M6 - Galway City Ring Road [planning decision pending]

lucernarian

Iwannahurl wrote: »

In which case the "bypass" thread should be closed again, because there is currently no such project requiring updates.

It's up to the mods to decide? And there are threads on this forum that deal with completely hypothetical plans or crayon-drawing, never mind schemes that got to the ECHR before being stopped. If you don't see the need for the thread, you can simply move past it and comment elsewhere. Other people might like to discuss the ramifications of this "transport project" along with the ECHR judgement on the existing published GCOB plans.

Iwannahurl

I have no problem contributing to both threads, if that is how things go, and I am quite happy to express my opinions about hypothetical roads and "transport projects".

There are no plans for a "GCOB" at present, as far as I know. The previous scheme has come to a dead end: Ça n'existe plus.

Poster King

I didn't realise the whole GCOB project had been scrapped, that is extremely frustrating. I have aspirations to possibly move to Galway to live at some stage but the traffic problems would be a serious deterrent and I'm sure these traffic problems are causing others to have the same reservations and also businesses.
Anyway, let's hope this new project proves fruitful. Apologies if this has been asked/proposed before, but to me it seems obvious that a route similar to what I have crudely drawn in the attached would be a straightforward enough and not too expensive option. In fact, I think that even if the GCOB had been built that a road as attached should/could also be built.
Any thoughts?
S.

antoobrien

Iwannahurl wrote: »

In which case the "bypass" thread should be closed again, because there is currently no such project requiring updates.

Ahem

Council looking at alternative routes for Galway city outer bypass

busyatwork

Are the not going devoloping galway docks ,so its is likely the will be doing the bypass in order to take in more fraight at the galway docks

antoobrien

busyatwork wrote: »

Are the not going devoloping galway docks ,so its is likely the will be doing the bypass in order to take in more fraight at the galway docks

The bypass was first proposed about 20 years ago, long before the docks redevelopment was dreamed up.

busyatwork

antoobrien wrote: »

The bypass was first proposed about 20 years ago, long before the docks redevelopment was dreamed up.

If it was needed it would of being build 20 years ago

antoobrien

busyatwork wrote: »

If it was needed it would of being build 20 years ago

I suggest you start reading up on the history of this project. Route selection was in 2000/01/02 (can't remember off the top of my head).

lucernarian

busyatwork wrote: »

If it was needed it would of being build 20 years ago

I'm not sure such a throwaway remark with no qualifiers or even common sense could be made if you looked through this thread and the mod warnings. After all the madness of this thread, is that a serious comment or something to stir the pot?

Just for the record, in case you don't actually know this, there are several very prominent projects that didn't go ahead despite various reports and in some cases safety-related issues and accidents highlighting the need. Politics and vote-buying are some of the biggest reasons. The liquidity crisis that has affected (and going by their behaviour, still affects) this State has denied many worthwhile projects of the required funds. Dart Underground has been put on hold, despite how it would stimulate a significant modal shift in most of the Greater Dublin region and has reasonable to good cost-benefit-analysis proposals when put forward. Metro North is currently being scrutinised very carefully and is being picked apart due to lack of political will now, and dare I say a lack of common sense too. BRT will offer the great improvement in transfer times and convenience that the current buses don't? I think not.

I really won't entertain such ad hominem logic. There are flaws within the GCOB proposals ignoring the court judgement. But simply because it wasn't built 20 years ago, you think it didn't need to be built then (or now perhaps)??

dubhthach

Iwannahurl wrote: »

In which case the "bypass" thread should be closed again, because there is currently no such project requiring updates.

Mod
No backseat modding please.

veryangryman

dubhthach wrote: »

Mod
No backseat modding please.

Yeah! :mad:

veryangryman

busyatwork wrote: »

If it was needed it would of being build 20 years ago

Define "needed". Ambition of a city to grow and prosper should be the only factor in defining something is needed.

Sure Dublin was grand with the Red Cow Roundabout, No Luas and 1 Terminal at the airport. None of them improvements were "needed", were they?

Iwannahurl

antoobrien wrote: »

Ahem

Council looking at alternative routes for Galway city outer bypass

The Galway Advertiser, if it wants to be regarded as a news source of superior quality, needs to make its mind up:

Revised plans for the controversial Galway city outer bypass are being drawn up and Galway City Council is examining a number of potential routes for the road.

The city council is the lead authority in developing a new planning application for the €300 million project. There will now be a consultation phase with the public and affected landowners and the amended plans are expected to be ready for submission to An Bord Pleanála by the second half of this year.

http://www.advertiser.ie/galway/article/74881/council-looking-at-alternative-routes-for-galway-city-outer-bypass

The Galway County Council is to be the lead authority in the €300 million Galway City Outer Bypass scheme with new consultants being appointed to prepare a new application which could be ready for submission to An Bord Pleanála 15 months from now.

At a Galway City Council meeting on Monday night councillors voted in favour of Section 85 Agreement under the Local Government Act 2001, which allows the scheme to progress with one local authority taking the lead.

http://www.advertiser.ie/galway/article/65028/galway-county-council-to-take-the-lead-in-new-galway-city-outer-bypass-scheme

As for "alternative routes", the issue is more ramified than that term might suggest. My own view is that the "N6 Galway City Transport Project" is trying really hard to say all the right things about all possible "alternative solutions" being considered, but the political reality is that a bypass is top of the wish list, for all the usual reasons.

The official position is that the "N6 Galway City Transport Project" consultants are investigating all viable alternative solutions, including transport solutions involving maximum public transport provision, which may avoid significant impacts on a European Designated Site. Reportedly, alternatives can take many forms including non-road alternatives or simple upgrades of the existing road/transport network. If there is a viable alternative, they will progress this alternative through normal planning processes, and Article 6(4) of the EU Directive will not apply to the planning application.

However, if the chosen "transport solution" does impact on a European Designated Site, they will be seeking the transport solution which will have the least adverse impact on the integrity of the designated site. Apparently, extensive ecological surveys have been undertaken as part of the constraints study to inform the development of options to ensure that the chosen option will represent the alternative which has the least adverse impact on the habitats and species listed in the Habitats Directive.

That's a lot more complicated and extensive than looking for an alternative "route".

veryangryman wrote: »

Ambition of a city to grow and prosper should be the only factor in defining something is needed.

Incidentally, from the first Advertiser report above:

Mayor of Galway wrote:

We have not had a major transport initiative in Galway since 1986.

Stated without irony, or much insight.

antoobrien

Iwannahurl wrote: »

As for "alternative routes", the issue is more ramified than that term might suggest. My own view is that the "N6 Galway City Transport Project" is trying really hard to say all the right things about all possible "alternative solutions" being considered, but the political reality is that a bypass is top of the wish list, for all the usual reasons.

The official position is that the "N6 Galway City Transport Project" consultants are investigating all viable alternative solutions, including transport solutions involving maximum public transport provision, which may avoid significant impacts on a European Designated Site. Reportedly, alternatives can take many forms including non-road alternatives or simple upgrades of the existing road/transport network. If there is a viable alternative, they will progress this alternative through normal planning processes, and Article 6(4) of the EU Directive will not apply to the planning application.

Had you gone to the public consultations you might already know this.

Iwannahurl wrote: »

However, if the chosen "transport solution" does impact on a European Designated Site, they will be seeking the transport solution which will have the least adverse impact on the integrity of the designated site. Apparently, extensive ecological surveys have been undertaken as part of the constraints study to inform the development of options to ensure that the chosen option will represent the alternative which has the least adverse impact on the habitats and species listed in the Habitats Directive.

Are you stating that these ecological studies didn't occur?

Iwannahurl wrote: »

Incidentally, from the first Advertiser report above:

Originally Posted by Mayor of Galway
We have not had a major transport initiative in Galway since 1986.

That's a really petty selective quotation.

Full quote

“I think the outer bypass is one of the most important pieces of infrastructure ever for Galway. It is not going to solve all our problems but as a city going forward, we need this to happen. We have not had a major transport initiative in Galway since 1986 when the Quincentennial bridge was built.”

He'd be more right than wrong though, the changeover of the roundabouts to lights, introductions of bus & cycle lanes & the bike scheme (is this a city council initiative?) have been tinkering. It should also be pointed out that the current alignment of the N6 into it's current route (what is inaccurately referred to as a bypass) is a continuation of the QB project.

Iwannahurl

antoobrien wrote: »

That's a really petty selective quotation.

He'd be more right than wrong though, the changeover of the roundabouts to lights, introductions of bus & cycle lanes & the bike scheme (is this a city council initiative?) have been tinkering. It should also be pointed out that the current alignment of the N6 into it's current route (what is inaccurately referred to as a bypass) is a continuation of the QB project.

There's nothing petty or selective about the quote at all. The Mayor is stating as a bald fact that there has been "no major transport initiative in Galway since 1986".

Of course we know that the same Councillor, along with a bunch of others, has been trumpeting a bypass as the most important piece of infrastructure (the "only solution", according to Galway Chamber of Commerce) for at least twenty years.

The all-eggs-in-one-basket reliance on a bypass is precisely why there has been "no major transport initiative" in all that time, in my view. Why would they bother?

The only reason we have an "N6 Galway City Transport Project" now is because the bypass-as-the-only-solution bandwagon was stopped in its tracks by the ECJ ruling.

antoobrien

Iwannahurl wrote: »

There's nothing petty or selective about the quote at all. The Mayor is stating as a bald fact that there has been "no major transport initiative in Galway since 1986".

You cut out any context of the quote to suit your viewpoint. If that's not selevtive...

Iwannahurl wrote: »

Of course we know that the same Councillor, along with a bunch of others, has been trumpeting a bypass as the most important piece of infrastructure (the "only solution", according to Galway Chamber of Commerce) for at least twenty years.

So?

Iwannahurl wrote: »

The all-eggs-in-one-basket reliance on a bypass is precisely why there has been "no major transport initiative" in all that time, in my view. Why would they bother?

The only reason we have an "N6 Galway City Transport Project" now is because the bypass-as-the-only-solution bandwagon was stopped in its tracks by the ECJ ruling.

To prove to those blinkered by the pie in the sky alternatives that there is no realistic alternative.

Here's a direct quotation from the original scheme's inspectors report regarding the "alternatives":

In the context of the transport needs of Galway, the case has been made that there should be investment in the public transport infrastructure of the city as an alternative to this project. That approach has merit in the context of sustainable transport facilities, but cannot reasonably be considered as an alternative given the specific aims and purposes of this road project. Nor should the road necessarily be seen as substituting for or precluding investment in public transport facilities. A relevant point in this regard is that the development of bus lanes on the Quincentennial Bridge and approaches would, in the absence of the bypass, reduce the capacity of the road system in the city to carry cross-city traffic.

Iwannahurl

antoobrien wrote: »

Here's a direct quotation from the original scheme's inspectors report regarding the "alternatives":

Hmmm, would that be the same Bord Pleanala that presided over this country's glorious rise to the second-highest level of car dependence in the EU28?

antoobrien

Iwannahurl wrote: »

Hmmm, would that be the same Bord Pleanala that presided over this country's glorious rise to the second-highest level of car dependence in the EU28?

Hardly their fault. Due to the historically rural nature of Irish settlements we are ranked 21 out of 28 in proportions of urban populations of the EU 28.

spacetweek

antoobrien wrote: »

Hardly their fault. Due to the historically rural nature of Irish settlements we are ranked 21 out of 28 in proportions of urban populations of the EU 28.

I think our small dispersed population meant that as soon as wealth arrived, people would get cars. The same pattern is being seen in many eastern European countries now where car ownership is being unlocked by economic growth. The car ownership rate was very low in Portugal and Spain until the 90s too.
The situation is worse in Ireland though as we are far less urbanised than Spain and Portugal or indeed most of EE.

Galway is a level far below even the Irish standard however as they really just aren't trying. Ludicrous percentages of car journeys are only travelling 1 km or so.

lucernarian

spacetweek wrote: »

I think our small dispersed population meant that as soon as wealth arrived, people would get cars. The same pattern is being seen in many eastern European countries now where car ownership is being unlocked by economic growth. The car ownership rate was very low in Portugal and Spain until the 90s too.
The situation is worse in Ireland though as we are far less urbanised than Spain and Portugal or indeed most of EE.

Galway is a level far below even the Irish standard however as they really just aren't trying. Ludicrous percentages of car journeys are only travelling 1 km or so.

From what I know about An Bord Pleanála, I don't think they had any executive or policy control over where housing and infrastructure *should* be built. Only where they *can't* be built I suppose... If this is true, I think it's unfair to castigate ABP because car ownership skyrocketed here in the past 2 decades. I strongly suspect that Government policy concerning public transport and especially its hands-off approach to what gets built where (except roads that ministers can cut the tape of) is more at fault, along with specific Dept. of Environment policy and inaction and then the same from the local authorities. Though local authorities have variable awareness of the needs of their communities and what is sustainable and so on, Galway's city infrastructure and planning seems lacking compared to other parts of Ireland even. Blame Galway City Council and the Dept. of the Environment...

antoobrien

lucernarian wrote: »

Though local authorities have variable awareness of the needs of their communities and what is sustainable and so on, Galway's city infrastructure and planning seems lacking compared to other parts of Ireland even. Blame Galway City Council and the Dept. of the Environment...

Considering the city council can't actually sanction bus routes, they can only propose them to the NTA, they're mostly not on the hook for any perceived PT shortfall in terms of coverage and frequency.

lucernarian

antoobrien wrote: »

Considering the city council can't actually sanction bus routes, they can only propose them to the NTA, they're mostly not on the hook for any perceived PT shortfall in terms of coverage and frequency.

Given that many of the bus routes have to drive through standstill traffic anyway or are badly affected by pinch points and poor traffic flow design, it's not like the NTA can do much about it with router alterations alone. If the govt. gives the NTA more money to pay for PSO services in Galway, that *might* result in improvements but it's doubtful without some kinds of infrastructural work from proper bus stops and shelters to priority signalling at traffic junctions. The problems in Galway seem much more deep-rooted than that.

Iwannahurl

lucernarian wrote: »

From what I know about An Bord Pleanála, I don't think they had any executive or policy control over where housing and infrastructure *should* be built. Only where they *can't* be built I suppose...

The core issue is that the existence of a consent authority, ie An Bord Pleanala, has made little or no difference in terms of curbing this country's absurd levels of car use and car dependence, with its inevitable results in terms of sprawl and GHG emissions.


There is nothing commendable about ABP giving consent for yet another car-dependent traffic-generating piece of infrastructure, such as the GCOB, and no surprise either, They're still at it, despite the existence of policies such as Smarter Travel and urgent UN-led imperatives such as GHG emissions targets.


The NRA are pursuing the same policies, only more so, since their entire raison d'etre is road building. It is hardly surprising that the so-called "N6 Galway City Transport Project" can't help using the word "route" all the time, since the NRA is inextricably involved with all aspects of the project. If you say "transport project" to the NRA their first thought is "roads" and their second is "cars".

lucernarian

Iwannahurl wrote: »

The core issue is that the existence of a consent authority, ie An Bord Pleanala, has made little or no difference in terms of curbing this country's absurd levels of car use and car dependence, with its inevitable results in terms of sprawl and GHG emissions.


There is nothing commendable about ABP giving consent for yet another car-dependent traffic-generating piece of infrastructure, such as the GCOB, and no surprise either, They're still at it, despite the existence of policies such as Smarter Travel and urgent UN-led imperatives such as GHG emissions targets.


The NRA are pursuing the same policies, only more so, since their entire raison d'etre is road building. It is hardly surprising that the so-called "N6 Galway City Transport Project" can't help using the word "route" all the time, since the NRA is inextricably involved with all aspects of the project. If you say "transport project" to the NRA their first thought is "roads" and their second is "cars".

I don't see how that post details the core issue with ABP. An Bord Pleanala's mandate is simply to see if applications fit in with Irish and European law. If they decided to act on their own behalf and outside its remit to be an independent (mostly) appellate body, they would be taken to court and have been successfully challenged in court on that note for decisions they have made. Then, the criticism is directed towards the NRA. Another statutory body that has legal responsibilities and if environmental considerations are to be reflected more strongly, a reform of the agencies or at least some changes to the 1993 etc. Road Acts would be required.


Talking about it being commendable or otherwise is not really relevant in the first instance. You could argue they have made incompetent judgements and the GCOB turned out to be more or less in breach of EU directives. If ABP were supposed to "make a difference" to the spate of bad planning requirements in this country, have they incorporated new powers that I'm unaware of? Do they have now have the right to scrap bad local area development plans or appeal rezoning decisions?

It may not be fit for purpose but that purpose is in itself entirely a matter for the Oireachtas and by extension the civil servants and lobbyists who have access to the corridors of power.

Iwannahurl

antoobrien wrote: »

Considering the city council can't actually sanction bus routes, they can only propose them to the NTA, they're mostly not on the hook for any perceived PT shortfall in terms of coverage and frequency.

That's an example of how this country's dysfunctional and disjointed "planning" system has led to poor provision of public transport and car-dependent sprawl.


Not only is there a disconnect between local authorities, national agencies and public transport providers, but there is also a lack of coordination and cooperation between departments in the same local authority. Then there's the meddling by elected representatives (eg rezoning in certain areas) and competing agendas pursued by local authorities that should be working together. Just look at Galway City and County Councils. Nearly a thousand staff and fifty elected representatives between them, and situated less than a kilometre from each other in the same city (small town really, by EU standards) and yet they have failed utterly for decades to develop regional and local transportation policy in a coordinated and sustainable manner.


Galway City Council, for example, has reportedly stated that while it may have a remit to instal bus lanes it doesn't necessary have a role in promoting public transport. That could be interpreted as merely stating a fact, but it could also be construed as institutional indifference to the issues involved.



It was out of such a culture that the GCOB proposal first emerged more than 20 years ago, when the various interests were content to openly pursue an approach almost entirely focused on road-building and the facilitation of private cars. They had to be dragged kicking and screaming away from that obsession, and it was only the ECJ ruling that finally called a halt to the actual scheme. The rhetoric is different now, but I don't believe the mindsets have changed much, which is why, for example, local elected representatives and media can comfortably regard the "N6 Galway City Transport Project" as a new bypass plan.

lucernarian

Iwannahurl wrote: »

It was out of such a culture that the GCOB proposal first emerged more than 20 years ago, when the various interests were content to openly pursue an approach almost entirely focused on road-building and the facilitation of private cars. They had to be dragged kicking and screaming away from that obsession, and it was only the ECJ ruling that finally called a halt to the actual scheme. The rhetoric is different now, but I don't believe the mindsets have changed much, which is why, for example, local elected representatives and media can comfortably regard the "N6 Galway City Transport Project" as a new bypass plan.

It's worth bearing in mind that although the culture in the body politic doesn't seem to be one based on principled leadership and good ethics, they are also but a function of the majority who voted for them. If the local reps and the media are comfortable about thinking of this as a new bypass plan, then it's probably a frustrating side effect of democracy where the powers that be are saying what their voters, the adults of Galway, want to hear.

Iwannahurl

lucernarian wrote: »

a frustrating side effect of democracy where the powers that be are saying what their voters, the adults of Galway, want to hear.

There is something in what you say.

Padkir

lucernarian wrote: »

It's worth bearing in mind that although the culture in the body politic doesn't seem to be one based on principled leadership and good ethics, they are also but a function of the majority who voted for them. If the local reps and the media are comfortable about thinking of this as a new bypass plan, then it's probably a frustrating side effect of democracy where the powers that be are saying what their voters, the adults of Galway, want to hear.

They are saying what the majority of the votes want to hear and are trying to follow through on that.

Is that not how democracy is meant to work? Get voted in and then try to do what the majority of your voters want done.

lucernarian

Padkir wrote: »

They are saying what the majority of the votes want to hear and are trying to follow through on that.

Is that not how democracy is meant to work? Get voted in and then try to do what the majority of your voters want done.

IMO it's hard to argue with that. But we don't have an electoral system that chooses people thinking and looking beyond their noses.

Its worth bearing in mind that Galway citizens are hardly that much different to other Irish people living in western towns and cities yet it seems Galway's children need more car lifts than other parts of Ireland. Its worth bearing that in mind.

Iwannahurl

Padkir wrote: »

They are saying what the majority of the votes want to hear and are trying to follow through on that.


Is that not how democracy is meant to work? Get voted in and then try to do what the majority of your voters want done.

lucernarian wrote: »

IMO it's hard to argue with that. But we don't have an electoral system that chooses people thinking and looking beyond their noses.


Its worth bearing in mind that Galway citizens are hardly that much different to other Irish people living in western towns and cities yet it seems Galway's children need more car lifts than other parts of Ireland. Its worth bearing that in mind.

If the popular will dictated public policy in Galway we'd have urban and suburban dual carriageways leading to drive-thru schools.

We're into the politics of roads here, of course. Framing the GCOB project as something "the majority of voters want done" invokes the concept of "legitimacy" which has been referred to previously in this thread.

Unfortunately, the Majority Rules/Popular Will approach does not always make for good public policy, as we know all too well in this country. I would also suggest that a culture of populist politics skews the policy agenda, so that those proposals most likely to win popularity contests (aka elections) are the ones that dominate. As I have stated elsewhere on Boards, by way of example, there was a particularly shoddy road scheme voted through by a majority of Councillors in Galway several years ago, at least partly on the basis that the egregious standard of cycle facilities could be tolerated because cyclists were only 3% of commuters nationally.

Such an attitude is clearly problematic. Why was the GCOB the only "major transport initiative" proposed in a period of more than two decades? I have voted in local and national elections for years, and I don't recall ever being offered a choice between a €300 million bypass and a €300 million "transport initiative" incorporating major investment in, say, Transportation Demand Management, Bus Rapid Transit, a city-wide network of high quality bus/cycle lanes, an integrated system of Park & Ride, school travel plans, ubiquitous pedestrian crossings, traffic calming, junction redesign etc etc etc.

The GCOB plan continued to be the "only show in town" for 20 years, with candidates for the Council and Dail making it an election issue. The reality, as even the most die-hard GCOB enthusiast has been forced to accept, is that the plan as originally proposed was fatally flawed, which is why it was finally euthanased by the ECJ. Are we to conclude therefore that the ECJ is undemocratic and lacks legitimacy?