Congestion taxation &
sustainable transport
Gustaf Landahl City of Stockholm
Sustainable transport by Carrots & Sticks! Carrots
Sticks
Improved cycle lanes
Parking fees
Increased public transport use
Low emission zone for lorries
New ways of transport – Car-sharing clubs – Better information – Adaptive traffic signals
Goods logistics
Clean vehicles
Congestion taxation
Objectives • Reduce congestion • Increase accessibility • Improve environment • Finance infrastructure
Congestion taxation zone
PAGE 4
Vehicle identification process Distance between center of gantry and equipment suspension points 1300 Height to Registration Unit suspension point
RU
1700
The Switch (S) shall be mounted above and not more than 500 mm from the TXes (not applicable for MR) RU
DBLS 31
50 TX / R / MR
Height to detection sensor suspension points
6500 5500
6500
6300
Minimum headroom
Height to Registration Unit suspension point
Height to Radio Communication equipment suspension points
6500 5500 Minimum headroom
25
Road Surface 1700
10000 Distance between suspension point of Registration Unit and center of middle gantry
Distance defined by detection sensor bracket 10000 Distance between suspension point of Registration Unit and center of middle gantry
Congestion tax PEAK PERIODS 7.30-8.30 a.m., 4-5.30 p.m.
€2
SEK 20
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
THE CITY OF STOCKHOLM
PAGE 7
4 Steps • Improved public transport 22 Aug 2005 • New park-and-ride sites Autumn 2005 • Congestion charging 3 Jan-31 July 2006 • Referendum 17 Sept 2006
Public opinion 2005 – 2010
80% 70% 60% 50% 40% 30% 20% 10% 0%
75% 65% 67% 51,50%
45,80% 35% 33%
Dec 2005 17 sep 2006
25%
Dec 2007 Dec 2010
Pro
Against
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
Stockholm: Climate Goals and achievements Tonnes CO2-ekv per capita
6
5.3 4.5
5 4
4.0
3.4
3
3.0 Fossil fuel free
2 1
0.0
0 1990
2000
Real Development
2005
2009
2015 Goals
2050
Thank you for your attention!
Gustaf Landahl Gustaf.landahl@stockholm.se