The High Cost of Free Parking

[moose]

I live in an ICHB, ex-council with mainly council tennants with a communal garden, its great!

So, you're profiting from the selling off of social housing, then? Interesting.

 

[Roadkill]

That would kind of rely on someone re-opening the food shops which shut down long ago, and that ain't going to happen.

It would, if they became the cheapest and/or most practical option.

 

[bi0boy]

The only fair anti-car tax would be one where the rate of tax is highest where there are alternative methods of travel.

For example, employees who live within walking distance of work, or on a bus route in, would have to pay punitive rates to park their cars at work, unless they had to work odd hours, or couldn't walk or something.

Likewise if I drove from Tower Hill to Birmingham New Street a satellite road toll system would charge me shit loads, because I could have got the train. However if I was a farmer driving to pick up some cider from my mate's orchard I wouldn't pay anything because there was no other way to make the journey.

Obviously this wouldn't work because i could just drive through the middle of nowhere on the way, so as to make my journey seem like it needed to be done by car, but yeah...

 

[soulman]

I think the whole idea stinks and I'll give you an example of why. This week I've had to take someone who is severley disabled to a couple of different hospitals. Both of those hospitals now have a privately owned and run multi-story car park where you have to pay pounds regardless of someone's inability to walk. If you try to park closer to the hospital you're likely to be clamped or receive a fixed penalty. There used to be a lot of space to park for free, either to drop someone off, collect them, or to stay a few hours while they were seen to. Now that free space seems to have been sold to certain taxi companies. It's another example of the privatisation of free space and profiteering at the expense of basic things like health care for all.

 

[co-op]

just a quick question..

what is the road fund licence for then?

The RFL was abolished in the 1930s. Meanwhile, in breaking news, Germany has invaded Poland....

 

[teuchter]

I think the whole idea stinks and I'll give you an example of why. This week I've had to take someone who is severley disabled to a couple of different hospitals. Both of those hospitals now have a privately owned and run multi-story car park where you have to pay pounds regardless of someone's inability to walk. If you try to park closer to the hospital you're likely to be clamped or receive a fixed penalty. There used to be a lot of space to park for free, either to drop someone off, collect them, or to stay a few hours while they were seen to. Now that free space seems to have been sold to certain taxi companies. It's another example of the privatisation of free space and profiteering at the expense of basic things like health care for all.

I don't understand in what way all this is at all relevant to the point in discussion? I don't think anyone arguing for more restrictions on free parking in public space would have any problem with making exceptions for special cases, such as for people with limited mobility. Nor would they be in favour of privatising public space, as the whole aim of this is to recover some of the space currently taken up by private vehicles for use by greater proportion of the population (ie. not just those running cars and making others' lives more difficult in the process).

 

[Athos]

Interesting book review below.

IMO There should be no free parking on any pubic road in the UK. Residential Parking permits should be a miniumum of £1000 per annum, try to rent a space in a commercial car park for a year for less than that.

Workplaces should charge employees at least £5 per day per space. (Nottingham's workplace parking levy is the first attempt to do this, based on the principle that if a workplace provides parking then cars will travel at peak hours on local authority funded roads to fill them).

We need to extend this principle to supermarkets, only giving planning permission for PAID parking lots at a realistic rate of £2 per hour. Then driving to the supermarket will no longer be better value than walking to the local shops, and we can stop the hollowing out of town centre high streets. (Labour promised to do this, but then gave into pressure from the supermarkets)

The High Cost of Free Parking - By Donald Shoup
Reviewed by Kristin Grabarek and Peter Roper

Donald Shoup provides a startling analysis of the high economic, social, and environmental impacts of free parking and offers solutions for curtailing the negative impact of the automobile.

... the cost of parking has shifted from the transportation sector to being lumped into the prices of development and living. According to Shoup's calculations, 99% of parking for automobile trips is free for the driver.

Planners then implemented policies to provide parking for all automobiles, all day, every day. The result of these policies was a landscape of asphalt, separating roads from buildings and buildings from each other, since the policies were most often set arbitrarily and without consideration for the actual demand for parking.

Then Shoup presents his most startling statistic: in the United States, in 2002, the public spent $127 billion or more subsidising public parking. To compare, in 2002 $231 billion was spent on Medicare and $349 billion on the U.S. military.

Shoup also directly relates the high cost of free parking to pedestrians and cyclists, detailing how the vast parking lots and requirement for more lanes of traffic to support the solo transportation make walking and cycling not only unpleasant, but also impossible in many cases, because of the increased distance walkers and cyclists must travel to cover the expanse that parking spaces require!

The conclusion of The High Cost of Free Parking realistically anticipates the righteous resistance of motorists accustomed to free parking, by reminding us that the biggest barrier to eliminating the subsidy of free or below market-rate parking is not technical, but political."

http://www.carbusters.org/magazine/sections.php?issue=33&go=books

Bonkers

 

[Velouria]

Bonkers

Seconded.

 

[soulman]

I don't understand in what way all this is at all relevant to the point in discussion? I don't think anyone arguing for more restrictions on free parking in public space would have any problem with making exceptions for special cases, such as for people with limited mobility. Nor would they be in favour of privatising public space, as the whole aim of this is to recover some of the space currently taken up by private vehicles for use by greater proportion of the population (ie. not just those running cars and making others' lives more difficult in the process).

Nah you're wrong. IMHO you're being fooled by those who want to privatise what small amount of public space still exists. Once upon a time every village, town and city had public spaces available and free for visitors. Travelling was encouraged and visitors were welcomed...

 

[teuchter]

Nah you're wrong. IMHO you're being fooled by those who want to privatise what small amount of public space still exists. Once upon a time every village, town and city had public spaces available and free for visitors. Travelling was encouraged and visitors were welcomed...

Yup. But those were the days when relatively few people actually owned cars, weren't they? Don't you see the connection?

 

[soulman]

Yup. But those were the days when relatively few people actually owned cars, weren't they? Don't you see the connection?

I do see it but I'm interested in what your solution is...

 

[Ich bin ein Mod]

Bonkers

Thirded.

The problem with posts like this is it gives weight to the pro-car lobby, by making anyone the slightest bit aware of eco issues surrounding transport seem like an absolute nutter.

 

[cybertect]

How much is your f'ing car tax? How much is the PUBLIC land used for the highways you drive on FOR FREE worth? How much does it cost to maintain them?

To answer your question, about £5.4 billion, or about £22 billion less than the Exchequer collects in Vehicle Excise Duty and Fuel Duty (plus nearly £5 billion more in VAT) every year.

 

[cybertect]

Add to the figures above over £1.2 billion collected by English and Welsh local authorities in parking charges and fines every year.

According to Shoup's calculations, 99% of parking for automobile trips is free for the driver.

BTW, it's possible that that is true in the United States. I have only limited experience driving in America and it's probably easier to park for free than in Britain.

However, based on my own experience, it's certainly not the case in the UK. I've used my car about five times in the last month and a half, and paid for parking on two of those occasions.

 

[teuchter]

To answer your question, about £5.4 billion, or about £22 billion less than the Exchequer collects in Vehicle Excise Duty and Fuel Duty (plus nearly £5 billion more in VAT) every year.

These guys disagree.

They argue it's rather more complicated than that, and that the true cost is more like £100 billion.

We show in this paper that the true cost of providing roads in Great Britain for motor vehicles exceeds £100 billion (adding inflation to our calculations based on 1993/1994). The total contributions from all vehicle users at the 'point-of-use' (the cost of each journey) amounts to only £15 billion.

Road users pay a further £13 billion in fixed payments (such as Vehicle Excise Duty and insurance) to enable them to use their vehicles on the roads. Hhowever these costs have little relevance to the choice between road and rail transport, as it is the point-of-use cost which influences travel decisions.

We have calculated the cost for providing the road network for vehicles by taking all hidden costs into account. For both road and rail transport there are "external costs" which users impose on non-users of pollution and other environmental damage. In the case of road transport these are considerable and well documented. In the case of rail transport, these external costs are small, but there is little data available for obtaining reliable estimates. Hence to compare the RELATIVE costs of road and rail transport we have excluded the external costs from the comparison.

Here's what they have to say about parking, by the way:

3. CAR PARKING

Every car used on the roads needs parking space. Not only at the owner's home, but also at work, at businesses visited, at the supermarket, in the local town centre, at the railway station, at the leisure centre, football ground, cinema, theatre or concert hall.



It has been estimated that the minimum total area devoted to car parking is 590 square kilometres, an area of land twice the size of Birmingham. (8) Land is a valuable commodity. Every time a vehicle is parked on land not owned by the vehicle owner a cost is applicable to the use of that land, even though seldom applied. For cars parked on the roadside or in a layby, the cost of parking is essentially part of the total cost of providing the road network. Each time a car is left on someone else's property without charge results in effect a subsidy to the car use by the owner of the land if no similar value offer is made towards public transport use.



Even when parked at fee paying car parks, cars will still be subsidised unless the fees cover not only all the operating costs of the car parks but also the full rent and rates which would be paid by a typical business or shop using the same land.



We are not aware of any figures that show the scale of car parking subsidies. In a typical week one author of this paper estimated that he had parked his car about 20 times in various places. The parking fees paid totalled £1 whilst an estimate of the possible market value of all parking places used (where the car was parked at a private residence an estimate was made of the likely fee of a nearby off street car park) was about £12.



Translated nationally this would represent car drivers paying £1.25 billion for £15 billion worth of car parking space. If we did pay the full equivalent of current prices for car parking every time a car is parked, this could generate a surplus which would result in lowering of charges even after the costs of administering those parking charges was added.

This would seem to indicate that the full cost of car and lorry parking does not exceed £15 billion. To get a more exact estimate, we look at this question simply in terms of land use for car parking. From (8), we find that the area of land taken by car parking is 590 square kilometres compared with 2,848 square kilometres for roads. Using the value of road space calculated in Section 2 at £32,426 million, this would put a value of £6.7 billion on car parking. We can summarise the payments made and the true cost of car parking:



Estimate of Fees paid by Motorists £1.25 billion

True Cost of Car Parking £6.7 billion

Much further work is needed to refine these estimates.

 

[trashpony]

And then everyone would pave over their front gardens, further reducing the number of birds in our cities. Brilliant

 

[teuchter]

And then everyone would pave over their front gardens, further reducing the number of birds in our cities. Brilliant

Another counter-argument which just ends up highlighting the central problem. Yes, paving over front gardens reduces green space. Just like providing all that free parking paves over public space which could be used for green space. Once a car owner thinks about paving over their own garden, instead of public space, it suddenly comes home to them that this is one of the consequences of car ownership.

 

[soulman]

So you're happy to see what was free public space privatised and charged for because you don't like motor vehicles.

 

[trashpony]

Another counter-argument which just ends up highlighting the central problem. Yes, paving over front gardens reduces green space. Just like providing all that free parking paves over public space which could be used for green space. Once a car owner thinks about paving over their own garden, instead of public space, it suddenly comes home to them that this is one of the consequences of car ownership.

Que? Roads are already there aren't they? I live in London, I haven't noticed any free car parking space anywhere that isn't the road. And I have to pay to park there too (and haven't got a problem with that).

 

[Cobbles]

... it follows that at best, individuals will be expected to pay the whole cost of their private motor vehicle usage, including parking provision......

That's fine so long as individuals also have to pay the whole cost of their public transport usage without any subsidies or handouts chipping in.

 

[stavros]

and what about those of us with big families to feed and need to to a big shop in order to get enough food to feed a large family.

I'm not singling you out here, but I always find the "By I've got a big family" argument a little hard to stomach. Ultimately, having kids is your choice, and by making that choice you've knowingly chosen to take on the extra costs that come with supporting an extra human life. We come back to the environment issue that few, even in green charities, will speak about; global overpopulation, ie. not immigration.

As for charging for all parking, whilst I don't drive I always pick up from the general populus the aggrievement that "this is just a money-making exercise". Thus it's my feeling that any scheme has to provide a carrot as well as a stick. I used to work at an out-of-town office which was ungettable to by public transport, and my employers had an excellent transport reward scheme where you got a small bonus each month if you racked up enough points from
car-sharing or cycling.

 

[mattie]

I'm not singling you out here, but I always find the "By I've got a big family" argument a little hard to stomach. Ultimately, having kids is your choice, and by making that choice you've knowingly chosen to take on the extra costs that come with supporting an extra human life. We come back to the environment issue that few, even in green charities, will speak about; global overpopulation, ie. not immigration.

I share your concerns to a great extent, but I would argue that child-raising should be a community, and not an individual, concern.

As for charging for all parking, whilst I don't drive I always pick up from the general populus the aggrievement that "this is just a money-making exercise". Thus it's my feeling that any scheme has to provide a carrot as well as a stick. I used to work at an out-of-town office which was ungettable to by public transport, and my employers had an excellent transport reward scheme where you got a small bonus each month if you racked up enough points from
car-sharing or cycling.

Agree again - the use of the carrot needs to be increased, the lengths the stick has been used to is both ridiculous and (so far) relatively ineffective.

 

[teuchter]

So you're happy to see what was free public space privatised and charged for because you don't like motor vehicles.

At the moment it's not free public space because it's got private cars parked all over it.

And I don't know why you keep going on about the space being "privatised" - the proposal is that it is either used for public use other than parking (eg green space) or, that a charge for its use is levied. Just as a charge for the use of the railways was levied even when they were in state ownership.

 

[roryer]

Bonkers

"The conclusion of The High Cost of Free Parking realistically anticipates the righteous resistance of motorists accustomed to free parking"

 

[roryer]

As for charging for all parking, whilst I don't drive I always pick up from the general populus the aggrievement that "this is just a money-making exercise". Thus it's my feeling that any scheme has to provide a carrot as well as a stick. I used to work at an out-of-town office which was ungettable to by public transport, and my employers had an excellent transport reward scheme where you got a small bonus each month if you racked up enough points from
car-sharing or cycling.

Conversion to a less car dependent society will take several years, so I agree that we need to reward those people who choose not to drive, and penalise those who continue to do so.

I simply can't see where free parking fits in though, as it rewards people for driving, which I believe most thinking people will understand causes worsening congestion, pollution, depletion of oil supplies, and climate change.

The adaption to a low energy world will be painful for every country in the world, but the UK suffers from chronic car addiction.

In terms of averages in the UK...

We walk less than anywhere else in Europe except Greece

We only cycle 77 kilometres a year compared with a European average of 189

 

[Cobbles]

At the moment it's not free public space because it's got private cars parked all over it.

I blame the Romans - ever since they adopted urban planning featuring thoroughfares broad enough to be used by vehicles (roads), people have had the audacity to want to park their chariots and carts on land that should be free for jolly urchins to play knucklebones on.........

 

[roryer]

Julius Caesar's solution to parking problems was to ban chariots from Rome's central business district.
(Source; "Not for Cars Only -- A Guide to Innovative Parking Lot Design" 1993)

 

[Cobbles]

Julius Caesar's solution to parking problems was to ban chariots from Rome's central business district.
(Source; "Not for Cars Only -- A Guide to Innovative Parking Lot Design" 1993)

Aha - there had to be some reason why the old despot got elbowed out of office (Caesar as well).

 

[Fullyplumped]

Conversion to a less car dependent society will take several years, so I agree that we need to reward ....

Who are "we?"

Do you think anyone would win even a little council seat with such policies, never mind a parliamentary election anyewhere with that as their main policy?

You must be thinking of the glorious day when the owners of 40 million cars all go away on some election day and the ecofacscists who live in your "inner city housing blocks" win.

 

[rioted]

........To then make it economically non-viable would require some corrective measure,.........

It's going to get economically non-viable for more and more people whether you or anybody else likes it or not.

Just the preserve of the rich, TC? It already is! I certainly can't afford a car, even if I were selfish enough to want one, and on a world scale I'm relatively well-off!

The rise of car ownership in the UK is the result of the failure of collective response to the attacks of capitalism, imposing individual responses instead. This is a negative thing and it is very sad that people who consider themselves communists or anarchists should defend it.