M6 - Galway City Ring Road [planning decision pending]

Schadenfreudia

Iwannahurl wrote: »

Meaningless.




Incorrect.

Zzzzz.....

monument

Schadenfreudia wrote: »

Galway needs to build that bypass quickly to make public transport solutions viable.

Schadenfreudia wrote: »

OK, so you don't believe in public transport solutions for Galway either? Nobody will use them? Figures...

What public transport solutions?

Schadenfreudia wrote: »

Oxford would simply not work without its extensive ring road/bypass system. And it's not that much bigger than Galway.

Really?

City | Urban | Metro
Galway City | 75,529 | ?
Oxford | 171,380 | 244,000



Galway County | 250,541 | 6,149 km2
Oxfordshire | 654,800 | 2,605 km2

Iwannahurl wrote: »

I asked for evidence that the residents of Oxford are using their supposed "bypasses" to travel from one side of the city to another which might make the case of Oxford somewhat more relevant to the Galway City situation.

TBH I think you're overly focused on this point.

It is very likely that people are using the bypass for all sorts of trips.

Aard

Getting into the nitty gritty about Oxford is, frankly, pointless wrt Galway.

Schadenfreudia

monument wrote: »

What public transport solutions?

You tell me! :rolleyes:

Really?

City | Urban | Metro
Galway City | 171,380 | 244,000
Oxford | 75,529 | ?

Yep. Just like I said!

Not at all sure what point you are trying to make here.

Schadenfreudia

Aard wrote: »

Getting into the nitty gritty about Oxford is, frankly, pointless wrt Galway.

It seems that to the anti-bypass folk getting into the nitty gritty of anywhere is problematic!

They (some of them) have now dismissed all of the UK, the US and any European city that is subject to scrutiny - Amsterdam being but one example. :cool:

monument

Aard wrote: »

Getting into the nitty gritty about Oxford is, frankly, pointless wrt Galway.

Yes, that's the main point of my last post.

The population size and configuration is too different to get down to exact details so much.

There's good in comparing places but the Galway vs Oxford examples of any kind (be in pro car or pro cycling or pro bus etc) should not be dwelled on too much.

Schadenfreudia

monument wrote: »

Yes, that's the main point of my last post.

The population size and configuration is too different to get down to exact details.

You will find that, just like snowflakes, there is no perfect match.

But that hasn't stopped anti-bypass opinion here citing numerous places - until challenged.

monument

Schadenfreudia wrote: »

You will find that, just like snowflakes, there is no perfect match.

But that hasn't stopped anti-bypass opinion here citing numerous places - until challenged.

I'm not saying there's a perfect match and nor am I saying we should not be looking at other examples around the world, I'm saying the two of you are looking at Oxford in a bit too much detail without refering back to Galway enough.

The key is to adopt ideas and relate then to the context of Galway City and County.

Schadenfreudia wrote: »

Yep. Just like I said!

Not at all sure what point you are trying to make here.

You said that Oxford is not much larger -- that's clearly not the case and even more so when you look at the conext of the two cities:

Galway County | 250,541 | 6,149 km2
Oxfordshire | 654,800 | 2,605 km2

The size of the bypass network in Oxford is more to support the sounding areas. According to city council quotes in the media, the 'bypass' in Galway is mainly being designed to carry people from one side of the city to the other. That's not really a bypass, it's a car commuter relief and expansion road.

Schadenfreudia

Galway County | 250,541 | 6,149 km2
Oxfordshire | 654,800 | 2,605 km2

You said that Oxford is not much larger -- that's clearly not the case and even more so when you look at the context of the two cities:

Oxford Town is in the same ballpark as Galway City; the population of the surrounding county is a different issue.

The size of the bypass network in Oxford is more to support the sounding areas. According to city council quotes in the media, the 'bypass' in Galway is mainly being designed to carry people from one side of the city to the other. That's not really a bypass, it's a car commuter relief and expansion road.

The Galway City Outer Bypass (thread title) will (1) to carry traffic past Galway and out of the city centre (2) to facilitate suburb to suburb transport and (3) will facilitate public transport in and of the city centre.

All good.

Sam Russell

Schadenfreudia wrote: »

Every journey starts with a first step.....

It really depends if that first step is onto a bus or into a car.

monument

Schadenfreudia wrote: »

Oxford Town is in the same ballpark as Galway City; the population of the surrounding county is a different issue.

It's more than twice the population size of Galway and the county area around Oxford has a much larger population in a much smaller area.

Schadenfreudia wrote: »

The Galway City Outer Bypass (thread title) will (1) to carry traffic past Galway and out of the city centre (2) to facilitate suburb to suburb transport and (3) will facilitate public transport in and of the city centre.

All good.

There's already a route which bypasses the city centre.

I've already outlined how both suburb to suburb and suburb to city centre could be accommodated by Galway Luas and some key road junction upgrades. So, a bypass isn't the only way.

There's zero detail on how it could facilitate public transport in and of the city centre -- Irish cities and towns do not have a good record on using bypass construction as a way to take space from cars inside the bypassed areas.

veryangryman

monument wrote: »

There's zero detail on how it could facilitate public transport in and of the city centre -- Irish cities and towns do not have a good record on using bypass construction as a way to take space from cars inside the bypassed areas.

Really?

Limerick lost a lane on the old N18/N20 route around city
Enfield added HUGE waiting time to through red lights in town
Dublin added Bus Lanes all around city. Plus Luas, cycle lanes.
One way system in Sligo

Sam Russell

If Bothar na dTreabh, Galway was made freeflow, and the Terryland area was sorted out, much of the need for the outer bypass would be covered. Crossing the Corrib is the problem that needs solving.

€500m would allow and leave quite a bit to cover a public transport improvement.

Iwannahurl

Aard wrote: »

Getting into the nitty gritty about Oxford is, frankly, pointless wrt Galway.

monument wrote: »

Yes, that's the main point of my last post.

The population size and configuration is too different to get down to exact details so much.

There's good in comparing places but the Galway vs Oxford examples of any kind (be in pro car or pro cycling or pro bus etc) should not be dwelled on too much.

monument wrote: »

The key is to adopt ideas and relate then to the context of Galway City and County.

Exactly, we can learn from published case studies of other cities, and from their current transport policies.

Oxford stopped building roads in the 1970s, reportedly. The city is of course a destination for traffic from other areas, many of which may be highly car-dependent. The draft OTS 2015 proposes intercepting traffic before it even reaches the ring roads, which according to various accounts are significantly congested. New Park & Ride facilities beyond the outer cordon are being proposed. BRT is now seriously on the cards, because it has long been acknowledged that building roads for cars will not alleviate traffic congestion and will in fact generate more traffic.

In Galway the plan is to build a €500 million expressway for private transport, which will have the miraculous effect of shifting car commuters onto bus services for which there are no plans (and no budget, not even a notional one).

Iwannahurl

Schadenfreudia wrote: »

The Galway City Outer Bypass (thread title) will (1) to carry traffic past Galway and out of the city centre (2) to facilitate suburb to suburb transport and (3) will facilitate public transport in and of the city centre.

All good.

Not good enough.

The expressway is to facilitate "suburb to suburb" car transport, which is a failed strategy on several levels, not least because it is hugely inefficient. The facilitation of car transport over three or four decades is what has led to levels of car dependence that are very high by EU standards. The only sustainable option is "suburb to suburb" public transport, and related supportive measures, which was not even in the consultants' brief. If Arup had been given a €500 million nominal budget and a brief for sustainable and efficient "suburb to suburb" transport solutions, it is highly unlikely they would have proposed an expressway. That's just speculation of course, but the long-established international evidence points to one conclusion: building more roads for cars does not solve traffic congestion in the long run.

Schadenfreudia

Iwannahurl wrote: »

Not good enough.

Considerably better than anything I've heard from you!

SeanW

Iwannahurl wrote: »

Now, this is a challenge. One of the few small cities with a congestion charge that I have been able to find is Znojmo in the Czech Republic.

Hmm, got this from your link ...

Road pricing is any system that directly charges motorists for the use of a road or network of roads.

By this definition, Ireland already had one of the most punitive road pricing systems in the world.

Two questions arise:

1. Are you looking for a supplementary or replacement road pricing system (i.e. would you keep or scrap "Motor" tax)?
2. Why would you punish traffic that is forced through Galway city that has no business being there (e.g. Ennis-Clifden)?

You can see why sane some people have a problem with this?

Sam Russell

SeanW wrote: »

Hmm, got this from your link ...
By this definition, Ireland already had one of the most punitive road pricing systems in the world.

Two questions arise:

1. Are you looking for a supplementary or replacement road pricing system (i.e. would you keep or scrap "Motor" tax)?
2. Why would you punish traffic that is forced through Galway city that has no business being there (e.g. Ennis-Clifden)?

You can see why sane some people have a problem with this?

Motor tax is not a use-based tax - you pay it whether you use the vehicle or not.

I think making the existing routes through Galway free-flow would alleviate the current problem at greatly less cost. Another bridge over the Corrib is needed - no doubt about that.

SeanW

Sam Russell wrote: »

Motor tax is not a use-based tax - you pay it whether you use the vehicle or not.

The tax is based on the use of a motor vehicle on public roads. You can own a motor but pay no motor tax by not driving it on public roads (motors that are stored, only ever used off-road are not liable, provided any associated paperwork is in order).

This is different to a property tax, which is usually limited to a percentage of the asset's value, and does not have exemptions for non-use.

Thusly according to IWHs own definition, Ireland already has "road pricing" (and quite a punitive regime at that) although it does not function effectively as a congestion charge. His own definition says "any system that charges motorists for the usage of a road or network of roads"

Motor tax (and its UK equivalent Vehicle Excise Duty, both colloquially known as "road tax) fit this description. The question now arises, does IWH want to replace the current road pricing system with a new one does he/she want multiple regimes of road pricing simultaneously.

Sam Russell

SeanW wrote: »

The tax is based on the use of a motor vehicle on public roads. You can own a motor but pay no motor tax by not driving it on public roads (motors that are stored, only ever used off-road are not liable, provided any associated paperwork is in order).

This is different to a property tax, which is usually limited to a percentage of the asset's value, and does not have exemptions for non-use.

Thusly according to IWHs own definition, Ireland already has "road pricing" (and quite a punitive regime at that) although it does not function effectively as a congestion charge. His own definition says "any system that charges motorists for the usage of a road or network of roads"

Motor tax (and its UK equivalent Vehicle Excise Duty, both colloquially known as "road tax) fit this description. The question now arises, does IWH want to replace the current road pricing system with a new one does he/she want multiple regimes of road pricing simultaneously.

Tolls, such as those levied in Ireland, are a usage tax. Motor tax and the TV license are taxes on ownership, not usage. Property tax is a wealth tax levied on the owner of the property, based on its value - different tax entirely.

I get no reduction on my road tax if I use the bus, but I do not pay a toll if I am on the bus. If I intend to use my vehicle, whether I do or not, I have to pay the road tax (and incidentally I have to insure the vehicle), otherwise, I have to declare the vehicle 'off the road' and suffer severe penalties if I am found on the road with it.

Schadenfreudia

Sam Russell wrote: »

Motor tax and the TV license are taxes on ownership, not usage.

It has already been pointed out that in relation to motor tax that is untrue. If you leave your car off the public roads you need pay no motor tax.

In fact, it was pointed out to you in the post you are quoting!

Sam Russell

Schadenfreudia wrote: »

It has already been pointed out that in relation to motor tax that is untrue. If you leave your car off the public roads you need pay no motor tax.

In fact, it was pointed out to you in the post you are quoting!

If you park your car on a public road, you are not using the car - merely parking it. If you intend to use the car, it must be taxed and insured, whether you actually use it or not. On the other hand, a toll is only charges for the use of the road that is tolled. Road tax is not a USAGE charge, but an OWNERSHIP charge. If you borrow a car, the road tax is paid by the owner, not the user. However, if the borrowed car passes the toll booth, the driver (user) must pay.

In order to avoid road tax, it is not enough to keep it off the road, you must declare beforehand that it is off the road. It is not sufficient just to 'not use it', you must be certain to declare it so.

what_traffic

http://www.rte.ie/radio1/today-with-sean-o-rourke/programmes/2015/0701/711909-today-with-sean-o-rourke-wednesday-1-july-2015/?clipid=1919828

Last point made by Kevin Gill was interesting.
NRA rep had nothing NEW to say other than expectation that 30,000 vehicle's will use the NEW Bridge.

Schadenfreudia

Sam Russell wrote: »

Road tax is not a USAGE charge, but an OWNERSHIP charge.

Nonsense - even you own arguments don't support that contention. You can own a car without payong motor tax, period.

If you borrow a car, the road tax is paid by the owner, not the user. However, if the borrowed car passes the toll booth, the driver (user) must pay.

So how do they identify the driver?! The bill gets sent to the owner.

In order to avoid road tax, it is not enough to keep it off the road, you must declare beforehand that it is off the road. It is not sufficient just to 'not use it', you must be certain to declare it so.

So? You can own the car without paying the tax. It is a tax on using the car on a public road.

Sam Russell

Schadenfreudia wrote: »

So? You can own the car without paying the tax. It is a tax on using the car on a public road.

You can own a car without paying the tax as long as you declare in advance you do not intend to use it and will pay a penalty if you do.

It is a tax on using, or intending to use, the car on the public road and is payable whether you do actually use it or not - it is not a tax on how much you use it. It is like a club membership - you pay the same whether you go or not, but green fees are a usage charge.

A usage charge has to be based on actual usage, not permission to use. Toll charges are a usage tax, that is for sure. If I keep off the tolled sections, I do not pay.

Schadenfreudia

Sam Russell wrote: »

You can own a car without paying the tax as long as you declare in advance you do not intend to use it and will pay a penalty if you do.

It is a tax on using, or intending to use, the car on the public road and is payable whether you do actually use it or not - it is not a tax on how much you use it. It is like a club membership - you pay the same whether you go or not, but green fees are a usage charge.

A usage charge has to be based on actual usage, not permission to use. Toll charges are a usage tax, that is for sure. If I keep off the tolled sections, I do not pay.

You are obfuscating! It is a tax one car usage on a public road - whether you drive it or not.

If you keep it in your garage you pay no motor tax. therefore, QED, it ain't a tax on car ownership.

Your arguments are slightly ridiculous :rolleyes:

Sam Russell

Schadenfreudia wrote: »

If you keep it in your garage you pay no motor tax. therefore, QED, it ain't a tax on car ownership.

You might as well keep it in a museum, or give it away.

You are missing my point entirely. If you wish to use the car, you need to pay motor tax (and insurance). That gives you the right to use it. That does not amount to a usage tax - you pay the same whether you use it or not.

Schadenfreudia

Sam Russell wrote: »

If you park your car on a public road..etc.

You are in denial of a simple fact. I'm not going to keep arguing the same point over and over.

The moon is made of cheese, OK?

SeanW

Sam Russell wrote: »

You might as well keep it in a museum, or give it away.

A motor may be legitimately used off road. If it's a campervan, you can use it as a camper on your property while not paying Motor (usage) tax. You only have to tax it if you are taking onto the road. Cars limited to use on racetracks and suchlike can be towed to the track. Cars can also be legitimately owned, but left off the road for a short time if you run out of money. While it is off the road, you will want to start the engine (i.e. use it albeit only in the driveway) every week or so to keep the battery charged.

The tax is on road usage. Full stop. By Iwannahurls linked definition, tolls and "motor" tax are both "Road Pricing". The question is, is congestion charging to be an additional or replacement Road Pricing scheme?

You are missing my point entirely. If you wish to use the car, you need to pay motor tax (and insurance). That gives you the right to use it. That does not amount to a usage tax - you pay the same whether you use it or not.

If you weren't going to use it, you'd be a moron to pay the tax! You said it yourself, if you wish to use it (on public roads) then you need to pay tax on that intended usage.

Iwannahurl

Sam Russell wrote: »

Motor tax is not a use-based tax - you pay it whether you use the vehicle or not.

Sam Russell wrote: »

I get no reduction on my road tax Motor Tax if I use the bus, but I do not pay a toll if I am on the bus. If I intend to use my vehicle, whether I do or not, I have to pay the road tax Motor Tax (and incidentally I have to insure the vehicle), otherwise, I have to declare the vehicle 'off the road' and suffer severe penalties if I am found on the road with it.

I pay Motor Tax, and I am fully in favour of increased taxes on car usage. Additional charges that would take proper account of currently unpaid externalities include road pricing, proper fees for parking and carbon taxes. These charges should be set at a rate that achieves the necessary effect in terms of a reduction in car use and a decrease in traffic congestion. Alone or in combination, and as part of a suite of Demand Management measures, such economic interventions would be a sustainable alternative to more road building, such as the "bypass" proposed for Galway.

Sam Russell wrote: »

I think making the existing routes through Galway free-flow would alleviate the current problem at greatly less cost.

Twenty years on (at least) we are still waiting for meaningful proposals to reduce total traffic in, through and across the city. Of course the reason for the long-term lack of such proposals is that various vested interests have always regarded motor traffic in, through and across the city as inherently A Good Thing. From the perspective of the vested interests, the larger the overall volume of motorised traffic the better. It only becomes a problem when average speeds are slowed down by the sheer weight of traffic, and motorists are unduly delayed by their own numbers. This is why a new road is the only serious proposal on the table so far: it is the Business As Usual solution par excellence.

It also explains why there are no serious moves to constrain traffic in the city centre. For example, there are political pressures, including from the "Left", for more public subsidies, aimed only at motorists, to draw more cars into the centre of Galway. This is happening in parallel with efforts to have a "bypass" built, on the basis that there are too many cars in the city. You don't have to make this stuff up, because Irish local and national politicians are writing the script.

Sam Russell wrote: »

Another bridge over the Corrib is needed - no doubt about that.

I might be persuaded to accept that, if presented with good evidence. Are you aware of any such evidence having been published?

From the Galway City forum, 1st July 2015:

JillyQ wrote: »

I cross from Salthill to Ballybrit every day. It takes me 25 mins at rush hour.