Issue - meetings

NB A further, more detailed, report will be circulated prior to the meeting.

            The Board considered a report of the Strategic Director – Environment regarding the Order being promoted by the Council under Section 168 of the Transport Act 2000 to secure powers to promote the elements of the Mersey Gateway Project (the “Project”) that related to the Silver Jubilee Bridge (“SJB”), in particular to authorise the imposition of charges upon vehicles using the SJB. The report outlined the next steps required to make an Order to impose such charges.

            In accordance with Section 170 of the Transport Act 2000, the Council commenced consultation on 30^th May 2008 in relation to the proposed road user charging scheme and the proposed A533 (SJB) Road User Charging Scheme Order, the objection period for which expired on 18^th August 2008. Details of the consultation, together with representations received and the responses to these representations, were outlined for Members’ consideration. It was noted that the responses to the consultation could be broken down into a number of broad types, which included support; opposition to charges/tolls in general on the SJB and/or Mersey Gateway Bridge; questions as to the legality of the proposals; suggestions that the SJB should not be the subject of charges; and suggestions for discounts or exemptions for tolls for certain groups.

            It was reported that without charges/tolls the Mersey Gateway project was not deliverable. Furthermore, the option of tolling the Mersey Gateway Bridge but leaving the SJB without charges was not a viable option. However, Members agreed that the proposed discount scheme should make provision for public transport to be exempt from tolling. In addition, there would be discounts for residents, which would be addressed at the stage at which the concession for the construction and operation of the Mersey Gateway project was let.

            The Board considered each of the representations made in response to the consultation, together with the officers’ comments, outlined at Annexe 4 to the report. In particular, it was noted that:

• the “do nothing” option would ultimately result in the SJB being congested at all times – this would be compounded by the maintenance work required on the bridge over the forthcoming years – whereas implementation of the project would result in free movement across the bridge;
• the Mersey Gateway project was comprised of a series of initiatives including a Sustainable Transport Policy;
• the traffic model took account of the value people placed on their time;
• people within deprived communities who did not have access to cars would not be tolled to cross the bridge if they were using public transport;
• it was intended that the revenue from the tolls would ultimately benefit public transport;
• older people of pensionable age would have access to free public transport;
• building a new bridge would have regenerative benefits to the area;
• the new bridge would be self-financing through tolls and PFI (Public Finance Initiative) Credits;
• the views of the shadow local authorities in Cheshire, which may differ from the existing authorities’, had also been sought;
• the question of whether or not  ...  view the full minutes text for item 34