Tom Anderson wrote:
On Thu, 5 Oct 2006, Colum Mylod wrote:

On 5 Oct 2006 01:07:55 -0700, wrote:

Colum Mylod wrote:

The extension will include zone 2 so your fears of an extension too
far are well grounded.

Impossible to have an extension too far. IMHO the boundary for the
congestion charge should be the M25, with a minimum charge of £50.

Offer that one up in a democratic system and see how it flies.

I'd vote for it.

Although ideally the zone would stop just beyond my house - otherwise it
makes it more likely that people from outside will drive in!

Any further extensions of the current congestion charging scheme in its
present guise are highly unlikely, as it would be very expensive to
operate as-is on a much larger scale, and there would be a
multiplication of the current issues over access to facilities inside
the zone for those not far outside.

Pan-London congestion charging would probably only be introduced as a
proper distance-based road user charging scheme, most likely using
either microwave "tag-and-beacon" technology, with charges per kilometre
varying by time of day and by road used.

--
Dave Arquati
www.alwaystouchout.com - Transport projects in London

On Thu, 5 Oct 2006, Earl Purple wrote:

Tom Anderson wrote:

So Colum, how many people get to Oxford Street by car, then?

Many did before the congestion charge zone was brought in. There is a
car-park at Cavendish Square

And Marble Arch.

and meters on many of the side roads.

Still, when you think how many people those carparks and roads would
accomodate, and how many people there are on Oxford Street when it's busy,
you realise that the vast majority must have got there by public transport
- even before the charge.

tom

--
see im down wid yo sci fi crew

On Thu, 5 Oct 2006 16:58:22 +0100, Tom Anderson
wrote:

It could happen but only under a dictator.

I love the way that you equate your preferencs with the will of the
majority.

Ken said his consultancy sessions were to comply with rules but he had
already made his mind up beforehand - CC, ShepherdsRd tram, quite a
few others too. Is that not being dictatorial? He has the power and
feels fully confident in exercising it in a brash manner. It's his
personality. Maybe that can be a force for good but the danger is
he'll go off the rails (on topic pun) eventually. I wish he was just
that bit more "democratic".

Usenet, the home of opinions and preferences. Just like yours for
having the CC at your front door.

--
Old anti-spam address cmylod at despammed dot com appears broke
So back to cmylod at bigfoot dot com

On 5 Oct 2006 09:39:51 -0700, "Earl Purple"
wrote:


Tom Anderson wrote:
So Colum, how many people get to Oxford Street by car, then?

Many did before the congestion charge zone was brought in. There is a
car-park at Cavendish Square and meters on many of the side roads. I
did notice in February 2003 how much easier it became to find a meter.
....
I still use car to get to Oxford Street to shop on bank holidays when
parking is free and there is no congestion charge.

Fully agree. When we go by car (3 of us) parking on single yellows in
Westminster was the thing to do on Sundays and you would need to get
in 12ish or all spaces were gone.

People who drive on Saturdays do use the car parks despite outrageous
prices. Much of that shopping market are not price sensitive or they'd
be filling the pound shops on the delightful Hounslow High St instead.

The Oxford St tram report does have details on fears for a decline in
the street's fortunes due to White City. I would expect comparisons
with Bluewater to hold up: tons more cars that would otherwise never
think of W12 will be piling in. Not the end of the world as we know it
but also not promising when the cry is all about global warming etc.
--
Old anti-spam address cmylod at despammed dot com appears broke
So back to cmylod at bigfoot dot com

On Thu, 05 Oct 2006 20:02:45 +0100, Dave Arquati
wrote:

Any further extensions of the current congestion charging scheme in its
present guise are highly unlikely, as it would be very expensive to
operate as-is on a much larger scale, and there would be a
multiplication of the current issues over access to facilities inside
the zone for those not far outside.

That would not rule out "tweaking" though, would it? Earls Court is
crying out for relief, K&C wanted that addressed.
--
Old anti-spam address cmylod at despammed dot com appears broke
So back to cmylod at bigfoot dot com

Tom Anderson wrote:

Evening all,

Firstly, what, if any, effect has the charge had on safety? Are there
fewer road casualties in central London now? More? Have they been
displaced? Anyone know of any data?

Secondly, why is it being extended westward? Why not to the north, where i
live, so i can ride to work more easily? Is the west more congested, or
more in need of better bus services? Or does Ken just like people in the
west more? Or particularly hate western drivers?

I've worked out a Northern boundary:

A5 up to junction A5205 of St John's Wood Road

A5205 St John's Wood Road, across the A41 and remain on A5205 Prince
Albert Road
Left onto Parkway (which is either A503 or A4201, not sure which)
A503 Camden Road. In the opposite direction the border goes down Bayham
Street then right into Pratt Street which becomes Delancey Street

A1 Holloway Road (East) up to Highbury Corner
A1199 St Pauls Road leading to A104 Balls Pond Road then A1207 Graham
Road
A107 Mare Street South until border with A106
then A106 in both directions (it's a split one-way street) up to first
junction with A12 then A12 Southbound beyond that. Could go through
Blackwall Tunnel or could simply go along A13 or A1261 etc. If
Blackwall Tunnel then A2 is boundary on the other side.

Where the border is made up of two one-way streets (as with A106) then
the roads between them are outside the zone.