Active Travel England - Boardman

[Vorpal]

Those things are all good but while they make active travel easier and more attractive, and might make driving less attractive, I think long term and, yes, in the 'big picture' it's necessary for us to address the need to travel. We need to look at things like siting of schools and employment, not to mention accessibility of housing (accessibility in the physical sense but primarily in the financial and administrative sense).

Absolutely. We need to stop school consolidation & restore or replace schools that have been lost due to consolidation, with criteria established, based upon minimising distances to schools, number of children living in, and expected to live in an area, cost & logistics of transporting them to schools, etc.

The same goes with shopping and services. Bring back the village green grocer & chippy, restore GP surgeries, local hospitals & clinics, etc.
Obviously, they have to weigh the cost & convenience of travel against the needs of local residents. It might make some sense to ask people in a population centre to travel 30 - 60 minutes for an MRI, for example, but not for an x-ray. And if people are asked to travel, then the transport should be provided & the travel should not be excessive.

Initially, some commercial enterprises would probably need incentives, but once local mobility is firmly in place, they should be commercially viable.

[rareposter]

Some of that is down to employers too though, especially as staff travel is often a big chunk of their CO2 footprint - they should be pressing councils to build lanes.

Especially so when they’re public sector.

There's a catch-22 with this - most people drive to work (outliers like London excepted) so they expect free parking so employers, terrified of losing employees, offer free parking which is a self-perpetuating spiral. It's "free" (at point of use) to drive (fuel, insurance, VED etc are very "hidden" costs) whereas a train or bus costs money (at point of use) and doesn't go directly to the workplace. This is especially true on out of town developments, industrial estates etc. So people drive.

Nottingham introduced a Workplace Parking Levy a few years ago to huge outcry about how businesses would be driven from the area etc - it's been very successful and the money reinvested into public transport.
Employers and shopkeepers are two of the real stick-in-the-muds when it comes to anything other than car-dominance. Shopkeepers throw up their hands in despair at the idea that a customer can't park *right outside*.

Takes a while for Active Travel measures to filter through and actually employers and shopkeepers need to be part of it in terms of providing secure bike parking, showers, lockers, changing etc. So any reluctance to get on board by them will delay the "improvement factor" - even if there's a nice safe bike lane to the shops, no-one is going to use it if your bike is going to get nicked the minute you leave it!

[Bmblbzzz]

As for major changes to the built environment, that is less necessary than you might think.

We can get 90% of the way there with things like LTNs and school streets, improvements to the existing environment (removing kerbs, improving surfaces during maintenance, etc.), ensuring that new housing (which is badly needed) includes mixed use & designs for independent living, and significant improvements in public transport.

It's not something that 'big picture' will happen quickly, but if we are to meet climate change mitigation goals, it needs to start now, and aggressively.

Those things are all good but while they make active travel easier and more attractive, and might make driving less attractive, I think long term and, yes, in the 'big picture' it's necessary for us to address the need to travel. We need to look at things like siting of schools and employment, not to mention accessibility of housing (accessibility in the physical sense but primarily in the financial and administrative sense).

Siting will take years to repair but yes, it should be addressed.

Decades!

One easement we could make now is encouraging and rewarding flexitime in order to enable active travel between school dropoffs and workplaces, reducing the economic waste of commuter car jams. The government could give a tax break to firms where no more than N% of workers start or finish within 30 minutes, for example.

Sounds like a relatively easy move, and yes we need quick fixes on the way to realigning things.

[squeaker]

"Adults’ self-reported barriers and enablers to riding a bike for transport: a systematic review":
https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10 ... 22.2113570
(I think that version isn't paywalled; please could someone confirm.)

Nope: only the abstract is free

Thanks

Please could you check the link directly from the tweet:
https://twitter.com/DrBenBeck/status/15 ... yIZiQ&s=19


Screenshot 2022-08-24 at 10.36.44.png


Jonathan

Still paywalled.

[Jdsk]

Thanks for testing.

: - (

Jonathan

[ratherbeintobago]

Shopkeepers throw up their hands in despair at the idea that a customer can't park *right outside*.

Which is of course completely unsupported by the evidence, and you can’t park outside the shop anyway if the space is filled by the proprietor.

[mattheus]

Nottingham introduced a Workplace Parking Levy a few years ago to huge outcry about how businesses would be driven from the area etc - it's been very successful and the money reinvested into public transport.
Employers and shopkeepers are two of the real stick-in-the-muds when it comes to anything other than car-dominance. Shopkeepers throw up their hands in despair at the idea that a customer can't park *right outside*.

That's brilliant to hear! (I've long thought it was an "obvious" strategy, but guessed that no-one had the power to do it.)
______________________________________
The ShopkeeperS thing is annoying because of the data that shows them to be wrong! (Plus of course you clearly get more browsing traffic if your street is pedestrianised) : *hopefully* trials schemes can win them over.

The Employers problems seems harder to solve - I imagine it just seems 1-way; where is the benefit in having employees that cycle/bus/walk? Boss doesn't care - he just wants his staff at his desks; and if they change jobs, they ain't at their desks!

[thirdcrank]

Nottingham introduced a Workplace Parking Levy a few years ago to huge outcry about how businesses would be driven from the area etc - it's been very successful and the money reinvested into public transport.
Employers and shopkeepers are two of the real stick-in-the-muds when it comes to anything other than car-dominance. Shopkeepers throw up their hands in despair at the idea that a customer can't park *right outside*.

That's brilliant to hear! (I've long thought it was an "obvious" strategy, but guessed that no-one had the power to do it.)
______________________________________
The ShopkeeperS thing is annoying because of the data that shows them to be wrong! (Plus of course you clearly get more browsing traffic if your street is pedestrianised) : *hopefully* trials schemes can win them over.

The Employers problems seems harder to solve - I imagine it just seems 1-way; where is the benefit in having employees that cycle/bus/walk? Boss doesn't care - he just wants his staff at his desks; and if they change jobs, they ain't at their desks!

It's not a new idea. Memory vague now but this was mooted/threatened / spun before I retired which dates it to the fag end of the Major government. I was personally concerned because I routinely commuted by bike but there was a parking space reserved for me and I didn't want taxing on it.

[ratherbeintobago]

On the other hand there is often a lack of spaces and you can’t get planning permission to build more Given that I think some employers are looking hard at other options.

[Bmblbzzz]

I think attitudes on high streets are changing as they become more and more places to eat, drink and socialise rather than shop.

[Vorpal]

It's not a new idea. Memory vague now but this was mooted/threatened / spun before I retired which dates it to the fag end of the Major government. I was personally concerned because I routinely commuted by bike but there was a parking space reserved for me and I didn't want taxing on it.

But all that takes is a requirement that you have to sign up to it. Companies can *offer* free parking places, which are taxed as benefits. They keep track of other benefits, like lunches and cars. They can keep track of parking spaces, too. Either that or charge employees a fee to park.

[Jdsk]

I think attitudes on high streets are changing as they become more and more places to eat, drink and socialise rather than shop.

Yes. And live.

And as is often the case a major threat is Golden Agery.

Jonathan

[ratherbeintobago]

I think attitudes on high streets are changing as they become more and more places to eat, drink and socialise rather than shop.

Yes. And live.

And as is often the case a major threat is Golden Agery.

Jonathan

Golden Agery?

They can keep track of parking spaces, too. Either that or charge employees a fee to park.

There is constant screaming on SoMe about NHS staff ‘deserving’ free parking (which one of my friends and a prominent AT campaigner tried to debunk here). In any case, there is never going to be enough parking, and thanks to the delights of induced demand, making it free worsens that.

I don’t think people calling for free parking have considered the tax implications.

[Jdsk]

I think attitudes on high streets are changing as they become more and more places to eat, drink and socialise rather than shop.

Yes. And live.

And as is often the case a major threat is Golden Agery.

Golden Agery?

The tendency to see a particular era as better than the present or a possible future. Often the era when the speaker was between 5 and 15 years old, but other Golden Ages are available.

For example Declinism:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Declinism
suggests ages of 10 to 30.

And includes the delightful description of rosy retrospection.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rosy_retrospection

There's a vast amount of it in this forum and the thread on use of English offers some great examples.

Fortunately it's one of the easiest cognitive biasses to spot and remove and avoid. By checking what's true and what isn't.

Jonathan

[ratherbeintobago]

Helpfully the golden age of the high street was when we had less cars