"N6 Galway City Transport Project"

KevR · 12-02-2015 6:45pm

Mrs OBumble wrote: »

So would mode-shifts among intra-city commuters. And it would be a lot cheaper and less disruptive of the homes of people and snails.

KevR wrote: »

Did it not cost almost €16 million to put bus and cycle lanes either side of the SQR? That was a distance of 1.6km

I'm genuinely curious about:
How many kms of bus and cycle lanes would we need to build to see a major modal shift?

Assuming that frequency would increase on existing routes and new routes would be introduced - how big would the fleet of buses need to be and how much would it cost?

What sort of subsidy would be required to run the bus network on a day to day basis?

Anyone???

what_traffic · 12-02-2015 10:54pm

KevR wrote: »

I'm genuinely curious about:
How many kms of bus and cycle lanes would we need to build to see a major modal shift?

Assuming that frequency would increase on existing routes and new routes would be introduced - how big would the fleet of buses need to be and how much would it cost?

What sort of subsidy would be required to run the bus network on a day to day basis?

I am too. I agree with you why was this information was not included in the Galway Transportation Study under the Public Transportation? Rather than 1 A4 sheet with a few graphics on it? Seems obvious that it should.

SeanW · 13-02-2015 11:23am

Mrs OBumble wrote: »

Rightly so - because this traffic would not by bypassing the city.

???

And if the existing roads were freed up by providing mode-shifts for intra-city travelers, then these people would get the benefits of the bypass without the huge costs.

The problem with that is twofold:

This traffic would still be going through the city.
There is little way to segregate "illegitimate" short haul traffic and genuine "legitimate" long haul traffic more suited to a bypass. Iwannahurl has repeatedly states that the solution is to have congestion charging, take roads space away from cars and lower speed limits, all of this before a bypass or more likely instead of one ... how does this help East-West long distance traffic?

what_traffic wrote: »

I am too. I agree with you why was this information was not included in the Galway Transportation Study under the Public Transportation? Rather than 1 A4 sheet with a few graphics on it? Seems obvious that it should.

So you are promoting a radical modal-shift strategy but you have no idea how much it would cost?

KevR · 13-02-2015 7:07pm

what_traffic wrote: »

I am too. I agree with you why was this information was not included in the Galway Transportation Study under the Public Transportation? Rather than 1 A4 sheet with a few graphics on it? Seems obvious that it should.

They key for me is the day to day subsidy. The up front infrastructure costs for public transport can be set aside.

Even entirely writing off the cost of putting the infrastructure in place, would we still end up with a public transport system that:

will never turn a profit?
will never even take in enough money to cover its own costs?

I fully admit that public transport is better than petrol/diesel private cars in environmental terms. However, it is never going to be a more sustainable in financial terms.

Some people on here seem genuinely shocked that politicians are not falling over themselves to build public transport and are instead looking to build roads. It's remarkable that anyone is surprised by this. Reality check - the politicians have a country to run! The financial contribution from motoring is colossal - it helps to fund the health service, education, the welfare system...etc. Not to mention it helps to subsidise public transport!

Even the London Underground with it's packed trains and high fares requires a multi-billion pound subsidy every year...
http://www.conservativehome.com/localgovernment/2009/11/a-conservative-government-should-scrap-the-3-billion-annual-subsidy-to-transport-for-london.html

Put yourself in the shoes of our politicians - you have a country to run and that costs a lot of money. If you force enough people out of their cars, how do you make up the difference in tax take? <-- Serious and honest question.

Do you drastically increase public transport fares so that public transport is now turning a profit and contributing towards the likes of the health service, education and welfare?? Higher fares would push people away from using public transport, therefore more and more people would start walking/cycling (decreasing revenue opportunities even further). Do you then tax people more on their wages???

Where does your tax go?
An €83.60 spend on petrol incorporates €47.96 in taxes. This breaks down as follows:

€15.87 on Social Programmes
€11.14 on Health
€6.89 on Education
€6.26 on Debt
€7.79 on Other

Not to mention Motor Tax, VRT and VAT.

The difference would have to be made up somehow if there was a modal shift to the level that some people on here are hoping for.

Does anyone think that increased use of electric cars (powered by clean green energy) is more practical and more likely than major modal shifts in Ireland (apart from maybe Dublin where they have scope for a shift towards rail)? It won't happen overnight but we could set 10 and 20 year targets for electric cars and pursue those targets aggressively. People will generally be happier with this solution given that many people prefer driving for various reasons. This solution also secures motoring revenue which can continue to fund health, education, welfare...etc. Seems like a win-win. New roads are a must for this.

KevR · 13-02-2015 7:17pm

If we see more of this type of thing, there will eventually be a tide shift away from petrol/diesel.
http://www.latimes.com/business/autos/la-fi-hy-chevy-confirms-bolt-ev-20150211-story.html

Assuming that we can generate enough clean electricity, this will seriously undermine the only legitimate argument against private car use and road building.

Iwannahurl · 14-02-2015 5:39pm

KevR wrote: »

I fully admit that public transport is better than petrol/diesel private cars in environmental terms. However, it is never going to be a more sustainable in financial terms.

Some people on here seem genuinely shocked that politicians are not falling over themselves to build public transport and are instead looking to build roads. It's remarkable that anyone is surprised by this. Reality check - the politicians have a country to run! The financial contribution from motoring is colossal - it helps to fund the health service, education, the welfare system...etc. Not to mention it helps to subsidise public transport!

It is typical of the socio-political culture in this country that public transport is seen as a cost rather than an essential service that needs to be provided, and funded accordingly.

In Stockholm, for example, people with children in prams can travel free. The bus service is also reliable, frequent, punctual, clean, efficient etc. The mere idea of it enough to make Irish policy-makers' heads explode.

As for private cars, our system of local and national government is entirely addicted to revenue derived from motoring, which is why they mostly give lip service to sustainable transport while doing everything they can to keep the goose laying golden eggs. The same applies to revenue from alcohol and tobacco, in my opinion.

KevR · 14-02-2015 6:04pm

Iwannahurl wrote: »

It is typical of the socio-political culture in this country that public transport is seen as a cost rather than an essential service that needs to be provided, and funded accordingly.

In Stockholm, for example, people with children in prams can travel free. The bus service is also reliable, frequent, punctual, clean, efficient etc. The mere idea of it enough to make Irish policy-makers' heads explode.

As for private cars, our system of local and national government is entirely addicted to revenue derived from motoring, which is why they mostly give lip service to sustainable transport while doing everything they can to keep the goose laying golden eggs. The same applies to revenue from alcohol and tobacco, in my opinion.

What would you do if you were in their shoes though? You would have to find significant new revenue streams if there was a drastic transport modal shift. Would you tax people more on their wages? Or would you get the money from elsewhere?

You say public transport is "sustainable". What do you mean by this? Environmentally sustainable? If so, that's fair enough.

Financial sustainability is very questionable - we have people on here casually suggesting that there can and should be a significant modal shift towards public transport. Yet nobody has mentioned what the day to day subsidy is likely to be and nobody has discussed where this money would come from. Subsidising public transport is not a one-off cost, it is long-term current expenditure.

I could happily live with a few hundred million being spent on public transport infrastructure in Galway if the system could then be financially self-sufficient in day to day operations. The unknowns surrounding long term subsidy make me feel very uneasy.

17-02-2015 10:45am

There's a meeting being held in the Westwood Hotel on Thursday 19th February at 7pm. Anyone who might be affected by any routes on this road should attend as it's good for people to knock their heads together and come up with submissions. The closing date for submissions looms next week...on Friday 27th February.

what_traffic · 17-02-2015 5:34pm

Emma Breezy Men wrote: »

There's a meeting being held in the Westwood Hotel on Thursday 19th February at 7pm. Anyone who might be affected by any routes on this road should attend as it's good for people to knock their heads together and come up with submissions. The closing date for submissions looms next week...on Friday 27th February.

Is this a residents association meeting, or groups of residents associations in the area?

17-02-2015 7:16pm

what_traffic wrote: »

Is this a residents association meeting, or groups of residents associations in the area?

Groups of residents from all of the routes and from different areas of Galway City. It will be a large meeting with a few hundred in attendance. Well worth going to if you are along any of the routes.

Pete_Cavan · 17-02-2015 7:42pm

KevR wrote: »

If we see more of this type of thing, there will eventually be a tide shift away from petrol/diesel.
http://www.latimes.com/business/autos/la-fi-hy-chevy-confirms-bolt-ev-20150211-story.html

Assuming that we can generate enough clean electricity, this will seriously undermine the only legitimate argument against private car use and road building.

Surely the biggest argument against the private car in urban centres is congestion - the lost productivity etc. from thousands of people spending large amounts of time each day sitting behind the wheel crawling through traffic. Regardless of how cheap or clean fuel is, it does not offset this.

Iwannahurl · 18-02-2015 4:36pm

Emma Breezy Men wrote: »

Groups of residents from all of the routes and from different areas of Galway City. It will be a large meeting with a few hundred in attendance. Well worth going to if you are along any of the routes.

It's being organised by the newly-formed "N6 Action Group", which, to my surprise, is against a "bypass":

Mr Mike Geraghty of the N6 Action Group said Galwegians should oppose the plan regardless of their proximity to the routes because “the whole thing isn’t good for Galway”.

The Galway N6 Action Group is organising a public meeting on Thursday, 19 February at 7pm in the Westwood Hotel.

http://www.galwayindependent.com/20150218/news/calls-for-road-reversal-S51045.html

Iwannahurl · 18-02-2015 4:44pm

KevR wrote: »

Assuming that we can generate enough clean electricity, this will seriously undermine the only legitimate argument against private car use and road building.

Thereby demonstrating the unsustainable folly of promoting and facilitating private car use.

Pete_Cavan wrote: »

Surely the biggest argument against the private car in urban centres is congestion - the lost productivity etc. from thousands of people spending large amounts of time each day sitting behind the wheel crawling through traffic. Regardless of how cheap or clean fuel is, it does not offset this.

Also an example of the rebound effect, whereby hoped-for energy savings do not materialise because the lower 'per unit' energy use leads to more use, exacerbated in the case of roads by the accommodation of even more energy users.

18-02-2015 4:48pm

Iwannahurl wrote: »

It's being organised by the newly-formed "N6 Action Group", which, to my surprise, is against a "bypass":

100% INCORRECT. They are NOT against a bypass. You should get your facts correct before making such an outlandish comment. The "whole thing" is the current proposed alignments that impact so heavily on people's HOMES...when there IS an alternative.

The group will make technical and legal submissions and observations based on FACT.

A bypass is a GOOD thing for the city.

However, with all of the current proposed routes, a large number of people's homes are set to be demolished. An alternative route still exists (the original route, which, contrary to most people's beliefs, is NOT dead) which goes through some SAC and doesn't have as significant an impact on human habitats, then of course people are going to make submissions about this!

A huge majority of people who show up tomorrow night (from all areas of Galway City may I add and from all 'sides' of the 'argument') are pro-bypass.

If you had actually attended any of the meetings you would be aware that people are NOT against a bypass. Getting the correct route that has minimal impact on the community and environment takes precedence.

Iwannahurl · 18-02-2015 4:53pm

Emma Breezy Men wrote: »

100% INCORRECT. They are NOT against a bypass. You should get your facts correct before making such an outlandish comment.

Maybe there are two meetings (or a double booking) in the Westwood?

Mr Geraghty [of the Galway N6 Action Group] said he would oppose all routes, even if it deflected the path of the road from his home. “I’m very much against this ‘nimby’-ism, saying ‘as long as it isn’t the red route, I don’t care’ – I don’t believe in that, I think the whole thing is flawed.”

The Galway N6 Action Group is organising a public meeting on Thursday, 19 February at 7pm in the Westwood Hotel.

18-02-2015 5:12pm

Iwannahurl wrote: »

Maybe there are two meetings (or a double booking) in the Westwood?

The N6 Action Group comprises many, many members. The group does not oppose a bypass. I can say this with 100% certainty. What they do oppose is the current alignments as an alignment exists which is not shown and doesn't demolish dwellings (the original alignment, which could still be adopted).

I don't think anyone can account for the comments of others. Making comments about opposing the whole bypass etc. seems to me to be damaging to what the group is really about. Is it possible that the words were taken out of context, in that opposed to current alignments but not more suitable ones?-possibly?....the current alignments are indeed flawed. I'd love to see a bypass going ahead...would make my life a heck of a lot easier each day. But I don't want it to go ahead and knock many, many houses when there IS a route that won't do this...but isn't shown and yet isn't dead in the water.

I have just read the article in the Independent and I know for a fact that a huge majority of this group are pro-bypass...just not pro-knocking human habitats when there's an option where less than an acre of SAC is affected. The group has highly qualified legal and technical representation so they are not just shouting their mouths off with rubbish, nor are they tree-huggers.

Again, let me reiterate...the group cannot account for individual's comments about their personal opinions in relation to the bypass. The group are very much pro-bypass.

Iwannahurl · 18-02-2015 5:18pm

So the many many members of the N6 Action Group are fully in support of a "bypass", as long as it's not built on or near their property?

nice_guy80 · 18-02-2015 7:36pm

tunnels are the best option for this.
untolled.

either that or put the whole up on stilts, like they do in the USA

KevR · 18-02-2015 7:44pm

Pete_Cavan wrote: »

Surely the biggest argument against the private car in urban centres is congestion - the lost productivity etc. from thousands of people spending large amounts of time each day sitting behind the wheel crawling through traffic. Regardless of how cheap or clean fuel is, it does not offset this.

That argument doesn't stand up to much scrutiny.

It suggests that there is no time/productivity issues with the alternatives. That is very(!) far from the truth.

We will always hear tales from people such as Iwannahurl about how they cycle past a line of stationary traffic on the way to school and they don't understand why anyone would ever drive a car. In reality, driving is faster in a lot of cases. (You may notice however that people who are anti-car tend not to post on boards about times where they were cycling and had cars moving freely past them).

Leaving my house in Westside at 07:55 in the morning, I can be in Parkmore in under 15 mins. It's 8.2km. Could I do it that fast on a bike or on (greatly improved) public transport? Like hell I could!

http://connachttribune.ie/city-light-rail-system-could-end-the-jams-144/

The red line zig-zags its way from Capagh (Knocknacarra) to “Nimmo’s Station”.

When you take into account that:
(1) it is a very indirect route
(2) every stop adds a minute or two to the journey time
(3) you still have a 5-10 minute walk to Shop Street / Eyre Square when you get off at “Nimmo’s Station”
(4) it doesn’t connect up with any other line so it’s no good to you if you work over in Mervue, Ballybrit, Parkmore…etc.

It would take you the best part of 40 mins to get into Eyre Square.!

How might the excessive journey times be tackled? Fewer stops and a more direct route. But wait... that would mean an even smaller potential passenger base. So would that drive the operating subsidy up? I'm not sure if this could be classed as sustainable.

KevR · 18-02-2015 8:02pm

Iwannahurl wrote: »

Thereby demonstrating the unsustainable folly of promoting and facilitating private car use.

Can you please clarify what you mean by "unsustainable"?

You have stated previously that the government is "addicted" to the revenue from motoring. Not sure if describing it as "addicted" is fair to them, the money plays a big part in the day-to-day running of the country. So in that sense, you are essentially admitting that private car use is financially sustainable (and necessary). Looking at it purely from a financial point of view, facilitating and promoting private car use can absolutely be justified.

The question is - is it or can it ever be environmentally sustainable? It's not now (petrol and diesel). Could we set aggressive 10 and 20 year targets for electric car usage? Most definitely.

Iwannahurl wrote: »

Also an example of the rebound effect, whereby hoped-for energy savings do not materialise because the lower 'per unit' energy use leads to more use, exacerbated in the case of roads by the accommodation of even more energy users.

What are the actual implications of increased energy use if the energy is clean?

Are you generally against increased energy consumption or is it specifically the the types of energy which cause pollution?

Iwannahurl · 18-02-2015 11:32pm

KevR wrote: »

You may notice however that people who are anti-car tend not to post on boards about times where they were cycling and had cars moving freely past them).

Oh I do, especially when their free movement can justifiably be called speeding.

And about a week ago, while I was doing the school run by bike, a freely moving 5-axle truck failed to yield to me at a junction. The same sort of thing happened to me at the exact same spot a few weeks previously, when slow-moving motorists clogging the junction decided to wave through a few freely-moving ones coming from a different direction. Does that count?

cats2000 · 19-02-2015 11:04am

Hi Everyone
There is an action group called Galway N6 Action Group which is opposing all these routes and calling for realistic and viable alternatives. Meeting this evening in Westwood Hotel at 7pm. or follow @N6Action and Galway-N6-Action-Group on Facebook.
Just about every politician in the west will be there, so great opportunity

Iwannahurl · 19-02-2015 3:18pm

KevR wrote: »

Can you please clarify what you mean by "unsustainable"?

You have stated previously that the government is "addicted" to the revenue from motoring. Not sure if describing it as "addicted" is fair to them, the money plays a big part in the day-to-day running of the country. So in that sense, you are essentially admitting that private car use is financially sustainable (and necessary). Looking at it purely from a financial point of view, facilitating and promoting private car use can absolutely be justified.

The question is - is it or can it ever be environmentally sustainable? It's not now (petrol and diesel). Could we set aggressive 10 and 20 year targets for electric car usage? Most definitely.

What are the actual implications of increased energy use if the energy is clean?

Are you generally against increased energy consumption or is it specifically the the types of energy which cause pollution?

Useful definition of sustainability in second paragraph here: http://www.unep.org/resourceefficiency/Home/WhatisSCP/tabid/105574/Default.aspx

See also:

http://www.ipcc.ch/publications_and_data/ar4/wg3/en/ch2s2-1-4.html
http://www.worldbank.org/depweb/english/sd.html
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sustainability

Successive governments have made themselves dependent on private transport by systematically turning it into a cash cow. The ever-hungry cow must be fed (roads, parking space, general infrastructure etc) so that it produces precious milk (tax, excise, charges etc) to feed the system. This is not sustainable, I would argue, and I'm not alone in that view. It's not a popular view, of course, among politicians and motorists.

Facilitating private car use can not be justified or sustained indefinitely, if only for reasons of space.

http://i.imgur.com/UvtzB.jpg

19-02-2015 5:50pm

Iwannahurl wrote: »

So the many many members of the N6 Action Group are fully in support of a "bypass", as long as it's not built on or near their property?

Of course

. When an option exists (original bypass as already explained!) that doesn't knock 50+ houses!

KevR · 19-02-2015 7:53pm

Iwannahurl wrote: »

Oh I do, especially when their free movement can justifiably be called speeding.

Ok, it's good that we are all in agreement on at least one thing - the "lost productivity" argument around car use does not stand up to scrutiny. The alternatives generally have equal or greater losses in productivity.

KevR · 19-02-2015 8:09pm

Iwannahurl wrote: »

Successive governments have made themselves dependent on private transport by systematically turning it into a cash cow. The ever-hungry cow must be fed (roads, parking space, general infrastructure etc) so that it produces precious milk (tax, excise, charges etc) to feed the system. This is not sustainable, I would argue, and I'm not alone in that view. It's not a popular view, of course, among politicians and motorists.

I'm still unclear on what you are proposing as an alternative to bring in revenue for healthcare, education, social welfare?

Iwannahurl wrote: »

Facilitating private car use can not be justified or sustained indefinitely, if only for reasons of space.

I don't think we need to worry ourselves too much about space in Ireland. There is plenty of space to build any type of transport infrastructure.

I must say though, I am all for building upwards in Galway City Centre. I would like to see dense office and residential space around Ceannt Station (where there is space to develop!). Increasing office space in business parks on the outskirts of the city makes no sense to me - providing decent, cost effective public transport to these places is a near impossible task. Ceannt Station / Eyre Square / Fairgreen is an existing major public transport hub (rail, coach and city buses). Increase density in the City Centre and there will be a natural transport modal shift.

spacetweek · 20-02-2015 5:43pm

Motoring related taxes aren't a money spinner. You have to plough a huge amount of them back into road maintenance and road building.

KevR · 20-02-2015 5:54pm

spacetweek wrote: »

Motoring related taxes aren't a money spinner. You have to plough a huge amount of them back into road maintenance and road building.

I haven't come across any recent figures but I remember 5 - 6 years ago reading that more than €7 Billion was collected through motoring related taxes in a 12 month period. Approximately €1.3 Billion was spent on road building and maintenance during the same 12 months.

According to publicpolicy.ie -

Where does your tax go?
An €83.60 spend on petrol incorporates €47.96 in taxes. This tax is spent as follows:

€15.87 on Social Programmes
€11.14 on Health
€6.89 on Education
€6.26 on Debt
€7.79 on Other

Not to mention Motor Tax, VRT and VAT.

dubhthach · 20-02-2015 9:39pm

spacetweek wrote: »

Motoring related taxes aren't a money spinner. You have to plough a huge amount of them back into road maintenance and road building.

That reminds me to dig up this old post of mine from another site:
---

VRT revenue from 1997-2008, taken from an answer to a Dáil question.

This covered basically all of NRA funding over that period. This only factors in VRT completing ignoring all other road taxes.

Here's a response from then Minister of Finance on 27th November 2007 showing income from taxes on Motorists.

Totals going to Central Gov. (excluding motor tax)

2002: €3 billion
2003: €3.2 billion
2004: €3.6 billion
2005: €4 billion
2006: €4.4 billion
2007: €4.8 billion (estimate)

Totals going to Local Gov. (Motor tax)

2002: €581m
2003: €680m
2004: €747m
2005: €802m
2006: €880m
2007: €944m (estimate)

Looking at the details from the 2011 budget you see that when it comes to "Local Goverenement Fund" that "Gross Motor Tax receipts" predicted for 2011 were:
€953m, the predicted expenditure on "Non-National Road payments" in the same Fund is €397.5m. In other words for vast bulk of roads (90,000 km) are funded out of a Fund made up of "Motor tax" receipts. The rest of fund goes mostly on staff costs in 40+ local authorities.

---

To say that taxes paid by Motorists aren't a money spinner doesn't fly when you look at the actual data.

spacetweek · 23-02-2015 1:25pm

Interesting. It's odd that petrol VAT goes on healthcare and social welfare though.
I'm amazed how much is collected from VRT in particular.

"N6 Galway City Transport Project"

Comments