|
|
Post by WH241 on Feb 4, 2023 9:56:28 GMT
Maybe I am missing something here but are most cars not already compliant? I think the ULEZ will hit diesel car owners more? but even those with modern cars that use AdBlue are compliant.
I know the scheme will affect people who live outside of the existing and expanded zone who travel in but again how many will have older cars? My older banger is over 15 years old and can be used. I think the most affected are businesses with vans and lorries and more help should be provided to them.
|
|
|
|
Post by SILENCED on Feb 4, 2023 10:04:51 GMT
How would you establish a genuine need though? Places like Beckton Tesco are built almost exclusively for car users who do big weekly shops and would be useless if people stopped using cars. The focus really should be on widening roads where possible to alleviate traffic. People are more likely to just move out of London, and not work in London should you make it hard to drive around. Cars play a massive part in the economy of the city and restricting them even more would do a lot more damage than good. Please give an example where widening roads has successfully worked anywhere. In the USA they've tried it plenty of times on their own roads and traffic has only ever worsened. Ultimately by building more lanes, you're creating induced demand.
Give me evidence of this 'induced demand'. Fable or fact? Induced demand and traffic evaporation are the two baseless buzzwords used by the anti motoring lobby. Widening the M25 has made it far better than it was. A3 tunnel. Dartford bridge is an effective widening. When was there really a coordinated joined-up road widening policy in London to know whether it works, or whether these often spouted ideaes as to why it would not work are fables and convieient conspiracy theories or not. Even if thing have stayed the same over past 30 years, that is in no part due to London's population growth, without them things would be much worse, not an induced demand ... building great big vertical buildings in areas where the infrastructure, not just roads, is creeking, is not the answer |
|
|
|
Post by Eastlondoner62 on Feb 4, 2023 10:11:34 GMT
How would you establish a genuine need though? Places like Beckton Tesco are built almost exclusively for car users who do big weekly shops and would be useless if people stopped using cars. The focus really should be on widening roads where possible to alleviate traffic. People are more likely to just move out of London, and not work in London should you make it hard to drive around. Cars play a massive part in the economy of the city and restricting them even more would do a lot more damage than good. Please give an example where widening roads has successfully worked anywhere. In the USA they've tried it plenty of times on their own roads and traffic has only ever worsened. Ultimately by building more lanes, you're creating induced demand.
It does improve safety however, it's only meant to be a short term solution to enable people to travel in their cars without congestion while a more sustainable long term plan is thought of. If removing cars were the answer it'd have been done by now. |
|
|
|
Post by SILENCED on Feb 4, 2023 10:18:18 GMT
Maybe I am missing something here but are most cars not already compliant? I think the ULEZ will hit diesel car owners more? but even those with modern cars that use AdBlue are compliant. I know the scheme will affect people who live outside of the existing and expanded zone who travel in but again how many will have older cars? My older banger is over 15 years old and can be used. I think the most affected are businesses with vans and lorries and more help should be provided to them. Big issue is a lot of the older petrol cars do not have their Euro emissions recorded by the DVLA, which seem to be coming up as compliant by default, when they are not. If the DVLA ever decide to update the missing info, cars that are currently 'compliant' could become non-compliant overnight. |
|
|
|
Post by Eastlondoner62 on Feb 4, 2023 10:23:37 GMT
Maybe I am missing something here but are most cars not already compliant? I think the ULEZ will hit diesel car owners more? but even those with modern cars that use AdBlue are compliant. I know the scheme will affect people who live outside of the existing and expanded zone who travel in but again how many will have older cars? My older banger is over 15 years old and can be used. I think the most affected are businesses with vans and lorries and more help should be provided to them. Big issue is a lot of the older petrol cars do not have their Euro emissions recorded by the DVLA, which seem to be coming up as compliant by default, when they are not. If the DVLA ever decide to update the missing info, cars that are currently 'compliant' could become non-compliant overnight. I'm a bit surprised by that, but it would explain why there's a lot of 2005 cars showing up as compliant when it's really only the back end of 2005 (55reg)+ where Euro4 kicked in. |
|
|
|
Post by SILENCED on Feb 4, 2023 10:32:50 GMT
Big issue is a lot of the older petrol cars do not have their Euro emissions recorded by the DVLA, which seem to be coming up as compliant by default, when they are not. If the DVLA ever decide to update the missing info, cars that are currently 'compliant' could become non-compliant overnight. I'm a bit surprised by that, but it would explain why there's a lot of 2005 cars showing up as compliant when it's really only the back end of 2005 (55reg)+ where Euro4 kicked in. I know of people with 02 & 04 reg cars that come up as compliant, when they are not. If the current vehicle checker say these cars are compliant, but they get issued fines, it could go very badly for the mayor. |
|
|
|
Post by M1104 on Feb 4, 2023 10:34:53 GMT
Maybe I am missing something here but are most cars not already compliant? I think the ULEZ will hit diesel car owners more? but even those with modern cars that use AdBlue are compliant. I know the scheme will affect people who live outside of the existing and expanded zone who travel in but again how many will have older cars? My older banger is over 15 years old and can be used. I think the most affected are businesses with vans and lorries and more help should be provided to them. Big issue is a lot of the older petrol cars do not have their Euro emissions recorded by the DVLA, which seem to be coming up as compliant by default, when they are not. If the DVLA ever decide to update the missing info, cars that are currently 'compliant' could become non-compliant overnight. Hope that wouldn't mean a backlog of charges drummed up for the owner. After all it wouldn't be their fault, particularly if they had the car from before the start of the congestion charge and ULEZ |
|
|
|
Post by SILENCED on Feb 4, 2023 10:37:37 GMT
Big issue is a lot of the older petrol cars do not have their Euro emissions recorded by the DVLA, which seem to be coming up as compliant by default, when they are not. If the DVLA ever decide to update the missing info, cars that are currently 'compliant' could become non-compliant overnight. Hope that wouldn't mean a backlog of charges owed for the owner. After all it wouldn't be their fault, particularly if they had the car from before the start of the congestion charge and ULEZ I would not put past the current regime. The other option is the coding behing the vehicle checker and the ULEZ system is different, and they are correctly non-compliant from day 1. |
|
|
|
Post by M1104 on Feb 4, 2023 10:46:26 GMT
Big issue is a lot of the older petrol cars do not have their Euro emissions recorded by the DVLA, which seem to be coming up as compliant by default, when they are not. If the DVLA ever decide to update the missing info, cars that are currently 'compliant' could become non-compliant overnight. I'm a bit surprised by that, but it would explain why there's a lot of 2005 cars showing up as compliant when it's really only the back end of 2005 (55reg)+ where Euro4 kicked in. Could also depend on the manufacturers as one or two may have introduced their lower emission variants at least one plate earlier. |
|
|
|
Post by SILENCED on Feb 4, 2023 10:46:55 GMT
Big issue is a lot of the older petrol cars do not have their Euro emissions recorded by the DVLA, which seem to be coming up as compliant by default, when they are not. If the DVLA ever decide to update the missing info, cars that are currently 'compliant' could become non-compliant overnight. I'm a bit surprised by that, but it would explain why there's a lot of 2005 cars showing up as compliant when it's really only the back end of 2005 (55reg)+ where Euro4 kicked in. If you know of any specfic cars you think should be non-compliant but are coming up compliant in the vehicle checker, investigate and see if it is the case. |
|
|
|
Post by WH241 on Feb 4, 2023 11:53:21 GMT
Maybe I am missing something here but are most cars not already compliant? I think the ULEZ will hit diesel car owners more? but even those with modern cars that use AdBlue are compliant. I know the scheme will affect people who live outside of the existing and expanded zone who travel in but again how many will have older cars? My older banger is over 15 years old and can be used. I think the most affected are businesses with vans and lorries and more help should be provided to them. Big issue is a lot of the older petrol cars do not have their Euro emissions recorded by the DVLA, which seem to be coming up as compliant by default, when they are not. If the DVLA ever decide to update the missing info, cars that are currently 'compliant' could become non-compliant overnight. That explains why I still see 2002 - 2003 cars inside the zone. |
|
|
|
Post by vjaska on Feb 4, 2023 12:40:55 GMT
What is your evidence that it wouldn't baring in mind, the Congestion Charge is a watered down version of it that only affects a small area and charges far less than it probably should? Like I said, a road pricing scheme can be tailored to give discounts for those who work or have a genuine need to use a car and for those who don't, cough up if you want to use it otherwise the roads will eventually grind to a halt whether you like it or not. There's still been lots of traffic on inner London roads despite ULEZ though? What's to say that expanding it to everywhere within London is a good idea? Traffic levels are surely lower in outer London, and yes there's hotspots like Southall but how is it going to help people who live in outer London and have a need to use the car because of poor public transport connections Because it hasn’t been done properly. Outer London traffic levels aren’t necessarily lower especially as car ownership is higher there than Inner London where most borough’s have low car ownership with the congestion caused by people who don’t live in those borough. Outer London is to receive several transport schemes in conjunction with the ULEZ. |
|
|
|
Post by Eastlondoner62 on Feb 4, 2023 12:45:03 GMT
There's still been lots of traffic on inner London roads despite ULEZ though? What's to say that expanding it to everywhere within London is a good idea? Traffic levels are surely lower in outer London, and yes there's hotspots like Southall but how is it going to help people who live in outer London and have a need to use the car because of poor public transport connections Because it hasn’t been done properly. Outer London traffic levels aren’t necessarily lower especially as car ownership is higher there than Inner London where most borough’s have low car ownership with the congestion caused by people who don’t live in those borough. Outer London is to receive several transport schemes in conjunction with the ULEZ. But where are these schemes? The ULEZ is kicking in later this year and barely any of these schemes exist. Half of Barking and Dagenham doesn't even have a proper night service nor is within any reasonable waking distance to stations, there's not even any night tube here. It's very hard to manage without a car in a lot of these parts. |
|
|
|
Post by COBO on Feb 5, 2023 13:15:03 GMT
The thing I don’t get about ulez and I’ve been thinking long and hard about it and that is I’m guessing is the whole point or one of the points of it is to get people out of there cars or to reduce amount of gas guzzling cars off the road. So if that’s the case wouldn’t you improve the transport network like creating new links and make more transport more frequent before introducing it or even increasing the amount cycle lanes or creating more cycle highways. So if Sadiq doesn’t have the money to improve his transport network ie TfL how is he going to achieve the goal of stopping people using their cars.
|
|
|
|
Post by northlondon83 on Feb 5, 2023 15:21:42 GMT
The thing I don’t get about ulez and I’ve been thinking long and hard about it and that is I’m guessing is the whole point or one of the points of it is to get people out of there cars or to reduce amount of gas guzzling cars off the road. So if that’s the case wouldn’t you improve the transport network like creating new links and make more transport more frequent before introducing it or even increasing the amount cycle lanes or creating more cycle highways. So if Sadiq doesn’t have the money to improve his transport network ie TfL how is he going to achieve the goal of stopping people using their cars. Neither of these are going to work because: 1. Tfl doesn't have as much money due to the impact of Covid-19, hence why they planned to withdraw several routes and cut many others too, rather than increasing links we're seeing decreasing links because of this like the removal of all weekend night services 2. Increasing the amount of cycle lanes or creating more cycle highways is a bad idea because they will actually increase traffic. Chiswick High Road is mental now because of the cycle lanes there. Besides many people do not use the cycle lanes |
|
