Sheffield Congestion Charge From Feb 27th 2023

[sheffbag]

38 minutes ago, HeHasRisen said:

Does part 7 of this existing one not satisfy your curiosity?

 

https://www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/caz_operator_and_information_sec

nope as it doesnt determine the methodology used. The way they have responded is a list of stations over half of which ar enot in the CAZ (Meadowhall, attercliffe, jenkin road, etc) but it does show that only 3 places are over 40 inside the CAZ and one of those SCC admits is due to trains primarily.

 

I'll put up the response when i get one probably in April

 

If they are basing it on individual tube results then they have no right to charge people anywhere bar the 3 spots over 40 and construct a zone around that area. 

If its the average then it is below 40 so no need ot have the CAZ in the first place.

 

[HeHasRisen]

Surely this is the case for any CAZ in the country, if they only charged round the ones where the reading were high it would be unmanageable, especially if they are spread out. 

I dont believe for a minute that the readings of every single station in Greater Manchester were high, wasnt the intention to include almost the entire county in the zone? I am aware it is "under review" anyway.

[Resident]

28 minutes ago, HeHasRisen said:

Does part 7 of this existing one not satisfy your curiosity?

 

https://www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/caz_operator_and_information_sec

So if I'm reading that right.

Only ONE tube inside the CAZ is over the limit, That being Arundel Gate. 

It would be interesting to know values of this specfic tube prior to the closure of Pinstone St, which forced more diesel vehicles onto Arundel gate

The cynic in me says that maybe the levels were just under prior to the closure & the refusal to re-open Pinstone to traffic has nothing to do with "Active Travel Initiatives" and more to do with pushing levels up in order to justify CAZ

[sheffbag]

18 minutes ago, HeHasRisen said:

Surely this is the case for any CAZ in the country, if they only charged round the ones where the reading were high it would be unmanageable, especially if they are spread out. 

I dont believe for a minute that the readings of every single station in Greater Manchester were high, wasnt the intention to include almost the entire county in the zone? I am aware it is "under review" anyway.

GM have submitted a non charging policy to the govt for approval

 

Back when the idea was first proposed the air quality was a lot worse in sheffield so there was grounds for it. Places like Uni roundabout, Shoreham St, pond st, Leopold St, West St were all over 40 if you look at the figures. That was the legitimate reason for the CAZ. Trouble is since then the results have now gone under 40 e.g

 

Duke St 2015 - 47     2021 - 37

West St 2015 - 47    2021 - 24

Shoreham St 2015 - 55      2021 - 39 

Pond St  2015 - 60      2021 - 39

Barkers Pool 2016 - 47     2021 - 22

Wicker 2015 - 43     2021 - 31

Ladys Bridge 2015 47     2021 - 27

University Roundabout 2015 - 64     2021 - 32

 

Those stats are on the SCC website 

 

You now have the situation where within the CAZ there are (according to the FOI response) 3 places over 40. Sheaf St will never go below 40 due to the train station (as SCC admit in the own clean air policy) so you are left with 2

 

Leeds scrapped its CAZ which it had been mandated to do (but according to SCC reps it cant be rescinded once mandated - fake news) as it was in the same scenario and in the time from the original mandate to potential implementation it had cleaned up the air in the proposed zone with 1 exception. It scrapped the scheme for fear of a legal challenge of driving in air which had been determined to be under the legal limit.

 

Sheffield is in the same position Leeds was realistically but chose to plough ahead saying 

it couldnt be changed as it had been mandated - False - Leeds, Nottingham are examples of cities getting mandated and not implementing

The govt would come in and implement one - There is no evidence anywhere that the govt would come in. Even Planner couldnt find any and if they were to come in they would have in Leeds and Nottingham

 

 

[HeHasRisen]

OK, but at the time Greater Manchester was considering including essentiallly all the county in a CAZ, was every monitoring station within that area in breach? Do you see the point I am trying to make?

[sheffbag]

15 minutes ago, HeHasRisen said:

OK, but at the time Greater Manchester was considering including essentiallly all the county in a CAZ, was every monitoring station within that area in breach? Do you see the point I am trying to make?

https://assets.ctfassets.net/tlpgbvy1k6h2/5x3t00AUL4BX3MB4YJVgRl/9c731d8f31974e15a731b064f9625446/GM_Air_Quality_Annual_Status_Report_2021pdf.pdf

I cant comment and i do see your point but the results in this document would suggest that overall it was high.

 

Not every result has to be over 40 but in sheffield if you take it as an average then it is below 40 , if you are justifying the zone on individual results then there is no justification for any where that used to be over 40 but isnt now to be included.

 

I do see your point but SCC has never said how it is taking the figures and using them, that was the reason for the FOI as i personally think Sheffield is in the same position as Leeds but Leeds acknowledged it and scrapped the scheme.

[HumbleNarrator]

1 hour ago, HeHasRisen said:

Surely this is the case for any CAZ in the country, if they only charged round the ones where the reading were high it would be unmanageable, especially if they are spread out. 

 

Indeed, so don't bother at all then.

[mike1961]

Despite being granted an exemption until June for my LGV vehicle, I am now getting fined for entering the forbidden zone otherwise known as the CAZ Zone .

 

I applied for the extension to the exemption on the 21st of January so well before the introduction of the zone charges on the 27th of February.

 

It's very annoying as I will now have spend time appealing these fines ,but I will be invoicing SCC for my time spent trying to sort this nonsense out.

[Anna B]

I'm old enough to remember Sheffield in the past when the steel works etc were a fact of life. The buildings were black with soot and grime (and let's not forget they were relatively new at the time,) and we suffered smogs often. My mum couldn't hang the washing out on certain days because it would come in covered in smuts. COPD and other respiratory illnesses were common, especially amongst steel and factory workers.

 

We moved on, and cleaned up. It's not long since we were proclaiming we had the cleanest air in England.

 

I'm all for clean air, but is the situation really so bad now that everyone has to be so inconvenienced? It's nothing like it used to be. The whole purpose of the ring road was that it would make travel better for everyone, not worse.  

 

 

Edited March 16, 2023 by Anna B

[RollingJ]

Agreed, Anna - I suspect this is SCC's way of saying 'we're in charge, like it or lump it'.