CityCyclingEdinburgh Forum » Debate!

Reducing car travel

(70 posts)
  • Started 2 years ago by Morningsider
  • Latest reply from chdot

123

  1. Morningsider
    Member

    Looks like the Scottish Government will be publishing its "roadmap" setting out how it will achieve a 20% reduction in the distance travelled by car in 2019 by 2030 this afternoon (13 January 2022).

    For the record - I think the target will be missed.

    So what do we reckon might be in it (I have not seen an advance copy)? Well, my bet is on lots of reiterating past policy announcements:

    Workplace Parking Levy: Not in force anywhere in Scotland and only even under vague consideration by Edinburgh and Glasgow.
    Low Emission Zones: Only proposed for four small city centre areas. As discussed on other threads, unlikely to reduce car travel due to applying to very few vehicles.
    Record active travel investment: Expect much trumpeting of this, but no evidence it is being spent on anything that will shift the dial at present.
    Bus priority measures: Expect the mythical £500m allocated for bus priority measures a few years ago at be rolled out again. No new bus lanes have been introduced in years.
    Active travel freeways: A recent announcement, no-one really seems to know what these are.
    Free bus travel for young people: A good thing, but evidence from elsewhere is that it has a very limited impact on car travel - can even reduce walking and cycling.

    I also expect the document to bemoan lack of action by the UK Government on road pricing (as a replacement for fuel duty) by the UK Government. This despite no Scottish political party showing any support for road user charging, which has been available as a policy tool in Scotland since 2001.

    I would also expect lots of waffle about investment in "de-carbonising" buses and rail, which is a good thing - but does precisely nothing to encourage modal switch from car to public transport.

    I assume there will also be some kind of "new" announcement.

    Have I missed anything?

    Posted 2 years ago #

  2. Yodhrin
    Member

    Well, this will be the first proper test for the Greens won't it, if it's as dismal as you lay out and Harvie or Slater are standing alongside with stapled-on smiles endorsing it, I suspect that'll hit enthusiasm for the party at the locals which would be a shame.

    Posted 2 years ago #

  3. steveo
    Member

    low traffic neighbourhoods. Scot Gov can make a big thing about them, local gov can kick it in to the long grass. When asked they can even show how millions has been spent (on endless consultations and legal challenges)

    @Yodhrin I have a horrible the Greens are about to go full lib dem.

    Posted 2 years ago #

  4. Yodhrin
    Member

    @steveo Ehh, I don't think that's really possible, the Greens have much more robust internal democracy than most parties so a betrayal of core principles to the extent we've seen from the LibDems would see the leadership toppled and replaced, and probably withdrawal from the cooperation agreement as well. Of course, that doesn't prevent a *perception* that they're "the same as the rest of 'em" from tainting the party at future elections.

    Not being a member of any party myself, I'll probably end up giving them the full parliamentary term before I make up my mind properly - not least because the alternatives remain utterly lacklustre - but if they want to do better in the locals I really do think they need to get something concrete. Not just announcements or fine words, but an actual "we will achieve X specific outcome by Y specific date using Z specific policy actions" commitment for something in the immediate future rather than 8 years down the line, with no weasel wording or get out clauses.

    Like, for example, the "active travel freeways" thing? Tell us that's an infrastructure project to build Netherlands-style high quality cycleways between city regions, and between suburbs & exurbs and their adjacent city centres, to create a national network, and that they're starting right away. Not planning or developing or brainstorming, like an actual "works to widen and separate the pavement along such-and-such A road will begin at the end of the month" beginning and a pledge to finish a certain - significant - number every year from now on.

    But yeah, like yourselves I suspect hopes like that are pie in the sky.

    Posted 2 years ago #

  5. acsimpson
    Member

    @Morningsider, you didn't make a prediction as to the exact date that this is rebranded as a shared vision. Otherwsie a very useful summary.

    Anything which is introduced and doesn't reduce sole occupancy private motor vehicle capacity on the roads by 20% or significantly rebalance the cost of a car journey vs public transport is bound to fail (IMHO).

    I can't see them cancelling the A9 dualling today.

    Posted 2 years ago #

  6. CycleAlex
    Member

    I imagine waffle will be the primary content. Perhaps talking STPR2 or a similar unreleased plan so that questions can be delayed further.

    “ No new bus lanes have been introduced in years.”
    To be fair, there were quite a few bus lanes introduced in PT’s version of Spaces for People.

    Posted 2 years ago #

  7. crowriver
    Member

    @acsimpson, @Morningsider, you didn't make a prediction as to the exact date that this is rebranded as a shared vision.

    Exactly this. I'll be surprised if Harvie or Slater turn up for any photo op. Neither is the Transport Secretary after all. Don't think Slater has any direct responsibility for transport matters. Harvie has the active travel brief, maybe also something about "sustainable" travel but that's likely shared with his boss or another colleague. So unless there's a specific announcement to do with active travel I reckon he might steer clear. That's what I'd do anyway in his shoes...

    But yeah, SNP will kick the can down the dual carriageway by passing the buck for difficult and potentially unpopular decisions on delivery to local authorities, as per.

    Posted 2 years ago #

  8. chdot
    Admin

    https://twitter.com/transcotland/status/1477935263577886721

    (From last week)

    Posted 2 years ago #

  9. Morningsider
    Member

    Statement now: https://www.scottishparliament.tv/meeting/meeting-of-the-parliament-continued-january-13-2022

    World leading apparently.

    Posted 2 years ago #

  10. Morningsider
    Member

    "Shared national endeavour", "national conversation", "consultation", "commissioned research".

    Posted 2 years ago #

  11. Frenchy
    Member

    Any idea where one should look for a list of places which have already tried these measures, and how successful they were?

    Similarly, is there a list of places which have achieved reductions in car use, and the methods they used?

    Something like a Scottish Parliamentary Information Centre briefing, perhaps?

    Posted 2 years ago #

  12. chdot
    Admin

    Just on web

    https://www.transport.gov.scot/news/reducing-car-use-for-a-healthier-fairer-and-greener-scotland/

    Posted 2 years ago #

  13. Morningsider
    Member

    This is an incredible document. Not one single demand management measure. The closest it gets is:

    Further exploration of equitable options for demand management to discourage car use, including pricing, will be explored through the commissioning of additional research
    in 2022. This will provide a short-list of options for further exploration and feasibility analysis, and will enable the development of a new Car Demand Management Framework by 2025, which will take into account the needs of people in rural areas and island communities as well as those on low incomes and people with Equality Act protected characteristics.
    Not one new policy that I can see (just a quick scan mind).

    Posted 2 years ago #

  14. crowriver
    Member

    Just as well the cover illustration is by a child at primary school as that appears to be the intended audience for this greenwash.

    Difficult to see how Green Party ministers can stomach this dreck.

    P.S.:- I note also nobody has actually put their name on the thing. It's all "we", "our": to whom exactly are they referring? Transport Scotland? Scottish Government? People in Scotland? The world in general?

    Posted 2 years ago #

  15. acsimpson
    Member

    "Shared national endeavour"

    Is that more or less than a vision?

    Posted 2 years ago #

  16. crowriver
    Member

    The TL;DR version might be:

    "We don't have a Scooby, and even if we did we can't be arsed".

    Posted 2 years ago #

  17. chdot
    Admin

    New money?

    “

    Investing £50 million on Active Freeways: This will provide high quality arterial active travel corridors enabling sustainable travel between connect centres of activity, outlying neighbourhoods and other major trip attractors in our cities and towns. It is recommended that these focus on high-demand travel corridors and on improving connections to communities for which transport exclusion is currently prevalent. Improved local connections from the main Active Freeway routes will ensure that people are able to access them from their homes, schools, workplaces and other destinations. This will support delivery of the networks of routes that are already under consideration in many of our towns and integrate with existing active travel networks. It will expand and be complementary to the Places for Everyone programme to provide direct, high quality, segregated networks of routes for people travelling actively, whether walking, cycling or wheeling, enabling efficient, swift and safe options for short- and medium-length journeys.

    “

    Posted 2 years ago #

  18. Morningsider
    Member

    @chdot - No. Active Freeways, plus associated cash, were announced in December 2020. See the first delivery plan for the second National Transport Strategy.

    Posted 2 years ago #

  19. CycleAlex
    Member

    Don't worry everyone, the world is saved. We're commissioning research to do a feasibility analysis so we can create a framework by 2025. Phew! To think I was worried about Transport Scotland not being ambitious.

    Posted 2 years ago #

  20. chdot
    Admin

    Ta

    From link -

    “

    We will work across government to develop a coordinated package of policy interventions to reduce car kilometres by 20% by 2030. Assuming the health pandemic has moved to a phase to allow more certainty regarding future forecasting, a route map to meet the reduction will be published in 2021

    “

    Think ‘by Christmas’ was mentioned previously. Must have been bouncing between departments (and, perhaps, politicians).

    Posted 2 years ago #

  21. chdot
    Admin

    Annex to today’s report

    Lots of stats, plus things like -

    “

    There is evidence of the effectiveness of road user charging schemes in supporting mode shift, such as the decrease in car use and increase in cycling levels seen in London following the introduction of a central congestion charge and the further reduction in the number of cars entering the zone following the introduction of an Ultra-Low Emission Zone Charge. There is modelled data to suggest that replacing fuel duty with road pricing could lead to a significant reduction in road traffic in the UK, without increasing overall costs to road users. A UK Workplace Parking Levy scheme has also been shown to correlate with a positive impact on reducing traffic congestion and increasing public transport usage, by generating funding for investment in public transport improvements and incentivising employers to reconsider their parking provision. It is, however, suggested that physically restricting or financially disincentivising car use works better when active travel or public transport alternatives are already in place.

    Posted 2 years ago #

  22. LaidBack
    Member

    a new Car Demand Management Framework by 2025, which will take into account the needs of people in rural areas and island communities as well as those on low incomes and people with Equality Act protected characteristics.

    Very, very clever. That CDMF should tie up people for another few decades. Genius. ;-)

    Not being a planner I would expect announcements like electrifying to Aberdeen to reduce A90 demand. Highland line too. Much better way to distribute power than chargers. Rural communities may well have driverless e-taxis at stations by then.
    Low emission zones and reduced parking to discourage solo car use. Cities so nice to walk and cycle round that you wouldn't drive is what everywhere else is doing.

    Earlier in week there was bit on radio about the permits required for staff at ERI. In a way it's like a city in miniature. Nurses need to drive and get their cars close to hospital for punctuality and safety (prog assumed they had cars ow wanted to use a car). Limited space since it went free means some may have to park at Sheriffhall and take a bus back to ERI. Dedicated shuttle is only every 30 mins. Zero mention of why existing buses can't get through Little France due to traffic. No mention of cycling. What's the demand for parking? Almost infinite! So was said they should learn from Edinburgh Airport. No, not build a tramway but build more car parks with more courtesy buses! Of course modern parking also needs EV recharging points. Cost per square metre is about to go skywards. Planet has gone crazy. The solutions in a small city are here with low tech, human powered mobility (with small e-boosts if required).

    Posted 2 years ago #

  23. Morningsider
    Member

    @crowriver - nicely observed. I reckon the "we" in the foreword was meant to be Graeme Dey and Patrick Harvie. I suspect their names were stripped out at the last minute and someone forgot to change the body text to something neutral. I can't think of another Scottish Government document that has an unattributed foreword.

    Posted 2 years ago #

  24. chdot
    Admin

    “I can't think of another Scottish Government document that has an unattributed foreword.“

    Interesting…

    Posted 2 years ago #

  25. chdot
    Admin

    https://www.heraldscotland.com/politics/19846307.snp-government-investigate-pricing-people-car-use-cut-carbon-emissions/

    Posted 2 years ago #

  26. chdot
    Admin

    “

    Motorists across the whole of London could be charged for every journey from 2024 under plans being drawn up to reduce carbon emissions and improve air quality.

    “

    https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2022/jan/18/sadiq-khan-proposes-journey-charge-for-motorists-in-london

    Posted 2 years ago #

  27. Baldcyclist
    Member

    "Motorists across the whole of London could be charged"

    Wrong people to charge, perceived that they *have* to get to work, and (rightly) for many no other means to do it.

    Instead charge buisinesses a huge levy to have city centre office space, the bigger the office the more the charge.

    Lets remove unneccesary journeys all together rather than trying to impose the mode. Would result in need for less cars, buses, and trains. All good.

    Walk and bike for local shops/leisure etc, cars only used for weekend leisure further away.

    Once that's all done knock down all of the office space and replace it with parks, something for the native city folk to do now they don't have to complain about all the incomers clogging their roads. win win.

    Posted 2 years ago #

  28. acsimpson
    Member

    We do need to rebalance the (financial) cost of taking the car vs the cost of making healthier choices. Currently the cost of me driving to the shops is vastly less than taking a bus, similarly when I was in the office the cost of a train ticket was much more than driving would have been. However I choose not to take the car as often as possible because I realise that financial cost is not the only input to the equation.

    I realise that not everyone can leave their car at home for every trip but that doesn't mean we should be facilitating the majority taking the car for short journeys. If we are not willing to subsidise the alternatives then I think we do need to look at ways of making motoring cost closer to what it really costs society.

    Posted 2 years ago #

  29. Baldcyclist
    Member

    "ways of making motoring cost closer to what it really costs society."

    I'm simply suggesting cutting that at source, ie make the journeys unnceccesary. No mass movement of people twice a day, no bad choices to make, no cars on the road.

    It's currently the choice of employers to impose the mass movement of people and all that entails on society twice a day.

    Posted 2 years ago #

  30. acsimpson
    Member

    That is certainly a good idea. However I don't agree that it's an either or. We also need to stop people driving half a mile to pick up a newspaper and pint of milk.

    Posted 2 years ago #

RSS feed for this topic

123

Reply »

You must log in to post.


Video embedded using Easy Video Embed plugin