Home |
Search |
Today's Posts |
![]() |
|
London Transport (uk.transport.london) Discussion of all forms of transport in London. |
Reply |
|
LinkBack | Thread Tools | Display Modes |
|
#1
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
chris harrison wrote in message ...
Nick wrote: In principle I've been agreeing with the congestion charge, but that At what point, when it isn't deserted and you join a queue (thereby contributing to that queue and hence the reason for the charge), should you start paying? Yep, I'd raise the same questions too if pushing the point you're trying to make. A charge isn't the problem perse, but more that I don't get my 5 pounds worth. 25 pence would be more reasonable. SE1. Deverill street joins bartholomew street and you leave the zone. In case it wasn't clear, it's not 100 yards into the zone (maybe 100 is even an over estimate), but 100 yards on a side street that's not used as a rabbit run or anything else and that leaves the zone and filters into a free flowing dual lane road that leads out of town. Fairly soon leave the main road to use some side streets that avoid New Cross bottlenecks and within just a few minutes one is rapidly approaching deptford and soon into Blackheath. It's opposite to the way of most other cars. There is no congestion nor ever likely to be except in exceptional cases. Give me PT that can do it so quickly as the car and I'd take it but unless we take to the skies it's not an option. That said our garden is more than big enough to take a helicopter without taking out the trees and squirrels in the process and so if anyone knows of a cheap helitaxi then maybe that's the solution. At what distance should your current 100 yards become untenable as an excuse? 200 yards? 400 yards? A mile? A free journey directly out from any point in the zone if you start there when the charge kicks in? Easiest answer: park your car outside of the zone overnight or, and this is the nub, don't drive. It's the large numbers of cars on the roads both within and without the zone that caused the charge in the first place, just because you're skirting the edges doesn't mean you are not part of the problem. Sounds like a whinge if you ask me. Suck it up and pay. hehe, sounds like a whinge about cars causing the problem in the first place ![]() I've been used to taking PT from SE3 into my office in CW and previously an office opposite Cannon Street station. Generally PT was OK. Of course trains were typically late or cancelled (although the DLR was good) but with years of conditioning to have low expectations of the rail service one could always say that the service met them. The only car I'd ever take was someone elses if I hopped into one of the private hire Mercs parked in Walbrook to get a comfy ride home if it was late and I was shattered. Driving into town on a morning would be madness. The don't drive argument really wears a bit thin after a while, and where should one stop? Would you advocate taking it to its logical conclusion and banning cars inside the M25, returning side streets where there's no public transport to parks, gardens and shelters for the homeless. Opening up cycle lanes so that people can get on their bikes and get a more healthy lifestyle and more of a sense of shared community rather than being isolated in their mostly metal pods of a morning? Damn, this actually starts to sound like a great idea. That and concreting over the Thames and we could really be onto something here. Of course the CC employees at TfL would be out of a job, but oh well and never mind, any anyway maybe they could take up studying the cycle lanes. Unfortunately of course in the real world the don't drive argument isn't practical, at least not yet and probably not for some considerable time to come. Easy for people to say who don't need to get from A to B not only within a reasonable timeframe but in good shape and awake, but on the route in question getting up earlier, which would be needed not just to avoid the charge but to take public transport as it's comparatively sucky, and taking PT would be more traumatic than the car, even with the cloud of having to pay the CC. Ho hum, 5 quid a day isn't a killer but in this case I'd rather give it to a cause where it might do some good. |
#2
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
In message , Nick
writes A charge isn't the problem perse, but more that I don't get my 5 pounds worth. 25 pence would be more reasonable. I have some sympathy for this view. The one and only time I've had to pay a CC was to retrieve my car from a car park on a Tuesday evening, where it had been since Sunday (no CC), and drive it about a quarter of a mile on an empty road to Euston. Of course, the next ten miles on non-CC roads was a nightmare. -- Roland Perry |
#3
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]() |
Reply |
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
Display Modes | |
|
|
![]() |
||||
Thread | Forum | |||
Enlarged Congestion Charging area | London Transport | |||
Congestion charging hits the rails | London Transport | |||
Congestion charging expansion plans: zone expansion. | London Transport | |||
Congestion Charging in Kensington | London Transport | |||
Crapita bailed-out over congestion charging | London Transport |