21
The rows over Ulez and LTNs lose sight of the truth: they save lives | Devi Sridhar
(www.theguardian.com)
this post was submitted on 04 Aug 2023
21 points (95.7% liked)
United Kingdom
4060 readers
389 users here now
General community for news/discussion in the UK.
Less serious posts should go in [email protected] or [email protected]
More serious politics should go in [email protected].
Try not to spam the same link to multiple feddit.uk communities.
Pick the most appropriate, and put it there.
Posts should be related to UK-centric news, and should be either a link to a reputable source, or a text post on this community.
Opinion pieces are also allowed, provided they are not misleading/misrepresented/drivel, and have proper sources.
If you think "reputable news source" needs some definition, by all means start a meta thread.
Posts should be manually submitted, not by bot. Link titles should not be editorialised.
Disappointing comments will generally be left to fester in ratio, outright horrible comments will be removed.
Message the mods if you feel something really should be removed, or if a user seems to have a pattern of awful comments.
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
This is the best summary I could come up with:
Travel is free on public buses for under 22s, and while low-traffic neighbourhood (LTN) schemes aren’t perfect, the council is rolling them out in the pursuit of a vibrant, active city.
Edinburgh’s commitment to pedestrians is not about banning cars, but about making it cheaper and simpler to replace short-distance single occupancy journeys with alternatives that have far-reaching benefits for the city’s inhabitants and the planet.
It only takes a visit to Amsterdam, Paris, Oslo, Barcelona or Copenhagen to see the huge policy efforts made to create cities that are easy and safe to navigate – and where six-lane highways jammed up with cars stuck at 5mph just don’t exist.
Unfortunately in Britain, progressive moves towards better designed cities have been hijacked by debates on ultra-low emission zones (Ulez) and LTNs, and jargon such as modal filters, which provoke increasing amounts of rage in certain quarters.
But it requires political leadership to make bold decisions in the face of lobbying by the car industry and motorists, along with investment in the proper infrastructure to ensure cyclists can complete their daily journeys as easily as possible.
Hundreds of doctors in London have written to the mayor Sadiq Khan about the health benefits of reducing car use within the city and the dangers of high levels of air pollution to their patients.
I'm a bot and I'm open source!
I don’t have a problem with ULEZ zones or LTNs for that matter but more with the lack of advanced warning about the London expansion.
As is often the way, it’s the implementation that’s a problem for people. The full ULEZ plans should have been made public, with a timeline of expansions, five years in advance to give people a chance to plan around them.
@Hossenfeffer @Emperor is 5 years practical with a 5 year election cycle?
Are you calling for no detail of any plan to be adjustable in less than 5 years?
When we're the ULEZ plans, in some form, published, please?
I think the August expansion was announced on 25th November of last year. So less than a year’s notice.
I don’t think that’s enough given the number of people it will affect.
And, obviously they didn’t decide on 24th November that this seemed like a cracking idea but must have planned it earlier.
All I’m saying is more notice would have allowed people to make better informed decisions about vehicle purchases. People who need to head into, or travel through, the expanded ULEZ might have made different choices if they’d known in advance that this was coming.
@Hossenfeffer It'll affect around 10 000 000 people, I think.
The effect is better air to breath and less illness caused.
If you were to tell them you were going to improve their air, but you'd decided to give them 5 years notice rather than one year, I think stepping back quickly out of reach would bd wise.
The effects are of course incremental.
Is this a new thing?
The MOT was introduced last century, I forget when it changed from "not a smokescreen" to limited exhsust emissions. But, no.
@Hossenfeffer And finally, Londoners who now need a <15 year old petrol car, to replace their 16 year old one, can have I gather £2000 toward it as scrappage, funded by the people who get cleaner air out of it, their wider neighbours.
Occasional visitors are asked not to be mucky, but if they insist, can pay.
Frequent visitors - well yes, action indicated.
@Hossenfeffer Barcelona has one. We drove a far from new SLK into there. (We don't live in London, either)
It required registration with an automatic system, in English, and a e5 fee.
Nuisance, but it is now recognised as compliant not just in Barcelona, but throughout Spain.
That's an area of nuisance in England, that this is multiplying effort, and an incompetent and uncaring central gov isn't coordinating it.
@Hossenfeffer vehicle purchase decisions involved would be an earlier buying of a less old car, or not a LandRover Defender, Aston Martin DB5, old Diesel etc.
Petrol newer than 16 years old, diesel newer than 5y, generally.
Not, generally, of ordering a new VW ID.3 (I drove into the dealer, said "I'd like that one" drove it home, but if I'd made a specification it would have taken much of a year to arrive.
But if I had, I'd have an order form, and IIUC, would have been exempt from ULEZ charge!