Extension of ULEZ to South Circular in Oct 2021


split this topic #21

4 posts were merged into an existing topic: Lewisham Gateway development


The EU directive that brought in level 4 applied to vehicles made in 2005 and later, so if you have a Petrol car that is newer than that, I think it would be ok, although obviously better to check on the tfl site. My car is 17 years old so I paid £21.50 to drive across London to get home for Christmas. I was planning to replace it this year anyway, but I do think it’s a big purchase for people to have to consider if they weren’t planning to. I will look at the consultation though, because I would be affected if traffic was displaced south of the south circular.


One other thought - if the South Circular is a hard boundary I assume this would also have noticeable effects on local parking? The roads to the north of SC would probably see a noticeable reduction in parking while those to the South could become overwhelmed with parked cars from both (i) local residents who wish to park outside the ULEZ and (ii) people using Forest Hill station.


I am mostly against the extension of this so called “clean air zone”. My main reasons are that it fails to target the main polluters - Diesel engined taxis, buses, light trucks and HGVs. These vehicles create 70% of the particulate air pollution which London suffers from and yet they have not been taken off the road or made prohibitively expensive to use inside Greater London. It therefore means that the actual proposed extension of the zone is simply a tool to increase tax revenue on motorists, especially the poorer ones who drive older cars. Older cars are already subject to much higher rates of road tax than newer vehicles and therefore I don’t see the need to do this. Bizarrely, my 2000 BMW is exempt from the charge as it falls within Euro 4 for emissions. I use my car perhaps 3 times a week so it’s not a huge issue for me, but for someone with an elderly parent, or with multiple children with activities at different locations, it’s likely to be. Most people can’t afford to replace a vehicle on a whim and ditching it to go via cab or some other means of transport might just not be feasible. I still think that the emphasis is incorrect and that ALL diesel vehicles should be banned from London, buses should be hybrid, as should cabs and light delivery trucks. HGVs shouldn’t be allowed into London but should deliver at hubs just outside and smaller hybrid trucks could then take cargos into the city. Or freight could come in by train. But that is all dependent on whether or not the mayor really wants to tackle air pollution or simply wants extra revenue from motorists.


By the time this comes into force I would expect a very small number of Londoners who regularly use their cars will not have changed to new vehicles. The worst impacted are likely to be elderly people with low disposable income and older vehicles and poorer people who cannot afford the capital outlay for a newer replacement vehicle. For these people the cost of driving will be another additional cost, but I expect the government will also see them as easier to force onto public transport than wealthy people.

I don’t imagine it will make much difference to parking within the zone, as most regular car users and commuters will be able to upgrade. But some people who don’t regularly use their vehicles will prefer to park just outside the zone rather than just inside the zone. So expect less parking places on roads like Thorpewood Avenue and Westbourne Drive. And a new demand for CPZs as a result of this shift in parking patterns around the boundary.

It will be interesting to predict the impact on traffic, particularly around the school run. But any impact is likely to be relatively short-term and most people close to the boundary will upgrade in a few years. But I wonder if the GLA might be tempted to move the goal posts every few years. How long before my 07 reg finds itself too polluting to continue on the streets?

I’m also interested to know how many cameras will be needed. What would happen if I lived in Honor Oak and drove to East Dulwich - would there be enough cameras to catch me? Perhaps I could avoid being caught by sticking to back streets and not using main roads. But then I guess most taxes can be avoided somehow.


Taxis exemption is a shame; they should be forced to upgrade to hybrid or electric.

A shame also it doesn’t cover the Circular - I personally answered for it to be covered.

I sympathize with old cars owners but there are really awful cars on the road, and a rare circulation is a poor excuse.


@faultythinking’s reference to the BBC article is welcome.

It demonstrates how difficult it is to get accurate emissions info on vehicles on a make by make or model by model basis.

It is common knowledge that VW of installed software known as a “defeat device” in 4-cylinder vehicles to defeat tests conducted in laboratory conditions. But virtually nothing is known about what other manufacturers did or did not do.

This has resulted in a myriad of statements made about vehicles - and about which it is impossible to verify accuracy or otherwise eg one published report stated that a modern VW Golf has a higher level of emission than a 40-foot articulated lorry - could that be accurate or true ?.

So what data will regulators act upon - those data published in the glossy handbooks or real-time data measured and verified by independent testing ?


Not sure but arent taxis meant to be zero emissions by 2020 with grants to help with cost? I believe there is also a commitment to have another 300 charging stations in London.


Not quite - all new taxis licenced from 2018 have to be zero emission capable and it’ll take up to 15 years the naturally cycle the fleet.

Whether or not they are used in full zero emission mode will depend on how busy the taxi is that day, and availability to recharge - so I guess the busy ones will continue to be running an engine more often than not.


Then it should be people power that chooses to use ‘green’ taxis and that will drive change quicker thsn anything!


Wouldn’t it be nice if we had a marketplace for customers and drivers where EVs and hybrids could be hailed by a tap on your smartphone, with journeys costing less than diesel cabs? People power… imagine that…


SE23 already suffers more than its fair share of slow-moving and heavy-polluting traffic on the stretch of the Sth Circ running from Sydenham Hill to Blythe Vale.

This proposed extension to the ULEZ will move the higher-polluting vehicles from the smarl-ups on Honor Oak Road, Honor Oak Park and Brockey Rise, as well as untold other car journeys that would normally use roads up to 1/2 a mile inside the proposed zone.

So how slow would the traffic on the Sth Circ be running then?

Given also that a high proprtion of that traffic will be the most-polluting vehicles trying to avoid the ULEZ charge, how high will the levels of pollution be for the people living alongside the Sth Circ and peripheral ‘feeder’ roads like Sydenam Hill, Dartmouth Road, Perry Vale, Westbourne Drive, Sunderland Road and Cranston Road etc?

They need to rethink their strategy because the situation re the SE23 section of the Sth Circ is already severely blighted by high levels of slow-moving traffic and its pollutants; and this proposal will only exacerbate an already unsustainable problem.


When we were in Montreal this summer we were huge fans of Teo Taxis… a fully electrical fleet. Was my first chance to ride a Tesla.



Sorry it will never catch on but its an über idea!


I think it might be bad for local traders especially Sainsburys. It will be £12.50 cheaper for those of us with older cars south of the South Circular to go to Bell Green and 2 miles further, we will take our weekly big shops away from the local one. It will stop many people from parking in the Sainsburys car park and then shopping on the high street.

The most polluting cars have no trade-in value such as Volkswagen diesels but are generally pretty reliable so I can see many people being pragmatic rather than idealistic and just running the cars till they scrap them rather than buying a new car before the change.


Great idea! then they could develop the old Gas holders to provide more choice, maybe even build an Aldi there :joy:


Although a lot of us who shop at the London Road Sainsburys walk there and back or call in on our way home from work. It is a medium size convenience store rather than a place for a big weekly shop. Remember a good percentage of Londoners do not own a car.


I live local so like you I mainly walk there as it takes less time than driving and I want the exercise but with a family it makes sense to occasionally drive to do the big shop. I lived in London without a car for 15 years so was one of that large percentage who decide not to bother as it is not worth the hassle unless your life changes. I think Sainsburys see itself as medium sized supermarket rather than a convenience store which is why they have a large car park and two lifts. I use it as both so it suits most people in the area whether in small or large households.


Fair enough. I tend to do the big shop online or at Denmark Hill Sainsbury’s as I find the Forest Hill one has a limited range.

I don’t think the ULEZ will really affect them that much.


Simply as a point of clarification, the car park is run by Lewisham Council and not Sainsburys.