Sheffield Congestion Charge From Feb 27th 2023

[mike1961]

1 hour ago, sheffbag said:

are they not the units, call them what you will, that are being used to provide the data to substantiate the CAZ? the name of them isnt important, they are monitoring the air quality at that point and the results from them are the reason why Sheffield is having the CAZ imposed

No it's not ,it's all about control and making money and you know that

[sheffbag]

19 minutes ago, mike1961 said:

No it's not ,it's all about control and making money and you know that

you evidently havent read my posts where i say that the CAZ isnt needed but hey feel free to increase your count by quoting something completely irrelevant to your post 

[mike1961]

10 minutes ago, sheffbag said:

you evidently havent read my posts where i say that the CAZ isnt needed but hey feel free to increase your count by quoting something completely irrelevant to your post 

Sorry I do apologise,I misread your post

[Longcol]

7 hours ago, Planner1 said:

Birmingham’s zone includes charging cars, so a lot more vehicles are involved. As far as I’m aware it is the same enforcement process as a parking or bus lane fine, so those who don’t pay can end up with a visit from bailiffs and paying much higher costs.

AFAIK Birmingham's  zone doesn't include the inner ring road, just roads inside it.

Edited January 31, 2023 by Longcol

[*_ash_*]

2 hours ago, Longcol said:

AFAIK Birmingham's  zone doesn't include the inner ring road, just roads inside it.

Birmingham is a bit like London, not really on the same level as cities like Sheffield and Leeds. 

 

Maybe Birmingham has been given more money for all the extra cameras required. 

 

#410 I asked @Planner1if he/she is prepared to accept their different responses over time.

Since at the time (a few years ago), I was keenly watching this subject, then planner1, will you accept that you've changed your stance?

You originally said that the reason the ring road was included in Sheffield was because it would cost too much money to install the necessary number of cameras for all the entrances into the city. Now you don't say this. 

 

Has your opinion changed, or the rules changed... what's changed? Can you clarify this please?

[Planner1]

11 hours ago, *_ash_* said:

Birmingham is a bit like London, not really on the same level as cities like Sheffield and Leeds. 

 

Maybe Birmingham has been given more money for all the extra cameras required. 

 

#410 I asked @Planner1if he/she is prepared to accept their different responses over time.

Since at the time (a few years ago), I was keenly watching this subject, then planner1, will you accept that you've changed your stance?

You originally said that the reason the ring road was included in Sheffield was because it would cost too much money to install the necessary number of cameras for all the entrances into the city. Now you don't say this. 

 

Has your opinion changed, or the rules changed... what's changed? Can you clarify this please?

All councils who have been directed to put CAZ’s in place have received substantial grants from the government to cover the cost of developing and installing the restrictions, including cameras, as well as covering the grants the councils  offer to vehicle owners to help with upgrades of vehicles and replacement with compliant ones. SCC’s grant was circa  £24 million.

 

I was told by the people who worked on the SCC scheme that the modelling work showed it would not deliver compliance unless the inner ring road was included.

 

These things take a lot of work to develop and they look at all the potential options. Schemes often change as they go through the development process. I’d guess the conversation you’re referring to was at a much earlier stage of scheme development, but I don’t remember it. The information I would have given would have reflected how things stood at that time.

[Guest]

1 hour ago, Planner1 said:

All councils who have been directed to put CAZ’s in place have received substantial grants from the government to cover the cost of developing and installing the restrictions, including cameras, as well as covering the grants the councils  offer to vehicle owners to help with upgrades of vehicles and replacement with compliant ones. SCC’s grant was circa  £24 million.

 

I was told by the people who worked on the SCC scheme that the modelling work showed it would not deliver compliance unless the inner ring road was included.

 

They would say this because they always want to do it their way and the public don't get a say.

 

This means that it will affect almost everybody rather than some.

 

One thing is for sure, if there are 2 choices, our planners & council will ALWAYS make the wrong one and the one most sure of killing the city centre entirely.

 

PEOPLE NEED TO FIGHT AND STOP ANY MORE RUBBISH LIKE THIS FROM BOTH PLANNERS & COUNCIL.

[HeHasRisen]

2 minutes ago, Organgrinder said:

They would say this because they always want to do it their way and the public don't get a say.

 

 

Yes you do. Every May (bar one year every 4), at the ballot box. 

 

Do you seriously want a referendum for every decision a local authority has to make?

[Planner1]

1 hour ago, Organgrinder said:

They would say this because they always want to do it their way and the public don't get a say.

 

This means that it will affect almost everybody rather than some.

 

One thing is for sure, if there are 2 choices, our planners & council will ALWAYS make the wrong one and the one most sure of killing the city centre entirely.

 

PEOPLE NEED TO FIGHT AND STOP ANY MORE RUBBISH LIKE THIS FROM BOTH PLANNERS & COUNCIL.

The way in which the CAZ scheme was planned ( the business case) was dictated by the government. That was the same for all councils who were mandated to implement them.

 

How is the CAZ going to affect “almost everybody”? It doesn’t involve cars. The vast majority of buses, taxis, vans and HGV’s using it will become compliant in very short order. Many of them are already compliant anyway.

 

Consultation on the CAZ has been done, but there’s no escaping the fact that the council has been instructed by the government to put one in place. Locals don’t want it will not be accepted as a reason for not doing so.

[Guest]

37 minutes ago, Planner1 said:

The way in which the CAZ scheme was planned ( the business case) was dictated by the government. That was the same for all councils who were mandated to implement them.

 

How is the CAZ going to affect “almost everybody”? It doesn’t involve cars. The vast majority of buses, taxis, vans and HGV’s using it will become compliant in very short order. Many of them are already compliant anyway.

 

Consultation on the CAZ has been done, but there’s no escaping the fact that the council has been instructed by the government to put one in place. Locals don’t want it will not be accepted as a reason for not doing so.

The government didn't tell them that they have to include the inner ring road.

Inner ring roads are an idea to attract the majority of traffic onto them, so that traffic elsewhere will be lighter.

This does the opposite.