This article leaves a lot of details out. As a Parisian who's been following this with attention, here are a few details:
* first, the "SUV" part is the intent, but not the reality. It's actually by weight: over 1600kg for ICE and 2000kg for electric/hybrids. A lot of French SUVs fit under those restrictions (for example Peugeot 2008/3008). It's unclear to me if there is really something specific to target those SUVs as well (I have not read the full text)
* part of the issue is width rather than weight: cars become larger and no longer fit in the parking spots. Parking spots minimum width in Paris is 180cm. For example, a Porsche Cayenne (a typical SUV) is 198cm without mirrors, 219cm with mirrors deployed. Being at least 20cm outside of the parking spot is an issue, roads are narrow.
* this is only for paid surface parking for non-residents. Residents price is not impacted (which is controversial). Underground parking is private and not affected. Free parking (outside of 8AM to 8PM Monday to Saturday) stays free for everyone.
* In general, underground parking is cheaper than surface parking even at the normal price. This will likely push those cars underground, which is IMO a good thing (especially because of the width issue).
* this vote is controversial in the first place (much like the rental scooters one was recently): the result was expected: it doesn't really affect negatively Parisians, only outsiders, and is strictly a QoL improvements for Parisians. I'm actually surprised it's not a landslide, but I guess the people who went to vote are generally more likely to have a car and vote against because of that.
* there were other questions asked for specific arrondissement. Those were important as well.
Edit: of those questions, only one arrondissement rejected its question (8th, which is also one of the least favorable over the poll). Those questions were mainly around reclaiming space from cars to allocate to pedestrians/cyclists/green spaces.
To be fair, the sentiment was "it will be a landslide in favour" (like the electric scooters). It indeed wasn't, but still went in the expected way.
People visiting Paris were not polled, only Parisians were, that's why I only explained this point of view. But yes it does benefit everyone that doesn't visit Paris in a SUV.
Note that it also impacts Parisians with a SUV when they are parking outside of their resident zones (a resident parking permit allows you to park in 4 zones around your home).
> this is only for paid surface parking for non-residents. Residents price is not impacted (which is controversial). Underground parking is private and not affected. Free parking (outside of 8AM to 8PM Monday to Saturday) stays free for everyone.
If my end goal was to apply this to everyone at some point, I would probably start with such a restricted law, then extend it step by step later.
The news makes people focus on this particular vote, but it's just yet another small step in the multitude of other steps to curb car use in Paris.
It started at least 10 years ago (current mayor that really pushes the issue was elected in 2014, I'm not sure it's the actual starting point), and we saw:
* bike lanes. Lots of bike lanes. Generally replacing traffic lanes and parking spots.
* several pedestrians zones replacing traffic lanes (especially in front of schools).
* Crit'air restrictions (car pollution rating, derived from Euro rating). You cannot drive a polluting car in Paris anymore.
* reduction of the speed limit from 50km/h to 30km/h in Paris, and from 80km/h to 70km/h on the Périphérique (highway circling Paris)
* there is no longer any always-free surface parking spot, and price has been raised a lot
In my country the car registration document has the weight number but not the width number. I suspect in France it's the same, and that's the reason they went by weight instead of width – it's easier to administer that way.
It’s interesting that new legislation is baking in the idea that more “sustainable” cars can weigh a lot more. Disappointing that this means we won’t tackle the other externalities of personal motorised transport including size, safety and visibility issues, wear on public infrastructure, and sheer amount of extra material people use to get themselves around.
I think the idea is that batteries can make the car more dense. Their concern was larger vehicles not fitting in parking spaces, allowing more weight in an EV makes sense in that case.
It is interesting that they went with weight as a proxy for size though. I expect the process for charging by weight or dimensions would come down to a list of oversized vehicle models, why abstract it a layer rather than a max width/length?
It makes sense that road and parking pricing should be proportional to the size and impact of your car. Hopefully this will encourage manufacturers to produce more smaller cars - it's getting somewhat hard to buy a small car these days. I'd love to have a Japanese-style Kei car.
Agreed -- the popularity of giant vehicles is basically a tragedy-of-the-commons situation, and probably regulation is the only way to fix it at this point.
You'd think that the country which invented the 2CV and went for full-nuclear electricity generation to save oil imports would have plenty of good small EV options.
There are some of them (like Zoé and the e-208). But even if the option is there, not everyone can afford it, and if everyone would, production would be insufficient, and if production were sufficient, then raw materials imports would not be enough.
There is no magical switch, we have to accept that any transition will be long and messy.
It would be nice if the rules for 2 wheeled vehicles could be refined as well.
Here (not France) you can drive an EU moped (45km/h) on a car license, which could (and should!) be a great alternative to a smaller car. The problem is that it's difficult to get to and through the city without touching the highways, which are strictly off limits for the mopeds for obvious reasons.
What's needed is something in between a full sized MC and a moped that can be driven on a car license and that can reach at least 80km/h to keep up with inner city highway speeds.
> Here (not France) you can drive an EU moped (45km/h) on a car license, which could (and should!) be a great alternative to a smaller car. The problem is that it's difficult to get to and through the city without touching the highways, which are strictly off limits for the mopeds for obvious reasons.
In France you can ride a scooter or motorcycle with a displacement < 125 cc with a car license. Certainly not ideal for long trips, but it’s enough for small stretches of motorways in the daily commute. Indeed it’s a good alternative to large cars but it can be dangerous depending on the state of the roads.
It would be nice if they didn't intentionally nerf the speed limit to 45 so that's impossible to keep up with the flow of traffic. That makes them a lot less appealing and much more dangerous.
EVs are not really popular in my EU city because they require a dedicated parking space with a charger and most people live in an apartment with none of that.
I agree but it's an interesting problem, things like parking spaces and roads will still have to be made to the size of largest vehicle that will use them and I imagine more cars in the same amount of road will lead to even more traffic.
Imo you should be allowed to use the parking spots for just about whatever you want within reason. Pay the parking price and set up a hotdog stand for the day if you want. Then raise the price until some spots are usually free
In my city, during the covid lockdowns, restaurants were allowed to set up outdoor tables in the street parking spots in front of their restaurants. Many built semi-permanent structures with wooden flooring, waist-high walls to isolate seated guests from motorists, roofs for shade, etc.
After everything opened back up, restaurants were allowed to keep the spots for about a year so long as they brought the structures up to code. After that, rather than shut them down the city started charging them rent.
It's such a nice solution. The city earns much more revenue than they would if they put a parking meter there, the business gets more seating capacity, the guests get al fresco dining options. The only people who lose are those who insist upon driving (instead of Ubering, taking public transit, biking, walking, etc.), but even they can just park further away from the crowded areas and walk, or park in the parking structures (which charge something closer to market rate).
Imagine if you could live in a parking spot. Or turn it into an AirBnB. Parking charges (and congestion charges) should equilibriate with rents for the same ground area.
Interesting to note: the turnout (5.6%) is even lower than when it was decided to ban e-scooters sharing systems (7.4%).
Also note this only applies to vehicles from non-residents. And that parking in public spots is already very expensive in Paris; limited to a maximum of 6h, which will cost you up to 75€: https://www.paris.fr/pages/payer-son-stationnement-2129
Most eligible voters are probably not personally affected and so didn't see a need vote. A quorum would make it effectively impossible to change anything.
Yes and no. Residents aren't affected if they are parking in their "authorized parking zone" but they are elsewhere, so unless their only Paris parking is in their neighborhood, they'll be affected by the change.
Of course a city's residents are the ones who should vote! Cities are built for us, who live in them, therefore we're the ones who get to decide how they are managed. It's the same reason that municipal elections are only open to residents of a city and national elections are only open to a country's citizens.
SUVs are a lot bigger than typical European cars. Since people don't feel safe driving small cars around big cars the presence of SUVs causes an upwards pressure on vehicle size. That's an issue in cities where the roads and parking spaces are built to fit vehicles from 20 years ago, causing a lot of frustration for everyone. Which creates the paradox that SUVs both cause people to dislike them and to buy them, for related reasons.
It's not that simple. There are SUV-like cars in all sizes now, starting with small cars like Suzuki Jimny, and you can find a model within each 5cm band up to 5m+. Where do you draw a line? Each of these could be called a SUV by a typical voter, with increased height and ground clearance, larger wheels, in many cases 4x4. There are also sedans and station wagons with increased height and some offroad protection and styling.
My point is it's very hard nowadays to say what's a SUV. According to the article, French authorities decided purely on weight, which is only semi-related to SUV-ness of a vehicle and might include non-SUV cars, especially with heavy diesel engines, but exclude my petrol Honda CR-V 3rd gen. Why didn't they call it "triple cost for heavier vehicles" instead?
I've noticed this trend, but I feel like it's down to several factors, and I think as full cost gets priced in correctly, it's likely to end.
Obviously these use more fuel than the equivalent smaller, lighter car. Over time that's going to affect both the direct fuel costs, and the other taxes and costs levied for environmental reasons, road use, etc. Credit has been remarkably cheap, particularly in cars, and that's coming to and end. Insurance premiums have been going up in many countries, and these cars generally cost more to insure. On top of all of this, in the US SUVs are more practical because of the support for much larger vehicles (parking, roads, etc), and US media is a trend-setter for much of the world, so these vehicles are considered desirable more than may otherwise be the case.
The numbers you point to are from 2022, I'd be interested to see 2023 numbers as that's where I expect things would really start to turn around.
“People like Coldplay and voted for the Nazis. You can’t trust people Jeremy.”
The popularity of SUVs is driven by a whole variety of factors. Eventually some of those factors will start to weaken. One of the factors is that many of the costs of SUVs are externalised.
Readit News
* first, the "SUV" part is the intent, but not the reality. It's actually by weight: over 1600kg for ICE and 2000kg for electric/hybrids. A lot of French SUVs fit under those restrictions (for example Peugeot 2008/3008). It's unclear to me if there is really something specific to target those SUVs as well (I have not read the full text)
* part of the issue is width rather than weight: cars become larger and no longer fit in the parking spots. Parking spots minimum width in Paris is 180cm. For example, a Porsche Cayenne (a typical SUV) is 198cm without mirrors, 219cm with mirrors deployed. Being at least 20cm outside of the parking spot is an issue, roads are narrow.
* this is only for paid surface parking for non-residents. Residents price is not impacted (which is controversial). Underground parking is private and not affected. Free parking (outside of 8AM to 8PM Monday to Saturday) stays free for everyone.
* In general, underground parking is cheaper than surface parking even at the normal price. This will likely push those cars underground, which is IMO a good thing (especially because of the width issue).
* this vote is controversial in the first place (much like the rental scooters one was recently): the result was expected: it doesn't really affect negatively Parisians, only outsiders, and is strictly a QoL improvements for Parisians. I'm actually surprised it's not a landslide, but I guess the people who went to vote are generally more likely to have a car and vote against because of that.
* there were other questions asked for specific arrondissement. Those were important as well.
Edit: of those questions, only one arrondissement rejected its question (8th, which is also one of the least favorable over the poll). Those questions were mainly around reclaiming space from cars to allocate to pedestrians/cyclists/green spaces.
With 54,55 % in favor and only 5,68 % voting, I wouldn't call that "expected".
>is strictly a QoL improvements for Parisians
No, anyone visiting Paris in anything other than an SUV (say, a train, a bus, a bicycle) will benefit.
People visiting Paris were not polled, only Parisians were, that's why I only explained this point of view. But yes it does benefit everyone that doesn't visit Paris in a SUV.
Note that it also impacts Parisians with a SUV when they are parking outside of their resident zones (a resident parking permit allows you to park in 4 zones around your home).
If my end goal was to apply this to everyone at some point, I would probably start with such a restricted law, then extend it step by step later.
It started at least 10 years ago (current mayor that really pushes the issue was elected in 2014, I'm not sure it's the actual starting point), and we saw:
* bike lanes. Lots of bike lanes. Generally replacing traffic lanes and parking spots.
* several pedestrians zones replacing traffic lanes (especially in front of schools).
* Crit'air restrictions (car pollution rating, derived from Euro rating). You cannot drive a polluting car in Paris anymore.
* reduction of the speed limit from 50km/h to 30km/h in Paris, and from 80km/h to 70km/h on the Périphérique (highway circling Paris)
* there is no longer any always-free surface parking spot, and price has been raised a lot
And I'm very probably forgetting a few.
(unless a national law is passed).
I also think the weight for EV cars should be lowered, considering the better acceleration that EVs have.
Perhaps that will come later.
It is interesting that they went with weight as a proxy for size though. I expect the process for charging by weight or dimensions would come down to a list of oversized vehicle models, why abstract it a layer rather than a max width/length?
https://www.capitalone.com/cars/learn/finding-the-right-car/...
Hopefully new regulation will fix it rather than make it worse
There is no magical switch, we have to accept that any transition will be long and messy.
[1] https://amp.theguardian.com/business/2024/jan/29/us-car-cost...
Here (not France) you can drive an EU moped (45km/h) on a car license, which could (and should!) be a great alternative to a smaller car. The problem is that it's difficult to get to and through the city without touching the highways, which are strictly off limits for the mopeds for obvious reasons.
What's needed is something in between a full sized MC and a moped that can be driven on a car license and that can reach at least 80km/h to keep up with inner city highway speeds.
In France you can ride a scooter or motorcycle with a displacement < 125 cc with a car license. Certainly not ideal for long trips, but it’s enough for small stretches of motorways in the daily commute. Indeed it’s a good alternative to large cars but it can be dangerous depending on the state of the roads.
Max speed is told to be 130km/h but I'm pretty sure I drove my C-zero faster than that without much issue
The Tesla model 3 is right on that limit with 1.980 Kg, whereas the model Y weighs 2.4 tonnes.
In Denmark the model Y is by far the most sold car in 2023, with 1 out of every 10 cars being a model Y.
So I think it will be an uphill battle to enact the same law in Denmark.
It's probably still not fully financing the parking spots. Parking spots in cities are incredibly expensive and heavily subsidized.
After everything opened back up, restaurants were allowed to keep the spots for about a year so long as they brought the structures up to code. After that, rather than shut them down the city started charging them rent.
It's such a nice solution. The city earns much more revenue than they would if they put a parking meter there, the business gets more seating capacity, the guests get al fresco dining options. The only people who lose are those who insist upon driving (instead of Ubering, taking public transit, biking, walking, etc.), but even they can just park further away from the crowded areas and walk, or park in the parking structures (which charge something closer to market rate).
Everybody is hyping Paris like the end of the car is near, but in fact it's just an action to get some money from visitors and other external people.
Don't see how this might change transport in large.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ztHZj6QNlkM
Also note this only applies to vehicles from non-residents. And that parking in public spots is already very expensive in Paris; limited to a maximum of 6h, which will cost you up to 75€: https://www.paris.fr/pages/payer-son-stationnement-2129
These things should really have a quorum requirement.
Only one (the 6th, both rich but also rather low on parking) had results that were closer than 60/40 or 40/60.
[0] https://www.paris.fr/pages/plus-ou-moins-de-suv-les-parisien...
The status-quo (all you can eat SUV use in cities) has a big impact on everyone using the city. Yet no one voted for that...
It is always heartening to hear that people who make antisocial choices (cars in cities) are finally being made to bear the costs of those choices.
My point is it's very hard nowadays to say what's a SUV. According to the article, French authorities decided purely on weight, which is only semi-related to SUV-ness of a vehicle and might include non-SUV cars, especially with heavy diesel engines, but exclude my petrol Honda CR-V 3rd gen. Why didn't they call it "triple cost for heavier vehicles" instead?
https://www.investopedia.com/terms/c/chicken-tax.asp
>Most SUVs are classified as light trucks and are therefore included in the Chicken Tax
Full story: https://www.wired.com/2014/12/subaru-brat/
Obviously these use more fuel than the equivalent smaller, lighter car. Over time that's going to affect both the direct fuel costs, and the other taxes and costs levied for environmental reasons, road use, etc. Credit has been remarkably cheap, particularly in cars, and that's coming to and end. Insurance premiums have been going up in many countries, and these cars generally cost more to insure. On top of all of this, in the US SUVs are more practical because of the support for much larger vehicles (parking, roads, etc), and US media is a trend-setter for much of the world, so these vehicles are considered desirable more than may otherwise be the case.
The numbers you point to are from 2022, I'd be interested to see 2023 numbers as that's where I expect things would really start to turn around.
The popularity of SUVs is driven by a whole variety of factors. Eventually some of those factors will start to weaken. One of the factors is that many of the costs of SUVs are externalised.