M6 - Galway City Ring Road [planning decision pending]

Iwannahurl

Deleted User wrote: »

IWH, quick question, you keep posting 600 million, can you cite a source for that figure.

I'm honestly curious as I've seen official figures markedly lower than that stated, just wondering where it's coming from

Good point.

It's on the Connacht Tribune website: http://connachttribune.ie/galway-bypass-route-decided-356/

Can you cite a source for the official figures markedly lower than 600 million?

Ah ok, so it's from the media as opposed to something official. I wonder where they are pulling it from. I might drop them a tweet to enquire.

I got 500 million from the following

http://www.n6galwaycity.ie/phase-2/bulletin-6-07-05-2015/

Briefing document 3 state's on the last line of page 11, 500 million

youngrun

Whats the next steps in this process, after landowners are agreed, does the NRA need to get planning permission or does it go through IROPI and what does that involve ..

Iwannahurl

Deleted User wrote: »

Ah ok, so it's from the media as opposed to something official. I wonder where they are pulling it from. I might drop them a tweet to enquire.

I got 500 million from the following

http://www.n6galwaycity.ie/phase-2/bulletin-6-07-05-2015/

Briefing document 3 state's on the last line of page 11, 500 million

Noted.

I'll use the 500 million figure from now on, unless something changes.

youngrun wrote: »

Whats the next steps in this process, after landowners are agreed, does the NRA need to get planning permission or does it go through IROPI and what does that involve ..

I believe the next step is an application to An Bord Pleanala. This will require an Environmental Impact Assessment, among other things. I don't believe IROPI is relevant, because the "emerging preferred route" is not through an SAC. I'm open to correction on that, however.

spacetweek

Iwannahurl wrote: »

I don't believe IROPI is relevant, because the "emerging preferred route" is not through an SAC. I'm open to correction on that, however.

Is the area of limestone they're tunnelling under not in the SAC?

Iwannahurl

I didn't notice!

what_traffic

This is interesting. In todays Galway Indo

http://www.galwayindependent.com/20150513/news/new-road-serves-the-city-S54837.html

Eileen McCarthy from consultants Arup says
"
Outlining the benefits of the scheme, she said that another bridge crossing point in the city was needed, and that there’s limited space between the existing Quincentenary Bridge and the priority habitat around Lough Corrib in which to do so. 34,000 vehicles currently use the bridge, and this will drop to 27,500 with the new road.
"

That seems like a very low reduction? Only 6,500 vechicles are estimated to move to the new proposed road.

spacetweek

what_traffic wrote: »

That seems like a very low reduction? Only 6,500 vechicles are estimated to move to the new proposed road.

It does, but the new road will also attract plenty of new traffic.

Iwannahurl

Looked at one way, that's nearly €77,000 for each vehicle 'removed' from the QB. It might be cheaper just to pay motorists to stay away.

On a more serious note, these figures are confusing, to me at least.

If, as ARUP reportedly claims, "the N6 Galway City Transport Project aims to tackles Galway’s chronic traffic problems, including lengthy journey times, congestion, the unreliability of public transport, and inadequate transport connections to the west of county" then you might think that a predicted traffic volume reduction of 6500 vehicles per day is a very poor outcome for one of the city's main arteries.

If one objective is to encourage modal switch to public transport especially, but also to cycling, then you could reasonably expect a traffic volume reduction higher than that.

Of course if you wanted to look at this as an opportunity, you could say that 27,500 vehicles still using the QB would provide scope for more modal switch to public transport etc. The ones using the expressway are presumably out of the running in that respect.

This prompts another question: bus lanes on the QB are supposedly not possible at present because of the traffic volume. Will a reduction of 6500 vehicles (19%, not to be sneezed at) be enough to allow the installation of bus lanes?

Bear in mind that a 19% reduction in traffic volume will make road space available for cars in the short term and for buses in the long term. Private transport can fill that space immediately, and as well as delighting motorists this would also be an outcome pleasing to "bypass" advocates such as Galway Chamber of Commerce. However, there would be a significant time lag in relation to increasing the Level of Service for public transport users, eg it can take several years just to get a bus shelter.

It also looks as if the €500 million is supposed to pay for all of the above as described by ARUP, including public transport. Is that enough? Which aspect of the project -- expressway or public transport -- will get the most funding? Or is the €500 million just for the expressway, with the as yet unspecified budget for public transport being purely aspirational for now?

spacetweek wrote: »

It does, but the new road will also attract plenty of new traffic.

The expressway will indeed attract new traffic -- in fact that's partly why it's being built. Another crucial point, though, is that the extra space on existing roads will also be available for new traffic. At the moment the biggest constraint on car use is traffic congestion. If over 70% of commuters are willing to drive every day on congested roads, how many are willing to drive on free-flowing ones?

youngrun

Iwannahurl wrote: »

Looked at one way, that's nearly €77,000 for each vehicle 'removed' from the QB. It might be cheaper just to pay motorists to stay away.

On a more serious note, these figures are confusing, to me at least.

If, as ARUP reportedly claims, "the N6 Galway City Transport Project aims to tackles Galway’s chronic traffic problems, including lengthy journey times, congestion, the unreliability of public transport, and inadequate transport connections to the west of county" then you might think that a predicted traffic volume reduction of 6500 vehicles per day is a very poor outcome for one of the city's main arteries.

If one objective is to encourage modal switch to public transport especially, but also to cycling, then you could reasonably expect a traffic volume reduction higher than that.

Of course if you wanted to look at this as an opportunity, you could say that 27,500 vehicles still using the QB would provide scope for more modal switch to public transport etc. The ones using the expressway are presumably out of the running in that respect.

This prompts another question: bus lanes on the QB are supposedly not possible at present because of the traffic volume. Will a reduction of 6500 vehicles (19%, not to be sneezed at) be enough to allow the installation of bus lanes?

Bear in mind that a 19% reduction in traffic volume will make road space available for cars in the short term and for buses in the long term. Private transport can fill that space immediately, and as well as delighting motorists this would also be an outcome pleasing to "bypass" advocates such as Galway Chamber of Commerce. However, there would be a significant time lag in relation to increasing the Level of Service for public transport users, eg it can take several years just to get a bus shelter.

It also looks as if the €500 million is supposed to pay for all of the above as described by ARUP, including public transport. Is that enough? Which aspect of the project -- expressway or public transport -- will get the most funding? Or is the €500 million just for the expressway, with the as yet unspecified budget for public transport being purely aspirational for now?




The expressway will indeed attract new traffic -- in fact that's partly why it's being built. Another crucial point, though, is that the extra space on existing roads will also be available for new traffic. At the moment the biggest constraint on car use is traffic congestion. If over 70% of commuters are willing to drive every day on congested roads, how many are willing to drive on free-flowing ones?

How may cars are there in Galway does anyone know or is there a car census. Are there trip or journey forecasts for new roads/all main city roads

Iwannahurl

youngrun wrote: »

How may cars are there in Galway does anyone know or is there a car census. Are there trip or journey forecasts for new roads/all main city roads

I know I have this information somewhere, and may even have posted it previously, but I can't find it just now.

Census 2011 perhaps?

what_traffic

http://connachttribune.ie/no-answer-for-bypass-families-in-negative-equity-983/

“It has never happened before that house prices have crashed by over 50%, so you’re going to get some hard-luck stories.”

Not very reassuring to home owner's along the proposed route is it

rowr

what_traffic wrote: »

http://connachttribune.ie/no-answer-for-bypass-families-in-negative-equity-983/

“It has never happened before that house prices have crashed by over 50%, so you’re going to get some hard-luck stories.”

Not very reassuring to home owner's along the proposed route is it

Also with new borrowing restrictions from central banks, it's gonna be very difficult for displaced homeowners to get a new mortgage, and lose any benefits that may be there for first time borrowers

what_traffic

what_traffic wrote: »

http://connachttribune.ie/no-answer-for-bypass-families-in-negative-equity-983/

“It has never happened before that house prices have crashed by over 50%, so you’re going to get some hard-luck stories.”

Not very reassuring to home owner's along the proposed route is it

I suspect (hope for their sake) that they'll have to honour the intentions of CP by providing sufficient compensation to buy an equivalent house in the locality.
Compulsory purchase shouldn't leave people out of pocket.

dubhthach

Just remember the road has to go through the whole planning process before they can even get to doing CPO, so you could be looking at 2-5 years (particularly if there are appeals). Generally most property that is in negative equity was purchased after 2002. Say the scheme goes through appeal etc. it could be 5+ years before any CPO's are issued by which stage the number of houses in negative equity on the route might be negligible. Tbh though my opinion would be that no body should be left in situation where CPO "compensation" doesn't cover any outstanding mortgage.

CPO pays market value, no more, no less.

Should that change, imho, no.

Will exceptions be made due to the downturn for a few, of course, this is Ireland.

Logic goes out the window when there's a soapbox nearby for an elected representative to grandstand upon.

However as pointed out, it'll be a long while before CPO's are issued

L1011

Deleted User wrote: »

CPO pays market value, no more, no less.

Plus costs involved in the process. It could easily be argued that clearing NE on a mortgage is one.

monument

[Deleted User] wrote: »

CPO pays market value, no more, no less.

"You should be left in the same financial position after the CPO as you were before the process."

http://www.citizensinformation.ie/en/housing/losing_your_home/compulsory_purchase_and_compensation.html

This link and others make it clear that the assessment of compensation is not restricted to market value of land and can can comment....

• Value of land acquired.
• Diminution in value of retained lands, if any.
• Costs resulting from acquisition.
• Disturbance.
• Loss of profits or goodwill.
• Loss or depreciation of stock in trade.
• Professional fees necessary for acquisition.

www.jordancs.ie/articles-compulsory-purchase.aspx

Schadenfreudia

Deleted User wrote: »

CPO pays market value, no more, no less.

Should that change, imho, no.

Will exceptions be made due to the downturn for a few, of course, this is Ireland.

Logic goes out the window when there's a soapbox nearby for an elected representative to grandstand upon.

A very limited notion of "logic"! It would be equally "logical" (and much fairer) to say that where a CPO takes a primary residence then the authorities should buy an equivalent home nearby for the affected party.

That is both logical and fair.

It is also likely to greatly lessen opposition to the project and greatly reduce the delay in starting it (or possibly prevent it from being blocked) and is probably cheaper than the tens of millions in Legal costs this project looks like it might involve.

Zzippy

Schadenfreudia wrote: »

A very limited notion of "logic"! It would be equally "logical" (and much fairer) to say that where a CPO takes a primary residence then the authorities should buy an equivalent home nearby for the affected party.

That is both logical and fair.

It is also likely to greatly lessen opposition to the project and greatly reduce the delay in starting it (or possibly prevent it from being blocked) and is probably cheaper than the tens of millions in Legal costs this project looks like it might involve.

Having been house hunting for quite a while in the area, it would be fair to say there are very very few equivalent homes nearby in the case of many of the homes affected on this route.

Schadenfreudia

Zzippy wrote: »

Having been house hunting for quite a while in the area, it would be fair to say there are very very few equivalent homes nearby in the case of many of the homes affected on this route.

The NRA could build them.

Iwannahurl

Drive-thru homes would be their preferred style.

Iwannahurl

I've done a quick check but I don't know whether this link has been posted already: detailed map of emerging preferred route.

Carawaystick

Will there be pedestrian and cycling access across this new bridge?

Zzippy

Not a roads engineer so not familiar with the symbology. Can someone tell me what the symbols alongside the road in these 2 pics mean? I presume they relate to slope and whether the road is elevated on an embankment or set in a cut below the surrounding land, but don't know which is which...

dubhthach

Carawaystick wrote: »

Will there be pedestrian and cycling access across this new bridge?

It's interesting question, as this section of road looks to be Type 1 DC, I can't imagine there would be such provision as part of the road deck itself (eg. you'll have DC + hard shoulders), if they did make provision for them I'd imagine it would be seperate "deck", the question than arises with regards to access to such a deck. One the west side of River it wouldn't really be an issue given pedestrian/cyclist access to Dangan. On east side though you could be looking at private property.

dubhthach

Zzippy wrote: »

Not a roads engineer so not familiar with the symbology. Can someone tell me what the symbols alongside the road in these 2 pics mean? I presume they relate to slope and whether the road is elevated on an embankment or set in a cut below the surrounding land, but don't know which is which...

That's correct, the first image appears to be cutting (look at section over by Ballybrit tunnel), whereas the second is for embankment (look for examples around the bridge in Dangan)

spacetweek

Carawaystick wrote: »

Will there be pedestrian and cycling access across this new bridge?

Why on earth would you want to cycle or walk over the new bridge? It would be highly unpleasant, and the old road is closer to the city and closer to where people live.

Zzippy

spacetweek wrote: »

Why on earth would you want to cycle or walk over the new bridge? It would be highly unpleasant, and the old road is closer to the city and closer to where people live.

To get from Moycullen to Parkmore, to take just one example? If there is a hard shoulder why would it be highly unpleasant?

veryangryman

Zzippy wrote: »

To get from Moycullen to Parkmore, to take just one example? If there is a hard shoulder why would it be highly unpleasant?

Possibly suit better to use the new cycle lanes on the old road. Possibly shorter distance too for those using only pedal power.

As for walking that far on any kind of regular basis....