Congestion Charging in London (A):
The Western Extension
Submitted By: -
Group No. – 10 Sec. – B
Abhishek Singh (2010062)
Ankit Saxena(2010068)
Deenbandhu Mishra(2010075)
Nikhil Bhandary (2010096)
Central London – Congestion
Problem
• Transportation was the primary responsibility of the Labour
party after gaining control of Parliament in 1997.
• London residents were happy with this move.
• The Great London Authority Act of 1999 required the
authority to develop a transport strategy and gave it power to
levy road usage as well as workplace parking charges.
• Ken Livingstone running as an independent candidate became
the Mayor in 2000, with implementation of congestion
charges being his primary agenda.
Road User Charges
Fuel Taxes Facility Tolls Congestion
• A fuel tax is a sales tax imposed on • Toll tax is primarily used to recover
the sale of fuel. the cost of Bridges, Tunnels and
• Positive Externalities intercity Express highways. It is • Tolls that vary with level of
• Financing road provision and beneficial there due to less number of
maintenance. access points. congestion.
• Reduces the environmental externalities • Putting Toll taxes on the congested • The congestion charges enables the
of road transport like less air & noise places is not a viable option as: government to charge the negative
pollution. • Urban expressways have large number of externalities
• Rise in government revenue for general • Positive externalities:
access point.
(non transport) expenditure purpose • Increase in cost to road users. • Reduction in Air and Noise Pollution
• Negative Externalities • Facility Toll seldom vary with congestion • Congestion Levels
• to people not using cars. and time of day. • Development in public transport, charging
• Increased cost to entire base, not just • There will be large queues outside toll the peak- hour users more for the
congested zone travellers. collection booths during congestion construction charges of road.
• Motorists using the congested road ends timings. • Rise in government revenue
up paying same as the one driving on a • Walking and cycling area
freeway. • Negative Externalities:
• Increase in fuel tax not a good option • Increased cost to road users
in reduction of congestion. • Economic cost to congested zone
residents, retailers, offices, transporters.
• Congestion or overcrowding at
underground rails
Prior Experience - Congestion Pricing
Singapore
• First city to adopt congestion pricing in 1975, 2.4 miles central area, that covers Singapore
Downtown, from 7:30 a.m. to 10:15 a.m.
• Shift from Colored coded license to Electronic collection Scheme so as to save cost of
staffing toll booths and the time lost.
• After 1998, the congestion charges were made to vary with the traffic.
• Successful in congestion zone, but spillover traffic in adjoining ring roads and streets.
• Gradually expanded to adjoining areas of traffic congestion.
Norway
• Norway introduces Toll Rings in the cities of Oslo, Bergen, Trondheim And Stavanger in late
1980s.
• Purpose to raise revenue rather than congestion control
• Proved congestion charges were feasible in countries apart from Singapore
• Pioneered in Automated License plate recognition system along with non- electronic
methods.
• Enforcement was by video recognition of license plates.
• Enforcement included Periodical license schemes, unmanned coin booths.
ROCOL Study
• Greater London Authority established “ Review of Charging
options for LONDON” - ROCOL.
• Central London area was selected for charging because of
practicality.
• Congestion Pricing Features :
• Cars: 5 Pounds/day
• Trucks : 15 Pounds/day
• Time : 7AM to 7PM
• Computer simulation was used to study travel pattern and
congestion levels throughout greater London. Overall 10
percent Reduction was Predicted, with overall time
reduction from 4 min/km to 3.5 min/km
ROCOL Study
Comparison between Congestion charging and Workplace
Parking scheme
Congestion charging Parking Scheme
Cost to consumers Car : 5 Pounds/day 3000 Pounds/Annum
Trucks : 15 Pounds/day
Societal Benefit 129 – 223 million 40 – 85 million Pounds
Pounds
Financial Gain 230 – 270 million 85 – 105 million Pounds
Pounds
ROCOL Study
• 3 Options for collecting Congestion charges were considered:
• Paper Windshield License
• Digital Video Enforcement
• Electronic Collection Scheme
• The Implementation time was different for different options
with 2002 for paper licensing scheme , 2003 for video option
and 2004 for electronic scheme.
Congestion charging scheme
Scheme designed to reduce congestion
Cars and trucks entering Congestion charging zone were charged £5 per
day
Emergency vehicles, Public buses, taxis, motorcycles and cars driven by
disabled persons were exempted from the congestion charges
Scheme applicable between 7:00 am and 6:30 pm, Monday through
Friday
90% discount for residents of Congestion charging zone, Central London
Vehicles were monitored via video surveillance software
Congestion charging scheme (contd.)
Violators were fined £80; fine reduced to £40 if paid
before midnight on the same day else it was increased to
£120
License plates of violators were verified manually before
the fine bills were sent
Toll licenses could be purchased on daily, weekly or
monthly basis from vending machines, selected petrol
pumps and retail stores via telephone, post or the internet
Extensive public information campaign regarding
congestion taxes were held
Current Status: After Charging in Central
Region
Particulars % Increase/Decrease
Cars* 33 % decrease
Delivery vans & trucks * 11 % decrease
Exempt Vehicles* 11-23 % increase
Traffic circulation 15 % decrease
Congestion delays 30 % decrease
Inner Ring Road (traffic diversion effects) 4 % increase
Overall Congestion* 11-21 % decrease
Motorists Shift to Public Transport 32500-37000
Motorist changing their hour of travel 8000-18500
All Vehicles 14 % decrease
*Exhibit 4
Results of Congestion Charging
Overall traffic reduced by 14%
Traffic of 4+ wheelers which contributes maximum to the
congestion is reduced by 18%
Time to travel one kilometer in central London is reduced by
14% from 3.6minutes to 3.1minutes
Time to travel one kilometer in Inner Ring road is reduced from
3.7minutes to 3.3 to 3.5minutes
Time to travel along approaches to Central London is reduced by
10% from 3minutes to 2.7minutes
Results of Congestion Charging
(contd.)
Congestion Delay reduced from 2.4 mins/km to 1.7 mins/km
Though the traffic around central London has been increased by 4%,
the congestion delays were down by 11 to 21%
Net annual social benefit amounted to £50mn
Apart from the estimated social benefit, there are other benefits like
reduced air/noise pollution, increased quality of life in central London
People supporting the project increased from 39% to 48%
PPP-Benefits
• Project Acceleration & cost effectiveness
• Eradication of negative externalities and free rider problem
The user pays for the benefits.
• The presence of government enables the social marginal
benefit and cost consideration.
Bandra–Worli Sea Link (BWSL)
Bandra–Worli Sea Link (BWSL)
• The Rs. 1600 crore project of Maharashtra State Road Development
Corporation (MSRDC) was executed by Hindustan Construction
Company, with design and project management by DAR Consultants.
• The link has an average daily traffic of around 37,500 vehicles per day
• The toll station (TP) and collection system will provide for 3 different
types of toll collection, as follows:
- Fully automatic system: Electronic payment through On board Units
mounted on the vehicles which allow passage without stopping.
- Semi-automatic system: Electronic payment through a smart card, which
allows payment without having to pay cash.
- Manual toll collection: Payment of toll by cash, requiring vehicle drivers to
make cash payment to a toll attendant, and stopping for cash exchange.
Advantages
The Sea Link reduces travel time between Bandra and Worli from 45–60 minutes to 7
minutes
• THANK YOU
