M6 - Galway City Ring Road [planning decision pending]

Seth Brundle

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/123123976#Comment_123123976

Normally I don't put much stock in the principle of "induced demand" being a bad thing, because IMHO people being able to get around is not, at least ipso facto, a bad thing.

I don't think anyone suggested that it would be a bad thing, including those you accuse of being jihadis/activists.

I do agree with a lot of what you have said though about doing a ring road in isolation. I think anyone would agree for a growing region just building roads is a bad idea. Indeed, that was what went wrong in Dublin - most of the investment in transport infrastructure in Dublin came in the form of the M50 (including the Port Tunnel) but it's been mainly crumbs for public transport for example. Two tram lines, a few extra bits of bus lane here and there, and some platform lengthening on the DART. I know from personal experience how awful PT in Dublin was when I worked there, the few high quality transport links in the immediate region were crammed like sardine cans.

Since it's inception, the GCRR has been looked at in isolation. The councils behind it have not put forward any alternative measures for moving people around aside from some wishy washy "we will look into this" nonsense. It is backward thinking that has been shown to just increase car dependency.

If you want to improve either public transport or active travel (both of which should be a high priority on any city's list) then you cannot have them as a small insignificant part of a large city transport plan which is exactly what the plan for Galway is. People moan about how traffic is so bad and they need the road and, like yourself, blaming the jihadis for delays to "improvements" whereas we all know from decades of experience that the current scope for "improvements" will not improve Galways traffic issues.

It was the same with Dublin - we prioritised car based traffic and allowed PT to become a poor alternative option. Now, we are left with a poor quality PT network in Dublin and any future improvements will cost us a lot more to develop.

I agree that Galway should be told in no uncertain terms not to repeat this mistake. However, in defence of the local authorities, I do see them fearing that there are those seeking to make sure the road does not happen under any circumstances, and I could see them being afraid that if they took measures "in advance of" the ring road or "in the meantime" those would become "instead of" if either an economic crisis or environmentalist/anti motorist pressure caused the road to be cancelled.

This situation - in equal measure to a "roads only" solution, must be avoided, and IMHO they have a mandate to prevent both.

I don't think people have said no to the road - they have said no to the road in the complete absence of any alternatives. What hasn't been done though is a proper evaluation of whether the road is actually needed IF Galway were to develop a proper PT & AT plan where people would choose it over the car where possible. If there were proper alternative options for people travelling in and around galway city, would a road actually be necessary or would the existing road suffice? The fact is, we don't know because Galway didn't bother their hole looking ito it in any meaningful way!

SeanW

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/123132602#Comment_123132602

alternative or complementary?

I don't think anyone wants to see a repeat of what happened in Dublin. But it's equally clear that there are those who do not to learn from that mistake, but simply to make the same mistake in reverse.

Any realistic suggestion of other measures being "alternatives" and not complementary relies on an idea - that proponents of it must prove - that the existing road network is somehow adequate despite having been conceived in - and for - an Ireland that was a third world backwater defined by poverty, emigration, unemployment, corruption and a total deference to a church hierarchy. A country with no apparent future, and a people who had nowhere to go, nothing to do when they got there, and no way to get there even if they wanted to. A.k.a. a different country.

At least on a volte face basis, that case can be disproven by having even a passing understanding of Irish history, an ability to read a map (which would show the problem of a choke-point on the Headford Road for example), ever having been to Galway or the surrounding region, having any concern whatsoever for the Western county, which is effectively cut off from the rest of the country by the current mess, or an ability to see any of this beyond ideological blinkers.

Seth Brundle

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/123135202#Comment_123135202

alternative or complementary?

I'm not sure what you're referring to specifically but I was referring to alternative modes of transport

I don't think anyone wants to see a repeat of what happened in Dublin. But it's equally clear that there are those who do not to learn from that mistake, but simply to make the same mistake in reverse.

Are we in agreement that this project as currently proposed is such a mistake?

Any realistic suggestion of other measures being "alternatives" and not complementary relies on an idea - that proponents of it must prove - that the existing road network is somehow adequate despite having been conceived in - and for - an Ireland that was a third world backwater defined by poverty, emigration, unemployment, corruption and a total deference to a church hierarchy. A country with no apparent future, and a people who had nowhere to go, nothing to do when they got there, and no way to get there even if they wanted to. A.k.a. a different country.

Again, I was referring to alternative modes of transport to the private car. I'm not going down a rabbithole of discussing the church, etc.

At least on a volte face basis, that case can be disproven by having even a passing understanding of Irish history, an ability to read a map (which would show the problem of a choke-point on the Headford Road for example), ever having been to Galway or the surrounding region, having any concern whatsoever for the Western county, which is effectively cut off from the rest of the country by the current mess, or an ability to see any of this beyond ideological blinkers.

I'm not sure what you're referring to here so ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

SeanW

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/123135219#Comment_123135219

My point (which should have been obvious) was that Galway's modern road network was laid down back in 1984, in what was basically a different country. The idea that a hodge-podge of street-road hybrids done on the cheap for a third world backwater back then is any way appropriate for Ireland 40+ years later is something I consider to be absurd on its face.

And while I'm leery of just building the GCRR and doing nothing else, not building the GCRR for whatever reason would be a mistake.

Green Peter

Lets do nothing, I doubt Galway will get any bigger, let's leave it to our children and grandchildren. Let them pay for it. Nothing to see here. We can all pretend it's 1986, smoke hash and parade in the arts festival and vote for Michael D and to heck with anyone else who wants to make a life in Galway.

KrisW1001

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/123135278#Comment_123135278

The plan in 1984 was exactly what would have been done in any other developed nation in a town of 60,000 people - let’s not kid ourself about the scale of Irish “cities”. Relief roads, express routes and a new bridge crossing. It didn’t work, but not because it was “on the cheap” - it was quite a bit to spend on such a small town that wasn’t on the way to somewhere else. The construction didn’t work because it wasn't addressing the root problem: there was, and still is, no alternative to the private car for getting around Galway.

This ring road can alleviate the worst symptoms of the previous disease, but it should be understood that it can only buy the time needed to completely overhaul public transport and active travel within the City.

xckjoo

It's also a bit disingenuous to date the road network as from 1984. It's constantly being updated and redeveloped.

hans aus dtschl

Just another small detail: the project team reviewing the traffic numbers found that the majority of traffic needing to be facilitated was local commuter traffic. They found that the quantity of traffic needing to purely bypass the city from East to West (and not access the city) was too low to justify a true bypass.

This is likely why they specifically opted for a road design that would double-job and increase the number of vehicles, in an effort to justify the large capital expenditure needed for this road.

So, somewhat counter-intuitively, I'd be in favour of this road if it was made a true bypass even though it would facilitate less traffic. Fewer junctions, in simple language. And then get on with making the existing distributor work as a distributor, and get on with putting in a city transport system.

It's a city: cars are an inefficient mode of local transport within a city. More roads won't fix that. A bypass is needed, so build a bypass. Both please. And this road is neither.

xckjoo

The other thing I've issue with is they say the purpose isn't to open up the west to development, but 1) it definitely will and 2) I'd have no problem with that if the development was planned. Develop some existing or new villages around strong infrastructure links instead of the hodge-podge mess of inefficiency we normally see.