Embed Size (px)
DESCRIPTION
Â
Citation preview
Congestion taxation &
sustainable transport
Gustaf Landahl
City of Stockholm
Carrots Improved cycle lanes
Increased public
transport use
New ways of transport
– Car-sharing clubs
– Better information
– Adaptive traffic
signals
Goods logistics
Clean vehicles
Sustainable transport
by Carrots & Sticks!
Sticks Parking fees
Low emission zone
for lorries
Congestion
taxation
Objectives
• Reduce congestion
• Increase accessibility
• Improve environment
• Finance infrastructure
PAGE 4
Congestion
taxation
zone
Vehicle identification process
Road Surface
6300
1700
25
50
1000010000
31
5500
1300
Distance between suspension point
of Registration Unit and center of
middle gantry
Height to Registration Unit
suspension point
Distance defined
by detection
sensor bracket
1700
Distance between center of gantry
and equipment suspension points
Height to Radio
Communication
equipment
suspension points
6500
Height to
detection sensor
suspension
points
Distance between suspension point
of Registration Unit and center of
middle gantry
DBLS
TX / R /
MR
RU RU
The Switch (S) shall be mounted
above and not more than 500 mm
from the TXes
(not applicable for MR)
6500
Minimum
headroom
5500
Height to Registration Unit
suspension point
6500
Minimum
headroom
Congestion tax
PEAK PERIODS
7.30-8.30 a.m., 4-5.30 p.m. SEK 20 € 2
SEMI PEAK PERIODS 7.-7.30 a.m., 8.30-9 a.m. 3.30-4 p.m.., 5.30-6 p.m.. SEK 15 € 1,5 MEDIUM-VOLUME PERIODS 6.30-7 a.m., 9 a.m.-3.30 p.m.. 6-6.30 p.m.. SEK 10 € 1 MAXIMUM CHARGE: SEK 60/day € 6
NO CHARGE Evenings, Saturdays, Sundays, holidays
All kinds of fears
• 1000 appeals/day
• Stolen license plates
• No one will pay
• Everyone is going to cheat
• It will not work technically
• The authorities will monitor (spy
on) every motorist
• The retailers would go bankrupt
• Companies will move from city
centre
PAGE 7 THE CITY OF STOCKHOLM
• Improved public transport
22 Aug 2005
• New park-and-ride sites
Autumn 2005
• Congestion charging
3 Jan-31 July 2006
• Referendum
17 Sept 2006
4 Steps
Public opinion 2005 – 2010
25%
75%
51,50%45,80%
65%
35%
67%
33%
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
Pro Against
Dec 2005
17 sep 2006
Dec 2007
Dec 2010
Reduced traffic in growing city
Incentive for Clean Vehicles
Why was the trial a success?
• Reliable technique
• Easy to understand
• Traffic effects exceeded
expectations
• People have seen the
benefits
• For a just cause
• Continuously measuring
didn’t give room for rumours
5.3
4.5 4.0
3.4 3.0
0.0 0
1
2
3
4
5
6
1990 2000 2005 2009 2015 2050
Tonnes CO2-ekv per capita
Stockholm: Climate Goals and achievements
Real Development Goals
Fossil
fuel
free
