HOPES of easing the burden of Manchester's congestion charges were due to be dashed today.
It all hinges on a bid to drop a plan for a third, inner `ring' just outside the city centre, which follows the route of the inner relief road.
If that happens drivers living outside the next band - the intermediate one - will have to pay even if they don't go right up to the city centre.
If the inner ring had existed they would have avoided paying provided their journey stopped before the inner zone. Area affected included Prestwich, Withington, Chadderton, parts of Ashton under Lyne and parts of Stockport.
Experts had been investigating the option of the third charging boundary.
But the Association of Greater Manchester Authorities was being asked to drop the plan - which came from a suggestion by Salford council leader John Merry - at a meeting today.
Sir Howard Bernstein, Manchester chief executive and clerk to the Passenger Transport Authority was expected to tell council leaders that a third ring would cost millions of pounds, increase congestion, and destroy the rest of the scheme as far as the government is concerned.
The government is being asked for £3bn in public transport improvements. The idea was not to charge vehicles in the morning peak which cross the intermediate ring without crossing the inner ring or which cross the inner ring but start their journeys inside the intermediate ring. The reverse would happen in the evening.
But Sir Howard said that the inner ring - which would cost £17m to set up and £3m a year to run - would charge just 31,750 drivers in the morning rush hour compared to 91,125 crossing the intermediate ring. That would be only half as effective in cutting journey times and would cost new jobs.
Sir Howard said: "The difference in outcomes of this scale would also undermine the case we are currently making for investment in our transport infrastructure."
And it would bring in up to £15m a year less in charges.
Because the plan is to borrow against those revenues, it would cut more than £300m from how much could be borrowed for public transport. Canny drivers would soon latch on to the idea of parking just outside the inner ring to avoid charges.
Sir Howard warns: "Such action would risk communities adjacent to the third ring becoming congested with traffic circulating to find car park spaces." Local shopping centre car parks would, he says, become full of commuter cars.
A third ring would `render the existing bid unsupportable in practice'.
What do you think? Have your say.
Tweet
Road charge `third zone' facing axe
October 26, 2007
HOWARD Bernstein: Third ring would cost millions of pounds

Showing comments 1 to 25 and replies | View All
Simon B, www.manchestertolltax.com (26/10/2007 at 10:21)
Snare Drum, Ashton-under-Lyne (26/10/2007 at 10:25)
polkyb (26/10/2007 at 10:25)
So does the first and second rings at £5 per day!
dessie, manchester (26/10/2007 at 10:25)
Speaking Bull, East Tepee (26/10/2007 at 10:52)
Heavens to Betsies!!! They wouldn't would they? - The naughty people - People WILL NOT go on the roads to a "ghost town and that is what it will become, so one zone or three is irelevant - If 77% of road users use their cars in preference to public transport - making them pay more is not the answer!
Simon B, www.manchestertolltax.com (26/10/2007 at 11:12)
And after that, the C-Charge monies go straight to central goverment anyway, not to directly to Greater Manchester public transport.
Pete in Salford, Salford (26/10/2007 at 11:28)
Terry (26/10/2007 at 11:56)
Al Capone, Atherton (26/10/2007 at 12:07)
Ricky Bad Boy, Manchester City Centre (26/10/2007 at 12:14)
Surely the congestion for local communities that would be caused by the inner boundary (as suggested by Sir Howard) would be pushed outwards to beyond the intermediate boundary by drivers wishing to leave their cars and use public transport for the remainder of their journey (if the publice transport ever exists of course!)
ace, manchester (26/10/2007 at 12:19)
Black Sabbath (26/10/2007 at 13:15)
Giles (26/10/2007 at 13:26)
Snare Drum, Ashton-under-Lyne (26/10/2007 at 13:45)
Don't be silly now, we all know that to be a bus driver all you have to know is to indicate and pull out without looking. Or theres the truck drivers that blame the sat nav for driving into a building.
Hey! doesn't this sound like how Leese and Jones work, bulldozing their ideas onto us without a thought of the damage they may cause to the future of Manchester. CONgestion charge, Stealtht Tax, Highway Robbery and all put forward by a Micky Mouse Government.
wkdboy1, Woodley (26/10/2007 at 13:54)
Call me Dave, Manchester (26/10/2007 at 14:30)
Absolute BS - multiply that by 10
When will they publish the finances, risk assessments, social mobility studies etc etc.
This is nothing but an exercise in obfuscation and deception - Look out Bolton Bury and Rochdale - Congestion charging coming to a town near you to pay for Manchester,s ambitions
alvinlwh (26/10/2007 at 15:49)
alvinlwh (26/10/2007 at 15:52)
Giles (26/10/2007 at 16:13)
The council give planning permission for a building that literally hundreds of people/businesses opposed which was funnily enough on the site of a car park.
The four lane road is only two now because the building site has taken over a pavement so they have put cones in the road so pedestrians can get round it. It is a new bottleneck. Go check it out on Whitworth Street near the junction of Princess Street in the village.
Simon B, www.manchestertolltax.com (26/10/2007 at 16:18)
"Recently, Oxford Road/Street had become much more congested. Why? Because they started the "upgrading" a week before University starts! And what "upgrading"? I got a copy of the plan, and it is just another exercise to increase congestion by putting in more Bus Lanes! The only reason for congestion on this, and many other roads are caused by Bus Lanes, which effectively reduced a road's capacity by 50%! Instead of widening roads, they build more bottle necks into it to create more congestion. And they call it "traffic planning"! "
Sack the boss of the GMPTE David Leather!!!
And sack Sir Howard Bernstein as well.
PW, Manchester (26/10/2007 at 19:39)
Believe me, I would love to use public transport to get to and from work, but it increases my working week by about 35%. In Denton, we have no proposed trams, and trains are non-existent. As far as Manchester-bound journeys are concerned, buses into town have to queue in the same artificially-created congestion that is becoming worse. Stop picking on workers!
Janet Lee (26/10/2007 at 23:03)
rammylad, ramsbottom (26/10/2007 at 23:41)
I was run over a month ago by a bus driver and he had accelerated towards me.
Question for the police: - If I cross a road with my arm out and my car keys or other sharp object in hand and a bus comes through on red and get's a nice expensive scratch down the side, who's at fault? Yes, I do now cross every crossing with my keys in my hand.
Womble, Westhoughton (27/10/2007 at 06:51)
Manchester is not London. I can't think of any 'institutions' other than the hospitals and universities, that can't relocate pretty easily.
What happens to the people who live within the congestion zone - will they get charged every time their car leaves their street?
This whole plan is bonkers and should be scrapped in its entirety before the city and its environs suffer economic damage beyond repair.
gladys rowbotham, Manchester (27/10/2007 at 09:06)
I will be fully exempt from the charge if I'm a member of a blackor minority ethnic group and/or from at least one of the EU accession states, apart from (Bulgaria or Romania, of course) and/or am a lone parent or otherwise in receipt of some benefit and/or under (or over) pensionable age AND I am an essential or low paid worker but live within boundary one and three and my vehicle is under 1400cc and I am driving with at least one passenger and although the buses are full of screaming kids travelling around all day for free ! Or will I ...........?
I dont' think this is as straightford as at first appears and in fact two very obvious questions remain:
1. What happens if/when there is an "r" in the month?
2. If a gumboil could boil oil, how much oil could a gumboil.............
Help - they're coming to get me.............