Click on the headline (link) for the full text.
Many more articles are available through gy Bulletin homepage
Clear Up the Congestion-Pricing Gridlock
Ken Livingstone, NY Times
THE New York State Assembly ended its session on June 22 without reaching a consensus on Manhattan’s congestion pricing proposal — a delay that may cost New York City some $500 million in federal transportation money. Assembly members have voiced concerns about the economic impact of the program, the effect on traffic outside Manhattan and even the effectiveness of the idea itself.
Four years ago, London was engaged in a very similar debate. We now have the luxury of hindsight. While the two cities’ situations are not identical, they certainly have analogies and therefore, perhaps, the success of London’s program can shed light on the current debate in New York.
At that time, London’s business district was undergoing rapid growth, but it was at capacity in terms of traffic. Efforts to channel more cars into the city center simply led to ever lower traffic speeds, which in turn led to business losses and a decrease in quality of life. Simultaneously, carbon emissions were mounting because of the inefficiency of engine use.
Is London’s success a guarantee that congestion charging will work in New York? Of course not. But it is an indicator that properly executed congestion pricing works, and works well. Singapore and Stockholm already operate such programs and other cities are examining them. Given the success of congestion charging in London, this is not surprising.
Ken Livingstone is the mayor of London.
(2 July 2007)
See also [NYC Mayor] Bloomberg defends congestion-pricing plan for vehicles.
Near the rails but still on the road
Sharon Bernstein and Francisco Vara-Orta, Los Angeles Times
Research casts doubt on the region’s strategy of pushing transit-oriented residential projects to get people out of cars.
—
TV cameras in tow and champagne at the ready, a dozen of the county’s most powerful civic leaders — including the mayor of Los Angeles, L.A. City Council members and county supervisors — touted the latest and glitziest new development in Hollywood: the planned W Hotel and apartments at the storied corner of Hollywood and Vine.
This project, they pledged at the groundbreaking earlier this year, would restore a sagging neighborhood while also minimizing traffic — an important promise in increasingly gridlocked Hollywood.
“People could live here and never use their cars,” declared MTA Chief Executive Roger Snoble at the February event.
It’s a vision expressed frequently by local government officials, who see building large mixed-use developments next to mass transit lines as a key solution for not just the region’s traffic congestion but also its spread-out geography and reputation for being unfriendly to pedestrians.
In Los Angeles alone, billions of public and private dollars have been lavished on transit-oriented projects such as Hollywood & Vine, with more than 20,000 residential units approved within a quarter mile of transit stations between 2001 and 2005.
But there is little research to back up the rosy predictions. Among the few academic studies of the subject, one that looked at buildings in the Los Angeles area showed that transit-based development successfully weaned relatively few residents from their cars. It also found that, over time, no more people in the buildings studied were taking transit 10 years after a project opened than when it was first built.
Los Angeles, with its huge geographic footprint and its limited public transportation system, can’t offer residents of these developments the kinds of sophisticated transit networks available in cities like Washington, D.C. — or even smaller ones like Portland — where transit-oriented projects are believed by many to be working.
The Times decided to examine driving habits at four apartment and condominium complexes that have already been built at or near transit stations in South Pasadena, North Hollywood, Pasadena and Hollywood.
(30 June 2007)
Plane Stupid activists give aviation industry a bumpy ride
Johnny Davis, The Observer
When two students decided something had to be done about climate change, they levelled their sights on flights. Now, with 150 fully committed activists behind them, Plane Stupid are giving the aviation industry a bumpy ride.
—-
…So it continues. The next month, aviation executives at London’s Waldorf Hilton abandon their conference on ways to leverage demand for cheap flights when demonstrators burst in and release helium balloons tied to screeching rape alarms. At Tower Bridge, protesters wearing business suits infiltrate a gala dinner for airline CEOs, making it impossible for police to tell who’s who. In Manchester, Birmingham, Cambridge and Southend, travel agent staff arriving for work find their paths blocked and their windows plastered with stickers: ‘Closed for a Rethink’.
It’s all the work of Plane Stupid, an environmental action group co-founded by student Joss Garman, who, in his 21 years, has already chalked up a lifetime of frontline protest. Plane Stupid believe air travel poses the single greatest threat to our climate. Their stated aim is ‘to bring the aviation industry down to earth’ by seeking an end to short-haul flights, a tax on aviation fuel and abandonment of airport expansion.
Their 150 or so members represent a new generation of green activists, many of whom grew up with one eye on the Reclaim the Streets anti-road movement of the Nineties, were involved in Iraq protests and believe direct action is now the only way forward.
(1 July 2007)
Ontario to introduce speed limiters for transport trucks
680News staff, with a report from Canadian Press
Toronto – Transport trucks will soon be travelling slower along Ontario highways, as the McGuinty government will soon make it mandatory for large commercial vehicles to use speed limiters.
Speed limiters would cap the speed of transport trucks and other large vehicles at 105 km/h. The government said speed limiters will help improve safety on the road and cut greenhouse gas emissions in the province. Transportation Minister Donna Cansfield said the reason for capping the speed, five kilometres above most speed limits, would be to give truckers the opportunity to pass slower vehicles. ..
The Ontario Trucking Association played a large role in pressuring the government to enforce mandatory speed limiters, she went on to say. ..
(2 July 2007)
Bikes beat the rush in commuter challenge
Alan Roden, The Scotsman
CYCLISTS emerged victorious in a battle to find the quickest way to travel into Edinburgh city centre.
A “commuter challenge” was staged in the city to find the fastest way to get to work, with bikes winning three of the four races. The seven-mile journey from Ingliston was won by former Commonwealth Games rider Andy Matheson, who made the trip in just 19 minutes.
A more “average cyclist” reached Castle Street in 36 minutes, behind the park-and-ride express bus service from Ingliston and a motorist. But cyclists did emerge genuinely victorious in two of the contests – from Newcraighall and the Edinburgh Royal Infirmary – while the motorbike proved quickest from Ocean Terminal. ..
Despite concerns over congestion in Edinburgh, and a perceived lack of city centre parking spaces, the commuters travelling by car were never the slowest. The motorist even took joint first place in the trip from Newcraighall, if the efforts of another faster-than-average cyclist are overlooked. ..
(3 July 2007)
