Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

- SCOTLAND `MUST CONSIDER CONGESTION CHARGES'

Expand Messages
  • eric.britton@ecoplan.org
    ... From: Wetzel Dave [mailto:Davewetzel@tfl.gov.uk] Sent: Thursday, July 29, 2004 7:18 PM To: Ole Lefmann Subject: RE: PA COPY - SCOTLAND `MUST CONSIDER
    Message 1 of 1 , Jul 29, 2004
    • 0 Attachment
      -----Original Message-----
      From: Wetzel Dave [mailto:Davewetzel@...]
      Sent: Thursday, July 29, 2004 7:18 PM
      To: 'Ole Lefmann'
      Subject: RE: PA COPY - SCOTLAND `MUST CONSIDER CONGESTION CHARGES'

      Many thanks for this Ole.

      1. If you charge a rental for a scarce resource it works better.
      Road space in Central London is scarce - congestion charge (CC) reduces
      cars
      so the traffic flows and the economy works better.
      Development land in London is scarce - if we charge LVT it is brought to
      best use and the economy works better.

      2. Yes, both we and the UK Govt are looking at satellite technology to
      create differential charges which would allow higher charges for more
      congested streets. (Not currently TfL policy to implement though).

      Incidentally, the flat £5 charge encourages motorists to maximise their
      mileage within the zone on the day that they have paid.
      e.g. B4 CC a motorist might drive in 3 days for 3 transactions.
      After CC he/she now drives in on one day and carries out all three
      transactions. or
      An operator of lorries may have sent 6 in each day - now only 4 come in
      and
      can complete the drops that it formerly took six to do.

      Hence, we have a reduction of 18% of vehicles entering the zone but only
      a
      reduction of 16% of traffic within the zone.
      However, congestion is down 30%!

      3. If CC drives shoppers, business or residents away then yes rents will
      fall. That is not our experience in Central London. In fact, some
      property
      commentators have suggested residential rents are rising because of the
      traffic reduction, quicker buses, pedestrians finding streets easier to
      cross and less air and noise pollution.

      4. Who suggested LVT reduces rent? It shares the rent with between the
      landowner and the state which reduces the freehold price the landowner
      can
      claim.


      Dave
      Dave Wetzel; Vice-Chair; Transport for London.-----Original Message-----
      From: Ole Lefmann [mailto:olefmann@...]
      Sent: 28 July 2004 21:27
      To: Wetzel Dave
      Subject: RE: PA COPY - SCOTLAND `MUST CONSIDER CONGESTION CHARGES'



      Dear Dave,

      I use to agree in your points (and I admire your clear way of arguing
      for
      our case), but I cannot see that Congestion Charges are like Land-Value
      Taxation. I hope you will assist.

      DIFFERENT INTENSITY IN USE. If you increase the LVT (up to 100% of the
      rent
      of land; cannot increase more than that - if you try to it is not LVT)
      then
      you increase the intensity of the use of the sites in question; contrary
      to
      the effect of increased congestion charges (the upper limit of which is
      either where the public opinion disagree or where the total amount of
      the
      revenue begins to decrease) which is that you decrease the intensity of
      the
      use of the roads, (CCs may increase the intensity of the use of the
      cars).

      DIFFERENT WAY OF CHARGING. CCs demand flat rates in the area they cover;
      LVT
      demand individual charges that differ in accordance with the values of
      the
      sites in the area. (Maybe a technologically development in the future
      will
      sophisticate CCs so that they may distinguish between streets/sqares and
      make certain routes more cheap/expensive to use than others).

      DIFFERENT EFFECT ON THE SIZE OF RENT OF LAND. CCs' increase the rent of
      land as long as they make people choose their routes and means of
      transport
      more sensible than they would have done without the CCs. But all taxes -
      also CCs - reduce the rent of land; and unwisely administered CCs may
      make
      people behave less sensible than they would else have done, in which
      case
      they make the rent of land shrink considerably.

      LVT doesn't reduce the rent of land, but it decreases the part of it
      left
      for the landowners to pick up.

      Ole



      -----Original Message-----
      From: Wetzel Dave [ mailto:Davewetzel@...
      <mailto:Davewetzel@...> ]
      Sent: 25 July 2004 19:51
      To: 'For Your Attention Personally'
      Subject: FW: PA COPY - SCOTLAND `MUST CONSIDER CONGESTION CHARGES'


      Can anyone educate the Scottish First Minister that congestion charging
      works like land value taxation?

      Dave
    Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.