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

road pricing

Expand Messages
  • Simon Norton
    In reply to Robin Chase, the argument referred to is used -- validly or not -- whenever anything it proposed which is seen as hitting motorists. It is probably
    Message 1 of 6 , Jul 25, 2005
      In reply to Robin Chase, the argument referred to is used -- validly or not --
      whenever anything it proposed which is seen as hitting motorists.

      It is probably just as valid an argument against doing nothing and allowing
      congestion to regulate traffic levels.

      I also remember the argument being used in reverse when off-centre superstores
      started to proliferate in the UK. The argument was that if there were more of
      them then people wouldn't have to drive so far to find one. Surrender to this
      argument has killed many a town centre.

      To my mind there is no way of maintaining a civilised urban or semi-urban
      environment in which the car is the normal means of travel. Perhaps the only way
      to stop the rot is to impose a tax on parking spaces, which is similar to what
      Stephen Plowden suggested. This would have the advantage of targeting those
      developers who created the problem in the first place by taking the profit out
      of sprawl (and the test of whether the tax was high enough would be whether this
      happened).

      However, I don't see why this should be exclusive of London style congestion
      charging -- can't we have both ?

      Simon Norton
    • Simon Norton
      Yes, Stephen Plowden s latest posting seems to make a bit more sense. One essential aspect of road pricing is that it shouldn t encourage people to shun town
      Message 2 of 6 , May 2, 2006
        Yes, Stephen Plowden's latest posting seems to make a bit more sense.

        One essential aspect of road pricing is that it shouldn't encourage people to
        shun town and city centres altogether -- and especially not to move economic
        activity out to places where it is only accessible by car.

        It is for that reason that I believe that the most effective form of road
        pricing may well be a tax on private parking. Not only would this encourage
        developers to choose locations accessible without cars, but it would improve the
        competitive position of retailers etc. in such locations as against the
        superstores which we have foolishly allowed to mushroom.

        I may say that I am not against the concept of superstores -- I use them myself
        when they are conveniently located, because they are more likely to have the
        things I want. But if they aren't conveniently located then not only do they not
        contribute to the choice available to non-motorists, they actively sabotage it
        by abstracting custom. That is why shopping facilities have deteriorated not
        only in local centres but even in city centres like Cambridge.

        Simon Norton
      • Todd Alexander Litman
        You may be interested in our latest report, Parking Taxes: Options and Impacts (http://www.vtpi.org/parking_tax.pdf ), which describes several examples of
        Message 3 of 6 , May 2, 2006

          You may be interested in our latest report, "Parking Taxes: Options and Impacts" ( http://www.vtpi.org/parking_tax.pdf ), which describes several examples of per-space parking taxes. They are an excellent way of raising funding, reducing parking supply, increasing parking prices, and discouraging automobile ownership and use. Also see my Parking Management report ( http://www.vtpi.org/park_man.pdf ) and book ( http://www.planning.org/bookservice/description.htm?BCODE=APMB ), which describe other ways of managing parking facilities for efficiency.

          However, I think that the evidence so far is that when properly used, congestion pricing can be quite effective at reducing urban automobile use, and thereby improving conditions for other modes, including walking, cycling, taxi and public transit. Perhaps the largest beneficiaries of London's congestion pricing program is bus riders, who gained from increased investment (much of the revenue was invested in new buses) and reduced congestion delay (see http://www.vtpi.org/london.pdf ).


          Best wishes,
          -Todd Litman


          At 09:05 AM 5/2/2006, Simon Norton wrote:
          One essential aspect of road pricing is that it shouldn't encourage people to
          shun town and city centres altogether -- and especially not to move economic
          activity out to places where it is only accessible by car.

          It is for that reason that I believe that the most effective form of road
          pricing may well be a tax on private parking. Not only would this encourage
          developers to choose locations accessible without cars, but it would improve the
          competitive position of retailers etc. in such locations as against the
          superstores which we have foolishly allowed to mushroom.

          I may say that I am not against the concept of superstores -- I use them myself
          when they are conveniently located, because they are more likely to have the
          things I want. But if they aren't conveniently located then not only do they not
          contribute to the choice available to non-motorists, they actively sabotage it
          by abstracting custom. That is why shopping facilities have deteriorated not
          only in local centres but even in city centres like Cambridge.

           Simon Norton



          Check in here via the homepage at http://www.newmobility.org 
          To post message to group: NewMobilityCafe@yahoogroups.com
          But please think twice before posting to the group as a whole
          (It might be that your note is best sent to one person?)



           
          Yahoo! Groups Links

          <*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
              http://groups.yahoo.com/group/NewMobilityCafe/

          <*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
              NewMobilityCafe-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com

          <*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
              http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
           


          Sincerely,
          Todd Alexander Litman
          Victoria Transport Policy Institute (www.vtpi.org)
          litman@...
          Phone & Fax 250-360-1560
          1250 Rudlin Street, Victoria, BC, V8V 3R7, CANADA
          “Efficiency - Equity - Clarity”
           

        • Simon Norton
          I think we ve had this argument before, but may I suggest that raising train and bus fares sky high while failing to price car use is possibly the ultimate in
          Message 4 of 6 , Dec 5 2:16 PM
            I think we've had this argument before, but may I suggest that raising train and
            bus fares sky high while failing to price car use is possibly the ultimate in
            distributional unfairness.

            And in answer to John Ashmore, heavy goods vehicles may be essential to our
            economy. But what cannot be described as essential is the long journeys they do,
            e.g. when some goods are transported from area A to area B while identical goods
            are transported from B to A. Pricing road haulage will give selective advantage
            to those businesses who source their supplies and market their goods locally.
            Isn't this what we want ?

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