N6 - Galway outer bypass: Is it needed?

antoobrien

Iwannahurl wrote: »

While you're at it, perhaps you could also expand a bit on your thought-provoking idea of a referendum restricted to "the people who live and work in Galway city & environs" regarding a road scheme that is supposedly intended for motorists from outside the area who actually want to bypass the city altogether?

Well that's actually a sop to the "reasoned objectors" who, among other things, want to cut down on parking on Galway but also don't believe that anybody living outside of the city boundary should have a say in the matter, despite having to enter the city.

Iwannahurl wrote: »

The GCOB is a bypass, we're told, and any traffic improvements within the city will be "nearly entirely unconnected" with it. Meanwhile, people from outside Galway City don't have valid opinions on the subject because "they don't have to sit in traffic to get the shopping".

Go back and take a read of the bit you've quoted, that misinterpretation is so hilariously wrong that I can't begin to describe how foolish you look.

Even then as usual you have removed tyhe context (talk about disingenuous) which is that the complaint is not about shoppers, but about posters complaining about it, when they freely admit that they're rarely in Galway at all.

Iwannahurl

antoobrien wrote: »

So a 20 car increase equates to a 5% modal share increase. 20 cars is a rounding error in 12,000 journeys.

So, if I'm understanding you correctly, the 2006-2011 travel to work stats for car use in Waterford City can be explained by a "rounding error" whereas as the changes in the generally lower figures (in modal split terms) for PT, walking and cycling are "clearly caused" by the drop in employment?

antoobrien wrote: »

the bypass has clearly not caused the drop in in walking, cycling and bus use, the drop in employment has.

And can you elaborate a bit on the text in red above?

Iwannahurl

antoobrien wrote: »

Go back and take a read of the bit you've quoted, that misinterpretation is so hilariously wrong that I can't begin to describe how foolish you look.

Even then as usual you have removed tyhe context (talk about disingenuous) which is that the complaint is not about shoppers, but about posters complaining about it, when they freely admit that they're rarely in Galway at all.

Much of the context is here, including numerous excerpts from your musings on the general subject: http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=85750010&postcount=495

Any chance you could fashion a Unifying Theory of the Galway City Outer Bypass to explain why there seems to be so many disparate views regarding its intended function?





EDIT: Now I think I get it. Maybe.

antoobrien wrote: »

Go back and take a read of the bit you've quoted, that misinterpretation is so hilariously wrong that I can't begin to describe how foolish you look.

Even then as usual you have removed tyhe context (talk about disingenuous) which is that the complaint is not about shoppers, but about posters complaining about it, when they freely admit that they're rarely in Galway at all.

antoobrien wrote: »

Besides, all we have heard to this point is opposition to the plans, mostly from people outside of Galway (almost totally invalid, they don't have to sit in traffic to get the shopping) or from people who stand to land (which I have some sympathy for, and landowners should be compensated appropriately, but not extortionately, which has happened on other schemes around Galway). So maybe its time for the supporters to register their support and we'll see if (as is my opinion) there many more supporters than objectors to the project

So the opinions of people from outside Galway regarding the GCOB, whether they just want to use it to go shopping or for some other reason, are valid if they support the bypass but not otherwise? Is that your position on this particular issue?

antoobrien

Iwannahurl wrote: »

So the opinions of people from outside Galway regarding the GCOB, whether they just want to use it to go shopping or for some other reason, are valid if they support the bypass but not otherwise? Is that your position on this particular issue?

No people that don't come to Galway that often (or at all as a few people have said). There are a fair few people on here that do show a good level of knowledge that are not from Galway (and clearly so) and come here on business regularly. Those people I would listen to.

People who freely admit to only coming once in the past 10 years I'd ignore either way. Would you listen to their opinions if thy said they said that due to their one experience in Galway that we needed a bypass? I think not, but you show no problem in using their arguments to bolster your claims, so stop with the hypocrisy, it's just making you look pettier than usual.

monument

antoobrien wrote: »

...so stop with the hypocrisy, it's just making you look pettier than usual.

Ok more than enough warnings -- enjoy a week ban.

Iwannahurl

antoobrien wrote: »

So a 20 car increase equates to a 5% modal share increase. 20 cars is a rounding error in 12,000 journeys.

As for kids, lets look back at the past:
Year | 5-12 | Passengers (incl vans) | %
96 | 5312 | 2363+41=2404 | 45%
02 | 4817 | 2872+10=2882 | 59%
06 | 4791 | 3005+10=3015 | 63%
11 | 5253 | 3509+07=3516 | 52.5%


Hey wait a sec, that's a severe drop off in the % of car & van passengers between 2006 & 2011, despite an actual increase (that makes a mockery of your 5% increase for 20 cars in 12,000 work journeys).

Now let's look at the cycling and bus figures over that time:

Year | 5-12 | cycle | bus
96 | 5312 | 38 | 449
02 | 4817 | 9 | 356
06 | 4791 | 3 | 242
11 | 5253 | 12 | 275


Your assertion that the bypass is responsible for increases/drops is not supported by the trend shown over the past 4 census enumerations, as it shows increasing car numbers

The Census figures and/or system of arithmetic you're using do not seem to compute.

With regard to the figures in red, (a) where does the figure of 5253 come from, and (b) are you saying that 3516 is 52.5% of 5253?

The 2011 Census figures I am using refer to 5360 primary school children aged 5-12, of which 3554 travel to school by car or van. That's 66% of children aged 5-12 travelling to school by private motor vehicle, which is what I posted earlier.

I don't understand how you have come up with the figure of 52.5%, or how you arrived at your conclusion ("a severe drop off in the % of car & van passengers between 2006 & 2011, despite an actual increase") or even what that is supposed to mean.

Details aside, what the 2006-2011 Census stats for Waterford City show is indeed greater car use. I'm not saying the Waterford bypass is responsible for those changes, I'm saying it made no difference in terms of what is supposed to be local and national policy, ie Smarter Travel and all that.

The trend is towards increasing car use, and the Waterford bypass did not alter that trend in a positive direction. What reason is there to believe that the GCOB will be any different?

galwaycyclist

antoobrien wrote: »

Okay, then lets do a though experiment. Lets remove the Stockholm (a favourite "sustainable" example) ring road. What happens?

The approach roads get clogged up with traffic that is not trying to access areas on those routes but now have to use them in order to get to their intended destinations. This sounds eerily familiar, I wonder where we could have seen this before?

I am not sure why we are comparing Galway with a city with about the same population as Dublin. The problem with this is that in Stockholm the availability of alternative routes, extensive public transport etc clearly was not enough to prevent avoidable traffic using the city centre. So they had to bring in a congestion charge in 2007.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stockholm_congestion_tax

Even where Swedish levels of infrastructure investment are available active demand management is needed to stop motor traffic growing to fill all the available capacity.

antoobrien wrote: »

Your definition of common good is obviously very different from mine, because to me the common good includes providing/improving access to facilities, not removing it. Measures that restrict car use without practical alternatives will not help, they will make the situation worse - see the bus gate in Dublin for what happens when "sustainability" and practicality aren't in the same room when a project is touted.

A solution that does not include a bypass of Galway is unsustainable because it will have the effect of further increasing the focus of traffic on the centre of the urban area, which is already unable to handle what it is getting.

If cars, and car management are allowed to dominate all the available road capacity then the alternatives are less practical. If greater effort goes into securing greater convenience for private motor traffic then the alternatives, receiving less effort, or being deliberately restricted, cannot compete.

Stockholm proves that simply having a bypass does not prevent traffic being focused in a particular area.

antoobrien wrote: »

But hey, we don't like cars in Galway, so lets not build a road that will keep those vehicles that do not need to be in the main commercial area out of it. That will help us get our "sustainable" future right?

The principle behind the proposed bypass is the same one behind those cities that you describe as sustainable - removing traffic from areas that is not the intended destination of said traffic. A very simple concept that is very fundamental to providing true sustainability of traffic.

Galway already has a bypass of sorts that it is not even trying to use properly. Why, despite a bypass, has car dependency continued to grow in Waterford at a time of record unemployment and record fuel prices?

Iwannahurl

galwaycyclist wrote: »

I am not sure why we are comparing Galway with a city with about the same population as Dublin.

[...]

Galway already has a bypass of sorts that it is not even trying to use properly. Why, despite a bypass, has car dependency continued to grow in Waterford at a time of record unemployment and record fuel prices?

Stockholm is worth mentioning because of their highly effective congestion charge. That's one important approach to TDM that needs serious consideration in Galway City, imv.

Perhaps those thanking post #496 above might provide an answer to your question regarding Waterford? They could also suggest an explanation for why the drop in employment supposedly led to both a reduction in walking, cycling and bus use and increased car use in that bypassed city.

antoobrien wrote: »

the bypass has clearly not caused the drop in in walking, cycling and bus use, the drop in employment has.

Perhaps these posters, and others who have been vociferous in their support for the GCOB in various threads and forums over a long period, could also respond to the question I posed earlier.

It is evident that among GCOB enthusiasts there is a range of opinion, often conflicting imo, with regard to the intended use of the proposed bypass. Can any of them, individually or collectively, come up with a Unifying Theory of the Galway City Outer Bypass to tie together the many disparate views regarding its supposed function?

I've never been totally comfortable with the title of this thread, but if the question "is the GCOB needed" is to be answered satisfactorily, it would be helpful if its advocates were ad idem about what it's supposedly needed for.

.

starlit

The city itself takes a while to get into and a bottleneck for traffic be handy to have a bypass but how you go about it could be tricky.

Iwannahurl

While we're waiting for the Final Theory that explains and draws together all the disparate views of what the GCOB is supposedly needed for (e.g. simultaneously taking current traffic out and bringing new traffic in) the earlier comment about the Stockholm congestion charge prompts me to wonder how such a measure might work in Galway.

Stockholm is built on a number of islands. This makes it a beautiful waterfront city but the disadvantage in terms of transportation is that north-south traffic has no alternative but to follow routes through or near the core of the city.

Sounds familiar?

The geography of Stockholm also lent itself to the implementation of the system: electronic toll gates are sited at 18 locations around the perimeter (see map below). My understanding is that the objective of the charge in Stockholm was to reduce congestion at peak times, typically the morning and evening rush hours.





There was popular, political and media opposition to the plan when it was first proposed (it was described as "the most expensive and painful way to commit political suicide ever devised") but there was sufficient political will and leadership to ensure that a trial period was implemented. The trial was very successful, and a majority approved the plan in a subsequent referendum. Support for the congestion charge actually increased over time. Source: http://www.tmleuven.be/expertise/seminar/20111205_Stockholm.pdf

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wRS_urfujmw

The geography of Galway City also lends itself to a congestion charge, in my opinion. This might be a topic worth exploring in its own thread, but for the moment I would suggest that there is no technical reason why the existing four bridges across the Corrib could not function as electronic toll gates. This would not preclude the inclusion of a future bypass in such a system. Charges would be organised in a way that achieved the desired congestion-reducing effects across the entire network, as part of a wider integrated TDM strategy.

galwayrush

Tolls on existing roads/bridges, Congestion Charge... that's a solution..:pac::pac:

Iwannahurl

@galwayrush, ?Cee?view et al: are you simply avoiding my question regarding the Final Theory of why the GCOB is allegedly needed?

Can you enlighten us as to why there are so many apparently conflicting notions as to the function of the proposed bypass?

http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=85750010&postcount=495

Is it for the Kingston Commuters or those unfortunate people in Connemara who are "cut off" from the rest of the country?

Is its purpose to get traffic out of Galway City or bring it in?

Is it to help us do the shopping?

serfboard

Iwannahurl wrote: »

@galwayrush, ?Cee?view et al: are you simply avoiding my question regarding the Final Theory of why the GCOB is allegedly needed?

Can you enlighten us as to why there are so many apparently conflicting notions as to the function of the proposed bypass?

http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=85750010&postcount=495

Is it for the Kingston Commuters or those unfortunate people in Connemara who are "cut off" from the rest of the country?

Is its purpose to get traffic out of Galway City or bring it in?

Is it to help us do the shopping?

You might as well ask what the M50 is for. Or the Athlone bypass. Or any other one. There is a primary purpose for a bypass, which is to remove long-distance traffic from City and Town Centres, and then there are uses to which is put. The law of unintended consequence applies but some of these consequences can, and should, be mitigated.

Iwannahurl

The normally opinionated GCOB enthusiasts seems to have gone uncharacteristically quiet.

That's a real pity, because as well as wanting to know how they can reconcile the apparently conflicting notions regarding the supposed function(s) of the Galway Outer Bypass, I'd be very interested to hear their views on the Waterford Bypass. Perhaps there are lessons to be learned from the Waterford experience, as reported below, so that the business case for the GCOB does not turn out to be "something that promises big but fails to deliver", aka "vaporware".

Troubled Kilkenny Waterford bridge over Suir a rip-off for motorists

Kilkenny People, 9th February 2011

ONE of the largest infrastructure projects ever completed in the South-East of Ireland is a white elephant. The new, iconic bridge over the River Suir linking counties Kilkenny and Waterford was predicted to carry 14,000 vehicles a day when it opened in October 2009 but now struggles to meet a third of that quota.

An investigation by the Kilkenny People has revealed that the toll bridge, known locally as the 'Cat-Flap', is now handling an average of 5,500 customers a day and according to the National Roads Authority, is overcharging each trip by 10 cent.

Most commuters around Waterford are avoiding the bridge because it is too expensive and it is still easier to go through the city than pay a toll, especially at off-peak times.

The €55 million suspension bridge was built partly to alleviate pressure on the Edmund Rice draw-bridge on the city's quay but this has not happened. Neither has the new by-pass been successful in getting people to change their motoring habits.

A spokesperson for Celtic Roads Group (CRG), which operates the bridge told the Kilkenny People that the economic downturn was to blame for the bridge's poor performance and the lower than expected usage.

Traffic figures from the Edmund Rice Bridge have remained stubbornly high. The most recent comparable figures available show that the levels of traffic using the Edmund Rice bridge before and after the opening of the Suir Bridge have decreased by 2,000 vehicles a day, from 40,000 to 38,000. The Department of Transport and the National Roads Authority had claimed that traffic volumes using Rice Bridge would be reduced by 10,000 to 12,000 vehicles per day once the Suir bridge was in operation.

The entire bypass scheme, which promised to remove "up to 14,000 vehicles" per day from the city, cost around half a billion Euro. The actual reduction in city centre traffic falls far short of the 30% predicted by the brochure, and does not represent good value for money, imo.

I also find it odd that CRG can blame the economic downturn for this situation. What kind of economic downturn reduces traffic on the Edmund Rice Bridge by 5%, while at the same time resulting in increased car travel to work, school and college in Waterford City between 2006 and 2011, as Census figures show?

I'd be interested to know what the current traffic figures are for the Rice Bridge and the Waterford Bypass.

Meanwhile, back in Galway, the GCOB is projected to cost €300 million. The most likely financing is through public-private partnership and a toll.

Kingston commuters, cut-off Connemara people, Salthill visitors and people stuck in traffic on the way to the shops may all be longing for the day when they shall be released, but given the Waterford experience is there any guarantee that the GCOB will deliver on its big promises?

Iwannahurl

serfboard wrote: »

You might as well ask what the M50 is for. Or the Athlone bypass. Or any other one. There is a primary purpose for a bypass, which is to remove long-distance traffic from City and Town Centres, and then there are uses to which is put. The law of unintended consequence applies but some of these consequences can, and should, be mitigated.

Damn right we should ask.

If we're to stump up €300 million for a "bypass" should we just hope for the best regarding "the uses to which it is put"?

And why should we assume that those uses are "unintended" consequences?

galwayrush

The by pass is the most practical way to remove unnecessary traffic from near the city centre. Simple.

Iwannahurl

galwayrush wrote: »

The by pass is the most practical way to remove unnecessary traffic from near the city centre.

Simple.

Simple?

No actually:

http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=85750010&postcount=495

http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=85794078&postcount=515

If it's so simple, (a) why are there such different views regarding the supposed function of the GCOB, and (b) why has the Waterford Bypass "simply" not functioned in that manner, up to 2011 in any case?

PS: can you define "most practical" please?

serfboard

Iwannahurl wrote: »

If we're to stump up €300 million for a "bypass" should we just hope for the best regarding "the uses to which it is put"?

No. As I said "these ... can, and should, be mitigated."

Iwannahurl wrote: »

And why should we assume that those uses are "unintended" consequences?

Unintended consequences refers to uses which cannot reasonably be foreseen.

For example, pre the M6/M4 and M1 I would never have conceived using the M50 toll bridge to get from Galway to Belfast, and those building it presumably didn't imagine I would either. Now, travelling to Belfast I can still go via Sligo and Enniskillen (or cross-country) as before, or I can decide, as I do, to drive along the much safer motorway system including the M50.

Or, taking a public transport example, the excellent Eireagle service from Citylink means I can be in Dublin airport in 2.5 hours. Would you rather that the M50 "bypass" wasn't built and instead the bus should crawl though Dublin?

Aard

galwayrush wrote: »

The by pass is the most practical way to remove unnecessary traffic from near the city centre. Simple.

The problem with removing traffic from the city centre is that vacant road space tends to fill up (over the course of a few months to a couple of years) until it is back to the original congestion level. This is proven. The only way to ensure the continued removal of traffic from near the city centre is to remove a commensurate amount of roadspace as has been provided by the bypass. This can be done by re-purposing roadspace to buslanes, cycle lanes, removal of lanes in multi-lane roads, tightening junctions to make them more pedestrian friendly, increasing the length of the "green man" at lights around the centre, creating no-through-routes for cars (done extensively in Vancouver and the Netherlands for example), or a combination of the lot. Building a bypass is an incredible opportunity to re-purpose city centre roadspace, and any plans for a bypass should include plans for such a re-purposing.

serfboard

Aard wrote: »

The problem with removing traffic from the city centre is that vacant road space tends to fill up (over the course of a few months to a couple of years) until it is back to the original congestion level. This is proven. The only way to ensure the continued removal of traffic from near the city centre is to remove a commensurate amount of roadspace as has been provided by the bypass. This can be done by re-purposing roadspace to buslanes, cycle lanes, removal of lanes in multi-lane roads, tightening junctions to make them more pedestrian friendly, increasing the length of the "green man" at lights around the centre, creating no-through-routes for cars (done extensively in Vancouver and the Netherlands for example), or a combination of the lot. Building a bypass is an incredible opportunity to re-purpose city centre roadspace, and any plans for a bypass should include plans for such a re-purposing.

100% agree with this.

galwayrush

Iwannahurl wrote: »

Simple?

No actually:


PS: can you define "most practical" please?

Yes actually.
It's a by pass, it will remove unnecessary traffic from the city centre. Simple.
This in turn will leave room to make better use of the the existing road / street network regarding public transport, cycling etc.

Iwannahurl

serfboard wrote: »

No. As I said "these ... can, and should, be mitigated."

Unintended consequences refers to uses which cannot reasonably be foreseen.

So should we be hoping instead that such off-label uses of a "bypass" will actually be "mitigated"?

In the Irish 'planning' context?

And what forms might such "mitigation" take?

It's already perfectly obvious what the punters want to use the Galway "outer bypass" for. They've been telling us over and over for quite some time now: http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=85750010&postcount=495

Iwannahurl

Aard wrote: »

Building a bypass is an incredible opportunity to re-purpose city centre roadspace, and any plans for a bypass should include plans for such a re-purposing.

galwayrush wrote: »

Yes actually.
It's a by pass, it will remove unnecessary traffic from the city centre. Simple.
This in turn will leave room to make better use of the the existing road / street network regarding public transport, cycling etc.

Can you answer the question regarding why the "simple" solution of a bypass has apparently not worked in Waterford?

And are these descriptions of a "bypass" and of "unnecessary traffic"?

"The GCOB will take away ... cross town traffic to & from Knocknacarra and environs"

"probably take a big chunk of the traffic originating in Knocknacarra"

"people living in Salthill/Knocknacarra ... working on the eastern side of the city"

"Kingston Road, Bishop O'Donnell Road, Knocknacarra ... need the bypass now"

"it's about moving large volumes of people around Galway city from both inside AND outside the city area"

.

galwayrush

What is your magic solution then? It obviously doesn't involve a by pass.

Iwannahurl

galwayrush wrote: »

What is your magic solution then? It obviously doesn't involve a by pass.

I'm questioning assumptions here, genuinely.

Can I have your views on the issues raised, eg re "unnecessary traffic", who's going to use the Galway "bypass" and how, the "simple" (non-)solution of the Waterford Bypass etc.

These are important considerations, imo.

galwayrush

Iwannahurl wrote: »

I'm questioning assumptions here, genuinely.

Can I have your views on the issues raised, eg re "unnecessary traffic", who's going to use the Galway "bypass", the "simple" (non-)solution of the Waterford Bypass etc.

These are important considerations, imo.

Obviously for through traffic that does not need to go to near the city centre, but at the moment have no choice in the matter.
I'll admit quite a lot of traffic that would use it would do so to get from the West of the city to the industrial estates on the East, but is this a bad thing?

Regarding the Waterford by pass, speaking to friends there. the biggest problem there is the cost of the toll. Reading the Connacht Tribune today, the toll between Loughrea and Ballinasloe is experiencing something similar. Considering the Government pick up any shortfall in revenue for the toll operators and the cost of running the operation, why toll at all?

There is the fear that the bypass will lead to vast areas being opened for development in the future, but that's a problem for the planners . Perhaps planned satellite developments along the motorway would be better than the badly planned sprawl we've experienced in recent decades?

Aard

galwayrush wrote: »

There is the fear that the bypass will lead to vast areas being opened for development in the future, but that's a problem for the planners . Perhaps planned satellite developments along the motorway would be better than the badly planned sprawl we've experienced in recent decades?

It is for this reason that I would advocate pushing the bypass as close to the city as possible. It might help to reduce leapfrog development that way. Even better would be if the new motorway could be woven into the existing urban fabric. This would allow for the densification of existing sprawl, rather than just ignoring the existing sprawl and promising to build more densely in the future way out of town.

yer man!

Aard wrote: »

It is for this reason that I would advocate pushing the bypass as close to the city as possible. It might help to reduce leapfrog development that way. Even better would be if the new motorway could be woven into the existing urban fabric. This would allow for the densification of existing sprawl, rather than just ignoring the existing sprawl and promising to build more densely in the future way out of town.

Well the plans are already pretty close to the city as it is, otherwise a lot of demolition would need to happen which would piss more people off...

Iwannahurl

galwayrush wrote: »

Obviously for through traffic that does not need to go to near the city centre, but at the moment have no choice in the matter.

Please bear in mind that I'm still questioning assumptions here. Through traffic that has no alternative but to go through the city at present: that would be bypass material for sure. So we're talking long-distance traffic with destinations far to the East or West of Galway? If so, fair enough.

galwayrush wrote: »

I'll admit quite a lot of traffic that would use it would do so to get from the West of the city to the industrial estates on the East, but is this a bad thing?

It's perfectly obvious that major demand for a "bypass" in Galway City is coming from commuters, and that they'd like to be able to use it to get from Kingston-Knocknacarra-Rahoon and environs to Parkmore-Ballybrit and adjacent areas.

Questioning assumptions again: is this a good thing? If so, why?

galwayrush wrote: »

Regarding the Waterford by pass, speaking to friends there. the biggest problem there is the cost of the toll. Reading the Connacht Tribune today, the toll between Loughrea and Ballinasloe is experiencing something similar. Considering the Government pick up any shortfall in revenue for the toll operators and the cost of running the operation, why toll at all?

As the Kilkenny People report stated, in 2011 a large number of motorists still regarded it as easier to go through a city centre regarded as critically congested rather than pay €1.90 (each way) to use the bypass. Only 2000 of them apparently felt that sitting in traffic along the quays and over the Rice Bridge was worse that paying the toll.

Here's a beauty of a comment regarding motorists' choice of whether to use the bypass or take the congested cross-town route: "€20 per week [in your pocket] or 20 minutes extra in bed... which would you go for?"

So it seems that in Waterford traffic through the city is so bad that it justifies a €500 million bypass but not so bad that motorists are unwilling to put up with it for the sake of not having to fork out €1.90. What does that tell us about economics and motoring behaviour, I wonder?

The state, i.e. the general taxpayer, compensates toll operators for shortfalls in revenue if a road scheme is underutilised. On the other hand, a toll is pay-per-use, so those who avail of the facility and benefit from its Level of Service contribute directly to the costs of constructing and operating it.

galwayrush wrote: »

There is the fear that the bypass will lead to vast areas being opened for development in the future, but that's a problem for the planners . Perhaps planned satellite developments along the motorway would be better than the badly planned sprawl we've experienced in recent decades?

IIRC retail parks were specifically factored into the Waterford Bypass proposal. That's planning for car dependence, imo.

What Irish "planners" do is a problem for our society, now and for the next generations. They haven't done a great job so far, imo.

So again is that the best we can hope for: planned car-dependent sprawl rather than the unplanned variety?

Iwannahurl

Aard wrote: »

It is for this reason that I would advocate pushing the bypass as close to the city as possible. It might help to reduce leapfrog development that way. Even better would be if the new motorway could be woven into the existing urban fabric. This would allow for the densification of existing sprawl, rather than just ignoring the existing sprawl and promising to build more densely in the future way out of town.

So is the GCOB a "bypass" or a "ring road"?

serfboard

Iwannahurl wrote: »

The state, i.e. the general taxpayer, compensates toll operators for shortfalls in revenue if a road scheme is underutilised.

Apart from the M3 (Navan "bypass") and N18 (Limerick "bypass") schemes, where else does this happen?

For instance, it does not happen on the M6, which is why the toll operator is in trouble.

Aard

Iwannahurl wrote: »

So is the GCOB a "bypass" or a "ring road"?

Very good question. I am coming at this from all angles, trying to see every side. I have no vested interests in Galway, and am not biased. You are absolutely correct in that there are a variety of needs/wants facilitated by a new road, not all of them intended.

I don't like to get too bogged down in semantics, which is why I just like to refer to it as "the new motorway". If it were a true bypass, there would be no intersections between the N6 in the far east, and the N59 in the west. But that's not going to happen (nor should it IMO).

Iwannahurl

serfboard wrote: »

Apart from the M3 (Navan "bypass") and N18 (Limerick "bypass") schemes, where else does this happen?

For instance, it does not happen on the M6, which is why the toll operator is in trouble.

Fair enough.

My earlier comment was really in response to a remark made that "the Government" picks up the tab. Where private interests are compensated it's the tax-payer who coughs up.

In all likelihood the Galway Outer "Bypass" will be tolled. Whether or not the toll operator has a compensation clause, a toll will have an interesting effect on usage of the "bypass" by Galway commuters, don't you think?

Iwannahurl

Aard wrote: »

Very good question. I am coming at this from all angles, trying to see every side. I have no vested interests in Galway, and am not biased. You are absolutely correct in that there are a variety of needs/wants facilitated by a new road, not all of them intended.

I don't like to get too bogged down in semantics, which is why I just like to refer to it as "the new motorway". If it were a true bypass, there would be no intersections between the N6 in the far east, and the N59 in the west. But that's not going to happen (nor should it IMO).

I can't remember whether I ever posted the specific text and link below, but when I stated something similar it was shot down as being estate-agent flummery or some such. I doubt that's what it is, though clearly the Celtic Casino collapse has put a stop to their gallop. Their thinking, and their long-term influence, hasn't gone away you know.

GALWAY CITY OUTER BYPASS
The next phase will be the GCOB, the Galway City Outer Bypass, which involves the construction of 27km of roadway including the fifth bridge over the Corrib estimated to cost in the region of €340 million. The C.P.O. process has already begun on the road, which will commence at Briarhill/Garraun, continue north where it will cross the Tuam Road (N17) at Two Mile Ditch, travel in a westerly direction where there will be a major intersection at Ballindooley with the N84 Headford road.

This will open up access for areas like Corrandulla, Headford, etc. It will then continue west where it will cross over a new bridge on the Corrib at Menlo (this is very significant as it will be the 5th bridge over the Corrib), then continuing in a westerly direction towards Bushypark and dissecting Glenlo Abbey Golf Club, before crossing over the Moycullen Road (Junction A – benefiting Moycullen, Oughterard, etc.) and turning further west bypassing Knocknacarra and then emerging on the west side of Barna. It will be a dual-carriage and will be equivalent to a ring road around on the west/northern side of Galway City.

This has huge implications for all of Galway. First of all, it will make commuting time from all of these areas much more accessible, creating serious opportunities for land development and providing further opportunities for house buyers, warehouses, commercial buildings, shopping centres and park and ride. Bearing in mind the continuation of the provision of the infrastructural services like sewer, water, energy and roads which will open up enormous development potential.

It is possible that in some of these outline [sic] locations that a new shopping centre can be built to rival the likes of Liffey Valley. The ideal location would be somewhere off the N6 close to the connection of the N17 and N18 and this would ideally provide 200 shops, anchor tenants and parking for 5000 cars. It would avoid some seepage of shoppers to outline [sic] areas like Athlone and Liffey Valley.

serfboard

Iwannahurl wrote: »

I'm questioning assumptions here, genuinely.

It wasn't until you made this statement here that I got where you're coming from. And it is absolutely fair game to question the need for it thoroughly. For instance:

Iwannahurl wrote: »

It's perfectly obvious that major demand for a "bypass" in Galway City is coming from commuters, and that they'd like to be able to use it to get from Kingston-Knocknacarra-Rahoon and environs to Parkmore-Ballybrit and adjacent areas.

Questioning assumptions again: is this a good thing? If so, why?

Absolutely not. West-East commuters, whose cars will spend all day sitting in a car park in Ballybrit, should be using public transport. What cross-town services operate for these commuters at present, though?

And, as I've often said before, what f**kin eejits would zone Industrial Areas on one side of a river, and large residential areas on another side of a river, and have no public transport between them?

Which leads onto another point. I agree with your lack of faith in planning in this country. However, I wouldn't blame planners - the blame, IMO, lies squarely with politicians who are "influenced" by vested-interest developers and landowners. And the blame for politicians is ourselves, who continually elect the same gombeen gobsh1tes.

Iwannahurl wrote: »

Please bear in mind that I'm still questioning assumptions here. Through traffic that has no alternative but to go through the city at present: that would be bypass material for sure. So we're talking long-distance traffic with destinations far to the East or West of Galway? If so, fair enough.

Good. Some agreement.

Iwannahurl wrote: »

In all likelihood the Galway Outer "Bypass" will be tolled. Whether or not the toll operator has a compensation clause, a toll will have an interesting effect on usage of the "bypass" by Galway commuters, don't you think?

I'll answer that with your own quote:

Iwannahurl wrote: »

As the Kilkenny People report stated, in 2011 a large number of motorists still regarded it as easier to go through a city centre regarded as critically congested rather than pay €1.90 (each way) to use the bypass. Only 2000 of them apparently felt that sitting in traffic along the quays and over the Rice Bridge was worse that paying the toll.

Here's a beauty of a comment regarding motorists' choice of whether to use the bypass or take the congested cross-town route: "€20 per week [in your pocket] or 20 minutes extra in bed... which would you go for?"

So it seems that in Waterford traffic through the city is so bad that it justifies a €500 million bypass but not so bad that motorists are unwilling to put up with it for the sake of not having to fork out €1.90. What does that tell us about economics and motoring behaviour, I wonder?

If f**kin eejits value 20 minutes of their own time at less than 2 Euro, then that really says a lot about them.

I'm not sure that the bypass in Galway will be tolled, though.

Iwannahurl

What effect would a toll on the Galway "bypass" have?

And when the "bypass" is built what would motivate people commuting west-east to use public transport?

By the way, €20 in the pocket versus 20 minutes in bed is an example of a change in driving behaviour when supply-side measures are introduced.

When a shiny new road is provided, cutting travel time, how do motorists respond? And how is that influenced by cost factors, such as a toll? Clearly in Waterford City some people prefer to get up twenty minutes earlier to save the price of a toll, whereas others are willing to pay for the privilege of leaving for work later.

Either way, they adapt their car use to suit the conditions and their personal preferences. Interesting that so many people complain about traffic congestion but still prefer it to the alternatives...

serfboard

Iwannahurl wrote: »

What effect would a toll on the Galway "bypass" have?

I honestly can't say. And I don't think you can either. As someone who infrequently bypasses Limerick and Dublin, I use those tolls. But then, I value my time.

Iwannahurl wrote: »

And when the "bypass" is built what would motivate people commuting west-east to use public transport?

Well, as I've said before, I believe in carrots and sticks. In Galway's case, IMO, it's:

Carrots:

• the bypass.
• improved public transport
• Park & Rides on/off all approach roads
• constructing a bus lane on the full length of the Western Distributor Road (it's wide enough for it)

Sticks:

• Bus Lanes:
  • dedicating one lane of all dual-carriageways inside the outer bypass as Bus lanes (as is done on SQR).
  • closing either College Road or Lough Atalia (or one lane) to all except public transport.
• Increased (doubling?) car parking charges
• Possible consideration of congestion charging.

We can see some semblance of what might be possible with free car parking in Oranmore train station. More of this please.

serfboard

Aard wrote: »

If it were a true bypass, there would be no intersections between the N6 in the far east, and the N59 in the west.

Well, in fairness, the one planned at Ballindooley could still be allowed for a "true" bypass since this allows a connection to a national route (N84).

serfboard

Iwannahurl wrote: »

Interesting that so many people complain about traffic congestion but still prefer it to the alternatives...

I heard a Dublin bus driver saying on the telly one night that there are some people for whom, if a bus pulled up right outside their door, and dropped them off right outside work, they'd still prefer to drive.

I'd hate to see a situation develop in this country like what happens in the US where buses are considered the mode of transport for real "losers". Thankfully, I don't think we're like that here.

galwaycyclist

There has been a whole page of reasoned debate and discussion here without any name calling or taunts. I like it, it pleases me very much.

Iwannahurl

serfboard wrote: »

I heard a Dublin bus driver saying on the telly one night that there are some people for whom, if a bus pulled up right outside their door, and dropped them off right outside work, they'd still prefer to drive.

I'd hate to see a situation develop in this country like what happens in the US where buses are considered the mode of transport for real "losers".

Thankfully, I don't think we're like that here.

I wouldn't bet on it.

It would be very naive to think that a bypass is the start of a move towards mass use of public transport in Galway City.

serfboard

Iwannahurl wrote: »

It would be very naive to think that a bypass is the start of a move towards mass use of public transport in Galway City.

Don't worry - I'm not naive. That's why I advocate carrot and stick. After the carrots, congestion charging and/or €4/5/6 an hour car parking would shift people fairly fast.

After all, as you've acknowledged yourself (wrt toll-dodging), people will do anything to avoid having to pay more money.

And, OTOH, there will always be people who can afford to, and do, pay anything to use their car (cf. Dublin Port Tunnel car users at peak hours).

what_traffic

This is an interesting article, recently published in the IT from Paul Krugman. American Economist
"
How urban sprawl is stretching the land of opportunity to breaking point
"
http://www.irishtimes.com/business/economy/world/how-urban-sprawl-is-stretching-the-land-of-opportunity-to-breaking-point-1.1478599

Can some of it's lessons be relevant here for Galway City?

galwayrush

The NRA have already scuppered Galwegians Rugby Club's plans to move to a location off the Moycullen road, they felt it would put pressure on the proposed link in the area connecting to the proposed by pass. Looks like planning close to the by pass exits/entrances will be quite restrictive.

I don't see any problem with commuters on the West side using it to commute to work each day, in turn, roads closer to the city centre could possibly be redesigned/ reclassified to include more bus lanes / less car lanes .
I don't see the by pass / orbital commuter route as the complete solution to our traffic problem , but I do believe it's a vital part of working towards a solution.

Iwannahurl

serfboard wrote: »

I honestly can't say. And I don't think you can either. As someone who infrequently bypasses Limerick and Dublin, I use those tolls. But then, I value my time.

Well, as I've said before, I believe in carrots and sticks. In Galway's case, IMO, it's:

Carrots:

• the bypass.
• improved public transport
• Park & Rides on/off all approach roads
• constructing a bus lane on the full length of the Western Distributor Road (it's wide enough for it)

Sticks:

• Bus Lanes:
  • dedicating one lane of all dual-carriageways inside the outer bypass as Bus lanes (as is done on SQR).
  • closing either College Road or Lough Atalia (or one lane) to all except public transport.
• Increased (doubling?) car parking charges
• Possible consideration of congestion charging.

We can see some semblance of what might be possible with free car parking in Oranmore train station. More of this please.

I had something a lot stronger written earlier (replete with damning quotes) but after seeing galwaycylist's post above, and its implicit request for moderate voices, I edited it PDQ!

Not directed at yourself, I hasten to add, but towards what I perceive as being very negative attitudes towards public transport as well as other non-PMV modes of travel. There are numerous examples of such disdain on Boards, typically contrasted with the superiority of private car use. It is taken as a given that, once a car has been (or is being) paid for, private transport is the way to go.

I'm doing my best to 'hedge' here, but I have to say that I feel very strongly that it is entirely misguided to believe that a "bypass" has any inherent qualities that will significantly boost the numbers travelling by public transport, on foot and by bike. With regard to push and pull factors, it is a major mistake to include the outer "bypass" under the heading of Carrot (for anything other than private car use).

A new high-capacity road facilitating commuters in the west of Galway City is classic supply-side stimulus for car use par excellence. To quote both galwaycyclist and David Bowie, it is putting out fire with gasoline.

Why in god's name would anyone take the bus from Kingston-Knocknacarra-Rahoon to, say, Parkmore, however excellent the service, when they know that they can stay at home a bit longer in the morning, hop into their car outside their front door, nip up the Western Distributor Road onto the "bypass" and be across to the other side of the city in 10-15 minutes?

People value that 'freedom' -- especially once they've invested heavily in it -- far more than they do any wider concerns about transportation policy, sustainability, the greater good etc. I would go as far as to say that, in the present context, most motorists don't give anything else other than their own comfort and convenience a second thought. Why would one own a car other than to use it? Why would one demand the provision of a service other than to avail of it to ones best personal advantage? Motorists may well be the same as every other human being in that regard, but the key difference is that the cumulative decisions of thousands of motorists have profound and far-reaching negative effects.

I believe there are two diametrically opposite perspectives here. The Supply Side approach, in my view, aims to take 'external' traffic out of the city by means of a bypass in order to facilitate motorists who don't need to go through the centre. The problem here is that any increased capacity on roads within the city also becomes a Supply Side stimulus for 'internal' traffic, whether that's the school run, shopping expeditions or just rat-running to avoid the toll if there is one. Some of that increased car travel may be due to "the law of unintended consequences" but for vested interests it is a desirable outcome not a side effect.

The Demand Side approach, I would argue, seeks to reduce or eliminate unnecessary 'internal' traffic in the city in order to facilitate (a) necessary external traffic and (b) more sustainable modes of travel in and through the city.

A true bypass could be used sustainably as part of a suite of coherent measures to massively overhaul traffic and transportation policy in Galway City and County, but I do not believe this is what is envisaged.

This country has been strongly emphasising Supply Side measures for car travel over several decades, and it is utterly unrealistic to expect that public transport, walking and cycling will bloom when a major restriction on car use (i.e. lack of road capacity) is lifted.

Once a bypass is opened the brakes will be off (though a toll would significantly complicate the picture, as in Waterford) and it will be very hard to rein in car use after that. There won't be much of a carrot to play with.

galwayrush wrote: »

I don't see any problem with commuters on the West side using it to commute to work each day, in turn, roads closer to the city centre could possibly be redesigned/ reclassified to include more bus lanes / less car lanes .

Once the currently car-dependent residents of Kingston, Knocknacarra, Rahoon and Barna have a new high-capacity commuter route at their disposal, who's going to fill the buses and bike lanes?

It won't be them, that's for sure. It will be extremely hard to use the stick in a post-bypass scenario, because one way or another effective TDM interventions are seen by a goodly chunk of motorists as "really oppressive, punitive anti-car measures".

I would argue that the time to get the public used to both carrot and stick is in the lacuna before a bypass materialises (if one ever does). There are imperative reasons of over-riding public interest for doing so.

.

SeanW

Iwannahurl wrote: »

Speaking for myself, I have no hidden agenda.

This particular claim would be easier to believe if it were not totally belied by every single transport related post in your history.

I have stated my view clearly that there is a high risk that the GCOB could lead to more car use within Galway City, not less.

And we are expected to believe that your skepticism of the Galway Bypass has absolutely no connection whatsoever to do with your other frequently posted very hostile views on motoring? Are you serious?

SeanW

Iwannahurl wrote: »

It will be extremely hard to use the stick in a post-bypass scenario

And from your position, that I suspect is the ultimate fear. The utter terror you must feel that you might have difficulty using the stick against motorists. I can understand why you would want to prevent such a situation at any cost.

because one way or another effective TDM interventions are seen by a goodly chunk of motorists as "really oppressive, punitive anti-car measures".

Perhaps because the things you advocate are just that?

I would argue that the time to get the public used to both carrot and stick is in the lacuna before a bypass materialises (if one ever does).

The fact that you would penalise motorists for going through the city - for the sole reason that they have no other option - says everything that needs to be said about your position.

There are imperative reasons of over-riding public interest for doing so.

On what planet?

Iwannahurl

what_traffic wrote: »

This is an interesting article, recently published in the IT from Paul Krugman. American Economist
"
How urban sprawl is stretching the land of opportunity to breaking point
"
http://www.irishtimes.com/business/economy/world/how-urban-sprawl-is-stretching-the-land-of-opportunity-to-breaking-point-1.1478599

Can some of it's lessons be relevant here for Galway City?

Thanks. I spotted that in the Irish Times business supplement on Tuesday. It's also in the NY Times.

The Equality of Opportunity Project he refers to is here: http://www.equality-of-opportunity.org/

This broad topic has also been the subject of research and analysis by the likes of Thad Williamson and Robert Davis.

monument

Re carrot and stick:

There's so much "carrot" that needs doing in Galway -- basic things like safe pedestrian crossing and joint-up cycle routes where there is room -- that it's nearly premature to be taking about "stick".

glyons

galwaycyclist wrote: »

There has been a whole page of reasoned debate and discussion here without any name calling or taunts. I like it, it pleases me very much.

just saw this , are u having a laugh did you write this while drinking your tea and eating your scones? it pleases me very much....jesus!