowed in North America but EU regulations dont allow it. So, I want to see how it was allowed wherever that shot was taken. Several Czech traffic engineers have told me that the reason why the front racks are not a problem in the USA is because there are no (or fewer) pedestrians there, and so the racks wont make the buses more dangerous. Like a shish kabob. Pretty funny. Even if there were more injuries, I think there would end up being net gains in health because the scheme would encourage more people to ride their bikes (gains through exercise) and get some to not put their bikes on the roofs of their cars (gains through less pollution). Thanks, T Here is a Quicktime video which shows someone putting a bike on a bus in the San Francisco Municipal Railway (MUNI) system: http://www.sfbike.org/download/resources/muni_bikerack.mov ------------------------------------------------------ Todd Edelman Director Green Idea Factory Korunn? 72 CZ-10100 Praha 10 Czech Republic ++420 605 915 970 Skype: toddedelman edelman@greenidea.eu http://www.worldcarfree.net/onthetrain Green Idea Factory, a member of World Carfree Network -------------------------------------------------------- IMPORTANT NOTE to everyone who gets sustran-discuss messages via YAHOOGROUPS. Please go to http://list.jca.apc.org/manage/listinfo/sustran-discuss to join the real sustran-discuss and get full membership rights. The yahoogroups version is only a mirror and 'members' there cannot post to the real sustran-discuss (even if the yahoogroups site makes it seem like you can). Apologies for the confusing arrangement. ================================================================ SUSTRAN-DISCUSS is a forum devoted to discussion of people-centred, equitable and sustainable transport with a focus on developing countries (the 'Global South'). From Carlos.Pardo at sutp.org Wed Jan 3 00:39:59 2007 From: Carlos.Pardo at sutp.org (Carlos F. Pardo SUTP) Date: Tue, 2 Jan 2007 10:39:59 -0500 Subject: [sustran] Re: [SPAM] [NewMobilityCafe] World's Most Congested Cities - Better, faster, cheaper? In-Reply-To: References: <002b01c72960$03b3c220$d607a8c0@SA152A> Message-ID: <007d01c72e84$43e48900$cbad9b00$@Pardo@sutp.org> Eric, I would add "nicer" to the three adjectives you mention. Aesthetics and a feeling of modernity are one of the greatest factors that make mayors go for the underground or expensive rail systems. The bus is seen as dirty, old fashioned and ugly, whereas rail is seen as strong, clean, modern and beautiful. I think it's mostly because of the great lobby from rail groups and their excellent vehicle designs. BRT is getting there, by the way. Best regards, Carlos F. Pardo From: NewMobilityCafe@yahoogroups.com [mailto:NewMobilityCafe@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of eric.britton@ecoplan.org Sent: 27 December 2006 04:38 AM To: 'Global 'South' Sustainable Transport' Cc: sudhir@secon.in; sujitjp@gmail.com; NewMobilityCafe@yahoogroups.com; WorldTransport@yahoogroups.com Subject: [SPAM] [NewMobilityCafe] World's Most Congested Cities - Better, faster, cheaper? Dear Sudhir and Sujit, "High cost underground metros"? Why not? Sounds great to me. Eh? But one small step first perhaps before spending all that money and necessarily waiting all those years before your 'deus ex machina' kicks in and is finally ready to do those good works. We refer to this necessary step in the planning and policy process as . . . BETTER, FASTER, CHEAPER! That's the modest challenge that needs to be put before the responsible policy maker and their advisors. In public and with public answers. So if we are able to get our hands on all that money and can start to spend it tomorrow, how much of the problem can we take care of . . . starting now. As opposed to waiting the inevitable twenty or whatever years that good metro is going to take. This is the vital question that under the New Mobility Agenda we feel needs to be asked each time. For starters you have to make that long list of the real needs, priority objectives and targets, and then as possible put quantities to them. Then you go to the tools, measures, policies side of the ledger and start to build your packages of measures with an eye to getting at the problems NOW! Now the responses that this approach provides are many and, when you get them right, hugely gratifying and effective. That is if you can bear in mind what the whole thing is indeed all about. Or is that just too simple for all those who are making these decisions, along with those who are urging them on? And perhaps, do they have something else in mind? It's my position that if such an exercise is not run with care and brilliance, and the right decisions are made in the full glare of the media and before the attentive eyes of civil society, then something is rotten in the state of Denmark (or wherever). I think that is along the lines that Sujit is suggesting, but let me leave it to him and to all of you on this. Eric Britton -----Original Message----- From: sustran-discuss-bounces+eric.britton=ecoplan.org@list.jca.apc.org [mailto:sustran-discuss-bounces+eric.britton=ecoplan.org@list.jca.apc.org] On Behalf Of Sudhir Sent: Wednesday, December 27, 2006 3:38 AM To: Global 'South' Sustainable Transport Subject: [sustran] Re: [NewMobilityCafe] World's Most Congested Cities Dear Sujit, On one hand you suggest TDM strategies and on other hand you suggest that high cost underground metros not solving problem of congestion. Metro (Underground or overhead) is a viable public transportation mode which has the capacity of attracting the private vehicle users. It is not only flyovers but also RUB/ROB's constructed contribute to induced traffic. Regards Sudhir -----Original Message----- From: sustran-discuss-bounces+eric.britton=ecoplan.org@list.jca.apc.org [mailto:sustran-discuss-bounces+eric.britton=ecoplan.org@list.jca.apc.org] On Behalf Of Sujit Patwardhan Sent: Monday, December 25, 2006 9:19 AM To: Global 'South' Sustainable Transport Cc: NewMobilityCafe@yahoogroups.com; Eric.britton@free.fr; WorldTransport@yahoogroups.com; Sustran-discuss@jca.apc.org Subject: [Sustran] Re: [NewMobilityCafe] World's Most Congested Cities 25 December 2006 Christmas Haven't read what Eric's written (and I'm sure he wouldn't say that) but in my humble opinion advocating underground (especially Underground Metros) transportation mode as a means of reducing with the traffic congestion on the roads is like an Ostrich burying its head in the sand. Perhaps the same logic was put forward by the pioneers of flyovers (plenty of them hale and hearty in Asian cities) to overcome the problem of crowded streets. What many (not all) advocates of the underground are saying is that we simply can't do anything about the mess we have created on our streets so let's not waste time on locating the "source" of the problem (too many auto vehicles) but get on with building the underground tunnels with their promise of high (overkill levels) capacity, which may de-congest the streets. This of course never happens. Just like flyovers (ones meant to relieve congestion, not the ones meant to cross railway lines etc) constructed at huge cost become magnets inviting even more auto vehicles (cars and two wheelers) to come on the roads, underground metros consume huge finances at the cost of other needs of the city and fail to attract level of ridership projected in the concocted project reports. But by this time the politicians have pocketed their loot, the infrastructure companies their obscenely high profits and the public left high and dry with over-crowded streets, crowded flyovers and underutilised underground metro. If one is really concerned with sustainable transportation and indeed sustainable life on our planet one has to acknowledge that auto vehicles have long crossed the limit in terms of their ecological footprint. NEW faster/high capacity modes, NEW cleaner fuels, we can certainly pursue but let's not lose sight of the REAL problem and see how that can be reduced. Incentives for Public Transport, Non Motorised Modes (Walking and Cycling) and real disincentives for auto vehicles through various TDM measures appropriate for each city. I know I'm not saying anything new but in all the technical discussions of pphpd and cost per Km etc we sometimes miss the most obvious. -- Sujit -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: winmail.dat Type: application/ms-tnef Size: 11838 bytes Desc: not available Url : http://list.jca.apc.org/public/sustran-discuss/attachments/20070102/492a182b/winmail.bin From ericbruun at earthlink.net Wed Jan 3 05:49:02 2007 From: ericbruun at earthlink.net (Eric Bruun) Date: Tue, 2 Jan 2007 15:49:02 -0500 (GMT-05:00) Subject: [sustran] Re: World's Most Congested Cities- Better, faster, cheaper? Message-ID: <25353551.1167770942784.JavaMail.root@elwamui-norfolk.atl.sa.earthlink.net> Two quick comments: 1) Don't confuse construction time with project completion time. I point out that Delhi built the Metro but still hasn't built the promised BRT lines. Despite costing less to construct it can take many years to get public policy changed to priortize the use of road space for buses. I wouldn't automatically blame this on a "rail lobby." Blame it also on the "highway lobby" and the polticians (most of whom probably secretly oppose BRT because they are privileged car users and want to keep it that way.) 2) While congestion doesn't automatically reduce just because you build elevated or underground systems, surely carrying hundreds of thousands or passengers must have some impact. If public policy doesn't prevent cars using the liberated street capacity, surely more intense activity is the result instead. Better along the rail lines than out in the fringes of the city. Eric Bruun -----Original Message----- >From: "Carlos F. Pardo SUTP" >Sent: Jan 2, 2007 10:39 AM >To: NewMobilityCafe@yahoogroups.com, 'Global 'South' Sustainable Transport' >Cc: WorldTransport@yahoogroups.com, sujitjp@gmail.com >Subject: [sustran] Re: [SPAM] [NewMobilityCafe] World's Most Congested Cities - Better, faster, cheaper? > >Eric, > > > >I would add "nicer" to the three adjectives you mention. Aesthetics and a >feeling of modernity are one of the greatest factors that make mayors go for >the underground or expensive rail systems. The bus is seen as dirty, old >fashioned and ugly, whereas rail is seen as strong, clean, modern and >beautiful. I think it's mostly because of the great lobby from rail groups >and their excellent vehicle designs. BRT is getting there, by the way. > > > >Best regards, > > > >Carlos F. Pardo > > > >From: NewMobilityCafe@yahoogroups.com >[mailto:NewMobilityCafe@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of >eric.britton@ecoplan.org >Sent: 27 December 2006 04:38 AM >To: 'Global 'South' Sustainable Transport' >Cc: sudhir@secon.in; sujitjp@gmail.com; NewMobilityCafe@yahoogroups.com; >WorldTransport@yahoogroups.com >Subject: [SPAM] [NewMobilityCafe] World's Most Congested Cities - Better, >faster, cheaper? > > > >Dear Sudhir and Sujit, > > > >"High cost underground metros"? Why not? Sounds great to me. Eh? > > > >But one small step first perhaps before spending all that money and >necessarily waiting all those years before your 'deus ex machina' kicks in >and is finally ready to do those good works. We refer to this necessary >step in the planning and policy process as . . . > > > >BETTER, FASTER, CHEAPER! > > > >That's the modest challenge that needs to be put before the responsible >policy maker and their advisors. In public and with public answers. > > > >So if we are able to get our hands on all that money and can start to spend >it tomorrow, how much of the problem can we take care of . . . starting now. >As opposed to waiting the inevitable twenty or whatever years that good >metro is going to take. > > > >This is the vital question that under the New Mobility Agenda we feel needs >to be asked each time. For starters you have to make that long list of the >real needs, priority objectives and targets, and then as possible put >quantities to them. Then you go to the tools, measures, policies side of the >ledger and start to build your packages of measures with an eye to getting >at the problems NOW! > > > >Now the responses that this approach provides are many and, when you get >them right, hugely gratifying and effective. That is if you can bear in >mind what the whole thing is indeed all about. > > > >Or is that just too simple for all those who are making these decisions, >along with those who are urging them on? And perhaps, do they have >something else in mind? > > > >It's my position that if such an exercise is not run with care and >brilliance, and the right decisions are made in the full glare of the media >and before the attentive eyes of civil society, then something is rotten in >the state of Denmark (or wherever). > > > >I think that is along the lines that Sujit is suggesting, but let me leave >it to him and to all of you on this. > > > >Eric Britton > > > > > > > >-----Original Message----- >From: sustran-discuss-bounces+eric.britton=ecoplan.org@list.jca.apc.org >[mailto:sustran-discuss-bounces+eric.britton=ecoplan.org@list.jca.apc.org] >On Behalf Of Sudhir >Sent: Wednesday, December 27, 2006 3:38 AM >To: Global 'South' Sustainable Transport >Subject: [sustran] Re: [NewMobilityCafe] World's Most Congested Cities > > > >Dear Sujit, > > > >On one hand you suggest TDM strategies and on other hand you suggest that >high cost underground metros not solving problem of congestion. > >Metro (Underground or overhead) is a viable public transportation mode which >has the capacity of attracting the private vehicle users. > > > >It is not only flyovers but also RUB/ROB's constructed contribute to induced >traffic. > > > >Regards > >Sudhir > > > >-----Original Message----- >From: sustran-discuss-bounces+eric.britton=ecoplan.org@list.jca.apc.org >[mailto:sustran-discuss-bounces+eric.britton=ecoplan.org@list.jca.apc.org] >On Behalf Of Sujit Patwardhan >Sent: Monday, December 25, 2006 9:19 AM >To: Global 'South' Sustainable Transport >Cc: NewMobilityCafe@yahoogroups.com; Eric.britton@free.fr; >WorldTransport@yahoogroups.com; Sustran-discuss@jca.apc.org >Subject: [Sustran] Re: [NewMobilityCafe] World's Most Congested Cities > > > >25 December 2006 >Christmas > > > >Haven't read what Eric's written (and I'm sure he wouldn't say that) but in >my humble opinion advocating underground (especially Underground Metros) >transportation mode as a means of reducing with the traffic congestion on >the roads is like an Ostrich burying its head in the sand. > >Perhaps the same logic was put forward by the pioneers of flyovers (plenty >of them hale and hearty in Asian cities) to overcome the problem of crowded >streets. What many (not all) advocates of the underground are saying is that >we simply can't do anything about the mess we have created on our streets so >let's not waste time on locating the "source" of the problem (too many auto >vehicles) but get on with building the underground tunnels with their >promise of high (overkill levels) capacity, which may de-congest the >streets. > >This of course never happens. Just like flyovers (ones meant to relieve >congestion, not the ones meant to cross railway lines etc) constructed at >huge cost become magnets inviting even more auto vehicles (cars and two >wheelers) to come on the roads, underground metros consume huge finances at >the cost of other needs of the city and fail to attract level of ridership >projected in the concocted project reports. > >But by this time the politicians have pocketed their loot, the >infrastructure companies their obscenely high profits and the public left >high and dry with over-crowded streets, crowded flyovers and underutilised >underground metro. > >If one is really concerned with sustainable transportation and indeed >sustainable life on our planet one has to acknowledge that auto vehicles >have long crossed the limit in terms of their ecological footprint. NEW >faster/high capacity modes, NEW cleaner fuels, we can certainly pursue but >let's not lose sight of the REAL problem and see how that can be reduced. >Incentives for Public Transport, Non Motorised Modes (Walking and Cycling) >and real disincentives for auto vehicles through various TDM measures >appropriate for each city. I know I'm not saying anything new but in all the >technical discussions of pphpd and cost per Km etc we sometimes miss the >most obvious. >-- >Sujit > From czegras at MIT.EDU Wed Jan 3 08:52:19 2007 From: czegras at MIT.EDU (P. Christopher Zegras) Date: Tue, 02 Jan 2007 18:52:19 -0500 Subject: [sustran] video on seperated bike lanes Message-ID: <459AF033.5040502@mit.edu> New York-focused, but perhaps of interest to a broader audience: http://www.streetsblog.org/2007/01/02/the-case-for-physically-separated-bike-lanes/ From sujit at vsnl.com Wed Jan 3 15:03:11 2007 From: sujit at vsnl.com (Sujit Patwardhan) Date: Wed, 3 Jan 2007 11:33:11 +0530 Subject: [sustran] Re: World's Most Congested Cities- Better, faster, cheaper? In-Reply-To: <25353551.1167770942784.JavaMail.root@elwamui-norfolk.atl.sa.earthlink.net> References: <25353551.1167770942784.JavaMail.root@elwamui-norfolk.atl.sa.earthlink.net> Message-ID: <4cfd20aa0701022203x5f524c42jfda554dfa6da5b01@mail.gmail.com> 3 January 2007 Dear Eric, 1) Neither have they constructed cycle tracks or pedestrian sidewalks (costing peanuts) on 40-60 meter plus(ie 130 feet/196 feet) WIDE roads in many places. Whether one blames the "rail" or the "highway" lobby, I thought the real point was to show how much quicker BRT and NMT infrastructure can be put in place if it is given priority -- and not to state the obvious, that political support is often strongest when more expensive (and even unviable) projects are proposed because there's greater scope for kickbacks and also because such projects are assumed to be better simply because they cost more. We feel our task as NGOs is to expose these myths and to demand as loudly and incessantly as possible that we want cheaper, simpler and quicker solutions for a problem that is literally threatening to bulldoze our cities into a "monoculture" of cement and concrete wedded to an auto dominated vision. A vision that has not worked (for solving the pollution, congestion and livability problem) in even ONE city in the whole world !!!!! If we keep showing this reality to our citizens and politicians who ARE indeed privileged car users, people do understand and start asking questions. Questions such as why doesn't the city have better public transport or why aren't there citywide safe cycle tracks (particularly for the school children) or why senior citizens don't have adequate wide and obstruction-free footpaths? Hopefully such focused pressure will create the much needed "political will" to drive and adopt sensible solutions. 2) In contrast the "alternative" solutions albeit adopted rather late in the day for most western cities, are showing wonderful results in more than a dozen cites around the globe (both in the first as well as the third world). As Lloyd Wright's book on NMT/BRT points out can we in Asian cities avoid the auto dominated path and leapfrog directly to the more sustainable alternatives? And the last point before I close my rather long winded response, I question the image of underground metros carrying hundreds of thousands commuters and thus easing the pressure on roads. To my knowledge, other than high rise cities like Hongkong, underground Metros in Asian cities only have high capacity potential. In reality they carry far less people and hence don't really make much of an impact on the extreme congestion on the roads. I also remember someone showing the figures to prove that for the cost of the Metro, Delhi could have had a citywide-FREE BRT system. -- Sujit On 1/3/07, Eric Bruun wrote: > > Two quick comments: > > 1) Don't confuse construction time with project completion time. I point > out that Delhi built the Metro but still hasn't built > the promised BRT lines. Despite costing less to construct it can take many > years to get public policy changed to priortize > the use of road space for buses. I wouldn't automatically blame this on a > "rail lobby." Blame it also on the "highway lobby" and > the polticians (most of whom probably secretly oppose BRT because they are > privileged car users and want to keep it that way.) > > 2) While congestion doesn't automatically reduce just because you build > elevated or underground systems, surely carrying hundreds > of thousands or passengers must have some impact. If public policy doesn't > prevent cars using the liberated street capacity, surely > more intense activity is the result instead. Better along the rail lines > than out in the fringes of the city. > > Eric Bruun > > -----Original Message----- > >From: "Carlos F. Pardo SUTP" > >Sent: Jan 2, 2007 10:39 AM > >To: NewMobilityCafe@yahoogroups.com, 'Global 'South' Sustainable > Transport' > >Cc: WorldTransport@yahoogroups.com, sujitjp@gmail.com > >Subject: [sustran] Re: [SPAM] [NewMobilityCafe] World's Most Congested > Cities - Better, faster, cheaper? > > > >Eric, > > > > > > > >I would add "nicer" to the three adjectives you mention. Aesthetics and a > >feeling of modernity are one of the greatest factors that make mayors go > for > >the underground or expensive rail systems. The bus is seen as dirty, old > >fashioned and ugly, whereas rail is seen as strong, clean, modern and > >beautiful. I think it's mostly because of the great lobby from rail > groups > >and their excellent vehicle designs. BRT is getting there, by the way. > > > > > > > >Best regards, > > > > > > > >Carlos F. Pardo > > > > > > > >From: NewMobilityCafe@yahoogroups.com > >[mailto:NewMobilityCafe@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of > >eric.britton@ecoplan.org > >Sent: 27 December 2006 04:38 AM > >To: 'Global 'South' Sustainable Transport' > >Cc: sudhir@secon.in; sujitjp@gmail.com; NewMobilityCafe@yahoogroups.com; > >WorldTransport@yahoogroups.com > >Subject: [SPAM] [NewMobilityCafe] World's Most Congested Cities - Better, > >faster, cheaper? > > > > > > > >Dear Sudhir and Sujit, > > > > > > > >"High cost underground metros"? Why not? Sounds great to me. Eh? > > > > > > > >But one small step first perhaps before spending all that money and > >necessarily waiting all those years before your 'deus ex machina' kicks > in > >and is finally ready to do those good works. We refer to this necessary > >step in the planning and policy process as . . . > > > > > > > >BETTER, FASTER, CHEAPER! > > > > > > > >That's the modest challenge that needs to be put before the responsible > >policy maker and their advisors. In public and with public answers. > > > > > > > >So if we are able to get our hands on all that money and can start to > spend > >it tomorrow, how much of the problem can we take care of . . . starting > now. > >As opposed to waiting the inevitable twenty or whatever years that good > >metro is going to take. > > > > > > > >This is the vital question that under the New Mobility Agenda we feel > needs > >to be asked each time. For starters you have to make that long list of > the > >real needs, priority objectives and targets, and then as possible put > >quantities to them. Then you go to the tools, measures, policies side of > the > >ledger and start to build your packages of measures with an eye to > getting > >at the problems NOW! > > > > > > > >Now the responses that this approach provides are many and, when you get > >them right, hugely gratifying and effective. That is if you can bear in > >mind what the whole thing is indeed all about. > > > > > > > >Or is that just too simple for all those who are making these decisions, > >along with those who are urging them on? And perhaps, do they have > >something else in mind? > > > > > > > >It's my position that if such an exercise is not run with care and > >brilliance, and the right decisions are made in the full glare of the > media > >and before the attentive eyes of civil society, then something is rotten > in > >the state of Denmark (or wherever). > > > > > > > >I think that is along the lines that Sujit is suggesting, but let me > leave > >it to him and to all of you on this. > > > > > > > >Eric Britton > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >-----Original Message----- > >From: sustran-discuss-bounces+eric.britton=ecoplan.org@list.jca.apc.org > >[mailto:sustran-discuss-bounces+eric.britton=ecoplan.org@list.jca.apc.org > ] > >On Behalf Of Sudhir > >Sent: Wednesday, December 27, 2006 3:38 AM > >To: Global 'South' Sustainable Transport > >Subject: [sustran] Re: [NewMobilityCafe] World's Most Congested Cities > > > > > > > >Dear Sujit, > > > > > > > >On one hand you suggest TDM strategies and on other hand you suggest that > >high cost underground metros not solving problem of congestion. > > > >Metro (Underground or overhead) is a viable public transportation mode > which > >has the capacity of attracting the private vehicle users. > > > > > > > >It is not only flyovers but also RUB/ROB's constructed contribute to > induced > >traffic. > > > > > > > >Regards > > > >Sudhir > > > > > > > >-----Original Message----- > >From: sustran-discuss-bounces+eric.britton=ecoplan.org@list.jca.apc.org > >[mailto:sustran-discuss-bounces+eric.britton=ecoplan.org@list.jca.apc.org > ] > >On Behalf Of Sujit Patwardhan > >Sent: Monday, December 25, 2006 9:19 AM > >To: Global 'South' Sustainable Transport > >Cc: NewMobilityCafe@yahoogroups.com; Eric.britton@free.fr; > >WorldTransport@yahoogroups.com; Sustran-discuss@jca.apc.org > >Subject: [Sustran] Re: [NewMobilityCafe] World's Most Congested Cities > > > > > > > >25 December 2006 > >Christmas > > > > > > > >Haven't read what Eric's written (and I'm sure he wouldn't say that) but > in > >my humble opinion advocating underground (especially Underground Metros) > >transportation mode as a means of reducing with the traffic congestion on > >the roads is like an Ostrich burying its head in the sand. > > > >Perhaps the same logic was put forward by the pioneers of flyovers > (plenty > >of them hale and hearty in Asian cities) to overcome the problem of > crowded > >streets. What many (not all) advocates of the underground are saying is > that > >we simply can't do anything about the mess we have created on our streets > so > >let's not waste time on locating the "source" of the problem (too many > auto > >vehicles) but get on with building the underground tunnels with their > >promise of high (overkill levels) capacity, which may de-congest the > >streets. > > > >This of course never happens. Just like flyovers (ones meant to relieve > >congestion, not the ones meant to cross railway lines etc) constructed at > >huge cost become magnets inviting even more auto vehicles (cars and two > >wheelers) to come on the roads, underground metros consume huge finances > at > >the cost of other needs of the city and fail to attract level of > ridership > >projected in the concocted project reports. > > > >But by this time the politicians have pocketed their loot, the > >infrastructure companies their obscenely high profits and the public left > >high and dry with over-crowded streets, crowded flyovers and > underutilised > >underground metro. > > > >If one is really concerned with sustainable transportation and indeed > >sustainable life on our planet one has to acknowledge that auto vehicles > >have long crossed the limit in terms of their ecological footprint. NEW > >faster/high capacity modes, NEW cleaner fuels, we can certainly pursue > but > >let's not lose sight of the REAL problem and see how that can be reduced. > >Incentives for Public Transport, Non Motorised Modes (Walking and > Cycling) > >and real disincentives for auto vehicles through various TDM measures > >appropriate for each city. I know I'm not saying anything new but in all > the > >technical discussions of pphpd and cost per Km etc we sometimes miss the > >most obvious. > >-- > >Sujit > > > > -- ------------------------------------------------------ Sujit Patwardhan sujit@vsnl.com sujitjp@gmail.com "Yamuna", ICS Colony, Ganeshkhind Road, Pune 411 007 India Tel: 25537955 ----------------------------------------------------- Hon. Secretary: Parisar www.parisar.org ------------------------------------------------------ Founder Member: PTTF (Pune Traffic & Transportation Forum) www.pttf.net ------------------------------------------------------ -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://list.jca.apc.org/public/sustran-discuss/attachments/20070103/6f47ebaf/attachment.html From roryer at yahoo.com Thu Jan 4 04:15:35 2007 From: roryer at yahoo.com (Rory McMullan) Date: Wed, 3 Jan 2007 19:15:35 +0000 (GMT) Subject: [sustran] Re: [NewMobilityCafe] Re: World's Most Congested Cities- Better, faster, cheaper? In-Reply-To: <25353551.1167770942784.JavaMail.root@elwamui-norfolk.atl.sa.earthlink.net> Message-ID: <20070103191536.71231.qmail@web31706.mail.mud.yahoo.com> I haven't been following this discussion in full but I notice that in debating better, faster, cheaper it has mostly been about trams, buses, metro and rail, while the provision and promotion of an adequate and safe walking and cycling network have hardly been mentioned. I believe that right across the world there is an over-emphasis on gleaming new infrastructure projects, while often the quickest and cheapest way to a sustainable urban transport system is just giving priority to cyclists and pedestrians. I also like the World's most congested cities tag mentioned alongside Better Faster Cheaper, chronic congestion is surely the best TDM tool we have to encourage folk to use a bike or a BRT to get around. Eric Bruun wrote: Two quick comments: 1) Don't confuse construction time with project completion time. I point out that Delhi built the Metro but still hasn't built the promised BRT lines. Despite costing less to construct it can take many years to get public policy changed to priortize the use of road space for buses. I wouldn't automatically blame this on a "rail lobby." Blame it also on the "highway lobby" and the polticians (most of whom probably secretly oppose BRT because they are privileged car users and want to keep it that way.) 2) While congestion doesn't automatically reduce just because you build elevated or underground systems, surely carrying hundreds of thousands or passengers must have some impact. If public policy doesn't prevent cars using the liberated street capacity, surely more intense activity is the result instead. Better along the rail lines than out in the fringes of the city. Eric Bruun -----Original Message----- >From: "Carlos F. Pardo SUTP" >Sent: Jan 2, 2007 10:39 AM >To: NewMobilityCafe@yahoogroups.com, 'Global 'South' Sustainable Transport' >Cc: WorldTransport@yahoogroups.com, sujitjp@gmail.com >Subject: [sustran] Re: [SPAM] [NewMobilityCafe] World's Most Congested Cities - Better, faster, cheaper? > >Eric, > > > >I would add "nicer" to the three adjectives you mention. Aesthetics and a >feeling of modernity are one of the greatest factors that make mayors go for >the underground or expensive rail systems. The bus is seen as dirty, old >fashioned and ugly, whereas rail is seen as strong, clean, modern and >beautiful. I think it's mostly because of the great lobby from rail groups >and their excellent vehicle designs. BRT is getting there, by the way. > > > >Best regards, > > > >Carlos F. Pardo > > > >From: NewMobilityCafe@yahoogroups.com >[mailto:NewMobilityCafe@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of >eric.britton@ecoplan.org >Sent: 27 December 2006 04:38 AM >To: 'Global 'South' Sustainable Transport' >Cc: sudhir@secon.in; sujitjp@gmail.com; NewMobilityCafe@yahoogroups.com; >WorldTransport@yahoogroups.com >Subject: [SPAM] [NewMobilityCafe] World's Most Congested Cities - Better, >faster, cheaper? > > > >Dear Sudhir and Sujit, > > > >"High cost underground metros"? Why not? Sounds great to me. Eh? > > > >But one small step first perhaps before spending all that money and >necessarily waiting all those years before your 'deus ex machina' kicks in >and is finally ready to do those good works. We refer to this necessary >step in the planning and policy process as . . . > > > >BETTER, FASTER, CHEAPER! > > > >That's the modest challenge that needs to be put before the responsible >policy maker and their advisors. In public and with public answers. > > > >So if we are able to get our hands on all that money and can start to spend >it tomorrow, how much of the problem can we take care of . . . starting now. >As opposed to waiting the inevitable twenty or whatever years that good >metro is going to take. > > > >This is the vital question that under the New Mobility Agenda we feel needs >to be asked each time. For starters you have to make that long list of the >real needs, priority objectives and targets, and then as possible put >quantities to them. Then you go to the tools, measures, policies side of the >ledger and start to build your packages of measures with an eye to getting >at the problems NOW! > > > >Now the responses that this approach provides are many and, when you get >them right, hugely gratifying and effective. That is if you can bear in >mind what the whole thing is indeed all about. > > > >Or is that just too simple for all those who are making these decisions, >along with those who are urging them on? And perhaps, do they have >something else in mind? > > > >It's my position that if such an exercise is not run with care and >brilliance, and the right decisions are made in the full glare of the media >and before the attentive eyes of civil society, then something is rotten in >the state of Denmark (or wherever). > > > >I think that is along the lines that Sujit is suggesting, but let me leave >it to him and to all of you on this. > > > >Eric Britton > > > > > > > >-----Original Message----- >From: sustran-discuss-bounces+eric.britton=ecoplan.org@list.jca.apc.org >[mailto:sustran-discuss-bounces+eric.britton=ecoplan.org@list.jca.apc.org] >On Behalf Of Sudhir >Sent: Wednesday, December 27, 2006 3:38 AM >To: Global 'South' Sustainable Transport >Subject: [sustran] Re: [NewMobilityCafe] World's Most Congested Cities > > > >Dear Sujit, > > > >On one hand you suggest TDM strategies and on other hand you suggest that >high cost underground metros not solving problem of congestion. > >Metro (Underground or overhead) is a viable public transportation mode which >has the capacity of attracting the private vehicle users. > > > >It is not only flyovers but also RUB/ROB's constructed contribute to induced >traffic. > > > >Regards > >Sudhir > > > >-----Original Message----- >From: sustran-discuss-bounces+eric.britton=ecoplan.org@list.jca.apc.org >[mailto:sustran-discuss-bounces+eric.britton=ecoplan.org@list.jca.apc.org] >On Behalf Of Sujit Patwardhan >Sent: Monday, December 25, 2006 9:19 AM >To: Global 'South' Sustainable Transport >Cc: NewMobilityCafe@yahoogroups.com; Eric.britton@free.fr; >WorldTransport@yahoogroups.com; Sustran-discuss@jca.apc.org >Subject: [Sustran] Re: [NewMobilityCafe] World's Most Congested Cities > > > >25 December 2006 >Christmas > > > >Haven't read what Eric's written (and I'm sure he wouldn't say that) but in >my humble opinion advocating underground (especially Underground Metros) >transportation mode as a means of reducing with the traffic congestion on >the roads is like an Ostrich burying its head in the sand. > >Perhaps the same logic was put forward by the pioneers of flyovers (plenty >of them hale and hearty in Asian cities) to overcome the problem of crowded >streets. What many (not all) advocates of the underground are saying is that >we simply can't do anything about the mess we have created on our streets so >let's not waste time on locating the "source" of the problem (too many auto >vehicles) but get on with building the underground tunnels with their >promise of high (overkill levels) capacity, which may de-congest the >streets. > >This of course never happens. Just like flyovers (ones meant to relieve >congestion, not the ones meant to cross railway lines etc) constructed at >huge cost become magnets inviting even more auto vehicles (cars and two >wheelers) to come on the roads, underground metros consume huge finances at >the cost of other needs of the city and fail to attract level of ridership >projected in the concocted project reports. > >But by this time the politicians have pocketed their loot, the >infrastructure companies their obscenely high profits and the public left >high and dry with over-crowded streets, crowded flyovers and underutilised >underground metro. > >If one is really concerned with sustainable transportation and indeed >sustainable life on our planet one has to acknowledge that auto vehicles >have long crossed the limit in terms of their ecological footprint. NEW >faster/high capacity modes, NEW cleaner fuels, we can certainly pursue but >let's not lose sight of the REAL problem and see how that can be reduced. >Incentives for Public Transport, Non Motorised Modes (Walking and Cycling) >and real disincentives for auto vehicles through various TDM measures >appropriate for each city. I know I'm not saying anything new but in all the >technical discussions of pphpd and cost per Km etc we sometimes miss the >most obvious. >-- >Sujit > __._,_.___ Messages in this topic (1) Reply (via web post) | Start a new topic Messages | Files | Photos | Links | Database | Polls | Calendar Check in here via the homepage at http://www.newmobility.org To post message to group: NewMobilityCafe@yahoogroups.com Please think twice before posting to the group as a whole (It might be that your note is best sent to one person?) Change settings via the Web (Yahoo! ID required) Change settings via email: Switch delivery to Daily Digest | Switch format to Traditional Visit Your Group | Yahoo! Groups Terms of Use | Unsubscribe Visit Your Group Yahoo! Music Listen to radio 50+ free stations, for all your moods Yahoo! Movies Up for a movie? Check out the new releases. Yahoo! Mail You're invited! Try the all-new Yahoo! Mail Beta . __,_._,___ Send instant messages to your online friends http://uk.messenger.yahoo.com -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://list.jca.apc.org/public/sustran-discuss/attachments/20070103/d0d3f6f0/attachment.html From ericbruun at earthlink.net Thu Jan 4 06:10:43 2007 From: ericbruun at earthlink.net (Eric Bruun) Date: Wed, 3 Jan 2007 16:10:43 -0500 (GMT-05:00) Subject: [sustran] Re: World's Most Congested Cities- Better, faster, cheaper? Message-ID: <8567780.1167858643293.JavaMail.root@elwamui-karabash.atl.sa.earthlink.net> An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://list.jca.apc.org/public/sustran-discuss/attachments/20070103/c56cb3e5/attachment.html From edelman at greenidea.info Thu Jan 4 06:28:42 2007 From: edelman at greenidea.info (Todd Edelman) Date: Wed, 3 Jan 2007 22:28:42 +0100 (CET) Subject: [sustran] Shared space In-Reply-To: <8567780.1167858643293.JavaMail.root@elwamui-karabash.atl.sa.earthlink .net> References: <8567780.1167858643293.JavaMail.root@elwamui-karabash.atl.sa.earthlink.net> Message-ID: <22937.194.149.113.177.1167859722.squirrel@mail.smartweb.cz> Hi, There was some discussion a number of months ago based on a video which showed an intersection in India (I think) where all users ignored signals and just moved through it using eye-contact, body language and so on and mostly things went okay. This programme in the Netherlands, Germany and UK packages that system quite nicely. It proposes creating intersections and city street spaces with absolutely no signals, signs or even raised curbs... and it mentions important things like making a street safer with more life rather than even the most seemingly progressive traffic calming devices. It really seems like a rediscovery of the way roads used to be, before signals and separated spaces. The main thing I dont like about it is that it allows cars. The best thing about it is that its emphasis on responsibility and communication. http://www.shared-space.org http://www.shared-space.org/files/14445/SharedSpace_Eng.pdf Walking, cycling, no complicated technology... ------------------------------------------------------ Todd Edelman Director Green Idea Factory Korunn? 72 CZ-10100 Praha 10 Czech Republic ++420 605 915 970 Skype: toddedelman edelman@greenidea.eu http://www.worldcarfree.net/onthetrain Green Idea Factory, a member of World Carfree Network From sudhir at secon.in Thu Jan 4 11:47:33 2007 From: sudhir at secon.in (Sudhir) Date: Thu, 4 Jan 2007 08:17:33 +0530 Subject: [sustran] Re: [NewMobilityCafe] Re: World's Most Congested Cities-Better, faster, cheaper? - " Desperate Times require Desperate measures" References: <20070103191536.71231.qmail@web31706.mail.mud.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <005b01c72faa$af452ac0$d607a8c0@SA152A> " Desperate Times require Desperate measures" The Problem with Indian cities is that people will use the public transportation if it is cheap and has high Level of Service. One can see people hanging in the overcrowded buses even without having good LOS. The answer to ever multiplying congestion can be any good traffic demand management technique BRT, Metro etc.. Congestion will never on itself attract the masses to public transportation. The government should provide the suitable alternative. Congestion is never in itself a TDM tool, The government should channel the desire of public to escape congestion by offering good sustainable transportation. I had advocated metro in my earlier mail as I firmly believe that in a long run (say 10-15 years down the line) it will push people away from personal automobiles. Other public transportation modes such as buses can augment metro efficiency if properly planned. Metro is not a "magician's wand" which would disappear congestion in a flash. Metro in Delhi may or may not provide profits to the government right now. The government decision making should not be influenced by such short term profits. In long run the metro investment will serve its purpose. It takes time to attract "choice riders" . I don't believe that the person will not walk just because he does not have footpath. Provision of Footpath and other facilities will attract pedestrians no doubt.In India many poor people walk from bus station to work place or to home as they don't have any other alternative. You cannot expect a car owner to cycle around 10km just because government has provided him a cycle track.It may not work in India as a normal one way work trip in Indian metro's is easily more than 5-10km. if you want to attract a person with better alternative than you have to provide even better service. The best answer for any city is provision of cheap public transportation with good level of service . I don't feel that there is any controversy with above statement. I feel the provision of Metro is a step in right direction. BRT may not work for all the corridors. As the land acquisition is a big problem. People in India don't have lane discipline. One can see people driving on footpaths, one ways (opposite direction) and jumping signals. BRT may be a short term improvement measure but It may not work exceedingly well for entire city. Just imagine if any city in world offers free ride in Public transportation with excellent service. Hope this dream becomes a reality. Regards Sudhir -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://list.jca.apc.org/public/sustran-discuss/attachments/20070104/fd1a9198/attachment.html From SCHIPPER at wri.org Thu Jan 4 19:11:22 2007 From: SCHIPPER at wri.org (Lee Schipper) Date: Thu, 04 Jan 2007 05:11:22 -0500 Subject: [sustran] [NewMobilityCafe] Re: World's Most Congested Cities- Better, faster, cheaper? Message-ID: in Bangalore, the earliest BRT plans were discussed in the late 1990s, with support from SIDA... Today is 2007! >>> ericbruun@earthlink.net 1/3/2007 4:10:43 PM >>> Sujit: That is a big "if" about buses getting priority. You won't get any argument from me that bus lanes and signal priority would be a very good thing. But how long does one have to wait? It is my understanding that the pollution problems were urgent in Delhi. This alone might have justified the Metro, especially if a less corruption prone model could be used to finance and build the system, and efforts were made to build up industrial and management skills usable elsewhere in India. Thus, I also clearly don't agree that it is "obvious" that Metro is favored ONLY because it is more expensive, has more opportunities for kickbacks, etc. In addition to not requiring street space, it also has a higher travel speed than any BRT system -- this could be very important in very large cities with long travel distances. I didn't claim that building on separate rights-of-way automatically reduces congestion. I claimed that if efforts are not taken to reduce congestion and the liberated bus space from former auto and bus users fills back up, we are still left with the benefit that a higher level of activity can be supported within a given area. This is a good thing from a sustainable development standpoint. If anyone doubts that this is true, then I would recommend reading Yong-Eun Shin's 1997 disseratation from the City and Regional Planning program at the University of Pennsylvania. He made a mathematical model that shows the level of development intensity that can be supported as a function of passenger transport infrastructure. Finally, I don't fully agree with the analysis in Lloyd Wright's NMT/BRT book, but that is a subject for another forum. Eric Bruun -----Original Message----- From: Sujit Patwardhan Sent: Jan 3, 2007 1:03 AM To: Eric Bruun , Global 'South' Sustainable Transport , NewMobilityCafe@yahoogroups.com, WorldTransport@yahoogroups.com Subject: Re: World's Most Congested Cities- Better, faster, cheaper? 3 January 2007 Dear Eric, 1) Neither have they constructed cycle tracks or pedestrian sidewalks (costing peanuts) on 40-60 meter plus(ie 130 feet/196 feet) WIDE roads in many places. Whether one blames the "rail" or the "highway" lobby, I thought the real point was to show how much quicker BRT and NMT infrastructure can be put in place if it is given priority -- and not to state the obvious, that political support is often strongest when more expensive (and even unviable) projects are proposed because there's greater scope for kickbacks and also because such projects are assumed to be better simply because they cost more. We feel our task as NGOs is to expose these myths and to demand as loudly and incessantly as possible that we want cheaper, simpler and quicker solutions for a problem that is literally threatening to bulldoze our cities into a "monoculture" of cement and concrete wedded to an auto dominated vision. A vision that has not worked (for solving the pollution, congestion and livability problem) in even ONE city in the whole world !!!!! If we keep showing this reality to our citizens and politicians who ARE indeed privileged car users, people do understand and start asking questions. Questions such as why doesn't the city have better public transport or why aren't there citywide safe cycle tracks (particularly for the school children) or why senior citizens don't have adequate wide and obstruction-free footpaths? Hopefully such focused pressure will create the much needed "political will" to drive and adopt sensible solutions. 2) In contrast the "alternative" solutions albeit adopted rather late in the day for most western cities, are showing wonderful results in more than a dozen cites around the globe (both in the first as well as the third world). As Lloyd Wright's book on NMT/BRT points out can we in Asian cities avoid the auto dominated path and leapfrog directly to the more sustainable alternatives? And the last point before I close my rather long winded response, I question the image of underground metros carrying hundreds of thousands commuters and thus easing the pressure on roads. To my knowledge, other than high rise cities like Hongkong, underground Metros in Asian cities only have high capacity potential. In reality they carry far less people and hence don't really make much of an impact on the extreme congestion on the roads. I also remember someone showing the figures to prove that for the cost of the Metro, Delhi could have had a citywide-FREE BRT system. -- Sujit On 1/3/07, Eric Bruun wrote: Two quick comments: 1) Don't confuse construction time with project completion time. I point out that Delhi built the Metro but still hasn't built the promised BRT lines. Despite costing less to construct it can take many years to get public policy changed to priortize the use of road space for buses. I wouldn't automatically blame this on a "rail lobby." Blame it also on the "highway lobby" and the polticians (most of whom probably secretly oppose BRT because they are privileged car users and want to keep it that way.) 2) While congestion doesn't automatically reduce just because you build elevated or underground systems, surely carrying hundreds of thousands or passengers must have some impact. If public policy doesn't prevent cars using the liberated street capacity, surely more intense activity is the result instead. Better along the rail lines than out in the fringes of the city. Eric Bruun -----Original Message----- >From: "Carlos F. Pardo SUTP" < Carlos.Pardo@sutp.org> >Sent: Jan 2, 2007 10:39 AM >To: NewMobilityCafe@yahoogroups.com, 'Global 'South' Sustainable Transport' < sustran-discuss@list.jca.apc.org> >Cc: WorldTransport@yahoogroups.com, sujitjp@gmail.com >Subject: [sustran] Re: [SPAM] [NewMobilityCafe] World's Most Congested Cities - Better, faster, cheaper? > >Eric, > > > >I would add "nicer" to the three adjectives you mention. Aesthetics and a >feeling of modernity are one of the greatest factors that make mayors go for >the underground or expensive rail systems. The bus is seen as dirty, old >fashioned and ugly, whereas rail is seen as strong, clean, modern and >beautiful. I think it's mostly because of the great lobby from rail groups >and their excellent vehicle designs. BRT is getting there, by the way. > > > >Best regards, > > > >Carlos F. Pardo > > > >From: NewMobilityCafe@yahoogroups.com >[mailto:NewMobilityCafe@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of >eric.britton@ecoplan.org >Sent: 27 December 2006 04:38 AM >To: 'Global 'South' Sustainable Transport' >Cc: sudhir@secon.in; sujitjp@gmail.com ; NewMobilityCafe@yahoogroups.com; >WorldTransport@yahoogroups.com >Subject: [SPAM] [NewMobilityCafe] World's Most Congested Cities - Better, >faster, cheaper? > > > >Dear Sudhir and Sujit, > > > >"High cost underground metros"? Why not? Sounds great to me. Eh? > > > >But one small step first perhaps before spending all that money and >necessarily waiting all those years before your 'deus ex machina' kicks in >and is finally ready to do those good works. We refer to this necessary >step in the planning and policy process as . . . > > > >BETTER, FASTER, CHEAPER! > > > >That's the modest challenge that needs to be put before the responsible >policy maker and their advisors. In public and with public answers. > > > >So if we are able to get our hands on all that money and can start to spend >it tomorrow, how much of the problem can we take care of . . . starting now. >As opposed to waiting the inevitable twenty or whatever years that good >metro is going to take. > > > >This is the vital question that under the New Mobility Agenda we feel needs >to be asked each time. For starters you have to make that long list of the >real needs, priority objectives and targets, and then as possible put >quantities to them. Then you go to the tools, measures, policies side of the >ledger and start to build your packages of measures with an eye to getting >at the problems NOW! > > > >Now the responses that this approach provides are many and, when you get >them right, hugely gratifying and effective. That is if you can bear in >mind what the whole thing is indeed all about. > > > >Or is that just too simple for all those who are making these decisions, >along with those who are urging them on? And perhaps, do they have >something else in mind? > > > >It's my position that if such an exercise is not run with care and >brilliance, and the right decisions are made in the full glare of the media >and before the attentive eyes of civil society, then something is rotten in >the state of Denmark (or wherever). > > > >I think that is along the lines that Sujit is suggesting, but let me leave >it to him and to all of you on this. > > > >Eric Britton > > > > > > > >-----Original Message----- >From: sustran-discuss-bounces+eric.britton=ecoplan.org@list.jca.apc.org >[mailto:sustran-discuss-bounces+eric.britton=ecoplan.org@list.jca.apc.org] >On Behalf Of Sudhir >Sent: Wednesday, December 27, 2006 3:38 AM >To: Global 'South' Sustainable Transport >Subject: [sustran] Re: [NewMobilityCafe] World's Most Congested Cities > > > >Dear Sujit, > > > >On one hand you suggest TDM strategies and on other hand you suggest that >high cost underground metros not solving problem of congestion. > >Metro (Underground or overhead) is a viable public transportation mode which >has the capacity of attracting the private vehicle users. > > > >It is not only flyovers but also RUB/ROB's constructed contribute to induced >traffic. > > > >Regards > >Sudhir > > > >-----Original Message----- >From: sustran-discuss-bounces+eric.britton=ecoplan.org@list.jca.apc.org >[mailto: sustran-discuss-bounces+eric.britton=ecoplan.org@list.jca.apc.org] >On Behalf Of Sujit Patwardhan >Sent: Monday, December 25, 2006 9:19 AM >To: Global 'South' Sustainable Transport >Cc: NewMobilityCafe@yahoogroups.com; Eric.britton@free.fr; >WorldTransport@yahoogroups.com ; Sustran-discuss@jca.apc.org >Subject: [Sustran] Re: [NewMobilityCafe] World's Most Congested Cities > > > >25 December 2006 >Christmas > > > >Haven't read what Eric's written (and I'm sure he wouldn't say that) but in >my humble opinion advocating underground (especially Underground Metros) >transportation mode as a means of reducing with the traffic congestion on >the roads is like an Ostrich burying its head in the sand. > >Perhaps the same logic was put forward by the pioneers of flyovers (plenty >of them hale and hearty in Asian cities) to overcome the problem of crowded >streets. What many (not all) advocates of the underground are saying is that >we simply can't do anything about the mess we have created on our streets so >let's not waste time on locating the "source" of the problem (too many auto >vehicles) but get on with building the underground tunnels with their >promise of high (overkill levels) capacity, which may de-congest the >streets. > >This of course never happens. Just like flyovers (ones meant to relieve >congestion, not the ones meant to cross railway lines etc) constructed at >huge cost become magnets inviting even more auto vehicles (cars and two >wheelers) to come on the roads, underground metros consume huge finances at >the cost of other needs of the city and fail to attract level of ridership >projected in the concocted project reports. > >But by this time the politicians have pocketed their loot, the >infrastructure companies their obscenely high profits and the public left >high and dry with over-crowded streets, crowded flyovers and underutilised >underground metro. > >If one is really concerned with sustainable transportation and indeed >sustainable life on our planet one has to acknowledge that auto vehicles >have long crossed the limit in terms of their ecological footprint. NEW >faster/high capacity modes, NEW cleaner fuels, we can certainly pursue but >let's not lose sight of the REAL problem and see how that can be reduced. >Incentives for Public Transport, Non Motorised Modes (Walking and Cycling) >and real disincentives for auto vehicles through various TDM measures >appropriate for each city. I know I'm not saying anything new but in all the >technical discussions of pphpd and cost per Km etc we sometimes miss the >most obvious. >-- >Sujit > -- ------------------------------------------------------ Sujit Patwardhan sujit@vsnl.com sujitjp@gmail.com "Yamuna", ICS Colony, Ganeshkhind Road, Pune 411 007 India Tel: 25537955 ----------------------------------------------------- Hon. Secretary: Parisar www.parisar.org ------------------------------------------------------ Founder Member: PTTF (Pune Traffic & Transportation Forum) www.pttf.net ------------------------------------------------------ __._,_.___ Messages in this topic (3) Reply (via web post) | Start a new topic Messages | Files | Photos | Links | Database | Polls | Calendar Check in here via the homepage at http://www.newmobility.org To post message to group: NewMobilityCafe@yahoogroups.com Please think twice before posting to the group as a whole (It might be that your note is best sent to one person?) Change settings via the Web (Yahoo! ID required) Change settings via email: Switch delivery to Daily Digest | Switch format to Traditional Visit Your Group | Yahoo! Groups Terms of Use | Unsubscribe Recent Activity 1 New Members Visit Your Group Yahoo! Movies Up for a movie? Check out showtimes and buy tickets Yahoo! Music Choose your radio Rock, pop, indie, country, and more. Yahoo! Mail Next gen email? Try the all-new Yahoo! Mail Beta. . __,_._,___ From eric.britton at free.fr Thu Jan 4 19:39:11 2007 From: eric.britton at free.fr (eric.britton at free.fr) Date: Thu, 4 Jan 2007 11:39:11 +0100 Subject: [sustran] new clips for the City Cycling Video Library Message-ID: <00d601c72fec$94a35d30$6501a8c0@Home> Thanks so much Sujit and Chris for getting those good cycling videos to us here over the weekend -- and as promised they have been immediately integrated into the City Cycling Video Library. To access it easily, may I suggest that you wander over to the New Mobility Agenda at http://www.newmobility.org and once there click the Video Libraries link under Group Work Tools on the left menu. There you will see the cycling libraries, among others, each with their own short and ugly introduction, and then a series of the latest videos selected in each category. As you will see, they play automatically one after the other. I personally find this wonderfully useful as a mind jogger and resource, and hope that it serves you all well. Eric Britton -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://list.jca.apc.org/public/sustran-discuss/attachments/20070104/1fcd02de/attachment.html From vivek at cseindia.org Fri Jan 5 20:18:27 2007 From: vivek at cseindia.org (vivek chattopadhyaya) Date: Fri, 5 Jan 2007 16:48:27 +0530 Subject: [sustran] Cost of congestion In-Reply-To: <20061230030112.B0AF12C64E@mx-list.jca.ne.jp> Message-ID: <459E815B.5281.1427982@localhost> Dear All, I wish everyone a happy new year. Pls see the following editorial on congestion issue, you may find it of interest. thanks, Vivek Economics of congestion (December 31, 2006, Down To Earth) The Society of Indian Automobile Manufacturers (SIAM) says India produced over 10 million vehicles in 2006. The number of cars was more than one million. As the manufacture and sale of vehicles are important parameters of the national economy, this millionth-vehicle yardstick says the economy?s fundamentals are buoyant. I have no quarrel with this. But I do find this economic assessment rather incomplete and simplistic. Because vehicles require resources to operate, maintain and even park. Where will these resources come from? Who pays? Who does not? These assessments are critical to learn the economics that really matters: what is the cost of this growth, and how should we pay for it? At the very least, five costs have to be added to the price of each vehicle. One, the cost of building a road. Two, the cost of maintaining roads, the cost of policing on the road, the cost of powering the millions of traffic lights. Three, the crippling cost of local air pollution and bad health which requires monitoring, control and regulation. Added to this, is evidence that vehicles are key contributors to pollution, which is feeding climate change and will result in even bigger costs. Four, the cost of congestion, which every motorist on a busy road imposes on fellow travellers?from delays that cost time, to increased fuel consumption that costs money. Five, the cost of space for parking vehicles, at home and at work. We need to ask why economists? the ones who normally rant about markets, the need for full cost pricing and removal of subsidies?never account for these costs in their calculations of growth. After all, the cold logic of the market, repeatedly cited when it comes to the meagre support given to farmers, should apply here as well. Could it be that our economists are so vertically integrated to the market?with mind and matter?that these distortions fail to catch their attention? Take roads. We know that cars on roads are like the proverbial cup that always fills up. Cities invest in roads, but fight the losing battle of the bulge: congestion. The US provides up to four times more road space per capita than most European cities, and up to eight times more road space per capita as compared to the crowded cities of Asia. When more roads fail to solve the problem, governments invest in flyovers and elevated highways. These roads occupy space?real estate?and are costly to build and maintain. It has been estimated that in Western cities dependent on automobiles, it could cost as much as US $260 per capita per year to operate these facilities. But this investment is also not paying off as ever increasing cars fill the ever increasing space. This is why experts say building roads to fit cars is like trying to put out a fire with petrol. Britain?s orbital motorway, something akin to Delhi?s Ring Road that ?bypasses? the city, was built 20 years ago. Since then, it has been expanded at huge costs to 12 lanes. But bumper-to-bumper traffic on it has dubbed it the nation?s biggest car park. Congestion costs the earth, in terms of lost hours spent in traffic; in terms of fuel and in terms of pollution. In the US, the congestion bill for 85 cities totalled to a staggering US $63 billion in 2003. This calculated only the cost of hours lost?some 3.7 billion?and extra fuel consumed, not the loss of opportunity because of missed meetings and other such factors. In the UK, the industry has pegged the figure at US $30 billion. Our part of the world is similarly blessed: Bangkok estimates that it loses 6 per cent of its economic production due to traffic congestion. These costs do not even begin to account for pollution: emissions of hydrocarbons and carbon monoxide are linked with speed and frequent stop and start. The logic of the market tells us that people overuse goods and services that come free. Why, then, should this dictum not be applied to roads? Why should fiscal policy not be designed to reflect the real cost of this public asset? Why not charge for it? The question of who should pay is simple: the user. But what is often not understood is the nature?colour and class?of the ?real? user of the public largess in our economies. While in the Western world, the car has replaced the bus or bicycle, in our world it has only marginalised its space. Therefore, even in a rich city like Delhi, cars and two wheelers carry less than 20 per cent of the city?s commuting passengers. The rest are transported by buses, bicycles or other means. But the operational fact is that these cars and two-wheelers occupy over 90 per cent of the city?s road space. Therefore, it is evident that the user of the public space and the beneficiary of public largess?the road, the flyover or the elevated highway?is the person in the car or the two- wheeler. Cars do not only cost on the road. They also cost when they are parked. Personal vehicles stay parked roughly 90 per cent of the time; the land they occupy costs real estate. Cars occupy more space for parking than what we need to work in our office: 23 sq metres to park a car, against 15 sq metres to park a desk. My colleagues have estimated that the one million-odd cars in Delhi would take up roughly 11 per cent of the city?s urban area. Green spaces in the city take up roughly the same. Ultimately, the issue is not even what it costs. The issue is why we are not computing the costs or estimating its losses. ?Sunita Narain ================================================================ SUSTRAN-DISCUSS is a forum devoted to discussion of people-centred, equitable and sustainable transport with a focus on developing countries (the 'Global South'). End of Sustran-discuss Digest, Vol 40, Issue 21 ********************************************************************************************** -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Vivek Chattopadhyaya Sr R.A. Centre for Science and Environment 41, Tughlakabad Institutional Area New Delhi: 110062 India Tel: 29955124, 29956110, 29956394, ext: 222, Fax: 29955879 website: www.cseindia.org From edelman at greenidea.info Sun Jan 7 11:06:17 2007 From: edelman at greenidea.info (Todd Edelman) Date: Sun, 7 Jan 2007 03:06:17 +0100 (CET) Subject: [sustran] Vietnam prepares for boom times Message-ID: <14445.194.149.113.177.1168135577.squirrel@mail.smartweb.cz> Vietnam prepares for boom times Vietnam is expected to become a member of the World Trade Organisation next week. The deal will help a country once regarded as a backwater to catch up with its economically successful neighbours. Unqualified terms: Catch up; Boom times Excerpt: "Economists say that soon - maybe as soon as next year - the income of Vietnam's city families will reach the size when they will start to buy cars. And if that happens, then the flow of the hordes of mopeds will be replaced by logjams, and the human scale and amiability of this low-rise city will be shoved aside by angry people in static tin boxes and looming skyscrapers like the other cities of Asia. The authorities have big plans for public transport, and as this is still a centrally directed economy they may be able to get their way [but...." Full story: http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/programmes/from_our_own_correspondent/6234089.stm ------------------------------------------------------ Todd Edelman Director Green Idea Factory Korunn? 72 CZ-10100 Praha 10 Czech Republic ++420 605 915 970 Skype: toddedelman edelman@greenidea.eu http://www.worldcarfree.net/onthetrain Green Idea Factory, a member of World Carfree Network From anirudhsingh1 at gmail.com Sun Jan 7 16:46:57 2007 From: anirudhsingh1 at gmail.com (anirudh singh bais) Date: Sun, 7 Jan 2007 13:16:57 +0530 Subject: [sustran] hi Message-ID: <549e2f6c0701062346y6d8614fev59af1b9ea868233e@mail.gmail.com> Hi, A very Happy New Year to all. Well can somebody help me out to get some information or data regarding Dynamic P.C.U. Value . Thanking you Yours Sincerely Anirudh Singh Bais Transport Planning School Of Planning and Architecture New Delhi Email:anirudhsingh1@gmail.com -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://list.jca.apc.org/public/sustran-discuss/attachments/20070107/be898442/attachment.html From eric.britton at free.fr Mon Jan 8 00:18:02 2007 From: eric.britton at free.fr (eric.britton at free.fr) Date: Sun, 7 Jan 2007 16:18:02 +0100 Subject: [sustran] Car Boom Puts Europe on Road to a Smoggy Future Message-ID: <03f601c7326f$0d4f2dc0$6401a8c0@Home> [I think that this states the case and the challenge just about as well as any. But hey, not one mention of the New Mobility Agenda. Hmm. Well, back to work.] Car Boom Puts Europe on Road to a Smoggy Future By ELISABETH ROSENTHAL Published: January 7, 2007 http://www.nytimes.com/2007/01/07/world/europe/07cars.html?_r=1&oref=slogin&page wanted=all DUBLIN - Rebecca and Emmet O'Connell swear that they are not car people and that they worry about global warming. Indeed, they looked miserable one recent evening as they drove home to suburban Lucan from central Dublin, a crawling 8.5-mile journey that took an hour. Skip to next paragraph Enlarge This Image Eamonn Farrell/Photocall Ireland The evening traffic jam in Dublin. In Ireland, car ownership has more than doubled since 1990, and car engines have grown steadily. Multimedia The Cost of GrowthGraphic The Cost of Growth John McConnico for The International Herald Tribune A father and son with a multipurpose Christiania bike in Copenhagen. Bicycles of all types have helped Denmark to reduce the use of cars. But in this booming city, where the number of cars has doubled in the last 15 years, there is little choice, they said. "Believe me - if there was an alternative we would use it," said Ms. O'Connell, 40, a textile designer. "We care about the environment. It's just hard to follow through here." No trains run to the new suburbs where hundreds of thousands of Dubliners now live, and the few buses going there overflow with people. So nearly everyone drives - to work, to shop, to take their children to school - in what seems like a constant smoggy, traffic jam. Since 1990, emissions from transportation in Ireland have risen about 140 percent, the most in Europe. But Ireland is not alone. Vehicular emissions are rising in nearly every European country, and across the globe. Because of increasing car and truck use, greenhouse-gas emissions are increasing even where pollution from industry is waning. The 23 percent growth in vehicular emissions in Europe since 1990 has "offset" the effect of cleaner factories, according to a recent report by the European Environment Agency. The growth has occurred despite the invention of far more environmentally friendly fuels and cars. "What we gain by hybrid cars and ethanol buses, we more than lose because of sheer numbers of vehicles," said Ronan Uhel, a senior scientist with the European Environment Agency, which is based in Copenhagen. Vehicles, mostly cars, create more than one-fifth of the greenhouse-gas emissions in Europe, where the problem has been extensively studied. The few places that have aggressively sought to fight the trend have taken sometimes draconian measures. Denmark, for example, treats cars the way it treats yachts - as luxury items - imposing purchase taxes that are sometimes 200 percent of the cost of the vehicle. A simple Czech-made Skoda car that costs $18,400 in Italy or Sweden costs more than $34,000 in Denmark. The number of bicycles on Danish streets has increased in recent years, and few people under the age of 30 own cars. Many families have turned to elaborate three-wheeled contraptions. (Beijing, meanwhile, has restricted the use of traditional three-wheeled bikes.) On a recent morning in Copenhagen - which is flat, and has bike lanes - Cristian Eskelund, 35, a government lobbyist, hopped on a clunky bicycle with a big wooden cart attached to the front. The day before, he had used the vehicle, a local contraption called a Christiania bike, to carry a Christmas tree he had bought. This day, he was taking his two children to school, then heading to the hospital, where his wife was in labor. "How many children do I have?" Mr. Eskelund said. "Two, perhaps three." There are high-end options, too. At $2,800, a three-wheeled Nihola bike costs as much as a used car, but many people insist it is far more practical. Sleek, lightweight, with a streamlined enclosed bubble in front, it is good for transporting groceries and children. High taxes on cars or gasoline of the type levied in Copenhagen are effective in curbing traffic, experts say, but they scare voters, making even environmentalist politicians unlikely to propose them. When Britain's chancellor of the exchequer, Gordon Brown, revealed his "green" budget proposal, it included an increase in gas taxes of less than two and a half cents per quart. Other cities have tried variations that require fewer absolute sacrifices from motorists. Rome allows only cars with low emissions ratings into its historic center. In London and Stockholm, drivers must pay a congestion charge to enter the city center. Such programs do reduce traffic and pollution at a city's core, but evidence suggests that car use simply moves to the suburbs. But Dublin is more typical of cities around the world, from Asia to Latin America, where road transport volumes are increasing in tandem with economic growth. Since 1997, Beijing has built a new ring road every two years, each new concentric superhighway giving rise to a host of malls and housing compounds. In Ireland, car ownership has more than doubled since 1990 and car engines have grown steadily larger. Meanwhile, new environmental laws have meant that emissions from electrical plants, a major polluter, have been decreasing since 2001. Urban sprawl and cars are the chicken and egg of the environmental debate. Cars make it easier for people to live and shop outside the center city. As traffic increases, governments build more roads, encouraging people to buy more cars and move yet farther away. In Europe alone, 6,200 miles of motorways were built from 1990 to 2003 and, with the European Union's enlargement, 7,500 more are planned. Government enthusiasm for spending on public transportation, which is costly and takes years to build, generally lags far behind. For instance, Dublin and Beijing are building trams and subways, but they will not reach out to the new commuter communities where so many people now live. The trend is strongest in newly rich societies, where cars are "caught up in the aspirations of the 21st century," said Peder Jensen, lead author of the European Environmental Agency report on traffic. Peter Daley, a Dublin retiree who has five children, said: "We used to be a poor country and all the kids used to leave to find work. Now they stay and they need a car when they're 17. So families that would have had one car 15 years ago, now have three or four." As a result, traffic limps around Dublin's glorious St. Stephen's Green. Just as skiers can check out the snow at St. Moritz on the Internet, drivers can monitor Dublin's traffic through the City Council home page. In the past two years, the city has completed two light-rail lines. During the holidays, the police provide extra officers to direct traffic at all major junctions. But nothing helps much. When the O'Connells returned from London four years ago, and could not afford the prices of Dublin's city center, they bought a wood and brick semi-detached house in one of hundreds of new developments. Today, it seems that every home has two or three cars out front. "No one thought, 'How will all these people get home from work?' " said Mr. O'Connell, an architectural technician, who said the commute took just 20 minutes at first. Ms. O'Connell's job at the National College of Art and Design in downtown Dublin comes with a parking space. So their gray Toyota Yaris is their lifeline. One day a week, Mr. O'Connell does take the bus. But if he does not leave home by 7:30 a.m., the buses are all full and simply speed by his stop. On a recent evening, their 18-year-old daughter, Imogen, missed her art class in town because the bus ride took two hours; when she tried to get home, all the buses were full, leaving her stranded. So they drive. "I complain and I moan, but we continue," Ms. O'Connell said. "I suppose if petrol got really expensive or I lost my free parking, we'd face up to the fact that we shouldn't be driving so much, and try to figure something else out." John MacClain, a cabdriver in Dublin for 20 years, said that on a recent trip to Prague, he liked the architecture just fine. But what really impressed him, he said, was "the tram system." "Now that was beautiful," he said. "I could get everywhere with ease." -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://list.jca.apc.org/public/sustran-discuss/attachments/20070107/e36e09da/attachment.html -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: image/jpeg Size: 15735 bytes Desc: not available Url : http://list.jca.apc.org/public/sustran-discuss/attachments/20070107/e36e09da/attachment.jpe -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: image/jpeg Size: 8457 bytes Desc: not available Url : http://list.jca.apc.org/public/sustran-discuss/attachments/20070107/e36e09da/attachment-0001.jpe -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: image/jpeg Size: 15014 bytes Desc: not available Url : http://list.jca.apc.org/public/sustran-discuss/attachments/20070107/e36e09da/attachment-0002.jpe From zvi.leve at gmail.com Mon Jan 8 13:49:26 2007 From: zvi.leve at gmail.com (Zvi Leve) Date: Sun, 7 Jan 2007 23:49:26 -0500 Subject: [sustran] Re: Hi Message-ID: Anirudh, You might want to take a look at the following paper which contains PCU values in the Indian context: Maini & Khan (1999). Discharge Characteristics of Heterogeneous Traffic at Signalized Intersections- See table 7 for PCU values of different vehicle types from a number of studies. And the dissertation: Patil Gopal (2002) "CAPACITY ANALYSIS OF SIGNALISED INTERSECTION IN DEVELOPING COUNTRIES" - See tables 5.3-5.5 in particular. I am not sure if these values were used 'dynamically' (ie the values vary depending on the volume) or not. Dynamic PCU values may cause convergence problems within the context of a traffic assignment procedure, particularly when analyzing intersection capacity. Best regards, ZVi Date: Sun, 7 Jan 2007 13:16:57 +0530 > From: "anirudh singh bais" > Subject: [sustran] hi > To: sustran-discuss@list.jca.apc.org > > Hi, > A very Happy New Year to all. > Well can somebody help me out to get some information or data regarding > Dynamic P.C.U. Value . > Thanking you > > Yours Sincerely > > Anirudh Singh Bais > Transport Planning > School Of Planning and Architecture > New Delhi > Email:anirudhsingh1@gmail.com > > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://list.jca.apc.org/public/sustran-discuss/attachments/20070107/04a9fa96/attachment.html From martincassini at blueyonder.co.uk Thu Jan 4 07:16:17 2007 From: martincassini at blueyonder.co.uk (Martin Cassini) Date: Wed, 3 Jan 2007 22:16:17 -0000 Subject: [sustran] Re: Shared space References: <8567780.1167858643293.JavaMail.root@elwamui-karabash.atl.sa.earthlink.net> <22937.194.149.113.177.1167859722.squirrel@mail.smartweb.cz> Message-ID: <009f01c72f84$ca6c1d20$a7382352@mc> ----- Original Message ----- From: "Todd Edelman" To: "Global 'South' Sustainable Transport" Sent: Wednesday, January 03, 2007 9:28 PM Subject: [sustran] Shared space Hi, There was some discussion a number of months ago based on a video which showed an intersection in India (I think) where all users ignored signals and just moved through it using eye-contact, body language and so on and mostly things went okay. This programme in the Netherlands, Germany and UK packages that system quite nicely. It proposes creating intersections and city street spaces with absolutely no signals, signs or even raised curbs... and it mentions important things like making a street safer with more life rather than even the most seemingly progressive traffic calming devices. It really seems like a rediscovery of the way roads used to be, before signals and separated spaces. The main thing I dont like about it is that it allows cars. The best thing about it is that its emphasis on responsibility and communication. http://www.shared-space.org http://www.shared-space.org/files/14445/SharedSpace_Eng.pdf Walking, cycling, no complicated technology... ------------------------------------------------------ Todd Edelman Director Green Idea Factory Korunn? 72 CZ-10100 Praha 10 Czech Republic ++420 605 915 970 Skype: toddedelman edelman@greenidea.eu http://www.worldcarfree.net/onthetrain Green Idea Factory, a member of World Carfree Network -------------------------------------------------------- IMPORTANT NOTE to everyone who gets sustran-discuss messages via YAHOOGROUPS. Please go to http://list.jca.apc.org/manage/listinfo/sustran-discuss to join the real sustran-discuss and get full membership rights. The yahoogroups version is only a mirror and 'members' there cannot post to the real sustran-discuss (even if the yahoogroups site makes it seem like you can). Apologies for the confusing arrangement. ================================================================ SUSTRAN-DISCUSS is a forum devoted to discussion of people-centred, equitable and sustainable transport with a focus on developing countries (the 'Global South'). From roadnotes at freenet.de Mon Jan 8 22:52:57 2007 From: roadnotes at freenet.de (Robert Bartlett) Date: Mon, 08 Jan 2007 14:52:57 +0100 Subject: [sustran] Dynamic pcu values Message-ID: <45A24CB9.4030801@freenet.de> I understand PCU's may be "pseudo-values" in that they are non-constant and non-definable ... or rather, you'd have to define them so precisely as to have a meaningless result... reb From msholler at itdp.org Mon Jan 8 22:53:08 2007 From: msholler at itdp.org (Matthew Sholler) Date: Mon, 8 Jan 2007 08:53:08 -0500 Subject: [sustran] Re: RSVP Today for 2007 Sustainable Transport Award Ceremony in DC, Jan 22 In-Reply-To: <20070108030110.E45C42C4DA@mx-list.jca.ne.jp> Message-ID: <200701081353.l08Dr6H5028608@itdp.org> RSVP Today 2007 Sustainable Transport Award Ceremony and Reception in honor of Guayaquil, Ecuador Monday, January 22, 2007 6:00 - 7:30 p.m. The Palladian Room Omni Shoreham Hotel 2500 Calvert St, NW Washington, DC 20008 Jaime Nebot, the Mayor of Guayaquil, Ecuador will be honored with the 2007 Sustainable Transport Award for his leadership in dramatically enhancing Guayaquil's livability through improvements to its mass transportation system and public spaces. In Guayaquil, a city in which 84% of its 2.3 million residents had made trips using private cars or a 20 year-old fleet of buses, Mayor Nebot has opened the Metrovia bus rapid transit system to provide cleaner, higher quality service that reduces travel time in key corridors and that is expected to grow to serve almost half a million passengers daily by 2008. Under his leadership, previously deteriorated public spaces like Guayaquil's waterfront and the Santa Ana district were successfully pedestrianized and revitalized. In addition, Guayaquil celebrated its first Car-Free Sunday in September 2006, closing streets to traffic that allowed thousands of residents to enjoy the city by walking and riding bicycles. Each year, the Sustainable Transport Award is given to a city that provides an international example for enhancing the livability of its community by reducing transport emissions and accidents, increasing access for bicyclists and pedestrians, or improving the mobility of the poor. The 2006 Sustainable Transport Award was given to Mayor Myung-Bak Lee of Seoul, Korea. Cities that will receive Honorable Mention at the 2007 Award ceremony for their sustainable transport initiatives include: Mexico City ? for introducing ultra-low sulfur diesel, for continued improvements in vehicle inspection and maintenance, and for the Metrobus BRT corridor Pereira, Colombia ? for opening a BRT system through its city center, the first city in Colombia to emulate the success of TransMilenio in Bogot? Quito, Ecuador ? for efforts to re-establish exclusive bus priority on its Trolebus BRT system, after initially re-opening lanes to cars and taxis Jakarta, Indonesia ? for extending its TransJakarta BRT system from one to three corridors in 2006, modernizing interchanges and improving corridor sidewalks Beijing, China ? for expanding its BRT system and overcoming some operational challenges, significantly increasing ridership Hangzhou, China ? for opening a near-BRT bus priority system complete with improved facilities for cyclists and pedestrians The award selection and ceremony are organized by ITDP, Environmental Defense, the US Transportation Research Board Committee on Transportation in Developing Countries, the regional Clean Air Initiatives for Asia, Latin America, and Africa; GTZ and the United Nations Centre for Regional Development. Seating for this event is limited. Please RSVP on-line by clicking here: https://app.etapestry.com/hosted/ITDP-InstituteForTransport/OnlineRegistrati on.html ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- ---- Directions from Other TRB Meeting Hotels and Locations: >From Marriott Wardman Park Hotel: walking - exit from lobby level onto Calvert Street, cross the street and turn left, Omni Shoreham will be on the right (5 minutes) >From Hilton Washington Hotel: walking - right on Connecticut Avenue, cross Taft Bridge, left on Calvert Street, Omni Shoreham on left side (approx. 20 minutes); or taxi ($7-8) Nearest Metro stop: Woodley Park/National Zoo, Red Line Access a Google map of the Omni Shoreham Hotel here: http://maps.google.com/maps?q=2500+Calvert+Street+Nw,+Washington,+DC For directions to the Omni Shoreham from points outside the DC area, call 202-756-5141. For additional questions about the award ceremony, call 212-629-8001 or e-mail smayers@itdp.org. ------------------------------------------------------------------------ To translate this page: http://babelfish.altavista.com/ or http://www.worldlingo.com/en/websites/url_translator.html Matthew Sholler Director of Development and Communications Institute for Transportation and Development Policy 127 West 26th Street, Suite 1002 New York, NY 10001 USA Tel. (212) 629-8001 Fax (212) 629-8033 Promoting environmentally sustainable and equitable transportation worldwide Visit http://www.itdp.org -----Original Message----- From: sustran-discuss-bounces+msholler=itdp.org@list.jca.apc.org [mailto:sustran-discuss-bounces+msholler=itdp.org@list.jca.apc.org] On Behalf Of sustran-discuss-request@list.jca.apc.org Sent: Sunday, January 07, 2007 10:01 PM To: sustran-discuss@list.jca.apc.org Subject: Sustran-discuss Digest, Vol 41, Issue 8 Send Sustran-discuss mailing list submissions to sustran-discuss@list.jca.apc.org To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit http://list.jca.apc.org/manage/listinfo/sustran-discuss or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to sustran-discuss-request@list.jca.apc.org You can reach the person managing the list at sustran-discuss-owner@list.jca.apc.org When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific than "Re: Contents of Sustran-discuss digest..." ######################################################################## Sustran-discuss Mailing List Digest IMPORTANT NOTE: When replying please do not include the whole digest in your reply - just include the relevant part of the specific message that you are responding to. Many thanks. About this mailing list see: http://list.jca.apc.org/manage/listinfo/sustran-discuss ######################################################################## Today's Topics: 1. hi (anirudh singh bais) 2. Car Boom Puts Europe on Road to a Smoggy Future (eric.britton@free.fr) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Message: 1 Date: Sun, 7 Jan 2007 13:16:57 +0530 From: "anirudh singh bais" Subject: [sustran] hi To: sustran-discuss@list.jca.apc.org Message-ID: <549e2f6c0701062346y6d8614fev59af1b9ea868233e@mail.gmail.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Hi, A very Happy New Year to all. Well can somebody help me out to get some information or data regarding Dynamic P.C.U. Value . Thanking you Yours Sincerely Anirudh Singh Bais Transport Planning School Of Planning and Architecture New Delhi Email:anirudhsingh1@gmail.com -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://list.jca.apc.org/public/sustran-discuss/attachments/20070107/be898442 /attachment-0001.html ------------------------------ Message: 2 Date: Sun, 7 Jan 2007 16:18:02 +0100 From: Subject: [sustran] Car Boom Puts Europe on Road to a Smoggy Future To: , Cc: 'Lee Schipper' , 'Roland RIES' Message-ID: <03f601c7326f$0d4f2dc0$6401a8c0@Home> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" [I think that this states the case and the challenge just about as well as any. But hey, not one mention of the New Mobility Agenda. Hmm. Well, back to work.] Car Boom Puts Europe on Road to a Smoggy Future By ELISABETH ROSENTHAL Published: January 7, 2007 http://www.nytimes.com/2007/01/07/world/europe/07cars.html?_r=1&oref=slogin& page wanted=all DUBLIN - Rebecca and Emmet O'Connell swear that they are not car people and that they worry about global warming. Indeed, they looked miserable one recent evening as they drove home to suburban Lucan from central Dublin, a crawling 8.5-mile journey that took an hour. Skip to next paragraph Enlarge This Image Eamonn Farrell/Photocall Ireland The evening traffic jam in Dublin. In Ireland, car ownership has more than doubled since 1990, and car engines have grown steadily. Multimedia The Cost of GrowthGraphic The Cost of Growth John McConnico for The International Herald Tribune A father and son with a multipurpose Christiania bike in Copenhagen. Bicycles of all types have helped Denmark to reduce the use of cars. But in this booming city, where the number of cars has doubled in the last 15 years, there is little choice, they said. "Believe me - if there was an alternative we would use it," said Ms. O'Connell, 40, a textile designer. "We care about the environment. It's just hard to follow through here." No trains run to the new suburbs where hundreds of thousands of Dubliners now live, and the few buses going there overflow with people. So nearly everyone drives - to work, to shop, to take their children to school - in what seems like a constant smoggy, traffic jam. Since 1990, emissions from transportation in Ireland have risen about 140 percent, the most in Europe. But Ireland is not alone. Vehicular emissions are rising in nearly every European country, and across the globe. Because of increasing car and truck use, greenhouse-gas emissions are increasing even where pollution from industry is waning. The 23 percent growth in vehicular emissions in Europe since 1990 has "offset" the effect of cleaner factories, according to a recent report by the European Environment Agency. The growth has occurred despite the invention of far more environmentally friendly fuels and cars. "What we gain by hybrid cars and ethanol buses, we more than lose because of sheer numbers of vehicles," said Ronan Uhel, a senior scientist with the European Environment Agency, which is based in Copenhagen. Vehicles, mostly cars, create more than one-fifth of the greenhouse-gas emissions in Europe, where the problem has been extensively studied. The few places that have aggressively sought to fight the trend have taken sometimes draconian measures. Denmark, for example, treats cars the way it treats yachts - as luxury items - imposing purchase taxes that are sometimes 200 percent of the cost of the vehicle. A simple Czech-made Skoda car that costs $18,400 in Italy or Sweden costs more than $34,000 in Denmark. The number of bicycles on Danish streets has increased in recent years, and few people under the age of 30 own cars. Many families have turned to elaborate three-wheeled contraptions. (Beijing, meanwhile, has restricted the use of traditional three-wheeled bikes.) On a recent morning in Copenhagen - which is flat, and has bike lanes - Cristian Eskelund, 35, a government lobbyist, hopped on a clunky bicycle with a big wooden cart attached to the front. The day before, he had used the vehicle, a local contraption called a Christiania bike, to carry a Christmas tree he had bought. This day, he was taking his two children to school, then heading to the hospital, where his wife was in labor. "How many children do I have?" Mr. Eskelund said. "Two, perhaps three." There are high-end options, too. At $2,800, a three-wheeled Nihola bike costs as much as a used car, but many people insist it is far more practical. Sleek, lightweight, with a streamlined enclosed bubble in front, it is good for transporting groceries and children. High taxes on cars or gasoline of the type levied in Copenhagen are effective in curbing traffic, experts say, but they scare voters, making even environmentalist politicians unlikely to propose them. When Britain's chancellor of the exchequer, Gordon Brown, revealed his "green" budget proposal, it included an increase in gas taxes of less than two and a half cents per quart. Other cities have tried variations that require fewer absolute sacrifices from motorists. Rome allows only cars with low emissions ratings into its historic center. In London and Stockholm, drivers must pay a congestion charge to enter the city center. Such programs do reduce traffic and pollution at a city's core, but evidence suggests that car use simply moves to the suburbs. But Dublin is more typical of cities around the world, from Asia to Latin America, where road transport volumes are increasing in tandem with economic growth. Since 1997, Beijing has built a new ring road every two years, each new concentric superhighway giving rise to a host of malls and housing compounds. In Ireland, car ownership has more than doubled since 1990 and car engines have grown steadily larger. Meanwhile, new environmental laws have meant that emissions from electrical plants, a major polluter, have been decreasing since 2001. Urban sprawl and cars are the chicken and egg of the environmental debate. Cars make it easier for people to live and shop outside the center city. As traffic increases, governments build more roads, encouraging people to buy more cars and move yet farther away. In Europe alone, 6,200 miles of motorways were built from 1990 to 2003 and, with the European Union's enlargement, 7,500 more are planned. Government enthusiasm for spending on public transportation, which is costly and takes years to build, generally lags far behind. For instance, Dublin and Beijing are building trams and subways, but they will not reach out to the new commuter communities where so many people now live. The trend is strongest in newly rich societies, where cars are "caught up in the aspirations of the 21st century," said Peder Jensen, lead author of the European Environmental Agency report on traffic. Peter Daley, a Dublin retiree who has five children, said: "We used to be a poor country and all the kids used to leave to find work. Now they stay and they need a car when they're 17. So families that would have had one car 15 years ago, now have three or four." As a result, traffic limps around Dublin's glorious St. Stephen's Green. Just as skiers can check out the snow at St. Moritz on the Internet, drivers can monitor Dublin's traffic through the City Council home page. In the past two years, the city has completed two light-rail lines. During the holidays, the police provide extra officers to direct traffic at all major junctions. But nothing helps much. When the O'Connells returned from London four years ago, and could not afford the prices of Dublin's city center, they bought a wood and brick semi-detached house in one of hundreds of new developments. Today, it seems that every home has two or three cars out front. "No one thought, 'How will all these people get home from work?' " said Mr. O'Connell, an architectural technician, who said the commute took just 20 minutes at first. Ms. O'Connell's job at the National College of Art and Design in downtown Dublin comes with a parking space. So their gray Toyota Yaris is their lifeline. One day a week, Mr. O'Connell does take the bus. But if he does not leave home by 7:30 a.m., the buses are all full and simply speed by his stop. On a recent evening, their 18-year-old daughter, Imogen, missed her art class in town because the bus ride took two hours; when she tried to get home, all the buses were full, leaving her stranded. So they drive. "I complain and I moan, but we continue," Ms. O'Connell said. "I suppose if petrol got really expensive or I lost my free parking, we'd face up to the fact that we shouldn't be driving so much, and try to figure something else out." John MacClain, a cabdriver in Dublin for 20 years, said that on a recent trip to Prague, he liked the architecture just fine. But what really impressed him, he said, was "the tram system." "Now that was beautiful," he said. "I could get everywhere with ease." -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://list.jca.apc.org/public/sustran-discuss/attachments/20070107/e36e09da /attachment-0001.html -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: image/jpeg Size: 15735 bytes Desc: not available Url : http://list.jca.apc.org/public/sustran-discuss/attachments/20070107/e36e09da /attachment-0003.jpe -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: image/jpeg Size: 8457 bytes Desc: not available Url : http://list.jca.apc.org/public/sustran-discuss/attachments/20070107/e36e09da /attachment-0004.jpe -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: image/jpeg Size: 15014 bytes Desc: not available Url : http://list.jca.apc.org/public/sustran-discuss/attachments/20070107/e36e09da /attachment-0005.jpe ------------------------------ ================================================================ SUSTRAN-DISCUSS is a forum devoted to discussion of people-centred, equitable and sustainable transport with a focus on developing countries (the 'Global South'). End of Sustran-discuss Digest, Vol 41, Issue 8 ********************************************** From Eduardo.Kohlberg-Ruiz at hubner-germany.com Mon Jan 8 23:33:28 2007 From: Eduardo.Kohlberg-Ruiz at hubner-germany.com (Eduardo Kohlberg-Ruiz) Date: Mon, 08 Jan 2007 15:33:28 +0100 Subject: [sustran] Antw: Re: RSVP Today for 2007 Sustainable Transport Award Ceremony in DC, Jan 22 In-Reply-To: <200701081353.l08Dr6H5028608@itdp.org> References: <20070108030110.E45C42C4DA@mx-list.jca.ne.jp> <200701081353.l08Dr6H5028608@itdp.org> Message-ID: <45A26447.A697.00AE.0@hubner-germany.com> Thanks for the information Mr Matthew Sholler , even though I wont be able to make it, I am sure there will other opportunities where we can meet. Have you heard of the UITP conference to be held in Bogot?, I will be there so I would be looking forward to seeing you there or in other time. You can find more information on the following link below: http://www.uitp.com/Events/2007/bogota/es/program.cfm Greetings from Germany Eduardo Kohlberg Atentamente / Saludos Cordiales Sincerely/ Greetings MOL Eduardo Kohlberg Ruiz Investigaci?n y Desarrollo / Research and Development H?BNER GmbH Heinrich-Hertz-Str. 2 34123 Kassel Deutschland Telefon +49 561 998-1263 Telefax +49 561 998-1291 Eduardo.Kohlberg-Ruiz@hubner-germany.com www.hubner-germany.com >>> "Matthew Sholler" 01/08/07 2:53 >>> RSVP Today 2007 Sustainable Transport Award Ceremony and Reception in honor of Guayaquil, Ecuador Monday, January 22, 2007 6:00 - 7:30 p.m. The Palladian Room Omni Shoreham Hotel 2500 Calvert St, NW Washington, DC 20008 Jaime Nebot, the Mayor of Guayaquil, Ecuador will be honored with the 2007 Sustainable Transport Award for his leadership in dramatically enhancing Guayaquil's livability through improvements to its mass transportation system and public spaces. In Guayaquil, a city in which 84% of its 2.3 million residents had made trips using private cars or a 20 year-old fleet of buses, Mayor Nebot has opened the Metrovia bus rapid transit system to provide cleaner, higher quality service that reduces travel time in key corridors and that is expected to grow to serve almost half a million passengers daily by 2008. Under his leadership, previously deteriorated public spaces like Guayaquil's waterfront and the Santa Ana district were successfully pedestrianized and revitalized. In addition, Guayaquil celebrated its first Car-Free Sunday in September 2006, closing streets to traffic that allowed thousands of residents to enjoy the city by walking and riding bicycles. Each year, the Sustainable Transport Award is given to a city that provides an international example for enhancing the livability of its community by reducing transport emissions and accidents, increasing access for bicyclists and pedestrians, or improving the mobility of the poor. The 2006 Sustainable Transport Award was given to Mayor Myung-Bak Lee of Seoul, Korea. Cities that will receive Honorable Mention at the 2007 Award ceremony for their sustainable transport initiatives include: Mexico City * for introducing ultra-low sulfur diesel, for continued improvements in vehicle inspection and maintenance, and for the Metrobus BRT corridor Pereira, Colombia * for opening a BRT system through its city center, the first city in Colombia to emulate the success of TransMilenio in Bogot? Quito, Ecuador * for efforts to re-establish exclusive bus priority on its Trolebus BRT system, after initially re-opening lanes to cars and taxis Jakarta, Indonesia * for extending its TransJakarta BRT system from one to three corridors in 2006, modernizing interchanges and improving corridor sidewalks Beijing, China * for expanding its BRT system and overcoming some operational challenges, significantly increasing ridership Hangzhou, China * for opening a near-BRT bus priority system complete with improved facilities for cyclists and pedestrians The award selection and ceremony are organized by ITDP, Environmental Defense, the US Transportation Research Board Committee on Transportation in Developing Countries, the regional Clean Air Initiatives for Asia, Latin America, and Africa; GTZ and the United Nations Centre for Regional Development. Seating for this event is limited. Please RSVP on-line by clicking here: https://app.etapestry.com/hosted/ITDP-InstituteForTransport/OnlineRegistrati on.html ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- ---- Directions from Other TRB Meeting Hotels and Locations: >From Marriott Wardman Park Hotel: walking - exit from lobby level onto Calvert Street, cross the street and turn left, Omni Shoreham will be on the right (5 minutes) >From Hilton Washington Hotel: walking - right on Connecticut Avenue, cross Taft Bridge, left on Calvert Street, Omni Shoreham on left side (approx. 20 minutes); or taxi ($7-8) Nearest Metro stop: Woodley Park/National Zoo, Red Line Access a Google map of the Omni Shoreham Hotel here: http://maps.google.com/maps?q=2500+Calvert+Street+Nw,+Washington,+DC For directions to the Omni Shoreham from points outside the DC area, call 202-756-5141. For additional questions about the award ceremony, call 212-629-8001 or e-mail smayers@itdp.org. ------------------------------------------------------------------------ To translate this page: http://babelfish.altavista.com/ or http://www.worldlingo.com/en/websites/url_translator.html Matthew Sholler Director of Development and Communications Institute for Transportation and Development Policy 127 West 26th Street, Suite 1002 New York, NY 10001 USA Tel. (212) 629-8001 Fax (212) 629-8033 Promoting environmentally sustainable and equitable transportation worldwide Visit http://www.itdp.org -----Original Message----- From: sustran-discuss-bounces+msholler=itdp.org@list.jca.apc.org [mailto:sustran-discuss-bounces+msholler=itdp.org@list.jca.apc.org] On Behalf Of sustran-discuss-request@list.jca.apc.org Sent: Sunday, January 07, 2007 10:01 PM To: sustran-discuss@list.jca.apc.org Subject: Sustran-discuss Digest, Vol 41, Issue 8 Send Sustran-discuss mailing list submissions to sustran-discuss@list.jca.apc.org To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit http://list.jca.apc.org/manage/listinfo/sustran-discuss or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to sustran-discuss-request@list.jca.apc.org You can reach the person managing the list at sustran-discuss-owner@list.jca.apc.org When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific than "Re: Contents of Sustran-discuss digest..." ######################################################################## Sustran-discuss Mailing List Digest IMPORTANT NOTE: When replying please do not include the whole digest in your reply - just include the relevant part of the specific message that you are responding to. Many thanks. About this mailing list see: http://list.jca.apc.org/manage/listinfo/sustran-discuss ######################################################################## Today's Topics: 1. hi (anirudh singh bais) 2. Car Boom Puts Europe on Road to a Smoggy Future (eric.britton@free.fr) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Message: 1 Date: Sun, 7 Jan 2007 13:16:57 +0530 From: "anirudh singh bais" Subject: [sustran] hi To: sustran-discuss@list.jca.apc.org Message-ID: <549e2f6c0701062346y6d8614fev59af1b9ea868233e@mail.gmail.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Hi, A very Happy New Year to all. Well can somebody help me out to get some information or data regarding Dynamic P.C.U. Value . Thanking you Yours Sincerely Anirudh Singh Bais Transport Planning School Of Planning and Architecture New Delhi Email:anirudhsingh1@gmail.com -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://list.jca.apc.org/public/sustran-discuss/attachments/20070107/be898442 /attachment-0001.html ------------------------------ Message: 2 Date: Sun, 7 Jan 2007 16:18:02 +0100 From: Subject: [sustran] Car Boom Puts Europe on Road to a Smoggy Future To: , Cc: 'Lee Schipper' , 'Roland RIES' Message-ID: <03f601c7326f$0d4f2dc0$6401a8c0@Home> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" [I think that this states the case and the challenge just about as well as any. But hey, not one mention of the New Mobility Agenda. Hmm. Well, back to work.] Car Boom Puts Europe on Road to a Smoggy Future By ELISABETH ROSENTHAL Published: January 7, 2007 http://www.nytimes.com/2007/01/07/world/europe/07cars.html?_r=1&oref=slogin& page wanted=all DUBLIN - Rebecca and Emmet O'Connell swear that they are not car people and that they worry about global warming. Indeed, they looked miserable one recent evening as they drove home to suburban Lucan from central Dublin, a crawling 8.5-mile journey that took an hour. Skip to next paragraph Enlarge This Image Eamonn Farrell/Photocall Ireland The evening traffic jam in Dublin. In Ireland, car ownership has more than doubled since 1990, and car engines have grown steadily. Multimedia The Cost of GrowthGraphic The Cost of Growth John McConnico for The International Herald Tribune A father and son with a multipurpose Christiania bike in Copenhagen. Bicycles of all types have helped Denmark to reduce the use of cars. But in this booming city, where the number of cars has doubled in the last 15 years, there is little choice, they said. "Believe me - if there was an alternative we would use it," said Ms. O'Connell, 40, a textile designer. "We care about the environment. It's just hard to follow through here." No trains run to the new suburbs where hundreds of thousands of Dubliners now live, and the few buses going there overflow with people. So nearly everyone drives - to work, to shop, to take their children to school - in what seems like a constant smoggy, traffic jam. Since 1990, emissions from transportation in Ireland have risen about 140 percent, the most in Europe. But Ireland is not alone. Vehicular emissions are rising in nearly every European country, and across the globe. Because of increasing car and truck use, greenhouse-gas emissions are increasing even where pollution from industry is waning. The 23 percent growth in vehicular emissions in Europe since 1990 has "offset" the effect of cleaner factories, according to a recent report by the European Environment Agency. The growth has occurred despite the invention of far more environmentally friendly fuels and cars. "What we gain by hybrid cars and ethanol buses, we more than lose because of sheer numbers of vehicles," said Ronan Uhel, a senior scientist with the European Environment Agency, which is based in Copenhagen. Vehicles, mostly cars, create more than one-fifth of the greenhouse-gas emissions in Europe, where the problem has been extensively studied. The few places that have aggressively sought to fight the trend have taken sometimes draconian measures. Denmark, for example, treats cars the way it treats yachts - as luxury items - imposing purchase taxes that are sometimes 200 percent of the cost of the vehicle. A simple Czech-made Skoda car that costs $18,400 in Italy or Sweden costs more than $34,000 in Denmark. The number of bicycles on Danish streets has increased in recent years, and few people under the age of 30 own cars. Many families have turned to elaborate three-wheeled contraptions. (Beijing, meanwhile, has restricted the use of traditional three-wheeled bikes.) On a recent morning in Copenhagen - which is flat, and has bike lanes - Cristian Eskelund, 35, a government lobbyist, hopped on a clunky bicycle with a big wooden cart attached to the front. The day before, he had used the vehicle, a local contraption called a Christiania bike, to carry a Christmas tree he had bought. This day, he was taking his two children to school, then heading to the hospital, where his wife was in labor. "How many children do I have?" Mr. Eskelund said. "Two, perhaps three." There are high-end options, too. At $2,800, a three-wheeled Nihola bike costs as much as a used car, but many people insist it is far more practical. Sleek, lightweight, with a streamlined enclosed bubble in front, it is good for transporting groceries and children. High taxes on cars or gasoline of the type levied in Copenhagen are effective in curbing traffic, experts say, but they scare voters, making even environmentalist politicians unlikely to propose them. When Britain's chancellor of the exchequer, Gordon Brown, revealed his "green" budget proposal, it included an increase in gas taxes of less than two and a half cents per quart. Other cities have tried variations that require fewer absolute sacrifices from motorists. Rome allows only cars with low emissions ratings into its historic center. In London and Stockholm, drivers must pay a congestion charge to enter the city center. Such programs do reduce traffic and pollution at a city's core, but evidence suggests that car use simply moves to the suburbs. But Dublin is more typical of cities around the world, from Asia to Latin America, where road transport volumes are increasing in tandem with economic growth. Since 1997, Beijing has built a new ring road every two years, each new concentric superhighway giving rise to a host of malls and housing compounds. In Ireland, car ownership has more than doubled since 1990 and car engines have grown steadily larger. Meanwhile, new environmental laws have meant that emissions from electrical plants, a major polluter, have been decreasing since 2001. Urban sprawl and cars are the chicken and egg of the environmental debate. Cars make it easier for people to live and shop outside the center city. As traffic increases, governments build more roads, encouraging people to buy more cars and move yet farther away. In Europe alone, 6,200 miles of motorways were built from 1990 to 2003 and, with the European Union's enlargement, 7,500 more are planned. Government enthusiasm for spending on public transportation, which is costly and takes years to build, generally lags far behind. For instance, Dublin and Beijing are building trams and subways, but they will not reach out to the new commuter communities where so many people now live. The trend is strongest in newly rich societies, where cars are "caught up in the aspirations of the 21st century," said Peder Jensen, lead author of the European Environmental Agency report on traffic. Peter Daley, a Dublin retiree who has five children, said: "We used to be a poor country and all the kids used to leave to find work. Now they stay and they need a car when they're 17. So families that would have had one car 15 years ago, now have three or four." As a result, traffic limps around Dublin's glorious St. Stephen's Green. Just as skiers can check out the snow at St. Moritz on the Internet, drivers can monitor Dublin's traffic through the City Council home page. In the past two years, the city has completed two light-rail lines. During the holidays, the police provide extra officers to direct traffic at all major junctions. But nothing helps much. When the O'Connells returned from London four years ago, and could not afford the prices of Dublin's city center, they bought a wood and brick semi-detached house in one of hundreds of new developments. Today, it seems that every home has two or three cars out front. "No one thought, 'How will all these people get home from work?' " said Mr. O'Connell, an architectural technician, who said the commute took just 20 minutes at first. Ms. O'Connell's job at the National College of Art and Design in downtown Dublin comes with a parking space. So their gray Toyota Yaris is their lifeline. One day a week, Mr. O'Connell does take the bus. But if he does not leave home by 7:30 a.m., the buses are all full and simply speed by his stop. On a recent evening, their 18-year-old daughter, Imogen, missed her art class in town because the bus ride took two hours; when she tried to get home, all the buses were full, leaving her stranded. So they drive. "I complain and I moan, but we continue," Ms. O'Connell said. "I suppose if petrol got really expensive or I lost my free parking, we'd face up to the fact that we shouldn't be driving so much, and try to figure something else out." John MacClain, a cabdriver in Dublin for 20 years, said that on a recent trip to Prague, he liked the architecture just fine. But what really impressed him, he said, was "the tram system." "Now that was beautiful," he said. "I could get everywhere with ease." -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://list.jca.apc.org/public/sustran-discuss/attachments/20070107/e36e09da /attachment-0001.html -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: image/jpeg Size: 15735 bytes Desc: not available Url : http://list.jca.apc.org/public/sustran-discuss/attachments/20070107/e36e09da /attachment-0003.jpe -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: image/jpeg Size: 8457 bytes Desc: not available Url : http://list.jca.apc.org/public/sustran-discuss/attachments/20070107/e36e09da /attachment-0004.jpe -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: image/jpeg Size: 15014 bytes Desc: not available Url : http://list.jca.apc.org/public/sustran-discuss/attachments/20070107/e36e09da /attachment-0005.jpe ------------------------------ ================================================================ SUSTRAN-DISCUSS is a forum devoted to discussion of people-centred, equitable and sustainable transport with a focus on developing countries (the 'Global South'). End of Sustran-discuss Digest, Vol 41, Issue 8 ********************************************** -------------------------------------------------------- IMPORTANT NOTE to everyone who gets sustran-discuss messages via YAHOOGROUPS. Please go to http://list.jca.apc.org/manage/listinfo/sustran-discuss to join the real sustran-discuss and get full membership rights. The yahoogroups version is only a mirror and 'members' there cannot post to the real sustran-discuss (even if the yahoogroups site makes it seem like you can). Apologies for the confusing arrangement. ================================================================ SUSTRAN-DISCUSS is a forum devoted to discussion of people-centred, equitable and sustainable transport with a focus on developing countries (the 'Global South'). From Eric.Britton at ecoplan.org Tue Jan 9 19:15:18 2007 From: Eric.Britton at ecoplan.org (Eric Britton (ChoiceMail)) Date: Tue, 9 Jan 2007 11:15:18 +0100 Subject: [sustran] Contested Streets - more thereof (Videos) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <020201c733d7$1321dcc0$6401a8c0@Home> Happily we continue to receive videos and leads which I am able from time to time either to integrate into one of our existing video libraries, or as in this case to develop a new thread as per the above title. To get to it, the easiest is to click over to the New Mobility Agenda at http://www.newmobility.org , from there on the left menu Video Libraries, and then to Contested Streets. You'll see - and in the meantime here is how we introduce it. Life in the public sphere, it turns out, is inevitably a matter of choices, with different people giving different values to different ways of being and interacting. This can create conflict, "guns or better" as it is sometimes put. What for example are roads, are these public spaces actually for? If to some of us this is not even up for discussion, as we move from Old to New Mobility it turns out that you can have quite a lively conversation right there. Here are some examples of this 'conversation'. (And oh yes, thanks www.transalt.org for that good title.) Let us hear what you think, suggest, or about clips that you think we should be adding here or to one of the other informal libraries. Eric Britton -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://list.jca.apc.org/public/sustran-discuss/attachments/20070109/1c684fd5/attachment.html From anirudhsingh1 at gmail.com Wed Jan 10 03:54:05 2007 From: anirudhsingh1 at gmail.com (anirudh singh bais) Date: Wed, 10 Jan 2007 00:24:05 +0530 Subject: [sustran] congestion pricing Message-ID: <549e2f6c0701091054q2d90d4b5sb14d7589db9be427@mail.gmail.com> > > Hi, > Well can somebody help me out to get some information or data and past > research regarding Congestion pricing. > Thanking you > > Yours Sincerely > > Anirudh Singh Bais > Transport Planning > School Of Planning and Architecture > New Delhi > Email:anirudhsingh1@gmail.com > > > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://list.jca.apc.org/public/sustran-discuss/attachments/20070110/93a5e328/attachment.html From litman at vtpi.org Wed Jan 10 05:27:42 2007 From: litman at vtpi.org (Todd Alexander Litman) Date: Tue, 09 Jan 2007 12:27:42 -0800 Subject: [sustran] Re: congestion pricing In-Reply-To: <549e2f6c0701091054q2d90d4b5sb14d7589db9be427@mail.gmail.co m> References: <549e2f6c0701091054q2d90d4b5sb14d7589db9be427@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <6.2.3.4.2.20070109122553.06524708@mail.islandnet.com> For an overview see the "Road Pricing" (http://www.vtpi.org/tdm/tdm35.htm ) chapter of our Encyclopedia, and my report, "London Congestion Pricing: Implications for Other Cities," Victoria Transport Policy Institute (www.vtpi.org/london.pdf ). Best wishes, -Todd Litman At 10:54 AM 1/9/2007, anirudh singh bais wrote: >Hi, >Well can somebody help me out to get some information or data and >past research regarding Congestion pricing. > > >Thanking you > >Yours Sincerely > >Anirudh Singh Bais >Transport Planning >School Of Planning and Architecture >New Delhi >Email:anirudhsingh1@gmail.com > > > > >-------------------------------------------------------- >IMPORTANT NOTE to everyone who gets sustran-discuss messages via YAHOOGROUPS. > >Please go to http://list.jca.apc.org/manage/listinfo/sustran-discuss >to join the real sustran-discuss and get full membership rights. The >yahoogroups version is only a mirror and 'members' there cannot post >to the real sustran-discuss (even if the yahoogroups site makes it >seem like you can). Apologies for the confusing arrangement. > >================================================================ >SUSTRAN-DISCUSS is a forum devoted to discussion of people-centred, >equitable and sustainable transport with a focus on developing >countries (the 'Global South'). Sincerely, Todd Alexander Litman Victoria Transport Policy Institute (www.vtpi.org) litman@vtpi.org Phone & Fax 250-360-1560 1250 Rudlin Street, Victoria, BC, V8V 3R7, CANADA "Efficiency - Equity - Clarity" -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://list.jca.apc.org/public/sustran-discuss/attachments/20070109/1f51728b/attachment.html From rivera at iss.nl Thu Jan 11 04:26:10 2007 From: rivera at iss.nl (Roselle Rivera) Date: Wed, 10 Jan 2007 20:26:10 +0100 Subject: [sustran] vietnamese video In-Reply-To: <20070106030126.B73612DBBB@mx-list.jca.ne.jp> References: <20070106030126.B73612DBBB@mx-list.jca.ne.jp> Message-ID: i dont know if this has been posted in the sustran egroup. some might like to see it, my vietnamese friend forwarded it to me. i would just like to share it if anyone cares. [http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-4080051650102267816&q=vietnam&pr=goog-sl]MADE IN VIETNAM -- MUST SEE! [ http://video.google.com/ThumbnailServer2?app=vss&contentid=84c331a97c9ee5af&offsetms=5000&itag=w320&lang=en&sigh=9ncxQKTZDw1DC1m8YP3eif-DwE0 ][Image] 2 min 12 sec - May 26, 2006 im pretty sure jonathan ( who posted in between my post for nguyen of thailand) wouldn't like this, he appeared to me....... put down by poetry and romantic-related matters, as if sustainable transport were just all being in the efficiency mode....... oh well but gosh, i just feel that must be truly truly boring............ winter wind, roselle ROSELLE LEAH K RIVERA PhD Fellow Human Resource and Local Development Staff Group Institute of Social Studies Kortenaerkade 12 2518 AX The Hague, Netherlands Office Tel: +31 70 4260428 Fax: +31 70 4260507 Mobile: +31 627315444 -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://list.jca.apc.org/public/sustran-discuss/attachments/20070110/1eca2352/attachment.html From Carlos.Pardo at sutp.org Fri Jan 12 23:21:33 2007 From: Carlos.Pardo at sutp.org (Carlos F. Pardo SUTP) Date: Fri, 12 Jan 2007 09:21:33 -0500 Subject: [sustran] Urban growth and cars: Chicken-and-egg issue Message-ID: <006601c73654$f6f45930$e4dd0b90$@Pardo@sutp.org> Nice article below. It?s funny how it seems that people can?t choose to live inside the city? Carlos. Original source: http://www.iht.com/articles/2007/01/11/business/cars.php?page=1 Urban growth and cars: Chicken-and-egg issue By Elisabeth Rosenthal Thursday, January 11, 2007 DUBLIN Rachel and Emmet O'Connell swear that they are not car people and that they worry about global warming. Indeed, they looked miserable one recent evening as they drove home from central Dublin to the suburb of Lucan, a crawling 8.5- mile journey that took an hour. But in this booming city, where the number of cars has doubled in the past 15 years, there is little choice, they said. "Believe me, if there was an alternative we would use it," said Rachel O'Connell, 40, a textile designer. "We care about the environment. It's just hard to follow through here." There are no trains to the new suburbs where hundreds of thousands of Dubliners now live, and the few buses going there overflow with people. So nearly everyone drives ? to work, to shop, taking the children to school ? in what seems like a constant smoggy, traffic jam. Since 1990, emissions from transportation in Ireland have risen 143 percent, the most in Europe. But Ireland is not alone. Transportation emissions are rising in nearly every European country, and across the globe. Because of increasing car and truck use, greenhouse emissions are increasing even where pollution from industry is waning because of stricter laws, as it is in much of Europe. The 23 percent growth in vehicular emissions in Europe from 1990 to 2003 has offset the effect of cleaner factories, according to a recent report by the European Environment Agency. The growth has occurred despite the invention of far more environmentally friendly fuels and cars. "What we gain by hybrid cars and ethanol buses, we more than lose be cause of sheer numbers of vehicles," said Ronan Uhel, a senior scientist with the agency. Transportation creates more than one-fifth of greenhouse gas emissions in Europe, where the problem has been extensively studied and where the bulk of them comes from cars. The few places that have aggressively sought to fight the trend have imposed taxes to offset the lure of driving. Denmark, for example, treats cars the way it treats yachts, as luxury items, with purchase taxes that are sometimes 200 percent of the cost of the vehicle. A simple Skoda that costs ?14,000, or $18,100, in Italy or Sweden, costs ?26,000 in Denmark. In Copenhagen, the price of parking spots, which are rare, recently doubled, to ?3.50 an hour. And so, on a recent morning in Copenhagen, Christian Eskelund, 35, a lobbyist, hopped on a clunky bike with a big wooden cart attached to the front to take his two children to school. The day before, he used the vehicle, a local contraption called a Christiania Bike, which is common on the streets of Copenhagen, to buy a Christmas tree. After he dropped off the children, he would ride quickly to the hospital, where his wife was in labor. "How many children do I have? Two, perhaps three," Eskelund said as he helped the children off their wooden seats out of the cart. But Dublin is more typical of cities around the world, from Asia to Latin America, where road transportation volumes are rising in tandem with economic growth. In Ireland, car ownership has more than doubled since 1990 and car engines have grown steadily larger. Since 1997, Beijing has built a new ring road every two years, each new concentric superway giving rise to a host of malls and housing compounds. Urban sprawl and cars are the chicken-and-egg question of the environmental debate. Cars make it easier for people to live and shop outside the center city, and this in turn creates a need for more cars. As traffic increases, governments build more roads, encouraging people to buy more cars and move yet farther away, a trend evident from Rome to Bucharest. In Europe alone, 10,000 kilometers, or 6,200 miles, of new highways were built from 1990 to 2003 and, with European Union enlargement, there are plans for 12,000 more. Government enthusiasm for spending on public transportation, which is costly and takes years to build, generally lags far behind. Despite intense traffic, neither Dublin nor Beijing has rail or subway systems that reach the airport, for instance. Though both are building trams and subways, they will not reach out to the new commuter areas where so many people now live. The trend is strongest in newly rich societies, where cars are "caught up in the aspirations of the 21st century," said Peder Jensen, lead author of the European Environmental Agency report on traffic. Peter Daley, a Dublin retiree who has five children, summed up the changes this way: "We used to be a poor country and all the kids used to leave to find work. Now they stay and they need a car when they're 17." As a result, traffic limps around St. Stephen's Green in Dublin. In the past two years, the city has completed two light rail lines. During the holidays, the police provide extra officers to direct traffic at all major junctions. But nothing helps much. When the O'Connells returned from London four years ago, and were unable to afford the prices of Dublin's city center, they bought a semi-detached house in one of hundreds of new developments. Today, it seems that every home has two or three cars out front. "No one thought, 'How will all these people get home from work?'" said Emmet O'Connell, an architectural technician, who said the commute took just 20 minutes at first. Rachel O'Connell's job at the Dublin College of Art and Design comes with a parking space. So their Toyota Yaris is their lifeline. One day a week, Emmet O'Connell takes the bus. But if he does not leave home by 7:30 a.m., the buses are all full and bypass his stop. On a recent evening, the O'Connells' 18-year-old daughter, Imogen, missed her art class in town after a two-hour bus ride; when she tried to return home, all the buses were full, leaving her stranded. Rachel O'Connell said, "I suppose if petrol got really expensive or I lost my free parking, we'd face up to the fact that we shouldn't be driving so much," Taxes on cars or gasoline of the type in Copenhagen are effective in curbing traffic, experts say, but they scare voters, making even green politicians unlikely to propose them. In Britain, when the chancellor of the Exchequer presented his "green" budget in December, it included a gasoline tax increase of 1.23 pence per liter, less than U.S. 3 cents. Yet in Copenhagen, people have learned to do without cars. "It's easier to go by bike or metro, and it's too expensive to do anything else," said Pernille Madsen, 32, pedaling her two children in Copenhagen, which is flat and has bike lanes. Her husband rides 25 kilometers to work one way. Other cities have tried variations that require less absolute sacrifices from motorists. Rome allows only those cars that have a low emissions rating into the historic center. In London and Stockholm, drivers must pay a congestion charge to enter the city center. Such programs reduce traffic and pollution at city's cores, but experts are not sure of their overall impact. There is evidence to suggest that such plans simply move car use to the suburbs. Jensen, the agency specialist, said new cities and suburbs must be designed with public transportation in place. Meanwhile, traffic chokes along. John MacClain, a cabdriver in Dublin, said that on a recent trip to Prague, he liked the architecture. But what really impressed him was the tram system. "Now that was beautiful," he said. "I could get everywhere with ease." -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: winmail.dat Type: application/ms-tnef Size: 11446 bytes Desc: not available Url : http://list.jca.apc.org/public/sustran-discuss/attachments/20070112/25f701c2/winmail.bin From edelman at greenidea.info Fri Jan 12 23:32:06 2007 From: edelman at greenidea.info (Todd Edelman) Date: Fri, 12 Jan 2007 15:32:06 +0100 (CET) Subject: [sustran] Re: Urban growth and cars: Chicken-and-egg issue In-Reply-To: <006601c73654$f6f45930$e4dd0b90$@Pardo@sutp.org> References: <006601c73654$f6f45930$e4dd0b90$@Pardo@sutp.org> Message-ID: <12454.194.149.113.177.1168612326.squirrel@mail.smartweb.cz> THE insides of cities in many cities in Europe are generally really expensive right now. This is a complicated problem directly related to all our sprawl and mobility discussions but I dont see enough discussion about it, never mind solutions. T > Nice article below. It?��s funny how it seems that people can?��t choose > to live > inside the city?�? > > > > Carlos. > > > > Original source: > http://www.iht.com/articles/2007/01/11/business/cars.php?page=1 > > > > Urban growth and cars: Chicken-and-egg issue > > By Elisabeth Rosenthal > > Thursday, January 11, 2007 > > > > DUBLIN > > Rachel and Emmet O'Connell swear that they are not car people and that > they > worry about global warming. Indeed, they looked miserable one recent > evening > as they drove home from central Dublin to the suburb of Lucan, a crawling > 8.5- mile journey that took an hour. > > But in this booming city, where the number of cars has doubled in the past > 15 years, there is little choice, they said. > > "Believe me, if there was an alternative we would use it," said Rachel > O'Connell, 40, a textile designer. "We care about the environment. It's > just > hard to follow through here." > > There are no trains to the new suburbs where hundreds of thousands of > Dubliners now live, and the few buses going there overflow with people. So > nearly everyone drives ?�� to work, to shop, taking the children to school > ?�� > in what seems like a constant smoggy, traffic jam. Since 1990, emissions > from transportation in Ireland have risen 143 percent, the most in Europe. > > But Ireland is not alone. > > Transportation emissions are rising in nearly every European country, and > across the globe. Because of increasing car and truck use, greenhouse > emissions are increasing even where pollution from industry is waning > because of stricter laws, as it is in much of Europe. > > The 23 percent growth in vehicular emissions in Europe from 1990 to 2003 > has > offset the effect of cleaner factories, according to a recent report by > the > European Environment Agency. The growth has occurred despite the invention > of far more environmentally friendly fuels and cars. "What we gain by > hybrid > cars and ethanol buses, we more than lose be cause of sheer numbers of > vehicles," said Ronan Uhel, a senior scientist with the agency. > > Transportation creates more than one-fifth of greenhouse gas emissions in > Europe, where the problem has been extensively studied and where the bulk > of > them comes from cars. > > The few places that have aggressively sought to fight the trend have > imposed > taxes to offset the lure of driving. Denmark, for example, treats cars the > way it treats yachts, as luxury items, with purchase taxes that are > sometimes 200 percent of the cost of the vehicle. > > A simple Skoda that costs ?�?14,000, or $18,100, in Italy or Sweden, costs > ?�?26,000 in Denmark. In Copenhagen, the price of parking spots, which are > rare, recently doubled, to ?�?3.50 an hour. > > And so, on a recent morning in Copenhagen, Christian Eskelund, 35, a > lobbyist, hopped on a clunky bike with a big wooden cart attached to the > front to take his two children to school. The day before, he used the > vehicle, a local contraption called a Christiania Bike, which is common on > the streets of Copenhagen, to buy a Christmas tree. After he dropped off > the > children, he would ride quickly to the hospital, where his wife was in > labor. > > "How many children do I have? Two, perhaps three," Eskelund said as he > helped the children off their wooden seats out of the cart. > > But Dublin is more typical of cities around the world, from Asia to Latin > America, where road transportation volumes are rising in tandem with > economic growth. In Ireland, car ownership has more than doubled since > 1990 > and car engines have grown steadily larger. > > Since 1997, Beijing has built a new ring road every two years, each new > concentric superway giving rise to a host of malls and housing compounds. > > Urban sprawl and cars are the chicken-and-egg question of the > environmental > debate. Cars make it easier for people to live and shop outside the center > city, and this in turn creates a need for more cars. As traffic increases, > governments build more roads, encouraging people to buy more cars and move > yet farther away, a trend evident from Rome to Bucharest. > > In Europe alone, 10,000 kilometers, or 6,200 miles, of new highways were > built from 1990 to 2003 and, with European Union enlargement, there are > plans for 12,000 more. Government enthusiasm for spending on public > transportation, which is costly and takes years to build, generally lags > far > behind. > > Despite intense traffic, neither Dublin nor Beijing has rail or subway > systems that reach the airport, for instance. Though both are building > trams > and subways, they will not reach out to the new commuter areas where so > many > people now live. > > The trend is strongest in newly rich societies, where cars are "caught up > in > the aspirations of the 21st century," said Peder Jensen, lead author of > the > European Environmental Agency report on traffic. > > Peter Daley, a Dublin retiree who has five children, summed up the changes > this way: "We used to be a poor country and all the kids used to leave to > find work. Now they stay and they need a car when they're 17." > > As a result, traffic limps around St. Stephen's Green in Dublin. In the > past > two years, the city has completed two light rail lines. During the > holidays, > the police provide extra officers to direct traffic at all major > junctions. > But nothing helps much. > > When the O'Connells returned from London four years ago, and were unable > to > afford the prices of Dublin's city center, they bought a semi-detached > house > in one of hundreds of new developments. Today, it seems that every home > has > two or three cars out front. > > "No one thought, 'How will all these people get home from work?'" said > Emmet > O'Connell, an architectural technician, who said the commute took just 20 > minutes at first. Rachel O'Connell's job at the Dublin College of Art and > Design comes with a parking space. So their Toyota Yaris is their > lifeline. > > One day a week, Emmet O'Connell takes the bus. But if he does not leave > home > by 7:30 a.m., the buses are all full and bypass his stop. On a recent > evening, the O'Connells' 18-year-old daughter, Imogen, missed her art > class > in town after a two-hour bus ride; when she tried to return home, all the > buses were full, leaving her stranded. > > Rachel O'Connell said, "I suppose if petrol got really expensive or I lost > my free parking, we'd face up to the fact that we shouldn't be driving so > much," > > Taxes on cars or gasoline of the type in Copenhagen are effective in > curbing > traffic, experts say, but they scare voters, making even green politicians > unlikely to propose them. In Britain, when the chancellor of the Exchequer > presented his "green" budget in December, it included a gasoline tax > increase of 1.23 pence per liter, less than U.S. 3 cents. > > Yet in Copenhagen, people have learned to do without cars. > > "It's easier to go by bike or metro, and it's too expensive to do anything > else," said Pernille Madsen, 32, pedaling her two children in Copenhagen, > which is flat and has bike lanes. Her husband rides 25 kilometers to work > one way. > > Other cities have tried variations that require less absolute sacrifices > from motorists. Rome allows only those cars that have a low emissions > rating > into the historic center. In London and Stockholm, drivers must pay a > congestion charge to enter the city center. Such programs reduce traffic > and > pollution at city's cores, but experts are not sure of their overall > impact. > There is evidence to suggest that such plans simply move car use to the > suburbs. > > Jensen, the agency specialist, said new cities and suburbs must be > designed > with public transportation in place. Meanwhile, traffic chokes along. > > John MacClain, a cabdriver in Dublin, said that on a recent trip to > Prague, > he liked the architecture. But what really impressed him was the tram > system. "Now that was beautiful," he said. "I could get everywhere with > ease." > > -------------------------------------------------------- > IMPORTANT NOTE to everyone who gets sustran-discuss messages via > YAHOOGROUPS. > > Please go to http://list.jca.apc.org/manage/listinfo/sustran-discuss to > join the real sustran-discuss and get full membership rights. The > yahoogroups version is only a mirror and 'members' there cannot post to > the real sustran-discuss (even if the yahoogroups site makes it seem like > you can). Apologies for the confusing arrangement. > > ================================================================ > SUSTRAN-DISCUSS is a forum devoted to discussion of people-centred, > equitable and sustainable transport with a focus on developing countries > (the 'Global South'). ------------------------------------------------------ Todd Edelman Director Green Idea Factory Korunn? 72 CZ-10100 Praha 10 Czech Republic ++420 605 915 970 Skype: toddedelman edelman@greenidea.eu http://www.worldcarfree.net/onthetrain Green Idea Factory, a member of World Carfree Network From SCHIPPER at wri.org Sat Jan 13 01:09:33 2007 From: SCHIPPER at wri.org (Lee Schipper) Date: Fri, 12 Jan 2007 11:09:33 -0500 Subject: [sustran] Re: Urban growth and cars: Chicken-and-egg issue Message-ID: Six years ago I raised this issue to the UITP guy selling the Millennium data base.. why was there nothing about housing and land costs/rents etc. The insides of most Asian and L American cities are also expensive in the central, most desirable areas. The UITP answer was that this was a fiduciary problem, almost a fiction. In fact it is what drives sprawl. Land farther out is cheaper. Homes are larger. And in the densest of cities, living space is less than in the less dense cities. The W Bank's "Sustainable Transport" from 1996 takes the Newman And Kenworthy data (which morphed into the Millennium data base) and looks at gasoline per capita vs housing space per capita, and voila.. those living in the cities with the highest NK "gasoline per capita" have the highest home area per capita and by implication from N and K the lowest population densities Yet look at all the environmentalist generated blather on sprawl and you never see housing costs; how much more does it cost to live 100 m from a metro vs 1 km away? We hear about which people spend the most or least on transport, but not how much the same people spend on housing, yet we know that housing cost may be a more sensitive function of location than distance traveled. I am writing this from a hotel in Tokyo close to the center and some of the most expensive land in the world. And the Tokyo city residents who live near in without a car have less space/capita to live in than those in the rest of japan or even in the outer suburbs of Tokyo So in discussing sprawl, lets talk about what could be the main driving force, desire for living space. And let's remember in the US case tax deductions let us deduct all our mortgage interest from the home loan, in contrast to (more compact) Canada. Kinda makes you wonder whether in all of the studies of km we should have been studying square meters of home instead? Lee >>> edelman@greenidea.info 1/12/2007 9:32:06 AM >>> THE insides of cities in many cities in Europe are generally really expensive right now. This is a complicated problem directly related to all our sprawl and mobility discussions but I dont see enough discussion about it, never mind solutions. T > Nice article below. It?��s funny how it seems that people can?��t choose > to live > inside the city?�* > > > > Carlos. > > > > Original source: > http://www.iht.com/articles/2007/01/11/business/cars.php?page=1 > > > > Urban growth and cars: Chicken-and-egg issue > > By Elisabeth Rosenthal > > Thursday, January 11, 2007 > > > > DUBLIN > > Rachel and Emmet O'Connell swear that they are not car people and that > they > worry about global warming. Indeed, they looked miserable one recent > evening > as they drove home from central Dublin to the suburb of Lucan, a crawling > 8.5- mile journey that took an hour. > > But in this booming city, where the number of cars has doubled in the past > 15 years, there is little choice, they said. > > "Believe me, if there was an alternative we would use it," said Rachel > O'Connell, 40, a textile designer. "We care about the environment. It's > just > hard to follow through here." > > There are no trains to the new suburbs where hundreds of thousands of > Dubliners now live, and the few buses going there overflow with people. So > nearly everyone drives ?�� to work, to shop, taking the children to school > ?�� > in what seems like a constant smoggy, traffic jam. Since 1990, emissions > from transportation in Ireland have risen 143 percent, the most in Europe. > > But Ireland is not alone. > > Transportation emissions are rising in nearly every European country, and > across the globe. Because of increasing car and truck use, greenhouse > emissions are increasing even where pollution from industry is waning > because of stricter laws, as it is in much of Europe. > > The 23 percent growth in vehicular emissions in Europe from 1990 to 2003 > has > offset the effect of cleaner factories, according to a recent report by > the > European Environment Agency. The growth has occurred despite the invention > of far more environmentally friendly fuels and cars. "What we gain by > hybrid > cars and ethanol buses, we more than lose be cause of sheer numbers of > vehicles," said Ronan Uhel, a senior scientist with the agency. > > Transportation creates more than one-fifth of greenhouse gas emissions in > Europe, where the problem has been extensively studied and where the bulk > of > them comes from cars. > > The few places that have aggressively sought to fight the trend have > imposed > taxes to offset the lure of driving. Denmark, for example, treats cars the > way it treats yachts, as luxury items, with purchase taxes that are > sometimes 200 percent of the cost of the vehicle. > > A simple Skoda that costs ?�*14,000, or $18,100, in Italy or Sweden, costs > ?�*26,000 in Denmark. In Copenhagen, the price of parking spots, which are > rare, recently doubled, to ?�*3.50 an hour. > > And so, on a recent morning in Copenhagen, Christian Eskelund, 35, a > lobbyist, hopped on a clunky bike with a big wooden cart attached to the > front to take his two children to school. The day before, he used the > vehicle, a local contraption called a Christiania Bike, which is common on > the streets of Copenhagen, to buy a Christmas tree. After he dropped off > the > children, he would ride quickly to the hospital, where his wife was in > labor. > > "How many children do I have? Two, perhaps three," Eskelund said as he > helped the children off their wooden seats out of the cart. > > But Dublin is more typical of cities around the world, from Asia to Latin > America, where road transportation volumes are rising in tandem with > economic growth. In Ireland, car ownership has more than doubled since > 1990 > and car engines have grown steadily larger. > > Since 1997, Beijing has built a new ring road every two years, each new > concentric superway giving rise to a host of malls and housing compounds. > > Urban sprawl and cars are the chicken-and-egg question of the > environmental > debate. Cars make it easier for people to live and shop outside the center > city, and this in turn creates a need for more cars. As traffic increases, > governments build more roads, encouraging people to buy more cars and move > yet farther away, a trend evident from Rome to Bucharest. > > In Europe alone, 10,000 kilometers, or 6,200 miles, of new highways were > built from 1990 to 2003 and, with European Union enlargement, there are > plans for 12,000 more. Government enthusiasm for spending on public > transportation, which is costly and takes years to build, generally lags > far > behind. > > Despite intense traffic, neither Dublin nor Beijing has rail or subway > systems that reach the airport, for instance. Though both are building > trams > and subways, they will not reach out to the new commuter areas where so > many > people now live. > > The trend is strongest in newly rich societies, where cars are "caught up > in > the aspirations of the 21st century," said Peder Jensen, lead author of > the > European Environmental Agency report on traffic. > > Peter Daley, a Dublin retiree who has five children, summed up the changes > this way: "We used to be a poor country and all the kids used to leave to > find work. Now they stay and they need a car when they're 17." > > As a result, traffic limps around St. Stephen's Green in Dublin. In the > past > two years, the city has completed two light rail lines. During the > holidays, > the police provide extra officers to direct traffic at all major > junctions. > But nothing helps much. > > When the O'Connells returned from London four years ago, and were unable > to > afford the prices of Dublin's city center, they bought a semi-detached > house > in one of hundreds of new developments. Today, it seems that every home > has > two or three cars out front. > > "No one thought, 'How will all these people get home from work?'" said > Emmet > O'Connell, an architectural technician, who said the commute took just 20 > minutes at first. Rachel O'Connell's job at the Dublin College of Art and > Design comes with a parking space. So their Toyota Yaris is their > lifeline. > > One day a week, Emmet O'Connell takes the bus. But if he does not leave > home > by 7:30 a.m., the buses are all full and bypass his stop. On a recent > evening, the O'Connells' 18-year-old daughter, Imogen, missed her art > class > in town after a two-hour bus ride; when she tried to return home, all the > buses were full, leaving her stranded. > > Rachel O'Connell said, "I suppose if petrol got really expensive or I lost > my free parking, we'd face up to the fact that we shouldn't be driving so > much," > > Taxes on cars or gasoline of the type in Copenhagen are effective in > curbing > traffic, experts say, but they scare voters, making even green politicians > unlikely to propose them. In Britain, when the chancellor of the Exchequer > presented his "green" budget in December, it included a gasoline tax > increase of 1.23 pence per liter, less than U.S. 3 cents. > > Yet in Copenhagen, people have learned to do without cars. > > "It's easier to go by bike or metro, and it's too expensive to do anything > else," said Pernille Madsen, 32, pedaling her two children in Copenhagen, > which is flat and has bike lanes. Her husband rides 25 kilometers to work > one way. > > Other cities have tried variations that require less absolute sacrifices > from motorists. Rome allows only those cars that have a low emissions > rating > into the historic center. In London and Stockholm, drivers must pay a > congestion charge to enter the city center. Such programs reduce traffic > and > pollution at city's cores, but experts are not sure of their overall > impact. > There is evidence to suggest that such plans simply move car use to the > suburbs. > > Jensen, the agency specialist, said new cities and suburbs must be > designed > with public transportation in place. Meanwhile, traffic chokes along. > > John MacClain, a cabdriver in Dublin, said that on a recent trip to > Prague, > he liked the architecture. But what really impressed him was the tram > system. "Now that was beautiful," he said. "I could get everywhere with > ease." > > -------------------------------------------------------- > IMPORTANT NOTE to everyone who gets sustran-discuss messages via > YAHOOGROUPS. > > Please go to http://list.jca.apc.org/manage/listinfo/sustran-discuss to > join the real sustran-discuss and get full membership rights. The > yahoogroups version is only a mirror and 'members' there cannot post to > the real sustran-discuss (even if the yahoogroups site makes it seem like > you can). Apologies for the confusing arrangement. > > ================================================================ > SUSTRAN-DISCUSS is a forum devoted to discussion of people-centred, > equitable and sustainable transport with a focus on developing countries > (the 'Global South'). ------------------------------------------------------ Todd Edelman Director Green Idea Factory Korunn? 72 CZ-10100 Praha 10 Czech Republic ++420 605 915 970 Skype: toddedelman edelman@greenidea.eu http://www.worldcarfree.net/onthetrain Green Idea Factory, a member of World Carfree Network -------------------------------------------------------- IMPORTANT NOTE to everyone who gets sustran-discuss messages via YAHOOGROUPS. Please go to http://list.jca.apc.org/manage/listinfo/sustran-discuss to join the real sustran-discuss and get full membership rights. The yahoogroups version is only a mirror and 'members' there cannot post to the real sustran-discuss (even if the yahoogroups site makes it seem like you can). Apologies for the confusing arrangement. ================================================================ SUSTRAN-DISCUSS is a forum devoted to discussion of people-centred, equitable and sustainable transport with a focus on developing countries (the 'Global South'). From edelman at greenidea.info Sat Jan 13 01:59:40 2007 From: edelman at greenidea.info (Todd Edelman) Date: Fri, 12 Jan 2007 17:59:40 +0100 (CET) Subject: [sustran] The Chicken-and-egg issues of sprawl; the high price of living in the centre... Message-ID: <12541.194.149.113.177.1168621180.squirrel@mail.smartweb.cz> Hi, Recently I think the following was posted on the Carfree Network list: Urban growth and cars: Chicken-and-egg issue By Elisabeth Rosenthal Full story: Carlos Pardo reposted it on the Sustran list and commented: "Its funny how it seems that people cant choose to live inside the cities" and I replied: "THE insides of cities in many cities in Europe are generally really expensive right now. This is a complicated problem directly related to all our sprawl and mobility discussions but I dont see enough discussion about it, never mind solutions." To which Lee Schipper said: "Six years ago I raised this issue to the UITP guy selling the Millennium data base... why was there nothing about housing and land costs/rents etc. The insides of most Asian and L American cities are also expensive in the central, most desirable areas. The UITP answer was that this was a fiduciary problem, almost a fiction. In fact it is what drives sprawl. Land farther out is cheaper. Homes are larger. And in the densest of cities, living space is less than in the less dense cities. The World Bank's "Sustainable Transport" from 1996 takes the Newman And Kenworthy data (which morphed into the Millennium data base) and looks at gasoline per capita vs housing space per capita, and voila.. those living in the cities with the highest NK "gasoline per capita" have the highest home area per capita and by implication from N and K the lowest population densities. Yet look at all the environmentalist generated blather on sprawl and you never see housing costs; how much more does it cost to live 100 m from a metro vs 1 km away? We hear about which people spend the most or least on transport, but not how much the same people spend on housing, yet we know that housing cost may be a more sensitive function of location than distance travelled. I am writing this from a hotel in Tokyo close to the center and some of the most expensive land in the world. And the Tokyo city residents who live near in without a car have less space/capita to live in than those in the rest of japan or even in the outer suburbs of Tokyo So in discussing sprawl, lets talk about what could be the main driving force, desire for living space. And let's remember in the US case tax deductions let us deduct all our mortgage interest from the home loan, in contrast to (more compact) Canada. Kinda makes you wonder whether in all of the studies of km we should have been studying square meters of home instead?" *** SOME thoughts: * More internalisation of the costs of transport will make living in the suburbs even more expensive relative to living in the centre, and it will effect construction costs, depending on where the materials and machines are coming from. * I propose that the green mobility people start talking about densification and the densification people start talking about its unintended effects :-) Seriously, this issue IS rarely mentioned, BUT sometime in the past six months or so someone on the Carfree Cities list mentioned they were working on it or familiar with some particular parts of it, and Joel Crawford recognized that the issue was important and asked for info... What became of that? Is there more research and real examples which people can share? On one hand it seems densification could lower prices as it will add housing units, but on the other it would make the neighbourhood more desirable (e.g. for self-selecting home-seekers, who are prepared to live in less space and carfree) which would counter that. Clearly, there are some "little piggy" issues here, as with getting people out of their cars: We spend lots of energy on creating alternatives to cars (and motorised two wheelers), and not enough on holistic and sustainable reasons why people should sacrifice (of course for many people the sacrifice is an illusion: it is only relative to their current overuse or resources) and simply be more responsible, i.e. lowering their ecological footprint to a reasonable level). So, this means people have to live in smaller homes, not just bigger homes for the same price further away. There are discounted loan programmes in some places for people that liver near transit hubs, and that may be a good start but it is certainly not enough, as the evidence shows. I would really like this issue to be a central theme of among other things the Towards Carfree Cities events in 2007 in Istanbul and 2008 in Portland, Oregon OR San Luis Potosi, Mexico. This means lots of outreach to urban planning and spatial planning specialists, and advisers to and people from public and even private housing loan entities, architects, and so on. Clearly we wont get too many people to help with this issue from UITP and other parts of the Green Mobility Mob, but of course they also have to participate. I spoke to middle-level person at UITP in the past year about this issue, and I think they are at least sensitive to it and possibly willing to listen, but they - and other large organisations - dont recruit staff who specialise in the issue... so we cant expect too much until our great arguments persuade them to expand their focus. T ------------------------------------------------------ Todd Edelman Director Green Idea Factory Korunn? 72 CZ-10100 Praha 10 Czech Republic ++420 605 915 970 Skype: toddedelman edelman@greenidea.eu http://www.worldcarfree.net/onthetrain Green Idea Factory, a member of World Carfree Network From litman at vtpi.org Sat Jan 13 02:39:25 2007 From: litman at vtpi.org (Todd Alexander Litman) Date: Fri, 12 Jan 2007 09:39:25 -0800 Subject: [sustran] Re: Urban growth and cars: Chicken-and-egg issue In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <6.2.3.4.2.20070112083722.090017e8@mail.islandnet.com> Yes, more centralized housing often costs more than more dispersed location housing, but that is partly a result of limited supply. The best response is to find ways to build more affordable and accessible housing, called Location Efficient Development (http://www.vtpi.org/tdm/tdm22.htm ), so households can enjoy the best options overall. Recent U.S. studies have examined combined consumer housing and transportation costs to create a household affordability index. The lower costs of suburban housing is often offset by increased transportation expenditures, compounded by increases in indirect costs, such as reduced employment options and higher rates of traffic crash disabilities and deaths. See: CTOD and CNT (2006), The Affordability Index: A New Tool for Measuring the True Affordability of a Housing Choice, Center for Transit-Oriented Development and the Center for Neighborhood Technology, Brookings Institute (www.brookings.edu); available at www.brookings.edu/metro/umi/20060127_affindex.pdf. Barbara Lipman (2006), A Heavy Load: The Combined Housing and Transportation Burdens of Working Families, Center for Housing Policy (www.nhc.org/pdf/pub_heavy_load_10_06.pdf). There are a number of smart growth strategies to encourage more affordable and accessible residential development. Here is some of the literature: Danielle Arigoni (2001), Affordable Housing and Smart Growth: Making the Connections, Subgroup on Affordable Housing, Smart Growth Network (www.smartgrowth.org) and National Neighborhood Coalition (www.neighborhoodcoalition.org). Scott Bernstein, Carrie Makarewicz, Kara Heffernan, Albert Benedict and Ben Helphand (2004), Increasing Affordability Through Reducing the Transportation and Infrastructure Cost Burdens of Housing, Atlanta Neighborhood Development Partnerships (www.andpi.org); available at www.andpi.org/uploadedFiles/pdf/03MICI%20MTC%20Report_CNT.pdf. CNT (2006), Paved Over: Surface Parking Lots or Opportunities for Tax-Generating, Sustainable Development?, Center for Neighborhood Technology (www.cnt.org/repository/PavedOver-Final.pdf). Todd Litman (2003), Parking Requirement Impacts on Housing Affordability, VTPI (www.vtpi.org); available at www.vtpi.org/park-hou.pdf. Todd Litman (2005), Understanding Smart Growth Saving, VTPI (www.vtpi.org); available at www.vtpi.org/sg_save.pdf. William Lucy and David L. Phillips (2006), Tomorrow's Cities, Tomorrow's Suburbs, Planners Press (www.planning.org). Arthur C. Nelson, Rolf Pendall, Casy Dawkins and Gerrit Knaap (2002), The Link Between Growth Management and Housing Affordability: The Academic Evidence, Brookings Institution Center on Urban and Metropolitan Policy (www.brook.edu); available at www.brook.edu/dybdocroot/es/urban/publications/growthmang.pdf. Ryan Russo (2001), Planning for Residential Parking: A Guide For Housing Developers and Planners, Non-Profit Housing Association of Northern California (www.nonprofithousing.org) and the Berkeley Program on Housing and Urban Policy (http://urbanpolicy.berkeley.edu). SPUR (1998), Reducing Housing Costs by Rethinking Parking Requirements, The San Francisco Planning and Urban Research Association (www.spur.org). When discussing the tradeoffs between urban and suburban locations it is important to maintain a distinction between "density" (people per acre of land) and "crowding" (people per room or square foot of housing). Increased density does not necessarily increase crowding, often it simply reflects reduced lawns and different types of housing, such as shifts from large-lot to small-lot single-family, or shifts from single-family to townhouses and condominiums. Here in the U.S., many households move to suburbs for the sake of social attributes (security, better schools and public services, prestige) rather than physical features such as large lawns. By redeveloping urban neighborhoods, and building suburbs with urban-type densities, mix and transportation options, we can satisfy consumer needs in ways that reduce per capita vehicle travel and its associated costs. Best wishes, -Todd Litman At 08:09 AM 1/12/2007, Lee Schipper wrote: >Six years ago I raised this issue to the UITP guy selling the >Millennium data base.. why was there nothing about housing and land >costs/rents etc. The insides of most Asian and L American cities are >also expensive in the central, most desirable areas. >The UITP answer was that this was a fiduciary problem, almost a fiction. > >In fact it is what drives sprawl. Land farther out is cheaper. Homes >are larger. And in the densest of cities, living space is less than >in the less dense cities. The W Bank's "Sustainable Transport" from >1996 takes the Newman And Kenworthy data (which morphed into the >Millennium data base) and looks at gasoline per capita vs housing >space per capita, and voila.. those living in the cities with the >highest NK "gasoline per capita" have the highest home area per >capita and by implication from N and K the lowest population densities > >Yet look at all the environmentalist generated blather on sprawl >and you never see housing costs; how much more does it cost to live >100 m from a metro vs 1 km away? We hear about which people spend >the most or least on transport, but not how much the same people >spend on housing, yet we know that housing cost may be a more >sensitive function of location than distance traveled. > >I am writing this from a hotel in Tokyo close to the center and some >of the most expensive land in the world. And the Tokyo city >residents who live near in without a car have less space/capita to >live in than those in the rest of japan or even in the outer suburbs of Tokyo > >So in discussing sprawl, lets talk about what could be the main >driving force, desire for living space. And let's remember in the >US case tax deductions let us deduct all our mortgage interest from >the home loan, in contrast to (more compact) Canada. Kinda makes >you wonder whether in all of the studies of km we should have been >studying square meters of home instead? > Sincerely, Todd Alexander Litman Victoria Transport Policy Institute (www.vtpi.org) litman@vtpi.org Phone & Fax 250-360-1560 1250 Rudlin Street, Victoria, BC, V8V 3R7, CANADA "Efficiency - Equity - Clarity" -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://list.jca.apc.org/public/sustran-discuss/attachments/20070112/1729c82f/attachment.html From Eric.Britton at ecoplan.org Tue Jan 16 00:37:34 2007 From: Eric.Britton at ecoplan.org (Eric Britton (ChoiceMail)) Date: Mon, 15 Jan 2007 16:37:34 +0100 Subject: [sustran] Taxes and transportation In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <00f801c738bb$18331830$6901a8c0@Home> Thanks so much Simon for that fine synopsis. A quick word about your good third point in which you mention Land (Value) Taxes as an important tool of public policy. And what is so interesting about our exchanges here over the last week or so is the extent to which all of the commentators have jumped right on the land/transport interface. There is absolutely no doubt about this, and given its importance and potential reach it is quite surprising that it gets so little attention. (Maybe because it's just too hard, and because it brings in areas of life and expertise which the folks who make the transportation decisions are simply not trained to.) We here at the New Mobility Agenda, just to make sure that this important topic does not get lost in the wash, got together with some colleagues and set up the Land Caf? which you can visit at www.landcafe.org ? and where the discussions run at a very high level indeed (as they do here in our are of concern, I should add). Eric Britton PS. And for those of you who might like to get a feel for how long these ideas have been around, if you click to the Land Caf??s Thinkpad (see top menu at www.landcafe.org ) you will see a splendid exchange between two people with quite contrary ideas on the subject. It is also a wonderful example of American English (yes!) at its most full throated.) On Behalf Of Simon Norton Sent: Sunday, January 14, 2007 4:12 PM Subject: [NewMobilityCafe] housing costs Yes, I always think that the higher cost of in town housing is largely a function of its scarcity. In the UK one's impression is that commercial developers have lost the knowledge of how to build anything but suburban style housing. As a result those who resent the ever increasing loss of open countryside (a very important issue in the UK) almost always lose out when the planners make their decisions. Planners distinguish between "Greenfield" and "brownfield" land, the latter signifying land that has previously been developed. Unfortunately it includes things like disused quarries and military airfields which are not in locations where they can be grafted on to an urban area. One of the reasons why people move out of the cities, I'm sure, is because they are fed up with traffic noise. So there's the usual problem that those who try to escape the problem are in fact exacerbating it by moving to locations where they have a greater need for cars. Much of the extra space available to householders in suburban areas is used to accommodate cars and as such does not contribute to people's quality of life. How about this for a solution ? 1. Go in for car-free housing in a big way. In other words move it out of the niche market it currently occupies and make it a significant proportion of new housing (say 30%, more for affordable housing). I believe that people will accept it if (a) Public transport is adequate for all their day to day needs that are beyond walking/cycling distance (b) Car club (community car hire) facilities are available (c) It provides a means to enable them to solve their personal housing problem. If necessary there should be a tax incentive within the housing market to encourage people to choose car-free housing. 2. Build new metropolitan centres or convert existing smaller towns and cities to metropolises. In the UK all our new towns have tended to be on the suburban model, no doubt as a result of Ebenezer Howard et al who developed his ideas at a time when cities were physically dirty. The only new town that is on the way to metropolitan size, Milton Keynes, was planned at a time when accommodating universal car use was seen as a virtue. My own home city, Cambridge, is becoming a key regional centre, but its population growth is almost all in suburban developments outside the traditional urban envelope. Both the road and public transport networks ensure that the traditional city (though not so much the historic centre) is the focus for activity, which makes our transport problems almost insoluble in terms of the car orientation of most of the people in the new suburbs. The local authority while restricting cars in the historic centre is doing very little to restrain traffic growth elsewhere. 3. And there's our old friends land tax, which could finance the public transport networks necessary to service the car-free developments of 1 and the new metropolises of 2 (including inter-urban links between them and other towns and cities). It should have little direct effect on affordability, because the initial cost of housing would fall in such a way as to offset the land tax that people who lived in it would have to pay. Simon Norton -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://list.jca.apc.org/public/sustran-discuss/attachments/20070115/1ca13cc8/attachment.html From litman at vtpi.org Thu Jan 18 03:12:05 2007 From: litman at vtpi.org (Todd Alexander Litman) Date: Wed, 17 Jan 2007 10:12:05 -0800 Subject: [sustran] Win-Win Emission Reduction Strategies Message-ID: <6.2.3.4.2.20070117101149.06619448@mail.islandnet.com> Media Notice 17 January 2007 'Win-Win Emission Reduction Strategies' Smart transportation strategies can achieve emission reduction targets and provide other important economic, social and environmental benefits = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = Concern over climate change has increased significantly in recent months. New reports have highlighted the risks and economic costs of climate change, prompting many jurisdictions to set greenhouse gas emission reduction targets and begin developing emission reduction plans. Innovative thinking is required to identify the best transportation emission reduction strategies. There are many possible ways to reduce transport emissions. Some provide just one or two benefits, while others provide a variety of benefits, including congestion reductions, road and parking facility cost savings, consumer cost savings, accident reductions, improved mobility for non-drivers, and support for strategic land use planning objectives. More comprehensive analysis helps identify the strategies that provide the greatest total benefits to society. The Victoria Transport Policy Institute identified more than a dozen "Win-Win Transportation Solutions" that provide substantial emission reductions in ways that help achieve other economic, social and environmental objectives. Win-Win Solutions are cost-effective, technically feasible market reforms that solve transport problems by increasing consumer options, removing market distortions that cause excessive motor vehicle travel, and creating more accessible, multi-modal communities. If implemented to the degree that is economically justified, Win-Win Solutions can achieve the transportation component of Kyoto emission reduction targets while stimulating economic development and helping address problems such as traffic congestion, accidents and inadequate mobility for non-drivers. For more information see the following VTPI reports: "Win-Win Emission Reduction Strategies" available at http://www.vtpi.org/wwclimate.pdf "Win-Win Transportation Solutions," available at http://www.vtpi.org/winwin.pdf. * * * * * * * The Victoria Transport Policy Institute is an independent research organization dedicated to developing innovative and practical solutions to transport problems. The VTPI website (http://www.vtpi.org ) has many resources addressing diverse transport planning and policy issues. For more information contact Todd Litman (litman@vtpi.org ) Sincerely, Todd Alexander Litman Victoria Transport Policy Institute (www.vtpi.org) litman@vtpi.org Phone & Fax 250-360-1560 1250 Rudlin Street, Victoria, BC, V8V 3R7, CANADA "Efficiency - Equity - Clarity" -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://list.jca.apc.org/public/sustran-discuss/attachments/20070117/035ddf8c/attachment.html From rgorham at worldbank.org Thu Jan 18 06:00:32 2007 From: rgorham at worldbank.org (rgorham at worldbank.org) Date: Wed, 17 Jan 2007 16:00:32 -0500 Subject: [sustran] Roger Gorham is out of the office. Message-ID: I will be out of the office starting 01/15/2007 and will not return until 01/26/2007. I will respond to your message when I return. From Eric.Britton at ecoplan.org Thu Jan 18 19:18:46 2007 From: Eric.Britton at ecoplan.org (Eric Britton) Date: Thu, 18 Jan 2007 11:18:46 +0100 Subject: [sustran] Rewarding Initiative (Todd Litman) Message-ID: <060801c73aea$0b1df760$6901a8c0@Home> Paris, Thursday, January 18, 2007 Dear New Mobility, World Transport, Kyoto Cities, LotsLessCars, Land Caf? and Global South Colleagues, wherever you may be this morning: This is to express my heartfelt thanks to Todd Littman for all the fine work he has done over these last years, and which he so generously continues to share with all of us who care about these important matters. Cracking the hard nut of unsustainable transport and cities in desperate need of new ideas, examples and practices is not something that any one of us will ever be do in isolation. But by continuing to put our heads (and hearts) together, we will, I absolutely promise you, be able to make a difference. All this comes to mind this morning as I race over the two latest of his rich offerings which just came in here yesterday: (a) ?Win-Win Emission Reduction Strategies? at http://www.vtpi.org/wwclimate.pdf; and (b) ?Win-Win Transportation Solutions,? at http://www.vtpi.org/winwin.pdf. And then beyond that of course all that he shares with us via the Victoria Transport Policy Institute and the ever-useful Online TDM Encyclopedia at http://www.vtpi.org/tdm/index.php. What I so much appreciate about Todd?s contributions and perspectives is that he takes on the same issues which are right up the center of our preoccupations here of what we call the New Mobility Agenda and which by any name is our common cause, and gives us his specific vision and interpretations. Through all that he shares with us, Todd informs me, reminds me, challenges me, and initiates a process of questioning and rethinking which I find most useful and enriching. So thank you Todd for all that ? and now what? Well, to get the ball rolling, in addition to this all too brief note of thanks, I have just popped a small video note ( a minute and a half) in which I try to set out a couple of ideas on this, o which you can click directly from here via http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-8312398871175245527 &pr=goog-sl. (No big deal of course, but it always strikes me that richer forms of communications such as this at times have their place, and this is one of them) As you will see there, the idea is simply to provide an indication of our collective thanks, possibly through a short (or less short is that is what you prefer) email, possibly copied to the New Mobility Agenda Idea Factory via the address NewMobilityCafe@yahoogroups.com so that we can eventually work them into some sort of compendium. In the past we have through our collective efforts found ways to gain high profile public recognition for the work of several of our colleagues and partners who are making important contributions to the sustainable cities and sustainable lives challenges. I would just remind you that thus far our list includes people like Enrique Penalosa (Bogot?), Hans Monderman (Groningen), Jan Gehl (Copenhagen), Ken Livingstone (London), Lee Myung-Bak (Seoul), Sue Zielinski (Toronto), and Wolfgang Zuckermann. As well as a fair number of projects that are leading the way in areas such as carsharing (Helsinki, San Francisco, Paris, Gothenburg), Walk to School programs, and yes even Car Free Days here and there. Now I am not quite sure how all this ties in to how we might express our thanks to Todd for all his hard work that serves many of us so well, but here you have a thought and now let?s see what we do with it. It?s your turn. Eric Britton Sustainable transportation, sustainable cities and sustainable lives: One city, one project, one person at a time. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://list.jca.apc.org/public/sustran-discuss/attachments/20070118/ecb4fcdc/attachment.html From eric.britton at free.fr Thu Jan 18 19:45:26 2007 From: eric.britton at free.fr (eric.britton at free.fr) Date: Thu, 18 Jan 2007 11:45:26 +0100 Subject: [sustran] Rewarding Initiative (Todd Litman) Message-ID: Paris, Thursday, January 18, 2007 Dear New Mobility, World Transport, Kyoto Cities, LotsLessCars, Land Caf? and Global South Colleagues, wherever you may be this morning: This is to express my heartfelt thanks to Todd Littman for all the fine work he has done over these last years, and which he so generously continues to share with all of us who care about these important matters. Cracking the hard nut of unsustainable transport and cities in desperate need of new ideas, examples and practices is not something that any one of us will ever be do in isolation. But by continuing to put our heads (and hearts) together, we will, I absolutely promise you, be able to make a difference. All this comes to mind this morning as I race over the two latest of his rich offerings which just came in here yesterday: (a) ?Win-Win Emission Reduction Strategies? at http://www.vtpi.org/wwclimate.pdf; and (b) ?Win-Win Transportation Solutions,? at http://www.vtpi.org/winwin.pdf. And then beyond that of course all that he shares with us via the Victoria Transport Policy Institute and the ever-useful Online TDM Encyclopedia at http://www.vtpi.org/tdm/index.php. What I so much appreciate about Todd?s contributions and perspectives is that he takes on the same issues which are right up the center of our preoccupations here of what we call the New Mobility Agenda and which by any name is our common cause, and gives us his specific vision and interpretations. Through all that he shares with us, Todd informs me, reminds me, challenges me, and initiates a process of questioning and rethinking which I find most useful and enriching. So thank you Todd for all that ? and now what? Well, to get the ball rolling, in addition to this all too brief note of thanks, I have just popped a small video note ( a minute and a half) in which I try to set out a couple of ideas on this, o which you can click directly from here via http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-8312398871175245527 &pr=goog-sl. (No big deal of course, but it always strikes me that richer forms of communications such as this at times have their place, and this is one of them) As you will see there, the idea is simply to provide an indication of our collective thanks, possibly through a short (or less short is that is what you prefer) email, possibly copied to the New Mobility Agenda Idea Factory via the address NewMobilityCafe@yahoogroups.com so that we can eventually work them into some sort of compendium. In the past we have through our collective efforts found ways to gain high profile public recognition for the work of several of our colleagues and partners who are making important contributions to the sustainable cities and sustainable lives challenges. I would just remind you that thus far our list includes people like Enrique Penalosa (Bogot?), Hans Monderman (Groningen), Jan Gehl (Copenhagen), Ken Livingstone (London), Lee Myung-Bak (Seoul), Sue Zielinski (Toronto), and Wolfgang Zuckermann. As well as a fair number of projects that are leading the way in areas such as carsharing (Helsinki, San Francisco, Paris, Gothenburg), Walk to School programs, and yes even Car Free Days here and there. Now I am not quite sure how all this ties in to how we might express our thanks to Todd for all his hard work that serves many of us so well, but here you have a thought and now let?s see what we do with it. It?s your turn. Eric Britton Sustainable transportation, sustainable cities and sustainable lives: One city, one project, one person at a time. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://list.jca.apc.org/public/sustran-discuss/attachments/20070118/b98b4484/attachment.html From sunny.enie at gmail.com Fri Jan 19 15:41:39 2007 From: sunny.enie at gmail.com (Sunny) Date: Fri, 19 Jan 2007 13:41:39 +0700 Subject: [sustran] In-Use Vehicle Retrofit Photos Message-ID: <45B06823.40502@gmail.com> Hello All, Can anyone tell me where I can find photos on In-use vehicle retrofit (free to use). Cheers!!! Sunny From sguttikunda at gmail.com Fri Jan 19 16:10:48 2007 From: sguttikunda at gmail.com (Sarath Guttikunda) Date: Fri, 19 Jan 2007 02:10:48 -0500 Subject: [sustran] Re: In-Use Vehicle Retrofit Photos In-Reply-To: <45B06823.40502@gmail.com> References: <45B06823.40502@gmail.com> Message-ID: <683ba1ca0701182310m43784bc8t363207d1f28e30de@mail.gmail.com> http://www.epa.gov/otaq/retrofit/latestnews.htm this is a place to start. Sarath On 1/19/07, Sunny wrote: > > Hello All, > > Can anyone tell me where I can find photos on In-use vehicle retrofit > (free to use). > > Cheers!!! > Sunny > -------------------------------------------------------- > IMPORTANT NOTE to everyone who gets sustran-discuss messages via > YAHOOGROUPS. > > Please go to http://list.jca.apc.org/manage/listinfo/sustran-discuss to > join the real sustran-discuss and get full membership rights. The > yahoogroups version is only a mirror and 'members' there cannot post to the > real sustran-discuss (even if the yahoogroups site makes it seem like you > can). Apologies for the confusing arrangement. > > ================================================================ > SUSTRAN-DISCUSS is a forum devoted to discussion of people-centred, > equitable and sustainable transport with a focus on developing countries > (the 'Global South'). > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://list.jca.apc.org/public/sustran-discuss/attachments/20070119/a0576c6d/attachment.html From carlos.pardo at sutp.org Sat Jan 20 01:30:19 2007 From: carlos.pardo at sutp.org (Carlos F. Pardo SUTP) Date: Fri, 19 Jan 2007 11:30:19 -0500 Subject: [sustran] WHO Photo- video contest (and GTZ Photo CD) In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <45B0F21B.2080907@sutp.org> An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://list.jca.apc.org/public/sustran-discuss/attachments/20070119/6124249d/attachment.html From edelman at greenidea.info Sat Jan 20 02:29:40 2007 From: edelman at greenidea.info (Todd Edelman) Date: Fri, 19 Jan 2007 18:29:40 +0100 Subject: [sustran] Re: WHO Photo- video contest (and GTZ Photo CD) In-Reply-To: <45B0F21B.2080907@sutp.org> References: <45B0F21B.2080907@sutp.org> Message-ID: <45B10004.7000500@greenidea.info> Carlos F. Pardo SUTP wrote: > Jonas Hagen drew my attention to the announcement below, which may be > of interest to many of you. THE related posts below seem to indicate an acceptance of mono-functional communication infrastructure (roads, streets...) as a given, i.e., for cars, and at a certain minimum speed. This needs to change. Most traffic engineers and believers of the Religion of Motoring need to "lose their religion". Erics proposal for a 15km/h limit is nice but so many other things about cars (their manufacturing, the space they use, and so on) are neither "safe" nor "uncivil". - T > > eric.britton@ecoplan.org wrote: >> >> Dear Friends, >> >> >> >> Here is what we have observed on this subject over quite some years >> in city after city, road after road and study after study, in many >> places around the world.... [.....] >> >> >> -------------------------------------------- Todd Edelman Director Green Idea Factory Korunn? 72 CZ-10100 Praha 10 Czech Republic ++420 605 915 970 ++420 222 517 832 Skype: toddedelman edelman@greenidea.eu http://www.worldcarfree.net/onthetrain Green Idea Factory, a member of World Carfree Network From edelman at greenidea.info Sat Jan 20 05:23:52 2007 From: edelman at greenidea.info (Todd Edelman) Date: Fri, 19 Jan 2007 21:23:52 +0100 Subject: [sustran] BBC Series: The Noisy Ape Message-ID: <45B128D8.3070300@greenidea.info> BBC World Service has produced a four-part series called "The Noisy Ape": Excerpt from the introduction: "Mankind has spent the entire last century making itself louder. A great deal louder. But why? And what are the consequences? .... in the last century alone the lower threshold of human hearing has gone up by four decibels. This may not look much until you realise that this means a 66% deterioration in hearing quiet sounds!" *** The third part aired this week, but you can listen to all four at the website: Every show has a list of links below of groups or projects which are referred to in that part of the series. There is discussion of oil exploration killing whales and noisy stereos, and actually many of the anti-noise groups focus on these extreme things, rather that what other groups say is also very damaging, e.g. traffic sound levels promoting learning problems in school children. Indeed, the third programme refers to a new law which will come into effect in NYC in July 2007, which more strictly enforces noise violations from music, construction, car alarms (more than 10db in the day; 7db in the night) over the "ambient noise level". So, since the ambient level includes individual automobile traffic, it seems like the "elephant in the room" is being ignored... by some at least. Clearly there are some groups here which should join our efforts, come to our conferences, and so on, and I hope people have the chance to visit the various links and invite the people on-board... - T -- -------------------------------------------- Todd Edelman Director Green Idea Factory Korunn? 72 CZ-10100 Praha 10 Czech Republic ++420 605 915 970 ++420 222 517 832 Skype: toddedelman edelman@greenidea.eu http://www.worldcarfree.net/onthetrain Green Idea Factory, a member of World Carfree Network From Eric.Britton at ecoplan.org Sat Jan 20 16:57:30 2007 From: Eric.Britton at ecoplan.org (Eric Britton) Date: Sat, 20 Jan 2007 08:57:30 +0100 Subject: [sustran] problem in London In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <023901c73c68$a4af3680$6901a8c0@Home> Simon Norton wrote on this date: "Any thoughts on this situation which was recently the subject of an article in a local newspaper. Transport for London recently removed some bus laybys on a main road . . . " I have, as maybe some of you know, given this a lot of thought and indeed I think there is an answer to this kind of unnecessary (I think) and potentially harmful anomaly. Briefly and by the numbers: 1. If there is one thing that can be said without a shadow of a doubt about our exiting transport arrangements in cities, it is that there are notoriously piecemeal. 2. Which to me suggest that what is needed is a broadly shared, explicit, consistent philosophy. 3. That indeed is what in fact many of us are trying to get at here. I am struggling with this and am trying to see what I can do to put down the main principles of such a philosophy, which if you are interested you can find in the Agenda site at http://www.newmobility.org , clicking Philosophy on the top menu. It is, as you will see, kind of all over the place, but I would say that I have something on the order of say 80% of the core values there. We need something that we can state relatively succinctly that can be understood by all of the key actors (local authorities, police, media, experts, interest groups, and the general public) which they can then debate among themselves and, in each place perhaps according to their own volition and conditions, hammer out something that is broadly shared and understood. In fact, I would suggest that if it is not something that can be read and understood by a reasonably bright eleven year old, then we probably have it somehow wrong. Does this help at all? And if it is a start, what next? All critiques and suggestions most welcome, both here to the group or to me personally as you think will serve us all best. Eric Britton -----Original Message----- On Behalf Of Simon Norton Sent: Saturday, January 20, 2007 12:09 AM To: lotslesscars@yahoogroups.com Subject: [LotsLessCars] problem in London Any thoughts on this situation which was recently the subject of an article in a local newspaper. Transport for London recently removed some bus laybys on a main road in outer London. This is often advocated as a means of reducing delays to buses caused by them having to wait for other traffic to pass before they can rejoin the traffic stream -- and then as a result probably missing the next set of traffic lights. I presume that that was TfL's motivation. However, on this occasion there were reports of collisions between cars and buses when the latter had to brake to serve stops. As a result the police stepped in and ordered the bus stops closed. This created consternation among bus users, particularly the elderly and infirm, who would now have to walk further. I'm not sure whether the relevant section of road has a speed limit of 40mph or 30mph. Would reduction to 20mph have been a fairer way to deal with the problem ? The road in question is part of the A1, just inside from the North Circular Road where it passes through a largely residential area. I remember when many years ago plans to widen it to dual 3 lane were scrapped after massive protest. Before I give my own moral on the situation I'll wait to see what others have to say. Simon Norton -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://list.jca.apc.org/public/sustran-discuss/attachments/20070120/71653f03/attachment.html From Eric.Britton at ecoplan.org Sat Jan 20 18:15:15 2007 From: Eric.Britton at ecoplan.org (Eric Britton) Date: Sat, 20 Jan 2007 10:15:15 +0100 Subject: [sustran] Honey, you got to slow down. In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <026101c73c73$85342080$6901a8c0@Home> The Flicker Fusion Factor Honey, you got to slow down (originally published in The New York Times) By Robert Winkler http://pages.cthome.net/rwinkler/fff.htm The closest we come to free flight in our lives is not when we take off in an airplane. It is when we drive our cars. The speed, altitude, centrifugal forces, and sensations of flying that we experience in an SUV, a sports car, or, in my case, an economy box, let us feel what it is like to be a bird. This partly explains why we love our cars, preferring this mode of locomotion to any other, even walking and running, for which we are supremely adapted. Despite the high price of gas, we go everywhere in our cars, and, for most of us, the faster we go the better. Posted speed limits are one of life's great fictions. Virtually no one observes them. Whenever I do I can be sure a tailgater will magically appear in my rearview mirror. Speeding is the norm, the de facto law, and many motorists view anyone who observes speed limits as a de facto lawbreaker or a wimp who deserves to be run off the road. Police enforcement of speed limits is spotty at best. Meanwhile, road improvements, car redesigns, and automaker advertisements are always nudging us to speed up. In our cities and on the highways that feed into them, traffic volume alone keeps speeding in check. In the suburbs, however, it's the Wild West. I frequently observe motorists going 40 miles an hour or faster on winding side streets. Many can't control their cars at such speeds, even those who drive luxury sports cars. As they come around a sharp curve, they go into the lane of oncoming traffic to combat the centrifugal force that threatens to fling them off the road. If they encounter your car coming from the other direction, too bad. You'll just have to move over. Suburban drivers who don't are asking for a head-on collision. Speed has become the driving force in our lives. Everyone is in a hurry-to get to work, to get home, to drop off the kids, to pick them up, to get to the supermarket, the post office, the dump, Wal-Mart. We must go ever faster, and we must build gas-guzzling cars ever bigger and stronger to protect us in the reckless chase for money and status. We pay lip service to the environment, then fill up at the gas station. God help those who get in our way. Man, however, wasn't meant to fly-neither with wings of Icarus nor within our beloved machines that float on a cushion of air. Physiologically, we're designed to locomote on two legs: to walk or to run. When we get behind the wheel of a car, we may think we gain a bird's power of flight, but actually we are poor, pathetic imitators of birds. Thousands of people and millions of wild and domestic animals die every year in this country because motorists lack the perceptual adaptations of birds.1 Motorists cannot avoid accidents because they are incapable of reacting quickly enough when moving at high speed. Their flicker fusion frequency-the point at which an animal sees an increasingly rapid flashing light as a continuous beam-is too slow. Humans have a flicker fusion frequency of 60 Hz (60 cycles per second); in domestic pigeons, flicker fusion frequency rises to 100 Hz. Birds of prey, whose survival hinges on quickness, are thought to have an even higher flicker fusion frequency than pigeons-consider, for example, the northern goshawk, which lives in deep forests and earns its living by chasing down other birds. Without benefit of road markings, warning signs, traffic lights, and speed limits, the goshawk zooms around its wild neighborhood in relative safety. As it hotly pursues a ruffed grouse or wood duck, the goshawk may fly just above the ground at 40 miles an hour, mirroring the unpredictable twists and turns of its prey. Although the goshawk's wingspan approaches four feet, superb vision and instant reflexes help it avoid collisions with countless branches. Were a goshawk to watch a movie, its high flicker fusion frequency might cause it to see jerky rather than smooth motion, similar to what we see in very old movies, which run at a slower frame rate than modern ones.2 This visual adaptation is thought to give birds greater resolving power while moving. A goshawk flying at high speed can probably perceive an obstacle, and react to it by veering away, in a fraction of the time it would take a motorist to avoid an accident. If the goshawk were subject to the inferior perceptual abilities of humans, it would end up splattered against a tree trunk.3 A road-hugging Porsche may be more responsive than a Ford Focus. But when you're going 40 and a deer steps right in front of your car, the great equalizer comes into play. If the deer is only a few yards away, both cars will collide with it, because neither driver can escape the physiological limitations of being human. The power we feel when we get into a car or an SUV is illusory. When we become motorists, we actually get weaker. We leave our natural bipedal realm for an airborne one in which we are out of control. Our self-absorption prevents us from accepting our limitations, though every day we see the consequences in untold deaths of humans and non-human animals. Minimizing the ill effects of this hubris is simple enough.4 As Prince observed in "Little Red Corvette": honey, you got to slow down. It's the price of being human. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://list.jca.apc.org/public/sustran-discuss/attachments/20070120/6f7599f0/attachment.html From Eric.Britton at ecoplan.org Sat Jan 20 21:55:44 2007 From: Eric.Britton at ecoplan.org (Eric Britton) Date: Sat, 20 Jan 2007 13:55:44 +0100 Subject: [sustran] Putting the Wikipedia to work for the New Mobility Agenda. (And for you.) Message-ID: <032f01c73c92$4d906930$6901a8c0@Home> I hope that what follows may be useful to some of you. As you will see, I think it is an important and powerful tool -- which we can shape and put to work for the good cause. Introduction: For the last couple of years I have tried to work with and shape the Wikipedia (not always so easy) to ensure that the matters which are important for our valiant collaboration to reform our transport arrangements in cities for all the reasons so well known to us here. And for this I have developed, hitched on to, and try to maintain a certain number of entries on what I believe to be key concepts for out joint efforts. And once I have them logged in, I then try to make them known to people and groups around the world who have real expertise and authority in each of these areas. People like, for instance you. This is all part of our attempts to create an informed and consistent agenda for mobility, cities and yes! people. So as part of my housekeeping (busy busy) each morning I have a 'Watchlist" that pulls up the latest entries, changes or discussions of any of the items on the following list (in fact my do- and watchlist also includes entries on a couple dozen of our more senior colleagues whose work I believe needs to be more broadly recognized, including by media folk as they come in looking for ideas and support). If, as Simon Norton suggests in his earlier post this morning (at least this is how I read it), we need a consistent set of principles to get around the many harmful anomalies that today populate our piecemeal approaches, this strike me as a good starting point. So here is my morning watchlist for your attention -- and hopefully for your comments and suggestions as to how we can complete and further refine. And, might I hope?, your eventual good use. Off we go! (PS. If your mail reads HTML you will find that these entries are directly clickable.) Mainline New Mobility entries These are the entries and concepts on which I try to keep out a watchful eye and make a real effort to stay abreast of as they develop. They are among the principal building blocks of our New Mobility systems and if you check them out you will see that most of them are in fairly heady evolution, thus giving a good example of the state of development of this far-emerging field.. ? 1. ?Autopartage (Talk ) 2. ?Bus rapid transit (Talk | History ) 3. ?Car-free Cities (Talk | History ) 4. ?Car-free movement (Talk | History ) 5. ?Car-free zone (Talk | History ) 6. ?Car Free Days (Talk | History ) 7. ?Car sharing (Talk | History ) 8. ?Carfree Cities (Talk | History ) 9. ?Carpool (Talk | History ) 10. ?Carshare (Talk | History ) 11. ?Carsharing (Talk | History ) 12. ?Community bicycle program (Talk | History ) 13. ?E-Work (Talk | History ) 14. ?Electronic toll collection (Talk | History ) 15. ?High-occupancy vehicle lane (Talk | History ) 16. ?Home zone (Talk | History ) 17. ?Jitney (Talk | History ) 18. ?Livable Streets (Talk | History ) 19. ?Living street (Talk | History ) 20. ?London congestion charge (Talk | History ) 21. ?New Mobility Agenda (Talk | History ) 22. ?New mobility (Talk | History ) 23. ?No-Car Zone (Talk | History ) 24. ?Paratransit (Talk | History ) 25. ?Park and ride (Talk | History ) 26. ?Parking (Talk | History ) 27. ?Pedestrian-friendly (Talk | History ) 28. ?Public space (Talk | History ) 29. ?Public transport (Talk | History ) 30. ?Reclaim the Streets (Talk | History ) 31. ?Road-traffic safety (Talk | History ) 32. ?Road pricing (Talk | History ) 33. ?Share taxi (Talk | History ) 34. ?Shared space (Talk | History ) 35. ?Shared transport (Talk | History ) 36. ?Singapore Area Licensing Scheme (Talk | History ) 37. ?Stockholm congestion tax (Talk | History ) 38. ?Sustainable transportation (Talk | History ) 39. ?Taxicab (Talk | History ) 40. ?Telecommuting (Talk | History ) 41. ?Toll road (Talk | History ) 42. ?Traffic calming (Talk | History ) 43. ?Transit-oriented development (Talk | History ) 44. ?Transportation Demand Management (Talk | History ) 45. ?Vanpool (Talk | History ) 46. ?Vehicle for hire (Talk | History ) 47. ?Witkar (Talk | History ) 48. ?Woonerf (Talk | History ) Backdrop to New Mobility The following which are also on my automatic morning check list (the Wikipedia people kindly handle this for us) I tend to treat more as background concepts. Certainly we need to have a good feel for what is going on under these headings. My thought is that once we have read and taken in the current state of development of each of these concepts, as basic building blocks in a more background sense, it will be useful to keep an eye on them as they too develop in terms of the maturity of the entries. 1. ?Alternative propulsion (Talk | History ) 2. ?Alternative Transportation Movement (Talk | History ) 3. ?Battery electric vehicle (Talk | History ) 4. ?Bicycle culture (Talk | History ) 5. ?Carbon footprint (Talk | History ) 6. ?Collaborative Innovation Networks (Talk | History ) 7. ?Collaborative Working Environment (Talk | History ) 8. ?Common good (Talk | History ) 9. ?Commune (intentional community) (Talk | History ) 10. ?Complex adaptive systems (Talk | History ) 11. ?Conceptual thinking (Talk | History ) 12. ?Cooperative (Talk | History ) 13. ?Corporate social responsibility (Talk | History ) 14. ?Critical Mass (cycling) (Talk | History ) 15. ?Ecocities (Talk | History ) 16. ?Electric vehicle (Talk | History ) 17. ?Environmental journalism (Talk | History ) 18. ?Environmentalism (Talk | History ) 19. ?Flextime plan (Talk | History ) 20. ?Free-market environmentalism (Talk | History ) 21. ?Future of the car (Talk | History ) 22. ?Gatnet (Talk | History ) 23. ?Gender differences (Talk | History ) 24. ?Global warming (Talk | History ) 25. ?Gridlock (Talk | History ) 26. ?Hierarchy of roads (Talk | History ) 27. ?Human Genome Project (Talk | History ) 28. ?Hydrogen economy (Talk | History ) 29. ?Hydrogen vehicle (Talk | History ) 30. ?Intelligent transportation system (Talk | History ) 31. ?Jeepney (Talk | History ) 32. ?Knowledge creation (Talk | History ) 33. ?Land use planning (Talk | History ) 34. ?Land value tax (Talk | History ) 35. ?List of people who died in road accidents (Talk | History ) 36. ?Low-carbon economy (Talk | History ) 37. ?Mitigation of global warming (Talk | History ) 38. ?New urbanism (Talk | History ) 39. ?Pedestrian (Talk | History ) 40. ?Petroleum electric hybrid vehicle (Talk | History ) 41. ?Road rage (Talk | History ) 42. ?Roadcraft (Talk | History ) 43. ?Rush hour (Talk | History ) 44. ?Self-Organizing Collaborative Networks (Talk ) 45. ?Self-organization (Talk | History ) 46. ?Simple living (Talk | History ) 47. ?Smart growth (Talk | History ) 48. ?Stockholm Partnerships for Sustainable Cities (Talk | History ) 49. ?Street hierarchy (Talk | History ) 50. ?Sustainable transport (Talk | History ) 51. ?Sustainability (Talk | History ) 52. ?Sustainability Advocates (Talk ) 53. ?Sustainable city (Talk | History ) 54. ?Sustainable community (Talk | History ) 55. ?Sustainable development (Talk | History ) 56. ?Sustainable energy (Talk | History ) 57. ?Sustainable living (Talk | History ) 58. ?Swarm intelligence (Talk | History ) 59. ?Traffic (Talk | History ) 60. ?Traffic congestion (Talk | History ) 61. ?Traffic flow (Talk | History ) 62. ?Traffic psychology (Talk | History ) 63. ?Tragedy of the commons (Talk | History ) 64. ?Transport (Talk | History ) 65. ?Transport economics (Talk | History ) 66. ?Transportation forecasting (Talk | History ) 67. ?Transportation planning (Talk | History ) 68. ?Urban park (Talk | History ) 69. ?Urban renaissance (Talk | History ) 70. ?Urban sprawl (Talk | History ) 71. ?User interface (Talk | History ) 72. ?United Nations Car Free Days (Talk | History ) 73. ?Value Capture (Talk | History ) 74. ?Vehicle Infrastructure Integration (Talk | History ) 75. ?Women and the environment through history (Talk | History ) In closing: Okay. You still there? If so, my question to you is how can we (a) improve what we already have here and (b) further add to this entries and definitions of important concepts and implements which are missing from this listing. Even as I look it over this morning, I can spot a couple of big hoes. For example, a couple of missing entries come to mind on . .. ? School transport, mobility? ? "Slow transport" or maybe 'slowth'? ? Walk to school The rules of the road for work in the Wikipedia are very explicit and require discipline as well as energy and good thoughts on all this, as you can well imagine. Thus we cannot of at least should not in my view talk about specific call them 'trade mark' implementations no matter how general they may be, but rather stick to board principles and important concepts such as those you see above. One of the first of these that I would draw to your attention is their dogged instance on NPOV - Neutral point of view. Yoyo can see all about that before you begin to dig in at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/NPOV. As a final word, to the extent that you decide to take advantage of these good tools and leads for your won work, you may also dins some interest in having a look at both the Discussions and the History sections of your favorite entries. I find them often most instructive. And I hope you will too. Eric Britton -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://list.jca.apc.org/public/sustran-discuss/attachments/20070120/1098200a/attachment.html From michael at yeatesit.biz Sun Jan 21 09:47:34 2007 From: michael at yeatesit.biz (Michael Yeates) Date: Sun, 21 Jan 2007 10:47:34 +1000 Subject: [sustran] Re: [NewMobilityCafe] problem in London In-Reply-To: <023901c73c68$a4af3680$6901a8c0@Home> References: <023901c73c68$a4af3680$6901a8c0@Home> Message-ID: <6.2.1.2.0.20070121101032.03986a40@mail.bigpond.com> Hi ... One solution in use in Oz (well certainly in Brisbane with some 700 buses in its bus fleet) is a requirement for ALL traffic to GIVE WAY to buses signalling an intention to pull out from an indented bus stop/bay. It applies on roads with 60 and 70 (and 80km/h?) speed limits. It works reasonably well esp if the bus drivers provide some notice, ie don't suddenly put on the right turn indicators AND pull out simultaneously ......... AND motorists indicate early eg flashing headlights is useful to signal the bus driver. The police action is clearly a typical pro-motorists' perspective whereas the legal situation is or should be quite clear namely, 1. bus driver required to signal intention to leave the bus bay ... right indicators on for sufficient/reasonable time 2. motorists slow down or if necessary stop to GIVE WAY to the bus (flashing headlights is useful to signal the bus driver) 3. motorists travelling too fast or too close to avoid crashing into the vehicle in front are driving illegally on a number of counts eg too close, too fast, without due care and attention, etc and probably others. I am amazed this system is not in place having assumed it isn't otherwise the police decision does not make sense (?) so if this is a novel solution, then I will try to send a photo of the signage involved. One other point ... I would strongly suggest that the problem reduces dramatically when rather more priority is provided to public transport eg as with Edinburgh's "green lane" system that provides the buses and cyclists and taxis with priority and creates space for the buses to pull out ... So in terms of scoring using one example of Eric's "consistent philosophy" approach, the "York hierarchy" priority of peds including people with disabilities (see the Pedestrian Council of Australia for the rationale) then cyclists then public transport (then taxis?) then small freight/delivery then cars, the London police and TfL example puts cars first ...!!! Not exactly what I would have expected from "green(er) transport Ken". Michael Yeates Public Transport Alliance At 05:57 PM 20/01/2007, Eric Britton wrote: >Simon Norton wrote on this date: "Any thoughts on this situation which was >recently the subject of an article in a >local newspaper. Transport for London recently removed some bus laybys on >a main road . . . " > >I have, as maybe some of you know, given this a lot of thought and indeed >I think there is an answer to this kind of unnecessary (I think) and >potentially harmful anomaly. Briefly and by the numbers: > > * If there is one thing that can be said without a shadow of a doubt > about our exiting transport arrangements in cities, it is that there are > notoriously piecemeal. > * Which to me suggest that what is needed is a broadly shared, > explicit, consistent philosophy. > * That indeed is what in fact many of us are trying to get at here. > >I am struggling with this and am trying to see what I can do to put down >the main principles of such a philosophy, which if you are interested you >can find in the Agenda site at >http://www.newmobility.org, clicking >Philosophy on the top menu. It is, as you will see, kind of all over the >place, but I would say that I have something on the order of say 80% of >the core values there. > >We need something that we can state relatively succinctly that can be >understood by all of the key actors (local authorities, police, media, >experts, interest groups, and the general public) which they can then >debate among themselves and, in each place perhaps according to their own >volition and conditions, hammer out something that is broadly shared and >understood. > >In fact, I would suggest that if it is not something that can be read and >understood by a reasonably bright eleven year old, then we probably have >it somehow wrong. > >Does this help at all? And if it is a start, what next? All critiques and >suggestions most welcome, both here to the group or to me personally as >you think will serve us all best. > >Eric Britton > > > > > >-----Original Message----- > On Behalf Of Simon Norton >Sent: Saturday, January 20, 2007 12:09 AM >To: lotslesscars@yahoogroups.com >Subject: [LotsLessCars] problem in London > > >Any thoughts on this situation which was recently the subject of an >article in a >local newspaper. > >Transport for London recently removed some bus laybys on a main road in outer >London. This is often advocated as a means of reducing delays to buses >caused by >them having to wait for other traffic to pass before they can rejoin the >traffic >stream -- and then as a result probably missing the next set of traffic >lights. >I presume that that was TfL's motivation. > >However, on this occasion there were reports of collisions between cars and >buses when the latter had to brake to serve stops. As a result the police >stepped in and ordered the bus stops closed. This created consternation among >bus users, particularly the elderly and infirm, who would now have to walk >further. > >I'm not sure whether the relevant section of road has a speed limit of >40mph or >30mph. Would reduction to 20mph have been a fairer way to deal with the >problem ? > >The road in question is part of the A1, just inside from the North Circular >Road where it passes through a largely residential area. I remember when many >years ago plans to widen it to dual 3 lane were scrapped after massive >protest. > >Before I give my own moral on the situation I'll wait to see what others >have to >say. > >Simon Norton > > > >__._,_.___ > >Check in here via the homepage at >http://www.newmobility.org >To post message to group: NewMobilityCafe@yahoogroups.com >Please think twice before posting to the group as a whole >(It might be that your note is best sent to one person?) > > > > > > > >Your email settings: Individual Email|Traditional >Change >settings via the Web (Yahoo! ID required) >Change settings via email: >Digest>Switch delivery to Daily Digest | >Delivery Format: Fully Featured>Switch to Fully Featured >Visit >Your Group | Yahoo! Groups Terms of Use >| >Unsubscribe > > >__,_._,___ -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://list.jca.apc.org/public/sustran-discuss/attachments/20070121/19db0adb/attachment.html From etts at indigo.ie Wed Jan 24 21:28:33 2007 From: etts at indigo.ie (Brendan Finn) Date: Wed, 24 Jan 2007 12:28:33 -0000 Subject: [sustran] Re: [NewMobilityCafe] problem in London References: <023901c73c68$a4af3680$6901a8c0@Home> <6.2.1.2.0.20070121101032.03986a40@mail.bigpond.com> Message-ID: <001b01c73fb3$2c783600$c801a8c0@finn> Three observations : 1) Removing bus lay-bys is not necessarily a reduction in priority for buses. It allows the bus to stand in the normal roadway, without requiring it to pull in from the traffic and then try to re-enter the traffic stream. Depending on the pavement configuration, recovering the space previously occupied by the lay-by could give more space to the waiting passengers and allow facilities such as shelters to be erected if the pavement was previously too narrow to do so; or to allow more space for the other pavement users including pedestrians and cycle paths. 2) The reported incidents in the London case sound like a poorly managed case where a bit of common sense and co-ordination would have resolved it. If drivers are braking late for stops, then it's an internal communication, training and disciplinary matter for the bus operating companies. I don't see why these stops should somehow be different from the countless stops around the rest of London which never had lay-bys and the police have not ordered them closed. It sounds to me as though a few motorists who have used the road for years were annoyed by finding themselves behind the buses stopped at the bus stops, and have embellished their complaints. There is nothing in this situation that couldn't have been sorted out by putting a few people from the traffic authorities and the operators on the ground for a few days to sort things out. 3) Giving absolute priority for buses to pull out into traffic is risky, and requires good understanding and behaviour on the part of 100% of road-users. Anything less that 100% all round, and there will be collisions. I agree with Michael Yeates' practical approach where buses do not have the absolute right, and should await an indication from the motorist - it's not that difficult in practice. The key is to have a good ongoing publicity campaign and build it around the concept of consideration, courtesy, a measure of being a good driver. In the late-1980's when I worked in Dublin Bus I implemented a set of signs on the rear of the bus asking motorists to please give way to buses signalling to exit a stop - I had seen this in Yorkshire (Leeds, I think) and nicked their good practice. Almost two decades on, buses in Dublin still carry these signs, and many motorists (but by no means all) will allow buses out from stops, make lane changes etc. The bus drivers always wave and acknowledge this little courtesy, which in turn makes the motorist feel appreciated and more likely to do it again. In turn, bus drivers must have the discipline not to launch themselves out into traffic and force motorists to yield - that is very dangerous and it creates a climate of hostility. With best wishes, Brendan Finn. _____________________________________________________________________________________ >From Brendan Finn, ETTS Ltd. e-mail : etts@indigo.ie tel : +353.87.2530286 ----- Original Message ----- From: Michael Yeates To: NewMobilityCafe@yahoogroups.com Cc: NewMobilityCafe@yahoogroups.com ; LotsLessCars@yahoogroups.com ; Sustran-discuss@jca.apc.org Sent: Sunday, January 21, 2007 12:47 AM Subject: [sustran] Re: [NewMobilityCafe] problem in London Hi ... One solution in use in Oz (well certainly in Brisbane with some 700 buses in its bus fleet) is a requirement for ALL traffic to GIVE WAY to buses signalling an intention to pull out from an indented bus stop/bay. It applies on roads with 60 and 70 (and 80km/h?) speed limits. It works reasonably well esp if the bus drivers provide some notice, ie don't suddenly put on the right turn indicators AND pull out simultaneously ......... AND motorists indicate early eg flashing headlights is useful to signal the bus driver. The police action is clearly a typical pro-motorists' perspective whereas the legal situation is or should be quite clear namely, 1. bus driver required to signal intention to leave the bus bay ... right indicators on for sufficient/reasonable time 2. motorists slow down or if necessary stop to GIVE WAY to the bus (flashing headlights is useful to signal the bus driver) 3. motorists travelling too fast or too close to avoid crashing into the vehicle in front are driving illegally on a number of counts eg too close, too fast, without due care and attention, etc and probably others. I am amazed this system is not in place having assumed it isn't otherwise the police decision does not make sense (?) so if this is a novel solution, then I will try to send a photo of the signage involved. One other point ... I would strongly suggest that the problem reduces dramatically when rather more priority is provided to public transport eg as with Edinburgh's "green lane" system that provides the buses and cyclists and taxis with priority and creates space for the buses to pull out ... So in terms of scoring using one example of Eric's "consistent philosophy" approach, the "York hierarchy" priority of peds including people with disabilities (see the Pedestrian Council of Australia for the rationale) then cyclists then public transport (then taxis?) then small freight/delivery then cars, the London police and TfL example puts cars first ...!!! Not exactly what I would have expected from "green(er) transport Ken". Michael Yeates Public Transport Alliance At 05:57 PM 20/01/2007, Eric Britton wrote: Simon Norton wrote on this date: "Any thoughts on this situation which was recently the subject of an article in a local newspaper. Transport for London recently removed some bus laybys on a main road . . . " I have, as maybe some of you know, given this a lot of thought and indeed I think there is an answer to this kind of unnecessary (I think) and potentially harmful anomaly. Briefly and by the numbers: 1.. If there is one thing that can be said without a shadow of a doubt about our exiting transport arrangements in cities, it is that there are notoriously piecemeal. 2.. Which to me suggest that what is needed is a broadly shared, explicit, consistent philosophy. 3.. That indeed is what in fact many of us are trying to get at here. I am struggling with this and am trying to see what I can do to put down the main principles of such a philosophy, which if you are interested you can find in the Agenda site at http://www.newmobility.org, clicking Philosophy on the top menu. It is, as you will see, kind of all over the place, but I would say that I have something on the order of say 80% of the core values there. We need something that we can state relatively succinctly that can be understood by all of the key actors (local authorities, police, media, experts, interest groups, and the general public) which they can then debate among themselves and, in each place perhaps according to their own volition and conditions, hammer out something that is broadly shared and understood. In fact, I would suggest that if it is not something that can be read and understood by a reasonably bright eleven year old, then we probably have it somehow wrong. Does this help at all? And if it is a start, what next? All critiques and suggestions most welcome, both here to the group or to me personally as you think will serve us all best. Eric Britton -----Original Message----- On Behalf Of Simon Norton Sent: Saturday, January 20, 2007 12:09 AM To: lotslesscars@yahoogroups.com Subject: [LotsLessCars] problem in London Any thoughts on this situation which was recently the subject of an article in a local newspaper. Transport for London recently removed some bus laybys on a main road in outer London. This is often advocated as a means of reducing delays to buses caused by them having to wait for other traffic to pass before they can rejoin the traffic stream -- and then as a result probably missing the next set of traffic lights. I presume that that was TfL's motivation. However, on this occasion there were reports of collisions between cars and buses when the latter had to brake to serve stops. As a result the police stepped in and ordered the bus stops closed. This created consternation among bus users, particularly the elderly and infirm, who would now have to walk further. I'm not sure whether the relevant section of road has a speed limit of 40mph or 30mph. Would reduction to 20mph have been a fairer way to deal with the problem ? The road in question is part of the A1, just inside from the North Circular Road where it passes through a largely residential area. I remember when many years ago plans to widen it to dual 3 lane were scrapped after massive protest. Before I give my own moral on the situation I'll wait to see what others have to say. Simon Norton -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://list.jca.apc.org/public/sustran-discuss/attachments/20070124/8f80ccd8/attachment.html From eric.britton at free.fr Thu Jan 25 06:21:38 2007 From: eric.britton at free.fr (eric.britton at free.fr) Date: Wed, 24 Jan 2007 22:21:38 +0100 Subject: [sustran] Old Mobility rules - 5 kinds of cities Message-ID: I should like to propose to you a thinking exercise. It works like this. Looking at them from a sustainability or Old/New Mobility perspective, I would propose that there are basically five gross categories of cities in the world today. Moreover, it's my guess that as you work your way down this list you find that the number of cities in each progressive category grows much smaller. Here it is in a nutshell, with "worse" of course meaning more traffic, more CO2 et al each year. Category 1. Those cities who are doing nothing, getting worse fast, and don't seem to care Category 2. Those doing nothing, getting worse. . . but who are starting to worry. And who just don't know what to do about it. Category 3. Those who overall are continuing to do worse (i.e., who continue to have growing traffic, more CO2, etc.), but have started to do a few better things - examples, building some pedestrianization, cycling paths, buying more buses, improved intermodal links, traffic engineering to smooth flows and provide most consistent speeds. And above all talking a lot about it. But who from the bottom line are still spending their money in the wrong (old) way, such that the only real impact of all this is to provide a cover for not really attacking the problem at the root. Category 4. Those who have decided explicitly to break with past practices and are starting to do long lists of good things. About these there are three important things to be said: First that they are an extremely small minority. Second, in every case I know, the basic bottom line traffic and environmental indicators continue to move in the wrong direction. And finally when you look at the budgets they are still at the end of the day spending more on roads and parking than on the rest. Category 5. Cities how have bought into the New Mobility Agenda and have adopted an aggressive integrated retrofit strategy for the sector with clearly defined, publicly available benchmarks and indicators of both micro and macro progress. Who have radically revised their budgets in the transport and related sectors, and are spending more on the new measures and programs than on road building, etc. To close with three questions/requests. * First to invite your comments, corrections, critical remarks, refinements etc on the above. * Second, to ask you where in this rough ranking you would put the city or cities you know best. * And finally, to ask if you can tell me one single city in the world who have made it to the final level -- one in which the move to sustainability is currently on track and, in being so, able to provide a shining example for the rest. (Though we have some great examples of cities that are real trying to dig in at Cat. 4, and that already is a wonderful start. After all, it's a big shift and we have to start somewhere.). Kind thanks. Eric Britton -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: winmail.dat Type: application/ms-tnef Size: 6248 bytes Desc: not available Url : http://list.jca.apc.org/public/sustran-discuss/attachments/20070124/f0c4d99d/winmail.bin From sujitjp at gmail.com Thu Jan 25 15:53:02 2007 From: sujitjp at gmail.com (Sujit Patwardhan) Date: Thu, 25 Jan 2007 12:23:02 +0530 Subject: [sustran] Re: Old Mobility rules - 5 kinds of cities In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <4cfd20aa0701242252j190389dbu492de3a77b1222ce@mail.gmail.com> 25 January 2007 Thanks Eric for this excellent exercise. Pune I would say is in Category 3 and somewhat stuck there. I will write in some detail soon. Warm regards, -- Sujit On 1/25/07, eric.britton@free.fr wrote: > > I should like to propose to you a thinking exercise. It works like this. > > Looking at them from a sustainability or Old/New Mobility perspective, I > would > propose that there are basically five gross categories of cities in the > world > today. Moreover, it's my guess that as you work your way down this list > you find > that the number of cities in each progressive category grows much smaller. > > Here it is in a nutshell, with "worse" of course meaning more traffic, > more CO2 > et al each year. > > Category 1. Those cities who are doing nothing, getting worse fast, > and > don't seem to care > > Category 2. Those doing nothing, getting worse. . . but who are > starting to > worry. And who just don't know what to do about it. > > Category 3. Those who overall are continuing to do worse (i.e., who > continue > to have growing traffic, more CO2, etc.), but have started to do a few > better > things - examples, building some pedestrianization, cycling paths, buying > more > buses, improved intermodal links, traffic engineering to smooth flows and > provide most consistent speeds. And above all talking a lot about it. But > who > from the bottom line are still spending their money in the wrong (old) > way, such > that the only real impact of all this is to provide a cover for not really > attacking the problem at the root. > > Category 4. Those who have decided explicitly to break with past > practices > and are starting to do long lists of good things. About these there are > three > important things to be said: First that they are an extremely small > minority. > Second, in every case I know, the basic bottom line traffic and > environmental > indicators continue to move in the wrong direction. And finally when you > look > at the budgets they are still at the end of the day spending more on roads > and > parking than on the rest. > > Category 5. Cities how have bought into the New Mobility Agenda and > have > adopted an aggressive integrated retrofit strategy for the sector with > clearly > defined, publicly available benchmarks and indicators of both micro and > macro > progress. Who have radically revised their budgets in the transport and > related > sectors, and are spending more on the new measures and programs than on > road > building, etc. > > To close with three questions/requests. > > * First to invite your comments, corrections, critical remarks, > refinements etc on the above. > * Second, to ask you where in this rough ranking you would put the > city or > cities you know best. > * And finally, to ask if you can tell me one single city in the > world who > have made it to the final level -- one in which the move to > sustainability is > currently on track and, in being so, able to provide a shining example for > the > rest. (Though we have some great examples of cities that are real trying > to dig > in at Cat. 4, and that already is a wonderful start. After all, it's a big > shift > and we have to start somewhere.). > > Kind thanks. > > Eric Britton > > > > -------------------------------------------------------- > IMPORTANT NOTE to everyone who gets sustran-discuss messages via > YAHOOGROUPS. > > Please go to http://list.jca.apc.org/manage/listinfo/sustran-discuss to > join the real sustran-discuss and get full membership rights. The > yahoogroups version is only a mirror and 'members' there cannot post to the > real sustran-discuss (even if the yahoogroups site makes it seem like you > can). Apologies for the confusing arrangement. > > ================================================================ > SUSTRAN-DISCUSS is a forum devoted to discussion of people-centred, > equitable and sustainable transport with a focus on developing countries > (the 'Global South'). > > > -- ------------------------------------------------------ Sujit Patwardhan sujit@vsnl.com sujitjp@gmail.com "Yamuna", ICS Colony, Ganeshkhind Road, Pune 411 007 India Tel: 25537955 ----------------------------------------------------- Hon. Secretary: Parisar www.parisar.org ------------------------------------------------------ Founder Member: PTTF (Pune Traffic & Transportation Forum) www.pttf.net ------------------------------------------------------ -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://list.jca.apc.org/public/sustran-discuss/attachments/20070125/32f75f21/attachment.html From lize at sustainable.org.za Thu Jan 25 15:57:14 2007 From: lize at sustainable.org.za (Lize Jennings) Date: Thu, 25 Jan 2007 08:57:14 +0200 Subject: [sustran] Re: Old Mobility rules - 5 kinds of cities In-Reply-To: Message-ID: Cape Town, South Africa probably falls within category 2 and 3. Although there are some people in the local government who wish to implement measures to improve the situation, particularly in addressing the problem of congestion, there is still the problem of traditional thinking and planning who believe that expanding roadways are probably the only way to go. In many cases the traditional (old-school) thinkers and those with the money. The interventions that are planned to be implemented are on a very small scale and are usually run as pilot projects, which once tested, stop because funding runs out. South Africa is hosting the 2010 Soccer World Cup and we are currently experiencing major congestion problems, particularly in the centre of town (where the main stadium will the built), so we can't image what it will be like once the large number of visitors arrive in the country. There are however, some organizations that are working with governments to change their thinking and planning methods and hopefully make a difference. We'll just have to wait and see. Regards Lize -----Original Message----- From: sustran-discuss-bounces+lize=sustainable.org.za@list.jca.apc.org [mailto:sustran-discuss-bounces+lize=sustainable.org.za@list.jca.apc.org] Sent: 24 January 2007 11:22 PM To: Sustran-discuss@jca.apc.org Subject: [sustran] Old Mobility rules - 5 kinds of cities I should like to propose to you a thinking exercise. It works like this. Looking at them from a sustainability or Old/New Mobility perspective, I would propose that there are basically five gross categories of cities in the world today. Moreover, it's my guess that as you work your way down this list you find that the number of cities in each progressive category grows much smaller. Here it is in a nutshell, with "worse" of course meaning more traffic, more CO2 et al each year. Category 1. Those cities who are doing nothing, getting worse fast, and don't seem to care Category 2. Those doing nothing, getting worse. . . but who are starting to worry. And who just don't know what to do about it. Category 3. Those who overall are continuing to do worse (i.e., who continue to have growing traffic, more CO2, etc.), but have started to do a few better things - examples, building some pedestrianization, cycling paths, buying more buses, improved intermodal links, traffic engineering to smooth flows and provide most consistent speeds. And above all talking a lot about it. But who from the bottom line are still spending their money in the wrong (old) way, such that the only real impact of all this is to provide a cover for not really attacking the problem at the root. Category 4. Those who have decided explicitly to break with past practices and are starting to do long lists of good things. About these there are three important things to be said: First that they are an extremely small minority. Second, in every case I know, the basic bottom line traffic and environmental indicators continue to move in the wrong direction. And finally when you look at the budgets they are still at the end of the day spending more on roads and parking than on the rest. Category 5. Cities how have bought into the New Mobility Agenda and have adopted an aggressive integrated retrofit strategy for the sector with clearly defined, publicly available benchmarks and indicators of both micro and macro progress. Who have radically revised their budgets in the transport and related sectors, and are spending more on the new measures and programs than on road building, etc. To close with three questions/requests. * First to invite your comments, corrections, critical remarks, refinements etc on the above. * Second, to ask you where in this rough ranking you would put the city or cities you know best. * And finally, to ask if you can tell me one single city in the world who have made it to the final level -- one in which the move to sustainability is currently on track and, in being so, able to provide a shining example for the rest. (Though we have some great examples of cities that are real trying to dig in at Cat. 4, and that already is a wonderful start. After all, it's a big shift and we have to start somewhere.). Kind thanks. Eric Britton << File: ATT00016.txt >> -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: winmail.dat Type: application/ms-tnef Size: 8036 bytes Desc: not available Url : http://list.jca.apc.org/public/sustran-discuss/attachments/20070125/a4cfa088/winmail.bin From etts at indigo.ie Thu Jan 25 17:57:52 2007 From: etts at indigo.ie (Brendan Finn) Date: Thu, 25 Jan 2007 08:57:52 -0000 Subject: [sustran] Re: Old Mobility rules - 5 kinds of cities - maybe one more? References: Message-ID: <006101c7405e$e61d4590$c801a8c0@finn> I suggest to add Category 0, those who are getting worse by doing plenty - of the "wrong" stuff - and are pretty determined to keep doing it. Those who are "doing nothing" - Category 1/2 - have at least paused in the hole they are digging. I would put Dublin in category 3, dressing itself up as something better. For all the talk about Transport 21 and public transport investment, the big bucks have gone into roads and will continue to do so for the next few years. For Cork, I would say that they are 4, with the caveats exactly as you describe them. Brendan. _____________________________________________________________________________________ >From Brendan Finn, ETTS Ltd. e-mail : etts@indigo.ie tel : +353.87.2530286 ----- Original Message ----- From: Lize Jennings To: eric.britton@ecoplan.org ; 'Global 'South' Sustainable Transport' Sent: Thursday, January 25, 2007 6:57 AM Subject: [sustran] Re: Old Mobility rules - 5 kinds of cities Cape Town, South Africa probably falls within category 2 and 3. Although there are some people in the local government who wish to implement measures to improve the situation, particularly in addressing the problem of congestion, there is still the problem of traditional thinking and planning who believe that expanding roadways are probably the only way to go. In many cases the traditional (old-school) thinkers and those with the money. The interventions that are planned to be implemented are on a very small scale and are usually run as pilot projects, which once tested, stop because funding runs out. South Africa is hosting the 2010 Soccer World Cup and we are currently experiencing major congestion problems, particularly in the centre of town (where the main stadium will the built), so we can't image what it will be like once the large number of visitors arrive in the country. There are however, some organizations that are working with governments to change their thinking and planning methods and hopefully make a difference. We'll just have to wait and see. Regards Lize -----Original Message----- From: sustran-discuss-bounces+lize=sustainable.org.za@list.jca.apc.org [mailto:sustran-discuss-bounces+lize=sustainable.org.za@list.jca.apc.org] Sent: 24 January 2007 11:22 PM To: Sustran-discuss@jca.apc.org Subject: [sustran] Old Mobility rules - 5 kinds of cities I should like to propose to you a thinking exercise. It works like this. Looking at them from a sustainability or Old/New Mobility perspective, I would propose that there are basically five gross categories of cities in the world today. Moreover, it's my guess that as you work your way down this list you find that the number of cities in each progressive category grows much smaller. Here it is in a nutshell, with "worse" of course meaning more traffic, more CO2 et al each year. Category 1. Those cities who are doing nothing, getting worse fast, and don't seem to care Category 2. Those doing nothing, getting worse. . . but who are starting to worry. And who just don't know what to do about it. Category 3. Those who overall are continuing to do worse (i.e., who continue to have growing traffic, more CO2, etc.), but have started to do a few better things - examples, building some pedestrianization, cycling paths, buying more buses, improved intermodal links, traffic engineering to smooth flows and provide most consistent speeds. And above all talking a lot about it. But who from the bottom line are still spending their money in the wrong (old) way, such that the only real impact of all this is to provide a cover for not really attacking the problem at the root. Category 4. Those who have decided explicitly to break with past practices and are starting to do long lists of good things. About these there are three important things to be said: First that they are an extremely small minority. Second, in every case I know, the basic bottom line traffic and environmental indicators continue to move in the wrong direction. And finally when you look at the budgets they are still at the end of the day spending more on roads and parking than on the rest. Category 5. Cities how have bought into the New Mobility Agenda and have adopted an aggressive integrated retrofit strategy for the sector with clearly defined, publicly available benchmarks and indicators of both micro and macro progress. Who have radically revised their budgets in the transport and related sectors, and are spending more on the new measures and programs than on road building, etc. To close with three questions/requests. * First to invite your comments, corrections, critical remarks, refinements etc on the above. * Second, to ask you where in this rough ranking you would put the city or cities you know best. * And finally, to ask if you can tell me one single city in the world who have made it to the final level -- one in which the move to sustainability is currently on track and, in being so, able to provide a shining example for the rest. (Though we have some great examples of cities that are real trying to dig in at Cat. 4, and that already is a wonderful start. After all, it's a big shift and we have to start somewhere.). Kind thanks. Eric Britton << File: ATT00016.txt >> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ -------------------------------------------------------- IMPORTANT NOTE to everyone who gets sustran-discuss messages via YAHOOGROUPS. Please go to http://list.jca.apc.org/manage/listinfo/sustran-discuss to join the real sustran-discuss and get full membership rights. The yahoogroups version is only a mirror and 'members' there cannot post to the real sustran-discuss (even if the yahoogroups site makes it seem like you can). Apologies for the confusing arrangement. ================================================================ SUSTRAN-DISCUSS is a forum devoted to discussion of people-centred, equitable and sustainable transport with a focus on developing countries (the 'Global South'). -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://list.jca.apc.org/public/sustran-discuss/attachments/20070125/0b6d8132/attachment.html From operations at velomondial.net Sun Jan 28 03:20:34 2007 From: operations at velomondial.net (Pascal van den Noort) Date: Sat, 27 Jan 2007 19:20:34 +0100 Subject: [sustran] petition In-Reply-To: <20070126030139.8F23D2E17B@mx-list.jca.ne.jp> Message-ID: <012401c7423f$d60fefd0$9600000a@MPBV> Dear Sir / Madam, Recently the European Commission presented their new plans for a clean energy strategy. Unfortunately, the conclusion after reading the report must be that, interesting as the proposed package of measures may be, the Commission misses a great opportunity to work towards a true European approach. The Commission leaves the initiative to implement and develop the goals up to the individual member states, while European leadership is called for. This disintegrated approach will not result enough in the substantial acceleration of R&D-spending that is needed. Only a common policy on the allocation of research funding and large-scale implementation of energy sources can ensure the best use of the geographical and other advantages of the various member states. We are trying to mobilize fellow civilians, politician and organizations, in order to convince our governments that they can make an important step towards an integral sustainable energy-policy in the next months. We kindly request your support: please sign the petition on www.eurenew.eu . It would also be of great help if you could forward this message and/or place the enclosed banner as a link on your website. Thanks in advance! Sincerely, Boris van der Ham, Member of Parliament, the Netherlands Geert Lambert, Member of Parliament, Belgium a.o. www.eurenew.eu Pascal J.W. van den Noort Executive Director Velo Mondial www.velomondial.net www.velo.info http://spicycles.velo.info operations@velomondial.net +31206270675 landline +31627055688 mobile phone From Eric.Britton at ecoplan.org Mon Jan 29 00:36:56 2007 From: Eric.Britton at ecoplan.org (Eric Britton (ChoiceMail)) Date: Sun, 28 Jan 2007 16:36:56 +0100 Subject: [sustran] Determining The Future Quality of a City Message-ID: <000001c742f2$3152d760$6701a8c0@Home> On Behalf Of Edward Dodson Sent: Sunday, January 28, 2007 3:59 AM To: Land-Cafe-Group Subject: [LandCafe] food for thought While doing some research, I came across some excerpts from the writings of an M.I.T. professor named Jay W. Forrester. In a paper titled, "Determining The Future Quality of a City," he writes: "By building a rapid transit system a city is often, in effect, deciding to change the composition of its population by encouraging new construction in outlying areas, allowing inner areas to decay, and attracting low-income and unskilled persons to the inner ring at the same time that job opportunities decline. In other words, a control of growth and migration has been exerted at all times, but it has often been guided by short-term considerations, with unexpected and undesirable long-term results. The issue is not one of control or no control. The issue is the kind of control and toward what end." In another paper I have not been able to locate or identify, Professor Forrester is quoted in some secondary materials as expressing support to the taxation of land values. Ed Dodson -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://list.jca.apc.org/public/sustran-discuss/attachments/20070128/2f7798c3/attachment.html From andrew.crane-droesch at undp.org Sat Jan 27 02:13:27 2007 From: andrew.crane-droesch at undp.org (Andrew Crane-Droesch) Date: Fri, 26 Jan 2007 12:13:27 -0500 Subject: [sustran] Histories and Ideas Behind Bogota's BRT Message-ID: <001c01c7416d$4b718500$6b3841a5@universi0qgqrc> Dear All, I've been following the Sustran listserv for quite some time now, but this is my first posting. Apologies if this question has been covered before. Regarding Bogot?'s widely hailed BRT system, who were the major designers of the system, and whose ideas did it rely upon? Was Curitiba's experience and expertise heavily relied upon? Did it involve international consultants or consulting firms? Or was it more of a homegrown affair? Who were the designers, and are they still active? Any relevant links to history of the system would be quite welcome. Many Thanks, Andrew Crane-Droesch United Nations Development Programme (UNDP)/ Global Environment Facility (GEF) 304 E 45th st, 9th Floor New York, NY 10016 andrew.crane-droesch@undp.org -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://list.jca.apc.org/public/sustran-discuss/attachments/20070126/a0e38b51/attachment.html From schipper at wri.org Mon Jan 29 01:50:28 2007 From: schipper at wri.org (Lee Schipper) Date: Sun, 28 Jan 2007 11:50:28 -0500 Subject: [sustran] Re: Histories and Ideas Behind Bogota's BRT Message-ID: To keep a long story justifiably long, start with Prof. Arturo Ardila's PHD Thesis from his MIT Days -- which aims squarely at your question. I copied this to him and I'm sure he'll send it. Nothing else comes close. Then, for better or worse, you only have a few hundred more articles, half in Spanish to read... Lee Schipper Director of Research EMBARQ, the WRI Center for Sustainable Transport 10 G St. NE Washington DC, 20002 +1202 729 7735 FAX +1202 7297775 www.embarq.wri.org >>> andrew.crane-droesch@undp.org 26/01/2007 12:13:27 >>> Dear All, I've been following the Sustran listserv for quite some time now, but this is my first posting. Apologies if this question has been covered before. Regarding Bogot?'s widely hailed BRT system, who were the major designers of the system, and whose ideas did it rely upon? Was Curitiba's experience and expertise heavily relied upon? Did it involve international consultants or consulting firms? Or was it more of a homegrown affair? Who were the designers, and are they still active? Any relevant links to history of the system would be quite welcome. Many Thanks, Andrew Crane-Droesch United Nations Development Programme (UNDP)/ Global Environment Facility (GEF) 304 E 45th st, 9th Floor New York, NY 10016 andrew.crane-droesch@undp.org From whook at itdp.org Mon Jan 29 02:00:38 2007 From: whook at itdp.org (Whook) Date: Sun, 28 Jan 2007 10:00:38 -0700 Subject: [sustran] Re: Histories and Ideas Behind Bogota's BRT Message-ID: <53ec43147f5bb5d9dfb1caa0fe0ecfb4@71.247.20.215> An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://list.jca.apc.org/public/sustran-discuss/attachments/20070128/3f42a463/attachment.html From ciclored at rcp.net.pe Mon Jan 29 01:58:58 2007 From: ciclored at rcp.net.pe (ciclored) Date: Sun, 28 Jan 2007 11:58:58 -0500 Subject: [sustran] Re: Histories and Ideas Behind Bogota's BRT References: <001c01c7416d$4b718500$6b3841a5@universi0qgqrc> Message-ID: <002701c742fd$9c41b720$2201a8c0@your4105e587b6> Andrew, you can find Ardilla?s paper in English: http://tecnologiaysociedad.uniandes.edu.co/Seminario/transitcuritibabogota.pdf regards, Carlos Cordero ----- Original Message ----- From: Andrew Crane-Droesch To: Global 'South' Sustainable Transport Sent: Friday, January 26, 2007 12:13 PM Subject: [sustran] Histories and Ideas Behind Bogota's BRT Dear All, I've been following the Sustran listserv for quite some time now, but this is my first posting. Apologies if this question has been covered before. Regarding Bogot?'s widely hailed BRT system, who were the major designers of the system, and whose ideas did it rely upon? Was Curitiba's experience and expertise heavily relied upon? Did it involve international consultants or consulting firms? Or was it more of a homegrown affair? Who were the designers, and are they still active? Any relevant links to history of the system would be quite welcome. Many Thanks, Andrew Crane-Droesch United Nations Development Programme (UNDP)/ Global Environment Facility (GEF) 304 E 45th st, 9th Floor New York, NY 10016 andrew.crane-droesch@undp.org ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ -------------------------------------------------------- IMPORTANT NOTE to everyone who gets sustran-discuss messages via YAHOOGROUPS. Please go to http://list.jca.apc.org/manage/listinfo/sustran-discuss to join the real sustran-discuss and get full membership rights. The yahoogroups version is only a mirror and 'members' there cannot post to the real sustran-discuss (even if the yahoogroups site makes it seem like you can). Apologies for the confusing arrangement. ================================================================ SUSTRAN-DISCUSS is a forum devoted to discussion of people-centred, equitable and sustainable transport with a focus on developing countries (the 'Global South'). -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://list.jca.apc.org/public/sustran-discuss/attachments/20070128/0aed38b4/attachment.html From schipper at wri.org Mon Jan 29 02:35:06 2007 From: schipper at wri.org (Lee Schipper) Date: Sun, 28 Jan 2007 12:35:06 -0500 Subject: [sustran] Re: Histories and Ideas Behind Bogota's BRT Message-ID: Works fine and won't get trapped by the UNDP server size limit! >>> ciclored@rcp.net.pe 28/01/2007 11:58:58 >>> Andrew, you can find Ardilla?s paper in English: http://tecnologiaysociedad.uniandes.edu.co/Seminario/transitcuritibabogota.pdf regards, Carlos Cordero ----- Original Message ----- From: Andrew Crane-Droesch To: Global 'South' Sustainable Transport Sent: Friday, January 26, 2007 12:13 PM Subject: [sustran] Histories and Ideas Behind Bogota's BRT Dear All, I've been following the Sustran listserv for quite some time now, but this is my first posting. Apologies if this question has been covered before. Regarding Bogot?'s widely hailed BRT system, who were the major designers of the system, and whose ideas did it rely upon? Was Curitiba's experience and expertise heavily relied upon? Did it involve international consultants or consulting firms? Or was it more of a homegrown affair? Who were the designers, and are they still active? Any relevant links to history of the system would be quite welcome. Many Thanks, Andrew Crane-Droesch United Nations Development Programme (UNDP)/ Global Environment Facility (GEF) 304 E 45th st, 9th Floor New York, NY 10016 andrew.crane-droesch@undp.org ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ -------------------------------------------------------- IMPORTANT NOTE to everyone who gets sustran-discuss messages via YAHOOGROUPS. Please go to http://list.jca.apc.org/manage/listinfo/sustran-discuss to join the real sustran-discuss and get full membership rights. The yahoogroups version is only a mirror and 'members' there cannot post to the real sustran-discuss (even if the yahoogroups site makes it seem like you can). Apologies for the confusing arrangement. ================================================================ SUSTRAN-DISCUSS is a forum devoted to discussion of people-centred, equitable and sustainable transport with a focus on developing countries (the 'Global South'). From carlos.pardo at sutp.org Mon Jan 29 10:43:56 2007 From: carlos.pardo at sutp.org (Carlos F. Pardo SUTP) Date: Sun, 28 Jan 2007 20:43:56 -0500 Subject: [sustran] Re: Histories and Ideas Behind Bogota's BRT In-Reply-To: <53ec43147f5bb5d9dfb1caa0fe0ecfb4@71.247.20.215> References: <53ec43147f5bb5d9dfb1caa0fe0ecfb4@71.247.20.215> Message-ID: <45BD515C.1010602@sutp.org> An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://list.jca.apc.org/public/sustran-discuss/attachments/20070128/5a18716d/attachment.html From Eric.Britton at ecoplan.org Mon Jan 29 19:41:15 2007 From: Eric.Britton at ecoplan.org (Eric Britton (ChoiceMail)) Date: Mon, 29 Jan 2007 11:41:15 +0100 Subject: [sustran] 'London must take lead on climate change' In-Reply-To: <01ef01c74323$476ab3c0$0202a8c0@acer56fb35423d> Message-ID: <006a01c74392$02758190$6701a8c0@Home> World Economic Forum - 'London must take lead on climate change' Mayor of London Ken Livingstone will say in Davos today that he aims to make London the world's leading centre for research and financial development on climate change over the next five years. The Mayor is in Davos to attend the World Economic Forum. He will be concentrating today (Thursday) on how government and business can work with cities to accelerate global emissions reductions. London established the C40 Large Cities Climate Leadership Group - to accelerate emissions reductions in the world's largest cities. Last August the Mayor announced a partnership with the Bill Clinton's Foundation to take this forward. (Media-Newswire.com) - Mayor of London Ken Livingstone will say in Davos today that he aims to make London the world's leading centre for research and financial development on climate change over the next five years. The Mayor is in Davos to attend the World Economic Forum. He will be concentrating today ( Thursday ) on how government and business can work with cities to accelerate global emissions reductions. Ken Livingstone said today: 'The challenge of climate change requires immediate action across governments and business to effect change. 'Cities produce 75 per cent of global carbon emissions and it is therefore in cities that the battle against climate change will have to be won. 'To win this battle three things are required. 'First, determination to tackle climate change and not denial of its reality or consequences. 'Second, the most sophisticated financial institutions to respond to carbon trading and investment in new technologies. 'Third, state of the art scientific and technical research facilities to develop the technological solutions of the future. 'A number of cities have parts of this solution. But London is the only one that brings together all three. My administration is totally focused on this. 'That is why I am setting the target that in the next five years London should become the undisputed world leader in research and financial development on climate change. 'Climate change is a tremendous challenge to humanity. But for London it is also a tremendous opportunity. The world is shifting to a new technical and financial system in which we do not produce and waste energy, in the form of carbon, but must conserve it. London has the potential to be at the centre of this shift and intends to work with all the other great world cities to achieve it. That is why London established the C40 group of major world cities on climate change.' ENDS Notes to Editors London established the C40 Large Cities Climate Leadership Group - to accelerate emissions reductions in the world's largest cities. Last August the Mayor announced a partnership with the Bill Clinton's Foundation to take this forward. -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: winmail.dat Type: application/ms-tnef Size: 4828 bytes Desc: not available Url : http://list.jca.apc.org/public/sustran-discuss/attachments/20070129/2cee1f2c/winmail.bin From martincassini at blueyonder.co.uk Mon Jan 29 19:57:41 2007 From: martincassini at blueyonder.co.uk (Martin Cassini) Date: Mon, 29 Jan 2007 10:57:41 -0000 Subject: [sustran] Re: 'London must take lead on climate change' In-Reply-To: <006a01c74392$02758190$6701a8c0@Home> Message-ID: <002e01c74394$4c827f70$fe3c2352@mc> Excuse me while I reach for the sick bag. Under Ken Livingstone's watch, some 1900 new sets of expensive gas and electricity-guzzling traffic lights have been inflicted on an already grotesquely over-regulated city. Many of them are at tiny crossings in quiet areas. There is a brand new set at the end of my one-way street with a left-turn-only into a one-way road. Thanks, Ken, once more you have succeeded in conjuring congestion where there was none before. Martin -----Original Message----- From: sustran-discuss-bounces+martincassini=blueyonder.co.uk@list.jca.apc.org [mailto:sustran-discuss-bounces+martincassini=blueyonder.co.uk@list.jca. apc.org] On Behalf Of Eric Britton (ChoiceMail) Sent: 29 January 2007 10:41 To: NewMobilityCafe@yahoogroups.com; Kyotoworldcities@yahoogroups.com Cc: Sustran-discuss@jca.apc.org Subject: [sustran] 'London must take lead on climate change' World Economic Forum - 'London must take lead on climate change' Mayor of London Ken Livingstone will say in Davos today that he aims to make London the world's leading centre for research and financial development on climate change over the next five years. The Mayor is in Davos to attend the World Economic Forum. He will be concentrating today (Thursday) on how government and business can work with cities to accelerate global emissions reductions. London established the C40 Large Cities Climate Leadership Group - to accelerate emissions reductions in the world's largest cities. Last August the Mayor announced a partnership with the Bill Clinton's Foundation to take this forward. (Media-Newswire.com) - Mayor of London Ken Livingstone will say in Davos today that he aims to make London the world's leading centre for research and financial development on climate change over the next five years. The Mayor is in Davos to attend the World Economic Forum. He will be concentrating today ( Thursday ) on how government and business can work with cities to accelerate global emissions reductions. Ken Livingstone said today: 'The challenge of climate change requires immediate action across governments and business to effect change. 'Cities produce 75 per cent of global carbon emissions and it is therefore in cities that the battle against climate change will have to be won. 'To win this battle three things are required. 'First, determination to tackle climate change and not denial of its reality or consequences. 'Second, the most sophisticated financial institutions to respond to carbon trading and investment in new technologies. 'Third, state of the art scientific and technical research facilities to develop the technological solutions of the future. 'A number of cities have parts of this solution. But London is the only one that brings together all three. My administration is totally focused on this. 'That is why I am setting the target that in the next five years London should become the undisputed world leader in research and financial development on climate change. 'Climate change is a tremendous challenge to humanity. But for London it is also a tremendous opportunity. The world is shifting to a new technical and financial system in which we do not produce and waste energy, in the form of carbon, but must conserve it. London has the potential to be at the centre of this shift and intends to work with all the other great world cities to achieve it. That is why London established the C40 group of major world cities on climate change.' ENDS Notes to Editors London established the C40 Large Cities Climate Leadership Group - to accelerate emissions reductions in the world's largest cities. Last August the Mayor announced a partnership with the Bill Clinton's Foundation to take this forward. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://list.jca.apc.org/public/sustran-discuss/attachments/20070129/7fd2fa8b/attachment.html From carlos.pardo at sutp.org Mon Jan 29 22:35:50 2007 From: carlos.pardo at sutp.org (Carlos F. Pardo SUTP) Date: Mon, 29 Jan 2007 08:35:50 -0500 Subject: [sustran] Re: Old Mobility rules - 5 kinds of cities In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <45BDF836.2070801@sutp.org> An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://list.jca.apc.org/public/sustran-discuss/attachments/20070129/b02d8b49/attachment.html From edelman at greenidea.info Tue Jan 30 03:46:08 2007 From: edelman at greenidea.info (Todd Edelman) Date: Mon, 29 Jan 2007 19:46:08 +0100 Subject: [sustran] Efficient Use of Energy in Transport: 9 Innovative Projects supported by the IEE Programme Message-ID: <45BE40F0.7010008@greenidea.info> The transport sector plays a central role in the European economy and as such accounts for around 30% of the energy consumption in Europe. 98% of the energy consumed in this sector is fossil fuel. As transport is also the fastest growing sector in terms of energy use, it is essential to realise the potential for energy efficiency gains in this sector. -- -------------------------------------------- Todd Edelman Director Green Idea Factory Korunn? 72 CZ-10100 Praha 10 Czech Republic ++420 605 915 970 ++420 222 517 832 Skype: toddedelman edelman@greenidea.eu http://www.worldcarfree.net/onthetrain Green Idea Factory, a member of World Carfree Network From carlos.pardo at sutp.org Tue Jan 30 05:27:30 2007 From: carlos.pardo at sutp.org (Carlos F. Pardo SUTP) Date: Mon, 29 Jan 2007 15:27:30 -0500 Subject: [sustran] GTZ Sourcebook in Chinese now available online Message-ID: <45BE58B2.2070700@sutp.org> Dear all, The Chinese version of the GTZ Sustainable Transport Sourcebook for Policy-makers in Developing Cities is now available online. 22 modules of the Sourcebook have been translated into Chinese and can now be downloaded from our resources section (registered users) in www.sutp.org . From March 2007, all 23 modules will be available in Chinese language. Please direct any questions to sutp@sutp.org (not to the listgroup). Best regards, -- Carlos F. Pardo Coordinador de Proyecto GTZ - Proyecto de Transporte Sostenible (SUTP, SUTP-LAC) Cl 126 # 52A-28 of 404 Bogot? D.C., Colombia Tel: +57 (1) 215 7812 Mobile: +57 (3) 15 296 0662 e-mail: carlos.pardo@sutp.org P?gina: www.sutp.org From martincassini at blueyonder.co.uk Mon Jan 29 19:57:41 2007 From: martincassini at blueyonder.co.uk (Martin Cassini) Date: Mon, 29 Jan 2007 10:57:41 -0000 Subject: [sustran] Re: 'London must take lead on climate change' In-Reply-To: <006a01c74392$02758190$6701a8c0@Home> Message-ID: <002e01c74394$4c827f70$fe3c2352@mc> Excuse me while I reach for the sick bag. Under Ken Livingstone's watch, some 1900 new sets of expensive gas and electricity-guzzling traffic lights have been inflicted on an already grotesquely over-regulated city. Many of them are at tiny crossings in quiet areas. There is a brand new set at the end of my one-way street with a left-turn-only into a one-way road. Thanks, Ken, once more you have succeeded in conjuring congestion where there was none before. Martin -----Original Message----- From: sustran-discuss-bounces+martincassini=blueyonder.co.uk@list.jca.apc.org [mailto:sustran-discuss-bounces+martincassini=blueyonder.co.uk@list.jca. apc.org] On Behalf Of Eric Britton (ChoiceMail) Sent: 29 January 2007 10:41 To: NewMobilityCafe@yahoogroups.com; Kyotoworldcities@yahoogroups.com Cc: Sustran-discuss@jca.apc.org Subject: [sustran] 'London must take lead on climate change' World Economic Forum - 'London must take lead on climate change' Mayor of London Ken Livingstone will say in Davos today that he aims to make London the world's leading centre for research and financial development on climate change over the next five years. The Mayor is in Davos to attend the World Economic Forum. He will be concentrating today (Thursday) on how government and business can work with cities to accelerate global emissions reductions. London established the C40 Large Cities Climate Leadership Group - to accelerate emissions reductions in the world's largest cities. Last August the Mayor announced a partnership with the Bill Clinton's Foundation to take this forward. (Media-Newswire.com) - Mayor of London Ken Livingstone will say in Davos today that he aims to make London the world's leading centre for research and financial development on climate change over the next five years. The Mayor is in Davos to attend the World Economic Forum. He will be concentrating today ( Thursday ) on how government and business can work with cities to accelerate global emissions reductions. Ken Livingstone said today: 'The challenge of climate change requires immediate action across governments and business to effect change. 'Cities produce 75 per cent of global carbon emissions and it is therefore in cities that the battle against climate change will have to be won. 'To win this battle three things are required. 'First, determination to tackle climate change and not denial of its reality or consequences. 'Second, the most sophisticated financial institutions to respond to carbon trading and investment in new technologies. 'Third, state of the art scientific and technical research facilities to develop the technological solutions of the future. 'A number of cities have parts of this solution. But London is the only one that brings together all three. My administration is totally focused on this. 'That is why I am setting the target that in the next five years London should become the undisputed world leader in research and financial development on climate change. 'Climate change is a tremendous challenge to humanity. But for London it is also a tremendous opportunity. The world is shifting to a new technical and financial system in which we do not produce and waste energy, in the form of carbon, but must conserve it. London has the potential to be at the centre of this shift and intends to work with all the other great world cities to achieve it. That is why London established the C40 group of major world cities on climate change.' ENDS Notes to Editors London established the C40 Large Cities Climate Leadership Group - to accelerate emissions reductions in the world's largest cities. Last August the Mayor announced a partnership with the Bill Clinton's Foundation to take this forward. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://list.jca.apc.org/public/sustran-discuss/attachments/20070129/7fd2fa8b/attachment-0001.html From anirudhsingh1 at gmail.com Wed Jan 31 01:21:02 2007 From: anirudhsingh1 at gmail.com (anirudh singh bais) Date: Tue, 30 Jan 2007 21:51:02 +0530 Subject: [sustran] hi all Message-ID: <549e2f6c0701300821t49125efdl6bc47325c739ba24@mail.gmail.com> I am studying the concept of "central area congestion pricing" and its applicability in Indian context. Presently I am researching on ? Calculating the optimal level of congestion. ? Arriving at best possible level of charge to be levied for pricing. It would be really helpful to find some examples and prior work done in these areas. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://list.jca.apc.org/public/sustran-discuss/attachments/20070130/2379791e/attachment.html From sunny.enie at gmail.com Wed Jan 31 02:27:35 2007 From: sunny.enie at gmail.com (Sunny) Date: Wed, 31 Jan 2007 00:27:35 +0700 Subject: [sustran] Re: hi all In-Reply-To: <549e2f6c0701300821t49125efdl6bc47325c739ba24@mail.gmail.com> References: <549e2f6c0701300821t49125efdl6bc47325c739ba24@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <45BF8007.8020200@gmail.com> Hi anirudh It is nice that you are interested in the area of congestion pricing and that too applying it in the Indian context. from my opinion i think just applying congestion pricing without other TDM measures would reduce the effect of the program. You might also want to see on improving other transit facilities while applying pricing. We at SUTP have a module on Economic Instruments which can provide the basic details of the economic options and there is also the TDM encyclopedia from Todd Litman. I guess even Lee schipper would be having good deal of info on congestion pricing. Our website is www.sutp.org and you can download the economic instruments module and also some other presentations on pricing. cheers! sunny anirudh singh bais wrote: > I am studying the concept of "central area congestion pricing" and its > applicability in Indian context. Presently I am researching on > ? Calculating the optimal level of congestion. > ? Arriving at best possible level of charge to be levied for > pricing. > > It would be really helpful to find some examples and prior work done > in these areas. From carlacalazans at gmail.com Wed Jan 31 05:58:27 2007 From: carlacalazans at gmail.com (Carla) Date: Tue, 30 Jan 2007 18:58:27 -0200 Subject: [sustran] Requalifying central residential areas Message-ID: <001301c744b1$65736530$01fea8c0@carla> I am studying the impacts of the often land use changing and the growing urban traffic circulation in central residential areas in a southern brazilian capital. Evaluating the use of traffic calming programs, or the simple application of the mesures, to requalify these space to the residents. I would appreciate if anyone could contribute to this research -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://list.jca.apc.org/public/sustran-discuss/attachments/20070130/fb9f2a4a/attachment.html From laura.lauramachado at gmail.com Wed Jan 31 08:44:59 2007 From: laura.lauramachado at gmail.com (Laura) Date: Tue, 30 Jan 2007 21:44:59 -0200 Subject: [sustran] Research Sustainable Mobility Message-ID: <47b030540701301544q662dcb6av6f5f04a6ebeb3d65@mail.gmail.com> I am studying the Sustainable Mobility influence at the quality of life for inhabitants, creating more livability communities that depend less on automobile . Select the indicators main and propose a specific index for the southern brazilian capital (Porto Alegre). I would appreciate if anyone could contribute to this research. Laura -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://list.jca.apc.org/public/sustran-discuss/attachments/20070130/9a1a3ff4/attachment.html From carlos.pardo at sutp.org Wed Jan 31 23:00:08 2007 From: carlos.pardo at sutp.org (Carlos F. Pardo SUTP) Date: Wed, 31 Jan 2007 09:00:08 -0500 Subject: [sustran] Biofuels- everything that shines is gold? Message-ID: <45C0A0E8.6050102@sutp.org> An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://list.jca.apc.org/public/sustran-discuss/attachments/20070131/cba2b9a8/attachment.html