UKC

https://parkswatchscotland.us12.list-manage.com/track/click?u=79f90929a02cf...

should tell you all you need to know ....

thats extortion! it really will be a barrier to participation in the outdoors. its not as if the public transport alternatives are feasible, or affordable, for many people to get to the area... real shame.

It's the same as two hours city centre parking in Manchester

I've participated in the outdoors for 30 years and parked here twice, there are alternatives. There are even alternatives if you are hell bent on going up the Cobbler, you can park your brand new soft roader/3 litre Audi Estate/camper van (the typical car I saw parked there in May) up the glen and walk in a different route.

Maybe discouraging car use like this will encourage people onto public transport making additional routes and services more viable. It won't happen overnight but changing the perception that people are  allowed to park where they want, for minimal cost, might help. 

So the wedge gets thicker. And still people wonder what is being complained about. I have to hope that public outcry at some point will get rid of parking charges like this in the same way out got rid of bridge tolls. I'll be pleasantly looking forward to this happening instead of getting angrier.

I'd say the council have put that stupid charge in initially so everyone goes wild with complaints and then they "listen", halve the original figure.......and you're still down to a fiver to park.

They then say they've listened to the masses...........it's a stitch up.....someone in the council has been watching how Trump works...

Two hours city centre parking in Manchester will be in a building that costs money to build and maintain and has CCTV security. Not just parked on an empty bit of tarmac without even toilet facilities IIRC.

And yes you can currently park elsewhere. So they'll do as has happened in other places and close off or introduce charges for those alternatives. The end result will be those who can afford it will pay, those who can't will cause problems by parking badly in the few places still available, or will go elsewhere instead.

I'd happily use public transport but it's not available at the times I need. Yes these charges could potentially make better services viable - but that hasn't happened anywhere else.

Well that really is poor.

Last time I was there (a few weeks ago) the car park was rammed full; luckily someone else was just leaving. Clearly they've spotted a chance to rake it in, with it being such an iconic peak and being popular with foreign tourists too.

There's still the approach from Glen Croe, but it's a lot boggier and less scenic (though probably does get you to the climbing or to the summit quicker).

In reply to Tyler:

That may be, but this is a car park in the Southern Highlands, not a city centre somewhere. Paying a quid or two to park is one thing; £9 is something else, actually more than it costs many to drive there in the first place.

You don't really believe that, do you? I mean, maybe if you built a large, free park&ride at Glasgow Central!

Yep.

After 5 years of zero increase in funding the Scottish government chose to impose £170 million pounds of cuts on local authorities this year. It was their choice, no one else told them to do it and the only reason it isn't twice that amount is because the Scottish Parliament refused to vote through such a massive cut.

Councils throughout Scotland are now left having to make choices about what stays and what goes, what's free and what's charged for. I expect this ridiculous increase is an attempt to recoup some money from somewhere in order to keep son other public service going.

I'm guessing 58 minutes before someone blames "Westminster".

I'm talking about on street parking. Argyle and Bute council has costs associated with all the tourists pouring into the area, why do you object to them contributing via this method (I appreciate there are other methods but lets face it there are plenty who drive up and contribute nothing, if anything this thread has proven that some of the people wanting to use this car park are pretty tight!)

Lets face it, the profile of people using this car park is of the relatively wealthy, middle classes. No I can't cite peer reviewed source to back this up etc. etc. but this trope of families not going to the countryside for the want of £8 extra for the day does not bear rational analysis.

Agreed, because people don't want public transport, they want to drive everywhere, they just want to pay as little as possible for the privilege. They'll gripe about it but they'll pay it because, in fact, £8 is fuck all to those who park here. 

I agree that it'd be daft to blame Westminster.

It's equally daft to blame Holyrood; you're pretty much doing the same thing you're objecting to, there, just with a different partisan slant to it.

This is a council matter, let's blame Argyll and Bute Council and not pretend that local government isn't a real thing, with its own powers and responsibilities (including tax-varying powers).

It’s funny, visiting state parks all over California there was a charge of between $5 and $20 per day to park at any of them, with a sort of enforicble honesty box and slip system.  

Public transport was almost never an option for the state parks, driving really was mandatory.  Everyone seemed to treat these charges as normal, no complaining, this despite free parking being the standard over there outside of big city centres.

I think the California money goes directly to the underfunded state park service though, rather than a council...  

Considering the total cost of a day out including the personal indirect costs of motoring (tax, insurance, depreciation, maintinance) as well as direct costs like fuel, a £9 parking charge is not the dominant cost of a day trip, although it is one of the most visible.

Just noticed the thread about the Cairngorm Parking Charges - £2 per day for cars.

You know, that'd probably be true for most of the 'hillwalking car parks' in the Highlands, but I really don't think it's true for this one, or the ones around Loch Lomond.

There's a lot of poverty in and around Glasgow, and a long history of people who don't have a lot of cash to spare nonetheless getting out to the Arrochar and Luss hills. Have a look at the history of climbing on the Cobbler, in fact!

Public transport is of some use, but it's pretty limited and limiting.

In fact Scottish councils have the least tax raising powers of any group of local government bodies in the world. No, really.

They have no say over business rates, council tax, nor can they impose a special local tax such as a tourist tax themselves. I guess parking charges are a revenue raising measure they do have control over but it's not going to bring much in.

That's interesting, if true (what's your source, and does it really factor in local government across the whole world? I'm surprised that information is readily available!)

But it really does have f*ck all to do with whether it's OK for Argyll and Bute Council to raise the Cobbler car park charges ninefold.

The last two times I visited this car park I was with someone on the dole. I'm happy to sub the petrol money but an extra £9.00 on top would make me think twice.

Of course it is Westminster and Tory austerity.  If the Tories decide to cut government expenditure then the Barnett formula means proportionally less money for Scotland and that is going to show through somewhere.

I can see why the council somewhere like Arrochar would be trying to bring in money from tourists and munro baggers rather than locals.    People don't seem to mind putting 20 quid worth of fuel in their tank to get to the Cobbler, probably about 15 quid of which goes straight to the Westminster government in taxes so why is it so bad when the folk who live near the mountain manage to get 9 quid out of people coming to climb their hill.

Yep, at £9 it is a deterrent.

I imagine you'd probably just go elsewhere instead; I would.

It seems likely that the main effect of this is going to be displacing some tourism from Arrochar to other areas rather than actually stopping people getting out.

But I'm concerned about the precedent it might set.

Come on Tom, it may well be flowing down from austerity and cuts, but it's down to the council how they handle parking. There's really no need to blame it on the Tories or the SNP at Westminster and Holyrood. Turning this thread into a pro or anti SNP rant is missing the point and detracting from the actual issue.

Local government matters, but it's mostly boring and people just don't pay it the attention it deserves.

I think that at £9, this may actually drive enough custom away to be a net cost to the area. They could have gone for, say, £3, and people would probably not be all that bothered - which might be their end game, I suppose.

Actually I'm wrong, I apologise for talking pish. In fact councils set their own tax bands but it is more or less the only tax raising power they have.

85% of funding comes from central government so even substantial rises in council tax will have a small effect on what they can spend.

I suspect the concept you are looking for is the external cost of motoring, I have not read this link through but think this may be worth a look.

https://www.eea.europa.eu/publications/ENVISSUENo12/page025.html

Right off for a walk, to check out a quarry

It's still cheaper than Pen y Pass which seems to be full both day and night. 

I see the actual issue as the council not having enough money and the underlying cause is  cuts coming from Westminster.     The council and the Holyrood government can't win: they have limited powers and no good options.  If they weren't getting stick for putting up parking charges they'd be getting it for cutting services.   

I don't know enough about the local factors to know whether £9 is a reasonable charge.  If the car park is overflowing then economics would suggest they would make more money by putting up the price.  One way to find the optimum price is to start high and reduce it until you find the maximum value of (number_of_customers * price).

As a more general point I think the way people do the munros needs to change from day trips to bag one munro with a circular walk and a huge amount of driving to multi-day trips using public transport where possible with camping and walking to bag groups of munros.   If parking charges start making the one-hill-per-day approach less feasible then maybe its a good thing.  Overnight stays could mean more money being spent closer to the hills rather than it all going on fuel.

I agree that walk throughs and multi day trips are much more rewarding but 7 days parking really will add up at these rates. 

Actually you are wrong again. Council Tax bands were set [by the Scottish Office I think] when the Council Tax was introduced in the early 1990s. They have remained the same ever since. Since April 2017 Scottish councils have been allowed to raise Council Tax by up to 3% per financial year. EG. In financial year April 2017 to April 2018 Stirling Council decided not to increase council tax. It decided to increase Council Tax by 3% in the present financial year. You are correct to say that Council Tax is the only tax raising power available to Scottish Councils. Non domestic rates are controlled by the Scottish Government.

As to the £9 charge it does seem a bit steep. OK if shared by a carload of 4 but enough to put off a single person like myself.

If you are going for a few days and walking to finish somewhere other than the start point a car is a nuisance.   Even if you bring the car, if you are there for a few days then you don't need to keep it in that car park.    It's only if you want to go Glasgow -> Arrochar -> Cobbler and back in a day that driving and a car park as close as possible to the hill is pretty much the best option.   

Personally, I object to parking charges where people are doing something positive and healthy wherever that might be. However, for a walk up and down the Cobbler on its own (the goal of most who park there) I can’t see many people needing to pay £9. You have the option of paying per hour, which in this case could reasonably be anything between £2 and £4. If you’re with someone else, you can half that again. The Munros can be accessed elsewhere.

Not sure if these charges will be imposed in winter but other popular car parks like the one at Rowardennan for Ben Lomond are free in winter (until 31 March) so winter climbers who could easily be parked all day would have no charges to pay.

Regardless, probably best airing your views to Mr Cleland Sneddon (CEO of Argyll and Bute Council) at cleland.sneddon@argyll-bute.gov.uk. Tel. 01546 604350.

Tangentially related to your comment I was surprised on one of my trips up the Cobbler this year to see how many people were camping in the corrie or on the mountain: OK it wasn't an enormous number but seemed enough that if it persisted over the summer there could be real issues with sanitation and water quality in the burn.

I've lost count of the number of times I've been up the Cobbler by bus, car and bike and nowadays I often park at the car park at Succoth. I don't mind paying £1 or £2 to do so ( indeed I often feel a bit uneasy about the way I typically go in and out of mountain areas without making any contribution to the local economy) however £9 seems out of kilter with other comparable sites and does seem rather punitive. My prediction is that a) casual visitors will be put off and drive on to Inverary ( where as I recall you park for free b) hillgoers will be put off and try to park elsewhere in on the lochside or in Glencroe compromising access for forest walks/ sub aqua clubs / outdoor groups / boulderers and moving pedestrian traffic off the constructed path c) hill goers will park at rest and be thankful filling up the viewpoint car park with long term parking, preventing access for motor based tourists and compromising the business of the snack van there d) people will park on verges in Glen Croe e) hill baggers will begin to access  narnain, the cobbler, and ime from the car park at Inveruglas which is free and I believe in another authority area.

In the summer time , for us Glaswegians, there's ample daylight to go up and down the hills from Arrochar after work at a time of day when the charges do not apply and in days gone by I could catch the  3 o clock bus from Buchanan St , get off at Tarbet run up the hill and be down in Arrochar/Tarbet in time for the 8 o clock bus back to Glasgow ( this escapade would now leave me requiring a form of transport with a flashing blue light rather than West Coast Motors)

What I tend to do these days, though, is to avoid the crowds and neglect the Cobbler. 

Come to think of it I'm not sure that I've ever had to pay for parking anywhere else in Argyll and Bute? 

A completely unfounded and frankly ignorant assumption.

I run these hills regularly at weekends. There is a huge diversity of hillgoers from foreign students and young families to regular walkers and people just starting out.

I do some voluntary work with children from less privileged backgrounds who love every opportunity they get to enjoy the outdoors. 

The last thing we should be doing is putting a further barrier in the way. 

Is no one else puzzled by the 900% increase, that should be 800%?

I do agree that it is a lot of money and I would be quite unhappy paying, but I can see why it's been done. Just look at the parking issues in places like Skye and the resentment of tourists it causes. If we can raise significant sums to help pay for the additional pressure then it may be a good thing in a way. Realistically the car park will be as busy as it ever was in peak times with the gradual increase in popularity. Still, next time I'm there I'll hopefully find somewhere else to park, or walk into the Munros from elsewhere

I think 9 quid is over the mark, but given that car park is often full it maybe it will be able to support it without destroying visitor numbers who knows. Hopefully it will encourage more car sharing.

I think to claim its divorced from the grant cut is sticking your head in the sand though. As mentioned Scottish councils don't have much autonomy in collecting more money.

In Scotland Council tax rates have been centrally frozen for the last 10 years and this year allowed to raise but only by 3% (which A&B did) and of course the central grant was simultaneously cut. They don't have control over business rates.

I used to live in A&B and its an economically depressed area with a relatively expensive population to serve (being spread out in the hills and islands). Already pre-grant cut we were on tri-weekly bin collection and library being shut.

They have certain statutory obligations to meet and find money for (e.g. social care which with an ageing population is ever increasing). Raising parking prices is one of the few levers they have, given services are already near the bone and need supporting. 

Whilst I would much prefer pay higher taxes and have better services, unfortunately at the moment any income or other progressive tax increases seem to be unpalatable so councils at least have to try these sorts of tricks to try and break even (or not c/f Northamptonshire).

I'm told that it is in the summer, but I've never seen it more than half full when I've been (winter and spring, always in good weather). And even then, with charges at a more than reasonable £1, a significant proportion seem to have been ticketed for not paying!

Is it hell as like.

The Scottish Government is making a big thing about those aspects which they are making cheap or free, and making out that Westminster is the bad guy (when the SNP MP's at Westminster actually vote against doing the same thing in England/Wales in some cases).

It always keeps quiet about where that money is coming from.

You can't have it both ways.

As for the £9 a day, I wouldn't mind betting that you need such a silly figure just to pay for the person collecting the money (or dishing out the tickets) - but wouldn't go near paying for the vehicle they have to use (Of course they could always use public transport - what do you think Tyler ?)

So this entire thing is probably all about paying the wage for someone whose job has been entirely dreamed up, but won't pay the entire bill, will p*ss a lot of people off, but some Nationalists can use it to carry on moaning.

Incidentally, what about the "right to roam" you Scots go on about - only for the rich now is it ?

Have you ever read "Animal Farm" ?

yes and the point of that is to dissuade people from driving into the busy and overcrowded city centre, instead using the ample public transport!

if the plan is to get people on busses and trains then you need the public transport in place BEFORE you stop people from driving! not 2 or 3 years down the line if you manage to raise a bit of cash!

yes there are currently alternatives, i know of a spot 500m up/down the road, but that and others are now going to become mobbed by 9am. and would you rather the masses took the alternative footpath up the glen, masively increasing errosion, instead of using the well maintained and well managed arochar path?

In which cases?   Can Scottish MPs even vote on legislation which only affects England and Wales?

There's no secret where the Scottish Government gets its money.

Yes I can.

Maybe they will have one of those new-fangled ticket machines?

Yeah - the job for the guy handing out tickets is completely dreamed up.  By you.

'right to roam' isn't the same as 'right to park for free'.    Why not apply that argument to the price of the fuel to drive to the hills which is greater than the parking charges and almost all tax for the Westminster government. 

Yes.  I'm sure George Orwell had parking charges in Arrochar in mind when he wrote it.

How many spaces do you think there are in the carpark? At £9 a day they will cover someone doing a check on busy days very quickly. It won't be their entire job either. The rest will help pay for general council car parks and upkeep. Even if it doesn't cover the entire cost it is fair that people who use them contribute to the cost of car parking facilities, £9 is quite a lot of money though...

What has this got to do with the Land reform act...?

For f*cks sake.

It's a council matter. (And it isn't an SNP-led council; not that that matters.)

Blaming the Scottish government for it would be like blaming the UK government for the mess the SNP made of merging the Scottish police force (also meant to save money in the face of cuts from above). The matter is not under their remit.

The council control the parking charges. Charges in this car park are not going to persuade the minority-SNP Scottish Government to raise taxes, or the minority-Tory UK Government to end austerity (or cancel Brexit to strengthen the pound and reduce fuel costs for the council, for that matter). That isn't relevant to this.

It's really sad that on a supposedly climbing/hillwalking site, a thread about a massive increase in parking charges for accessing one of the country's most iconic hills - one which has started the hillwalking and climbing hobbies, careers and passions of a great many hillgoers - is being used as yet another tedious political "debate" thread, but I suppose that's just the way UKC is now.

At least the start of the thread is good for raising awareness, and the issue is already being handled by people who actually care about and have a connection to the matter in hand; it was encouraging to hear a news item about it on the radio as I drove home yesterday.

£8 is a day or two's food in our mouths for some of us who park there, you smug prick

Also, have you heard of parking ticket machines?

Yes they can, and they do. For instance they voted to stop English shops from opening longer hours on a Sunday, even though they already can in Scotland and Westminster MPs have no powers to set the rules north of the border. The justification seemed to be that if the law was changed, then the Scottish government would be somehow forced to scrap all the rights of Scottish workers.

Of course the real reason was to get some cheap publicity and annoy the English.

(I've said English rather than English and Welsh as I don't know if it's a devolved area in Wales)

Actually they can. The so-called English Votes for English Laws is asymmetrical. A bill [proposed law] affecting English education, roads, health, etc is introduced into the House of Commons and voted on only by MPs representing English constituencies. If passed it is voted on by all MPs in the Commons, including ones representing Scotland. If the bill is defeated then it fails to become law. 

In the first instance above, if a majority of MPs representing English constituencies vote against such a bill then the bill goes no further. 

If you don't believe me look up the Lallans Peat Worrier blog, written by Andrew Tickell, a lecturer in constitutional law [at Glasgow Caledonian University I think], an SNP member, and a strong supporter of Scottish independence.

This is getting a long way from car parking charges.

They have to be emptied.

Those without tickets have (supposedly) to be given parking tickets.

Of course they can - they used to abstain, but, after instructions from the Chief Minister of the SCOTTISH Parliament, as head of the SNP, they now stick their noses in.

And in fact seem to do so in a manner that will cause the most annoyance - probably part of her plan for another referendum (and I'd much rather complete independence for the rest of us FROM Scotland if that's the sort of games she wants to play, and to hell with the majority of those living in Scotland who seem to want to stay in a united UK).

Anyway all this when I responded to someone who brought up as to how long before Westminster is blamed for the hike in parking charges in one location just north of Glasgow. Thankfully I have walked all over the are already, and hence have no desire to return to it in the near (or even distant) future.

Perhaps I'm wrong, but I get the distinct impression that you are unfamiliar with the area.

Here's the car park:
https://tinyurl.com/yce5rloc

It currently has one ticket machine, and is checked intermittently for non-payment, there isn't someone employed to sit there.

So that we're clear, you're saying that

"As for the £9 a day, I wouldn't mind betting that you need such a silly figure just to pay for the person collecting the money (or dishing out the tickets)" for this car park?

What odds are you proposing, and did you have a stake in mind?

Unusual. I've never known any hillgoer not to love it; I've certainly been up most of the Arrochar hills many times, walking and climbing.

Agreed. The Cobbler and Ben Lomond (Rowardennan car park £3 a day) are two of the busiest hills in Scotland and proximity to Glasgow is obviously a huge factor in that. But it is not just the Audi driving hillwalking middle classes that walk those hills - there is a greater diversity of people on these hills than probably anywhere else in the Highlands and it is pretty apparent that many are not affluent at all. This charge will seriously deter people from certain sectors of society.

Whatever people think about the rights and wrongs of the camping management zones in Loch Lomond & Trossachs National Park, the £3 a tent per night charge is a reflection of what costs that society can bear. There is no justification for such a rise other than blatant recouping lost council funding.

Aye,

Davie

FWIW, there are **already** parking ticket machines at both affected car parks thus one assumes someone already empties these and gives out tickets for the cars without tickets. 

Isn't complicated, just park up and don't pay.

It should really only deter people who want to drive and park right next to the start of the path.  From memory it wouldn't be hard to find somewhere to park on a road for free in Arrochar village. 

I can see the council's point of view when they are short of cash.  People who drive from Glasgow and park there are probably also bringing their own food and not spending any money in the local area.   The Cobbler and the other hills are that area's resource and they want to extract some revenue from visitors.   Whether £9 is a reasonable charge is a different question.  If the car park ends up empty they'll presumably reduce it.   The level could also be about making coming from Glasgow by car as expensive as coming by public transport to try and persuade more people to use the train.

I was on the West Highland way a few weeks ago and the £3 a tent thing looked to be pretty much theoretical for actual wild camping.  Someone told me they only have a couple of rangers for the whole park.  So unless you camp somewhere totally obvious such as lochside near a road they have no chance of catching you even if they wanted to (and my guess is they don't).    The thing that wasn't at all theoretical was the midges waiting outside the tent in the morning.

1. Well done on a complete over reaction to what I said. Also well done to the many others who have liked Webster calling me a smug prick for daring to suggest that people who drive themselves up to the Cobbler, on their own, in a private vehicle to perform some leisure activity are not prime candidates for subsidised parking.

2. Well done for lumping yourself in with those who may be in genuine need of help, "food in *our* mouths" my aunt fanny. People for whom removing £8 from their budget means going without food are not much minded about car park charges, as they are too busy worrying about paying the gas, leccy etc. They are not people with "interests outside of climbing" of"Rugby, Hockey, Squash, Skiing/Snowboarding" nor are they people who ruminate over which pair of £400 boots to buy for their hobby.

3. There are many who face barriers getting to enjoy the hills but car parking cost is the least of them, because by the time they rock up at the car park they will already have overcome enough obstacles (including probably not having a car). The bigger obstacles are a lack of education about the outdoors, or they are dependant on services in their locality or they have people dependant on them or they can't get away from their zero hours jobs because they might get called up at short notice, they can't afford the petrol to drive up in the first place. If you genuinely care you should be advocating fleecing the car owners of every penny and funnelling the money where its needed (which might well be what's happening).

4. Even if the car park is 30 - 40% full of the poor and needy, however you chose to define them, that still leaves the majority of users enjoying ludicrously cheap parking when they have no need. Which services do you thing A&B council should cut so they can provide parking here at below market value? Homeless services? Mental health? Social work? Maybe they should increase the parking charges elsewhere?

Whenever this topic crops up we get people advocating cheaper/free parking using the cover of the low income demograph to try and justify polices that they themselves are the main beneficiaries of. Its the same as hotels asking not to wash your towels to "protect the environment"!

Probably true. We also get weirdos jumping in saying how great it is that the landowner/authority/corporate body is making it harder and more expensive to go climbing or walking, or saying that because it's worse where they live, it's fine to make it worse for others too. It's like some sort of bizarre Stockholm Syndrome or something.

Cobblers!

Until the residents (rightly) complain, and restrictions are introduced there as well. 

Yes, that could happen but maybe if people were parking in the village they would spend some money in shops/cafes and the businesses  would be in favour of free parking.

I think what we are seeing is just a natural consequence of less central funding for the council forcing them to raise more money locally.  It's not a rich area and they are trying to make money from the main asset that they have (which is exactly what everybody else does).  It's the hill which is the attraction but when people drive up for a day trip and park next to the path all the money for the leisure activity is getting spent in Glasgow.  The fuel, the food, the gear for hillwalking all get bought in Glasgow.

The argument that parking to access the hills should be low cost or free because of the health benefits is not fair to the local council.   When there are cuts in central funding  it is not up to Argyll and Bute to forego revenue it needs for local services to benefit the health of people from Glasgow or tourists.    If there is to be subsidy for parking in hill walking areas to promote health then Glasgow (in the case of the Cobbler) or Holyrood should be underwriting it.   They aren't going to because they are skint too and they are skint because of Tory austerity.

I think there's also a wider issue that the whole drive-up-to the-highlands, walk-up-a-hill, drive-back day trip paradigm is probably past its sell by date even without higher parking charges.  There's too much driving and not enough walking, the fuel is too expensive and it's not environmentally friendly.   We need to swap it out for a 'take a few days off - go up to the highlands, ideally on public transport - walk a whole bunch of munros - come back' paradigm which will also have the side effect of  more money being spent in the highlands.

I'm too far away for a day trip, so most of our visits are weekend trips and hence involve spending lots of money locally on food, accommodation, and gear shopping. If I'm undecided about where to go and one option will cost the best part of an extra £20 just to park the car, then I'll go somewhere else and spend my money there instead.

completely wrong.   there are loads of people who can just afford to get out of doors and extra charges for parking are not an insignificant barrier  - they are just adding to what is already making it more difficult to get out

there is intrinsic smugness in your argument.  if you already have to struggle to run a car to get by then you will know that public transport as an extra is simply unaffordable - don't forget there are 2 types of older people, those who got bus passes at 60 and those who have to wait till SRA

This discussion isn't about 'older' people - is it?

However, since you mention 'older people', and since we're talking about Scotland: if you're resident in Scotland you still qualify for a bus pass at 60.

Where's this notion of there being a subsidy coming from?

A trip to the Highlands pretty much any day this summer would have shown that to be false.

Hell, I've been out for a hill walk mid week with colleagues every week this summer after work and it has been great. We've been in the Ochils several times, up Beinn Each, Ben Ledi, Meall nan Tarmachan and Ben Vrackie. The Cobbler was an option, but hasn't seemed the best choice so far and the light evenings are getting shorter now.

And we buy something locally quite often, be it drinks and snacks, fuel, or a takeaway dinner. I think that's pretty normal.

Pretty much the whole point of living here, for me at least, is that I can quickly and easily get out on the hills and crags. Take that away, and we might as well all live in London, make more money, and spend it on trips abroad.

The council - effectively the people who live there - have a resource i.e. the car park at the foot of a popular hill.   They are being asked not to extract the full economic value of that resource from the people who use it.    That's a subsidy to hillwalkers from the people who live in Argyll and Bute.   If they collected the maximum amount from the car park they could either have more council services or pay less council tax.

Only if the cost to the people of Argyll and Bute of maintaining the car park is greater than the income provided by the fees. Which judging by the state of the place the last time I was there is pretty unlikely - the most recent money that seemed to have been spent on it was the installation of the P&D meters a few years ago.

That isn't a subsidy, though. Unless, as Simon points out, it costs more to run than it takes. And you haven't factored in the loss to local businesses from lower levels of custom, which there will be, at least outside of peak times.

Most parking for the hills in the Highlands is free at point of use, of course (and often unmaintained).

Also, I'm curious as to where you have found free parking in the town, I'm not aware of it. Unless you mean the housing estate up the hill as you come in from the East - but parking there really isn't appropriate.

It depends how you define subsidy.  You are asking them to charge less than the market value - in my book that is a subsidy.  There's no reason a council should set their car parking fees to just break even if they aren't getting enough funding from other sources to maintain services.  It's like Edinburgh Council telling Edinburgh Leisure to set the charges for Ratho or the Commonwealth Pool at break even rather than market rate because they want to subsidise access to healthy leisure activities for the people of Edinburgh.    The difference in this case is that most of the people using the car park are not residents of Argyll and Bute.

If it was a landowner or a national body like the Forestry Commission trying to make a profit from car parking to access the hills I would have much more of a problem than when it is a council doing it for the benefit of the people who live locally. 

I'm no expert on parking in Arrochar, when I've been there I've used the train or bus. 

I'm not sure we get to redefine it as we please!

But you know what, I've said my piece and I'm done with this thread. Have fun arguing to make hillwalking and climbing less accessible, at least you're clear about yor stance!

That's not what I'm arguing.  I am arguing that the previous situation where Argyll and Bute got a decent grant from central government and didn't need to make money from parking charges was preferable.  Or they could get a grant from central government specifically to promote outdoor activities by subsidising parking.  But they shouldn't be asked to forgo money from parking when they are getting screwed by austerity policies.

Holy shit, that's even more expensive than Langdale. The greedy buggers. People will just park elsewhere.

Does anyone know whether the car park times are the same?  The old £1 per day was for 9am to 6pm (or something like that).  If you started early, you could be out of the car park by 9am.

I'm reminded that when the Creahdubh were putting up all those routes on the Cobbler they got the bus from Glasgow, possibly Friday night or Saturday morning, bivvied under various shelter stones in the corrie then got the bus back on Sunday evening.

The wider use of cars resulted in clubs going away more as the few people with cars shared them with those without. Hitch hiking was another option and in the seventies any time you passed Balloch roundabout there would be several people standing the the layby on the North side trying to get a lift up to the Highlands.

All of this has died out as cars have become ubiquitous and costs lower. If any of the old ways of getting to the hills had been more convenient then we'd still them.

I don't have a problem with the charge, it may be excessive, but the majority of hill users can pay the hourly rate and be down in 4/5 hours.

The charge should discourage solo car journeys. Reducing the environmental impact both in terms of Co2 emissions and air pollution on route . Split between 2 or more users the charge is manageable for most.

If people genuinely can't afford the charge then there is free parking close by in a few different locations. And lots of equally amazing hills close by with free parking.

Arrochar is extremely easy to get to by public transport, I have never had a problem with using bus or train in summer or winter, and have managed to do i think all the Munros that either side of whw between Glasgow and fort William by public transport.

I can't afford a car and have been greatful for lifts to the hills via a number of great clubs and meet up groups, maybe we need to go back to days of clubs organising bus trips to hills, or car sharing forums to reduce the cost and environmental impact of access.

Anyone up there this weekend and care to comment on how things were now that the new charges have kicked-in - main carpark empty, wee parking spot up the back rammed etc?

From the Mountaineering Scotland website -

"A fresh bid to overturn a massive 800 per cent increase in car parking charges at Arrochar will take place this week.  Two councillors have lodged a motion to be debated at Thursday’s full meeting of the Argyll & Bute Council calling for a £3 cap on parking charges at the two Glen Loin car parks, currently the favoured parking option for walkers and climbers heading for The Cobbler or the other Arrochar Alps."

Full story here  https://www.mountaineering.scot/news/challenge-to-800-per-cent-parking-incr...

Lets hope Councillors Paterson and Douglas are successful.

Disappointing news - councillors Paterson and Douglas were unsuccessful.

The Tory/LibDem Council at Argyll & Bute voted to retain the £9 daily charge at yesterdays meeting.

ta for the updates.

For me that takes that off the list solo day trips from Edinburgh (in the general case). I'd be ok with 3-5 pounds. The train is too expensive (37 - 64 pounds currently for tomorrow) to make a last minute decision on destination which is how I like to play it in the UK in general. It's also very restrictive if you like to leave early and is slower. Also you need to leave a lot of time spare in case you are late of the hill. For me its a long way from ideal.

Shame. 

I imagine the locals in Arrochar will soon be fed up with people parking in areas other than the £9 car park.

Out of interest is Argyll & Bute one of these councils that seem to be closing all the public toilets like North Ayrshire?

Disappointing.

Tory/Lib Dem combination... that’s never worked out well.

Very high charge for parking. Ive just been in France for 2 weeks and was pleased to find numerous car parks created at crags specifically for climbers to use, all free, also information boards and sometimes even topo notices  provided by the French Alpine club.

I will certainly avoid the Cobbler car parks now, how long till they start with ticket machines in Glen Coe? 

I was about to suggest other places to park but thought better of it. Certainly if I turned up at that car park and saw the charge I'd leave without hesitation.

Every council has to make cuts because they're being given less money while their costs are rising. Are they, for example, expected to give their employees no pay rise this year? The same sort of process is happening in Edinburgh where there is a £28 million shortfall. Infuriatingly Edinburgh could have plugged this gap with a tourist tax but up until now have been forbidden to do so. I now hear that it might be possible to introduce something in about a year's time...

My take on this is that central government are effectively raising taxes for ordinary people but forcing councils to take the flak for it. In the past few years Scotland's block grant has reduced by 1.8% while funding for councils has reduced in the same period by 7.1%.

Anyone know if new charges are in force? Presumably new machines have to be installed?

Yes the charges are in force. Old machines covered up and new ones installed  

We had to pay the full 9 quid in September as we couldn't guesstimate how long our walk would take and didn't fancy getting a ticket if we guessed wrong. 

Thanks for that. Going up probably tomorrow but will park up Rest a bit... if there's any room!

Did you notice whether the car park looked any less busy than on previous occasions?

Seemed fairly busy so I think most folks are just paying the increased rates.

Sadly, I didn't have any choice as I was leading a walk as a volunteer and as the route etc was published in advance I couldn't change it.

I'll be parking elsewhere and walking a bit further in future if I climb or walk in that area again as I object deeply to such ridiculous charges. 

Gorilla

glue

Vandal!

Swap the machine covers

Car park pretty full.... I'm sorry to say. Does this mean Argyll and Bute Council gauged the price rise correctly?

I’ve been parking at Ardgarten, still no cost and has toilets. Adds an extra mile or two if heading up the Cobbler path. 

Errrr hang on , I should be able to park where I want !!!!  I work all week,  pay my taxes , no benefits, no kids , never claimed a penny  - I just want to be able to park without funding some counsil cretins new desires  !   A car park costs nothing - then it's first come first served !   Simple 

Anyone who thinks otherwise is clearly an asshole 

Shhhhhh!!!! Keep quiet!

Largely agree but I'd have stopped at 'pay my taxes'. "no benefits, no kids , never claimed a penny" doesn't mean anything and implies these people are undeserving... I apologise if that was not your intention but such people are indeed deserving.