Printable View
CONGESTION charging in the region is inevitable, councils in Merseyside have told Government ministers.
But that stance, contained in a report signed off by councillors earlier this month and now with the Department for Transport, has placed the local authorities on a collision course with one of the region's biggest developers.
More Here
http://www.liverpooldailypost.co.uk/...4375-19649167/
Yet another regressive tax that will affect the poorer motorist more, and some people have no choice but to drive to work.
I agree with it totally, although I think 4x4 drivers should pay 100 times more than everyone else.
its funny how a few years back the government was against out of town shopping because it created ghost towns, now look whats happening, they rebuild brown field sites only for investors to get penalised! *madness* but in reality we all know this is about creating revenue, and the more they can screw out of us the more ideas they will come up with, and now no doubt this will please the save the tree, or world nut jobs.
kat:PDT_Xtremez_12:
I'm sure there is a deliberate policy of intimidation against the car user by the city council.Quote:
Originally Posted by Howie
Now, let me get this right! Run it past me again. There's no complaints with the City of Liverpool's traffic flow, access or departure points.
Nevertheless they spend hundreds of millions of pounds of taxpayers hard-earned to pay for 'improvements' to the road system.
This causes congestion where there was no congestion before. So they are introducing congestion charges to ease the congestion and so return it to the easier traffic flow that existed before they 'improved' the roads..
Excuse me . . . may I leave the room . . . I just can't cope with this.
Congestion charge for Liverpool? Hello to the Trafford Centre good by Liverpool
CITY leaders fear the government will turn congestion charge ambitions to Liverpool following the defeat of plans for a toll in Manchester. Read
Liverpool just needs to:
- Update Merseyrail and reuse the underground tunnels
- Block up the urban motorway along the Strand
- Re-direct traffic coming out of Queensway tunnel by either by curving the tunnel underground and emerging in Byrom St or banning cars and using it for rail. This tunnel pours vehicles into the centre.
The Goree Warehouses on the Strand were demolished to accommodate a 50-60 mph inner motorway loop, that mercifully never transpired. Totally madness!!! The Strand was the only section built. It is best to get rid of the only section built and make the dock waters merge easily with the city beyond. This will reduce emissions and congestion in the centre. But the rail transports needs updating urgently.
In the 20th century the city had a fixation about cars and roads.
- Queensway tunnel poured cars into the city centre
- A whole district was demolished to get the Kingsway tunnel in.
- A city centre inner motorway was planned
- long wide boulevards were built projecting out to the city outskirts
Rail was ignored and run down. London Underground was formed in the 1930s. It merged a collection of different independent railways to form one large metro system. They did an excellent job. Liverpool tried this in the 1970s. It was partially done and the rest abandoned. Liverpool should have merged all the railways into one metro system just after WW2. Late as usual.
The Wapping Tunnel to the Central Station branch tunnels was started and abandoned. The outer loop from Hunts X to Aintree and to Edge Hill via Broad Green never took off as the local Tory MP complained his constituents (many car owners) would be inconvenienced by the construction at Broad Green junction. The track was then lifted. This would have made a loop back to Liverpool centre via Kirkdale.
It is time to block off many inner "motorways" and do what they originally intended but with a re-design to get the full underground tunnels operative in Liverpool and Birkenhead.
Then who needs congestion charging.
Being that Liverpool Is one of the major UK cities, It's digusting how Liverpool has been treated. No world class arenas or much regeneration till we were nominated for the COC for example.Quote:
Originally Posted by Waterways
I can imagine any congestion charge here in Liverpool getting the same thumbs down as in Manchester.Quote:
Originally Posted by Kev
Generally traffic flows quite well around Liverpool, the only problem have been the bottlenecks caused by the road narrowing as a consequence of the "Big Dig" and the remodelling of certain junctions.
Whoever remodelled the Water Street / Strand junction did so with the express aim of creating a traffic jam!
John
The remodelled Water st/Strand junction is rubbish as is the one outside the Adelphi.
Cities have to reach emission levels. Flow could be good but emissions high, so action is needed in congestion charging, encouraging electric and hybrid vehicles or pedestrianization. Ken Livingstone never met London's emission levels, even with congestion charging. That meant the charge was too low.Quote:
Originally Posted by irishseashipping.com
The city needs to get real. There has to be something to attract people to the city. The Albert Dock made the city attractive near the centre and was the start of giving the city some positive image - water always works, something they do not recognise or have forgotten.Quote:
Originally Posted by Max
But companies and people require more than that. A rapid transport infrastructure attracts people. The city should have insisted on having the underground uprated and re-used and an extension to John Lennon airport. Put together convincing staged plans and emphasise how essential it is for growth - which such systems are.
The city has not even put together a plan to the DfT in London to re-use the tunnels and get the city zipping along. If the infrastructure is there companies will find the place attractive and move in, along with people. This should have all been put together 10 years ago.
The city seems to think that when companies and people come they will uprate Merseyrail. How wrong they are. They put the cart before the horse.
Gavin Stamp in, Britain's Lost Cities, says "Liverpool is its own worst enemy". He is partially right.
Totally agree with you.Quote:
Originally Posted by Waterways
If you improve the flow of traffic you will reduce the pollution. Many recent road improvements have congested traffic.Quote:
Originally Posted by Waterways
Liverpool has enough pedestrianisation - do we need any more?
John
Getting rid of The Strand and having seamless pedestrianization from the docks to the city would be nice and it gets rid of the urban motorway - the New York Times criticised the wide fast road.Quote:
Originally Posted by irishseashipping.com
Discouraging cars and improving the underground will make matters better in a really big way all around.
Eliminating car parking from new residential blocks should be done too. This only encourages people to own cars unnecessarily.
On the wider view. Look at the new metro systems in Spain. Bilboa, Valencia, Alicanti, Sevilla, Palma have all new metro systems, partially underground. Barcelona and Madrid have extended their metros extensively. Most of this is within the past 20 years. The metro systems have greatly assisting these cities progression.Quote:
Originally Posted by Broliv
In the UK, we have London, Liverpool and Glasgow that have underground metro systems. Apart from London, nothing has been done to Glasgow or Liverpool's underground sections for decades. Liverpool has done some easy extensions on the peripheral overground sections. Although existing overground lines were merged into a surface metro system in Tyne & Weir. All we have done is implement silly, slow congestion causing trams in place like Manchester, Sheffield, Nottingham and Croydon.
We don't have much of a clue really. Rapid transit is the way, as the Spanish assessed. It alleviates cars in the centres and gets people around fast.