Traders have claimed increased charges at council-run car parks will ruin their businesses. But STEPHEN YOUNG, activist for Living Streets ( www.livingstreets.org) and a member of the Transport Group at Transition Brighton and Hove, argues that fewer cars could lead to more prosperity. Arguing against increases in parking charges last month (March 17) , Stuart Wilkie, a member of the Lanes Business Network, suggested Brighton needs more car-borne shoppers if it is to face down the recession. This is ironic, given Mr Wilkie runs a shop in The Lanes, an area of Brighton that owes much of its popularity to its quirky and generally car-lite character.

I am surprised Mr Wilkie has not noticed a bigger threat to Brighton’s recession-hit shops is the growing influence of the big chains gradually encroaching into areas like The Lanes, North Laine and St James’s Street.

For those of us who think Brighton and Hove needs to pay more attention to those users of the streets who are not in a car most of us, most of the time I would argue the case for cheaper parking has been overstated. A study in Bristol last year, which interviewed 126 retailers and 840 customers, showed retailers overestimated the importance of car-borne trade by almost 100%.

They estimated 41% of their customers arrived by car, whereas only 22% had done so. In fact, more than half of the shoppers walked to the shops.

Does Mr Wilkie know that when London’s Oxford Street and Regent Street were closed to traffic on December 6 last year, there were queues to get into the shops? Organised by the New West End Company, which represents businesses in the area, it was dubbed VIP Day Very Important Pedestrians.

I also take issue with Mr Wilkie’s suggestion that shoppers who travel in to cities by car spend more than those who don’t.

Research carried out by Transport for London in 2008 showed shopping and personal business is the largest journey purpose category for walk trips, accounting for 74% of all walk trips. And there is a growing body of research which shows people who do not travel by car are likely, over time, to spend more in shops than those who do.

In May and June 2003, 1,300 people were questioned as they left shops in the town centres of Dijon, Grenoble, Lille, Nantes, Salonde-Provence and Strasbourg. The results showed car drivers spend less than pedestrians and cyclists who have a similar disposable income.

Advocates for more parking also seem to think the costs should be shouldered by the rest of us. The French study found the cost of an underground parking building was (in 2004) about 15,000 euros per space, or six million euros for 400 spaces. Added to this are expenses for maintenance and security, about 100,000 euros per year.

There are only two ways to recover these costs: By charging the users of the car park, or charging the rest of us. Does Mr Wilkie think non-car drivers should cross-subsidise the cars being driven into the city?

And I haven’t mentioned the other costs imposed by cars on cities: Isolation, sprawl, danger, noise, pollution, etc I also do not believe the car is an efficient way of bringing shoppers to the city.

The same French study analysed the flow of people delivered by different modes of transport on a 3.5m wide road: 12,000 people per hour can be carried on a tram, 10,000 people per hour on foot, 6,000 by bike, 5,000 by bus . . . and 1,000 people per hour by car.

Across the world, there are towns and cities that have redesigned their streets so other users enjoy the rights Mr Wilkie seems to think are the exclusive preserve of car drivers.

To take one example, central Copenhagen is one of the largest and oldest examples of car-free zones, heavily used with much tourist traffic.

Has Mr Wilkie ever visited Copenhagen, or cities like Graz, Prague and Stockholm which have created environmental zones with limitations on traffic or strolling zones to make the city centre more pedestrian-friendly? Did he enjoy the experience?

And did he notice an alarming absence of tourists, shoppers and visitors? Or was it the other way round?

In fact, to quote a Civitas report on these cities: The new strolling zones have boosted commercial activity like bars and shops. I believe Brighton should join the small but growing number of British cities like York, Bristol and Manchester, that have understood their future prosperity depends on creating high quality public spaces where people will want to spend time and money.

Another point is that, for every person who comes by car who will choose to shop, eat or play elsewhere as a result of the council’s increase in car parking charges, there is likely to be another, non-car driver, who will choose to come to Brighton because it is a friendly and encouraging space for those of us who do not choose to cocoon ourselves in metal whenever we venture outside.

Mr Wilkie rightly bemoans the near-gridlock on our streets at weekends, which is bound to get worse as summer draws more cars into the city, despite the rail and bus services bringing visitors to Brighton and Hove.

I would be interested to hear how his call for more cars to be attracted to the city will help to solve the gridlock problem.

There is also no denying the success of the award-winning of the new-look New Road, with many traders calling for full pedestrianisation. The team that devised the scheme has also designed a proposal for remodelling the Steine and Victoria Gardens.

Living Streets and the Transport Group of Transition Brighton & Hove support recent comments by Councillor Geoffrey Theobald: Our streets should be places for people to meet, spend time and enjoy all that our wonderful city has to offer.

As we all face the worst recession for a century, surely this has to be the way to go?