Upload
nguyentuong
View
218
Download
1
Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
Auckland Council
Auckland Council Road Charging Options Study: Scheme Design and Costing
Review of the Operational and Business Requirements of a Road Charging Scheme
1 October 2014
Part A - Review of the Operational and Business Requirements of a Road Charging Scheme
Table of Contents
Key conclusions 2
1. Introduction 4
2. Customer channels and engagement 7
3. Vehicle detection and technology 14
4. Back office 26
5. Enforcement and legal powers 32
6. Operating costs 35
7. Conclusions 39
Annex A – Terms of reference 41
Annex B – Road charging options 42
Annex C – ANPR performance challenges 44
Annex D – Examples of mounting structures for roadside equipment 47
Part A - Review of the Operational and Business Requirements of a Road Charging Scheme 1
Glossary
Abbreviation Definition
AC Auckland Council
ANPR Automatic Number Plate Recognition
AT Auckland Transport
ATM Automatic Teller Machine
CBD Central Business District
DSRC Dedicated Short Range Communications
ERP Electronic Road Pricing (Singapore)
ETC Electronic Toll Collection
GPS Global Positioning System
GNSS Global Navigation Satellite System
HRV Heavy Rigid Vehicle
LRV Light Rigid Vehicle
LPR Licence Plate Recognition (same as ANPR)
LTA Land Transport Authority
MCL Melbourne City Link
NG Northern Gateway
NZ Transport Agency New Zealand Transport Agency
OBU On-Board Unit
OCR Optical Character Recognition
PCN Penalty Charge Notice
RFID Radio Frequency Identification
SMS Short Message Service
TfL Transport for London
VRM Vehicle Registration Mark
Part A - Review of the Operational and Business Requirements of a Road Charging Scheme 2
Key conclusions
Though there are many operational and technical “lessons” that can be applied from other schemes to
the potential road charging schemes being considered for Auckland, the main conclusions we can
make are:
a) It needs to be made easy for drivers to understand and use; collecting payments through
customer accounts and the internet are the preferred and lowest cost methods for the majority
of schemes elsewhere. Cash/retail and call centre channels may also be required but have
high processing costs. Casual users – those without accounts - need to have an easy means
to pay that is also cost effective for the operator.
b) Once drivers have become used to the operation of a scheme, early provisions for excess
customer channel capacity can be fine-tuned to optimise customer service and operating
costs. Lower cost channels should have incentives to attract customers. The continuing
optimisation of customer channels and costs has been demonstrated on the Northern
Gateway toll road as well as other schemes around the world.
c) Customer privacy is a key concern; the scheme needs to carefully address what and how
data is stored.
d) The majority of city area or cordon schemes use cameras for vehicle detection. Tag and
beacon is primarily used as an addition to cameras where there is strong business case for
improved detection rates, given the additional cost of issuing and managing tags; this is
usually where there are multiple detection events needed to calculate the charge due. There
are no urban schemes that use GPS devices for road charging.
e) Data quality is a key driver of scheme operating cost and efficiency in collecting revenue,
including enforcement evidence, customer data and transaction data. In most cases charging
schemes have gone live with an acceptable level of quality and then fine-tuned the operation
to improve quality, reduce costs and collect additional revenue.
f) The quality of vehicle registration data held on the Motor Vehicle Register is a key
determinant of the feasibility of enforcement.
g) The on-street detection infrastructure can become a focus for opposition; for an urban
scheme the aesthetic appearance of equipment needs to be carefully designed to be
acceptable, especially if it is on residential roads. The detection equipment can also impact
nearby parking, driveways and access which can make it hard to locate.
h) Enforcement processes should build on existing proven processes that drivers already
understand primarily to make them acceptable and thereby reduce the risk of challenge.
Part A - Review of the Operational and Business Requirements of a Road Charging Scheme 3
i) The categories of exemptions and discounts should be minimised as there can be significant
costs in processing them in addition to the revenue not collected. For example, in London
over 60% of vehicles driving in the city are exempt or discounted.
j) The costs of other schemes are generally not a reliable benchmark for planning a new
scheme as there are so many factors that make the schemes different. Cost of collection as a
proportion of the revenue collected can range from 15-70% depending on many local factors.
Unit costs, are however, more comparable e.g. per camera, call centre payment, card
payment. Therefore, it is generally more useful to model the costs and revenue of a specific
scheme based on the intended charging parameters, a high level design, traffic data, and unit
costs for the transactions involved. Most charging scheme projects initially under-estimate the
costs of operation and interacting with customers and take some time to fine tune their
operations.
Part A - Review of the Operational and Business Requirements of a Road Charging Scheme 4
1. Introduction
1.1. Purpose of this document
This document sets out experience and ‘lessons learnt’ from previous road charging schemes, and
identifies how their outcomes may be used to guide the options being considered for road charging in
Auckland. Annex A describes the terms of reference for this report.
1.2. Road charging scheme options
In summary the road charging options being considered for Auckland are:
• A motorway charging scheme
• A cordon-based scheme.
Further details of these schemes are set out at Annex B.
1.3. Structure of this document
Our intent is to capture the lessons learnt from other road charging schemes in a way that then
assists in defining the business and technical requirements for these options. The document is
structured according to the main business process and technology elements of a road charging
operation identifying lessons in the relevant area.
Figure 1 summarises a high level process model which is used as a checklist to bring out lessons
learnt in each of:
a) Customer channels and engagement (section 2)
b) Vehicle detection and technology (section 3)
c) Back office (section 4)
d) Enforcement (section 5).
Section 6 explores the relevance of costs of other schemes to Auckland.
In Section 7 we summarise the main areas where lessons from other schemes have impact.
Part A - Review of the Operational and Business Requirements of a Road Charging Scheme 5
Figure 1: High level process summary for typical road charging activities
In each area we identify selected aspects where the experience of other schemes is useful and
relevant to Auckland.
Table 1 on the following page provides a summary of the main schemes we draw on as references in
this document.
1. Customer Channels• Contact channels• Payment channels• Cash collection• Account management• Marketing and communications
2. Vehicle Detection• Vehicle passage records• Tag transactions• Manage detection data quality• Manage on-street infrastructure• Store evidence
3. Back Office• Reconcile vehicle transactions
and payments/accounts• Manage exemptions and
discounts• Process customer accounts and
registrations• Manage customer data quality• Reconcile interoperable accounts• Verification of vehicle detection
records• Refer non-payers to enforcement• Process top-ups/billing of post-
pay accounts
4. Enforcement• Validate violation data/evidence• Gather owner records from Vehicle
Registrar• Issue violation/penalty notices• Receive penalty payments• Manage enforcement data quality• Register debts• Manage input to court process• Manage appeals• Identify persistent non-payers• Initiate debt collection/bailiff action• On-street enforcement• International debt collection
Part A - Review of the Operational and Business Requirements of a Road Charging Scheme 6
Table 1: Reference scheme summary
Scheme Operating hours
Charge/Tax/Toll Payment Detection/Enforcement Transactions/trips per day
Go-live Capital cost
Operating cost
Stockholm Congestion Tax
Weekdays 6.30 am – 6.30 pm
Cordon crossing
SEK 10, 15, 20 with maximum of SEK 60 per day
Monthly in arrears Cameras at 18 locations 350k-400k 2007 following 2006 trial
1.9bn SEK
($342m)
220m SEK ($39.6m)
London Congestion Charging
Weekdays 7am-6pm
Area daily charge
£11.50 casual user
£10.50 account holder
Various discounts and exemptions
In advance, on the day or following day; or for accounts monthly in arrears
Cameras at ~ 180 locations on the boundary and 25 locations internally
170k unique vehicles of which only 67k pay
Feb 2003 £162m
($324m)
£90m
($180m)
Milan Area C Weekdays 7.30am-7.30pm, excl Thurs 7.30 – 6pm
Area daily charge
€5
Discounts and exemptions
In advance, on the day or next day – ticket activation based
€15 late payment
Cameras at 43 surveillance points – of which 7 are only for public transport
100k unique vehicles
Jan 2012 – was previously Eco-pass environmental zone
Not published
€7m
($11.2m)
Dartford ‘Freeflow’ river crossing
7 days a week 6am-10pm
Charge for a river crossing
£2.50 for a car but varies by class of vehicle
Web
Call centre
Account (with and without a tag)
Cameras and tag detectors on gantries across each carriageway
140k-150k crossings Nov 2014 conversion from barrier to open road. ETC from 1991
£62m
($124m)
£36m
($72m)
Northern Gateway
7 days/week $2.20 LRV per trip
$4.40 HRV per trip
Within 5 days of trip
Cameras at one location 13k trips 2009 $446k $5.3m
Part A - Review of the Operational and Business Requirements of a Road Charging Scheme 7
2. Customer channels and engagement
2.1. Scheme complexity, user understanding and acceptability
One of the key challenges for road charging is whether users can easily understand how the scheme
operates and therefore the actions they must take to use it efficiently. The high cost of compliance for
end users often stems from users not being able to easily understand the scheme; this can then
impose additional loading and costs on the operation of customer channels and also feed stakeholder
objections if service levels are not met under high loading conditions.
Singapore
The Electronic Road Pricing (ERP) scheme in Singapore is relatively complex with both a Central
Business District (CBD) charging zone and motorway/urban expressway charging and charges
varying by time of day and direction of travel. The main objective was to reduce congestion. ERP
went live in 1998. At first glance, the complexity has not been a significant problem for users.
However, Singaporeans were already used to paying for use of the road through a paper-based Area
Licensing Scheme introduced in 1975. The change in 1998 was merely to the method of collection
from users who were already very familiar with road charging.
London
The London Congestion Charging Scheme is a simple single zone operating as a charged area. It
went live in 2003. Though there is a boundary, the driver is liable to pay for driving inside the “area”
for a flat daily charge during operating hours (0700-1800, Mon-Fri). The charge was set at £5 in 2003
(an amount equivalent to a return tube fare from Zone 3) to drive modal shift and reduce congestion in
central London. Drivers also had the choice to select an alternative route – driving around the zone.
Though the scheme was simple to understand, because Londoners were generally not used to paying
a charge for use of the road, a substantial publicity and education exercise was needed. In addition
the customer contact channels needed to be able to service a high and relatively unpredictable
volume of calls before and during go-live.
Additional provision for customer contact resources was made to handle a “bow-wave” of customer
events at go-live. Retail channels for cash payment were provided – although they have since been
phased out. Regarding call centre usage, TfL reported in Congestion Charging Six Months On (Oct
2003):
Following 17 February 2003 payments or enquiries via the call centre fell from 167,000 to around 70,000 per week over the summer months. The reduction in call volumes since February is explained by increased public awareness of the scheme both in terms of policy and its operation, and reduced use of the call centre for payments. Average call time reduced from just over three and a half minutes in the early weeks of the scheme, to below three minutes after three months of operation. This reduction in average call time has been sustained.
Part A - Review of the Operational and Business Requirements of a Road Charging Scheme 8
Stockholm
The Stockholm Congestion Tax went live in 2006 as a trial and then following a referendum in 2007
was implemented permanently. It is a relatively complex scheme:
• It is a cordon scheme
• Charges vary by direction of travel
• Charges vary according to time spent inside the cordon but are capped at a maximum amount
for the day
• Some users are not charged if they transit the city within a given time.
However, it is geographically very simple – the boundary is very well defined through the bridges and
islands as indicated in Figure 2 below. The infrastructure used to detect vehicles is also very visible
and imposing – there is little likelihood that a driver will not see they are approaching a cordon point.
Figure 2: Stockholm scheme boundary and example detection infrastructure
Source: SNRA
The cordon points are located on areas where there is lots of space for equipment and there are large
gaps between the premises inside and outside the cordon.
The congestion tax cannot be paid through the call centre, but rather using other channels following
issue of monthly tax bills. Because the scheme is legislated as a tax, all users must be registered.
This reduces the costs associated with the call centre.
Part A - Review of the Operational and Business Requirements of a Road Charging Scheme 9
Milan
The Area C congestion zone went live in Jan 2012 in Milan. It covered the same area as the earlier
Ecopass environmental zone, illustrated in Figure 3 below, which had been in operation since January
2008. The change to a congestion zone was easy for users to understand. Also the zone boundary
follows the very well understood city wall – the Cerchia dei Bastoni. The scheme was treated as a trial
in 2012 to gauge public reaction; partly because it used a wide range of payment channels to procure
a “ticket” (which then had to be activated) - including shops, bank ATMs, web, call centre, parking
meters, selected garages, and SMS. This was introduced in a conservative and cautious manner
giving users maximum opportunity to understand and comment. It is an Area scheme.
Cars entering Milan’s ‘Area C’ are detected by a system of 43 electronic gates equipped with Automatic Number Plate Recognition (ANPR) technology. The fee charged per day is €5. Mopeds, motorcycles, electric cars, vehicles for disabled people as well as some other vehicle categories are exempt. Residents have 40 free accesses per year and pay €2 from the 41st access.
Figure 3: Ecopass access gates (from 2008) – evolved into Area C in 2012
Area C Camera Detection Site – Porto di Romano – 2 Lanes
Source: Comune di Milano Source: Google
Melbourne City Link
Melbourne City Link (MCL) is the main link between Melbourne’s south east and the airport. It went live in the summer of 2000 as one of the world’s first fully free flow electronic toll roads at a time when there were many tourists in town and many Melbourne residents had gone on holiday. This unfortunate timing was further complicated by the fact that up to that point Melbourne had had no experience of paying tolls (electronic or otherwise) apart from a rudimentary system on a river crossing which had been removed some years previously. The prior marketing campaign aimed at the residents did not reach the tourists in the city, causing overloading of contact channels by those who did not understand the scheme. It took Transurban, the owners of MCL some time to implement effective customer service operations with efficient account management, service quality and customer satisfaction.
Part A - Review of the Operational and Business Requirements of a Road Charging Scheme 10
Key Conclusions for Auckland
• Where there has been a similar scheme or trial already in operation it reduces the risk:
o That customers will not understand the scheme
o Of contact channel overloading
• Where a new charging scheme is to be introduced without a predecessor, the charging policy and
system needs to be very simple. Otherwise there is a risk of high levels of non-compliance and systemic
opposition.
• There needs to be a full customer education and marketing campaign for a scheme to be successful. In
addition there needs to be consideration of casual users who can easily discover how to pay the charge
without placing a heavy burden on the operation.
• Provision of spare customer service capacity to serve high demand scenarios can have a significant
cost impact but in the short term may be needed to ease customer acceptance.
• The means of payment in the early stages may need to be more varied (and therefore more costly); the
long term payment channel strategy can be optimised later once users have understood the system.
• Delivery of customer service for open road charging is similar to any service oriented business –
banking, telecoms, and utilities - and differs from traditional ‘toll plaza’ cash collection models.
2.2. Casual users
There needs to be a simple means for visitors or casual users to participate in the scheme at
acceptable cost.
London Congestion Charging
Casual users – without a CC Autopay Account (private vehicles) or CC Fleet Account (commercial
vehicles) – can pay on the day or the following day over the internet or call centre. The daily charge
was £10 ($20) and rose to £11.50 ($23) on 16 June 2014, if paid on the day; if paid the following day
the charge is now £13.50 ($27).
Stockholm
As a tax it does not apply to foreign vehicles and all Swedish vehicle owners must be registered for
tax.
Milan
The €5 charge can be paid by casual users up to midnight on the following day through the wide
range of payment channels. This involves two steps:
• Purchasing the “entrance ticket”
• Activating the ticket for the specific day.
The ticket can be purchased at:
• Parking meters
• Newsagents and tobacconists
• Branches and ATMs of the Intesa Sanpaolo bank
Part A - Review of the Operational and Business Requirements of a Road Charging Scheme 11
• Online at www.areac.it
• Through the call centre at the number + 39.02.48684001
• Garages and petrol stations.
There is a high cost for operating this wide range of payment channels.
Northern Gateway
Most users have tolling accounts on the Northern Gateway toll road; however, casual users can pay
within 5 days of their trip either at kiosks, on the web, or through the call centre.
Key Conclusions for Auckland
• Making it easy for casual users to pay without having accounts reduces the operational costs of the
scheme.
2.3. Use of digital channels
Wider usage of mobile phones, the internet and payment accounts have reduced the cost of operation
for a charging scheme. But not all users can operate digital payment channels and some are
concerned about privacy so do not wish to register their details.
Northern Gateway
NZ Transport Agency found that its direct costs per transaction for payments in 2009 were:
• Web - $0.14
• Kiosk - $0.35
• Call centre - $2.70.
There was a decision to encourage customers towards accounts and the lower cost channels by
introducing administrative fees for call centre and kiosk payments and to reduce the account minimum
top-up from $40 to $20. The result has been significant increases in account take up. In 2012/13 over
60% of payments were by accounts, with only 1% using the call centre.
Table 2: Northern Gateway channel loading 2012/13
Part A - Review of the Operational and Business Requirements of a Road Charging Scheme 12
Figure 4: Evolution of Northern Gateway channel loading
Source: NZ Transport Agency
London payment channel loading
When London went live in 2003 there were only fleet accounts for commercial vehicles. Personal
accounts were not introduced until January 2011 following recognition that there were significant
savings in operating costs and this would ease costs of user compliance. Payment channel loading
over 2003-2013 (see Figure 5 below) has substantially changed as a result.
Figure 5: London payment channel loading evolution, 2003 - 2013
Source: TfL
In 2013 over 70% of payments were made through personal or fleet accounts with retail (which had
been nearly 40% by volume in 2003), now reduced to less than 4%. TfL removed the retail channel in
summer 2013 following a consultation exercise.
Key Conclusions for Auckland
• Tariffs charged to accounts need to be more attractive financially than a casual user tariff in order to
drive take up.
• The channel mix at go-live may be very different from steady state so there needs to be flexibility in the
scheme to allow and potentially drive channel change and thereby reduce operating costs.
• For either a city cordon scheme or a motorway option account take up should be targeted at 50-70% or
more, with encouragement of web based payments.
• If feasible and politically acceptable there should be a differential cost by channel to encourage use of
digital channels.
• In some cases it may be feasible to remove channels that have become underused.
Part A - Review of the Operational and Business Requirements of a Road Charging Scheme 13
2.4. Privacy
Many users are concerned about whether personal data gathered might be used for other purposes
such as parking fines, traffic offence prosecution or car-related crime.
In London the Home Office Minister required TfL to make its data from Congestion Charging available
to the police through a Ministerial Directive. There were a number of instances where major crimes
triggered requests for camera records, for example:
• Following the London bombings in July 2005 police requested data on vehicle movements.
• After the ‘Tiger Tiger’ car bomb in June 2007 data from congestion charging cameras was
requested and used to re-construct the route the car took before being parked and identify the
driver.
In Stockholm the Congestion Tax is billed retrospectively through a monthly tax bill. As a tax, users
must already be registered for payment of taxes and cannot object to being registered, provided that
data gathered about their movements is only stored for the purposes of tax collection and is disposed
of when the tax is paid.
The UK Department for Transport decided that a Vehicle Registration Mark (VRM) was not by itself
personal data – it becomes personal only when linked to the owner/keeper; this stance was at odds
with the UK Information Commissioner who regarded VRMs as personal. At the same time TfL
decided that any VRM officially held should be treated as personal data. This resulted in additional
complexities and constraints for managing VRM data.
Key Conclusions for Auckland
• There need to be formal mechanisms in place to minimise privacy intrusions. Many users/residents are
very concerned about privacy matters: whether their trips are recorded or whether their personal details
are retained and potentially shared with other agencies. This can impact customer sign-up for accounts.
• There needs to be consensus on what is personal data within the Council and NZ Transport Agency.
The Privacy Commissioner should be consulted on the procedures adopted.
• Where data sharing with another agency is authorised, there should be effective mechanisms to meet
these requirements whilst protecting the integrity of the personal information.
• The proposed charge or tax should allow the operator to hold personal data to enable its recovery, as is
already the case for the AT HOP Card.
Part A - Review of the Operational and Business Requirements of a Road Charging Scheme 14
3. Vehicle detection and technology
3.1. Technology adopted
Table 3-Table 5 identifies the technology adopted by selected city, motorway and truck charging
schemes.
Table 3: Technology adopted by city charging schemes
City Scheme and technology When implemented
Singapore Paper Area Licence 1975
Bergen Cordon: Autopass Tag with toll plaza 1986 manual tolling; electronic from 2004
Oslo Cordon: Autopass Tag with toll plaza From 1991
Trondheim Cordon then area: Manual payment (toll plaza) or Autopass tag
1991 cordon, then area from 1998
Singapore ERP Area: DSRC Tag/on-board device 1998
London Area: ANPR detection Feb 2003
Durham Area: Barrier based payment initially, then ANPR based detection
2002
Stockholm Cordon: ANPR with tags from 2006, then just ANPR from 2007
Trial from 2006. Full operation from 2007
Milan Area: ANPR detection Jan 2012
Gotenborg ANPR Jan 2013
Motorway/express tolling schemes are typically quite different and may involve a series of charges
being applied by section. They typically use a mix of technologies including ANPR, DSRC tags and
GPS systems. The majority of GPS based systems implemented to date are for heavy goods vehicle
charging. Distance based charging schemes have been primarily implemented for heavy goods
vehicles and include those set out in Table 5.
Part A - Review of the Operational and Business Requirements of a Road Charging Scheme 15
Table 4: Examples of motorway charging/tolling scheme technology
Scheme Technology When implemented
Liber-t: French Autoroutes Tags and manual payments with barriers 1980s
Italian motorways Tag and beacon with barriers 1990
Dartford Crossing, UK Manual payment (toll plaza) or Dart tag until Nov 2014 – when it will move to ANPR based detection
1991
Toronto ETR 407, Canada Cameras and tag and beacon – open road 1997
ERP, Singapore Electronic OBUs – open road 1998
Melbourne City Link, Australia Went live with tag and beacon DSRC with video tolling payments for occasional users – open road
2000
M6 Toll, UK Barrier-based with manual payments and tags 2003
Salik, Dubai Tag and beacon with RFID OBUs (ISO 18000 6B)
2007
Dublin M50, Ireland Tag or video payment account or occasional user video payment
2008
Golden Ears/Port Mann Bridges, Canada/US
Tag and beacon with RFID OBUs (ISO 18000 6B) and more recently 6C tags + video tolls
2009 Golden Ears
2012 Port Mann
Northern Gateway, NZ ANPR based detection 2009
Gauteng Freeway Improvement Project South Africa
Tag and beacon with camera enforcement 2012
Table 5: Summary of distance charging schemes
Scheme Technology Status/When Implemented
Swiss LSVA Tachograph/GNSS with manual enforcement 2001
Austrian Maut Tag and beacon with camera enforcement Jan 2004
German Maut GNSS with camera and infra-red DSRC enforcement
Jan 2005
Czech Truck Toll Tag and beacon with camera enforcement 2007
Slovak Skytoll GNSS with DSRC and camera enforcement 2010
Poland: HGV charging Tag and beacon with camera enforcement July 2011
French Ecotaxe GNSS with DSRC and camera enforcement Scheme was suspended pending political decisions (Oct 2013)
UK HGV Levy Paper-based vignette April 2014
Belgium HGV Charging GNSS with DSRC and camera enforcement Due to go live in 2016
Key Conclusions for Auckland
• ANPR-based detection use for city schemes has risen as this technology has improved.
• GPS-based systems are only suitable for national schemes with distance based charging like the
current Heavy Goods Road User Charge.
• Tag and beacon is primarily used for motorway/expressway schemes in addition to cameras which are
required for enforcement.
Part A - Review of the Operational and Business Requirements of a Road Charging Scheme 16
3.2. Evidential quality of data capture for enforcement
The proposed cordon scheme will need to capture evidence from the roadside that a vehicle crossed
the cordon line and was therefore liable for the charge.
Northern Gateway
The Northern Gateway toll road uses cameras with ANPR capability mounted on an overhead gantry
to capture vehicle images of those users liable to pay the toll. The cameras are understood to be
“gazetted” and meet the evidential requirements of New Zealand to enable enforcement. We
understand that the vehicle images are encrypted and secured on capture by the camera and passed
to the image processing back office. In addition:
• There is a vehicle detector and classification device – this helps identify there is a vehicle
present and trigger the number plate reader.
• Cameras face in both directions directly over each lane capturing front and rear plates using
spatial information from the classification device to identify where the front and rear plates
should be for the type of vehicle.
• In the back-office there is a secondary ANPR device reviewing the images captured and
number plates interpreted from the picture to assure and make corrections.
Northern Gateway went live in 2009. Initially motor-cycles were not tolled; given successes with
detection of motorcycle rear plates, they are now tolled.
Though Northern Gateway also procured a tag reading device which is on the gantry, the decision
was made to rely only on ANPR detection data because it provided sufficient quality.
London
In 2000 when London Congestion Charging was being planned there was little precedent in place on
what evidence was required to enforce, even though the offence of non-payment was just a civil
offence and only required proof “on the balance of probabilities” (unlike a criminal offence which
requires “proof beyond reasonable doubt”). As a result TfL had to:
• Define what was needed as evidence – an evidential record.
• Define the security mechanisms that protected the evidential integrity of the captured data from
tampering.
• Determine what approvals (if any) were needed for camera equipment used. This was in an
area where to date most camera equipment used to capture evidence in an ‘unattended
manner’ (without a witness) had to be tested and type approved by the Home Office.
TfL decided to parallel existing processes used for criminal prosecution to easily “clear the hurdle” for
evidence quality, except that it did not require equipment type approval which would have limited the
available solutions and increased camera related costs.
Part A - Review of the Operational and Business Requirements of a Road Charging Scheme 17
Stockholm
In Stockholm the charge for crossing the cordon was classed as a tax and it was determined that the
only admissible evidence which could be used for enforcement was photographic. The tag and
beacon system originally used in the 2006 trial was removed as a result following advice from the
Swedish Ministry of Justice and consideration of the additional operational costs.
Melbourne City Link
The MCL Regulations legislation defined prescribed devices – focusing on the camera as evidentially
important. The tag is also categorised as a prescribed device.
Extracted from Melbourne City Link Regulations, 2009, S/R 7/2009
Part 5, 11 Prescribed tolling devices r. 11
(1) For the purposes of Part 4 of the Act, a digital toll camera unit is a prescribed tolling device.
(2) For the purposes of section 74 of the Act, a tag is a prescribed tolling device. Tag – definitions section
tag means a vehicle transponder known as a Tag (Model Numbers TS 3204/00A, TS 3204/01A, TS 3204/02A, TS 3204/02B, TS 3203/10A, TS 3203/11A, TS 3203/10B, TS 3203/11B, TS 3203 1xA, or TS 3203/1xB);
However in practice the state is the enforcing authority and it was decided that camera evidence
would be used to support violation notices.
Key Conclusions for Auckland
• There needs to be a well-defined link between the evidence to be captured that a charge applies and
the enforcement powers to collect payments. Though legislation is generally in place the form of the
evidence to be captured to allow collection to be pursued through the Ministry of Justice is not defined.
The assumption is that the same evidence as for Northern Gateway is needed, but for an Auckland road
charging scheme with a nominated highway authority with enforcement powers.
• To maximise value for money and have access to the widest range of camera solutions the need for
type approvals/gazetting should be balanced with cost. The lead time for approval and costs of testing
may limit what is available on the market otherwise. The evidential strategy for ensuring protection of
camera evidence (encryption, watermarking, storage, requirement for calibration or witnessing of
maintenance etc.) must be defined.
• For the purposes of the cordon the evidence required of a vehicle crossing a defined ‘cordon line’ should
not be onerous.
• The recent court case between NZ Transport Agency and a non-payer of tolls on Northern Gateway
should be reviewed for the robustness of evidence that the driver was liable for the toll.
• If tags are to be used, provision may also be made for a tag transaction stored in the system, or on the
tag, being regarded as evidence of a charge being due.
Part A - Review of the Operational and Business Requirements of a Road Charging Scheme 18
3.3. Vehicle registration data quality
Payment and enforcement will rely on the quality of data within the Motor Vehicle Register. Quality
checks also typically make use of validation rules drawn from the list of all number plates so that:
• ANPR readers do not report VRMs that do not exist.
• Users cannot erroneously pay for or register an incorrect VRM.
London
In London there was a major programme to improve the quality of vehicle registration data so that
non-payers could be reliably enforced against. Additionally, the database listing all 34 million vehicles
(but not owner details) in the UK was made available to support cleansing of ANPR data and
validation of VRMs for accounts and casual payments. For example Figure 6 below shows the
confirmation step on the vehicle make, model and colour before payment can be made for ‘ABC123’.
Figure 6: Screen dialogue for congestion charge payment validating the VRM.
Source: TfL
Northern Gateway
Based on NZ Transport Agency reports between 2009 and 2013 about Northern Gateway operation, it
seems that less than 1% of debt for tolls is non-recoverable because vehicles are incorrectly
registered. This indicates a high level of vehicle registration in New Zealand.
Key Conclusions for Auckland
• Vehicle registration data quality does not seem to be a significant problem in NZ, though this needs to
be validated with NZ Transport Agency. The volume and mix of drivers in Auckland may mean that the
compliance rate differs from the 13,000 daily users of Northern Gateway.
• The scheme operator will need to agree with NZ Transport Agency that access can be provided to the
VRM database for the purposes of validating vehicle registrations for which users are paying or
registering; and cleansing ANPR data. In addition access will be required to pursue non-payers through
violation notices.
Part A - Review of the Operational and Business Requirements of a Road Charging Scheme 19
3.4. Trip data quality and billing accuracy
The different road charging technologies have varying capabilities to accurately capture trip data
reliably. This can result in loss of data, incorrect data capture and additional costs for secondary
checking of the data. Depending on the charging policy, data capture may need to:
• Be >98% accurate every time a vehicle passes – as is implied by a cordon charge, like
Stockholm – quite a demanding requirement;
• Select the best data capture event out of a series of detection events over a day to support a
daily charge – like London and Milan - less demanding;
• Use two detection events to calculate a route between two locations and apply a distance
based charge – can generate a geometric error from the product of two read rates;
• If direction of travel needs to be captured then there is usually a need for segregation of the
carriageway, and the on-street equipment needs to be set up to monitor each lane;
• Capture multiple detections each of which is charged and presented on a bill or statement –
very demanding.
ANPR performance
Number-plate recognition systems have been implemented to perform at read rates as high as 99%.
Northern Gateway cites its read rate at 97-99%; Stockholm claims a 98% read rate; the contractual
read rate on Dartford Crossing Freeflow (due to go live in Nov 2014) is 98%. As an area scheme the
read rate in London did not need to be so high; typically a vehicle was captured 2-4 times over the
day so only the best picture needed to be retained to establish the vehicle was liable for the daily
charge.
Even if lighting and camera set up are perfect, other factors that may reduce performance include:
• Obscuration of the plate by other vehicles in closely bunched traffic or because of high sided
vehicles
• Broken or damaged plates
• Dirty plates
• Foreign plates
• Lack of a front plate – in New Jersey there is no requirement to have a front plate
• Colour markings are not read by infra-red – so it may not be possible to interpret separate
coloured markings on plates.
It can be more difficult to:
• Detect motorcycles – which only have rear number-plates that are readable
• Detect the rear plates of trucks – which often have dirty or obscured number-plates – so front
plates are usually best for recognition.
Part A - Review of the Operational and Business Requirements of a Road Charging Scheme 20
Using additional cameras or detection sites can improve likelihood of capture.
Annex C explores ANPR performance in more detail.
Figure 7 below illustrates a typical 2-lane bi-directional configuration with cameras mounted on a
roadside pole – typical for an urban street in a city environment. Each camera covers a single
direction of travel/lane and has a “letterbox” shaped field of view within which it looks for number-
plates; here the field of view is shown as 3.5m – a lane width.
Figure 7: Illustrative ANPR installation with pole and 2 camera and bi-directional road
Similar equipment is implemented on motorways, but typically mounted overhead on a gantry. On the
Northern Gateway motorway ANPR detection is used with cameras detecting front and rear plates
with associated triggering and vehicle tracking. A dual gantry approach is used so that front and rear
plates can be captured. This is a very robust implementation with vehicle classifiers which is probably
why it is achieving the quoted 99% collection rate.
Figure 8: Northern Gateway gantry installation (facing northbound)
Source: Kapsch
Part A - Review of the Operational and Business Requirements of a Road Charging Scheme 21
We understand that the ANPR system on Northern Gateway uses:
• An ‘on-camera’ ANPR algorithm for number-plate reading – a primary reader working in real
time as each vehicle passes. This process also applies a “read confidence” measure
• A back office ANPR reader which reviews the captured images “off-line” and using additional
business rules and other pixel processing techniques, determines whether the original read
was correct, and which may then apply amendments – a secondary reader
• Manual checking by staff that inspect the image and interpreted plate to validate or correct the
read.
These three activities, together, result in the 97-99% read rate which has been quoted; the
performance of the ANPR camera by itself has not been identified. Annex C examines in more detail
how ANPR camera performance can degrade in poor conditions and typical performance measures.
Each site needs to be engineered to get maximum performance. The more ‘safety margin’ left in when
commissioned, the lower the likelihood of degradation. Sites may need to be relocated to improve
performance. The setup of a site needs to be “commissioned” and measured.
A local trial should be carried out to get locally relevant performance measures. The performance of
the systems currently installed on Northern Gateway should also be reviewed.
Tag and beacon
This technology uses radio communications primarily governed by the European CEN standard for
Dedicated Short Range Communications (DSRC) and a US standard for Radio Frequency ID (ISO
18000). The mature DSRC solution adopted in Europe, Australia and some parts of South America
uses 5.8 GHz radio to communicate between a reader (mounted overhead) and a tag (transponder)
mounted in the vehicle as indicated below.
Figure 9: Illustration of tag and beacon operation and geometry
Part A - Review of the Operational and Business Requirements of a Road Charging Scheme 22
The dimensions for the installation need to meet specific geometry with the reader mounted to
capture a vehicle approximately 2-8 metres away from the mounting pole or gantry as the vehicle
approaches.
DSRC typically achieves detection rates of >99.8% subject to the tag functioning and being correctly
fitted in the vehicle. Typical reasons for a tag not being read correctly or not at all include:
• Driver places tag in the glove box or elsewhere in the vehicle
• Vehicle has a metallised windscreen without an open patch (by the rear view mirror) e.g. for the
Audi A8, and does not allow the radio communications signal through
• Tag battery has expired – they may last 5-8 years
• Motorcycles do not always have an optimum location to mount a tag
• Tag in a car was obscured by a high sided vehicle – less likely to occur when the reader is
mounted overhead.
This is often combined with number plate recognition (for enforcement, validation of tag and number
plate relationships and to identify casual users) all mounted on a gantry.
Along with equipment designed to gather vehicle specific data (VRM and/or tag read information) the
toll-point equipment will also usually include a system of vehicle class (car, truck, taxi etc)
identification using various possible mechanisms including radar, road embedded axle counters,
specific tags allocated to different classes etc. and supporting equipment to position the tag
accurately within specific vehicles to reduce the risk of tag/vehicle mismatches.
Because of the differing geometry for detecting the licence plate and reading the tag, either a single
gantry approach is used (as shown for Melbourne City Link below – pre-2008) or dual gantries as
shown for Northern Gateway above. MCL implemented a second gantry in 2008 to improve detection.
[Note: Northern Gateway’s gantries have been equipped with tag readers as well as cameras – NZ
Transport Agency has not exercised the option to use tags yet.]
Figure 10: Single gantry arrangement on Melbourne City Link (pre-2008)
Source: Transurban
Part A - Review of the Operational and Business Requirements of a Road Charging Scheme 23
Key Conclusions for Auckland
• Camera-based ANPR without the use of tags is more widely used for city charging schemes (e.g.
Stockholm, London, and Milan). Tag and beacon schemes operate primarily on motorway and
expressway environments.
• In both cases systems require significant mounting infrastructure to be located.
• It is unlikely that an ANPR system would achieve significantly better than 98% read rate for vehicles
passing a single detection point.
• The level of confidence required to be sure that the automatic read is accurate is a key determinant of
the cost associated with ANPR. This is driven by the acceptable level of risk of automatic billing based
on a false positive read, vs the cost of manual checking.
• Though tag and beacon technology can provide higher read rates, 99.8% or better, there are significant
capital costs and infrastructure needed to mount the tag readers and other factors, like incorrect
mounting by the user, or battery failure can become the dominant factors reducing overall performance.
• Better read rates are achieved when equipment is mounted over a lane – this is more feasible with
gantries in a motorway environment than in a more urban or residential environment.
• There is a high risk that ANPR ‘misreads’ will create ‘false positives’ – other valid registrations registered
on the system which will be wrongly charged. Secondary automated checks and manual checking, as
applied on Northern Gateway, can be used to alleviate this but has a cost.
• Where multiple detection events are required, e.g. to support entry and exit from a motorway scheme,
the probability of capturing both events correctly is the product of two read rates – in the case of an
ANPR system operating at 98% for a single site, the product is 96%. For a DSRC system operating at
99.8% for a single site, the product is 99.6%.
• Improvements to read rates need to be carefully designed into each detection site and into back office
data cleansing processes.
• The intelligent application of business rules about registered, known or previously manually viewed
licence plates (known as ‘golden databases’, white/blacklists etc.) can add significant value to the task
of reducing the rate and cost of human image viewing. In each system these rules need to be locally
tailored.
3.5. Public realm impact
On-street equipment requires enough mounting space for the technology to detect vehicles reliably.
However poles, cantilevers and gantries may not fit well with the local streetscape and public realm
strategy. Choosing a cordon boundary therefore requires careful consideration of how detection
equipment may affect space and streetscape. This factor may make acceptance of the infrastructure
by local businesses and residents challenging if:
a) It is intrusive and out of character with the local ‘streetscape’ – this may have planning
implications under the Resource Management Act
b) The equipment requires the removal of parking at the kerbside along the length of its
detection zones to avoid obscuration of passing vehicles. In the case of tag and beacon
systems a vehicle parked near a tag reader will cause the tag battery to expire quickly
because of the continual read attempts. The amount of kerbside made unusable for parking
may be of the order of 11-20m in the case of single direction facing systems or 20-30m for bi-
directional systems.
Figure 11 illustrates the equipment used in Stockholm for the cordon scheme. This type of mounting
may be acceptable on some of the proposed major cordon access points, but may not be acceptable
on residential streets.
Part A - Review of the Operational and Business Requirements of a Road Charging Scheme 24
Figure 11: Stockholm gantry based camera system
Source: Q-Free
Additionally, the infrastructure may require strong poles, gantries and cantilevers to be embedded in
concrete bases at the roadside. It is not always feasible to locate such a concrete base on the
highway or footway because of local services (cables, ducts, gas, and power supplies), access to
premises (driveways). As a result there needs to be flexibility to choose the installation site without too
much disruption to local services.
Though there have been a number of attempts to develop low impact mountings for equipment, the
current ‘off the shelf’ solutions may not fit well into Auckland’s streetscape.
Annex D explores examples of where equipment has been specially designed to reduce its impact on
the street.
Key Conclusions for Auckland
• Each site on the cordon will need to be considered for its visual impact.
• Provision for parking near the detection site may need to be removed in order to allow clear line of sight for the detection equipment and also, if tags are adopted, to prevent battery failure for tags mounted in parked vehicles.
• It may not be feasible to locate equipment precisely on the cordon boundary given obstructions, and requirements for civil works to mount a pole; the equipment may need to be located some distance inside the boundary.
• A budget for tailoring the mounting structure will be needed to balance visual impact with effective mounting of the camera (and potentially tag reader) to optimise detection rate.
Part A - Review of the Operational and Business Requirements of a Road Charging Scheme 25
3.6. Interoperability with other schemes
The scheme could be made interoperable with existing and future New Zealand toll roads to improve
the customer experience. Australia has implemented interoperability between all tolling schemes
through a common tag technology, number-plate data exchange and inter-operator agreements.
Interoperability has been in place in Australia since 2000. It now covers 3 states, 16 toll roads totalling
over 250 km, 13 operators and 8 different tag issuers through an agreement amongst the operators to
standardise around a common set of technical and commercial principles and a system of data
exchange administered by the Roads and Maritime Services (RMS) in NSW. RMS is both a regulator
in NSW and also a participant in interoperability because it operates the tolling schemes on the
Sydney Harbour Bridge and Tunnel.
State government regulations in each jurisdiction mandate that all current and future tolling
infrastructure (tags and roadside equipment) must comply with an Australian Standard (AS4962)
entitled ‘Electronic Toll Collection – Transaction Specification for Australian Interoperability on the
DSRC link’ which is based on the European CEN Standards for DSRC operating in the 5.8GHz
microwave band.
The system works well from both the customer’s (road user) perspective who can travel on any road
in Australia with a single tolling account and also for the operator who can take advantage of the
reduced cost and complexity of having to deal individually with each of the other operators and
possibly tens of thousands of ‘foreign’ customers travelling on their roads.
Part A - Review of the Operational and Business Requirements of a Road Charging Scheme 26
4. Back office
4.1. Exemptions and discounts
Stockholm
As a tax the Stockholm Congestion scheme applied to all users. The only drivers who are exempt are
foreign drivers as they are not registered for tax. The trial in 2006 exempted taxis, but this exemption
was removed for the full scheme in 2007; low emissions vehicles were also exempt, but this
exemption ceased for low carbon vehicles purchased after 2009. This meant that the vast majority of
vehicles crossing the cordon are liable.
London
The London Congestion Charging scheme offers a 90% discount to residents, and taxis and buses
are exempt, as are ‘blue badge’ (disabled) users, motorcycles and low emissions vehicles.
The process for proving entitlement to the resident’s discount required original utility bills or bank
statements, plus a copy of the vehicle registration document (warrant) which had to identify the user:
a) As a resident
b) As the ‘keeper’ of the vehicle concerned.
A significant part of the back office operation concerned the processing of discounts and exemptions
at a substantial cost. The result is that today (2013) out of ~170,000 unique vehicles driving in the
zone each day, only ~67,000 actually pay the full charge.
Dartford Crossing
In 2008 Dartford Crossing introduced a residents discount allowing 50 toll free trips per annum and
further trips at 90% discount. This was in response to a political decision to continue tolls on the
crossing as a congestion reduction measure after the bridge had been paid for. The process for
applying for the discount involved submission of a range of paper documents (residency, council
tax/rates bill, vehicle registration document to prove ownership of the vehicle) to be processed by the
back office and returned. Also a new process for reading residents’ number-plates was introduced at
the toll plaza. This impacted the toll system which required enhancement, reduced revenue and
increased back office costs.
Milan
The Milan Area C has a series of exemptions and discounts, and like London there are substantial
resources involved in processing them, as well as impacts on revenue. As Area C had previously
been an environmental zone 2008-2011, ‘Ecopass’, many of the exemptions and discounts were
related to the previous charging policy.
Part A - Review of the Operational and Business Requirements of a Road Charging Scheme 27
Key Conclusions for Auckland
• The decision on which drivers are liable to pay and those that are discounted or exempt is likely to have
long term impacts on the cost of the operation and the net revenue. The charging policy needs to be
carefully considered.
• The method for establishing exemptions or discounts needs to be simple to process for the back office
and not incur substantial resource costs.
• There needs to be a clear commitment to review exemptions and discounts on a regular basis to re-
assess if they are still valid in the light of the traffic impacts and user base at the time.
4.2. Pre-pay or post-pay accounts
User accounts make it simpler to process transactions within the back office, as a registered user
listed against the relevant vehicle registration generally incurs a lower transaction cost.
In recognition of the lower processing cost it is usual for operators to offer a discount to the advertised
tariff particularly if the account is set up on a pre-pay basis, but conversely if, for example, a tag is
provided, there may also be a monthly charge and/or a deposit.
Northern Gateway
Northern Gateway requires account holders to pre-pay for their use of the road. We understand that
at go-live the minimum balance was $40, but this was reduced to $20 and may be reduced even
further to encourage account take up. Account take up is >60%.
UK toll roads
In the UK each toll operator decides its own policy on level of discount. The table below summarises
examples of policy for operating accounts on UK tolled or charging schemes.
Table 6: UK toll road examples of account operating policy
Dart Tag Account
Severn Tag M6 Toll Mersey Tunnel Fast Tag
London CC Auto-pay
Vehicle detection Tag + ANPR Tag Tag Tag Number-plate read
Scheme Barrier-based
Open road from Nov 14
Barrier-based operation
Barrier-based Barrier-based Open road
Monthly charge No charge No charge £1 No charge No charge
Deposit on tab (OBU)
No charge £30 £5 returnable No charge subject to initial balance
No charge
Application fee £10 0 £25 or £30 0 £10
Initial balance £10 free credit on successful
application
0 Quickstart - £40 Sufficient to meet estimated monthly
spend
0
Payment event Pre-pay Pre-pay Pre-pay Pre-pay Post-pay
Discount from cash toll
33% for cars
13% for HGVs
0% 5% 13% for all vehicle classes
10%
Other payment channels
Cash Cash Credit card Contactless card
Cash
Cash Web, telephone
Part A - Review of the Operational and Business Requirements of a Road Charging Scheme 28
Auckland Transport HOP Card
The Auckland Transport public transport payment card currently offers an average 10% discount on
normal bus, train and ferry fares, but is pre-pay. The minimum top-up is currently $10. Account take
up is > 70%.
Given the credit on the account is regarded as a financial instrument it is subject to regulation by the
Financial Markets Authority (FMA).
The operator would therefore be subject to the FMA which requires that:
• Any person who advises on financial products; provides an investment planning service in New
Zealand; makes investment management decisions on behalf of another person under an
authority; or receives, holds, pays or transfers client money is subject to disclosure
requirements and conduct obligations under the Financial Advisers Act 2008 (FAA).
• Persons providing services relating to more complex products will generally also have to
become authorised by the Financial Markets Authority and meet qualification, training and
competence requirements. Persons providing services on simpler products will generally need
to be registered in New Zealand. The FAA applies regardless of the country in which the
person performing the services resides.
• The Financial Service Providers (Registration and Dispute Resolution) Act 2008 (FSPA)
requires that any person or entity which provides a financial service is registered on the
Financial Service Providers Register and (if they provide financial services to the public) is a
member of a dispute resolution scheme. This includes financial advisers under the FAA, banks,
securities issuers, KiwiSaver managers, custodians, money managers, credit contract
providers, credit card providers, travellers cheque providers, currency exchanges, insurers,
trustees, listed companies, and foreign exchange and futures dealers. Generally the FSPA will
not apply to financial service providers who reside outside New Zealand and provide financial
services in New Zealand.
• Securities trustees and statutory supervisors are registered under the Securities Trustees and
Statutory Supervisors Act 2011. Insurers are regulated by the Insurance (Prudential
Supervision) Act 2010.
• The Financial Transactions Reporting Act sets out the current anti-money laundering regime,
requiring financial institutions to carry out customer due diligence, identity verification and
suspicious transaction reporting. An expanded regime, reflecting the FATF Recommendations
will apply from 30 June 2013, under the Anti-Money Laundering and Countering Financing of
Terrorism Act.
Refunds of unused credit on the pre-payment account are permitted for the HOP card, subject to an
administration fee. This is a more attractive model for the customer than, for example, than a pre-pay
SIM card where typically unused balances are lost. Most pre-pay charging schemes allow refund of
unused balances.
Part A - Review of the Operational and Business Requirements of a Road Charging Scheme 29
Melbourne City Link
MCL opened in 2000 as the second fully free flow electronic toll road in the world and without the
benefit of hindsight or the advantages of ‘lessons learnt’ from other roads it started with a tolling
transaction focus, largely based on early toll-plaza ‘cash collection’ thinking. Transurban, the owner
and operator of MCL did not adequately assess the need to interact with its road users as customers
and was unable to meet their expectations for service and access to information. Its immediate
response was to increase customer facing resources (at considerable extra cost) and the construction
of a temporary database to handle customer accounts.
Transurban quickly realised that it was running a ‘customer service’ business and after some adverse
publicity generated by disgruntled road users it decided in 2001 to undertake a complete review of its
customer operations and systems. This resulted in the adoption of a Customer Relationship
Management (CRM) package integrated with the tolling transaction system and the incremental
development of a range of access channels for account management and the progressive
development of a range of tolling ‘products’ aimed at satisfying various customer needs and
requirements. This approach set the standard for all future electronic tolling operations in Australia.
As evidence that Transurban has learnt the lessons of the past it now regards itself as being a leader
in tolling customer management with the introduction of initiatives such as:
• A dedicated customer care team charged with resolving any case that can’t be handled by the
front line customer service centre
• An internal resolution team independent of Customer Care
• A Customer Charter underpinned by service objectives and KPIs
• A published annual scorecard of performance against all objectives and KPIs
• An external Customer Ombudsman.
NZ Heavy Vehicles Road User Charging Scheme
New Zealand already operates a road user charging scheme for heavy vehicles over 3.5 T. The
scheme operates through having pre-pay accounts where units of 1,000 km are purchased. There are
a number of approved methods and devices for measuring distance actually travelled – one of these
methods or devices must be used for the heavy vehicle concerned.
Key Conclusions for Auckland
• Pre-pay accounts for road charging are acceptable and can help with the processing of vehicle
registration data to reduce ANPR errors and reduce payment channel costs.
• A minimum top-up of the order of $10-$20 is practical given the potential charge level of $2-$3.
• To drive account take up a discount of at least 10% should be considered – 15% may be more realistic.
• If tag accounts are offered and there is a clear benefit to the customer then a deposit or account charge
may also be feasible to mitigate loss of the tag and its capital cost.
• Pre-pay account models are well established with appropriate financial market regulation for acting as a
deposit taker for transport services.
• The key to customer acceptance for large scale open road charging schemes is implementing effective
customer services.
Part A - Review of the Operational and Business Requirements of a Road Charging Scheme 30
4.3. Manual checking of ANPR/OCR records
London
The ANPR system used in London graded each vehicle record captured and interpreted into a
registration mark with a confidence level ranging up to 100%. This meant the accuracy of a read could
be graded and:
• Some records automatically applied to a user account without a manual check – e.g. for > 95%
confidence
• Other records could be ranked and have sampled checks applied – e.g. for 85-95%
• Remaining records could be passed through a secondary OCR process.
Additionally a series of filters were applied, including:
• Removal of duplicates – caused by multiple captures of the same vehicle as it moved back
across the camera field in slow moving traffic
• Whether the registration mark existed on the national database
• Whether there was a registered account with the registration mark.
This meant that the final ‘bucket’ of images for checking was substantially reduced.
Two manual checking processes were adopted:
a) Where the checker had to retype the registration mark interpreted – an operator could typically
check 250-300/hour.
b) Where just visual inspection was used to compare the image of the vehicle with the interpreted
VRM – an operator could typically check 500-600/hour.
Typically only 6-8 manual checkers were required given London is an area scheme and only the best
image over a day needs to be retained out of typically 2-4 images captured per vehicle.
Northern Gateway
Northern Gateway has adopted a similar filtering and manual check process to that applied in London,
applying confidence levels and ranking the records in a way to prioritise how filters are applied and
manual checking performed. A secondary OCR process is also applied to review and correct
misreads. The resulting read rate is quoted as 97-99%.
Part A - Review of the Operational and Business Requirements of a Road Charging Scheme 31
Melbourne City Link
MCL also uses a system of manual checking to either verify automatic reads that have not been
produced with a sufficient level of confidence or to correct low quality or badly rendered images. The
expected level of confidence is set at around 80% before it will take the image as ‘correct’ and send
the transaction for billing without human viewing and validation.
Key Conclusions for Auckland
• Metrics for filtering and manual checking of ANPR reads are well established and the staff time involved
can be quantified and prioritised. As a worked example:
• If a cordon or motorway scheme generated ~200,000 – 300,000 records a day and automated filters
removed two-thirds of the records then, at 600 records per hour the staff needed for checking may be of
the order of 13-20 FTE.
Part A - Review of the Operational and Business Requirements of a Road Charging Scheme 32
5. Enforcement and legal powers
5.1. Build on existing processes
Stockholm
Non-payment of taxes in Stockholm is an offence so when the Congestion Tax was introduced there
was a requirement for an enforcement process that was sufficiently robust. Following the initial trial in
2006, it was decided that for the full operation key elements were:
• Tax decisions based on a witness statement of vehicle liability.
• An evidential record based around the vehicle registration – already a legal means of
identifying a unique vehicle.
• A mapping from the vehicle registration to the owner who became liable for the tax.
• The tax being collected along with other tax liabilities for the owner as part of the usual monthly
process.
London
There was no precedent in place for road charging in London. In 1999 when the new Greater London
Authority (GLA) was being created, the legislation supporting the GLA also empowered the Mayor to
implement a congestion charge, for which non-compliance was a civil offence. The closest precedent
for such an offence related to parking enforcement; it was therefore decided to adopt a similar legal
process and powers to enforce the congestion charge through:
• Accessing vehicle keeper details on the national vehicle registration database.
• Issuing a penalty charge notice (PCN) to non-payers – a PCN was already understood for
parking.
• Allowing a customer to make a representation if they wished to challenge the PCN.
• Using the established traffic enforcement centre (effectively a court) as a means to register a
debt.
• Operating an independent appeals process using the already operational Parking and Traffic
Appeals Adjudicator.
Though there were some differences with parking, they were primarily addressed through secondary
legislation.
Part A - Review of the Operational and Business Requirements of a Road Charging Scheme 33
Key Conclusion for Auckland
• Adopt as far as possible an established enforcement process, for example, a model similar to that
operated by NZ Transport Agency for the Northern Gateway or parking enforcement in Auckland.
5.2. Evidential robustness
Though non-payment of a charge may be a civil offence, because of the politically high profile of
charging schemes it is important that the evidence of a vehicle being liable for a charge is very robust
and cannot be challenged in court.
Auckland Council parking enforcement
Experience from parking enforcement in Auckland is that the presiding justice has substantial latitude
to interpret the situation, and any departure from a fully documented procedure, or flaw in how an
evidential record is captured, may result in the case being rejected. Auckland Council therefore takes
care to capture all pertinent evidence of an offence, including capturing:
• Images of the vehicle registration plate.
• Images of the vehicle’s warrant of fitness.
• Images of the vehicle relative to signage which sets out the parking restrictions.
• The witness statement of the enforcement officer.
• Notes that the officer makes in a notebook.
An equivalent level of detail and care is needed for evidence that liability for a charge has been
incurred.
London Congestion Charging
As the evidence captured was by an ‘unattended camera’ there was no human witness to make a
statement. To establish the integrity of the evidence and demonstrate that an error could not have
been made, and the evidence could not have been interfered with, a number of mechanisms were
adopted, including:
• Each camera had its location, identity and lane details programmed into the camera head at
commissioning so it could not be altered by an engineer remotely.
• Each image captured was time-stamped, encrypted, and watermarked.
• An integrity indicator showing the camera was working correctly was applied.
• A camera “session” was adopted with clear start and end records and sequential numbering of
frames, to demonstrate the image could not have been inserted.
• If camera sites or their related cabinets were undergoing maintenance then evidence from the
cameras concerned was flagged as potentially having less integrity.
Part A - Review of the Operational and Business Requirements of a Road Charging Scheme 34
• The equipment was specified to have the same level of integrity as equipment typically used for
criminal enforcement, even though there was no formal requirement for the system to be “type
approved” (gazetted) by the police.
• The overall system including communications network and datacentre was subject to
demanding security requirements meeting ISO 27001.
Key Conclusions for Auckland
• The camera system needs to be specified very carefully with a supporting evidential strategy that could
withstand the most detailed scrutiny and challenge of the technology and capture process.
• The end to end system used to capture, store and present the evidence needs to be secured in a
manner that can demonstrate the integrity of the evidence.
Part A - Review of the Operational and Business Requirements of a Road Charging Scheme 35
6. Operating costs
6.1. Comparison of costs
The overall cost of road charging systems varies substantially with each project. Each scheme has its
own parameters and commercial operating model and reports its costs and revenue differently. The
charges applied to the end user also vary substantially (for example, London will be £11.50/day as of
June 2014 while Auckland is considering testing a somewhat lower cordon crossing/motorway
charge) which usually makes comparison of collection costs as a % of revenue quite meaningless.
Few cities report the costs of their schemes in a fashion that allows easy comparison. Commercial
operators also tend not to report costs and revenues as this data is sensitive. In many cases it is not
simple to separate out the one-off capex costs for the project, system related costs, civil and highway
works, staff operating costs, costs of contract change and other items such as project management,
procurement, trials, complementary traffic and transport measures and then the costs of managing
through the political and stakeholder challenges relevant to the locality.
The costs of other schemes are generally not a reliable benchmark for planning a new scheme as
there are so many factors that make the schemes different. In practice it is far more useful to model
the costs and revenue of a specific scheme based on the intended charging parameters and a high
level design and traffic model; even then estimates of revenue and costs may have an error range of
20%-30%. For example, the very detailed modelling and revenue and cost analysis done for London
did not foresee the extent of traffic reduction achieved, in line with the primary congestion mitigation
objective; this meant that net revenues were initially lower than expected by some £20m-£30m
(NZ$40-NZ$60m) per annum.
The degree to which drivers will change their behaviour or be compliant in paying the charge also
varies – in Stockholm users were largely compliant; in London there was greater non-compliance than
expected. Market research will be needed to assess the extent to which drivers in Auckland will (a)
comply, (b) switch travel modes, and (c) have a preference for payment channels (accounts, web,
retail, call centre) – the cost of which drives much of the operation.
Revenue collection rates are also influenced by the ability of the operator to enforce violations and
collect unpaid tolls. This in turn is often a balance between the potential revenue uplift through strict
enforcement and collection and the additional operating costs that this will generate.
Australian experience suggests that while the rate (and cost) of strict enforcement varies substantially
with the level of traffic, the rate of violation and the cost of enforcement and debt collection processing
in the various State jurisdictions, the rate of violations and final collection rates are remarkably similar.
Part A - Review of the Operational and Business Requirements of a Road Charging Scheme 36
On Transurban’s Sydney toll-roads for example, where traffic is high, the rate of revenue that remains
uncollected after standard billing processes (expressed in terms of total traffic) is currently 4%-6%.
This reduces to 2.5%-3% after the first stage of enforcement and debt collection and finally to 1.5%-
2% after which the effort and cost of collecting the debt outweighs the revenue benefit. The cost of
debt collection in NSW is high.
On MCL where traffic is also high, but the cost of enforcement and debt collection is lower than in
NSW, the rate of uncollected revenue after standard billing is currently 4%-5%. This drops to 3% after
the first stage of enforcement and 2% after which the matter is handed over to the police to pursue.
In Queensland QML figures indicate that like in NSW and Victoria 4%-6% of tolls remain outstanding
after standard collection processes which represents AUD$18m+ of revenue. This is reduced to 2%
after enforcement.
The above comments notwithstanding, the following section seeks to make some cost comparisons.
6.2. Typical cost structures
Table 7 identifies the typical cost elements of a road charging system.
Table 7: Typical cost elements
Capex elements Opex
• High level scheme design
• Detailed design and specification
• Legislative change and traffic orders
• Procurement of the system and business operation (customer channels, back office, enforcement)
• Implementation of on-street equipment, customer channels, back office, enforcement
• On-street signs and lines
• Publicity and public awareness campaigns
• Consultation
• Customer management and contact
• Payment processing
• On-board unit supply chain distribution/asset management (where applicable)
• Enforcement/violation processing and debt collection
• System operation and maintenance
• On-street equipment maintenance
• Communications network operation
• Signs and lines maintenance
• Contract management
• System enhancements
• Ongoing publicity and awareness
The underlying cost structure is usually composed of:
• One-off client team project costs, which some city authorities choose to include, for the life of
the project, from feasibility stage onwards, while others do not.
• One-off supplier costs – where suppliers take a major role in delivery, some one-off supply
costs can be recovered through being amortised costs within a service charge.
• Client team annual operating costs – before any user transactions are considered.
• Supplier annual operating costs – before there are any user transactions considered.
• The marginal costs of a transaction (vehicle day/detection event, payment, enforcement event
etc).
What is more generally reported is total operating cost, excluding one-off costs. The marginal costs of
a transaction are typically not reported, but it is usually these costs that are more comparable
between schemes.
Part A - Review of the Operational and Business Requirements of a Road Charging Scheme 37
6.3. Cost of collection as a proportion of revenue
An analysis by Jacobs Engineering Group in 2010 (see National Cooperative Highway Research
Programme, Report 689, 2011) of toll road operations in North America identified:
• Operational costs as a percentage of revenue collected varied from 15% (Toronto) to 90%
(SANDAG) with an average of 35%.
• Transaction costs varied from US$0.16 to US$1.43 with an average of US$0.54.
The same report analysed the area/cordon schemes at the time and indicated costs of collection of
between 11% (Oslo) and 55% (London) with an average of 38%. The others were Milan (54%) and
Stockholm (29%).
In May 2011, Walker (The Acceptability of Road Pricing, RAC Foundation) reported the following
comparative operating costs by scheme:
Table 8: Comparative operating costs by scheme
Scheme Operating cost as a % of revenue
London Congestion Charging 42%
Stockholm 21%
German Lorry Charging 12-25%
Austria Lorry Charging 11%
Swiss Lorry Charging 6%
Norway City Tolling 8-14%
Singapore ERP 20-30%
In general our research indicates that many transport authorities estimate their operating costs at the
“lower end” of what is probable and many exclude key areas of scope like enforcement.
6.4. Comparison of two city scheme costs
London and Stockholm’s revenue and costs were reported as follows:
Table 9: Comparison of London and Stockholm revenue and costs
London (2012/13) Stockholm (2008)
User charge £10.50 ($23) 10, 15, 20, SEK ($1.7, $2.5, $3.4) with daily cap of 60 SEK ($10.2)
Capital cost £162m ($324m) (2001-03) of which ~ £80m ($160m) was on traffic management
~ 1.9bn SEK (2005-07) ($323m)
Income £220m ($440m) 850m SEK ($144m)
Operating costs £89.9m ($180m) 190m SEK ($32.3m)
Net revenue £132.1m ($264m) 660m SEK ($112m)
Typical vehicles/passages/day 170k (unique vehicles) 350k-400k (cordon crossings)
Typical charged vehicle passages/day
68k 350k
Cost of collection 40% 22%
Part A - Review of the Operational and Business Requirements of a Road Charging Scheme 38
London (2012/13) Stockholm (2008)
Effective cost per charged vehicle transaction
£5.51 (per day) ($11) 2.26 SEK (per cordon crossing) ($0.38)
The effective cost per charged day in London ($11) based on the reported operating costs, is
substantially higher than the charge being tested for Auckland. The cost per cordon crossing in
Stockholm ($0.38) is more in line with US toll road examples. We suspect that in practice the
comparison is not on a like-for-like basis.
6.5. Cost per transaction
It is probably more useful to consider individual costs per transaction in Auckland. Each cost needs to
be tailored to fit the local resource base, supply chain and event volume. Hence, below we identify
typical calculations for some example events.
Table 10: Typical calculations for example events
Event Relevant assets Illustrative calculation/assumption Notes Indicative value
Camera detection event
Capital cost of camera infrastructure and image processing back office, network and associated operating cost
• Camera infrastructure @$40m capex amortised over 5 years
• Opex @ 12%
• Capturing 250k cordon images/day
This is just an example calculation
$0.21/ image
Contact Centre Call
Call centre agent time
Capital and operating costs of call centre equipment & premises
• 3.5 mins/call
• agent cost of $50k pa - $1.60 per call
• Equipment + premises @ $0.90 per call
NZ Transport Agency report a cost of $2.70 1
$2.50/call
Web-Payment by Credit Card
Capital cost of web portal + merchant acquirer fee
• 2% of payment made
• Payment of $10
AT report a MA fee of 2%
NZ Transport Agency report a cost of $0.14
$0.20/ payment
Retail kiosk
Retailer commission • Commission of 15%
• Payment of $3
NZ Transport Agency reports a kiosk cost of $0.35 on a $2.20 toll
$0.45
Issue Violation Notice
Owner details lookup
Staff time to check
Capital and operating costs of system
Postage
• Lookup of vehicle with Registrar costs $0.50
• Time to check 30 secs - $0.22
• Cost of system - $0.50
• Postage of $0.50
$1.72
1 Source: NZTA for Northern Gateway.
Part A - Review of the Operational and Business Requirements of a Road Charging Scheme 39
7. Conclusions
Table 11 summarises the main areas where our analysis indicates there could be significant impact or
relevance on the feasibility and costs of the two charging options being considered and which
therefore need careful consideration for a scheme in Auckland.
Table 11: Summary of our analysis of impacts of ‘lessons learnt’ by scheme option
Lessons learnt area Relevance of impact2 Notes on impact for Auckland, and possible mitigation options
Cordon Motorway
1. Customer engagement
Scheme complexity XXX XX Depends on final scheme design. Drivers not used to paying city tolls; will need more education and allowance for “bow wave” call centre capacity. This was the key lesson learnt from Melbourne City Link.
Casual user XXX XXX It is hard to know which scheme will have more casual users: both may be quite high. Higher levels of casual users will tend to drive a greater need to have more payment channels (e.g. retail), and be more costly to operate. Milan is the scheme with the most payment channel options, but also the most expensive to operate.
Digital channels XX XX Account take up is the main priority. Lower cost digital channels established for Northern Gateway (NG) although this is a simple closed road scheme with a single charge level. Allow for evolution of channel mix and incentivise take-up of digital channels where possible. London has increasingly emphasised use of digital channels to reduce cost and improve customer convenience.
Privacy XX XX Formalise privacy policy for Cordon. Privacy model already established for NG, however the potential size of the scheme does change the perception. Use of kiosks may be less viable for such a large scheme.
2. Vehicle detection & tech
Evidence capture XXX XX Links closely to enforcement powers. More challenging to gather evidence on the cordon due to dense urban environment. Possible mitigation measures could be to move boundary to allow positioning of cameras on less challenging locations (similar to Stockholm), or change to a flat daily charge similar to London and Milan.
Minimise requirement for gazetting of equipment.
Vehicle registration data quality
XX X Some users may not know their registration. Unregistered vehicles may be less likely drive on motorways – not considered a big risk in Auckland.
2 Inevitably this is a subjective judgement
Part A - Review of the Operational and Business Requirements of a Road Charging Scheme 40
Lessons learnt area Relevance of impact2 Notes on impact for Auckland, and possible mitigation options
Cordon Motorway
Trip data quality and customer billing
XXX X ANPR more widely used for city (cordon/area) schemes.
Accuracy of trip data likely to be poorer for cordon scheme under the current design (location). Mitigation measures could include heavier manual checking in the back office, changing to a daily charge – or an Area scheme - to allow for multiple detection events, or moving the boundary.
Motor-cycles likely to have a poor detection rate (if charged) and only where cameras are rear facing.
Public realm impact XXX X Equipment visual impact on cordon sites may be significant in some locations. Design mitigations are possible but can be costly.
Interoperability X XX Users are likely to assume/ demand interoperable accounts with toll roads based on the motorway connecting with the Northern Gateway, particularly if the scheme is motorway based.
3. Back office
Exemptions, discounts and special vehicles
XX X Minimise exemptions and discounts, except where straightforward to administer (e.g. already linked to vehicle registration). May be more pressure for discounts to a cordon scheme, particularly from residents. Options include requiring residents to register for an account and offering X trips for free.
Pre- and post-pay accounts X X Assume pre-pay for regular non-commercial users. Post-pay for registered commercial users. Post-pay per trip for casual users.
Manual checking XXX XXX Needed resources can be quantified subject to camera read rate. Both schemes have challenges, if minimising error rates and maximising revenue collection are priorities.
4. Enforcement
Build on existing enforcement processes
XX XX Assumed to use an existing enforcement model.
Evidential robustness X X Assumed to use established standards for evidence.
5. Costs
Comparison with other schemes
XXX XX Cordon transaction cost likely to be higher than motorway based on experience elsewhere. Cost may vary substantially with payment channels and setup cost amortisation. Both will have significant costs.
Capital costs XX XXX Motorway scheme likely to have higher up front cost based on up to 200 detection points for a closed scheme.
Notes: XXX indicates major impact; XX indicates medium impact; X indicates minor impact.
Part A - Review of the Operational and Business Requirements of a Road Charging Scheme 41
Annex A – Terms of reference
Review of the operational and business requirements of road charging scheme
The document is to provide:
A review of international system examples, technology applications and trends, including:
• Current systems
• Developing technologies
• International benchmarking of operating costs
• Relevance to New Zealand.
Part A - Review of the Operational and Business Requirements of a Road Charging Scheme 42
Annex B – Road charging options
Cordon scheme option (extracted from Don Houghton’s paper of April 2013)
Cordon charging scenarios propose the tolling of all roads entering a particular part of the urban area.
The single cordon scenario assumes all roads would be tolled crossing a cordon surrounding central
Auckland, cutting the Auckland Harbour Bridge, Tamaki Drive and Orakei Road, and running along
the northern side of Green Lane Road, Balmoral Road and St Lukes Road before cutting Meola Road.
It is assumed that the charge points would be tolled using DSRC/ANPR systems requiring 40 charge
points. DSRC (tags) would be the prime collection technology with ANPR (number plate reading) also
required for casual users and for enforcement purposes.
The layout of this scenario assumed for costing purposes is outlined below.
Figure 12: Layout of Cordon scheme option
Part A - Review of the Operational and Business Requirements of a Road Charging Scheme 43
Motorway option
For the purposes of this scenario the strategic network is made up of:
• SH1 from just north of Warkworth (assuming Puhoi – Warkworth is constructed) to just south of
Drury interchange.
• SH 16 from the start of the motorway in Grafton Gulley to just south of the roundabout at
Brighams Creek Road.
• SH20 from SH16 to SH1.
• SH20A from SH20 to just north of Kirkbride Road.
• SH18 from SH16 to SH1.
Part A - Review of the Operational and Business Requirements of a Road Charging Scheme 44
Annex C – ANPR performance challenges
C.1 Degraded conditions
When lighting or weather conditions degrade, ANPR products may vary in how their performance
changes. Some products will continue to perform while others may be affected. There is no single
reference profile that can be used as a benchmark under such conditions – each product needs to be
measured under the potential adverse scenarios. This varies according to:
• How the ANPR ‘triggers’ that a plate may be in view – e.g. self-triggering (looking for plates in
the field of view with a series of frame-stores which are successively analysed), vs loops in the
road (external trigger), vs laser (external) trigger.
• How the product matches characters to pixel patterns/shapes – e.g. template-based matching
or neural networks.
• The number of pixels needed to get character resolution (typically minimum of 3-4 across the
width of a ‘stroke’ - the white-black-white transition across a line) and the vertical resolution
needed (typically a minimum of 14-16 pixels top to bottom).
• How different lighting conditions exercise the camera contrast/gain – sun blinding can cause
infra-red (IR) contrast to be completely lost and the read rate to fall to zero, depending on the
angle of the sun at a particular time of day, and site geometry; use of IR narrow band filters and
lens hoods can reduce this effect depending on the site.
• Snow and heavy rain may cause some obscuration of plates.
• Strong wind can cause the camera head to move around, depending on how it is mounted, but
generally wind and rain have little impact.
• Light reflections off buildings, vehicles and the road surface can affect the camera. For
example, with some systems, a wet road surface can generate false triggers.
Part A - Review of the Operational and Business Requirements of a Road Charging Scheme 45
C.2 ANPR performance measures
The following measures relate to the plate recognition process at the camera:
• Capture rate - the number of vehicles which cause one or more usable Records to be
generated (i.e. including correct reads and misreads but excluding false triggers), as a
percentage of vehicles which actually pass the site (usually excluding bikes and motorbikes).
• Trigger rate - the number of vehicles which cause one or more usable records to be generated
(i.e. including correct reads and misreads but excluding false triggers and partial reads) as a
percentage of vehicles with readable license plates passing a camera site – not all plates may
be readable.
• Correct read rate - the proportion of records that contain correctly interpreted license plates as
a percentage of all records.
• Misread rate - the proportion of records that contain an incorrect interpretation of a visible
license plate as a percentage of all Records.
• False read rate - the proportion of records that do not contain a license plate image as a
percentage of all records. This tends to go up with heavy rain and reflections.
The most challenging measure is the proportion of ‘false positives’ contained in the misread rate –
where a plate is incorrectly read but interpreted as another genuine plate. There is no generic means
of quantifying this measure as much depends on the pool of genuine plates and the characters
misinterpreted.
In order to manage the risk of accepting a false positive read as genuine, business rules can be implemented that specify the confidence levels associated with the automatic read. For example, an operator may specify that the ANPR system must be 100% confident that it has read the plate correctly (i.e. no false positives) otherwise the image must go to human viewing. In this case a 99% automatic read rate (or anywhere near it) will be very difficult to achieve.
Most operators who are not so risk averse will set their confidence levels at around 85% to strike a
balance between the reputational risk of getting the read wrong and the cost of manual viewing.
In addition, the back office can compensate for performance through:
• A secondary OCR processor which reviews the captured images in slow time – but depends on
input of the raw pictures captured when the system triggers.
• The use of reference databases of previously manually reviewed and authenticated images
which can be automatically billed without going to further human viewing.
• The use of known licence plates that can be processed at the roadside (black lists or white
lists) without the need for back office processing.
• Manual inspection and checking of an image to correct a read or remove a false read.
Part A - Review of the Operational and Business Requirements of a Road Charging Scheme 46
Performance is usually specified within a contract on the basis of:
• A percentage of “readable plates”, where readable plates excludes broken, dirty, incorrectly
mounted or missing plates.
The overall resulting read rate is the end result of all these measures and processes, each of which
may be affected differently by the particular adverse conditions.
The more sites there are, the wider the range of geometries and lighting conditions.
Part A - Review of the Operational and Business Requirements of a Road Charging Scheme 47
Annex D – Examples of mounting structures for roadside equipment
This Annex identifies examples of how mountings for cameras and tag readers (beacons) have been
tailored to better integrate with the streetscape.
Figure 13: Camera and tag and beacon system mounted either side of the street
Source TfL
Part A - Review of the Operational and Business Requirements of a Road Charging Scheme 48
Figure 14 illustrates a cantilever being used instead of a full gantry to mount cameras and tag
readers.
Figure 14: Single cantilever used to mount cameras and tag readers
Source TfL
Figure 15: Single cantilever used to mount cameras and tag readers
Source TfL
Part A - Review of the Operational and Business Requirements of a Road Charging Scheme 49
Figure 16: Dual cantilevers used to mount cameras and tag readers
Source TfL
Figure 17: Roadside trial of Kapsch equipment in Singapore (Woodlands gantry)
Source: Kapsch
Old Pole
New PoleNew Pole
Part A - Review of the Operational and Business Requirements of a Road Charging Scheme 50
Figure 18: Experimental gantry at Kapsch Development Site, Sweden
Source: Kapsch
Though it is possible to develop a toolkit of solutions, essentially each site requires tailoring to
minimise its local impact. Q-Free has developed a toolkit of single gantry based solutions for a range
of lane configurations, as illustrated in Figure 19 below. However the solution is still gantry-based and
requires a significant section of highway to be dedicated to vehicle detection.
Figure 19: Toolkit of single gantry configurations
Source: Q-Free
Part A - Review of the Operational and Business Requirements of a Road Charging Scheme 51
The examples shown above are all for integrated camera and tag and beacon systems. Alternatively,
camera only solutions can be mounted with reducing degrees of roadside infrastructure:
Overhead cameras – like those used for Northern Gateway - deliver better performance than side
mounted cameras; but kerb side mounted cameras – as used in London - can more easily blend in
with the surroundings (see Figure 20 and Figure 21 below).
Figure 20: London Congestion Charging camera site
Source: TfL Figure 21: Side-mounted camera pole in London
Source: TfL