M6 - Galway City Ring Road [planning decision pending]

L1011

lucernarian wrote: »

Pay for a parallel runway at one of the busier airports in Europe (Dublin), or pay for a bypass/ring road/call-it-what-you-want-it-doesn't-matter around a town by European standards (Galway).

The DAA are going to privately borrow to fund the Galway Bypass? Is that strictly within their remit?


(because the exchequer isn't funding the runway)

lucernarian

L1011 wrote: »

The DAA are going to privately borrow to fund the Galway Bypass? Is that strictly within their remit?


(because the exchequer isn't funding the runway)

Sure. But a state-owned body paying for this with loans and paying those back with increased airport taxes for example, is not at all far away from the idea of another company borrowing on behalf of the state to build this road and then having the state pay tens of millions back every year out of our taxes to fund it.

L1011

lucernarian wrote: »

Sure. But a state-owned body paying for this with loans and paying those back with increased airport taxes for example, is not at all far away from the idea of another company borrowing on behalf of the state to build this road and then having the state pay tens of millions back every year out of our taxes to fund it.

You presenting it as an either/or is inaccurate, though.

lucernarian

L1011 wrote: »

You presenting it as an either/or is inaccurate, though.

I'd rather say simply lazy and melodramatic. Fair enough. It wasn't meant to be an absolute declarative statement any more than implying that what I said earlier was that the entirety of the Carrickmines area was buried in Gravel. Also, does the DAA's substantial debt have any impact on general government debt or on the state's ability to raise funding on the markets? I have dozens of other projects in my mind that would be relevant, and I'd guess you and any other reasonable-minded person does too. Regarding Dublin Airport alone, less than €500 million would build a rail link to Dublin Airport, an inadequate option in the eyes of many and 500 mill would also pay for most of a Luas connection from near Broombridge to Swords - something that would directly benefit hundreds of thousands of people. People are clamouring for "no more delays" when we don't even have a CBA report on a new project costing over €500 million.

hardy_buck

Iwannahurl wrote: »

The first example you mention is in Moycullen, off the N59. It's major "one-off" territory. Driving in this road to enter or cross the city is no bother when the schools are off, afaik.

Well for starters it was you who mentioned it pal, and it is far from one off.
This sort of thing is present out in Barna, Moycullen, Oughterard Oranmore and pretty much every other satelite town/village surrounding the city.

Regarding students being off, what about the other 9-10 months of the year when the weather is awful and evenings short? From this logic we could say that there is no need for anything to be done because 'driving is no bother' 8 out of 24 hours of the day are traffic free at night.

Regarding the opposition to the bypass in general, I have yet to hear of an actual specific alternative to Galways traffic woes that makes sense. There is the typical arguement of over dependence on cars which most people (myself included I'll add) accept but a sore lack of actual viable alternatives IMO.

Iwannahurl

hardy_buck wrote: »

Well for starters it was you who mentioned it pal, and it is far from one off.

This sort of thing is present out in Barna, Moycullen, Oughterard Oranmore and pretty much every other satelite town/village surrounding the city.

Correct all round. The consequences of such "planning" were entirely predictable. And we should facilitate this unsustainable folly with a €500 million expressway for car commuters?

hardy_buck wrote: »

Regarding students being off, what about the other 9-10 months of the year when the weather is awful and evenings short? From this logic we could say that there is no need for anything to be done because 'driving is no bother' 8 out of 24 hours of the day are traffic free at night.

Regarding the opposition to the bypass in general, I have yet to hear of an actual specific alternative to Galways traffic woes that makes sense. There is the typical arguement of over dependence on cars which most people (myself included I'll add) accept but a sore lack of actual viable alternatives IMO.

Why should a €500 million expressway be built for car commuters to drive from their "one off" haciendas into or across the city, and also to accommodate those driving Sophie or Jack a few km to school, when they are the ones collectively causing the problem? They are effectively getting in each other's way, and in the way of public transport, cycling and walking. Yet the last three congestion-busting modes are the ones most neglected over the past three decades or so.

You haven't heard of a specific alternative to the proposed €500 million expressway for car commuters because no €500 million alternative has been proposed. Ever.

_Puma_

Letter in the Galway Independent today.

*Edit Actually it was last week. Apologies if it has been posted already*

Iwannahurl

It's today, because it's in the print edition. The date on the webpage is incorrect.

what_traffic

_Puma_ wrote: »

Letter in the Galway Independent today.

*Edit Actually it was last week. Apologies if it has been posted already*

I would agree with the letter writer on the following:

Build a road and it will attract more traffic.

hardy_buck

Iwannahurl wrote: »

Correct all round. The consequences of such "planning" were entirely predictable. And we should facilitate this unsustainable folly with a €500 million expressway for car commuters?

So could you enlighten me as to what are we to do with the current inhabitants of these poorly planned haciendas then which you've just accepted are now great in number? Move them out?

Why should a €500 million expressway be built for car commuters to drive from
their "one off" haciendas into or across the city...

Oh I don't know, alleviate chronic traffic congestion from a city that is suffering it on a scale dispropotionate to its size perhaps?

You haven't heard of a specific alternative to the proposed €500 million expressway for car commuters because no €500 million alternative has been proposed.

"€500 million, €500 million, €500 million..." yes I am aware of the cost thank you, there's no need to incessantly repeat it.
Anyhow you can spend the money and have an actual solution or penny pinch and get some waste of time solution that has no real benefit as one quick look at Dublin's transport infrastructure will prove that

Iwannahurl

hardy_buck wrote: »

So could you enlighten me as to what are we to do with the current inhabitants of these poorly planned haciendas then which you've just accepted are now great in number? Move them out?

Oh I don't know, alleviate chronic traffic congestion from a city that is suffering it on a scale dispropotionate to its size perhaps?

"€500 million, €500 million, €500 million..." yes I am aware of the cost thank you, there's no need to incessantly repeat it.

Anyhow you can spend the money and have an actual solution or penny pinch and get some waste of time solution that has no real benefit as one quick look at Dublin's transport infrastructure will prove that

Certain things have to be repeated because the fundamental issues are not being addressed.

For example:

Iwannahurl wrote: »

That kind of development went ahead without the kind of road infrastructure being proposed. In other words, people moved out of the city to their boreen-based haciendas already knowing what the traffic would be like. Is such development going to reduce or stop altogether once the expressway is built?

Galway is suffering traffic congestion disproportionate to its size because the level of car dependence is disproportionate.

To repeat the question: if the hacienda-dwellers are facilitated with an expressway for car commuters, what effect will that have on the hacienda-dwelling tendency?

monument

Carawaystick wrote: »

Where will the traffic come from to clogg up a new dual carriageway? Is the Limerick Bypass CLogged up?

There's a million people in DUblin to clogg up a D3M. Can't see the traffic to clogg up a D2 in Galway.

There's notable east-west flows in Galway and the bypass would just increase this kind of land use, development, and travel patterns. Local road to key central and edge-of-centra locations would be the first to clog up. It took a while for even the M50 to clog up the first time and it will likely take longer in Galway, but it will happen to local roads first.

Limerick's bypass is less urban in nature, partly tolled, and it's part of the national network far more so than could ever be said about Galway. It has less junctions and nearly all of those are will national route (all but one if I'm correct).

As an aside: Limerick City also seems to be at least trying to promote sustainable transport.

hardy_buck wrote: »

In your first example there, how are these people meant to get to work in Ballybrit can I ask? I have a hunch it's through the city

Here's how:

http://touch.boards.ie/thread/2057438782

Note: Key road junction improvements also suggested.

SeanW

monument wrote: »

How many people are you talking about? Is the bypass been planned for them or mainly for more local commuters?

For one thing, most of Galways' tourist traffic. Pretty sure there's not much in Ballinasloe, Athenry etc that attracts visitors, tourists etc.

Some might be going to Eyre Square, but everyone else is going West of the Corrib, from daytrippers to Salthill to visitors to Connemara, to the Atlantic Ocean and all the rest.

We also know that the only figures that have been produced are completely bogus, an Arup report states "5% of commuters would use the entire length" and that's been siezed on by various entities to say that it would have no use except to facilitate more sprawl. The two problems with those analyses, and the figures that they're based on, is that it excluded actual bypassing traffic (tourists, weekly travellers to Dublin, other irregular long distance users). It's also nonsense because there would be plenty of legitmate reason to use the bypass in part that would be excluded from the 5% - e.g. driving from Spiddal to Tuam or anywhere in the East to Clifden and suchlike places.

IIRC the old bypass plan was a lot cheaper because it proposed a route that did not go through the city and as such avoided all the demolition and tunnelling. Gotta love that EU :rolleyes:

The only question is will the benefits, to Galways tourism, the people live/are going to the West of the Corrib for whatever reason, the quality of life benefits to any who do end up using it as a commuterway outweigh the increased cost, or the money could be better used elsewhere, either on a GLuas (which would be of zero benefit to anyone whose destinations are outside the city, but would have significant benefits to those living and travelling in the city), or on roads elsewhere (like the M20 for example).

Schadenfreudia

monument wrote: »

Maybe you should read all of my post? M50 not a mistake, but how it has been designed and managed is.

Apologies if I misinterpreted your post; I certainly did read all of it.

So, if the commuter bypass was somehow scrapped, do you think that would:

(A) Increase the chance of a Luas solution

(B) Decrease the chance of a Luas solution

I believe it will increase the chances. I accept that you believe the opposite.

Mask slips = you half reading things / lumping different arguments from different people togather / etc

Again, I do not half-read things.

However, when I read phrases like "burying Carrickmines in gravel" I draw certain conclusions.

Schadenfreudia

Iwannahurl wrote: »

1. The Waterford bypass hasn't taken traffic out of the city.

As Monument might say you should read the posts you are replying to

I never said any such thing.

2. In Galway "common sense" and "most people" means a ridiculous ...etc... They all (sic) think they're right, and that nothing abnormal is going on. It's called car dependence or perhaps car addiction....

That's what you call it. I'm not a fan of psychobabble myself.

3. The "anti-car mentality"....is also a form of denial, a well-known feature of dependence syndromes (see above).

More psychobabble.

5. "Predict and provide" transport planning is 1960s/1970s thinking, and it's what gifted us our ludicrous car dependence.

Overuse and ludicrous misapplication of the word "ludicrous".

You think we should provide transport solutions without making any predictions regarding their use?

Like the Ennis-Galway train maybe?

Iwannahurl

Schadenfreudia wrote: »

1. I never said any such thing.

2. That's what you call it. I'm not a fan of psychobabble myself.

3. More psychobabble.

4. Overuse and ludicrous misapplication of the word "ludicrous".

5. You think we should provide transport solutions without making any predictions regarding their use? Like the Ennis-Galway train maybe?

1. What you said was:

Schadenfreudia wrote: »

It has made a huge difference to anyone bypassing Waterford on the N25; which is the primary function of a bypass. So it works.

Part of the sales pitch for the Galway "bypass" is that it will take out large volumes of traffic bypassing the city. Turns out that such traffic would only be 5% of the total. Likewise, it is claimed that it will reduce traffic within the city. The Waterford bypass experience suggests otherwise.

2. I wouldn't bet on it.

3. Car dependence is a well-recognised phenomenon in transportation research. It explains a lot of what is happening in Galway.

4. A huge amount of car use in and around Galway is utterly ludicrous. We had yet another instance of it on Sunday 14th June.

5. No.

monument

Schadenfreudia wrote: »

Again, I do not half-read things.

However, when I read phrases like "burying Carrickmines in gravel" I draw certain conclusions.

A phrase I did not make.

SeanW wrote: »

For one thing, most of Galways' tourist traffic. Pretty sure there's not much in Ballinasloe, Athenry etc that attracts visitors, tourists etc.

Some might be going to Eyre Square, but everyone else is going West of the Corrib, from daytrippers to Salthill to visitors to Connemara, to the Atlantic Ocean and all the rest.

Which is generally a small percentage of traffic. A Galway Luas would help keep tourists and visitors to the city and around the city in a way which a new road never could -- ie a Luas could keep moving on race week.

SeanW wrote: »

We also know that the only figures that have been produced are completely bogus, an Arup report states "5% of commuters would use the entire length" and that's been siezed on by various entities to say that it would have no use except to facilitate more sprawl. The two problems with those analyses, and the figures that they're based on, is that it excluded actual bypassing traffic (tourists, weekly travellers to Dublin, other irregular long distance users). It's also nonsense because there would be plenty of legitmate reason to use the bypass in part that would be excluded from the 5% - e.g. driving from Spiddal to Tuam or anywhere in the East to Clifden and suchlike places.

Iwannahurl should have the link but even the city council has admitted that the project is mainly for local commuters.

SeanW wrote: »

The only question is will the benefits, to Galways tourism, the people live/are going to the West of the Corrib for whatever reason, the quality of life benefits to any who do end up using it as a commuterway outweigh the increased cost, or the money could be better used elsewhere, either on a GLuas (which would be of zero benefit to anyone whose destinations are outside the city, but would have significant benefits to those living and travelling in the city), or on roads elsewhere (like the M20 for example).

That's not strictly true -- the Luas suggestion serves areas outside the city proper and, like the Luas in Dublin, park and ride can make Luas in Galway of benefit to those who are coming from further away.

lucernarian

Schadenfreudia wrote: »

However, when I read phrases like "burying Carrickmines in gravel" I draw certain conclusions.

Foolish conclusions it seems, going by posts which fail to grasp what the word "complete" means...

Let me spell it out again. The M50 was not complete while Carrickmines was being buried in gravel. The ruins of Carrickmines, obviously. Your bizarre fixation on that phrase is nothing more than a red herring.

There are many people who would rather not see a bypass at all but Galway, with its existing road network and the concentration of routes that involve central parts of the city and residential areas, needs an additional East-West routes. Does it need a €500 million solution?? NO Arup seem to have gone on a mad crayon-drawing exercise with the NRA when they realised the Govt. would spend whatever money was going on a scheme for a very small city and environs with no national strategic relevance.

SeanW wrote:

For one thing, most of Galways' tourist traffic. Pretty sure there's not much in Ballinasloe, Athenry etc that attracts visitors, tourists etc.

Hmmm, if I can assume that there is tourist traffic throughout the summer and not just race week, the reports on this thread of Galway's traffic situation suggest that school holidays make a big difference. Holiday traffic doesn't seem to be adding that much to Galway's problem. My experience has been that Galway has substantial visitors from continental Europe and other places that treat Galway as a city break on their Dublin visit. They're taking tours to the Cliffs of Moher or public transport to stay in Galway for a couple of days. It would indeed be used in addition to commuters, but I think the effect will be small.

IIRC the old bypass plan was a lot cheaper because it proposed a route that did not go through the city and as such avoided all the demolition and tunnelling. Gotta love that EU

After looking at the info involved in the court judgement, I can certainly agree. My position is that I'd rather the scheme be made with a more limited and less "futureproofed" scope to get around the judgement, rather than nearly double its damn budget!

Iwannahurl

monument wrote: »

Iwannahurl should have the link but even the city council has admitted that the project is mainly for local commuters.

The "outer bypass" sales pitch has been dropped. No more hyperbole about those unfortunates in Connemara "cut off" from the rest of the country due to alleged permanent gridlock.

The latest buzzwords are about "ten thousand jobs" in Parkmore-Ballybrit, and how an expressway is needed to transfer them by private car (not by public transport) from residential areas west of the city. Note that in Galway City Council's corporate culture, "people" actually means motorists and their cars.

[Galway City Council Director of Services for Planning and Transportation] Joe O’Neill also told councillors that options which circled the city, taking a route out into the countryside would have less benefit in terms of reducing the traffic burden on the city, as they would not be convenient enough to convince drivers to use them.

“People in Knocknacarra are not going to go out by Moycullen,” said Mr O’Neill. “It has to be close enough to the city to attract people on to it.”

http://www.galwayindependent.com/20150204/news/rocky-road-ahead-S50450.html

Schadenfreudia

lucernarian wrote: »

Foolish conclusions it seems, going by posts which fail to grasp what the word "complete" means...

Let me spell it out again. The M50 was not complete while Carrickmines was being buried in gravel.

You are tiresomely trying to maintain that the Luas network was "completed" before the M50. It wasn't, period.

Your "buried in gravel" was an instance of the mask slipping - I am well aware of the nonsense the anti-roads fanatics kicked up about some insignificant foundations in Carrickmines - I live near there.

The rest of your post is merely repeating stuff I've already exposed as nonsense.

No point in you repeating the same preferences cloaked in psychobabble over and over and me repeating the same exposure of your arguments over and over.

It is simply cluttering up the thread.

If you say something new I'll be happy to respond.

lucernarian

Schadenfreudia wrote: »

You are tiresomely trying to maintain that the Luas network was "completed" before the M50. It wasn't, period.

I'm sorry to persist but you are engaging in baseless statements. You have conjured up that I am "maintaining" that the luas network was completed. That is fiction. It's a straw man of shameless proportions. I have said all along that the M50 was not complete before the Luas was built and operational to Sandyford. This is an iron-clad fact and what I've written here all along. Persisting in the straw men and misrepresenting anything I said is little more than childish.

Your "buried in gravel" was an instance of the mask slipping - I am well aware of the nonsense the anti-roads fanatics kicked up about some insignificant foundations in Carrickmines - I live near there.

Can you please explain this "mask" nonsense? I am just gobsmacked on this gravel obsession - all my point was, and is, is that the M50 ***couldn't*** be complete while there was a bloody construction site right in the middle of the southeastern motorway by 2004! Why is this so hard for you to come to terms with? Questioning my agenda is absurd, not least because I don't and never had one beyond finding an economical and sustainable solution. I've never been opposed to motorists using a new bypass of Galway and I was much more in favour of a €300 million bypass, as opposed to the repugnant €500 million sum being touted now. Use the search facility if you care to know more.

The rest of your post is merely repeating stuff I've already exposed as nonsense.

No point in you repeating the same preferences cloaked in psychobabble over and over and me repeating the same exposure of your arguments over and over.

Again, from someone who won't accept they were proven wrong about the M50 and is looking to prop up their non-point with straw men. Is there no one else on this thread that can see this madness for what it is? Also, I thought you had excused yourself from this conversation already.

Lads, ye are so off topic, you've ended up on the other side of the country

veryangryman

Deleted User wrote: »

Lads, ye are so off topic, you've ended up on the other side of the country

No leave them continue, its perfectly relevant discussing non-existant public transport projects on a thread about a road.

Call it backseat modding, but there's no frontseat modding happening (and yes ive reported posts but still see nothing happening to alleviate it )

lucernarian

veryangryman wrote: »

No leave them continue, its perfectly relevant discussing non-existant public transport projects on a thread about a road.

Call it backseat modding, but there's no frontseat modding happening (and yes ive reported posts but still see nothing happening to alleviate it )

It's a very simple point and while I don't agree with some of the premise, Galway could have better alternative public transport infrastructure without the need for a GCOB being built first. Dublin (especially Sandyford) offers an Irish example of light rail being developed in an area before a ring road/expressway/bypass was complete. I'm not saying that the bypass ought to come second place but its price tag is too substantial to countenance in its current form.

hardy_buck

lucernarian wrote: »

It's a very simple point and while I don't agree with some of the premise, Galway could have better alternative public transport infrastructure without the need for a GCOB being built first. Dublin (especially Sandyford) offers an Irish example of light rail being developed in an area before a ring road/expressway/bypass was complete. I'm not saying that the bypass ought to come second place but its price tag is too substantial to countenance in its current form.

Dublin is really not a shining example of well a planned and executed transport system...

fcio

Iwannahurl wrote: »

The "outer bypass" sales pitch has been dropped. No more hyperbole about those unfortunates in Connemara "

I suppose its better that people do not have jobs, all those windmills and taxes + whatever the green numpties think we need to save the planet from biblical Armageddon will just "organically" appear out of think air.

Anyways back to work I go, those green taxes (the latest one being water bill) aint going to pay themselves.

lucernarian

hardy_buck wrote: »

Dublin is really not a shining example of well a planned and executed transport system...

Doesn't matter. It's still an example that belies this concept of "bypass must come before bus" or Luas indeed. It's dogmatic and real-world evidence (like some parts of Dublin, and there are more examples than the supposedly DC-based bus corridors) shows that this is far from being a blanket reality. As for Galway, I still think some kind of bypass is needed above all other transport infrastructure developments of a large scale (like luas or maybe BRT if a high-quality solution was proposed), just not a €500 million DC for a route of practically no national or intercity relevance.

monument

fcio wrote: »

I suppose its better that people do not have jobs, all those windmills and taxes + whatever the green numpties think we need to save the planet from biblical Armageddon will just "organically" appear out of think air.

Anyways back to work I go, those green taxes (the latest one being water bill) aint going to pay themselves.

Who said it would be better is people did not have jobs?

Carawaystick

So, there's been a lot of heat, for the amount of light shone on the whole "how to make Galway better" thing.

We have proponents of better PT, ranging from better busses, to a brt, to a tram line
and we have proponents of a new road, which will be used mainly by cars, but could also be used by PT.

WE have the city council, who want to spend other peoples money to build the road, as they would be able to get money for *CAPITAL* expenditure, but not for *CURRENT* expenditure

We have civil engineers, who in Ireland don't have a great track record of PT, cycling or pedestrian designs.




We need to change the system of govt to make it feasible for a city council, or the nta to be able to ramp up PT

Iwannahurl

veryangryman wrote: »

its perfectly relevant discussing non-existant public transport projects on a thread about a road.

The road is also non-existent.

The "N6 Galway City Transport Project" is real, at least notionally on paper.