M6 - Galway City Ring Road [planning decision pending]

Pappa Charlie

Iwannahurl wrote: »

Maybe some day straw men arguments on Boards will go out of fashion, though I won't hold my breath.

As for the "I'm alright Jack attitude" you're missing the point completely.

By the way, while you're there, I hope your colleagues don't take an "I'm alright Jack attitude" on Sunday. It would be nice to see road traffic law rigorously and fairly enforced.

Bring your buggy and camera! And let us know here on Sunday evening how you got on!

Iwannahurl

Pappa Charlie wrote: »

Bring your buggy and camera! And let us know here on Sunday evening how you got on!

All in a good cause of course:

churchview wrote: »

Delighted to hear this!

For years, cars have parked all along the Kingston Road for these matches even though there's no parking on this road. I've had some people who even felt free to park in (not at, not blocking, but in!) my driveway.

I hope cars were are ticketed on Kingston Road as well.

The GAA is a wealthy broadly spread organisation. It shouldn't be beyond it to organise some park and ride type arrangement for its fans.

churchview wrote: »

This is one of those instances where the law should be the least of anyones' concern. What about the children, people in wheelchairs, residents, other motorists cyclist, pedestrians, blind people......you get the drift......who are put in danger by lazy inconsiderate sports "fans" who can't be bothered parking in such a way as not to be a danger to other people. Not killing or maiming them should be more important than avoiding a parking fine.

Looks like the GAA and AGS are finally noting the existence of road traffic legislation and listening to the long-suffering locals:

http://www.midwestradio.ie/index.php/sport/14797-galway-gaa-to-run-park-and-ride-service-for-sunday-s-games-at-pearse-stadium

http://www.garda.ie/Controller.aspx?Page=11135

Of course website rhetoric and real-world action (attitudes and behaviour) can be quite different things...


.

?Cee?view

Not quite sure of how a picture of a buggy in the path of traffic promotes safe behaviour though. Or how comfortable families feel being harassed by self-appointed "traffic photographers".

It would be great to see the professionals such as AGS dealing with it but I wouldn't have any confidence that'll happen.

Iwannahurl

churchview wrote: »

It would be great to see AGS dealing with it but I wouldn't have any confidence that'll happen.

Quite.

Pappa Charlie

Iwannahurl wrote: »

Quite.

Don't forget the dash cam for the buggy today and bring the baby as well!

tharlear

For years, cars have parked all along the Kingston Road for these matches even though there's no parking on this road. I've had some people who even felt free to park in (not at, not blocking, but in!) my driveway.

Can you tell me why you believe this statement to be true? I cycled that road for years (not lately) and I've never seen double yellow lines or anything else that would lead me to believe that parking is not allowed on this road.

As for blocking a driveway or gate, or parking on the footpath, both are illegal.
However there are a number of driveways on this road you could park "in" but still be outside the gates and not block the gate or traffic, and indeed be off the footpath. There are also some green areas in front of houses that people like to park on match day, not sure of the legality of that. There is also the area behind the bus stop beside Manor drive that some like to park on.

But when the bypass is built the can all leave that much quicker :-)

?Cee?view

tharlear wrote: »

Can you tell me why you believe this statement to be true? I cycled that road for years (not lately) and I've never seen double yellow lines or anything else that would lead me to believe that parking is not allowed on this road.

As for blocking a driveway or gate, or parking on the footpath, both are illegal.
However there are a number of driveways on this road you could park "in" but still be outside the gates and not block the gate or traffic, and indeed be off the footpath. There are also some green areas in front of houses that people like to park on match day, not sure of the legality of that. There is also the area behind the bus stop beside Manor drive that some like to park on.

But when the bypass is built the can all leave that much quicker :-)

The entire road is marked by a solid white line in its centre. Parking next to such a line is prohibited. Presumably the logic is that doing so forces traffic to cross the solid line.

As to parking outside gates but not blocking the footpath, this can severely limit visibility of those exiting their homes which in combination with the other illegal and inconsiderate parking is a recipe for disaster. It's plain bad manners too but that seems to be an irrelevance to most.

GalwayMagpie

A tender for Engineering Consultancy Services on the GCOB has just got out.

N6 Galway By-pass Multi-disciplinary Engineering Consultancy Services
The Council requires multi-disciplinary engineering consultancy services in relation to the proposed N6 Galway by-pass, which would extend from the R336 Regional Road west of Galway City, to the N6 east of the City. The proposed road development would have an approximate length of 24 km. The commission is to advance the development of the proposed road to completion of Phase 2, Phase 3 and Phase 4 of the NRA Project Management Guidelines.

https://irl.eu-supply.com/app/rfq/publicpurchase_frameset.asp?PID=66536&B=&PS=1&PP=ctm/Supplier/publictenders


http://www.mytenders.ie/search/show/search_view.aspx?ID=JUN408034

Robbo

Profile in this month's Law Society Gazette on Mr. Sweetman's solicitor, where he gives his thoughts on the CJEU judgment.

In the Sweetman judgment, the ECJ found that the Galway bypass project might have progressed had the planning authorities invoked the proper legislative provisions to ensure the adequate protection of the limestone pavement.

Chris_5339762

GalwayMagpie wrote: »

A tender for Engineering Consultancy Services on the GCOB has just got out.



https://irl.eu-supply.com/app/rfq/publicpurchase_frameset.asp?PID=66536&B=&PS=1&PP=ctm/Supplier/publictenders


http://www.mytenders.ie/search/show/search_view.aspx?ID=JUN408034

Thats interesting because it goes from the R336 all the way to the N6... ie: the western AND eastern section. Remember it was only the eastern section that got approved.

serfboard

Robbo wrote: »

Profile in this month's Law Society Gazette on Mr. Sweetman's solicitor, where he gives his thoughts on the CJEU judgment.

Can someone explain how the planning authorities might have "invoked the proper legislative provisions to ensure the adequate protection of the limestone pavement"?

Robbo

serfboard wrote: »

Can someone explain how the planning authorities might have "invoked the proper legislative provisions to ensure the adequate protection of the limestone pavement"?

I think it was the late, lamented Sponge Bob who pointed out that any ould piece of limestone pavement could have been subbed in to the "threatened" area to satisfy the legislative requirement.

GalwayMagpie

Chris_5339762 wrote: »

Thats interesting because it goes from the R336 all the way to the N6... ie: the western AND eastern section. Remember it was only the eastern section that got approved.

Indeed and it is interesting, I also found this to be interesting:

The Consultants will be required to provide the necessary design support and documentation to enable Galway County Council to fast track this Scheme, and will be required to co-locate relevant members of the design Team to the Client's Offices located at the National Road Design Office in Ballybrit, Galway City.

Pappa Charlie

But what about the bog cotton and local snails?

antoobrien

Pappa Charlie wrote: »

But what about the bog cotton and local snails?

Don't worry the bog cotton will die out after a few years of the "bog protection scheme" and there are no snails to worry about that can't be cooked in aniar.:pac:

antoobrien

Chris_5339762 wrote: »

Thats interesting because it goes from the R336 all the way to the N6... ie: the western AND eastern section. Remember it was only the eastern section that got approved.

There was some money in the 2012 budget to develop an alternative route after the project was split. From a logistical point of view it makes sense to bring the western part back into the overall scheme as that is how it was progressed until ABP rejected the western portion and they will both similar environmental work.

GalwayMagpie

Have any plans on bridge design or road elevation been made public?
Or has this even been considered yet?

I would hope to see something slightly more inspirational that the horrid quincentennial bridge.

galwayrush

Pappa Charlie wrote: »

But what about the bog cotton and local snails?

Indeed, what a stunning discovery in County Galway, bog/ bog cotton / limestone, and we have snails as well?:eek:

antoobrien

GalwayMagpie wrote: »

Have any plans on bridge design or road elevation been made public?
Or has this even been considered yet?

I would hope to see something slightly more inspirational that the horrid quincentennial bridge.

At least some of what you're looking for is in the EIS, available from the Galway city council website.

The current proposal from the bridge is something like this (taken from earlier in the thread):

serfboard

GalwayMagpie wrote: »

Indeed and it is interesting, I also found this to be interesting: "The Consultants will be required to provide the necessary design support and documentation to enable Galway County Council to fast track this Scheme, and will be required to co-locate relevant members of the design Team to the Client's Offices located at the National Road Design Office in Ballybrit, Galway City."

In response to this item, Sean Kyne was on Galway Bay FM this morning, and he said that the Sweetman judgement will be mentioned (tomorrow?) in the Supreme Court but that the intention now is to plough ahead with IROPI process.

GalwayMagpie

serfboard wrote: »

In response to this item, Sean Kyne was on Galway Bay FM this morning, and he said that the Sweetman judgement will be mentioned (tomorrow?) in the Supreme Court but that the intention now is to plough ahead with IROPI process.

Did anything happen on this. I had a look on the supreme court website but it was not designed with accessibility in mind.

antoobrien

GalwayMagpie wrote: »

Did anything happen on this. I had a look on the supreme court website but it was not designed with accessibility in mind.

There's been nothing that I've seen in the papers and until a judgement is made there will be nothing on the supreme court website. I just checked the supreme court site, there's an unrelated judgement from yesterday so there doesn't seem to be a long delay in having judgements posted. To find the latest judgements, go into the "search judgements by year" and open 2013. They'll be listed by date, newest at the top.

Carawaystick

antoobrien wrote: »

There's been nothing that I've seen in the papers and until a judgement is made there will be nothing on the supreme court website. I just checked the supreme court site, there's an unrelated judgement from yesterday so there doesn't seem to be a long delay in having judgements posted. To find the latest judgements, go into the "search judgements by year" and open 2013. They'll be listed by date, newest at the top.

I looked for stuff on their website (courts) before, there seems to be no rhyme of reason to the publication of judgements. I sent a mail to the courts service asking them to outline their methods for publishing judgements, quoting their blurb about being a professional service; obviously several months later I've heard nothing, not even an acknowledgement.

COYI

I fear that the Supreme Court kicked this one to Europe so that they wouldn't have to bear the popular backlash when they ultimately deliver an unfavourable judgement. The fundamental point is that the Sharpston judgement interprets the Habitats Directive as disallowing ANY damage to an area of ecological importance by ANY project.

It may be a blessing in disguise though in that I can't imagine anybody (excluding a tiny minority of extremists) intended this directive to conflict so readily with major infrastructure projects to such an inflexible extent. Now that it's true colours have been shown I imagine politicians across Europe will act before projects in their own countries are similarly afflicted.

Iwannahurl

COYI wrote: »

I fear that the Supreme Court kicked this one to Europe so that they wouldn't have to bear the popular backlash when they ultimately deliver an unfavourable judgement. The fundamental point is that the Sharpston judgement interprets the Habitats Directive as disallowing ANY damage to an area of ecological importance by ANY project.

It may be a blessing in disguise though in that I can't imagine anybody (excluding a tiny minority of extremists) intended this directive to conflict so readily with major infrastructure projects to such an inflexible extent. Now that it's true colours have been shown I imagine politicians across Europe will act before projects in their own countries are similarly afflicted.

I doubt that the members of the Supreme Court fill their mind much with populist concerns.

By the way, Galway City traffic is remarkably light at the moment, in my experience anyway. Did a bypass suddenly materialise overnight or what?

Pappa Charlie

Iwannahurl wrote: »

I doubt that the members of the Supreme Court fill their mind much with populist concerns.

By the way, Galway City traffic is remarkably light at the moment, in my experience anyway. Did a bypass suddenly materialise overnight or what?

Did you ever hear about planning for the future? Just because traffic is light now dosent mean we don't do anything, that's the sort of attitude that has the country way behind in infastructure! Just as well you weren't around when the wheel was being invented!

Chris_5339762

Iwannahurl wrote: »

I doubt that the members of the Supreme Court fill their mind much with populist concerns.

By the way, Galway City traffic is remarkably light at the moment, in my experience anyway. Did a bypass suddenly materialise overnight or what?

Schools are off for the summer. Halves commute times in Dublin as well.

L1011

Chris_5339762 wrote: »

Schools are off for the summer. Halves commute times in Dublin as well.

Schools are off, and due to that, about 1/6th of my workplace are off on holidays in any given week. That has far more of an impact than the lack of school traffic particularly as kids are generally all well home before the evening rush hits peak. Add the two together and you get an absolutely huge reduction in traffic.

Something which cannot be replicated by a few cycle paths - as I know this is exactly where someone is trying to force this discussion in yet another tiring, pointless diversion.

monument

MYOB wrote: »

Schools are off, and due to that, about 1/6th of my workplace are off on holidays in any given week. That has far more of an impact than the lack of school traffic particularly as kids are generally all well home before the evening rush hits peak. Add the two together and you get an absolutely huge reduction in traffic.

Something which cannot be replicated by a few cycle paths - as I know this is exactly where someone is trying to force this discussion in yet another tiring, pointless diversion.

Getting 2/6 or more of car commuters onto bikes or their own two feet does not sound that hard.

monument

monument wrote: »

Getting 2/6 or more of car commuters onto bikes or their own two feet does not sound that hard.

You know, you might be right and the discussion would be better placed on a thread in the C&T forum

Not being a smart ass, just sick of seeing threads on this board being side-tracked