Sheffield Clean Air Zone

[*_ash_* 88]

1 hour ago, Weredoomed said:

 

I bet Rotherham, Doncaster, Barnsley, Chesterfield and Meadowhall will be rubbing their  hands in glee at all the extra business and jobs that will be coming their way.

 

You read it here first...

side note: they may not rub their hands when all this nasty fumes come with all that trade!

 

Maybe it would be cheaper than 42 million to pipe the exhaust from the incinerator to said places! That would reduce pollution here, and we can pay em off with a back-hander! :);)

 

 

[*_ash_* 88]

trying to get rid of quotes in reply... see if this works

 

 

[*_ash_* 88]

Quote

To reduce pollution as fast as possible, we need to introduce a clean air zone. This will charge the most polluting vehicles for entering the city centre.

Under these proposals, we need the most polluting taxis, vans, HGVs, buses and coaches to upgrade. These are currently 20% of the vehicles on our roads but cause 50% of the NO₂ pollution.

From consultation ^^^^ (notice how taxis first and bolded)

 

Now let's look at the facts, and perhaps people will see my point of view as a taxi driver (not in a high polluting one either)

 

NOx Pollution Sources in Sheffield:

 

50% Road Transport

35% Industry

15% Domestic & Commercial

 

Of that 50% Road Transport:

 

81% of vehicles are Private cars and make up 50% of NOx

3% of vehicles are Taxis and make up 4% of NOx

17% of vehicles are buses LGV/HGV and make up 46% of NOx

 

-

 

And I am going to be charged £70 a week to work.

 

Does this look reasonable? And at the prices shown to replace vehicle, even if ALL 3000 of us change vehicles (which is never going to happen in 2 years) it would only reduce NOx emissions by 2%

 

Read it again, if you drive a private car, you make up 81% of Sheffield's traffic and 50% of road transport's NOx pollution.

 

Read questions 10 and 19 again in the consultation again as I post on page 8 at the end:

 

Q10. Says this:

Your vehicle:

We will not be charging cars to drive in the Clean Air Zone, but we will be charging some other types of vehicle, including taxis, lorries and vans (LGVs).

Q19. Says this:

If the Clean Air Zone does not improve air quality enough to meet legal limits, we may have to introduce charging for private cars.

 

-

 

My questions are these:

 

Qx:    Do you think it's fair to charge me £70 a week?

Qx2: Do you think that you won't be next?

 

 

 

 

 

[*_ash_* 88]

1 minute ago, *_ash_* said:

Q19. Says this:

If the Clean Air Zone does not improve air quality enough to meet legal limits, we may have to introduce charging for private cars.

 

I want to expand on this part next.

 

Legal limits are currently not been met in the following areas:

 

1. M1 Junction 34S - over the limit.

2. Arundel Gate Interchange - over the limit.

3. Derek Dooley Way - over the limit.

4. Sheffield Parkway - (around junction 1) - over the limit

5. Sheffield Parkway - (between PoW Rd and A57 turn off) - over the limit

6. Sheaf Street - Train Station - over the limit

 

-

 

My opinions (feel free to discuss)

 

1. M1 - how will this alter as M1 isn't in clean air zone?

2. A bus station with high pollution? No ****!

3. DD way - poorly built, poorly traffic lit, a busy busy junction in any case - how will this alter?

4 and 5. Parkway, probably the most major highway in and out of the city and also close to the incinerator belching out 3.5m m3 every day. How will this alter?

6. The station includes the trains, and Cllr Scott said at the meeting that the reason for this is that the Torys shelved the electrification plans. How is this £70 a week my fault?

 

6b. When asked why at peak times the light sequence now doesn't allow vehicles to get out of the area, this was said to be 'to keep the ring road flowing' - How is this my fault? Why are the cars that are going into the Drop zone and waiting (which is what causes the queues) not being dealt with? People always blame taxis here, but the taxi lanes ENTERING are completely separate from ordinary traffic.

 

Any thoughts?

 

 

 

 

 

 

[Cyclone 10]

Typical SCC, they feel the need to do something, even if the something isn't appropriate or supported by evidence that it will achieve the desired outcome.  Oh, and they don't like motor traffic.

[*_ash_* 88]

8 minutes ago, *_ash_* said:

6b. When asked why at peak times the light sequence now doesn't allow vehicles to get out of the area, this was said to be 'to keep the ring road flowing' - How is this my fault? Why are the cars that are going into the Drop zone and waiting (which is what causes the queues) not being dealt with? People always blame taxis here, but the taxi lanes ENTERING are completely separate from ordinary traffic.

 

 

A colleague has already pointed out something with this one, I'll copy it here:

 

Quote

One point... if the inner ring road is to be kept flowing via traffic light sequences... why have they included the ring road and not inside it?

 

[Cyclone 10]

I don't understand that quote, what's the context and what is it commenting on?

[*_ash_* 88]

3 minutes ago, Cyclone said:

Typical SCC, they feel the need to do something, even if the something isn't appropriate or supported by evidence that it will achieve the desired outcome.  Oh, and they don't like motor traffic.

Yes, and the consultation is still up on the matrix boards. Very misleading IMO.

 

I can't see anywhere on the consultation that states this:

 

3% of vehicles are Taxis and make up 4% of NOx

 

-

 

btw I forgot to include links Cyclone. The top one is short, the 2017 is lengthy

 

Here are the ones I took from:

 

Sheffield . gov Clean Air Proposals

Clean air strategy 2017

[Weredoomed 10]

Well *_ash_*, it seems pretty clear that taxis will be paying, as unfortunately you're effectively a captive audience to help fill the coffers of SCC. I don't doubt they'd squeeze you dry if they could. I feel for you mate. My suggestion - move your taxi to a neighbouring town, they'll be bustling soon enough.

 

Based on your figures, unless the existing figures are only just over whatever the legal limit is, then it also seems pretty clear that the initial charging regime won't work and that the ordinary car driver will be coughing up cash to enter the zone. Or more likely getting a job elsewhere and NOT doing their shopping in the city centre.

 

If there is pollution at the station, why can't SCC charge the train operators to enter the zone as well as bus and taxi operators? Isn't that being prejudiced against one group whilst favouring another? How can that be justified?

 

Which, as I said, will all have our neighbouring towns and Meadowhall rubbing their hands at all the extra business coming their way.

 

Although again, if the problem areas are only as you state, it's questionable why SCC are proposing the zone boundaries that they are doing - much of the zone doesn't suffer air quality problems if your quoted locations are correct. In which case, why is the zone so big, other than to generate income for SCC? How can that be justified?

 

CAZ is not the only way to reduce pollution in the city centre, as I pointed out. Much larger P&R facilities on the outskirts will reduce pollution. But P&R wont generate cash for SCC, so that extra provision is highly unlikely to occur. If SCC were smart enough, (there's that flying piggy again), they'd impose a charge of, say, £10 for a car to enter the zone but provide a P&R service that cost, say, £5. I think if the P&R service was reliable enough, most folks would pay £5 rather than £10. "Reliable" and "SCC" - boy there's a lot of pork in the air today!

 

So what options are SCC going to propose other than eventually charging everyone and totally killing off the city centre? They won't propose any other option, will they? Because they want the money, short-sighted that they are...

 

SCC anti-car? Why would anyone think that? Unless they lived in cloud-cuckoo land...

[geared 303]

 

 

20 minutes ago, Weredoomed said:

SCC anti-car? Why would anyone think that? Unless they lived in cloud-cuckoo land...

 

Well you almost answer that question yourself?

 

19 minutes ago, Weredoomed said:

If there is pollution at the station, why can't SCC charge the train operators to enter the zone as well as bus and taxi operators? Isn't that being prejudiced against one group whilst favouring another? How can that be justified?

 

Also of note is the contribution to the emissions figures from the citys own waste incinerator, which if correct is quite significant.

[ads36 214]

30 minutes ago, Weredoomed said:

Well *_ash_*, it seems pretty clear that taxis will be paying,

this is a draft, a proposal, for consultation, and inevitably - revision. The latest petrol  and diesel engines will almost certainly be exempt from any charge.

 

30 minutes ago, Weredoomed said:

Which, as I said, will all have our neighbouring towns and Meadowhall rubbing their hands at all the extra business coming their way.

Meadowhall, where you park outside, and walk in. If SCC suggested something similar for the city centre, people's heads would explode.

 

imagine how awful meadowhall would be if we were allowed to drive through it - which is roughly the current state of the city centre.

Edited July 22, 2019 by ads36

[Cyclone 10]

37 minutes ago, ads36 said:

this is a draft, a proposal, for consultation, and inevitably - revision. The latest petrol  and diesel engines will almost certainly be exempt from any charge.

 

Meadowhall, where you park outside, and walk in. If SCC suggested something similar for the city centre, people's heads would explode.

 

imagine how awful meadowhall would be if we were allowed to drive through it - which is roughly the current state of the city centre.

You realise that the walk, even at it's worse, is like 200 metres.  In most multi stories that wouldn't even get you to the exit of the car park, and then the entire town centre is STILL OUTSIDE!