M6 - Galway City Ring Road [planning decision pending]

what_traffic

ballinadog wrote: »

Its def more than 25 anyway...

Will ya DM me the exact specific measurment ballinadog?

Zzippy

marno21 wrote: »

Good idea that. More apartments quite some distance from the employment hubs with little public transport access.

Galway to a tee.

Whatever criticisms people might have, the above is wrong. It's within walking distance of Parkmore, which is the major employment hub. It's got a bus stop for the 409 bus which features a double decker bus every 12 minutes and bus lanes most of the way into town, where it passes GMIT and the Bons Secours, two more employment hubs, and terminates in Eyre Square, close to every major employer in town. I used to live 100 metres from there and we enjoyed the best public transport route in Galway, and most residents lived there precisely because of the proximity to Parkmore.
Valid criticisms might include exacerbating traffic on Doughiska Road, which is already chronic at rush hour, adding yet another exit onto the road in a very short distance and impacting on road safety, directly across the road from 2 schools and a pre-school, but not the above. The gym, swimming pool, astro pitches, restaurant and bar facilities would be a welcome addition to the area.

marno21

Zzippy wrote: »

Whatever criticisms people might have, the above is wrong. It's within walking distance of Parkmore, which is the major employment hub. It's got a bus stop for the 409 bus which features a double decker bus every 12 minutes and bus lanes most of the way into town, where it passes GMIT and the Bons Secours, two more employment hubs, and terminates in Eyre Square, close to every major employer in town. I used to live 100 metres from there and we enjoyed the best public transport route in Galway, and most residents lived there precisely because of the proximity to Parkmore.
Valid criticisms might include exacerbating traffic on Doughiska Road, which is already chronic at rush hour, adding yet another exit onto the road in a very short distance and impacting on road safety, directly across the road from 2 schools and a pre-school, but not the above. The gym, swimming pool, astro pitches, restaurant and bar facilities would be a welcome addition to the area.

I wouldn't be as familiar as others would be and if you are right I will accept that I am wrong.

Hearing regular stats about Galway's average commute being 4km by car it would make you think that it'll be used for more car commuting.

I'd like to see more housing developments in the area directly around the Parkmore/Ballybrit area, along with futher city centre employment to enable more meritous public transport services.

It's an improvement on the Knocknacarra mess at lest.

In fairness, you are going back to the mid 80's for when Knocknacarra started it's expansion. I'm not sure that it's comparable

phelant

Deleted User wrote: »

This location is within 1-2 kms of the largest employers in the city with over 10,000 workers, and is on the highest frequency bus route in the city, with cycle lanes (albeit crap ones) right outside the door

What exactly are you looking for? Asking this seriously as I initially thought this ticked a lot of boxes when I saw it first

As the crow flies. Not on footpaths road or cycle lanes. And presumably access would be onto the already clogged doughiska road.

phelant

phelant wrote: »

As the crow flies. Not on footpaths road or cycle lanes. And presumably access would be onto the already clogged doughiska road.

It's 2km from this location to the RAB in the middle of Parkmore. That's 10 mins to cycle and 25 to walk, neither of which are unreasonable amounts.

There are footpaths for all of it and cycle lanes for maybe 50% (obv could be better for the cyclists)

What's your suggestion for an alternative?

Something like the Chinese model where the workers live above the factory floor perhaps?

phelant

Deleted User wrote: »

It's 2km from this location to the RAB in the middle of Parkmore. That's 10 mins to cycle and 25 to walk, neither of which are unreasonable amounts.

There are footpaths for all of it and cycle lanes for maybe 50% (obv could be better for the cyclists)

What's your suggestion for an alternative?

Something like the Chinese model where the workers live above the factory floor perhaps?

Nobody works in the roundabout, it’s 2.9 km from Medtronic building to the proposed location using the doughiska rd. A tad more than 1km to 2 km. I don’t have any problem with the development, just like accuracy.

Benbecul97

phelant wrote: »

Nobody works in the roundabout, it’s 2.9 km from Medtronic building to the proposed location using the doughiska rd. A tad more than 1km to 2 km. I don’t have any problem with the development, just like accuracy.

Which Medtronic building - there are 5?? Just like accuracy!!

phelant

phelant wrote: »

Nobody works in the roundabout, it’s 2.9 km from Medtronic building to the proposed location using the doughiska rd. A tad more than 1km to 2 km. I don’t have any problem with the development, just like accuracy.

Yes and there are many other businesses up there than medtronic. I took the RAB as a rough central location within that area. If you insist on being pedantic, then by all means, provide the exact distance for each and every business, including the multiple buildings for each and don't forget, most of the buildings will have 2 or more doors into them so you'll need to account for that too, just for, you know, accuracy

phelant

Benbecul97 wrote: »

Which Medtronic building - there are 5?? Just like accuracy!!

First one

phelant

Deleted User wrote: »

Yes and there are many other businesses up there than medtronic. I took the RAB as a rough central location within that area. If you insist on being pedantic, then by all means, provide the exact distance for each and every business, including the multiple buildings for each and don't forget, most of the buildings will have 2 or more doors into them so you'll need to account for that too, just for, you know, accuracy

Just took a real world location where people actually work. It’s even longer the further into the estates you go. Certainly not 1 km.

Sam Russell

Mod: Can we drop this pedantry.

m17

Stuck in a jam for the next seven years at the coolough roundabout

Aontachtoir

Interesting article in the Times today reporting on an Oireachtas transport committee meeting attended by Anne Graham, the NTA's chief. She argued that a Luas-style light rail system would not be a suitable solution to Galway's traffic woes. https://www.irishtimes.com/news/politics/luas-style-tram-system-for-galway-is-not-appropriate-1.3392364

Of greater relevance to this thread, the head of Galway County Council, Kevin Kelly, appeared to suggest at the same meeting that the goal now is to have the planning permission application for the bypass lodged by the end of April, not the end of February as had been recently announced. Slipping timetable?

what_traffic

Aontachtoir wrote: »

Interesting article in the Times today reporting on an Oireachtas transport committee meeting attended by Anne Graham, the NTA's chief. She argued that a Luas-style light rail system would not be a suitable solution to Galway's traffic woes. https://www.irishtimes.com/news/politics/luas-style-tram-system-for-galway-is-not-appropriate-1.3392364

Of greater relevance to this thread, the head of Galway County Council, Kevin Kelly, appeared to suggest at the same meeting that the goal now is to have the planning permission application for the bypass lodged by the end of April, not the end of February as had been recently announced. Slipping timetable?

It has been slipping for years at this stage. Originally this was meant to be done in Q3 2016
It is no longer a bypass either - City Ring Road as the title says.

marno21

This thread hasn't been updated in a while, but we still haven't had a large bundle of paper sent to An Bord Pleanala yet.

Fingers crossed we should see a submission in the next month or so, however it's then we will see a vast amount of fruitcakes coming out of the woodwork along with large scale objections from people along the route. Expect to see some vintage objections from the days of the M3 and the M50 South Eastern Motorway.

As soon as this project gets planning permission, we should see Arup moving with regards to the "Transport Project" element of this overall scheme, that is redesignating car prioritised road space within Galway city for alternative use. Some people have suggested a light rail system, but this has been ruled out by the NTA on the grounds that it'll have low ridership and won't be value for money. Improved/quality bus corridors would be a good start with the 4 lane N6 up for grabs.

I would be hoping that the section of this road from Doughiska to the N59 junction will be M6, albeit with a 100km/h limit. The section from Barna to N59 will likely be a protected regional road to keep Galway County Council's dirty mits off it.

The project is fully funded as one of the flagship road schemes in the National Development Plan 2018-2027 with a completion date of 2025. Arup, the consulting engineers on the scheme expect it to be shovel ready by 2021, which likely means a 2022 start.

Hopefully now the ABP mess coming down the road won't be too severe.

what_traffic

marno21 wrote: »

As soon as this project gets planning permission, we should see Arup moving with regards to the "Transport Project" element of this overall scheme, that is redesignating car prioritised road space within Galway city for alternative use.

What is this based on? also why do think Arup will also be responible for this? Is this not the work of the GTU within Galway City Council?

Zzippy

marno21 wrote: »

This thread hasn't been updated in a while, but we still haven't had a large bundle of paper sent to An Bord Pleanala yet.

Fingers crossed we should see a submission in the next month or so, however it's then we will see a vast amount of fruitcakes coming out of the woodwork along with large scale objections from people along the route. Expect to see some vintage objections from the days of the M3 and the M50 South Eastern Motorway.

As soon as this project gets planning permission, we should see Arup moving with regards to the "Transport Project" element of this overall scheme, that is redesignating car prioritised road space within Galway city for alternative use. Some people have suggested a light rail system, but this has been ruled out by the NTA on the grounds that it'll have low ridership and won't be value for money. Improved/quality bus corridors would be a good start with the 4 lane N6 up for grabs.

I would be hoping that the section of this road from Doughiska to the N59 junction will be M6, albeit with a 100km/h limit. The section from Barna to N59 will likely be a protected regional road to keep Galway County Council's dirty mits off it.

The project is fully funded as one of the flagship road schemes in the National Development Plan 2018-2027 with a completion date of 2025. Arup, the consulting engineers on the scheme expect it to be shovel ready by 2021, which likely means a 2022 start.

Hopefully now the ABP mess coming down the road won't be too severe.

I have no firm opinion either way, the road will actually make my life a bit easier on occasion, while I also see the point of view of people not in favour of it. Referring to potential objectors as fruitcakes, however, is poor form; there will be genuine objections made in good faith and to be referring to them in advance as fruitcakes is just being deliberately divisive. We have a democratic planning process that allows people to voice their opinions, and professional planners and legal professionals to determine their validity. Making the debate personal and abusive in that manner encourages others to do likewise and can facilitate online bullying and worse. If the planning application is good enough (and God knows they've had long enough to get it perfect) the planning process will find in favour. Can we not just let that happen without the abuse of anyone who holds a different opinion?

Reuben1210

Zzippy wrote: »

I have no firm opinion either way, the road will actually make my life a bit easier on occasion, while I also see the point of view of people not in favour of it. Referring to potential objectors as fruitcakes, however, is poor form; there will be genuine objections made in good faith and to be referring to them in advance as fruitcakes is just being deliberately divisive. We have a democratic planning process that allows people to voice their opinions, and professional planners and legal professionals to determine their validity. Making the debate personal and abusive in that manner encourages others to do likewise and can facilitate online bullying and worse. If the planning application is good enough (and God knows they've had long enough to get it perfect) the planning process will find in favour. Can we not just let that happen without the abuse of anyone who holds a different opinion?

You are also entitled to your opinion, but our planning system is too "democratic", and actually stifles progress at any meaningful rate, and as we have seen with the Apple Athenry debacle, it also loses us huge FDI inflows through being open to abuse of process and the snails pace of the system.
Reform is needed ASAP.

marno21

Zzippy wrote: »

I have no firm opinion either way, the road will actually make my life a bit easier on occasion, while I also see the point of view of people not in favour of it. Referring to potential objectors as fruitcakes, however, is poor form; there will be genuine objections made in good faith and to be referring to them in advance as fruitcakes is just being deliberately divisive. We have a democratic planning process that allows people to voice their opinions, and professional planners and legal professionals to determine their validity. Making the debate personal and abusive in that manner encourages others to do likewise and can facilitate online bullying and worse. If the planning application is good enough (and God knows they've had long enough to get it perfect) the planning process will find in favour. Can we not just let that happen without the abuse of anyone who holds a different opinion?

The people who I am calling "fruitcakes" are the people objecting this scheme who don't stand to sustain negative effects from the scheme. There is constant talk of reform of planning laws to stop people outside the area, or objecting on frivolous "environmental grounds".

If people have a genuine concern about an infrastructural project, I am all for democratic objections. However, in this case the consultant engineers have had to go to great length to prevent this scheme from being objected to, in addition to the requirement for planning law reform.

This is a critical infrastructure project for Galway and Ireland, and it should not be stopped by people objecting either on a NIMBY basis or on baseless environmental grounds.

Zzippy

Reuben1210 wrote: »

You are also entitled to your opinion, but our planning system is too "democratic", and actually stifles progress at any meaningful rate, and as we have seen with the Apple Athenry debacle, it also loses us huge FDI inflows through being open to abuse of process and the snails pace of the system.
Reform is needed ASAP.

marno21 wrote: »

The people who I am calling "fruitcakes" are the people objecting this scheme who don't stand to sustain negative effects from the scheme. There is constant talk of reform of planning laws to stop people outside the area, or objecting on frivolous "environmental grounds".

If people have a genuine concern about an infrastructural project, I am all for democratic objections. However, in this case the consultant engineers have had to go to great length to prevent this scheme from being objected to, in addition to the requirement for planning law reform.

This is a critical infrastructure project for Galway and Ireland, and it should not be stopped by people objecting either on a NIMBY basis or on baseless environmental grounds.

Valid points both, and by all means have the debate about reforming the process, but do we have to go down the road of abusing people legitimately engaging in the process as it is now?
Your definition of genuine concern may be very different to another person, and "frivolous environmental grounds" to you could be a very critical loss of habitat that contravenes legislation to a wildlife ranger, for instance.

As a mod especially, I find it surprising that you would engage in that kind of language. Can we not just wait for the application, read the EIS etc ourselves before the dog whistling and sh1t stirring starts?

marno21

Zzippy wrote: »

Valid points both, and by all means have the debate about reforming the process, but do we have to go down the road of abusing people legitimately engaging in the process as it is now?
Your definition of genuine concern may be very different to another person, and "frivolous environmental grounds" to you could be a very critical loss of habitat that contravenes legislation to a wildlife ranger, for instance.

As a mod especially, I find it surprising that you would engage in that kind of language. Can we not just wait for the application, read the EIS etc ourselves before the dog whistling and sh1t stirring starts?

A significant proportion of the "people legitimately engaging in the process" will be forbidden so if we ever get proper planning laws. Most of the objections are completely baseless and just serve to slow the process down.

I'm not sure of your background on this scheme or roads in general, but anyway. The NRA as they were proposed a "N6 Galway City outer bypass" scheme which was sent for planning approval around 5 years ago, and was rejected for a variety of reasons.

This is the 2nd attempt at a bypass/ring road and has been in planning now for FOUR years. The parties involved in the planning (Galway County Council, TII & the NTA) will have no desire to repeat the same mistakes as before and this scheme will have been fully audited several times to ensure it's the most workable and best solution for the scheme. The scheme is being made legally watertight by Galway County Council and TII, and given how desperately needed the scheme is, it'll be the solution that causes the least negative benefit to both Galway, it's residents and wildlife habitats. There is no ideal solution, but what we'll get is the best one. The tunnels under the racecourse and the limestone at Menlough are testiment to how far they are going to ensure it does the best possible job.

In relation to "abuse", take a look at the M28 Cork-Ringaskiddy thread to see what happens when a so-called environmental concern group gets called out on outright lies which were borderline defamatory to the parties progressing the scheme. When called out on these, the only response was abuse.

Most people objecting for non-geniune reasons and only cynically objecting for themselves can be very quickly found out when their fabrications are revealed to be untrue and they have no other cards in their hand.

what_traffic

marno21 wrote: »

In relation to "abuse", take a look at the M28 Cork-Ringaskiddy thread to see what happens when a so-called environmental concern group gets called out on outright lies which were borderline defamatory to the parties progressing the scheme. When called out on these, the only response was abuse.

Most people objecting for non-geniune reasons and only cynically objecting for themselves can be very quickly found out when their fabrications are revealed to be untrue and they have no other cards in their hand.

So is your logic that you are just getting in your abuse first here in relation to the Galway City Ring Road by calling potential objectors fruitcakes?

marno21

what_traffic wrote: »

So is your logic that you are just getting in your abuse first here in relation to the Galway City Ring Road by calling potential objectors fruitcakes?

Certain objectors, and I wouldn't call the term fruitcake abusive, hence why I used it. A lot of these objections will be dismissed but they will still delay the project

Can you give some meritorious reasons for objecting, which Arup/TII/GCC will have neglected in the planning process?

The amount of effort into making this the best solution possible means that there will be very little reason to object. Of course objecting to the scheme itself is another matter, and it would be a bit foolish were the scheme canned for the sake of 30 people who don't want it.

I quite like tarts myself

what_traffic

marno21 wrote: »

Can you give some meritorious reasons for objecting, which Arup/TII/GCC will have neglected in the planning process?

Will wait for the ABP submission before getting into the detail of it but obvious first one on the list is that it won't fix the problem that its supposedly meant to fix.
You still have not answered your assertion that Arup will also be responsible for the Galway Transportion Strategy implementation? Has something changed? Am pretty certain City Council GTU is repsonsible for this.

marno21

what_traffic wrote: »

Will wait for the ABP submission before getting into the detail of it but obvious first one on the list is that it won't fix the problem that its supposedly meant to fix.
You still have not answered your assertion that Arup will also be responsible for the Galway Transportion Strategy implementation? Has something changed? Am pretty certain City Council GTU is repsonsible for this.

Submission to ABP has been delayed for 9 months or so to ensure it's all good - I think a bit of faith wouldn't go astray

I totally agree that the bypass in isolation won't solve much - it'll simply create a expressway to encourage further sprawl and will be overcrowded in 20 years time - hence the need to use the bypass as the vehicular mode, especially for trucks and heavy vehicles, and use a combination of the bypass and the existing road network to encourage multi modal transport. Bikes and buses have to be prioritized here, and the existing road-space needs a serious clampdown of cars. In addition, there needs to be a clampdown on housing developments that encourage car dependence and "20 minutes down the N6 to Parkmore".

I was fairly sure Arup were commissioned to do some design work for the existing road network reprioritisation as part of the overall "N6 Galway City Transport Scheme" - however I may be wrong here.

what_traffic

marno21 wrote: »

Submission to ABP has been delayed for 9 months or so to ensure it's all good - I think a bit of faith wouldn't go astray

9 months - its double that. More like 18 months. Originally was meant to go to ABP in Q3 2016.

what_traffic

marno21 wrote: »

I totally agree that the bypass in isolation won't solve much - it'll simply create a expressway to encourage further sprawl and will be overcrowded in 20 years time - hence the need to use the bypass as the vehicular mode, especially for trucks and heavy vehicles, and use a combination of the bypass and the existing road network to encourage multi modal transport. Bikes and buses have to be prioritized here, and the existing road-space needs a serious clampdown of cars. In addition, there needs to be a clampdown on housing developments that encourage car dependence and "20 minutes down the N6 to Parkmore".

I was fairly sure Arup were commissioned to do some design work for the existing road network reprioritisation as part of the overall "N6 Galway City Transport Scheme" - however I may be wrong here.

ARUP are, but its not just them. The GTU will share the €€€ with other consultancy groups as well.
If they were to do even half of what you say then I would be far more in favor of the scheme - however both Councils past records are extremely poor.

tharlear

I totally agree that the bypass in isolation won't solve much - it'll simply create a expressway to encourage further sprawl and will be overcrowded in 20 years time

Are you suggesting we stop the city from expanding.
The first go round was to deliver a bypass 12 years ago, and some "fruitcakes" stopped it.
Snails, bog cotton, special limestone, it's a joke.