Antony Little's Blog - Live From Norwich
Total Non Brainer. Perhaps they will start with a wrecking hammer on the recently built multi storeys that almost bankrupted the City, or was that another Comrade Read brain wave?
Well I thought so ... and maybe some of the middle class voters lured by the self righteous Green policies will agree too?
Green policies are noble in principle but their prescriptions are not particulary joined up. Why build Chapefield and other car parking provision, to then shrink it. Its a bullet in the foot. Result: Reduced parking revenues Doh, Higher Council Tax to compensate, More illegal parking in inner city suburbs, reduced visitor numbers to the retail sector and tourist numbers in the central area. Chaos and frustrated communter.If one wishes to give people choice, don't say no to cars coming into the city. Provide the car parks/spaces and public transport options, and raise Car Park fees to pursuade motorists to use Park and ride, buses, train or cycling into the city.Unfortunately First have raised their bus fares by 20% (£2.00) single ticket up from £1.80 to travel into the city. So really City Centre Car Park fees should go up by 20% to restore the balance. Also Norfolk CC has upped Park and Ride fares that further moves in the wrong pricing differential/ direction of bus commuting over car commuting
To the last anonymous poster- a) It's news to me that the Greens supported Chapelfield and increased car parking provision!b) If you're increasing the price of car parking you'll have less people parking... so why do you need to keep the same number of parking places? Sounds like common sense to me.
annon a)Exactly. No practical solutions, just ideals!b)Keep the same parking spaces, Tourism. Why does Norwich CC generate £800,000 for parking offences, mostly in the City centre. Answer: Lack of official parking spaces at peak hours and events like Christmas, Easter, Bank Holidays.Charging 20% for parking spaces is a congestion charge substitute. Removing parking spacing is a pie in the sky no brainer
I'd say EcoTaxes on un-ecologically friendly cars, specifically on fuel-guzzling cars and not just high carbon-emmiters (as it is predicted we will face fuel-shortages before we face climate-change problems) will solve a lot more than whatever that policy will. Though admittedly taxes won’t take cars away from busy areas, but that still doesn't mean reducing the spaces is the way forward. Also to note - the scene of 'micro-cars' has cooled off in the UK, in contrast to on the continent. Many more spaces can be made available if just a small proportion of current ones were converted to micro-car spaces. This really needs national implementation however before the concept really catches on. Reducing car park spaces will appear more direct and aggressive to people rather than raising prices alone. I’m sure it will just cause people to hotly contest those that are available. More to the point, what can you use ex-car parks spaces for? Tarmac art? And for the record in reply to an Anonymous, I fail to see how significantly less people will park if you raise the prices. You'd have to have a huge price hike to curb the great demand for spaces on something people regrettably do not view as a luxury. Kudos to the ‘restoring the balance’ suggestion.
peter. c Supply and Demand. Lets have this high car park fee rise, and not have congestion charges madness proposed by Greens and Greedy County Tories. Lets use existing systems and infrastructure. Congestion charges unfairly hammers businesses with dlivery vehicles. If car parking, permits are more expensive, relative to buses, more people will choose buses or cycling, car share or leave their cars at home. Cllr Gunson, who wants his NDR at all costs, through revenue greed put park and ride schemes up, doing exactly the opposite as did First raising their prices typically from £1.80 to £2.00, and abolishing discounted return fares. Totally the wrong message. Now central car park fee increases are needed to readdress the cost balance.
Post a Comment