Outer City Bypass

Unrealistic

TerrorFirmer wrote: »

Arup also conducted feasability studies on public transport only solutions and found them completely unfeasible in the context of the current situation.

Did they really? (genuine question) Can you point us to more information on this?
All I've seen are two sheets of buzzwords, 'possible options' and fancy graphics with no concrete information. At the consultation events there was plenty supporting documentation for the various road options and the staff on hand were able to discuss the details knowledgeably. For the public transport options the opposite was the case; the only info shown was the same two slides that are on the website and the staff were very vague if you asked questions about this aspect. I went away with the impression that 99% of the preparatory effort had gone into the new road routes and public transport was just tacked on as a box ticking exercise.

galwaycyclist

dubhthach wrote: »

If Galway was the Netherlands no body would be talking about closing 3 out of 4 bridges to vehicular traffic, ye obviously don't know many Dutch people cause in my experience working with them they are a practical people.

Delft - small university city with a water feature running down the middle - much like another small university city in Ireland.

http://www.woonerfgoed.nl/int/Childstreet_files/StevenSchepel.pdf

The 70’s in Delft

11.
Necessary repairs on two bridges in the middle of the city center were a good opportunity to get rid of most of the motorized through-traffic. In some
parts of the historic centre (about 1.000 m wide and 1.500 m long) a system of loops was introduced, meaning that cars entering from one side have to leave on the same side of the city center. An exception is made for the local buses. Nowadays it is hard to imagine how many cars used to force themselves through narrow streets and tight corners.

Iwannahurl

dubhthach wrote: »

And it makes sense for bus's to sit in traffic congestion trying to traverse University Road, Salmon Weir Bridge, Francis Street and Eyre Square and Bohermore?

After all if you provide a bus route over the QCB you might actually get modal shift given that it would be more direct route for people going to east side of city instead of been routed through An Lár

In my personal opinion it makes no sense at all to wait in the rain for a bus delayed by traffic and legal/illegal parking, and then sit on it in traffic congestion that is not of my making.

Which is why, when push comes to shove, I prefer to cycle.

However, bus routes are already established in the city, despite the many obstacles, which means that they must be providing some level of service for passengers.

My comments on the long-time lack of QB bus lanes are based on my understanding of the private bus operator's unwillingness to put buses on that traffic-clogged route. They're the professionals, so presumably they have a business rationale for their decision.

Of course, now that I think of it, there's also the question of licensing. Maybe they didn't seek a licence, or maybe no licensing opportunity has existed to date?

You are correct regarding the potential for modal shift and the need to avoid the An Lár trap.

galwaycyclist wrote: »

There is still merit in an orbital bus route to connect the radial routes.

I agree. However, a "bypass" costing €500-750 million may not be required to achieve it. Extensive modification of the strategically important but grossly misused Q Bridge may be enough.

Padkir wrote: »

If Galway was in the Netherlands, there would be a bypass around it to realistically suggest such a proposal.

In many such cases what is being called a "bypass" is actually a motorway or other major road leading from A to B or even Z, past densely populated and well-planned urban developments. The Dutch have to plan their urban development and transportation carefully, because they have so many people living in a comparatively small space. Here we think we can build any old way, because we imagine land, including bogs, SACs and the like, is plentiful and expendable.

In the present context we know perfectly well by now that what is being discussed is a ring-road for car commuters which is being sought as a remedy for the inevitable consequences of poorly-planned low-density urban sprawl.

dubhthach wrote: »

If Galway was the Netherlands no body would be talking about closing 3 out of 4 bridges to vehicular traffic, ye obviously don't know many Dutch people cause in my experience working with them they are a practical people.

In the Netherlands I believe they can even provide free parking in some areas (no link -- I read it somewhere recently) because there is no chance that they will be inundated with cars. This is Ireland, so a "bypass" won't fix that for us. Maybe a congestion charge would though. Keep the bridges open -- just put a road pricing system in place, which will deter unnecessary car use. And while we're at it, start putting a realistic economic cost (factoring in externalities) on currently free parking.

Unrealistic wrote: »

Did they really? (genuine question) Can you point us to more information on this?
All I've seen are two sheets of buzzwords, 'possible options' and fancy graphics with no concrete information. At the consultation events there was plenty supporting documentation for the various road options and the staff on hand were able to discuss the details knowledgeably. For the public transport options the opposite was the case; the only info shown was the same two slides that are on the website and the staff were very vague if you asked questions about this aspect. I went away with the impression that 99% of the preparatory effort had gone into the new road routes and public transport was just tacked on as a box ticking exercise.

There were some colourful graphics alluding to public transport, but nothing on a scale that came close to the material on "Route Selection". However, since the overall process is about investigating alternatives, maybe they're just getting the "routes" question out of the way first. As for the necessary battle for public transport, maybe they're keeping their powder dry for the moment? Surely all that traffic modelling is not just about cars, cars and more cars?

dubhthach

Delft which like all comparable Dutch cities has motorway/dual carriageway ring road. In this case the A14 to the west and the A13 to east, the loop is completed with the N470 (dual carriageway with at grade junctions) to south which provides a link between the two motorways (A14 has a bridge over Delftse Schie as does the N470). Leaving that aside their two main bridges within the actual historic core are both dual carriageway

Do you really think they closed bridges in middle of their historic core to private motor vehicles without providing infrastructure to remove traffic that didn't need to be near the region?



Have you actually spent much time in the Netherlands? I have after all I used to work for a company that was founded in Netherlands. How did Dutch get to where they are at moment? Not by sitting on their arse and doing nothing they built the required infrastructure, be it road, cycle trail (35,000 km+ of separate cycle routes) and public transport.

Now personally I'd have no problem with closing O'Brien's bridge, if anything it would allow for complete pedestrianisation of all streets within the boundaries of old city wall (except for bit at Claddagh bridge). If you want to get rid of Claddagh bridge then you are gonna need a new "harbour bridge" to remove traffic south, cutting across the Swamp to say Rinmore point.

Iwannahurl

dubhthach wrote: »

Delft which like all comparable Dutch cities has motorway/dual carriageway ring road. In this case the A14 to the west and the A13 to east, the loop is completed with the N470 (dual carriageway with at grade junctions) to south which provides a link between the two motorways (A14 has a bridge over Delftse Schie as does the N470). Leaving that aside their two main bridges within the actual historic core are both dual carriageway

Have you actually spent much time in the Netherlands? I have after all I used to work for a company that was founded in Netherlands. How did Dutch get to where they are at moment? Not by sitting on their arse and doing nothing they built the required infrastructure, be it road, cycle trail (35,000 km+ of separate cycle routes) and public transport.

How's your Dutch?

Would you care to provide us with a summary in English of this report in the Delft op Zondag?

http://www.delftopzondag.nl/algemeen/kritiek-op-de-aanleg-van-de-a4-tussen-delft-en-schiedam-neemt-meer-en-meer-toe

galwaycyclist

dubhthach wrote: »

Delft which like all comparable Dutch cities has motorway/dual carriageway ring road. In this case the A14 to the west and the A13 to east, the loop is completed with the N470 (dual carriageway with at grade junctions) to south which provides a link between the two motorways (A14 has a bridge over Delftse Schie as does the N470). Leaving that aside their two main bridges within the actual historic core are both dual carriageway

Do you really think they closed bridges in middle of their historic core to private motor vehicles without providing infrastructure to remove traffic that didn't need to be near the region?

Sorry but in my view you are being disingenuous. Delft sits between Den Haag and Rotterdam each with municipal populations in excess of half a million. Clearly there will be motorways linking these cities - especially Rotterdam as a major European transport hub.


The only thing on the other side of Galway is Connemara - population 39,000.

dubhthach

Iwannahurl wrote: »

How's your Dutch?

Would you care to provide us with a summary in English of this report in the Delft op Zondag?

http://www.delftopzondag.nl/algemeen/kritiek-op-de-aanleg-van-de-a4-tussen-delft-en-schiedam-neemt-meer-en-meer-toe

Non-existant, after all the Dutch tend to have better English than most Irish people. That article is out of date (2010) as specific gap which is notorious is actually under construction and scheduled to open this year:

http://www.rijkswaterstaat.nl/wegen/plannen_en_projecten/a_wegen/a4/delft_schiedam/index.aspx

See google maps where you can see construction it under construction, of course here's a quote from the relevant goverenment minister:

Minister Schultz van Haegen (Infrastructuur en milieu) is blij met de voortgang bij de aanleg van de nieuwe snelweg tussen Delft en Schiedam, die eind 2015 geopend wordt. 'We bereiken hiermee een nieuwe mijlpaal voor dit veelbesproken stuk snelweg, die van groot belang is voor de doorstroming in de regio Den Haag - Rotterdam. Met de aanleg van deze schakel in het wegennet geven we de economie een flinke impuls.'

Minister Schultz van Haegen (Infrastructure and Environment) is pleased with the progress in the construction of the new motorway between Delft and Schiedam , opened end of 2015 . "We thus reach a new milestone for this much-discussed piece of highway, which is important for the flow in the The Hague - Rotterdam area. The construction of this link in the road network we give the economy a boost . "

Typical Dutch pragmatism. As a result there will be two parallel motorways connecting the Hague to Rotterdam (one to west of Delft and one to east)

galwaycyclist

dubhthach wrote: »

Typical Dutch pragmatism. As a result there will be two parallel motorways connecting the Hague to Rotterdam (one to west of Delft and one to east)

QED

dubhthach

galwaycyclist wrote: »

Sorry but in my view you are being disingenuous. Delft sits between Den Haag and Rotterdam each with municipal populations in excess of half a million. Clearly there will be motorways linking these cities - especially Rotterdam as a major European transport hub.


The only thing on the other side of Galway is Connemara - population 39,000.

Sure but you're the one comparing Delft to Galway, thence the reason I mention Leeuwarden, where the Haak om Leeuwarden was built removing traffic that had no business been in the city. (which by the way isn't on any major routes within the Netherlands, but is capital of Friesland)




of course if you want a University city there's always Gronigen to the east of Leeuwarden. Though size wise it's better comparison to Cork. In it's city center cycling has 57% modal share there, the city has motorway to the south and east and dual carriageway that goes along west/north providing a full bypass of the city.

Iwannahurl

galwaycyclist wrote: »

The only thing on the other side of Galway is Connemara - population 39,000.

There are many other comparisons that could be made, but how helpful would they be?

A key difference, of course, is population density. If Galway was as densely populated as the Netherlands average (495 per sq km) there would be three million people living in the city and county combined.

Can you imagine what it would be like if we had Dutch population density and Irish levels of car use?

Anyway, the reality is that, inevitably, the Dutch have traffic congestion too. The reason is self-evident: too many people using too many cars. In the Netherlands there are pressures to build more roads, and one of the main arguments against is that more roads will lead to more traffic sooner or later. It took the Dutch 54 years to begin construction of a 6.5 km section of the A4 between Delft and Rotterdam. The argument in favour was increased traffic, and the arguments against included that the traffic jams would merely be displaced and/or postponed.

galwaycyclist

dubhthach wrote: »

If Galway was the Netherlands no body would be talking about closing 3 out of 4 bridges to vehicular traffic, ye obviously don't know many Dutch people cause in my experience working with them they are a practical people.

Groningen - Another Dutch university city.

http://ursi.eldoc.ub.rug.nl/FILES/root/ResRep/2007/317/317.pdf

The Traffic Circulation Plan (Verkeerscirculatieplan , VCP), which was proposed by PvdA wethouder (political executive) Max van den Berg and decided
by the municipal council in 1975, naturally stated the similar objectives for the inner city:

- the inner city must be made car-limited, but still remain accessible for the car.

- in the inner city, more space must be offered to the pedestrian, public transport and the cyclist.

As a principle of strategy for these objectives, it argued for "keeping out the through traffic from the inner city"

. To realise this, it proposed dividing the inner city into four sectors for cars through enforcing one-way traffic restrictions overall (Figure 1).

The actual plan was implemented in 1977 dividing the city centre into four zones that could not be crossed by private cars but were open to buses, pedestrians and cyclists.

The city centre businesses had a hissy-fit much like the Galway Chamber of Commerce reacting to the removal of their beloved roundabouts. The commericial interests were faced down and nowadays Groningen is widely seen as a best practice model for city management and sustainable transport.

dubhthach

galwaycyclist wrote: »

Groningen - Another Dutch university city.

http://ursi.eldoc.ub.rug.nl/FILES/root/ResRep/2007/317/317.pdf



The actual plan was implemented in 1977 dividing the city centre into four zones that could not be crossed by private cars but were open to buses, pedestrians and cyclists.

The city centre businesses had a hissy-fit much like the Galway Chamber of Commerce reacting to the removal of their beloved roundabouts. The commericial interests were faced down and nowadays Groningen is widely seen as a best practice model for city management and sustainable transport.

Sure and Gronigen has motorway/dual carriageway on all four sides of it. Have you been there? I have, it's a beautiful city. The four zones only affect the inner city, which if you ask me makes a lot of sense. In Galway context the equivalent is the area within the Wall city (which the core of is already pedestrianised)

https://www.kvi.nl/images/KVIweg.gif

vs. actual Inner City:

http://compsoc.nuigalway.ie/~dubhthach/gcob/plattegrond_parkeergarages_Engels.jpg

Oh and there are plenty of multi-story carparks even within this area.

galwaycyclist

dubhthach wrote: »

If Galway was the Netherlands no body would be talking about closing 3 out of 4 bridges to vehicular traffic, ye obviously don't know many Dutch people cause in my experience working with them they are a practical people.

Utrecht

http://www.transport-research.info/Upload/Documents/200310/opium.pdf

Two of the main streets in the inner city of Utrecht, which are important streets for through traffic, were closed to private cars. A bus lane was implemented as an additional measure to support the restriction of private cars, in order to increase road safety, improve the efficiency
and accessibility of public transport in the inner city and encourage a positive modal shift.

The cities of Heidelberg, Gent and Utrecht followed the same approach in their parking strategy. The number of on-street parking places for long stay parking was reduced in the city centre. Additional parking capacity was offered in underground parking places in the city centre and /or at park and ride sites on the edge of the city centre. A parking guidance system, indicating the number of available parking places at different locations leads visitors to available spaces, reducing the circulating traffic seeking parking spaces and parking search times. The on-street parking spaces are reserved for residents, disabled people, deliveries and for short stay parking.
This reallocation of parking places has resulted in decreases in the amount of traffic entering the city centre.

antoobrien

galwaycyclist wrote: »

Utrecht

http://www.transport-research.info/Upload/Documents/200310/opium.pdf

Has a ring road.

Thanks for undermining your own arguments by repeatedly posting locations that have actual bypasses as examples of why Galway should not.

dubhthach

And the pedestrianisation of William's Gate Street/Shop Street/Mainguards Street isn't comparable to closing of two main steets in Utrecht how?

After all it use to be major route for through traffic (awh memories of been in Double decker bus to Salthill passing Lynch's castle). Of course again you fail to mention that Utrecht has motorway's/dual carriageways on all four sides, thus removing traffic from the historic inner city that has no business been there.

Can you show me where they closed 75% of bridges in Utrecht to private vehicular traffic (without providing alternative routes) which after all is the bit of snake oil that you are trying to sell.

Iwannahurl

dubhthach wrote: »

snake oil that you are trying to sell.

I should have patented that.

dubhthach wrote: »

removing traffic from the historic inner city that has no business been there.

Are you suggesting that is what a Galway "bypass" is for?

galwaycyclist

dubhthach wrote: »

<snip>
of course if you want a University city there's always Gronigen to the east of Leeuwarden. Though size wise it's better comparison to Cork. In it's city center cycling has 57% modal share there, the city has motorway to the south and east and dual carriageway that goes along west/north providing a full bypass of the city.

Again in my view you are open to the accusation that you are being disingenuous. Groningen sits beside a natural corridor from northern Germany Bremen, Emden etc to Amsterdam/Rotterdam. Naturally there are motorways.

There is nothing to the west of Galway except Connemara population 39,000.

And we already have a Dual Carriageway crossing the river that seems to have little traffic outside of peak travel hours.

Iwannahurl

To reach Dutch-standard motorway AADTs on a Galway "bypass" the entire population of Gaelgóirs, children included, would probably have to own at least three cars each and drive all of them at the same time.

Unless of course, the plan is not a "bypass" but a Connemara-Dublin highway intended to facilitate major repopulation of the West?

what_traffic

galwaycyclist wrote: »

Again in my view you are open to the accusation that you are being disingenuous. Groningen sits beside a natural corridor from northern Germany Bremen, Emden etc to Amsterdam/Rotterdam. Naturally there are motorways.

There is nothing to the west of Galway except Connemara population 39,000.

And we already have a Dual Carriageway crossing the river that seems to have little traffic outside of peak travel hours.

That's the key. How to shift this peak car traffic to other far more efficient mode's.
If you gave a Dutch Traffic Transport Expert Galway City and it's hinterland as a case study that would be the first thing they would look at.

galwaycyclist

dubhthach wrote: »

And the pedestrianisation of William's Gate Street/Shop Street/Mainguards Street isn't comparable to closing of two main steets in Utrecht how?

No because in Utrecht they only closed them to private cars - not to everything on wheels.

Shop street was a major cross-city cycling route before the council attempted to close it to cyclists.

To equate the two acts is perverse. Utrecht, like other Dutch cities, was trying to create a city centre that worked efficiently for the greatest number of people. Galway city was trying to create a pedestrian ghetto in a city centre optimised for cars. (not as if that could work anyway)

galwaycyclist

dubhthach wrote: »

Can you show me where they closed 75% of bridges in Utrecht to private vehicular traffic (without providing alternative routes) which after all is the bit of snake oil that you are trying to sell.

In Galway there are already alternative routes and mode of transport. They just cant work if you base everything around facilitating cars everywhere.

biko

This thread is not about bicycles. Let's keep it on the outer bypass and leave bicycles for another time and place.

galwaycyclist

biko wrote: »

This thread is not about bicycles. Let's keep it on the outer bypass and leave bicycles for another time and place.

I'm talking about cars - I'm not quite sure what you are talking about.

what_traffic

biko wrote: »

This thread is not about bicycles. Let's keep it on the outer bypass and leave bicycles for another time and place.

It's not even about the GCOB anymore to be honest. That has been removed from the City Dev Plan. It is the "N6 Galway City Transport Project"

Iwannahurl

In fairness, the agenda for public discussion has moved on considerably since 1999.

Graphic produced by the N6 Galway City Transport Project:

antoobrien

Iwannahurl wrote: »

In fairness, the agenda for public discussion has moved on considerably since 1999.

Graphic produced by the N6 Galway City Transport Project

And trying to put all that in without a bypass is like designing a house to around the chandelier you want to put in the front room before looking at the physical constraints of the site, placement of foundations, walls, doors, windows.......

Iwannahurl

By introducing an analogy with house-building, you are opening up the possibility of unflattering comparisons being made between Irish spatial and transport planning and Irish building standards/practices. Are you sure you want to go there?

dubhthach

galwaycyclist wrote: »

No because in Utrecht they only closed them to private cars - not to everything on wheels.

Shop street was a major cross-city cycling route before the council attempted to close it to cyclists.

To equate the two acts is perverse. Utrecht, like other Dutch cities, was trying to create a city centre that worked efficiently for the greatest number of people. Galway city was trying to create a pedestrian ghetto in a city centre optimised for cars. (not as if that could work anyway)

Perhaps you should visit Utrecht because you need to get your facts straight. All vehicular traffic is banned from Utrecht pedestrian zone, that includes mounted cyclists. It started out as two shopping streets and has now been extended, there's no reason why the whole of Galway within the area of the Old city walls can't be full pedestrianised either.

All it requires is provision of proper infrastructure for both public transport and for cyclists (along with removal of cross urban motorists from the area). So for example put a cyclist/pedestrian bridge over the old Railway piers, likewise put one over the Queen's gap providing a link from Cathedral to Bowling Green area. (Heck I'd put a pedestrian/cyclist bridge from Claddagh Basin over to Merchant road)

Pedestrian Ghetto? really how old are you 5?

dubhthach

galwaycyclist wrote: »

In Galway there are already alternative routes and mode of transport. They just cant work if you base everything around facilitating cars everywhere.

Sure which is why I've said it many times on this thread and others that any Outer bypass project should also include the following in it's costing/funding:

• Widening of Western Distrubitor road to include buslanes/cyclelanes (contuination of same on SQR)
• Conversion of QCB from dual carriageway to single carriageway with Buslanes/cycle lanes (get rid of those awful ones currently in place)
• Likewise for Séan Moyvole road, providing link to Dublin road buslane
• Convert the hard-shoulders on the R446 (former N6) all way out to Oranmore, likewise convert the hard shoulders of current "Bypass" from junction with N6/M6 to Ballybrit junction to bus lanes
• Bus lane/cycle lane in both directions along Tuam road from Cemetry cross (interchange with buslane coming across QCB) out to at least Parkmore
• Provision of new pedestrian/cyclist only bridges across the river (old railway bridge, queen's gap, claddagh)
• removal of surface carparking within city center at Market Steet, Newtownsmyth, Woodquay, Millstreet
• Parallel bridge to replace current Salmon Weir Bridge, existing one to be pedestrian/cyclist only
• extended pedestrian zone
• one way traffic system in areas such as woodquay/francis street (heck lets go the Gronigen zoned route)

In comparison all you suggest is lets close some bridges and we won't have to spend a dime. pfff

Mrs OBumble

dubhthach wrote: »

, there's no reason why the whole of Galway within the area of the Old city walls can't be full pedestrianised either.

Respectfully, the level of anti-social behaviour expected from pedestrians here may be slightly different. Pedestrianisation works where there is a high density of pedestrians. But where it's lower and you remove the passive surveilance provided by passing cars, things get dangerous.