Allocating David Levinson,. Where Does Congestion Come From?

Allocating

David Levinson,

Where Does Congestion

Come From?Flow throughbottleneck (q)

Flow throughupstream section (Q)

Flow throughupstream lane (Ql)

Inputs & OutputsInput-Output Diagram

0

5

10

15

20

25

0 2 4 6 8 10 12

Time

Cumulative Count

Cumulative Arrivals Cumulative Departures

How Do We Manage Congestion

• Infrastructure (Assembly)• Travel Demand Management (Administering)• Transportation Systems Management (TSM)[In pairs, everyone come up with a list of 3

Tools of TSM (things that affect the supply or capacity, not the demand), what are the advantages and disadvantages of each]

• Intelligent Transportation Systems (ITS) (TSM rebranded + more advanced technology)

Why TSM?• We have largely built out existing

transportation network (S-Curve). [What is an S-Curve?]

• Highways are a mature system.• More efficient (faster, safer, greater

person flows (and vehicle flows)) use of existing transportation facilities without significant new construction.

• Complements TDM strategies - but not aimed at reducing demand.

Some TSM/ITS Tools• High Occupancy Vehicle Lanes (HOV Lanes)• High Occupancy Toll Lanes (HOT Lanes)• Bus Priority Lanes, Queue Jumpers, Signal Pre-

emption• Park and Ride Lots• Ramp Meters• Highway Helpers• Variable Message Signs• Electronic Toll Collection• Highway Access Management• Other “Intelligent Transportation Systems”• Other

How Should We Manage Congestion

• Pricing

Classic ExplanationMarginal cost, short run

Average cost, short run

Quantity

Price,cost

Demand

QoQ*

Po

P*

Toll

= Welfare loss without tolls

Legend:

P* = Optimal price with tolls

Po = Price without tolls

Q* = Amount of travel with tolls

Qo = Amount of travel without tolls

Classic Explanation Unpacked

DA (Demand at LOS A)

DF

Money priceto travelers $

Quantity (traffic flow)

Revealed demand

SA

SB

SC

SD

SE

Travel time function(short-run average cost)

SF

Quantity (traffic flow)

Travel time(LOS)

Welfare Analysis

DC

DF

Moneyprice totravelers

($)

Quantity (traffic flow)

Revealed demand

C.S. unpriced

P.S. priced

C.S. priced

U

V

O

W

Y Z

Legend:

Consumers’ surplus priced = UVW Producer’s surplus priced = OVWY

Consumers’ surplus unpriced = VOZ Producer’s surplus unpriced = 0

X

But Travel Time Varies with Time

• Classic explanation doesn’t account for that.

• Recall I/O Diagram• What is marginal delay?

Inputs & OutputsInput-Output Diagram

0

5

10

15

20

25

0 2 4 6 8 10 12

Time

Cumulative Count

Cumulative Arrivals Cumulative Departures

Marginal DelayMarginal Delay (excluding own delay)

0

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

0 5 10 15 20 25

Cumulative Arrivals (Q)

Marginal Delay

HOT Lanes• Congestion pricing is “too hard”

politically at this time.• What are HOT Lanes?

Pricing is Inevitable• Why?• Gas tax revenue is shrinking as the fleet becomes

more fuel efficient - – better Internal Combustion Engine, – Hybrid vehicles– Alternative fuel vehicles– Fuel Cells

• Yet roads still need to be financed• Congestion will still be problem• Devolution of power changes incentives (free riders)• Electronic toll collection makes pricing much easier.

London’s Congestion

Charging Scheme

Presentation by Karen Akins to TRB Pricing Committee

January 15, 2002

Purpose of Presentation

• Briefly familiarize TRB Pricing committee with details of London’s scheme

• Explain unique circumstances leading to successful introduction of scheme

• Identify factors which will influence outcome of the scheme

Greater London

Charging zone is 8 square miles and covers 1.3% of the total 617 square miles of Greater London.

Scheme Operation

• Daily, weekly, monthly or annual license for individual vehicle registration number

• Flat charge of 5 pounds per day (Monday-Friday 7am-6:30 pm) for all vehicles*

• Payment by mail, telephone, retail, internet• Late payment until midnight, but charge rises

to 10 pounds after 10pm– *Exceptions/discounts granted

How it would work

• A network of 230 cameras will be located at sites throughout the charging zone, not just at the boundaries. All the main entry points will be covered.

• Every single lane of traffic will be monitored at both entrances and exits to the charging zone

Signage

Key Benefits of Scheme

• Reduce the amount of traffic in central London by 10-15%

• In turn, this would cut traffic delays by about 25%• Less traffic inside and outside the central zone• Help bus operations• Produce substantial net revenues for transport in

London (almost $200 million per year)

Source: Transport for London

London 2003

• Mayor Ken Livingstone- strong political leadership• Transportation crisis-years of underinvestment in

public transportation infrastructure (by law revenues tied to improvements)

• Public support- Traffic congestion is Londoners’ top transport issue

• Absence of privacy issues (London as “CCTV capital of the world”, City “Ring of Steel”)

Mayor Ken Livingstone• Mayor of London in 1980’s• GLC Abolished by Thatcher

government in 1986• GLA re-established as strategic

authority-specific authority given for congestion charging

• Mayoral elections in 2000-Livingstone re-elected

• All mayoral candidates supported congestion charging, except one

Historic Underinvestment in Public Transportation

• Two decades of population growth and one decade of economic growth

• Unpredictable and low level of investment by central government in tube

• Congestion charging revenues are the only source of significant funding for investment in transportation at mayor’s discretion

Population Growth

Congestion Charging will net 130 million pounds per year

Support by national government

• 1964-Sneed Report on Road Pricing, official endorsement of concept

• 1995-London Congestion Research Program publication

• 1999-GLA formed and given specific authority for road pricing

• 2000-Independent ROCOL group publishes technical assessment

Public Support

Ken Livingstone elected mayor by overwhelming majority (58%) on a platform of congestion charging

Congestion charging is backed by 53% of Londoners if revenue is solely used for making significant improvements to public transportation (Source: MORI poll, July 2001)

Public consultation-some 2,500 individuals and organizations responded during two rounds (July to October 2001 and December 2001-January 2002)

Political Compromises

Examples

1. Flat fee

2. Exemptions

3. Discounts

4. Hours

What would Vickery think?

Flat Fee

Trucks originally were to be charged 15 pounds per day, now they will pay only 5 like everyone else

Freight Transport Association lobbying

Discounts

• Residents’ 90% discount, for example– 80,000 households within charging zone– Car ownership 50%– Justification: 80% of trips start and end in boroughs outside

charging zone

Most deprived wards Original boundaries proposed did not extend south of river

Exemptions

• Motorcycles, mopeds

• Black cabs

• Licensed mini-cabs

• Disabled passenger vehicles

• Emergency service vehicles

• NHS vehicles exempt from duty

Public Opposition• Westminster City Council-call for “public inquiry” and

failed legal challenge• Kennington residents(severance /effect on property

values)-protest and failed legal challenge• Restaurant and theater workers (cost and safety for

female workers)• Meat traders at Spitalfields Market-cost• Inner London charities-cost to volunteers• Individual boroughs-majority do not support scheme

Privacy Issues(or lack thereof)

“Ring of Steel” in City of London for protection from IRA bombs

London is already unofficial CCTV capital of the world, what’s one more camera?

Factors Influencing Outcome

• Discounts/exemptions-are they too generous? Is scheme too watered down due to need for political compromise?

• Will implementation be smooth”-Will call center be overwhelmed if Post Office doesn’t participate?

• Are public transportation improvements so far sufficient to handle increased ridership?

Most Likely Implementation Problems

• Call center operation/post office

• Database problems-enforcement

• Motorcycle/moped/bicycle parking problems

• Adequacy of public transport system to handle additional ridership?

Public Transportation Improvements

• Specific emphasis on buses (i.e. 60 new routes)

• Expanded underground and rail capacity with new services across central London (long term)

New tram systems

Cross River Tram

Ready in 2011

72 million passengers/year

West London Tram

Ready in 2009

50 million passengers/year

The Future?

• Will Ken drop scheme after two months if the scheme is not successful? - odds are 4 to 1 he’ll drop it within first year

• If successful, other cities in U.K. will quickly follow, charge itself will likely be increased from 5 pounds

Big C DayFebruary 17, 2003

How to follow issue:

• www.transportforlondon.gov.uk (official local government website for London)

• www.bbc.co.uk/congestion (best overall website)

• www.guardian.co.uk (best commentary)• www.sod-u-ken.com (forum for

opposition)

For a copy of the paper or further information, contact:

Karen Akins

City Design and Social Science

283 Maple Street

Stowe, VT 05672

(802) 793-1481

karenakins@onebox.com