Birmingham unveils Ghent-style plan to reduce traffic levels

[aj444]

Are buses included in the air quality fines from day 1?? Or do they get a free pass??

The have to be Euro VI else they do get a fine for each day they are within the ULEZ.

[rhyds]

The problem with these schemes are they're trying to deal with a number of competing but equally valid facts:

Densely populated city centres will have poor air quality, which cars don't help.

Government policy means that councils will be fined if they do nothing

Nobody actively looks forward to a daily bus commute, and would in most cases rather pay the extra and drive


As for this particular idea, there's a throwaway line in the original article around improving the ring road. This shows there's at least some thought been given to the fact that not everyone is going to subscribe to the City Council's dreams and diktats and that in-city car journeys will still be done for whatever reason.

[roadtester]

Nobody actively looks forward to a daily bus commute, and would in most cases rather pay the extra and drive

Personally, I would use a really good bus service over a car because it avoids the faff of parking and so on.

I love driving to an almost obsessive degree. But I can't see any point in insisting on driving on really boring and tedious journeys where other forms of transport are more convenient.

More broadly, I think cars need to pull back a little from settings where they clearly damage quality of life if car ownership and use in general isn't to come under threat.

[jackal]

So what do they do then, install gates and literally stop people driving past a certain point ? The reality on the ground of what is implied by this EU impost must be clearly stated. 2021 is only 12 months away. I'll bet only GB will implement it, it will be totally ignored in Southern Europe.

Maybe the economics demand that the fines be paid and life carry on ! I'd be interested to see what the fines will be spend on by central government. It could be a zero-sum game as all a government has to do is recycle the money back in the form of grants for various transport schemes.

Nope.

Most European cities have had low emission zones with harsher regulations than London's for some time now.

Crit'Air in France bans virtually everything below Euro 6 without grades of expensive permit, Milan has the biggest LEZ in Italy that bans most diesel vehicles, the Madrid ZEZ is ZERO emissions vehicles only.

One minute on Google shows that, as usual, the only people not taking air quality seriously is the majority of the UK!

A minute at the European Air Quality Index suggests otherwise. Pretty average for a northern European country, which is to say great compared to most places.

https://airindex.eea.europa.eu/

[RichardA35]

Nobody actively looks forward to a daily bus commute, and would in most cases rather pay the extra and drive

Having had a 30 minute bus ride as part of my daily commute for 2 years, it is great for getting on with reading or listening to books or podcasts without the distraction of driving. It also helped to get my mental state ready for work and to allow a calm down from work.
Driving involves a degree of concentration and possibly stress that can be carried over into the workplace if that transition is not actively managed.

[Bryn666]

So what do they do then, install gates and literally stop people driving past a certain point ? The reality on the ground of what is implied by this EU impost must be clearly stated. 2021 is only 12 months away. I'll bet only GB will implement it, it will be totally ignored in Southern Europe.

Maybe the economics demand that the fines be paid and life carry on ! I'd be interested to see what the fines will be spend on by central government. It could be a zero-sum game as all a government has to do is recycle the money back in the form of grants for various transport schemes.

Nope.

Most European cities have had low emission zones with harsher regulations than London's for some time now.

Crit'Air in France bans virtually everything below Euro 6 without grades of expensive permit, Milan has the biggest LEZ in Italy that bans most diesel vehicles, the Madrid ZEZ is ZERO emissions vehicles only.

One minute on Google shows that, as usual, the only people not taking air quality seriously is the majority of the UK!

A minute at the European Air Quality Index suggests otherwise. Pretty average for a northern European country, which is to say great compared to most places.

https://airindex.eea.europa.eu/

Oh well carry on as normal then. I mean if Indian air quality is good enough...

[jackal]

Of course you can always do more but things should be kept in perspective.

[FosseWay]

Nobody actively looks forward to a daily bus commute, and would in most cases rather pay the extra and drive

Personally, I would use a really good bus service over a car because it avoids the faff of parking and so on.

I love driving to an almost obsessive degree. But I can't see any point in insisting on driving on really boring and tedious journeys where other forms of transport are more convenient.

More broadly, I think cars need to pull back a little from settings where they clearly damage quality of life if car ownership and use in general isn't to come under threat.

This precisely.

I do use a perfectly adequate bus service for most journeys - and all commuting other than when I cycle - because it is easier and cheaper than driving. It isn't perfect; there is an overcrowding problem, for a start. But there are overcrowding problems on the roads in general. There seems to be a widespread view that bus travel inevitably sucks, and it's fairly common in the UK to hear that people would never consider using a bus. I don't understand this. Sure, there are specific problems affecting specific places or routes, such as poor vehicles, poor reliability, not enough coverage at the right time and so on. The same can apply to rail travel and indeed to private motoring, especially if you factor in time-limited restrictions on access and congestion charges. Yet very few people have the same knee-jerk reaction to those modes.

There are advantages and disadvantages to all modes. But the anti-bus brigade seem to expect buses to somehow be entirely free of disadvantages for all users, otherwise they condemn them as being useless.

I've certainly got full value out of my season ticket today - took the bus to the back of beyond in the docks for a conference, then from there to my normal workplace. Then found I'd left my mobile at the meeting venue, so took the bus back there again to fetch it and thence home. Total cost: effectively zero above whatever I pay per normal commute. Yes, I might have done it quicker by car, but it would probably have cost an order of magnitude more than the basic commuting cost on the bus, and the slightest screw-up in the traffic can lead to journey times being much worse than on the bus.

[FosseWay]

I have a genuine question about the air quality issues that have both led to strategic plans like in Birmingham and acute warnings as (IIRC) in Sarajevo and other southern European cities over the last day or so.

Why are we getting these warnings now and not 10, 20 years ago?

I can imagine that car ownership and use somewhere like Sarajevo has increased hugely in recent decades, so that will be part of the explanation there. But in a city like Birmingham, has traffic increased so much in the last two decades that it has eclipsed the generally pollution-reducing effects of more efficient vehicles, less fossil power generation and less heavy industry?

Or is it that we've moved the goalposts - i.e. the thresholds at which councils are required to act have been reduced in line with recommendations resulting from better research?

If new research shows previously unknown harmful effects, or if technological developments mean it becomes practical to deal with pollution levels that we previously sighed over and lived with, then those are as far as I am concerned perfectly valid reasons for issuing warnings, imposing requirements on councils and getting people to change their travel habits. But it is misleading to say that pollution has "got worse" since whenever.

If it has objectively got worse, then that is all the more reason to do something about it, of course. But if in fact it's our reaction to it that's changed, I think that we should be clear on that and open about it. Spreading scare stories that turn out to be exaggerated doesn't help in the long term, whereas being upfront will help.

[rhyds]

I have a genuine question about the air quality issues that have both led to strategic plans like in Birmingham and acute warnings as (IIRC) in Sarajevo and other southern European cities over the last day or so.

Why are we getting these warnings now and not 10, 20 years ago?

Because its politically expedient.

[Micro The Maniac]

But I can't see any point in insisting on driving on really boring and tedious journeys where other forms of transport are more convenient.

Fully agree with this as a principle. However, it boils down to individual interpretation of "convenient".


And as has been discussed ad nauseum the convenience-factor often lies in the first and last few miles (getting to/from the nearest bus station or railway station) and/or multiple changes (especially if carrying luggage or equipment). Plus time.

My usual daily commute (25 miles and approx 35 minutes each way) would take over two hours each way (walk, bus, train, bus, bus and walk) - of which nearly an hour each way is waiting for the connections! And at over £30 per day, it doesn't stack up financially either.

[Bryn666]

I have a genuine question about the air quality issues that have both led to strategic plans like in Birmingham and acute warnings as (IIRC) in Sarajevo and other southern European cities over the last day or so.

Why are we getting these warnings now and not 10, 20 years ago?

Because its politically expedient.

That or society's expectations have moved on. We accepted smog as the price to pay for industrial progress until the 1950s. Even until ten years ago even. Paris used to have horrid shades of yellow skies due to air pollution even then.

[exiled]

I have a genuine question about the air quality issues that have both led to strategic plans like in Birmingham and acute warnings as (IIRC) in Sarajevo and other southern European cities over the last day or so.

Why are we getting these warnings now and not 10, 20 years ago?

Because its politically expedient.

There is also greater knowledge of the bad effects of this type of pollution now. Also where the pollution historically was was not where political or economic power lived. The powers that be were less bothered as it was not them or their families breathing in the gunk.

[Bryn666]

Indeed, people forget the only reason London got a proper sewage system in the height of Laissez-Faire Victoriana is that MPs were wading through cack to get to the Commons and it stunk.

Cholera killing off the plebs wasn't the real driver.

[Berk]

But I can't see any point in insisting on driving on really boring and tedious journeys where other forms of transport are more convenient.

Fully agree with this as a principle. However, it boils down to individual interpretation of "convenient".


And as has been discussed ad nauseum the convenience-factor often lies in the first and last few miles (getting to/from the nearest bus station or railway station) and/or multiple changes (especially if carrying luggage or equipment). Plus time.

My usual daily commute (25 miles and approx 35 minutes each way) would take over two hours each way (walk, bus, train, bus, bus and walk) - of which nearly an hour each way is waiting for the connections! And at over £30 per day, it doesn't stack up financially either.

This. When I worked in Leicester, it made good sense to take the train on the odd days Dad wasn’t working and I couldn’t car-share. I had to drive to the station (10 miles), buy a ticket (£20), and a car park ticket (£2), but for one day a week or so, it was worth it.

The train journey was 50 mins, drive to the station was 20 mins, and the walk to the office just 10 mins. So definitely quicker than I could’ve driven in to Leicester.

In any case, I was only in that job for 5 months before I got a transfer.

Working here, in Peterborough, I would have a long-ish walk (close to ¾-mile at both ends). Plus, now I’ve changed shifts, there isn’t a return bus at 10 at night. Not to mention weekends, for overtime.

So you’re talking about 30 mins extra travel for the beginning and end, plus the core 20-min journey (which is the same as the end to end car journey).

Oh, and I don’t experience delays, for example due to utility works, or people wanting to pay with £20 notes on Monday morning (or trying to use their bus pass before 9-30).

I’ve known a morning commute take an extra 15-20 minutes, not due to traffic delays, just due to money and ticketing issues. I’d really hope they’d have drilled pensioners not to use their passes before the correct time by now.

[Alderpoint]

Crit'Air in France bans virtually everything below Euro 6 without grades of expensive permit,

Crit'Air is being introduced in a phased manner in some cities in France. At the moment, the toughest measures are in Paris. But even in Paris you can drive diesels Euro 5 until 2024, when they ban diesels, and petrol Euro5 until 2030, when petrol engines will be banned too (even hybrids).

https://urbanaccessregulations.eu/count ... ance/paris

[FosseWay]

I have a genuine question about the air quality issues that have both led to strategic plans like in Birmingham and acute warnings as (IIRC) in Sarajevo and other southern European cities over the last day or so.

Why are we getting these warnings now and not 10, 20 years ago?

Because its politically expedient.

That or society's expectations have moved on. We accepted smog as the price to pay for industrial progress until the 1950s. Even until ten years ago even. Paris used to have horrid shades of yellow skies due to air pollution even then.

This is what I imagine is the case, and I fully support the idea of our expectations being higher as we learn more about the health and environmental effects, and technology allows practical solutions to lower but still harmful pollution levels that it didn't before. But that is not how most news coverage comes over, and I think in the long term that doesn't help in the process of getting people on board.

As to yellow skies: I remember when my parents first moved to Sheffield in 1994, you could walk up onto the moor above Ringinglow and look down on a yellow haze. I'm not there as often now as then, obviously, but I don't remember having seen that in the last 10-15 years. I don't know how much that change is down to declining industry, cleaner industry or cleaner vehicles though.

[Micro The Maniac]

At the moment, the toughest measures are in Paris. But even in Paris you can drive diesels Euro 5 until 2024, when they ban diesels, and petrol Euro5 until 2030, when petrol engines will be banned too (even hybrids).

Of course, Paris is at a gridlock at the moment, as a result of the wide ranging public-sector strike, meaning that the Metro is completely shut-down and local trains and buses significantly reduced.

[Berk]

At the moment, the toughest measures are in Paris. But even in Paris you can drive diesels Euro 5 until 2024, when they ban diesels, and petrol Euro5 until 2030, when petrol engines will be banned too (even hybrids).

Of course, Paris is at a gridlock at the moment, as a result of the wide ranging public-sector strike, meaning that the Metro is completely shut-down and local trains and buses significantly reduced.

That’s an even more important point - critical, in fact. If you’re going to start compelling people to use public transport, you have got to make sure there are contingencies in place when the workforce decides it just doesn’t want to work today.

Advising people to stay home (as SouthWestern and Southern have done) just doesn’t cop it.

[Ruperts Trooper]

Back in the mid '90s, I worked in Birmingham, just off Bristol Road near it's junction with the Middleway - my commute route was M42, M6, A38(M) and A38 through the tunnels - if I was still working there facing these restrictions I'd be seriously looking at changing jobs to a different location based on the present road network and public transport capability. Using the Middle Ring Road to get round the centre would be a nightmare with constant interruptions to the flow from roundabouts and traffic lights, to say nothing of the effect of the extra traffic.

More recently I have done the almost identical journey by public transport to get to an Eye Clinic for which I couldn't drive back - fortunately I live on a bus route in Tamworth but there's still a walk across town to the train station, a change of train at Birmingham New Street and then a walk to the clinic - a journey taking nearly 2 hours that can be done by car in 20 minutes off-peak and 45 minutes in the rush hour.

In Birmingham's context, public transport is stretched during peak periods as it is - but any reduction in car use needs to be matched by increased use of public transport - so where's that extra capacity coming from?

Birmingham New Street runs at full capacity most of the day because of the restrictive throat and access tracks so longer trains seems to be the only potential form of rail increase although some routes could use Moor Street or Snow Hill. Like any big city, the travel-to-work area covers a large area for which rail is the only practical alternative to cars because of the distances involved.

Air quality and congestion are both valid reasons for restricting car travel in city centres but there must surely be a massive investment in public transport - what's needed is cheap, clean, fast public transport to make people want to use it rather than simply restricting cars in some form.