There is a hardware store on my local high street renowned not just for its excellent and reasonably priced products, but also for the witty messages written on a chalkboard by its entrance. Right now, it reads, “500% increase in parking tariffs; Trump jealous”.
This is probably lost on anyone who doesn’t live in York, UK, but will be recognisable (and funny) to anyone who does. It refers to a controversy that has become the talk of the town, and could turn out to be a test case for any city in the world with a traffic congestion and air pollution problem – which is pretty much everywhere. A few weeks ago, the local council hiked the cost of the car park nearest the store by roughly 500 per cent. It used to charge 80 pence per hour. It is now £4.85 an hour, rising to £5.30 on Fridays and Saturdays. The cost of using other city-centre car parks has been raised to the same amount, albeit from a higher starting point.
The council has justified the steep rise on the grounds that York has a congestion problem, and also for environmental reasons. The city’s air quality is bad. Reducing car use would also cut carbon emissions. York’s climate change strategy calls for a 20 per cent reduction in car miles by 2030.
Advertisement
Cue a predictable furore. A petition against the increase has been signed over 8000 times; the local paper is full of . Less hysterically, traders are worried they will lose business and even go under, which would be a crying shame. The high street near me is thriving and packed with independent shops and restaurants. In 2015, it was voted Great British High Street of the Year.
The local councillor copping all the flak is executive member for transport Kate Ravilious, who also happens to be a science writer and a contributor to 91av. In a combative , she pointed out that 1 in 4 households in York don’t have access to a car and rely on buses, which are usually stuck in traffic. Businesses are already affected by late deliveries, she said. The city is growing and the council is committed to tackling congestion and pollution.
The row reminds me of similar spats in London over the imposition of the congestion charge in 2003 and the expansions of the Ultra Low Emission Zone in 2021 and 2023. Both were vociferously opposed by the car lobby and many drivers, who falsely claim that there is a “war on motorists” and that they are always used as a cash cow by local government.
A review found that increasing parking costs leads to a reduction in car ownership and better air quality
The opposite is true. Recent in Germany found that car owners don’t pay the full cost to society of their pollution, noise and accident risk. In fact, the up 41 per cent of the total. We all subsidise car owners, not the other way round.
I asked Ravilious how the council arrived at the decision. She told me that it drew on various lines of evidence, including what happened when it last increased parking charges, which was by 15 per cent in 2023. That hike led to a 5 per cent decrease in car park use, but no reduction in visits to the city centre. In fact, footfall on two of the main shopping streets rose by 7 per cent.
The council also looked at two other UK cities, Oxford and Edinburgh, which have experimented with large increases in car park prices too. “Their cities have not suffered economic decline,” Ravilious told me. “In fact, the reverse has happened.”
The final piece of evidence was a commissioned by the Scottish government on how parking policy might help it achieve its target of a 20 per cent reduction in car use by 2030. Using evidence from the UK and abroad, the review found that increasing parking costs leads to a reduction in total distance travelled by car, a reduction in car ownership, increased use of other forms of transport and improved air quality.
I am on the council’s side, but evidence doesn’t win arguments like this. “It has become very, very emotive,” Ravilious told me. “There’s plenty of evidence, but there’s also politics and emotion. And once emotion takes hold, it tends to win out over evidence.” There are rumours the council will back down. I say, hold your nerve and give the world more evidence that car use can be curbed.
Speaking of holding your nerve, a few months ago I wrote about an impending court decision with huge implications for the UK’s marine protected areas. In a nutshell, the European Union challenged the UK’s decision to close its sand-eel fisheries to protect various endangered seabirds, including puffins. A win for the EU would have led to the UK’s entire marine conservation strategy effectively being declared null and void. The court announced its final, non-negotiable decision earlier this month. The UK largely won, and the ban will stay.
Graham’s week
What I’m reading
I’m preparing to interview a big-name author, so her new book, mostly.
What I’m watching
Climate dystopia drama Families Like Ours on BBC iPlayer.
What I’m working on
See above.
Graham Lawton is a staff writer at 91av and author of Mustn’t Grumble: The surprising science of everyday ailments. You can follow him @grahamlawton
