Glasgow Congestion Charge

[HLaB]

I heard on the news tonight that Glasgow are thinking of introducing a congestion charge or something, fining the biggest polluters.

BBC
STV
ITS

What do people think about that?

 

[simoncc]

Manchester council wants one. It's a racket to raise cash. Birmingham have decided they don't need one, and so has New York, so I'm sure Glasgow and Manchester don't need them.

 

[MERV]

6 cans of Special Brew?

 

[Tetedelacourse]

Initial thoughts:

1. About damn time, but...

2. They plan to put it out to public consultation. If that's lip service then fair enough but if they plan to do what the consultation recommends then forget it. There's no way the public will vote in favour.

3. A bit difficult to create LEZ in Glasgow due to the M8 slicing through very near the city centre.

4. It would be unfair on retailers if the public are suddenly expected to pay to park at out of town retail parks, having previously not had to. The retailers are only there because the council and town planners don't want vast shops in the city centre exacerbating the congestion problems.

 

[magnatom]

Great idea, but getting it right is very difficult. As tete says, might be hard on retailers etc.

 

[Tetedelacourse]

They piloted congestion charges in Edinburgh didn't they? Or was it scrapped before it ever came to pass? I can't recall now.

I reckon it's time the public were told what's good for them rather than ask them if they'd like it.

I drive a fair bit too fwiw. Was pretty pi$$ed off with the removal of tolls on the FRB and believe me, living where I live and working where I work I'm in the group that's supposed to have benefitted most. Backwards thinking govt.

 

[HLaB]

They piloted congestion charges in Edinburgh didn't they? Or was it scrapped before it ever came to pass? I can't recall now.

I reckon it's time the public were told what's good for them rather than ask them if they'd like it.

I drive a fair bit too fwiw. Was pretty pi$$ed off with the removal of tolls on the FRB and believe me, living where I live and working where I work I'm in the group that's supposed to have benefitted most. Backwards thinking govt.

I was living in Dublin at the time but I don't think they actually piloted just consulted and I think one of the main objections were the drivers of Fife were getting double charged, once on the bridge and oce to enter Edinburgh. Now they pay neither since the toll are removed. I thought that was a backward step to and it wasn't as if the the tolls were too high IMO they weren't high enough.

 

[Morrisette]

Cambridge is trying for this as well. Unsurprisingly it isn't popular.

Mind you, it isn't well planned, they haven'y thought through things like, whether the hospital will be inside the zone, and if city residents or the disabled will get discounts. It's fairly obvious that the money is all going to go into Stagecoach's back pocket (the bus company that basically has a monopoly on routes, in town anyway). There is meant to be money for cycling, but not that much - mainly it's buses buses buses. There was public consultation, but everyone thinks/knows it's a done deal.

I am broadly in favour of it, but one thing really irritates me about the whole scheme - the ONE thing they could do to improve traffic in town is expand the school bus service, including for the private schools, and that's the ONE thing that has never been mentioned....my thought is that if they did this, none of the other measures would be necessary.

 

[Maz]

Cambridge is trying for this as well. Unsurprisingly it isn't popular...

Yeah, tell me about it. I got a ticket slapped on my windscreen when I was displaying a valid resident's parking permit in the Riverside area...they claimed they couldn't see the permit cos the windscreen was frosted up n stuff.

I 'aint paying a penny. Wanna sue me? See you in Strasbourg!

 

[domd1979]

Virtually all road pricing schemes are predicated on re-investing any revenue in transport improvements. Your argument that it is a "racket to raise cash" holds no water.

Manchester council wants one. It's a racket to raise cash. Birmingham have decided they don't need one, and so has New York, so I'm sure Glasgow and Manchester don't need them.

 

[jmaccyd]

Talking with experience of the London C charge I have to say I don't think it has worked. It certainly had an effect initially, with a noticable drop in traffic levels. This honey-moon period has worn off and traffic levels are back to, or are worse, than before the C charge was implemented. The excuse to place CCTV camera everywhere is also something that I am now finding very concerning.

A positive - a lot more people cycling to work, so more cyclists!

 

[BentMikey]

A positive - a lot more people cycling to work, so more cyclists!

So apparently, according to you, it did work after all?

 

[jmaccyd]

So apparently, according to you, it did work after all?

If the aim of the C charge was to increase the number of people cycling in London then it has been a success. If the aim of the C charge was to reduce congestion then its failed.

 

[domd1979]

If you read the quite extensive research into the London congestion charge, including the annual monitoring reports (also pretty comprehensive) it has been a success, and traffic levels are still lower. There are other external factors at play such as a substantial increase in the amount of road works taking place (especially by utilities), which obviously impact upon congestion.

Info at:

http://www.tfl.gov.uk/roadusers/congestioncharging/6722.aspx#2

If the aim of the C charge was to increase the number of people cycling in London then it has been a success. If the aim of the C charge was to reduce congestion then its failed.

 

[MERV]

If the aim of the C charge was to increase the number of people cycling in London then it has been a success. If the aim of the C charge was to reduce congestion then its failed.

I agree at least on my route there are more cyclists.