Terms of use Privacy About us Media Contact

Author Topic: Congestion tolling etc.  (Read 12084 times)

Offline verbatim9

  • Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4291
Re: Congestion tolling etc.
« Reply #80 on: July 31, 2018, 12:52:08 PM »
Does anyone think we should start peak congestion tolling for inner city CBD streets, Riverside Expressway and Captain Cook Bridge to help pay for a future cross city tunnel from the PA to Toowong Cemetery? Once the tunnel is completed we can start thinking about demolishing the Riverside Expressway. A token amount of 50c per one way trip per light vehicle (incl motor cycles) and $1.00 per trip per heavy vehicle. This will help save for a new tunnel as well as divert traffic to existing arterials and tunnels?
Off peak would remain toll free. Peak 6am-10am 3pm-7pm
Special event congestion tolling should also be considered.
« Last Edit: July 31, 2018, 01:02:43 PM by verbatim9 »

Offline SurfRail

  • Global Moderator
  • Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 8069
Re: Congestion tolling etc.
« Reply #81 on: July 31, 2018, 02:28:17 PM »
Why would we toll roads to pay for more roads?

How about we set up a cordon toll, don't build a new motorway and spend the money on PT and cycling network improvements instead.
Ride the G:

Offline red dragin

  • Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1533
Re: Congestion tolling etc.
« Reply #82 on: July 31, 2018, 02:34:51 PM »
Or remove the need (and ability) to work in the CBD?

In the 'cloud' age, the need to have a centralised point of business should be reducing?
Aside from getting keys, which can be worked around at a moderate once off cost (individual key lockers at each rental property), I don't need to go to an office anymore. Everything I do can now be done on a portable device.

Combine that with not allowing any more office space to be created in the CBD and force decentralisation.

Offline SurfRail

  • Global Moderator
  • Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 8069
Re: Congestion tolling etc.
« Reply #83 on: July 31, 2018, 02:56:28 PM »
^ Not true.  Humanity is getting more urban, not less. 

If working from home was the be-all-and-end-all, why is there still a demand for office-space in the CBD?  Why didn't the internet, email, faxes or even telephones get rid of offices?  It's not just about technology.

There's no such thing as a "paperless" office for that matter.  I just laugh whenever somebody tries to convince me otherwise these days.
Ride the G:

Offline red dragin

  • Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1533
Re: Congestion tolling etc.
« Reply #84 on: July 31, 2018, 03:05:33 PM »
I'm not suggesting working from home for the masses.

But surely the need to be in the CBD because that's the place to be, or you have to be close to another office to pass cheques or paperwork has reduced?

We still use paper, but are now working to reduce the storage of that paper once signed. Increases office space, and reduces the space taken for archiving.

Offline SurfRail

  • Global Moderator
  • Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 8069
Re: Congestion tolling etc.
« Reply #85 on: July 31, 2018, 03:33:16 PM »
But surely the need to be in the CBD because that's the place to be, or you have to be close to another office to pass cheques or paperwork has reduced?

Not that I've noticed measurably.

Do you really think that the like of Deloitte, EY, MinterEllison, BDO, or any of the other really big professional services firms, government departments, finance houses and the like are going to leave the CBD?  Even the banks haven't left, they just farmed out their less well paid employees where it is marginally cheaper to accommodate them (especially in Sydney). 

The only decentralisation we are going to see of the kind people keep crowing about is in Sydney, where people will start decamping to Macquarie Park and Parramatta over time.  It isn't a trend that is being replicated anywhere else - not even in Melbourne.  The idea people are just going to move to Rockhampton or Townsville or even Caboolture and Ipswich en masse just doesn't hold much water when you look at it.

Brisbane needs to work as a city, shambolic planning and infrastructure can't just be excused on the hope people will have more managable travel demand in future.
Ride the G:

Offline techblitz

  • Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2823
Re: Congestion tolling etc.
« Reply #86 on: July 31, 2018, 08:12:36 PM »
red dragin if its any consolation......AI/Machine learning will put pay to a lot of CBD based jobs over the coming years.....with the main shift being jobs which can be done via algorithm shifted over to external techies who love nothing better than working from home.

So provided the techies can keep on top of the security risks which come with the cloud and algos....I would envisage more big companies embracing the AI revolution...eventually shredding where machine learning can do a better job or for efficiency gains...

Offline verbatim9

  • Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4291
Re: Congestion tolling etc.
« Reply #87 on: August 02, 2018, 09:29:54 AM »
Does anyone think we should start peak congestion tolling for inner city CBD streets, Riverside Expressway and Captain Cook Bridge to help pay for a future cross city tunnel from the PA to Toowong Cemetery? Once the tunnel is completed we can start thinking about demolishing the Riverside Expressway. A token amount of 50c per one way trip per light vehicle (incl motor cycles) and $1.00 per trip per heavy vehicle. This will help save for a new tunnel as well as divert traffic to existing arterials and tunnels?
Off peak would remain toll free. Peak 6am-10am 3pm-7pm
Special event congestion tolling should also be considered.
The reason why congestion tolling would be good for the Riverside Expressway Alice, Ann, Elizabeth, Edward and Turbot streets is that the city will no longer be used as a thoroughfare and just used for local traffic. This will enhance the CBD's  appeal to live and work close to the city and reduce local air and noise pollution from Coronation Drive to the East and North of the CBD. I don't think people working in the CBD at the moment have contributed to mass traffic congestion, just people/vehicles passing through it.

Offline verbatim9

  • Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4291
Re: Congestion tolling etc.
« Reply #88 on: August 02, 2018, 09:39:50 AM »
Ipswich CBD is the same used as a thoroughfare. On street  pedestrian activation is poor and businesses struggle. I don't know why Ipswich CBD has 3 lanes of traffic running through in each direction? Should be reduced to two with wider footpaths and segregated bike lanes in each direction. Congestion Tolling of 50c per vehicle could help save for better Public Transport and improvements in the area.

Offline techblitz

  • Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2823
Re: Congestion tolling etc.
« Reply #89 on: August 02, 2018, 09:55:13 AM »
https://ops.fhwa.dot.gov/congestionpricing/cp_what_is.htm

Quote
Congestion Pricing Strategies

Congestion pricing projects can be grouped into two broad categories: (1) projects involving tolls; and (2) projects not involving tolls.  Within these two categories are eight types of strategies, each of which is discussed in more detail in the Strategies section of this web site.
•Strategies Involving Tolls ◦HOT Lanes (Partial Facility Pricing)
◦Express Toll Lanes (Partial Facility Pricing)
◦Pricing on Entire Roadway Facilities
◦Zone-Based Pricing, including Cordon and Area Pricing
◦Regionwide Pricing

•Strategies Not Involving Tolls ◦Parking Pricing
◦Priced Vehicle Sharing and Dynamic Ridesharing
◦Pay as You Drive - Making Vehicle Use Costs Variable


Offline verbatim9

  • Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4291
Re: Congestion tolling etc.
« Reply #90 on: August 02, 2018, 01:07:48 PM »
^^Return the Transit/Hot lanes to Coronation Drive and the M3 Pacific Motorway (from Eight Mile Plains to the City) and have them congestion tolled during peak and special events. Buses of course would be toll free. Any other vehicles with any amount of passengers would be tolled.

Offline ozbob

  • Administrator
  • Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 93336
    • RAIL Back On Track
Re: Congestion tolling etc.
« Reply #91 on: September 19, 2018, 11:53:41 AM »
https://twitter.com/CityByrne/status/1042203929948250112

The Conversation --> Our new PM wants to ‘bust congestion’ – here are four ways he could do that

Quote
Road congestion is costing Australia more than an avoidable A$16 billion every year. This is set to almost double to A$30 billion by 2030. That’s why we have a new minister for cities and urban infrastructure, Alan Tudge, who says he’s looking forward to “congestion busting”.

It’s also why state election campaigns repeatedly focus on reducing congestion. The Victorian Labor government’s recent announcement of a plan to build “the biggest public transport project in Australian history” is a good example.

The proposed A$50 billion underground rail link will allow commuters to travel between suburbs without having to go into the city. And transport minister Jacinta Allan said it will take 200,000 cars off major roads.

While the project’s 2050 timeline is disappointing, this is a step in the right direction. If federal, state and local governments are serious about congestion, the discussion must continue to move beyond our obsession with more roads.

Building more roads is not a long-term solution to solving congestion. Most new roads, and the temporary de-congestion they may bring, simply lure more people into their cars. Eventually congestion increases, except now with more cars on the road, further exacerbating the original problem.

Here are four alternative measures to “bust” congestion and improve our overall quality of life.

1. Invest in mass, rapid, zero-emissions public transport

This type of transport includes electric bus rapid transit, where buses have dedicated roads and priority at intersections, and high-speed, electric underground systems, such as where passengers are transported in autonomous so-called “electric skates” that travel at over 200km/h.

Australia has been sorely lacking investment in mass, rapid public transport over recent decades. But this is slowly changing with the announcements of future projects, including: Sydney Metro, Melbourne Metro, Brisbane Metro, the recent Melbourne Suburban Rail Loop, and Brisbane Cross River Rail

But much more effort is needed to ensure these projects are implemented quickly and expanded beyond inner-city suburbs. Peak-hour bus lanes should be introduced to provide congestion-free bus rapid transit routes to and from metro stations.

And these new projects must move towards zero-emission vehicles to reduce the 1,700 premature deaths caused every year in Australia due to vehicle pollution - 40% more than in motor vehicle accidents.

2. Enable public transport subscriptions

The difference between public and private transport pricing in Australia is perverse. Those who own a car mainly pay a fixed upfront fee every year, no matter when or where they travel.

Ironically, the exact opposite is true for public transport users who are often charged more to travel during peak-hour traffic (see fares in Queensland, New South Wales, and South Australia), and have to pay for each individual trip, at a higher cost, the further they travel. This pricing structure effectively penalises commuters.

Read more: How many people make a good city? It's not the size that matters, but how you use it

Enabling monthly and annual public transport tickets, with unlimited trips, would encourage commuters to use public transport more often, to get the best bang for their buck from their subscription ticket.

Governments should also support integrating other transport services into these subscription tickets, including taxis, bike-sharing and even car hire. Such schemes have already been introduced overseas, including in the UK and Finland, given their potential to reduce car ownership and congestion under the right policy settings.

3. Invest more in active transport

Investment in dedicated active transport infrastructure, such as separated lanes, is paramount for encouraging active transport. It will also ensure the safety of pedestrians and cyclists, while minimising motor vehicle conflicts.

Additionally, the arrival of electric bikes, scooters, and skateboards, has opened up other modes of transport as a viable option for more Australians. These devices are particularly important for addressing the “first and last mile transport problem”, where commuters do not use public transport because stations are too far to walk to and/or from.

While there are challenges with regulating some of these devices, and ensuring they are safe to use, it is important governments invest in infrastructure - such as electric bike charging at public transport stations - to support their use in addressing the first and last mile problem.

4. Introduce dynamic road pricing

Finally, while public and active transport is crucial for reducing congestion, infrastructure to support these services comes at a cost. Most road taxes, such as annual registration fees, do not accurately reflect how and when car owners drive.

Is it fair for a pensioner who drives to the shops a couple of times a week, outside peak-hour, to pay the same fees as someone who drives to and from the city, every day, during peak-hour traffic? We need to progressively introduce cost-reflective road pricing, which is not simply focused on how far car owners drive, but on when, where and what they drive.

Road pricing should be used to disincentivise peak-hour, urban commuting to minimise congestion, while raising revenue to fund both public and active transport alternatives, as well as reduce tolls on roads that bypass city centres.

One pathway forward could be a voluntary (low-fee) road pricing scheme for electric vehicle owners. This would be in exchange for waiving existing road taxes, such as registration, stamp duty, import duty and fuel excise. Such a scheme could initially act as an incentive to encourage the uptake of this technology.

As electric vehicles become more affordable, the pricing scheme could be increased and expanded to the entire vehicle fleet, reducing emissions and travel costs, at the same time as minimising congestion.

Half baked projects, have long term consequences ...
Instagram   Facebook  @ozbob13@mastodon.social

Offline techblitz

  • Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2823
Re: Congestion tolling etc.
« Reply #92 on: September 19, 2018, 12:48:50 PM »
another opportunity for dynamic pricing would be to detect amount of ridesharing eg: number of people in each car....switch your phone on along with other people in the car...you are automatically granted a discount on the dynamic pricing.....if its only you in the car in the morning peak then u pay the FULL fare....no discount...

Offline verbatim9

  • Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4291
Re: Congestion tolling etc.
« Reply #93 on: September 19, 2018, 01:59:40 PM »
another opportunity for dynamic pricing would be to detect amount of ridesharing eg: number of people in each car....switch your phone on along with other people in the car...you are automatically granted a discount on the dynamic pricing.....if its only you in the car in the morning peak then u pay the FULL fare....no discount...
Can this be done now with E lanes? T3 lanes only on Coronation Drive and Gympie Road Monday-Saturday 6am-7.30pm and event days.

A number of cameras and sensors can assist that the E lane is used appropriately and tolls charged accurately for the number of KMs used in that particular lane.

Offline verbatim9

  • Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4291
Re: Congestion tolling etc.
« Reply #94 on: April 29, 2019, 11:33:21 PM »
Transurban says user-pays road charges needed within decade

Brisbane Times--------------------------------------->https://www.brisbanetimes.com.au/business/companies/transurban-says-user-pays-road-charges-needed-within-decade-20190429-p51i9i.html

Quote
Transurban says user-pays road charges needed within decade

Australia must find a new way of taxing road users soon or be unable to fund new infrastructure, according to the boss of toll giant Transurban, who says the inevitable mass adoption of electric vehicles will soon demolish fuel excise revenue.

Transurban chief executive Scott Charlton said on Monday that while electric vehicle sales in Australia had been "anemic" to date, nothing could stop the rise of zero emission vehicles (ZEVs), and connected and automated vehicles (CAVs), which can drive themselves and communicate autonomously with other vehicles on the road.

“We now believe that the mainstream uptake of CAVs will approach some sort of critical mass in the mid to late 2030s, and the ZEVs will be a little bit earlier," Mr Charlton said.

Electric vehicles would reach price parity with fuel-engine cars by the mid 2020s, which would spur faster adoption, he said.

That would hit government earnings from fuel excise - the 40¢ per litre tax motorists pay when they fill up at the bowser, which contributes about $12 billion to government coffers every year to fund new roads.

"We believe that as the road funding sources decline, the need for road-user charging will significantly increase by the late 2020s," Mr Charlton said.

“Something will have to change by the end of the next decade. Because all of these trends are going to feed on themselves and that funding pool… is going to dramatically decrease."

Road-user charging is a user-pays system where  motorists are slugged according to the frequency, time and location of their driving.

The federal government is trialling a road-user charging system for heavy vehicles, to test options for alternative revenue models to registration fees and fuel taxes.

“We’re hopeful that can be adopted eventually, with a brave politician, in Australia," Mr Charlton said.

The other option was to increase the goods and services tax or introduce some other tax that was not directly associated with roads, but that would lead to "misuse or misalignment" between the raising revenue and spending it.

Labor leader Bill Shorten wants to make 50 per cent of new car sales electric by 2030, a goal which the Coalition said was an attack on Australians' weekends and their ability to tow boats and trailers.

Transurban owns and operates many of the country's biggest toll roads, including Melbourne's CityLink and Sydney's Cross City Tunnel, M2, M5, M4 and M7, plus Brisbane's Gateway Motorway and Airport Link.

It is also building Melbourne's West Gate Tunnel and has bought a 51 per cent stake in Sydney's WestConnex.

The introduction of zero emissions vehicles and automated vehicles - which could operate as a fleet of self-driving, on-demand vehicles - was not a threat to Transurban's earnings, Mr Charlton said, and in fact would increase the use of its roads.

That is because the next-generation of vehicles would be cheaper to drive, and autonomous vehicles would open up a new category of road users in people who cannot currently drive, like younger people, the elderly or people with disabilities, Mr Charlton said.

Shares in Transurban closed down almost 1 per cent to $13.60 on a weak trading day for the Australian market.
« Last Edit: April 29, 2019, 11:49:37 PM by verbatim9 »

Offline ozbob

  • Administrator
  • Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 93336
    • RAIL Back On Track
Re: Congestion tolling etc.
« Reply #95 on: October 14, 2019, 01:46:02 AM »
ABC --> Congestion charge the cheapest, most effective way to reduce traffic jams in Australia, report finds

Quote

A new report by the Grattan Institute is calling for all major cities in Australia to impose a congestion charge on drivers during peak hours to ease heavy traffic in the CBD.

Key points:

A Grattan Institute report is calling for a congestion charge on drivers who travel into the CBD during peak hours

Those who drive into the CBD to work have some of the highest incomes in Australia

Lead researcher Marion Terrill said the charge should match public transport fees

A new report by the Grattan Institute is calling for all major cities in Australia to impose a congestion charge on drivers during peak hours to ease heavy traffic in the CBD.

What is a congestion charge?

It's exactly what it sounds like — a fee paid by drivers for using heavily congested roads.

The report suggested a cordon should be put around the CBDs of Australia's major cities with drivers paying a nominal fee when they cross the cordon during the peak morning and afternoon period.

The idea is not a new one.

The Melbourne City Council, the Productivity Commission, Infrastructure NSW, and Infrastructure Victoria have all supported the idea.

"For decades, governments have tried to reduce congestion by building new roads, updating existing ones and adding public transport services," Ms Terrill said.

But that's done little to alleviate bumper-to-bumper traffic, she said.

"It's time for a new approach."

The idea behind the charge is that it would encourage people to catch public transport, walk, or ride their bike.

It would mean workers with flexible hours could avoid the charge by changing the time of travel.

That means drivers who do need go into the CBD during peak hour would get there faster.

Is it worth it?

Ms Terrill said cities such as London, Singapore, and Stockholm had seen a "significant reduction in traffic" during peak hour by using a congestion charge.

The report predicted a cordon charge would result in 40 per cent fewer cars on the road during peak hour and a 1 per cent speed increase across a city's entire road network — which was on par with speed increases from major road projects.

"There would likely be a 16 per cent speed increase on roads in the CBD, less waiting time at intersections and a 20 per cent speed increase on arterial roads coming into the CBD," Ms Terrill said.

Three years ago, Infrastructure Victoria said a road-user fee could reduce the number of trips by 5 per cent, reducing traffic to school-holiday levels.

In response to the Grattan Institute's proposal, Victorian Premier Daniel Andrews said it was not on the state's agenda.

"The best way to ease congestion is to build a public transport network system which can deliver more trains, more often — and we're getting it done," he said in a statement.

"We have no plans and do not support a congestion tax."

What would it look like?

It wouldn't really look like anything.

While the idea of a road-pricing system had been suggested before, Ms Terrill said technological advances meant it was cheaper and easier than ever to execute.

The report suggested a number plate recognition system.

"[It's] like the cameras used as backups on toll roads and red light cameras," Ms Terrill said.

"It's matured as a technology and is used around the world. You don't need the gantry, [cameras] can exist on existing street furniture."

How much would it cost?

While the report did not suggest a price, Ms Terrill said the charge should be similar to the cost of catching public transport.

So, it would cost roughly $5 each way in Melbourne, Brisbane, Adelaide and Perth, and $8 in Sydney.

It was also suggested the cordon would "more than cover its costs of operation" and therefore was a better option than multi-billion-dollar road infrastructure projects.

What is peak hour?

The report did not suggest what was defined as peak hour but Ms Terrill said she imagined the morning peak to be from 8:00am to 9:30am and the afternoon peak to be from 4:00pm to 6:00pm.

"Some people will have to go at 8:00am for whatever reason, some people are more flexible and this encourages the most flexible drivers to be more flexible," she said.

"But those who can't be flexible get a faster trip and a more reliable trip."

Do we even have a congestion problem?

The report said Australia's major cities needed to catch up with the likes of New York, London, Stockholm and Singapore.

But are our cities really comparable to the biggest in the world?

While we might not experience the gridlock of New York and London that makes driving in the CBD almost impossible, according to Infrastructure Australia (IA) we do have a congestion problem, and it's getting worse.

A recent report by IA found despite recent investments in transport infrastructure, we were playing "catch up" rather than adding capacity to our roads.

Between 2006 and 2016 Melbourne added close to one million people to its population, Sydney added 800,000 and Brisbane and Perth grew by almost half a million.

Won't it just hit the pockets of low-income earners?

The most obvious criticism about a road charge is that it could hit low-income earners the hardest.

But Ms Terrill said that was a myth.

"The drivers who would pay the charge tend to be doing just fine. People who work in the CBD of Sydney or Melbourne are two to three times more likely to earn six-figure salaries than people across the city as a whole," she said.

Another concern was that people on low incomes were forced to drive to work.

"What we would say is the CBD is very well served by public transport and most people do travel to the CBD via public transport," Ms Terrill said.

The report said in Melbourne, barely a quarter of full-time CBD workers drove to work, and those who did tended to earn 17 per cent more than people using public transport.

In Sydney it was even higher, with people driving to work in the CBD earning 34 per cent more than their public transport counterparts.
Half baked projects, have long term consequences ...
Instagram   Facebook  @ozbob13@mastodon.social

Offline #Metro

  • Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 20298
Re: Congestion tolling etc.
« Reply #96 on: October 14, 2019, 03:34:58 AM »
Quote
Won't it just hit the pockets of low-income earners?

The most obvious criticism about a road charge is that it could hit low-income earners the hardest.

But Ms Terrill said that was a myth.

"The drivers who would pay the charge tend to be doing just fine. People who work in the CBD of Sydney or Melbourne are two to three times more likely to earn six-figure salaries than people across the city as a whole," she said.

Another concern was that people on low incomes were forced to drive to work.

I think this has been investigated by TMR already. This is the cordon toll idea. Australian cities are not Singapore or Europe.

You don't want to include the REX in it as there is a lot of South-West traffic that bypasses the city.

Also, much of the congestion would be on main roads leading to the CBD, roads such as Old Cleveland Rd, Coronation Drive etc.
Negative people... have a problem for every solution.
Posts are commentary and are not necessarily endorsed by RAIL Back on Track or its members. Not affiliated with, paid by or in conspiracy with MTR/Metro.

Offline timh

  • Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 444
Re: Congestion tolling etc.
« Reply #97 on: October 14, 2019, 07:46:10 AM »
I support the idea of a Congestion Charge. Could really motivate people to use public transport and also be a great source of revenue for government.

That being said, as you've pointed out, implementation is key. The REX is used as a bypass, so I'm thinking putting the toll points on the inbound off ramps (Margaret street, Turbot street, etc.)

That's for the south anyway, I don't know enough about the approach from the north/west

Sent from my SM-G950F using Tapatalk


Offline ozbob

  • Administrator
  • Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 93336
    • RAIL Back On Track
Re: Congestion tolling etc.
« Reply #98 on: October 14, 2019, 07:59:39 AM »
The Conversation --> Three charts on: why congestion charging is fairer than you might think

https://twitter.com/trnsprtst/status/1183475679330889728

Half baked projects, have long term consequences ...
Instagram   Facebook  @ozbob13@mastodon.social

Offline ozbob

  • Administrator
  • Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 93336
    • RAIL Back On Track
Re: Congestion tolling etc.
« Reply #99 on: October 14, 2019, 08:11:22 AM »
Every so often we see a news peak on congestion tolling ...  only to disappear until the next news peak rolls along ...

Simply isn't the political leadership to drive it.  They are happier ' busting congestion ' with more roads and lanes ...  :fp:
Half baked projects, have long term consequences ...
Instagram   Facebook  @ozbob13@mastodon.social

Offline verbatim9

  • Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4291
Re: Congestion tolling etc.
« Reply #100 on: October 14, 2019, 08:02:45 PM »
A car registration revolution is just a couple of months away. Queensland vehicle owners will be able to pay their rego monthly instead of the up-front annual fee. @STitmus7 #7NEWS https://t.co/m1PorGPHuG

https://twitter.com/7NewsBrisbane/status/1183660961342689280
^^A congestion charge for inner Brisbane would be good to help fund the remaining Trans Apex project (Toowong to Buranda)

Offline AnonymouslyBad

  • Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 282
Re: Congestion tolling etc.
« Reply #101 on: October 15, 2019, 04:29:50 PM »
That being said, as you've pointed out, implementation is key. The REX is used as a bypass, so I'm thinking putting the toll points on the inbound off ramps (Margaret street, Turbot street, etc.)

Yeah, you'd limit the toll points to the actual CBD grid. No Riverside Expressway.

As far as placement goes, remember that we aren't limited to old "one toll point = one toll" thinking. That would involve placing toll points at every entry or exit to the CBD, without any double counting, which is... challenging.
Just place toll points such that all CBD drivers hit at least one. If they hit multiple, no big deal: ignore it. Toll once per day (or once per X hours).
This also works out for service drivers. Charging a separate toll to a taxi or courier every time they enter the CBD is never, ever, ever going to happen, plus they're the ones who have a good reason.

Offline ozbob

  • Administrator
  • Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 93336
    • RAIL Back On Track
Re: Congestion tolling etc.
« Reply #102 on: October 19, 2019, 09:58:36 AM »
Melbourne Age --> Traffic congestion will continue until we summon the courage to tax it

Quote
The governments of NSW and Victoria lost zero time in rejecting the Grattan Institute’s proposal that all state governments introduce “congestion charging” in their capital cities. But don’t imagine this unpopular idea will go away. It will keep coming back until we buy it.

Australians and their political leaders have a record of trembling on the brink for decades before belatedly accepting the inevitability of upgrades to the tax system. Take value-added tax.

A full quarter century passed between the first official report recommending a VAT – which the Whitlam government rejected at the same time it made the report public - and its introduction by John Howard in 2000, rebadged as the more euphemistic goods and services tax.

Economists had lots of fancy economic-efficiency arguments for changing to a broad-based, single-rate tax on consumer spending but, in the end, it was quite pragmatic, revenue-protecting arguments that won the day.

The High Court had ruled various state government indirect taxes to be unconstitutional, and the growth in collections from the federal government’s ramshackle wholesale sales tax was falling further and further behind the growth of the economy, as more of every consumer dollar was being spent on (untaxed) services rather than goods.

An eventual move to charging motorists directly for using the roads could also be prompted by the declining effectiveness of the present tax system. As ever more of our car fleet moves from petrol-powered to electricity-powered, receipts from the nation’s main tax on motoring – the federal excise on petroleum – will wither away.

But that’s not an argument used in the Grattan Institute’s report – written by Marion Terrill – advocating a move to congestion charging. Indeed, Terrill makes it clear she’s not talking about a general road user charge – that is, charging that covers the cost of building new roads and maybe also the costs of wear and tear to roads, accidents and so forth. (Even though such a general charge for road use may well be what we end up with.)

No, Merrill is only on about charges designed to reduce excessive congestion.

So why might we get charges directed solely at reducing congestion? Because all of us hate it so much and because, even if it doesn’t increase in coming years as cities get ever bigger, you can be sure we’ll all believe it’s got a lot worse.

And, finally, because congestion charging is the most certain – and the cheapest – way to actually reduce congestion, not just promise to.

State politicians have gone for decades claiming to be reducing congestion by spending billions on new freeways (and a lot fewer billions on expanding public transport), but it hasn’t happened.

Why not? Partly because our cities keep getting bigger, but mainly because, in Merrill’s words, “most city-dwellers find car travel more appealing and convenient than other means of travel”.

Initially, a new freeway is much faster than the roads it replaces, but that just attracts more people who’d prefer to travel by car. They keep flooding in until the congestion increases the delay to the point where it’s about as bad as it was before.

By contrast, we know that congestion charging really works. You’d still have to build more freeways and railways as the city grew, but many fewer.

Merrill argues that congestion charges could be introduced in three stages. First is “cordon charging” where drivers pay to cross a boundary into a designated zone, such as a CBD. Next “corridor charging,” where drivers pay to drive along an urban freeway or arterial road. Then network-wide, distance-based charging, where drivers pay to drive within a designated network or area, on a per-kilometre basis.

She says there are three reasons why now’s the time to get started. First, many people say that congestion charging couldn’t be introduced without a big improvement in public transport. Well, that’s just what we’re getting.

In recent elections, the winning party promised spending on public transport of $72 billion in Victoria, $42 billion in NSW and $13 billion federally.

Specifically, Melbourne is getting the Suburban Rail Loop and the Airport Rail Link. Sydney’s getting Metro West, Metro City and rail to Western Sydney Airport.

Second, the technology for congestion charging is getting cheaper and better all the time. Third, there’s now enough global experience - not just Singapore, London and Stockholm, but also Malta, Gothenburg and Milan, with Jakarta and New York on the way - to show that congestion charging works and that, despite initial opposition, is soon accepted as a big improvement.

Merrill says that, in Sydney’s morning peak, for example, up to 21 per cent of trips are for “socialising, recreation or shopping”. A congestion charge wouldn’t raise much revenue. It wouldn’t have to be high to deter enough people to reduce road use in key parts of the city during peak hours. And remember, such charges are designed to be avoided.

It’s true that motorists with lots of money could easily afford to pay the charge, whereas people on modest incomes couldn’t. But the claim that a charge would be unfair is exaggerated.

If the charge was imposed on cars entering the CBD, only 3 per cent of Melbourne households would pay it on a typical day. And not many of those would be poor. The median income of full-time workers driving to work in the CBD is $1980 a week in Melbourne (and $2450 a week in Sydney). Sound poor to you?

But if you’re still not convinced by Merrill’s arguments, here’s a more radical proposal. The economists’ Coase Theorem implies it shouldn’t matter whether you impose the charge on workers required to start work in the CBD during peak hour or on their employer doing the requiring.

After all, workers have little or no ability to change the time they must start or leave work, but their bosses do.
Half baked projects, have long term consequences ...
Instagram   Facebook  @ozbob13@mastodon.social

Offline verbatim9

  • Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4291
Re: Congestion tolling etc.
« Reply #103 on: January 07, 2020, 11:09:52 PM »
Couriermail.com.au---> ‘Congestion tax’ should pay for driverless car, smart city infrastructure

Quote
CES 2020: ‘Congestion tax’ should pay for driverless car, smart city infrastructure
Motorists could be slapped with ‘congestion taxes’ in a bid to ramp up the stalling driverless car and ‘smart city’ networks which have been dubbed the answer to our gridlock hell.

Tanya French, News Corp Australia
Subscriber only

January 7, 2020 7:03pm

MOTORISTS should be slapped with congestion taxes so Australian cities can get driverless cars and other ‘smart city’ infrastructure off the ground, according to global tech experts.

If predictions of autonomous vehicle rollout a couple of years ago were to be believed, we’d be driving and flying around in robot-powered vehicles by now.

But leading transport experts at CES in Las Vegas today admitted it hadn’t happened as quickly as expected and major investment by governments was now needed.

‘Smart cities’ – an urban area that uses different types of integrated electronic ‘Internet of Things’ sensors to manage traffic, transportation and utilities – are slowly progressing in Europe and the US and have been hailed as the answer to tackling greenhouse gas emissions and future congestion woes in overcrowded cities.

But experts warned that if Australian cities didn’t seize the opportunities while tech giants like Uber, Toyota and Samsung were investing heavily in the driverless vehicle and supporting smart city technology, we could fall behind.

Clara Fain – the chief financial officer of transit company Via – said there was a ‘big disconnect’ in cities investing in smart city technology despite projections that two thirds of the global population would live in metropolitan centres by 2050.

“The consensus is autonomous vehicles are not happening today but it will happen,” she said.

“There’s a window of time cities have to seize on this while companies are putting huge investment into autonomous vehicle technology.”

She said governments were – on average - only investing two per cent of their budgets into smart city infrastructure – and the challenge was most were reluctant to invest heavily without immediate return.

The answer, she believes, is taxing motorists to finance new projects.

Self-driving cars are hailed as the answer to our congestion troubles?

“They need to use their biggest assets like roads to generate new funding,” she said during a CES panel discussion, referring to how major cities around the world are increasingly implementing congestion taxes to fund new infrastructure and push more people onto public transport.

“Every city is claiming they are working to be smart cities but the reality is most aren’t.”

Her calls were echoed by former US Transport Secretary Ray LaHood who said the ‘gas tax’ on Americans ‘built the interstate system’.

“The gas tax needs to be raised … use part of the funds to implement congestion pricing infrastructure – change the culture of how we get around our communities,” he said.

Driverless cars require a supporting infrastructure network to work most efficiently.

He called on political leaders from all levels of government to lead Smart City innovation but said ‘cash-strapped’ councils and states needed Federal Government resourcing to make it happen.

“Many of these things are not going to happen if you don’t have the resources … cities are cash-strapped,” he said.

“The Federal Government needs to be onboard to help resource it.”

He said public-private partnerships were critical but ‘the leadership has to come from the grassroots’.

Streetlight Data CEO Laura Schewel said if governments introduced congestion taxes or raised tolls, they had to ensure alternative and affordable options were readily available in order to make meaningful change in commuter habits.

She said the key to convincing governments to invest was to sell technology that fixes an immediate problem – like outdated traffic counting methods – and then pair the deal with ‘new boundary-pushing technology’ that offers a suite of other data that authorities never knew they needed.

“Help replace boring, old technology that governments have budgeted to replace … just selling innovative and futuristic technology is too tough against budget constraints,” she said.


Offline verbatim9

  • Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4291
Re: Congestion tolling etc.
« Reply #104 on: January 07, 2020, 11:11:37 PM »
Couriermail.com.au---> ‘Congestion tax’ should pay for driverless car, smart city infrastructure

Quote
CES 2020: ‘Congestion tax’ should pay for driverless car, smart city infrastructure
Motorists could be slapped with ‘congestion taxes’ in a bid to ramp up the stalling driverless car and ‘smart city’ networks which have been dubbed the answer to our gridlock hell.

Tanya French, News Corp Australia
Subscriber only

January 7, 2020 7:03pm

MOTORISTS should be slapped with congestion taxes so Australian cities can get driverless cars and other ‘smart city’ infrastructure off the ground, according to global tech experts.

If predictions of autonomous vehicle rollout a couple of years ago were to be believed, we’d be driving and flying around in robot-powered vehicles by now.

But leading transport experts at CES in Las Vegas today admitted it hadn’t happened as quickly as expected and major investment by governments was now needed.

‘Smart cities’ – an urban area that uses different types of integrated electronic ‘Internet of Things’ sensors to manage traffic, transportation and utilities – are slowly progressing in Europe and the US and have been hailed as the answer to tackling greenhouse gas emissions and future congestion woes in overcrowded cities.

But experts warned that if Australian cities didn’t seize the opportunities while tech giants like Uber, Toyota and Samsung were investing heavily in the driverless vehicle and supporting smart city technology, we could fall behind.

Clara Fain – the chief financial officer of transit company Via – said there was a ‘big disconnect’ in cities investing in smart city technology despite projections that two thirds of the global population would live in metropolitan centres by 2050.

“The consensus is autonomous vehicles are not happening today but it will happen,” she said.

“There’s a window of time cities have to seize on this while companies are putting huge investment into autonomous vehicle technology.”

She said governments were – on average - only investing two per cent of their budgets into smart city infrastructure – and the challenge was most were reluctant to invest heavily without immediate return.

The answer, she believes, is taxing motorists to finance new projects.

Self-driving cars are hailed as the answer to our congestion troubles?

“They need to use their biggest assets like roads to generate new funding,” she said during a CES panel discussion, referring to how major cities around the world are increasingly implementing congestion taxes to fund new infrastructure and push more people onto public transport.

“Every city is claiming they are working to be smart cities but the reality is most aren’t.”

Her calls were echoed by former US Transport Secretary Ray LaHood who said the ‘gas tax’ on Americans ‘built the interstate system’.

“The gas tax needs to be raised … use part of the funds to implement congestion pricing infrastructure – change the culture of how we get around our communities,” he said.

Driverless cars require a supporting infrastructure network to work most efficiently.

He called on political leaders from all levels of government to lead Smart City innovation but said ‘cash-strapped’ councils and states needed Federal Government resourcing to make it happen.

“Many of these things are not going to happen if you don’t have the resources … cities are cash-strapped,” he said.

“The Federal Government needs to be onboard to help resource it.”

He said public-private partnerships were critical but ‘the leadership has to come from the grassroots’.

Streetlight Data CEO Laura Schewel said if governments introduced congestion taxes or raised tolls, they had to ensure alternative and affordable options were readily available in order to make meaningful change in commuter habits.

She said the key to convincing governments to invest was to sell technology that fixes an immediate problem – like outdated traffic counting methods – and then pair the deal with ‘new boundary-pushing technology’ that offers a suite of other data that authorities never knew they needed.

“Help replace boring, old technology that governments have budgeted to replace … just selling innovative and futuristic technology is too tough against budget constraints,” she said.
^^Governments should be looking at per km distance charging capped for long distance driving over 50km per day. Relinquish or minimise car registration and fuel taxes as a result. Public Transport should also be calculated as per km charge as well. Singapore has this system and pays for further improvements in Public Transport infrastructure. Airlines already charge a per km charge for distances travelled thanks to IATA. People can have one account to travel seamlessly between all modes Car, Public Transport and Aeroplane

Offline #Metro

  • Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 20298
Re: Congestion tolling etc.
« Reply #105 on: January 08, 2020, 12:02:20 AM »
Quote
^^Governments should be looking at per km distance charging capped for long distance driving over 50km per day. Relinquish or minimise car registration and fuel taxes as a result. Public Transport should also be calculated as per km charge as well. Singapore has this system and pays for further improvements in Public Transport infrastructure. Airlines already charge a per km charge for distances travelled thanks to IATA. People can have one account to travel seamlessly between all modes Car, Public Transport and Aeroplane

It is just going to go the way of public transport fares. You would just have similar fare schemes applied to cars. This could be time of day, per kilometre, pre-paid passes, zones, etc.

Negative people... have a problem for every solution.
Posts are commentary and are not necessarily endorsed by RAIL Back on Track or its members. Not affiliated with, paid by or in conspiracy with MTR/Metro.

 

Sitemap 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 


“You can't understand a city without using its public transportation system.” -- Erol Ozan