Urgent! Object to the scrapping of the congestion charge extension

I've put this in a new thread because Vee Vee's thread is from the past and people may not realise that we can have imput now.

Thanks to Cameleon for this:

removal of the congestion charge extension is going ahead. will result in more congestion, more pollution, more CO2, less cycling, less walking - according to tfl..

you can object here, before august 2nd..

Link here:

http://www.tfl.gov.uk/roadusers/congestioncharging/15520.aspx

The form for objecting has three boxes:
!.Please use this space to provide your views on the proposed removal of the Western Extension

1. Please use this space to give us your views on the other proposed Congestion Charge changes

2. Please use this space to provide any other comments you may have

Here are my objections, interested to here your comments....

1. It's disastrous to remove the Western Extension, it's a giant leap backwards, please don't do this and please try and encourage less use of motorised transport in the Capitol.

2. Good to increase the congestion charge, well overdue.

The other proposals (Replacing the Alternative Fuel discount with a new Greener Vehicle discount
Making changes to the Electric Vehicle discount
Introducing a new registration charge for 9+ seated vehicles) are all useful in helping people to value the ecological impact of their transport choices when considering investing in motorised transport, but in effect just give a way forward for them to increase the vehicle congestion, I think these are all valid and useful measures for London but should be separate from and unrelated to the congestion charge, we need to implement changes that will cause a modal shift away from personal motorised transport not to more personal motorised transport with a different fuel or bigger cars or ones that require more electricity to be generated...
So in short let's increase the congestion charge and have less congestion.

1. The introduction of the congestion charge was a bold and important move in one of the most influential cities on the planet, in order for it to maintain any effectiveness it must at least keep up with if not excede inflation to encourage changes in behaviour and attitudes.
   

Can't get link to work

Me neither, working on it.

Think that's it now...
Please try and feedback.

Eccentric use of punctuation has probably brought Object's attention, beware!

done

Also done

Should be at LMNH till 5, see you there?

All I saw was; "Urgent! Object".

You're a bad man Digger. Responding now.

Objected.

I also took the opportunity to ask that the congestion charge be in effect on Saturdays in the run up to Christmas. Basically because everything West of Holborn gridlocks at that time and it seems crazy that a scheme aimed to reduce and prevent congestion isn't even enabled during one of the most congested periods.

Hey Digger... where's the review of the magbook?

Also done, good work on bringing it to our attention Digger.

@ Velocio, thanks for punctuation correction, massive fail on book review, maybe doing tomorrow, speak soon.

Objected.

I also took the opportunity to ask that the congestion charge be in effect on Saturdays in the run up to Christmas. Basically because everything West of Holborn gridlocks at that time and it seems crazy that a scheme aimed to reduce and prevent congestion isn't even enabled during one of the most congested periods.

I did that too, saturday afternoon is the worst time for private motor traffic in all of London, and as they seem to be occasional drivers and visitors the standard of driving makes for slower and more dangerous progress than the weekly rush hour.

Objected.

I also took the opportunity to ask that the congestion charge be in effect on Saturdays in the run up to Christmas. Basically because everything West of Holborn gridlocks at that time and it seems crazy that a scheme aimed to reduce and prevent congestion isn't even enabled during one of the most congested periods.

+1

All I saw was; "Urgent! Object".

You're a bad man Digger. Responding now.

Due to bizarre punctuation accident it originally said Urgent Object!

done

Isn't there the whole arguement about including the west will give a lot of rich residential people access to the congestion zone at 10%. Ie a lot of chealsea tractors will be already in it?

^I have heard this argument, I don't see how we can at present stop people living in town or owning cars, unless the congestion charge residential discount only applies to each extension? That would work...

Isn't there the whole arguement about including the west will give a lot of rich residential people access to the congestion zone at 10%. Ie a lot of chealsea tractors will be already in it?
That's why I requested a reduction in the percent discount afforded to residents living within the congestion zone from 90% to 25%(at most).

That's why I requested a reduction in the percent discount afforded to residents living within the congestion zone from 90% to 25%(at most).

Good call!

http://www.tfl.gov.uk/assets/downloads/congestion-charging-zone-map1.pdf

it's proposed removal of an existing zone, the above shows how lopsided london would be if it was removed, how can westminster and victoria not be in central london!?

http://www.tfl.gov.uk/assets/downloads/congestion-charging-zone-map1.pdf

it's proposed removal of an existing zone, the above shows how lopsided london would be if it was removed, how can westminster and victoria not be in central london!?

+1

I'm still abstaining from this. I don't see how fiddling around with a few square miles, either less or more, is going to make any real tangible impact. I agree that the residents' reduction ought to be much less. But I don't see why residents ought to be chargeable when they're not driving their cars but they are parked on the street. How on earth can you charge people for NOT using their cars? Bonkers.