9.12.3. However, in developing cities, it is noted:
a) congestion is severe and land use controls are a medium to long term policy (another factor in favour of congestion pricing which is an immediate policy);
b) competition between adjacent localities can seriously reduce the effectiveness of well–intended policies; if there is a choice between accommodating the requirements of a major project, which will enhance the local economy, by relaxing stringent policies or, seeing the project go elsewhere, by maintaining those policies, many authorities will opt for the former; and
c) land use control policies need a strong institutional and planning agency to define and to implement land use policy through the planning framework. Many developing cities lack these essentials.
9.12.4. Despite these problems, ultimately, every city should seek to reduce travel demand by integrated land use control and transport policies. Although examples are few and include Singapore, the case of Curitiba (Brazil) must be mentioned. “Curitiba has used, since 1965, land use planning, the hierarchy of road network, an economic development policy and public transport to co-ordinate the parameters for the location and density
of homes, work, recreation, services and commerce”[48]. The city continues to develop its land use in relation to transport. The Inter American Development Bank (IDB) has recently completed participation in a project that includes enhancement of the bus terminals at the out-of-town ends of major trunk line corridors. The terminals are being developed as local centres with facilities for shopping, local services (the municipality has established offices at each terminal), utility companies, offices, sports etc. It is reported that the IDB is currently also participating in a loan project with the State of Parana (of which Curitiba is the state capital) to replicate the Curitiba experience in medium sized cities (about 1 million population) throughout the State to integrate land use and transport. The Curitiba experience has been documented in the technical literature over the last two decades and is an example to the rest of the world. Other cities can clearly learn from Curitiba[49] but those cities need to understand that the success of the Curitiba system cannot be copied immediately and directly - the Curitiba system was developed over some 20 years, was founded on a strong planning institute (IPUUC) and benefited from political continuity.
9.13.1. As city populations and economies grow, car ownership and use will increase and urban traffic congestion will worsen. Although the construction of additional or alternative road capacity can alleviate some of the effects of congestion, (i) even if they are affordable, new roads generate traffic and (ii) the benefits are most likely to be offset by congestion unless growth in traffic is managed and restrained. Policies are needed to deal with inevitable increasing urban traffic congestion.
9.13.2. The objectives of an urban traffic demand management policy are to
a) reduce traffic congestion consistent with improved economic efficiency and personal mobility; and
b) reduce adverse traffic related impacts on the city environment. The rationale for demand management is that vehicles should pay a realistic price for the full costs of their journeys either by direct charging or by indirect means
9.13.3. Conclusions with respect to the possible policies are summarised as:
|
Measure |
Key Advantages |
Key Disadvantages |
Experience and Conclusions |
|||
|
Parking controls and management through § On street parking prohibitions § On and off street charged parking § Control of charges and supply of off and on street parking |
§ § § § |
least contentious demand management instrument most widely understood by public and likely to be most easily accepted can raise significant revenue charges have redistributive effect as generally car-owning “rich” pay the charges |
§ § § § § § |
on street parking controls in congested areas can generate traffic by releasing road space for through traffic; parking controls need high level (costly) enforcement parking charges and enforcement can be corrupt use of chauffeurs-drivers means cars do not have to park and thus avoid controls charges for publicly available off street parking may not be in control of the traffic agency private off street parking not likely to be control of traffic agency |
§ § § § |
parking controls are used to some extent in most developing cities but with the main objective to eliminate obstructions to traffic flow on main roads rather than to manage demand a parking policy is essential to good traffic management practice and despite the problems and weaknesses, a parking policy is likely to the starting point for demand management in most cities; parking should be charged since car drivers should pay the full costs of their journey and parking is a part of any journey made by car; free parking would be a subsidy to car users a parking policy will not be effective as a restraint measure unless the traffic agency controls a large fraction of all parking and can coordinate charges for on-street, publicly available off street and private non residential parking within a consistent policy. This is not easy to achieve, particularly for private non residential parking (where local taxes on parking places such as “workplace parking levies” would be needed and moreover would need to be passed on to drivers in some way to act as a disincentive to car travel) enforcement-sanctions-tracing offenders-corruption have posed difficulties in many developing cities; to some extent utilising the private sector, including for operation of on-street charged parking, can assist overcome the problems |
|
§ |
while parking charges alone are unlikely to have the congestion-relief effect required, charged parking should be part of an integrated policy |
|||||
|
Use of vehicles – demand management by regulatory control such as “odd-even” number plate prohibitions and variants based on number plate identification such as prohibitions for selected days, for selected hours and for selected roads |
§ § § |
cheap to implement almost always accepted by the public as a demonstration of commitment by city authorities to take positive action to reduce congestion and related air pollution less difficult to enforce than feared; experience in Mexico City, Bogota, Santiago etc) and even if there are infringements, provided enforcement is reasonably efficient, the |
§ § § § § |
encourages an increase in the number of vehicles owned, to provide households with both permitted vehicles for any day; induces more trips by permitted vehicles than were made by those vehicles before the prohibitions were introduced; possibility of fraud and evasion problem; not a long term measure as undermined by growth in vehicle ownership over time; undermined by concessions- |
§ § § |
Many cities have used variants of “odd-even” scheme including: § Lagos (odd/even but now no longer operational) § Mexico City (2 days per week but being phased out) § Bogota (peak period prohibitions 2 days per week) § Santiago de Chile (total exclusion for 2½ hours per day on main arteries during air pollution emergencies) § Seoul (2 or 3 days per month defined by last digit in number plate) § Sao Paulo - (2 days per week, peak hours) § Manila (prohibitions on main arteries in peak periods), The only scheme which has been subject to detailed analysis of impacts (as opposed to measurements of vehicle speed) indicates that dis-benefits may outweigh benefits in medium term (Eskelund etc al, see reference). The measures cannot be regarded as a long term solution. However, the basic measures are relatively simple to implement (although complex restrictions by time or location such as that in Manila are not |
Уважаемый посетитель!
Чтобы распечатать файл, скачайте его (в формате Word).
Ссылка на скачивание - внизу страницы.