Why not barrier free tolling on all tolls?

bk · 23-08-2011 1:01pm #1

I was just thinking, why don't we use the barrier free tolling video number plate recognition used on the M50 on all toll roads.

The M50 barrier free tolling has been pretty successful, why not extend it to all the other toll roads.

The advantage for drivers is not having to slow down to use a toll and the resulting tail backs this can cause. The advantage for the tool operators is they wouldn't need to employ so many staff to man the tolls, etcs.

Anyone know why this hasn't happened?

I can only assume that the costs of ripping up and replacing the current toll boots would cost more then the savings in staff etc.

Fair enough, however what I can't understand is why the new tolls recently opened aren't video tolls from the start.

D.L.R. · 23-08-2011 1:24pm

I think the M50 automated toll was developed primarily to combat congestion, as part of the M50 upgrade, so its not much of an issue for the intercity tolls.

Be nice if they did something about the eastlink toll mind you, like abolish it.

L1011 · 23-08-2011 8:58pm

There is a net INCREASE in staff costs due to the call centre staff, admin staff, appeals staff etc.

Its not cost effective, it was used on the M50 due to congestion not to save money.

bk · 23-08-2011 9:09pm

MYOB wrote: »

There is a net INCREASE in staff costs due to the call centre staff, admin staff, appeals staff etc.

Its not cost effective, it was used on the M50 due to congestion not to save money.

If all the tolls could use one call center, etc. then it might not cost more.

I know it won't happen, but just saying it seems sort sighted.

veryangryman · 23-08-2011 9:25pm

bk wrote: »

If all the tolls could use one call center, etc. then it might not cost more.

I know it won't happen, but just saying it seems sort sighted.

Alot of logistics involved.

Would need to hire probably twice the number of staff which may not all fit in the one call centre so may need to open a second with all its associated costs.

Id like to see it happen, but when you consider...

M6 Birmingham Toll
Severn Bridge(s) Toll
New Jersey Turnpike and every other toll around New York area

All roads with MAJOR backups at times yet the barriers dont get removed. You should consider us extremely lucky that E-Flow was invented - were one of the few countries thats implemented it.

And very, very well might i add

L1011 · 23-08-2011 9:52pm

bk wrote: »

If all the tolls could use one call center, etc. then it might not cost more.

I know it won't happen, but just saying it seems sort sighted.

That only brings in some economies of scale for back office operations. Not the number of staff required.

And as angry mentions there, there is a maximum size to a call centre before it becomes unmanageable...

D.L.R. · 23-08-2011 11:16pm

veryangryman wrote: »

You should consider us extremely lucky that E-Flow was invented.

I'd feel even luckier if the M50 was toll free

Del2005 · 24-08-2011 4:59am

D.L.R. wrote: »

I'd feel even luckier if the M50 was toll free

It can be, loose two wheels:D

veryangryman · 24-08-2011 8:50am

D.L.R. wrote: »

I'd feel even luckier if the M50 was toll free

Indeed. As ive said elsewhere, it could be replaced with a city congestion charge to encourage more use of public transport

antoobrien · 24-08-2011 10:11am

veryangryman wrote: »

Indeed. As ive said elsewhere, it could be replaced with a city congestion charge to encourage more use of public transport

Fortunately due to the lack of sufficient PT Leo shot this down a few weeks ago. I tend to agree with the reasons he has given.

But the recommendations were immediately rejected by Mr Varadkar. Cities with a congestion charge in place -- including Oslo and London -- already had a high quality public transport system which offered commuters an alternative, he told the Irish Independent.

"Irish cities are not currently able to provide such an extensive public transport alternative," he said.

loyatemu · 24-08-2011 12:45pm

antoobrien wrote: »

Fortunately due to the lack of sufficient PT Leo shot this down a few weeks ago. I tend to agree with the reasons he has given.

chicken and egg situation - Dublin Bus's operations are severely hampered by congestion, reduce congestion and the public transport situation will improve.

teol · 24-08-2011 4:14pm

veryangryman wrote: »

Indeed. As ive said elsewhere, it could be replaced with a city congestion charge to encourage more use of public transport

All that needs to be done is:

Implement the parking levy on employees in Dublin
Raise car parking fees
Introduce more bus gates

Stark · 24-08-2011 4:17pm

teol wrote: »

All that needs to be done is:
Implement the parking levy on employees in Dublin

I don't see how that would help. I have a parking space in work but I cycle most days. Under the proposed parking levy, I'd be charged regardless.

teol · 24-08-2011 4:21pm

Stark wrote: »

I don't see how that would help. I have a parking space in work but I cycle most days. Under the proposed parking levy, I'd be charged regardless.

Already covered

4.4 Occasional permission to use a parking space
Where an employee does not otherwise have entitlement to use a parking space, permission which is occasionally given to use a space is exempt from the levy provided that the total number of days involved in any year does not exceed 10 days. For the purposes of this exemption, use of a parking space for part of a day is treated as use for a full day.

http://www.revenue.ie/en/tax/it/leaflets/parking-levy-guidance.html#section4

L1011 · 24-08-2011 5:54pm

teol wrote: »

All that needs to be done is:
Implement the parking levy on employees in Dublin

Raise car parking fees

Introduce more bus gates

The parking levy wasn't implemented because its blatantly unenforceable. Expect to see every space marked "visitor" with clamping for people without "visitor passes"

The Corpo raising car parking fees won't affect long term parkers as they don't use Corpo spaces due to time limits. The state can't force private car park holders to increase theirs.

Bus gates - this one is workable, assuming they are enforced and commercial vehicles are allowed through. Starving the city of commercial access is a sure fire way to ensure businesses leave.

teol · 24-08-2011 6:57pm

MYOB wrote: »

The parking levy wasn't implemented because its blatantly unenforceable. Expect to see every space marked "visitor" with clamping for people without "visitor passes"

The Corpo raising car parking fees won't affect long term parkers as they don't use Corpo spaces due to time limits. The state can't force private car park holders to increase theirs.

Bus gates - this one is workable, assuming they are enforced and commercial vehicles are allowed through. Starving the city of commercial access is a sure fire way to ensure businesses leave.

Perth introduced a parking levy in 1999. I am just back from Nottingham and they are bringing in one next year. Nottingham is like Dublin so it will be interesting to see their experiences.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/local/nottingham/hi/people_and_places/newsid_8510000/8510763.stm

L1011 · 24-08-2011 8:15pm

teol wrote: »

Perth introduced a parking levy in 1999. I am just back from Nottingham and they are bringing in one next year. Nottingham is like Dublin so it will be interesting to see their experiences.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/local/nottingham/hi/people_and_places/newsid_8510000/8510763.stm

Being introduced elsewhere doesn't mean its actually been enforceable elsewhere.

irishguy · 24-08-2011 8:48pm

There should just be a €200 or more parking space tax per year in the city centre. No exemptions i.e. including government, private spaces, on street. Then use the money to improve public transport.

EI787 · 24-08-2011 9:26pm

What about something like this, as is the case in a number of US states:

Tri-State-Tollway-Reconstruction.aspx?width=300

The lanes continue straight on, with a gantry above for barrier-free tolling, like the M50. However, for those without a tag, there is the traditional toll booth just to the side. Those with a tag are rewarded with no need to slow down; but those without are not penalised and can simply pay in the normal way.

Even though we have the fast lane at tolls for tags, you still need to slow down to about 50km/h. Being able to continue at normal speed would be great.

Not sure how cost-effective the whole thing is though....

teol · 24-08-2011 9:37pm

MYOB wrote: »

Being introduced elsewhere doesn't mean its actually been enforceable elsewhere.

Why would it not be enforceable? It would be just like PRSI being deducted from your pay check.

Employers are obliged to deduct the levy
from employees who have an entitlement to
use employer-provided parking facilities.
The levy must be deducted from employee’s
net salary payments after PAYE, PRSI
and income levy are deducted and remit
the amount deducted to the Office of the
Collector-General under the PAYE system.

http://download.pwc.com/ie/pubs/introduction_of_employee_car_parking_levy.pdf

Del2005 · 24-08-2011 10:04pm

loyatemu wrote: »

chicken and egg situation - Dublin Bus's operations are severely hampered by congestion, reduce congestion and the public transport situation will improve.

DB's problems go much future then congestion. The fact that the vast majority of their routes are into the centre is one of the major obstacles and that's the governments fault.

Do you honestly believe that the majority of commuters want to drive? Personally if I could sleep on the way to work I'd love it. And I know several people who hate having to drive but have no alternative if they want to keep their jobs.

Del2005 · 24-08-2011 10:09pm

teol wrote: »

All that needs to be done is:
Implement the parking levy on employees in Dublin

Who has a huge percentage of parking spaces in Dublin?

L1011 · 24-08-2011 10:49pm

teol wrote: »

Why would it not be enforceable? It would be just like PRSI being deducted from your pay check.

Because, as I said, employers would claim that all their spaces are visitor spaces. There would be no way the state could disprove this without spending far more than the potential revenue on enforcement.

Its unenforceable and that is why they've announced they won't be implementing it.

Carawaystick · 27-08-2011 1:25am

The subsidiary of Sanef made 7% net profit, this is after excluding payments to the NRA, Sanef, and various kickbacks from their gross margin.
Considering abnormal utility would be looking for a return of 3-5%, the ghost of raphael buerk has not gone to rest in peace

L1011 · 27-08-2011 4:17am

Some, probably a tiny, amount of that profit is the profit made from being a tag operator is it not? eFlow get a commission from every time my van goes through a toll barrier anywhere, which is most often the M4 and M3 ones for me, not their M50. Work decided on eFlow tags...

Why not barrier free tolling on all tolls?

Comments