Forum Topic

Bollo Lane development

https://www.building.co.uk/news/developers-on-notice-for-670m-west-london-towers-scheme/5107069.article

Tania Bapuji ● 2296d18 Comments

Are there any more details available of the Ealing Common depot development? Does the Depot Museum survive?

Mark Evans ● 2296d

This development (I believe) covers Bollo Lane only, and does not encroach into Museum Way.

Gordon McDonald ● 2296d

Reading the aticle. 'Phase 1' goes as far as the station but 'Phase 2' extends into the depot area.

N V Brooks ● 2296d

That's correct. It looks as something is being planned as large again as the Bollo Lane development.

Andrew OSullivan ● 2296d

All the more reason to restrain the excesses of what we now know to be phase one (alongside Bollo Lane) so it doesn't set a precedent for the new phase two. Clearly TfL is under such financial pressure that every bit of railway land will be subject to redevelopment.

Peter Evans ● 2296d

Railway land has always been ripe for development.At least Ealing will see some income from the residential council tax - there is zero income from railway properties as they are 'business rates exempt'.

N V Brooks ● 2296d

Terms of reference just announced.  This is a review that will presumably lead to a package of measures to follow-on from the current government bail-out of TfL, which lasts until October.https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/financial-review-of-transport-for-london-terms-of-reference/terms-of-reference-for-the-government-led-financial-review-of-transport-for-londonInclusion of items like "development and assessment of options for .... non-fare based revenue and commercial income, including TfL’s housing development pipeline" and "revenue maximisation...including TfL’s housing development pipeline" would seem to imply there is unlikely to be any scaling back of the Bollo Lane plans.The government will want to minimise any additional money they need to provide.There could be some other interesting outcomes such as accelerating road user charging schemes, also referenced within the scope of the review.

Michael Robinson ● 2296d

So any hopes of them cancelling or postponing the extension of the ULEZ zone out to the N&S Circular roads are likely to be dashed.  That'll be another £4000 or so a year for us all to find if we move our car only a few yards every day, though I'm not sure how they'll know without installing thousands of extra cameras.

Peter Evans ● 2296d

The ULEZ will mitigate some of the extra traffic that will be generated by these schemes but possibly not by enough for roads like Gunnersbury Lane to be able to handle it.I'd assume that the cameras for the ULEZ will be at entry points so if you drive a car which doesn't qualify for the exemption within the zone you won't have to pay the charge.

Mark Evans ● 2295d

My understanding is that, even if we live within the ULEZ zone, we'll still have to pay the full amount to drive about with a non-compliant vehicle.  I've no idea how they'll monitor that, unless there'll be a blanket daily charge just for being there, never mind the hundreds of extra cameras they'll need to monitor every access road off 40 miles of the N/S Circular Roads.

Peter Evans ● 2295d

Like the congestion charge zone you will probably only be charged at the point of entering the zone so, if you have a non-compliant car, you could chose to keep it if you didn't have to cross the north circular regularly and you couldn't afford to get a new car.The ULEZ will reduce traffic a bit for the area in which this development is planned for but probably not enough to counteract the extra traffic. The Gunnersbury Lane Bollo Lane junction is problematic now even before an extra 1,700 flats are built in the area.

Paul Corcoran ● 2295d

Just to correct you -There ARE congestion charge cameras that operate inside the zone. Not that many, but there are certainly some e.g. New Cavendish Street. You can google their locations.

Andrew Jones ● 2295d

I'm pretty sure there will be no discount for living inside the ULEZ. The TfL sites do say "If you are driving any petrol or diesel vehicle within the expansion you will also need to meet the tighter emissions standards or pay a daily charge." though they'll need thousands of extra cameras to monitor us all. There's also this from a magazine article: "That would mean those who live within the zone could be forced to pay £12.50 if they use their car just once in a day to drive their children to school.  ..It is estimated that an additional 100,000 cars, 35,000 vans and 3,000 lorries might be affected by the expanded zone every day, City Hall said." That's a potential income of over £500m a year - unless we all replace our cars.

Peter Evans ● 2295d

What about hybrids?

Claire Moran ● 2295d

Hybrids are exempt.Interesting about the C-Charge having internal cameras. If they were installed locally for the ULEZ their presence would soon become known and people may be able to avoid them. Being stung for the occasional daily charge may work out cheaper than buying a new car.

Paul Corcoran ● 2295d

The point of a ULEZ is to cut pollution and prevent people dying before their time due to respiratory problems. And you're working out how to cheat it. Shame on you.https://www.nhs.uk/news/heart-and-lungs/air-pollution-kills-40000-a-year-in-the-uk-says-report/"Air pollution is contributing to about 40,000 early deaths a year in the UK," BBC News reports.The figures are the conclusion of a report assessing the impact of air pollution on public health in the UK. The report, published by the Royal College of Physicians and the Royal College of Paediatrics and Child Health, discusses the lifelong impact of air pollution. It presents a number of recommendations to the public, businesses and governments to make changes and reduce air pollution.The expert panel states: "Real change will only occur when everyone accepts this responsibility, and makes a concerted effort."

Ken Munn ● 2295d

I'm not working out how to cheat it. My car is compliant. I'm pointing out that people for whom buying a new car may not be an option and don't drive often or far enough to incur the charge may choose to keep the car they have - a decision which will have just about zero overall impact on air quality if their car is less than ten years old. So less of the sanctimonious self-righteousness please.

Paul Corcoran ● 2295d

Paying £12.50 every day that we move our (non-compliant) car around the streets of Chiswick, assuming they can detect it, would soon stack up. Three days a week would cost about £2000 a year, which could get us a replacement compliant car.  It wouldn't be an expensive hybrid or an impractical electric, but we could take our old diesel to somewhere outside London, where there'd still be a market for it, and trade it in for an even older petrol equivalent which, perversely, would meet the new low emission regulations.

Peter Evans ● 2295d