London ULEZ, Bristol CAZ and Wales 20 mph pushbacks

[geoffk]

Wales' 20mph speed limit: Bus route cuts considered

Arriva Buses Wales says lowering the default speed limit has led to an "impact on punctuality".

www.bbc.co.uk

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-wales-6716254

Just received this.

"Some bus routes could be cut or altered as a result of the introduction of Wales' 20mph speed limit. Arriva Buses Wales said the new limit had led to an "impact on punctuality", with other possible changes including cutting some stops from certain routes." Surely the Welsh Govt must have expected this to happen.

 

[Bletchleyite]

Surely the Welsh Govt must have expected this to happen.

If bus companies persist with boarding and ticket sales processes that often take upward of a minute per passenger, they should perhaps stop throwing stones inside their greenhouse before whining about a road safety measure.

 

[geoffk]

If bus companies persist with boarding and ticket sales processes that often take upward of a minute per passenger, they should perhaps stop throwing stones inside their greenhouse before whining about a road safety measure.

That's a fair point. Even with greatly reduced cash handling, boarding times where I live are often very slow. Add in students who don't know their way around. Dual door buses with centre exit would help.....

 

[johncrossley]

Wales' 20mph speed limit: Bus route cuts considered

Arriva Buses Wales says lowering the default speed limit has led to an "impact on punctuality".

www.bbc.co.uk

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-wales-6716254

Just received this.

"Some bus routes could be cut or altered as a result of the introduction of Wales' 20mph speed limit. Arriva Buses Wales said the new limit had led to an "impact on punctuality", with other possible changes including cutting some stops from certain routes." Surely the Welsh Govt must have expected this to happen.

They may just be making cuts anyway and the new speed limit is a convenient excuse. Presumably drivers are not taking much notice of the speed limit anyway.

 

[Krokodil]

Presumably drivers are not taking much notice of the speed limit anyway.

Bus drivers certainly are, as is anyone else with some kind of black box fitted (Tesco deliveries for example).

 

[johncrossley]

Bus drivers certainly are, as is anyone else with some kind of black box fitted (Tesco deliveries for example).

It may depend on the operator. I've recently been on some buses in Surrey where the driver was blatantly ignoring 30 mph speed limits and was basically driving the bus the way many people drive a car, that is as fast as possible until they reach the vehicle in front. Even TfL buses don't always stick to the limit, where you would expect speed limiters to be in use.

 

[Krokodil]

It may depend on the operator. I've recently been on some buses in Surrey where the driver was blatantly ignoring 30 mph speed limits and was basically driving the bus the way many people drive a car, that is as fast as possible until they reach the vehicle in front. Even TfL buses don't always stick to the limit, where you would expect speed limiters to be in use.

Arriva drivers have certainly been sticking to it.

 

[DC1989]

I note that it doesn't tell us what that impact actually was! Terrible journalism from the BBC (As usual)

 

[deltic]

TfL have just published its first month report on ULEZ expansion - https://www.london.gov.uk/programme...de-ultra-low-emission-zone-first-month-report - key findings are as follows

A larger proportion of vehicles seen driving in London are cleaner. The London-wide compliance rate for vehicles subject to the ULEZ standards during the first month was 95.3 per cent, up from 91.6 per cent in June 2023 and 39 per cent in February 2017 when changes associated with the ULEZ began.

Compliance rates have increased for both cars and vans. 96.4 per cent of cars and 86.2 per cent of vans seen driving in the London-wide ULEZ met the standards in the first month of operation, up from 93 and 80.2 per cent in June 2023 and 44 and 12 per cent in February 2017.

There are fewer older, more polluting cars seen driving in the zone. On an average day, there were 77,000 fewer unique non-compliant vehicles (i.e., individual vehicles detected travelling in the zone at least once) seen detected in the London-wide ULEZ compared to June 2023. This is a 45 per cent reduction in non-compliant vehicles.

There has also been an overall reduction in vehicles seen driving in the zone. On an average day, there were 48,000 fewer unique vehicles driving each day in the London-wide ULEZ compared to June 2023. This is a two per cent reduction, although it will take more time for traffic patterns post launch to fully emerge. Preliminary analysis of traffic flows indicates there have been no notable changes across London or on the London-wide ULEZ boundary. However, it is too early to draw firm conclusions and monitoring will continue in the coming months.

In the expanded outer London area, vehicle compliance has increased by 10 percentage points since the launch of the consultation to expand the ULEZ London-wide. Vehicle compliance in the expanded outer London area is now 95.2 per cent, up from 85.1 per cent in May 2022 when the consultation on proposals to expand the ULEZ London-wide launched, and from 90.9 per cent in June 2023.

The London-wide ULEZ has closed the compliance gap between outer London and inner and central London. After just one month of the London-wide ULEZ operating, compliance rates for vehicles using London’s roads are now nearly the same across all areas of London for each vehicle type. Overall vehicle compliance in the expanded outer London area is now 95.2 per cent, compared to 95.9 per cent in inner London the same month.

In outer London, well over nine in ten cars now meet the ULEZ standards. Car compliance in the expanded outer London area is 96.4 per cent, up from 92.4 per cent in June 2023 and 90 per cent in November 2022 when the Mayor announced the decision to expand the ULEZ London-wide. Van compliance in the outer London area was 86.2 per cent, up from 79.5 per cent in June 2023 and 77.8 per cent in November 2022.

High levels of compliance mean only a small proportion of vehicles paid the charge. On an average day, of all ULEZ vehicles seen driving in London, only 2.9 per cent pay the charge, 1.7 per cent are non-chargeable (including those registered for a discount or exemption), and 0.2 per cent are issued with a warning notice or, from 26 September, a penalty charge notice. The rest meet the ULEZ standards.

 

[Krokodil]

All the talk of civil disobedience was rather overblown then. Confined to a handful of cranks.

 

[greyman42]

TfL have just published its first month report on ULEZ expansion - https://www.london.gov.uk/programme...de-ultra-low-emission-zone-first-month-report - key findings are as follows

What has happened to the £26 million that it has generated in the first month? Sounds like nothing more than a tax grab to me.

 

[jon81uk]

What has happened to the £26 million that it has generated in the first month? Sounds like nothing more than a tax grab to me.

It apparently cost around £60million to install the cameras and signage. Therefore most of the income will be paying for the infrastructure at present.

Then going forward the 3.1% of vehicles paying the charge or the penalty will get lower as more older cars are removed.

 

[deltic]

What has happened to the £26 million that it has generated in the first month? Sounds like nothing more than a tax grab to me.

Not sure where the £26m figure comes from, The Telegraph reports £12m based on the additional numbers paying the charge. Around 10% of that will cover the cost of administering the scheme so just under £11m will flow into TfL coffers which will help offset the large subsidy to motorists that TfL has to cover.

 

[The Ham]

What has happened to the £26 million that it has generated in the first month? Sounds like nothing more than a tax grab to me.

TfL have a budget of £8bn, of which £5.25bn is from passengers, as such passengers find the majority of TfL costs. However, car drivers massively benefit from TfL providing public transport.

On a side note, when Londoners pay VED the vast majority of which isn't spent on roads in London - if you really wish to complain about a tax grab that's probably a bigger (£500 million) one to highlight. It's been said that if they could retain the whole figure they could run the buses for free as well fund their streets section.

 

[RT4038]

T

On a side note, when Londoners pay VED the vast majority of which isn't spent on roads in London - if you really wish to complain about a tax grab that's probably a bigger (£500 million) one to highlight. It's been said that if they could retain the whole figure they could run the buses for free as well fund their streets section.

And the things that this money is currently spent on? Where is the funding for that coming from?

 

[miklcct]

I have wondered why there are a long stretch of 20 mph on the A5 south of Kilburn. It is a primary road and is the main way of travelling between Central London and most place in North West London, such as Kilburn, Cricklewood, West Hendon, Colindale until Edgware. It is not a residential road at all.

Having the A5 on 20 mph slows down buses such as 16, 32 and N32 a slot, as they are forced to obey the reduced speed limit on a straight major thoroughfare.

What is the reason why non-residential major roads are now at 20 mph?

 

[DC1989]

I have wondered why there are a long stretch of 20 mph on the A5 south of Kilburn. It is a primary road and is the main way of travelling between Central London and most place in North West London, such as Kilburn, Cricklewood, West Hendon, Colindale until Edgware. It is not a residential road at all.

Having the A5 on 20 mph slows down buses such as 16, 32 and N32 a slot, as they are forced to obey the reduced speed limit on a straight major thoroughfare.

What is the reason why non-residential major roads are now at 20 mph?

That's a high street isn't it? Lot's of shops, pubs and people crossing etc. Campden is a 20mph borough so that would be why.

 

[AM9]

I have wondered why there are a long stretch of 20 mph on the A5 south of Kilburn. It is a primary road and is the main way of travelling between Central London and most place in North West London, such as Kilburn, Cricklewood, West Hendon, Colindale until Edgware. It is not a residential road at all.

Having the A5 on 20 mph slows down buses such as 16, 32 and N32 a slot, as they are forced to obey the reduced speed limit on a straight major thoroughfare.

What is the reason why non-residential major roads are now at 20 mph?

As @DC1989 says, over 1.5Km from Kilburn LU station southwards to the start of Maida Vale there is virtually continuous shops, restaurants, bars etc., with 5 controlled junctions, and four controlled pedestrians crossings. Hardy likely to be suitable for 30mph traffic, (some of which would run nearer to 40mph if those drivers thought that they could get away with breaking the law).

 

[talldave]

It apparently cost around £60million to install the cameras and signage. Therefore most of the income will be paying for the infrastructure at present.

Then going forward the 3.1% of vehicles paying the charge or the penalty will get lower as more older cars are removed.

So, anyone with an IQ greater than zero might wonder why it was worth spending £60m to either remove from the roads or fine the last few percent of non-compliant cars for polluting the atmosphere? We're talking miniscule levels of air quality improvement. We mustn't forget of course all the lies that were used to justify the ULEZ expansion in the first place - shock horror figures of 4,000 deaths when in fact only 1 death in 20 years was put down to pollution. Imperial College at their best once again .

I feel slightly aggrieved when in my non-compliant diesel car (zero emissions measured at last MOT) getting enveloped in a cloud of diesel pollution belching from TfL's diesel single decker buses.

The answer of course is that this isn't about pollution and never was. It's about getting a dense network of cameras in situ for Pay Per Mile charging for all vehicles - TfL's cash cow dream which was originally scheduled for 2023 before that pesky cough inconsiderately slowed things down three years ago.

 

[Bletchleyite]

Regarding the Wales 20:

I drove to Wales last weekend for the first time since it came in, and I found that in the rural areas it seems to largely be about right (i.e. through Fron/Llangollen/Corwyn on the A5) but the urban areas made less sense, e.g. 20 on the road from the A55 to Llandudno Junction (Conway Road) which really should be 30 until you reach the start of the shops/houses. Indeed I think that stretch could validly be 40, becoming 20 at the roundabout where the car dealerships are clustered - it's not "where people are" which is justification for 20s.

I seem to recall it's made deliberately a bit of a faff to upsign, so there will be a lot of these which will reduce respect for it.

I did however note most people did seem to be complying, though I also noticed some undesirable features, e.g. people were "cutting up" out of junctions a lot more presumably because they felt safer doing so, but it's still rude to do so.

 

[DC1989]

So, anyone with an IQ greater than zero might wonder why it was worth spending £60m to either remove from the roads or fine the last few percent of non-compliant cars for polluting the atmosphere? We're talking miniscule levels of air quality improvement. We mustn't forget of course all the lies that were used to justify the ULEZ expansion in the first place - shock horror figures of 4,000 deaths when in fact only 1 death in 20 years was put down to pollution. Imperial College at their best once again .

I feel slightly aggrieved when in my non-compliant diesel car (zero emissions measured at last MOT) getting enveloped in a cloud of diesel pollution belching from TfL's diesel single decker buses.

The answer of course is that this isn't about pollution and never was. It's about getting a dense network of cameras in situ for Pay Per Mile charging for all vehicles - TfL's cash cow dream which was originally scheduled for 2023 before that pesky cough inconsiderately slowed things down three years ago.

Hasn't the number of compliant cars changed from 85% to 96% already? Seems worth it to me

Please remember that TFL and other cities have a legal requirement to reduce air pollution set by central government. Of course the tories kept this part quiet when raging against ULEZ....

https://www.gov.uk/government/publi...20/10-march-2020-air-quality-factsheet-part-4

Fully agree that TFL should make their bus fleet electric much quicker, but again, it depends on funding from central government. TFL are broke

It is interesting to see the goalposts being moved though from many of the anti ULEZ crowd, most people have simply got on with it and upgraded their cars with the grant from TFL.

Also worth noting that even though Susan Hall says she will cancel ULEZ 'on day one' (Which legally can't happen) she has committed to keeping the cameras in place. Interesting.

 

[Bletchleyite]

Also worth noting that even though Susan Hall says she will cancel ULEZ 'on day one' (Which legally can't happen) she has committed to keeping the cameras in place. Interesting.

Presumably the lower level LEZ would remain, and they would be used for that? Also useful for law enforcement.

 

[Krokodil]

when in fact only 1 death in 20 years was put down to pollution

How many lives were shortened or blighted by asthma but not recorded as such by the coroner?

 

[bramling]

As @DC1989 says, over 1.5Km from Kilburn LU station southwards to the start of Maida Vale there is virtually continuous shops, restaurants, bars etc., with 5 controlled junctions, and four controlled pedestrians crossings. Hardy likely to be suitable for 30mph traffic, (some of which would run nearer to 40mph if those drivers thought that they could get away with breaking the law).

Notwithstanding any arguments for or against 20 mph, the idea that something should be justified on the basis that some people might abuse the law isn’t really satisfactory.

Maybe none of us shouldn’t be allowed in shops in case we shoplift?

Enforce 30 mph by all means, but don’t use it as justification for something else.

 

[Bletchleyite]

Enforce 30 mph by all means, but don’t use it as justification for something else.

Interestingly the principle of "set the speed limit 10mph below what you want people to do" was pretty universal before the first GATSO cameras were in place. Motorway roadworks for instance were often signed to 40 with the full expectation that the prevailing speed would actually be 50-55, because so many people (e.g. my Dad) used to just go around everywhere doing 10mph over because that was low enough that a police officer would just let it go.

 

[talldave]

How many lives were shortened or blighted by asthma but not recorded as such by the coroner?

I don't know because the only statistics quoted by Emporer Khan were lies. Real facts haven't seen the light of day.

I don't have an issue with progress in improving pollution from cars. But central government have set a policy with realistic time frames. Fining people for driving cars the government pushed them to buy is unacceptable.

 

[The Ham]

I don't know because the only statistics quoted by Emporer Khan were lies. Real facts haven't seen the light of day.

I don't have an issue with progress in improving pollution from cars. But central government have set a policy with realistic time frames. Fining people for driving cars the government pushed them to buy is unacceptable.

The encouragement to buy diesel was before 2015 (that's at least 8 years ago), given the average age of cars in the UK is 10 years old, the numbers of cars which are still under the owners who were "pushed" to buy them is likely to be close to zero (there's still going to be a fair few which are in use, just unlikely to be with the people who brought them).

Whilst they will be being used by others, it's still going to be the case that their use would be little to do with what the government was saying about them.

 

[talldave]

The encouragement to buy diesel was before 2015 (that's at least 8 years ago), given the average age of cars in the UK is 10 years old, the numbers of cars which are still under the owners who were "pushed" to buy them is likely to be close to zero (there's still going to be a fair few which are in use, just unlikely to be with the people who brought them).

Whilst they will be being used by others, it's still going to be the case that their use would be little to do with what the government was saying about them.

Well I was "pushed" to diesel around 15 years ago and am still there. I don’t see why I should scrap a perfectly good car worth £4k-£5k for a paltry £2k. If I can raise the cash I'll swap my diesel for the same age model with the 6.1L V8 engine - fully ULEZ compliant and even more fun .

 

[AM9]

The answer of course is that this isn't about pollution and never was. It's about getting a dense network of cameras in situ for Pay Per Mile charging for all vehicles - TfL's cash cow dream which was originally scheduled for 2023 before that pesky cough inconsiderately slowed things down three years ago.

It is about pollution in London just like it is in many other towns and cities in the UK, however, some of the cost of the monitoring installation is likely justified by the longer term need to charge EV keepers/owners for the use of roads rather than trying to create some complication of the charges for electricity used on their vehicles. Like it or not, drivers will have to acknowledge that every journey they make will have a cost appropriate to the actual roads that use. This will focus their minds on what is the best mode/route to use for each journey.

 

[talldave]

It is about pollution in London just like it is in many other towns and cities in the UK, however, some of the cost of the monitoring installation is likely justified by the longer term need to charge EV keepers/owners for the use of roads rather than trying to create some complication of the charges for electricity used on their vehicles. Like it or not, drivers will have to acknowledge that every journey they make will have a cost appropriate to the actual roads that use. This will focus their minds on what is the best mode/route to use for each journey.

Not in leafy outer London, it's definitely not about pollution. Find some data that proves otherwise that hasn't come from Imperial College and/or been funded by TfL.

So drivers pay car tax, road tax, fuel tax, VAT and in future parking tax and moving tax? I guess for EVs there will also be not plugging it into the grid tax and excessive weight per axle tax?