Request ID: FOI-3366-2324 Date published: 24 January 2024
You asked
Follow-on from FOI-3057-2324:
1 You were asked > • That means the locations that you used to collect the data, …..
The data requested was the locations used to collect the data, not the location of any cameras used.
Locations can be specified without providing precise locations of cameras.
In any event, the location of most if not all TFL ULEZ cameras is already public knowledge.
These two weblinks together show the location of around 3500 TFL ULEZ cameras.
http://webdefence.global.blackspider.com/urlwrap/?q=AXicY3BmUGFmYAgUZWQoyqk0NEjRKy4q08tNzMxJzs8rKcrP0UvOz2UwdvL1MivNSzawNDcwM2dwy_d0KEnL0UvPL9MrzWbIKCkpKLbS108uLSnRy6nUdyx3ibAwdQ9mYGDQ0mFgAABw_RwF&Z
http://webdefence.global.blackspider.com/urlwrap/?q=AXicY3BmUGFmYAgUZWQoyqk0NEjRKy4q08tNzMxJzs8rKcrP0UvOz2UwdvL1MivNSzawNDcwM2dwy_d0KEnL0UvPL9MrzWbIKCkpKLbS108uLSnRy6nUzyl3ibAo9vVlYGDQ0mFgAAB19Bxu&Z
The public has free access to these maps, and can zoom in to see the precise location of each of these cameras.
As this data is already in the public domain, TFL’s claims of an exemption are not valid.
In any event, all that is being asked for is a map that shows the locations used by TFL for its survey data.
It would be acceptable in the first instance for TFL to simply mark on these two maps with say a blue cross each location used.
This can then be accompanied by a linked list of the roads used and the direction surveyed.
It should be noted that the published data does include this information for each camera, but this FOI is not asking about the cameras, but the locations where data was collected.
-
2 Regardless of the location of the data collection points, there is no reason why TFL cannot provide the data from each one, for example listed by location NN, where NN is a number from 1 to whatever the highest number of locations used is.
Please provide the data requested.
-
3 TFL were asked:
> Please also confirm what data TFL has for compliant and non-compliant vehicles in outer London during each of the years 2016 to 2021 inclusive.
TFL say: “This information is provided in the First Month Report”.
However there is no table of data for the years 2016 to 2021.
Instead the compliance data only covers 2022 and 2023.
There is some traffic flow data from Jan 2019, but none for 2016-2018 incl.
Please provide the traffic flow data for 2016-2018 that corresponds to that provided for 2019-2023.
Please also provide compliance data for 2016-2021 for each of central, inner and outer London.
-
4 TFL were asked:
> • What is TFL’s assessment of the impact on driver behaviour of the Mayor stating with reasons in spring 2021 before the mayoral elections that expansion of the ULEZ to outer London made no sense, and then going directly against this policy announcement a year later?
There was no answer to this actual question.
Please explain what traffic and air quality factors led to the total reversal in TFL policy as stated by the Mayor between Spring 2021 and Spring 2022.
If it made “no sense” to expand the ULEZ to outer London in Spring 2021 in the lead-up to the mayoral elections, why did it become essential to do precisely that just one year later.
Thank you for your emails received by Transport for London (TfL) on 22 December 2023 and 3 & 8 January 2024, asking for information relating to the Ultra Low Emission Zone (ULEZ), including payment and autopay, vehicle and traffic data, enforcement, ANPR cameras and signage.
Your requests have been considered in accordance with the requirements of the Environmental Information Regulations (EIRs) and our information access policy. I can confirm we hold some of the information you require.
You asked for a wide range of information concerning the ULEZ scheme and its operation, comprising of nearly 50 questions across your requests. Approximately half of them do not even constitute a valid EIR request. Although a request can take the form of a question, rather than a request for specific documents, the EIRs only apply to recorded information. We do not have to answer questions for unrecorded comments, advice and explanation or the provision of a judgement, that was not already recorded at the time of your request.
Furthermore, we have established that the requested information is likely to be spread across a number of documents and files in multiple locations. Therefore, to identify, locate, extract and review the requested information would require a wide-ranging search of electronic and physical files. Given the wide range and volume of information you are looking for, we are applying Regulation 12(4)(b) as we believe that the requests are ‘manifestly unreasonable’ because the cumulative effect of your requests would impose unreasonable costs on us and require an unreasonable diversion of resources.
Answers to some of the questions may already be published in response to other information requests on this subject. Please check our transparency pages for previously answered requests here: https://tfl.gov.uk/corporate/transparency/freedom-of-information
Other information on the ULEZ that has been published, which may answer some of your questions, can be found here:
After reviewing the above documents and a search of our recent responses, you may wish to consider narrowing and/or focussing the scope of your requests so that we can more easily locate and retrieve any additional information you are seeking that is not already provided in these documents. There are limits on the time that we are required to spend determining whether we hold the information you are requesting, and the time spent locating, retrieving and extracting it. Therefore, you should identify the information that you want as clearly and concisely as you can, specifying the types of documents that you are looking for.
Please be assured that our application of the exception does not reflect a conclusion that it has been your deliberate intention to place an undue burden on TfL, and we will consider any future request for information on its merits and in accordance with the requirements of the FOI Act/EIRs and the expectations of the ICO. However, in making any future request I would ask that you consider carefully what information is of most importance to you. Please refer to the guidance and advice provided by the ICO on how to request information from a public authority, published here: https://ico.org.uk/your-data-matters/official-information/.
The use of this exception is subject to a public interest test, which requires us to consider whether the public interest in applying the exception outweighs the public interest in disclosure. We recognise that the release of information would promote accountability and transparency in public services and also help address any concerns you have about the operation of the scheme. However, the time it would take to provide the information you have requested would divert a disproportionate amount of our resources from its core functions and, taking into account the information already published, on balance we consider that the public interest currently favours the use of the exception.
Please see the attached information sheet for details of your right to appeal.
Yours sincerely
Eva Hextall FOI Case Officer
FOI Case Management Team General Counsel Transport for London
