[Previous entry: "So There We Were"] [Next entry: "Public Transportation Ridership Up By 2.11% In 2004"]

04/24/2005: "Observation from Birmingham (UK)"

When it comes to working out what people will pay for auto fuel, we should regard cars as being like real estate. I recall regular astonishment at the constantly accelerating price of houses, instead of grasping that this is what people will pay to “own” a roof (if they can afford it and its in line with whatever settlement patterns government is subsidising).

What’s interesting is what things people will give up to pay for their autodependency. The first thing that may happen is that houses/shops/schools that require a lot of fuel to get to them may alter their price in relation to energy costs.

Professor Phil Goodwin (advisor on UK government's post 1997 election White Paper on transport) referred to decisions of this kind as “the churn” about which I wrote a piece:Watch the Churn
Goodwin reminded his audience how adaptable most people are:

Every year anything up to athird of people change their jobs, up to one in seven move house. At each of these life events there may be a reason to reconsider travel patterns and choices... As a result, broadly speaking, a process of adaptation to a new policy starts on day one, takes between five and ten years before it is near enough to completion to get lost in other and longer term processes.

They change jobs. They move house. They get married, divorced, have children who change schools, move to be with relatives and so on. They cope with a lot of change. The statistics reflect the enormous number of choices being made by thousands and thousands of people every 12 months.

Imagining such a statistic extended over 5 to 10 years and you can see how between say 2005 and 2010 there is a real prospect that robust policies to improve the present situation have a real prospect of making an impact. Of course there must be political will in Whitehall and through local government but this will be helped by the myriad individual choices of "churn."

And how predictable therefore that Birmingham City Council planners have just circulated a consultation document by way of developing Interim Supplementary Planning Advice on "Mature suburbs residential guidelines - Feb 2005." "Mature suburbs" are what used until yesterday to be called "inner-city" with all the notoriety that attached to that term, and refer to a belt of housing within a mile and half to two miles of Birmingham's centre.

"It is anticipated that pressure for new residential development at high densities in these suburbs will continue and this could, if inappropriate, erode the character that makes these places so special."

This is an astonishing (tho' predictable in view of the above reflections on energy costs) change of tone. Guess what? As a resident here for 30 years, I am even noticing "white folk" starting to move in ("er... It's not so bad .,.really .. Is it?"). There goes the neighbourhood.

We came to live here because we liked it and not because the estate agents advised us. Rather the contrary: it emerges that when we moved in, being able to buy a large house for very little, large swathes of this part of the inner city (now a "mature suburb") turned out to have been ring fenced by the mortgage companies as not eligible for house purchase loans.

Where I'm going with this as I'm sure you've guessed is that a decade after I became enlightened on the subject people living close to the city centre may begin to ponder whether they really need their cars...however I anticipate a great deal of skeuomorphic car use before that notion sinks home.

Simon Baddeley, on 04.24.05 @ 14:20PST