Mayor plans to introduce Ultra Low Emission Zone in April 2019

sadiq
air-quality
#1

Diesel-chugging, often-idling black cabs will be exempt. Looks like lobbying works a treat on Sadiq Khan.

Except when lobbyists are trying to protect London’s historic woodland and green spaces.

3 Likes
Extension of ULEZ to South Circular in Oct 2021
#2

I do not think it is true to say that they are exempt. All newly licensed vehicles will have to comply and there is a pre-existing 15 year age limit anyway:

With the incentives to scrap the older ones, the diesel-chugger days are numbered.

#3

With respect, your linked article was from the Boris era, and it appears Boris planned to treat black cabs the same as other vehicles.

However, from Sadiq’s announcement linked in my OP:

#4

So my bunny hugging, kitten kissing, tree hugging diesel of three years old that was tax exempt is now not and I will have to pay for it to come to into London. However if I buy a classic 5.0 I can dive it like I stole it. Wierd.

#5

Not sure Sadiq plans to extend the ULEZ to Norfolk :wink:

If our pint-sized mayor can’t stand up to a few taxi drivers, I don’t think he stands a chance vs thousands of angry farmers!

#6

Zoe will be driving down once a week. Sadly fully compliant Euro 6 cars are rare, have a limited range and are bloody expensive.

#7

You might want to have a look at this: https://www.london.gov.uk/press-releases/mayoral/new-era-for-londons-taxi-and-private-hire-trades

The action plan means that older cabs are being encouraged to be scrapped and no new diesel cabs will be licenced from next year. I think this is one of the things that the cabbies keep demonstrating about. I got a cab home a couple of months ago and the cabbie told me (at great length) about the amount he had to pay for a new cab recently.

The zero emissions ranks are going to be interesting.

1 Like
#8

Definitely worth people checking how their vehicle fairs against the new plans. Pre 2001 automatically attracts the £10 charge. If and when expanded to the A205 and A406, I can see a LOT of people getting caught up paying the extra fees.

I love the idea of cleaner air, but hate the idea of people being forced out of cars which they rely on.

Sounds so idyllic, but in reality is going to be hell. IF he remains in til 2021.

#9

I like this bit…

If you live in the area, but in some peoples opinions “don’t care enough” to get a cleaner car… You get a discount. So locals can pollute their own area for just £1 a day. Bargain!

Discounts and exemptions

If you live in the Congestion Charge zone and your vehicle is registered for a Residents’ Discount you will receive a 90% discount, meaning you pay £1 per day for the T-Charge

OR

London licensed Taxis and Private Hire Vehicles (exempt)

Didn’t see that coming now did we!

#10

From a quick look at this today @anon64893700, expansion of the ULEZ beyond the current congestion charging zone seems to have been dropped from Sadiq’s plans. I don’t know if this is because the assessments show that the legal limits can be met in a reasonable timescale with just this, or if it is a genuine weakening of his proposals.

It’s worth remembering that this isn’t just about cleaner air for the sake of cleaner air, there are thousands of lives prematurely lost each year in London because of air pollution. It also permanently compromises children’s lung development and has a big cost to the economy. Given how many car journeys in London could easily be walked or cycled instead, and how many are of questionable necessity, I’m all for measures to get people out of their cars or at least into cleaner ones. Including cabbies.

2 Likes
#11

Ironically, this week is a great example of unnecessary journeys. With the schools off, at school run time, the roads are empty. I realise this is partially due to parents taking time off work. But there is no ignoring the thousands of short school run journeys done daily, resulting in idling cars sitting right outside school.

Food for thought

1 Like
#12

Short school runs are one thing. Idling while waiting is something else.

We gave up with the 122 because of the number of times my daughter would wait for it, only to see it go by without stopping because it was full.

#13

I completely agree about the school run being problematic. Across Forest Hill, Sydenham and Perry Vale wards, 26% of children are driven to primary school according to the latest available data. That’s up to 3,500 trips every morning and afternoon. The visible difference between traffic levels during term time and holidays is further evidence of this.

To resolve this we need to provide safe routes for children to walk and cycle to school. I quite like this idea, but maybe it is a bit extreme:

3 Likes
#14

Completely agreed about this bit. We rarely drive the school run but this would help a lot I think. The ULEZ, if extended to here, would help some too as you can really notice the pollution at street level on Brockley Rise for instance.

#15

What about introducing a school bus run?

1 Like
#16

How exactly does us fighting our way through traffic make parents “lazy”??? (I realise you’re only posting the story, @brencud - my comment is directed at the article!)

#17

Cars idling outside schools and parked on zigzags is one of my personal pet hates (pretty sure I have posted about this before). It’s like ‘oh the air in London isn’t bad enough, so I’ll sit in my car with the engine running so the kids can breathe in more fumes as they walk past, and if I see the parking warden coming I can pretend I wasn’t really parking at all’.
There should be on the spot fines!

Actually, I wonder if people realise it’s now illegal to use your mobile phone in a car unless you are parked with engine off? Most of the people I see in the idling cars are looking at their phones. Maybe that would deter people.

Recently a traffic warden has been coming to our school at pick-up time and had a busy time issuing tickets. It’s amazing how people seem to think remonstrating ‘I was only stopped on the double yellows / zigzags for a minute while I picked up my child!’ will make the parking warden change their mind!

As for encouraging more walking to school - one thing that would make a difference is safer crossings, . The new pedestrian crossings at the bottom of Brockley Rise are helpful, but Cranston Road is a nightmare to cross especially at the junction with Woolstone Road. Cars drive much too fast down it. Often parents are nervous about letting older children walk to school by themselves because of the roads.

4 Likes
#18

No longer a parent of school age children I am confused, so much press is attributed to catchment areas only 10 feet from the school gates (exaggeration) but seriously if this is becoming a factor, surely driving to school is not required.Save in situations whereby a school preference is outside the normal area?

1 Like
#19

Crossing Perry Vale by the shops (Siddons Road) is a nightmare and whilst there is an island it is quite scary with a pushchair to squeeze in when a bus or lorry wooshes by. There is a road narrowing opposite the old fire station but it is too close to the roundabout to be safe. If there was a need for a zebra/ light controlled crossing this is where it is needed.

#20

Actually not. The proposal will be subject to a consultation later in this year.

Clearly, bisecting SE23 is a major issue for this forum. Personally, I have 3 non-compliant vehicles (all petrol) and therefore am highly aggrieved that trips to Honor Oak, Dulwich or Peckham will now potentially attract a £12.50 fee because Volkswagen cheated and most vehicles permitted in the Congestion Charging Zone are diesel public service vehicles. I’m not a rich man and won’t be able to afford to upgrade my fleet to newer petrol vehicles.

I’m also annoyed because it includes motorcycles which are almost exclusively petrol. This will cost me a lot of money and will have no benefit to air quality in London by TfL’s own modelling (which excludes updated post-diesel-gate figures).

However, a wider concern will be a) the proliferation of signs required on the South Circular and other pieces of enforcement infrastructure like cameras and b) the fact that delivery vehicles will need to upgrade to almost brand new vehicles driving up the cost of deliveries and business. If anyone has ever looked at the cost of commercial vehicles, they’ll know that they aren’t cheap and businesses will either be forced to buy new fleet or close down.

The politics of this are also bonkers, with Labour-voting Inner London getting hammered a year after a Mayoral election, but that’s surely something for Politicos…

3 Likes