Tonight:
5°c
Western C-zone could be killed off
David Williams2 Jul 2008
London's western extension congestion charging zone could be killed off under consultation plans launched by Mayor Boris Johnson today.
The £123 million scheme was launched by Ken Livingstone in the face of major public opposition in February last year.
Today Mr Johnson delivered a key manifesto pledge by unveiling the five-week consultation that will begin this September.
He said he would ask Londoners whether the zone - which was extended to cover parts of Kensington and Chelsea and Westminster - should continue or be altered.
The consultation will be open to residents, businesses and stakeholders across the capital.
The Mayor said he "particularly" wanted to hear from those living inside the western zone and around its borders. If the consultation reveals that Londoners want to scrap the scheme it could be dismantled by the end of next year.
Mr Johnson said: "The previous Mayor made the decision to introduce the western extension in the face of overwhelming opposition.
"Unlike my predecessor I am going into this with an open mind and this will be a genuine consultation.
"It is high time that politicians listened to the people whom they represent and I am proud to keep the pledge to hold a further consultation.
"Londoners can be assured that, whether they stand for or against, this time their opinions will be respected and we will abide by the results."
Mr Johnson told the Standard: "This is not a referendum, so it won't be limited to a 'do you or don't you want to keep it?'
"Yes, there will be the option to scrap it but there will also be other options including keeping it and changing certain aspects of it, like whether it should operate all day.
"But this will be an opportunity for everyone with experience of the extension to tell me whether they want to see it removed, improved or if they are simply unmoved."
The West London Residents Association, which fought against the western extension, renewed its plea for the scheme to go. Chairman Gordon Taylor said: "It has damaged trade and it forces residents to pay to drive on roads that were never congested."
Paul Watters, the AA's head of roads and transport policy, said: "Because residents in west London gained 90 per cent discounts on the congestion charge it meant that hundreds more people began driving into the 'old' congestion charging zone too. It boosted congestion immediately. It was a retrograde step."
Lauren Preteceille, of business group London First, said: "Congestion hurts business but so do badly designed road charging schemes.
"We are confident the Mayor will come up with a solution to see off gridlock without seeing off business at the same time."
But Jenny Jones, of the London Assembly Green Party, said: "The congestion charge has been successful in reducing traffic, reducing pollution and encouraging people to switch to public transport and cycling. There is every chance that people inside the extension zone will vote to keep it in place as they have now seen that it works."
Richard Bourn, spokesman for the Campaign for Better Transport, said: "It would be tragic if the scheme was scrapped. It makes very good sense."
After the consultation, Transport for London will produce a report for the Mayor, who will make a final decision on the scheme. Consultation details - including how to obtain response forms - will be posted at www.tfl.gov.uk this week.
Keep it
Richard Bourn - Campaign for Better Transport
London has become an example to cities around the world mainly because of the success of the congestion charge. Few now suggest that the original charge zone should be abandoned.
Traffic in the centre of London has decreased by 20 per cent, creating numerous other benefits. Bus use has grown by about a third, 43 per cent more people are cycling in the zone and around £120million is being raised - mostly for public transport and road safety expenditure.
In the first year of operation there was approximately a 16 per cent reduction in carbon dioxide emissions and similar falls in emissions of other air pollutants.
The charge has also been good for car and commercial vehicle drivers as journey times have become more reliable and costs due to delays have declined.
Critics' dire predictions never materialised. Traffic did not seize up on the border of the zone nor overspill into residential areas. Public transport not only coped but improved and business prospered. The London economy has grown recently at roughly twice the national rate. Recent congestion increases have been caused by roadworks, not by traffic creeping up again.
Data on the operation of the Western extension of the zone is more scarce - itself a reason not to act in haste. But TfL's forecasts about the impacts of the congestion charge have always been quite accurate.
The effects of the extension seem to have been as expected. Traffic is down by 10 to 15 per cent, congestion has fallen by a larger amount and bus services are again coping well. The conditions for David Cameron's and other cyclists' journeys to work are much improved.
Londoners who have visited cities in Switzerland, Holland, Germany and Denmark know what modern urban transport is like. Does London really want to abandon its new reputation for progressive transport and return to the days of traffic-dominated streets and clogged-up public transport?
Abolish it
Gordon Taylor - chairman, West London Residents Association
The Western Extension should be abolished for the significant damage it is doing to the lives of residents in west London and to its economy.
Ken Livingstone's decision to expand westwards was an entirely political one taken against the advice of senior transport advisers.
West London is overwhelmingly residential. Employment is 170,000 compared with 1.1 million in the central zone. In the residential streets - nearly 95 per cent of the street length in the extension - traffic flows freely.
Residents are having to pay to drive on uncongested roads. Traffic on the main roads could be dealt with by charging for the use of these roads only, and only when they are congested. The technology for this fairer system is well known.
While the original central zone has failed, with congestion back to pre-charge levels, TfL claims the C-charge keeps out 70,000 vehicles per day. In the Western extension, 58,000 drivers have the 90 per cent charge discount. Many drive into central London for just 80p. Either the Western Extension or the discount has to go.
Many outside the zone need to bring their vehicles into the extension every day to go about normal business. These are the worst-hit, having to pay a tax of upwards of £2,000 a year to do so.
Evidence shows many shops have lost significant business due to the extension. Jobs have also been lost.
The new referendum should cover Wandsworth, Hammersmith and Fulham, Acton and Kensal Rise and the question should be simple: Do you approve of the abolition of the Western Extension? Yes or No.
Reader views (14)
that's crazy!!!!
unbelievable the next time, i'm gonna pay for get out of my home door.
A.
Notting Hill
- Angelo, London, 13/07/2008 11:33
Report abuse
The one policy I agreed with Ken was the free entry for less polluting cars, and the gas guzzlers pay more I bought such a car on this premise, the reason is a simple one, the problem here is pollution, and the usage of oil the average 4x4 does about 20-30 mpg and kicks out over 255g co2. My new Renault does 56 mpg and kicks out 117 co2 per kilometre, the congestion zone is just a money spinner for the mayor if it wasn't why change this policy?
- Simon, london uk, 08/07/2008 10:48
Report abuse
Traffic in Shepherds Bush now grinds to a halt while the discredited 1960's
"motorway box" approach to traffic (but without the motorway)
stays in place.
With the high volumes of extra traffic sure to be generated due to
the opening of the Westfield centre ... when is tfl going to come to
its senses and realise the disasterous Westward extension should be reversed?
- Anthony Collyer, London, UK, 07/07/2008 23:15
Report abuse
I live just outside the western extension. I am a pensioner and I used to drive my arthritic dog each day to Kensington Gardens which was the highlight of our day. He's a little too stiff to cope with the rather hairy bus journey plus often the drivers won't let me on with him. I adore Kensington Gardens and it is the nearest large park to where I live, just five minutes drive if that. I also used to drive to Portobello Road market to do my shopping and that is also out of the question now... I miss that too. For me personally I should be elated if Boris got rid of the western extension, it would make a huge difference to my life. Let's hope that he listens to us unlike Mr L.
- Nix, London, 02/07/2008 09:52
Report abuse
When I want to cross London I have to go via Shepherd's Bush, which gets pretty
congested, but what will happen when the huge shopping centre there opens, all
hell will break out traffic wise creating even more misery for the average London
driver. I believe the scheme worked well before the charge zone was extended.
- Linda Parker, Hampstead London, 02/07/2008 09:43
Report abuse
The congestion charges in London as a whole have very effectively kept me (and my money) out of the capital.
If that's what Ken wanted ......
- Cap, Lincoln, UK, 02/07/2008 09:09
Report abuse
The consultation will start on September, it will be wise to suspend the £25 charge which will be introduced on 28 October. Otherwise, it is foolish ask the people inside zone to buy a new car.
- Michael Lee, North Kensington, 01/07/2008 22:45
Report abuse
Both the original and western extension zone were part of Ken's manifesto commitments and his successful election was his mandate from all of London to pursue these schemes. Consultation is about boundaries and hours of operation not the policy.
While Brian Paddick said he would abolish it at this years election. Boris only said was he would open a consultation on the extension. This means he does not have a mandate to abolish the extension and could find himself open to legal challenge from the cycling and public transport users groups if he tries.
If the scheme were abolished it would be good-bye to cyclists on Kensington High Street as this would once again become a short cut for artic-lorries which given the cost of fuel will welcome west London once again becoming a short cut. Is this what residents, shoppers and the local council really want?
I think, the zone should if anything be extended as unlike the original zone which had a ring road as a boundary the western extension does not have a decent north/south western boundary. It would be better to extend the zone to Hammersmith and use Scrubs Lane -Hammersmith and River Thames as a boundary (Basically route 220). This would bring the new shopping development at Shepherds Bush within the Zone and encourage use of public transport to reach the centre.
Finally, I recently saw an electrically powered delivery van in west London it's this sort of initiative which needs to be encouraged to wean us off oil.
- Melvyn Windebank, Canvey Island, Essex, 01/07/2008 22:36
Report abuse
Assuming that the extension is scrapped altogether I am wondering why it would take so long after the decision is made.
I am of the opinion that motorists pay enough in various taxes without paying extra to use roads that they have already paid for.
Get rid of a few thousand taxis. That will relieve a fair bit of congestion.
- Alan Preen, McLean, Texas, USA, 01/07/2008 21:55
Report abuse
Hmmm. The problem is that dread word 'consultation' which is wholly bogus in modern British politics. Consultation means what you want it to mean by steering it and interpreting the results. It was 'consultation' that permitted the former Mayor to go ahead with the Western extension while seeing almost 70% opposition to it. The devil is in the detail of consultation and I think many had been under the impression that Boris had promised a referendum in the Western Extension Zone. As an opponent of the extension, I sadly think it might be time to place a hefty bet that it might still be in place through the lifetime of this Mayor...in spite of the promise of a referendum, which would almost certainly see it scrapped.
- Damian Hockney, London, UK, 01/07/2008 14:58
Report abuse
The congestion charged was introduced on a twin platform:
Reduce congestion
Fund transport infrastructure expenditure.
Congestion is higher than pre-introduction, and the scheme has raised more money for Capita than it ever will for the London transport.
Beggars belief that Richard Bourn thinks it a success.
- Scott, london, 01/07/2008 14:45
Report abuse
I am in favour of abolition. The Kings Road is effectively the high street for those of us who live in Fulham. Retailers are undoubtedly suffering enough at present so why deter shoppers even further. If the aim is to penalise commuters why not run the charge from 6 am until 10 am?
But best of all get rid of it Ken ignored the majority who didn't want it in the first place, Boris don't make the same mistake.
- Jeremy Dyer, Fulham, SW6, 01/07/2008 13:52
Report abuse
The vast majority of us who live in London appreciate that we have a massive congestion problem and want to see huge investments in Public Transport. Do we really want to go backwards on this issue and pander to those who choose to drive (usually alone) across London, blocking the buses and making commuting slower for all of us.
Why not get out of your cars and buy smaller less polluting cars in future. Ken was brave on this issue and of course it's not popular. Do the Tories have to repeat their mistakes of the 80s by reducing investment in Public services. Lets ask the people if they want a tax to drive or not, hmm, I wonder what the result will be. This is boring Boris and very disappointing.
- David, London, 01/07/2008 12:46
Report abuse
I live in Chelsea and since the C Zone was extended it has meant that with my resident's 90% discount I can drive into the main zone so for me it's been great! I'm not sure that was why Ken did it though!
If Boris really wants to ease congestion please rephrase the traffic lights to how they used to be. They change so quickly now that traffic gets jammed and the resultant pollution from stationary cars is much worse.
- Paul Tomlinson, london, 01/07/2008 12:07
Report abuse
