Congestion charging in Stockholm
Muriel Beser Hugosson, PhD
Royal Institute of Technology, Stockholm
Background
• Regional or local government not authorised to introduce a congestion fee
• National decision• Regulated by law• Executive responsibility - the National Road
Administration• Time limited full-scale trial • Referendum – voted yes• Permanent system since Aug 2007
Objectives• Reduce traffic volumes by
10-15% on the most congested roads
• Increase the average speed• Reduce emissions of
pollutants harmful to human health and of carbon dioxide
• Improve the urban environment as perceived by Stockholm residents
18 control points
Charged when entering/exiting the centre of Stockholm
E4/E20 bypass free of charge
County 6500 km2
County 1.9 millions inhab.County 754 000 cars and
403 cars/1000 inhabCity of Stockholm 770 000 inhab.City of Stockholm 279 000 cars and
364 cars/1000 inhabCharging zone 47 km2
Charging zone 280 000 inhab.
No barriers, no stops, no roadside payments
• Amount due for payment is shown at the control point
• Automatic identification. License plates are photographed
• A limited part of the car is shown on photograph
Laser
Camera
Antenna
6
Charging Point – Process Sequences• Vehicle Enters first detection line
DBLSRU
DBLS
TX
TXS
R
R
R
R
R
R
RU
R
R
R
R
DBLS
Road Surface
VDSLasers
TX / R /MR
RearVRU
FrontVRU
EIS
• Laser Line 1 Vehicle Entry message sent with vehicle position
7
Charging Point – Process Sequences• Vehicle Enters Second detection line
DBLSRU
DBLS
TX
TXS
R
R
R
R
R
R
RU
R
R
R
R
DBLS
Road Surface
VDSLasers
TX / R /MR
RearVRU
FrontVRU
EIS
• Laser Line 2 Vehicle Entry message sent with vehicle position
• Position based Front image capture triggered
8
Charging Point – Process Sequences• Vehicle Leaves First detection line
DBLSRU
DBLS
TX
TXS
R
R
R
R
R
R
RU
R
R
R
R
DBLS
Road Surface
VDSLasers
TX / R /MR
RearVRU
FrontVRU
EIS
• Laser Line 1 Vehicle Exit message sent
9
Charging Point – Process Sequences• Vehicle Leaves Second detection line
DBLSRU
DBLS
TX
TXS
R
R
R
R
R
R
RU
R
R
R
R
DBLS
Road Surface
VDSLasers
TX / R /MR
RearVRU
FrontVRU
EIS
• Laser Line 2 Vehicle Exit message sent with vehicle classification data
• Position based Rear image capture triggered
Congestion charges and timesPEAK PERIODS
7.30-8.30 a.m., 4-5.30 p.m SEK 20EUR 2
SEMI PEAK PERIODS7.-7.30 a.m., 8.30-9 a.m.3.30-4 p.m., 5.30-6 p.m. SEK 15 EUR 1.5
MEDIUM-VOLUME PERIODS6.30-7 a.m., 9 a.m.-3.30 p.m.6-6.30 p.m. SEK 10 EUR 1
MAXIMUM CHARGE: SEK 60/day EUR 6
Evenings, Saturdays, Sundays, holidays: NO CHARGE
Package 3 parts
Public transport
Congestion charges
Park and ride facilities
Improved Public Transport and park and ride facilities
• 14 new express bus lines• 18 bus lines with extended service• 200 new busses• Improvements of rail-bound lines• 2500 new park- and-ride places
Visible effectsLast day without charges (low traffic - right after New Year’s Eve)
First day with charges
First normal working day with charges
-22 % passages in/out of congestion charging zone
Passages in/out of congestion charging zone 06:00 – 19:00
End of trialbeforeafter
-28% -23% -22% -21% -20% -21% -24% -21% -20% -17% -18% -17%
-17%-19%-16%-19%-17%-22%-19%-16%-17%-17%-19%
0
100 000
200 000
300 000
400 000
500 000
600 000
jan feb mar apr maj jun jul aug sep okt nov dec
2005 (before charges)
2006 (with charges)
2006 (no charges)
2007 (no charges)
2007 (with charges)
2008 (with charges)
1. All car drivers did not return2. Reduction at same level as during the trial
dashed line – 2006-2007 ”between” charging
Passages in/out of the congestion charging zone
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 0
5000
10000
15000
20000
25000
30000
35000
40000
45000Innerstadssnittet
Tidpunkt
Flö
de (
ford
on
/h)
April 2005
April 2006
Time
Vehicles/h
before
after
30-50% less time in queue
Kötid, morgonrusning
0%
50%
100%
150%
200%
250%
300%
inreinfartIN inreinfartUT innerstadsgata innerstadsledN innerstadsledS
fm 2005 fm 2006before after
Public transport after compared with before
• Extended public transport itself did not increase amount of passengers
• Increase of passengers 6 % (4.5 % due to congestion charging)
• Accessibility increased
• Small increase of congestion in underground
Environment and health effects
• CO2 - 14 percent
• NOx - 7 percent
• PM10 - 9 percent
• Emissons were reduced in the ”right” area
Inner City7-14 % reduction
County 2-3 % reduction
Retail
•Minor effects on the retail trade•Department stores, malls and shopping centres trade increased
7 % in city (+ 7 % in nation)•Small-scale shops sales -6 % (trend)
Changed reporting in the media
Was it a good idea to carry out the congestion charge trial?
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
Bra idé
Dålig idé
Good idea
Bad idea
Exempted passages…
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
14
16
An
de
l
Kategori
Andel undantagna fordon
Försöket
jan-09
Share of exempted vehicles
trialafter
catogory
2009Month Tax
decisionsAmount, MEuro
Januari 409 500 5,46
Februari 423 800 5,97
Mars 441 100 6,72
April 437 500 5,74
Maj 449 200 5,71
Juni 479 500 6,17
From environmental fee to revenues for infrastucture investments
Why a success story?
• Technical system worked
• Information – people knew what to do
• Visible congestion reductions
• Comprehensive evaluation programme
• Clear objectives – achieved
• The design was consistent with expressed purpose
Conclusions
• Better public transport cannot reduce road congestion on its own
• Change of opinion when people get real experience
• Positive evironmental effects in decided areas
• Sold clean vehicles increased rapidly