Transcript Allocating - David Levinson

Allocating
David Levinson,
Flow through
upstream lane (Ql)
Flow through
upstream section (Q)
Flow through
bottleneck (q)
Where Does
Congestion
Come From?
Inputs & Outputs
Input-Output Diagram
Cumulative Count
25
20
15
10
5
0
0
2
4
6
8
Time
C um ula tive Arriva ls
C um ula tive De pa rture s
10
12
How Do We Manage
Congestion
Infrastructure (Assembly)
• Travel Demand Management (Administering)
• Transportation Systems Management (TSM)
[In pairs, everyone come up with a list of 3 Tools of
TSM (things that affect the supply or capacity, not
the demand), what are the advantages and
disadvantages of each]
• Intelligent Transportation Systems (ITS) (TSM
rebranded + more advanced technology)
•
Why TSM?
•
•
•
•
We have largely built out existing transportation
network (S-Curve). [What is an S-Curve?]
Highways are a mature system.
More efficient (faster, safer, greater person flows
(and vehicle flows)) use of existing transportation
facilities without significant new construction.
Complements TDM strategies - but not aimed at
reducing demand.
Some TSM/ITS Tools
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
High Occupancy Vehicle Lanes (HOV Lanes)
High Occupancy Toll Lanes (HOT Lanes)
Bus Priority Lanes, Queue Jumpers, Signal Pre-emption
Park and Ride Lots
Ramp Meters
Highway Helpers
Variable Message Signs
Electronic Toll Collection
Highway Access Management
Other “Intelligent Transportation Systems”
Other
How Should We Manage
Congestion
•
Pricing
Classic Explanation
P rice,
cost
Marginal cost, short run
Average cost , short run
Toll
P*
Po
Demand
Legend:
Q* Qo
Quant it y
P* = Optim a l pric e with tolls
Q* = Am ount of trave l with tolls
Po = P rice without tolls
Qo = Am ount of trave l without tolls
= We lfa re loss without tolls
Travel t ime
(LOS)
SF
SE
SD
SC
SB
SA
Travel t ime functi on
(s hort -run average cos t)
Quanti ty (t raffi c flow)
Money price
to t ravelers $
Revealed demand
Classic
Explanation
Unpacked
DA (Demand at LOS A)
DF
Quanti ty (t raffi c flow)
Welfare Analysis
But Travel Time Varies
with Time
•
•
•
Classic explanation doesn’t account for that.
Recall I/O Diagram
What is marginal delay?
Inputs & Outputs
Input-Output Diagram
Cumulative Count
25
20
15
10
5
0
0
2
4
6
8
Time
C um ula tive Arriva ls
C um ula tive De pa rture s
10
12
Marginal Delay
Ma rgina l De la y (e x cluding o wn de la y)
Marginal Delay
10
9
8
7
6
5
4
3
2
1
0
0
5
10
15
Cumulative Arrivals (Q)
20
25
HOT Lanes
•
•
Congestion pricing is “too hard” politically at
this time.
What are HOT Lanes?
Pricing is Inevitable
•
•
Why?
Gas tax revenue is shrinking as the fleet becomes
more fuel efficient –
–
–
–
•
•
•
•
better Internal Combustion Engine,
Hybrid vehicles
Alternative fuel vehicles
Fuel Cells
Yet roads still need to be financed
Congestion will still be problem
Devolution of power changes incentives (free riders)
Electronic toll collection makes pricing much easier.
London’s
Congestion
Charging Scheme
Presentation by Karen Akins to TRB Pricing Committee
January 15, 2002
Purpose of Presentation
• Briefly familiarize TRB Pricing
committee with details of
London’s scheme
• Explain unique circumstances
leading to successful
introduction of scheme
• Identify factors which will
influence outcome of the
scheme
Greater London
Charging zone is 8 square miles and covers 1.3% of
the total 617 square miles of Greater London.
Scheme Operation
• Daily, weekly, monthly or annual license for
individual vehicle registration number
• Flat charge of 5 pounds per day (MondayFriday 7am-6:30 pm) for all vehicles*
• Payment by mail, telephone, retail, internet
• Late payment until midnight, but charge rises
to 10 pounds after 10pm
– *Exceptions/discounts granted
How it would work
• A network of 230
cameras will be located
at sites throughout the
charging zone, not just at
the boundaries. All the
main entry points will be
covered.
• Every single lane of
traffic will be monitored
at both entrances and
exits to the charging
zone
Signage
Key Benefits of Scheme
• Reduce the amount of traffic in central London by 1015%
• In turn, this would cut traffic delays by about 25%
• Less traffic inside and outside the central zone
• Help bus operations
• Produce substantial net revenues for transport in
London (almost $200 million per year)
Source: Transport for London
London 2003
• Mayor Ken Livingstone- strong political leadership
• Transportation crisis-years of underinvestment in
public transportation infrastructure (by law revenues
tied to improvements)
• Public support- Traffic congestion is Londoners’ top
transport issue
• Absence of privacy issues (London as “CCTV capital
of the world”, City “Ring of Steel”)
Mayor Ken Livingstone
• Mayor of London in 1980’s
• GLC Abolished by Thatcher
government in 1986
• GLA re-established as strategic
authority-specific authority given for
congestion charging
• Mayoral elections in 2000Livingstone re-elected
• All mayoral candidates supported
congestion charging, except one
Historic Underinvestment in
Public Transportation
• Two decades of population growth
and one decade of economic
growth
• Unpredictable and low level of
investment by central government
in tube
• Congestion charging revenues are
the only source of significant
funding for investment in
transportation at mayor’s discretion
Population Growth
Congestion
Charging will net
130 million pounds
per year
Support by national government
• 1964-Sneed Report on
Road Pricing, official
endorsement of concept
• 1995-London Congestion
Research Program
publication
• 1999-GLA formed and
given specific authority
for road pricing
• 2000-Independent
ROCOL group publishes
technical assessment
Public Support
Ken Livingstone elected mayor by overwhelming
majority (58%) on a platform of congestion charging
 Congestion charging is backed by 53% of
Londoners if revenue is solely used for making
significant improvements to public transportation
(Source: MORI poll, July 2001)
Public consultation-some 2,500 individuals and
organizations responded during two rounds (July to
October 2001 and December 2001-January 2002)
Political Compromises
Examples
1. Flat fee
2. Exemptions
3. Discounts
4. Hours
What would Vickery think?
Flat Fee
Trucks originally were to be charged 15 pounds per day,
now they will pay only 5 like everyone else
Freight Transport Association lobbying
Discounts
• Residents’ 90% discount, for example
– 80,000 households within charging zone
– Car ownership 50%
– Justification: 80% of trips start and end in boroughs outside
charging zone
Most deprived wards
Original boundaries proposed
did not extend south of river
Exemptions
•
•
•
•
•
•
Motorcycles, mopeds
Black cabs
Licensed mini-cabs
Disabled passenger vehicles
Emergency service vehicles
NHS vehicles exempt from duty
Public Opposition
• Westminster City Council-call for “public inquiry” and
failed legal challenge
• Kennington residents(severance /effect on property
values)-protest and failed legal challenge
• Restaurant and theater workers (cost and safety for
female workers)
• Meat traders at Spitalfields Market-cost
• Inner London charities-cost to volunteers
• Individual boroughs-majority do not support scheme
Privacy Issues
(or lack thereof)
“Ring of Steel” in
City of London for
protection from IRA
bombs
London is already unofficial CCTV capital of
the world, what’s one more camera?
Factors Influencing Outcome
• Discounts/exemptions-are they too generous? Is
scheme too watered down due to need for political
compromise?
• Will implementation be smooth”-Will call center be
overwhelmed if Post Office doesn’t participate?
• Are public transportation improvements so far
sufficient to handle increased ridership?
Most Likely Implementation Problems
• Call center operation/post office
• Database problems-enforcement
• Motorcycle/moped/bicycle parking
problems
• Adequacy of public transport system to
handle additional ridership?
Public Transportation
Improvements
• Specific emphasis on buses (i.e. 60 new routes)
• Expanded underground and rail capacity with new
services across central London (long term)
New tram systems
West London Tram
Ready in 2009
Cross River Tram
Ready in 2011
72 million passengers/year
50 million passengers/year
The Future?
• Will Ken drop scheme after two months
if the scheme is not successful? - odds
are 4 to 1 he’ll drop it within first year
• If successful, other cities in U.K. will
quickly follow, charge itself will likely be
increased from 5 pounds
Big C Day
February 17, 2003
How to follow issue:
• www.transportforlondon.gov.uk (official
local government website for London)
• www.bbc.co.uk/congestion (best overall
website)
• www.guardian.co.uk (best commentary)
• www.sod-u-ken.com (forum for
opposition)
For a copy of the paper or
further information, contact:
Karen Akins
City Design and Social Science
283 Maple Street
Stowe, VT 05672
(802) 793-1481
[email protected]