Do city bypasses deliver the goods, and if so what's the evidence?

invinciblePRSTV

antoobrien wrote: »

I agree with most of that but i.m.o. it's not possible to entirely ignore roads when considering the alternatives, since they will have an effect on how roads are used. People have to travel to work and they will do so from areas where there are few if any reasonable PT options that will get them in for say an 8 a.m. start. To pick Eyrecourt at at random from Co Galway, residents will still have drive to where they're going. So should we cater for or ignore places like this?

Should we cater for tiny settlements and one off housing many KMs away from places of employment? no most certainly not as it would be cost prohibitive to provide PT options or improved roads to sparsely populated areas.

As we well know PT works better the higher population densities are, the onus is on local authorities to put into place planning practices which limit dispersed housing and ribbon development and promote sustainable development and increasing population densities.

Of course in the Irish example this isn't the case, with Cllrs frequently and with impunity contravening whatever development plans are in place. which is why I'm somewhat sceptical of plans for the N17/18, but less so for the GCOB, as both, despite I'm sure the NRA's best efforts, will be be eyed by developers, auctioneers and politicians (who frequently can be the same person) as something to make some money out of by lopping a housing estate off a junction 3 miles from the closest shop, or putting a mega shopping centre on the bypass.

antoobrien wrote: »

In an extreme case there are two solutions to the problem of people driving to long distances to work from areas that currently have little or no pt options (illustrative, I don't necessarily support or oppose either and not trying to spark a discussion of their merits):

1) make places like this so expensive so as it's impossible to live there, forcing people to move to towns like Galway, Tuam, Loughrea etc that have employment & facilities that make it possible to use PT, walk or cycle most places.

2) Move jobs closer to the people that are traveling to the large towns to work. Within Galway City it would be Knocknacara, in the county Athenry Loughrea, Ballinasloe, Tuam & Gort. This would help to reduce the pressure on the larger towns (e.g. the 5 city areas), giving extra time to time to put in place infrastructure (roads, rail, pt, water, telecoms, schools etc) that is needed to continue with proper development of these areas.

Either solution would affect transport policy which includes roads.

If we're talking about development policies for the Galway urban area then it's rather simple: clamp down on irresponsible developments such as out of town shopping developments and one off housing/rural estates far away from amenities, and most crucially, try and put the big ticket employmers, if they ever come to Ireland again, in area's already well served by PT. Will Galway Co.Co and it's councillors go along with such a plan? most certainly not.

Simpler solutions to dissuade long distance commuting would include a congestion charge for the Galway urban area, a motorway tolling system and of course, most importantly, increased spend on public transport measures.

Of course as has been seen on this forum and in infrastructure, most of these measures are fiercely resisted, although they are the optimum solution. I don't expect any of them to come to fruition, or for more stringent planning laws being put in place as part of a erform of local government.

As such I'm quite sure in time Galway will mimic the larger Irish urban area's and become another town with a dead centre whilst out of town commercial and residential developments prosper and congestion will be ever present.

invinciblePRSTV

Iwannahurl wrote: »

That's a great table iwannahurl, it shows exactly what happens when the transport spend is massively weighted towards roads spending like it has been in Ireland.

One only has to compare the never ending criticism and moaning about the costs of LUAS, Metro and Irish Rail projects in comparison to the near universal praise the Interurban programme, as well as all the other projects of dubious merit the NRA have built, receives.

The question of 'Boston or Berlin' frequently haunted political discourse during the bubble years, but when it comes to transport spending and planning, we Irish have made the conscious decision to go for American style of car worship and building never ending motorways to the smallest of places, as well as ignoring any good planning practices.

L1011

Iwannahurl wrote: »

I'm not sure what the quality of urban life is like in Brighton

Generally seen as extremely high. A competent, private, bus operator and a difficult to navigate by car city centre help in terms of what you'd count as quality factors.

HILLS, however, are a reason why cycling and walking are a lot less common than you'd expect for the only city in the UK with a Green MP - Brighton backs on to the South Downs, the railway line had to give up short of where the town centre at the time was due to the slope and so on.

Most people actually work in the city centre - the largest employer around is American Express who are very central, there's other major employers in the centre too - but live outside the city centre, often in the northern suburbs which are extremely difficult to cycle back to.

I spend a lot of time in Brighton (football) and have both driven and relied on public transport there; the parking and city layout mean that I generally use the buses now.

Should also add that Brighton's bus network was crippled until the town was bypassed by the A27 DC in the early 1990s.

dubhthach

Graz has a population densisty of 2,027 /km² from what I can see online.

It also has motorway (autobahn) bypasses to the West (A9) and South (A2). the western one (A9) is in a 10km tunnel. There is also a "Süd Autobahn" which feeds into the A2. The A2/A9 junction itself sees about 100k vehicle movements a day. Even leading aside the two bypasses the B69 basically forms an inner-relief dual carriageway bypassing the historic core to the west from North-South.

The reason why they can easily reduce speed limits on surface roads is the fact that all long distance North/South and East/West trips are removed via the presence of autobahn's which bypass the city.

I should also point out that the Urban population of Cork is actually 190k, the Cork city boundaries like those of Limerick are hopelessly out of date. Anyone who looks at Google Maps can see that there is a large amount of development south of the "Southern Ring Road"

Iwannahurl

In terms of bypass benefits, the size of an urban centre is very important.

Bypassing Kinnegad (pop. 2200) and Kilbeggan (pop. 1000) was obviously a major relief to the locals, given that the vast majority of traffic was just passing through.

However, nobody would claim that there was latent demand in such towns and villages for a local bus network that could be reasonably accommodated in a post-bypass situation.

Cities like Cork and Galway are much more suited to replacing car use with public transport, cycling and walking because of their larger populations and other factors.

The key consideration, IMO, is that while bypasses may be regarded as essential infrastructure, any resulting traffic 'vacuum' can't simply be left to fill up with car traffic by default. Nor should a bypass or other new roads infrastructure be used to facilitate unsustainable development.

Amtmann

Iwannahurl wrote: »

Cities like Cork and Galway are much more suited to replacing car use with public transport, cycling and walking because of their larger populations and other factors.

In plain language, is it your contention that Cork does not need - or never needed - a bypass?

marmurr1916

MYOB wrote: »

Generally seen as extremely high. A competent, private, bus operator and a difficult to navigate by car city centre help in terms of what you'd count as quality factors.

HILLS, however, are a reason why cycling and walking are a lot less common than you'd expect for the only city in the UK with a Green MP - Brighton backs on to the South Downs, the railway line had to give up short of where the town centre at the time was due to the slope and so on.

Cork is also very hilly. For example, cycle from the city centre to Douglas and you've got to negotiate some very steep uphill stretches.

Similarly, the railway line from Dublin to Cork didn't reach the city centre until the tunnel was built through the hills, several years after it had reached the northern outskirts of the city.

marmurr1916

Iwannahurl wrote: »

Compare for example the cities of Graz (Austria) and Brighton (England) which are similar in population size, c. 250,000, about twice that of Cork City.

Cork's population is closer to 200,000 than to 125,000, no matter what the census figures show. The city council area doesn't include Rochestown, Maryborough, Grange, Donnybrook, Frankfield, Glanmire, Ballincollig and all the other suburban areas that are part of the same built-up area.

Iwannahurl wrote: »

When the Jack Lynch/Lee Tunnel was conceived, a political decision could have been made to use the extra road space, especially in the absence of HGVs, for purposes other than accommodating more private car traffic.

That didn't happen, despite the firm conclusion in CASP that projected traffic growth is unsustainable.

Have you ever been to Cork? Because you don't see to be aware of the extensive pedestrianisation of city centre streets (which Cork pioneered in Ireland), and the re-construction of Patrick's Street, Oliver Plunkett Street, Emmett Place, the Grand Parade and the Coal Quay,(Cornmarket Street) to increase footpath space, reduce road space and generally enhance their streetscapes.

Iwannahurl wrote: »

If a bypass like the JLT/LT does not result in relief from traffic congestion, even in the short term, and if it does not facilitate traffic reduction by other means (eg public transport) within its catchment area, then IMO such infrastructure is not 'delivering the goods', especially in the context of planning strategies like the CASP.

Cork's SRR has reduced city centre traffic congestion. The fact that the county council gave planning permission which led to over-development of car-dependent commuting estates around the city's hinterland does not mean that congestion in Cork city centre and other parts of the city hasn't been reduced.

Iwannahurl wrote: »

In terms of their desired effects, bypasses are sometimes promised as the panacea that will cure traffic congestion and make public transport, walking and cycling not only more feasible but positively enjoyable in the newly quiet streets. IMO that's a reasonable, laudable and sustainable vision. But it takes a lot more than the construction of a bypass to make such things happen, and in the absence of political will to implement the necessary transportation and planning policies the freed up road space can be filled with induced traffic surprisingly quickly, not just in the city streets but also on the bypass itself.

As another poster has pointed out, Graz has a very well-developed network of motorways which enables traffic to bypass the city.

If it didn't have these motorways, then it wouldn't have been able to adopt the public transport, cycle- and pedestrian-friendly infrastructure that is has.

It's not a question of either/or. Ireland needs both a good quality road infrastructure and a good quality public transport and cycle/pedestrian infrastructure.

The fact that FF-led governments chose to prioritise roads from 1997 onwards, while utterly failing to develop any coherent national planning strategy or national landscape protection policy does not mean that bypasses of Cork or other cities have not been beneficial.

Any country which experienced a doubling in the levels of car ownership would see much more traffic on the roads, whether these roads existed before or after the increase in car ownership.

Ireland has made huge mistakes when it comes to planning and infrastructure.

Building bypasses of Cork and other cities can't be counted amongst those mistakes.

Iwannahurl

Tremelo wrote: »

In plain language, is it your contention that Cork does not need - or never needed - a bypass?

No.

I'm focusing on Cork City, for the moment, because an earlier poster nominated the Lee tunnel/Jack Lynch Tunnel as a highly successful (untolled) bypass.

Iwannahurl

marmurr1916 wrote: »

Cork is also very hilly. For example, cycle from the city centre to Douglas and you've got to negotiate some very steep uphill stretches.

Similarly, the railway line from Dublin to Cork didn't reach the city centre until the tunnel was built through the hills, several years after it had reached the northern outskirts of the city.

I believe CASP refers to the topography and concludes that cycle commuting is not a runner (as it were) for some parts of the city.

Iwannahurl

marmurr1916 wrote: »

Cork's population is closer to 200,000 than to 125,000, no matter what the census figures show. The city council area doesn't include Rochestown, Maryborough, Grange, Donnybrook, Frankfield, Glanmire, Ballincollig and all the other suburban areas that are part of the same built-up area.

Have you ever been to Cork? Because you don't see to be aware of the extensive pedestrianisation of city centre streets (which Cork pioneered in Ireland), and the re-construction of Patrick's Street, Oliver Plunkett Street, Emmett Place, the Grand Parade and the Coal Quay,(Cornmarket Street) to increase footpath space, reduce road space and generally enhance their streetscapes.

Cork's SRR has reduced city centre traffic congestion. The fact that the county council gave planning permission which led to over-development of car-dependent commuting estates around the city's hinterland does not mean that congestion in Cork city centre and other parts of the city hasn't been reduced.

As another poster has pointed out, Graz has a very well-developed network of motorways which enables traffic to bypass the city.

If it didn't have these motorways, then it wouldn't have been able to adopt the public transport, cycle- and pedestrian-friendly infrastructure that is has.

It's not a question of either/or. Ireland needs both a good quality road infrastructure and a good quality public transport and cycle/pedestrian infrastructure.

The fact that FF-led governments chose to prioritise roads from 1997 onwards, while utterly failing to develop any coherent national planning strategy or national landscape protection policy does not mean that bypasses of Cork or other cities have not been beneficial.

Any country which experienced a doubling in the levels of car ownership would see much more traffic on the roads, whether these roads existed before or after the increase in car ownership.

Ireland has made huge mistakes when it comes to planning and infrastructure.

Building bypasses of Cork and other cities can't be counted amongst those mistakes.

I haven't been to the beautiful city of Cork for several years -- mo náire é.

I am merely commenting on what is contained in official reports. Cork City Council's analysis of the 2002 Census highlights the fact that up to 50% of people walk or cycle to work, school or college in the city centre, as well as the fact that over a third of the City’s households have no car.

Cork City still compares favourably to national averages in terms of sustainable modes of travelling to work, school and college. This is not surprising considering that the option to walk, cycle or use public transport is more viable in an urban location rather than a rural one. Nevertheless, the continuing decline of walking and cycling and the opposing rise in the use of private vehicles as a means of getting to work, school or college is a worrying trend. Additionally, though again not surprisingly, the City also compares favourably nationally in terms of the distances travelled to work, school or college and the length of time it takes to get there.

Nevertheless, the fact remains that in the period 1991-2002 "walking and cycling as a means of getting to work, school and college recorded significant decreases" whereas "travelling to work by motor vehicles ... increased in almost direct proportion with the decrease in walking and cycling". In that time period, cycling to work decreased by 32.9% whereas driving increased by 32.8%. Commuting by bus decreased by 7%. These are the facts. The SRR may have reduced congestion, but the extra road space was not taken up by buses and bikes. As I said, I haven't yet looked at the 2006 CSO figures, and I haven't found a similar CCC report on that year's census.

The 2008 CASP update spoke of how future growth needs to be "solidly based on the principle of sustainable development and in particular needs to take place in a way which supports the use of sustainable transport modes (public transport, cycling and walking)".

The original CASP, published several years earlier and not long after the JLT opened, had referred to the "over-riding conclusion of the transport assessment" that the demand for travel would increase dramatically over the 20 year period of the Plan:

Without policy measures and infrastructure improvements to reduce car dependency, more travellers will drive cars rather than walking, cycling, using public transport or car sharing. This, in conjunction with population growth, will result in a doubling in demand for car use in the morning peak hour.

I agree with you that good roads infrastructure (including bypasses) and sustainable transport do not have to be mutually exclusive. To borrow from Bill Shakespeare, a bypass is neither good nor bad but planning makes it so.

The only reason I mentioned Graz is that it tends to pop up in EU reports on integrated transport, such as this one (the earlier link was broken).

Another city I could mention, this time from personal experience, is Copenhagen. They have superb public transport, blissfully uncongested streets (while I was there) and world-class cycle infrastructure. They're also not shy about planning major new roads infrastucture linked to other developments. The City of Copenhagen is currently developing the 3 km Nordhavnsvej road and tunnel in the residential Østerbro district, one of the wealthier areas of of the city. The Nordhavnsvej may be the first stage of a new 14 km eastern bypass linking the highway system north of Copenhagen with the highway system on the south, the purpose of which is to "remove a substantial part of road traffic from the centre of Copenhagen as well as providing better access to development areas east of Copenhagen Harbour".

From 1994 to 2005, the City of Copenhagen reduced parking spaces in the city centre from 14000 to 11500, replacing the spaces with other facilities and amenities such as parks and cycle paths. "Over that same time, not accidentally, bicycle traffic rose by some 40 percent" (source: Tom Vanderbilt, 2008, Traffic - why we drive the way we do, and what it says about us).

Can you see the culture and politics of Cork City giving rise to anything similar in the next ten years?

veryangryman

That "motorways to nowhere" line got my hump up.

WHAT motorway does not go in the direction to or from a city. If your talking about the M3, it is a road to Dublin which alot of people use to get to and from Dublin. M18 is Galway-Limerick-Cork. M11 is in the main inside the pale and connects the country's ferry ports albeit incomplete. Every other motoway is an inter-urban.

The M3 can be argued against as it doesnt lead to a city northbound. I forgive this as it is a tolled project. Yes they negotiated the toll/compensation via taxpayer deal, but the motorway in principle is badly needed for a region of the country (Meath to Donegal northwest) with no railway.

M9 should have been tolled but probably would have got the same sh1te toll/compensation deal negotiated by the tools Cullen and Dempsey. Dempsey especially is such a tool. Why people dont follow the smug git around and egg him daily is beyond me. Mention of his name makes the blood boil.

As for bypass of city benefits, we all have to say that the port tunnel/free-flow M50 combo is a great advertisement for what can be achieved. City has had the sense to develop Luas/Dublinbikes/Truck ban/Bus corridoors and it has improved things alot. Of course traffic is still pretty crap at rush hour but it is a help

Zubeneschamali

veryangryman wrote: »

As for bypass of city benefits, we all have to say that the port tunnel/free-flow M50 combo is a great advertisement for what can be achieved.

Indeed, several cyclists a year used to be killed by artics in the city centre before the port tunnel.

CerebralCortex

veryangryman wrote: »

That "motorways to nowhere" line got my hump up.

WHAT motorway does not go in the direction to or from a city. If your talking about the M3, it is a road to Dublin which alot of people use to get to and from Dublin. M18 is Galway-Limerick-Cork. M11 is in the main inside the pale and connects the country's ferry ports albeit incomplete. Every other motoway is an inter-urban.

<cough>Shannon Airport<cough>

Iwannahurl

Zubeneschamali wrote: »

Indeed, several cyclists a year used to be killed by artics in the city centre before the port tunnel.

Collision with a left-turning HGV was the proximal cause in a majority of such fatalities I believe. Taking HGVs off city centre streets is a great move.

An extensive 30 kph zone is also a valuable measure, though in this country such measures are not respected or enforced.

antoobrien

invinciblePRSTV wrote: »

Should we cater for tiny settlements and one off housing many KMs away from places of employment? no most certainly not as it would be cost prohibitive to provide PT options or improved roads to sparsely populated areas.

Again with the alternatives - are you telling us that we should just ignore them and wait for them to decide to move to town(s)? Should we decide to support 1/2/3+towns in a county - remember the top 4 counties by area covered take up more than 1/3 of the landmass of the republic and it's a long way from Clifden to Galway city - are you suggesting we abandon everything west of the corrib?

Are you suggest ing we should forc ethese people to move, potentially creating another Knocknatallagh, Darndale or Dolphins Barn?

invinciblePRSTV wrote: »

If we're talking about development policies for the Galway urban area then it's rather simple: clamp down on irresponsible developments such as out of town shopping developments and one off housing/rural estates far away from amenities, and most crucially, try and put the big ticket employmers, if they ever come to Ireland again, in area's already well served by PT. Will Galway Co.Co and it's councillors go along with such a plan? most certainly not.

Now I know you know nothing about Galway but what you read from certain sources (not many of which know anything about Galway either). Shopping centers have been developed either within the City limits or in towns like Oranmore, Tuam, Athenry, Loughrea, Ballinasloe. Why - because these places (which are all well established towns) have the required facilities and amenities and the people living in the towns and their hinterlands cant get into Galway for various reasons mainly die to the lack of any kind of planning.

Estates have been created in towns/villages int he area surrounding Galway in, with the same pattern of development that emerged in Dublin in the 50s & 60s starting to emerge in Galway.

You're skeptical about the bypass, the first published documents are from 1999 - a rare bit of foresight for GCC. Between the 1996 & 2002 censuses the population grew by 15%, with a further 8.8% in the county. There was no attempt at catering for this with PT so don't make me laugh. In 1999 the population of the city was about 61,500 (1996 figure 57241, average growth rate 2.5% over the 6 year cencus period), it's now 75,414. If you take a look at Galway city, the doubled in population between 71 & 96 (25 years), with the current growth rate being the lowest since 1961.

On PT efforts, the Galway Smarter Travel plan appears to be predicated on 2006 trip levels (to work & education, see page 5 of the doc).

They appear to be only taking into account 4k extra trips over a 14 year period, with no growth at all in trips between 2015 & 2020. That seems optimistically small given a historical growth rate from the 50s to the current day of roughly 1/8 extra being added to the city's population per census period.

People wonder why people give out about not estimating capacity correctly - things like this are a good example. They haven't learned anything from the estimates of the usage road network and now they appear to be making the same mistakes with PT. Over capacity is not a bad thing in itself (of course things like planning have to happen to maintain the balance)- under capacity is far worse.

Iwannahurl

antoobrien wrote: »

Now I know you know nothing about Galway but what you read from certain sources (not many of which know anything about Galway either). Shopping centers have been developed either within the City limits or in towns like Oranmore, Tuam, Athenry, Loughrea, Ballinasloe. Why - because these places (which are all well established towns) have the required facilities and amenities and the people living in the towns and their hinterlands cant get into Galway for various reasons mainly die to the lack of any kind of planning.

You're skeptical about the bypass, the first published documents are from 1999 - a rare bit of foresight for GCC. Between the 1996 & 2002 censuses the population grew by 15%, with a further 8.8% in the county. There was no attempt at catering for this with PT so don't make me laugh.

Bypasses depend on proper planning to function effectively. Is there a shining example of such in Ireland currently? Will the GCOB startle us all by breaking the mould forever?

Quote from the website of Galway private bus company City Direct:

Galway City Direct Limited was established in 1999 and is based in Rahoon, Galway. City Direct provides important public transport scheduled bus services from Barna, Knocknacarra, Salthill and Rahoon to Eyre Square - the centre of Galway city. There are numerous city bus stops along each route where passengers can board or alight.

I use that bus service myself from time to time. It's not exactly EU-standard but it's still a bus. Actual bus stops with bus shelters and non-fiction timetables would be nice.

City Direct have been crying out for QBCs for years. They may be getting some soon(ish).

Transport 21 arrived in 2005. I'm not sure when its effects started to be felt in Galway City, but I believe that the highly successful (though erratic in my experience) #9 bus route to Parkmore/Ballybrit was expanded in 2007.

A thought occurs: how much of Transport 21 was spent on PT and how much on roads? I believe that a 50/50 split or thereabouts was envisaged at the start.

Zubeneschamali

Iwannahurl wrote: »

Taking HGVs off city centre streets is a great move.

Did you ever see the bottleneck in Athlone?

That used to be the N6 Galway-Dublin road, HGVs and all.

antoobrien

Iwannahurl wrote: »

Quote from the website of Galway private bus

Fair play to city direct - that's a business person in action instead of people like yourself whining about not having buses.

The problem is that they service the west side of town, when the growth has been largely in the east during this period - Ballybrit, Merlin Park, Doughiska & Roscam in particular (should really have clarified that earlier shouldn't I).

What did we get east of Eyre square? The movable feast that was the #3 bus (terminus moved between only servicing Castlepark, going to current stop @ Briarhill, up to the industrial estate at Parkmore, before finally going back to the current spot) until they figured out that there was several hundred houses & apartments along the Dublin Rd past GMIT.

That's not even mentioning the developments on Bothar na Cosite (I'd love to see how the #7 bus is doing since they re routed it out there).

GCC have known about the PP for all these places and failed to act in association with the BE (the major bus network provider) or private enterprises like city direct to facilitate these developments.

I wonder what they're going to do with the #3 now anyways since the city council in their wisdom are about to remove the roundabout that allows it to use its current terminus. At a guess back to the future.

Iwannahurl

antoobrien wrote: »

Fair play to city direct - that's a business person in action instead of people like yourself whining about not having buses.

antoobrien wrote: »

There was no attempt at catering for this with PT so don't make me laugh.

Cake is being both had and eaten here.

I'm a motorist, pedestrian, cyclist and bus user. Bus services in Galway City have improved, but there is still a long way to go. Once you experience PT in other European countries where it is reliable and efficient, the level of service in Ireland looks a bit ramshackle.

I am strongly of the opinion that every effort should be made to facilitate and prioritise buses above private car traffic. That includes bus lanes and the ripping out of car-friendly roundabouts to facilitate bus-friendly AUTCs and pedestrian access to buses.

In the context of bypasses, traffic management and transportation planning, one big difficulty is that there is no coordinating body (in Galway/the West) with power and responsibility for overseeing the integration of different transport modes with each other or with spatial planning.

Galway City Council will tell you that they can provide bus lanes, for example, but beyond that can do no more than encourage PT providers to develop services.

It's all very well to say that cities like Graz are well supplied with bypasses and ring roads, but at the end of the day what really matters is planning, coordination and integration, with sustainablity as a primary objective.

Without such a coherent vision, bypasses can end up merely as good roads for motorists going from A to B, as opposed to strategic infrastructure for optimising transportation in urban settlements.

antoobrien

Iwannahurl wrote: »

Cake is being both had and eaten here.

Fair enough it was a bit ranty, however the intention is to show just how badly mismanaged PT provisioning was in Galway over the past 10+ years. After all GCC gave PP for all this residential & commercial land - so they should know where the buses have to go to support them - why aren't they planning ahead and where is the evidence that they are doing so?

Iwannahurl wrote: »

I'm a motorist, pedestrian, cyclist and bus user.

So am I in more than one city on this Island. The difference between us is that I don't have a persecution complex about being a cyclist or pedestrian, and my views on roads come from investigation of figures not based on sitting in traffic.

Iwannahurl wrote: »

Bus services in Galway City have improved, but there is still a long way to go. Once you experience PT in other European countries where it is reliable and efficient, the level of service in Ireland looks a bit ramshackle.

I like the way you keep comparing Galway to Stockholm - a capital city that has a ring road (like our prospective road it's much objected to). I much prefer a comparison to somewhere like Lorient - a regional town (which Galway is) which has a decent bus network, which is run reasonable efficiently (or at least it was when I was there in the mid 90s). I could throw in my experiences in Berlin, but that it also a capital city so not a fair comparison.

I wonder how many locations you'll find good PT in where the traffic has to go through the center of town to get across it.

Iwannahurl

antoobrien wrote: »

So am I in more than one city on this Island. The difference between us is that I don't have a persecution complex about being a cyclist or pedestrian, and my views on roads come from investigation of figures not based on sitting in traffic.

I like the way you keep comparing Galway to Stockholm - a capital city that has a ring road (like our prospective road it's much objected to). I much prefer a comparison to somewhere like Lorient - a regional town (which Galway is) which has a decent bus network, which is run reasonable efficiently (or at least it was when I was there in the mid 90s). I could throw in my experiences in Berlin, but that it also a capital city so not a fair comparison.

Two other differences you may wish to note. I don't mind-read, and I don't sit in traffic.

I haven't compared Galway to Stockholm. What I have in mind is the ability of planners in these European cities to organise traffic and transportation efficiently, and of the citizenry to resist car dependence. A small city like Galway ought to find such things easier. Instead we have people driving their kids 800 metres to school and parking on the footpaths and cycle lanes, all the while lamenting the lack of a bypass and the removal of roundabouts.

Once you experience such efficiency and responsibility elsewhere, the Irish lack of same jars a bit. An earlier poster mentioned our "closer to Boston than Berlin" tendencies. Our preference for private versus public transport may be part of that syndrome.

Iwannahurl

Zubeneschamali wrote: »

Did you ever see the bottleneck in Athlone?

That used to be the N6 Galway-Dublin road, HGVs and all.

According to the 2006 Census, 67% of people in Athlone travel to work by car, either as a driver or passenger.

44% of Athlone residents travelled a distance of 4 km or less to work. 12.5% travelled 1 km or less. Interestingly, almost one in five respondents didn't answer this question, mainly because the 2006 Census asked it in metric units for the first time. Another way in which we Irish tend to be stubbornly non-European.

invinciblePRSTV

antoobrien wrote: »

Again with the alternatives - are you telling us that we should just ignore them and wait for them to decide to move to town(s)? Should we decide to support 1/2/3+towns in a county - remember the top 4 counties by area covered take up more than 1/3 of the landmass of the republic and it's a long way from Clifden to Galway city - are you suggesting we abandon everything west of the corrib?

Are these places not 'ignored' already, eg PT options, besides school buses, are limited or non existant and road infrastructure is basic? you realise it's cost prohibitive to provide extensive PT and decent road links to every settlement haphazardly developed within the long distance commuting radius of every Irish urban area?

That's why we need to focus all commercial and residential development as possible, so the few resources the DoT does have can be spent in as efficient a manner as possible.

antoobrien wrote: »

Are you suggest ing we should forc ethese people to move, potentially creating another Knocknatallagh, Darndale or Dolphins Barn?

Nope, I'm suggesting a rigorous planning regime should be put in place the likes of which Galway has never seen.

antoobrien wrote: »

Now I know you know nothing about Galway but what you read from certain sources (not many of which know anything about Galway either). Shopping centers have been developed either within the City limits or in towns like Oranmore, Tuam, Athenry, Loughrea, Ballinasloe. Why - because these places (which are all well established towns) have the required facilities and amenities and the people living in the towns and their hinterlands cant get into Galway for various reasons mainly die to the lack of any kind of planning.

Perhaps you're not following the train of thought in my post but it really is rather simple: build infrastructure like the GCOB & M17/18 and spiv local politicians,and their special interests buddies, of which the wesht is famous for will see these developments as the perfect chance to engage in exactly the kind of unsustainable developments other cities have seen when they've had their BP's built.

antoobrien wrote: »

Estates have been created in towns/villages int he area surrounding Galway in, with the same pattern of development that emerged in Dublin in the 50s & 60s starting to emerge in Galway.

Yeah but we've also seen rampant one off housing and ghost estates built in Co. Galway and further afield, just like in the rest of the country. Pretty much every major Irish town or city can point to some examples of properly planned area's but those are isolated examples, by and large the cities of Dublin, Cork, limerick and probably Galway have developed or will develop on a sprawl like exurb basis.

antoobrien wrote: »

You're skeptical about the bypass, the first published documents are from 1999 - a rare bit of foresight for GCC. Between the 1996 & 2002 censuses the population grew by 15%, with a further 8.8% in the county. There was no attempt at catering for this with PT so don't make me laugh. In 1999 the population of the city was about 61,500 (1996 figure 57241, average growth rate 2.5% over the 6 year cencus period), it's now 75,414. If you take a look at Galway city, the doubled in population between 71 & 96 (25 years), with the current growth rate being the lowest since 1961.

I'm not sceptical about the bypass, I'm sceptical about the knock on effects the bypass will have on Galways local authorities and beal bocht local interests if that makes sense.

antoobrien wrote: »

On PT efforts, the Galway Smarter Travel plan appears to be predicated on 2006 trip levels (to work & education, see page 5 of the doc).

They appear to be only taking into account 4k extra trips over a 14 year period, with no growth at all in trips between 2015 & 2020. That seems optimistically small given a historical growth rate from the 50s to the current day of roughly 1/8 extra being added to the city's population per census period.

People wonder why people give out about not estimating capacity correctly - things like this are a good example. They haven't learned anything from the estimates of the usage road network and now they appear to be making the same mistakes with PT. Over capacity is not a bad thing in itself (of course things like planning have to happen to maintain the balance)- under capacity is far worse.

PT just isn't a priority for Irish government or local authorities.

Zubeneschamali

Iwannahurl wrote: »

According to the 2006 Census, 67% of people in Athlone travel to work by car, either as a driver or passenger.

That only counts against the usefulness of the bypass if you believe that people travelling by car is in itself bad.

Athlone had a chronic congestion problem, with the N6 travelling the length of the town, through that bottleneck and over the only Shannon bridge for many miles up or downriver. The bypass sorted out that congestion. It didn't turn Athlone into a cycling mecca, but then, it wasn't intended to.

antoobrien

invinciblePRSTV wrote: »

Are these places not 'ignored' already, eg PT options, besides school buses, are limited or non existant and road infrastructure is basic? you realise it's cost prohibitive to provide extensive PT and decent road links to every settlement haphazardly developed within the long distance commuting radius of every Irish urban area?

That's why we need to focus all commercial and residential development as possible, so the few resources the DoT does have can be spent in as efficient a manner as possible.

That attitude is the cause of the problems in Galway - we want people to work in Galway City, but not provide the infrastructure to get there.

invinciblePRSTV wrote: »

Perhaps you're not following the train of thought in my post but it really is rather simple: build infrastructure like the GCOB & M17/18 and spiv local politicians,and their special interests buddies, of which the wesht is famous for will see these developments as the perfect chance to engage in exactly the kind of unsustainable developments other cities have seen when they've had their BP's built.

Followed and dismissed as private car bashing.

And for the love of god, loike, stop talking loike a d4 head loike.

invinciblePRSTV wrote: »

PT just isn't a priority for Irish government or local authorities.

You couldn't prove that by my, what with the attempt to "upgrade" Galway's roundabouts in support of a "PT friednly" traffic control system. Something that the mayor has apparently been told is unnecessary and the only reason for proceeding with it is the loss of 6m in funding.

The Mayor of Galway has slammed City Council management and accused them of being shortsighted in their efforts to alleviate traffic problems in Galway.

And she insisted councillors only voted in favour of plans to replace city roundabouts with signalised junctions because of warnings by officials that €6m in funding would be withdrawn by Government.

“There appears to be a problematic system within the City Council that continues to come up with agendas that are proven to be inadequate when it is too late e.g. Moneenageisha junction, the Eyre Square upgrade fiasco and the cryptosporidium crisis to name but a few,” Mayor Hildegarde Naughton told the Connacht Sentinel.

She added that she had been professionally advised that there is no need to remove the roundabouts.

Mayor Naughton – who was one of the five councillors who voted against the plans last week – said: “Councillors voted in favour of removing the roundabouts because they were told if they didn’t, we would lose the €6m in funding. There should have been alternatives looked at.

“We should use common sense – we should put the Urban Traffic Control system in place first, analyse traffic flow and know exactly how to proceed. I’m not convinced that removing roundabouts is the answer.

“We gave our power over to officials by voting the project through. If we voted against it, there would have been a need for an alternative, and I believe that we would have come up with an alternative.

“I have made a stand on behalf of the citizens of Galway, and based on the professional expertise I have received from outside the City Council.

Iwannahurl

Zubeneschamali wrote: »

That only counts against the usefulness of the bypass if you believe that people travelling by car is in itself bad.

Athlone had a chronic congestion problem, with the N6 travelling the length of the town, through that bottleneck and over the only Shannon bridge for many miles up or downriver. The bypass sorted out that congestion. It didn't turn Athlone into a cycling mecca, but then, it wasn't intended to.

I would contend that it's possible to be in favour of -- or at least not to be against -- any particular bypass, yet to oppose certain effects of such infrastructure.

Bypasses provide opportunities, and making certain choices above others may have opportunity costs.

"If you believe that people travelling by car is in itself bad": this raises the question of values as well as costs.

In the case of Athlone, the bypass didn't turn this small town into a "cycling Mecca" (3% modal share of commuters) despite the small distances involved and the nature of the terrain, eg not being hilly like Cork. Neither did this small town turn into a walking Mecca (15%) or a bus Mecca (3%).

It didn't turn into a Mecca for children walking to primary school, since 47% of them travelled by car in 2006.

It didn't turn into a Mecca for walking or cycling to secondary school either, since 37% travelled by car as a passenger, while a total of 12 students drove to school in their own cars (four less than went by bike).

However, the fact that three times as many girls drove their own cars to secondary school than went by bike might suggest that Athlone is a Mecca for female school-going motorists aged 13-18. As long as you don't look too hard at the actual numbers: three drivers and one cyclist.

The Athlone bypass, of course, was constructed in the early 1990s I believe, long before Transport 21, the National Spatial Strategy, Kyoto, National Climate Change Strategy, Smarter Travel and PR rhetoric about giving the heart of a city back to its people.

It therefore wasn't "intended" to give the heart of Athlone back to its "people" presumably, just to take passing cars and HGVs off the narrow streets that couldn't handle such through traffic.

But do new and planned bypasses have different categories of effect I wonder: intended effects that are declared, intended effects that are undeclared, and actual intended or unintended effects that may only become apparent over time?

A city like Copenhagen may be planning to construct a major new bypass, but you can be sure that it is intended to complement other transport and planning decisions. If they say its purpose is to remove a substantial amount of road traffic from the centre of Copenhagen then that's what it will do. And they won't fill the gaps with new traffic either. It will be buses and bikes for the most part. That's their values.

What are the Irish values underlying the planning and construction of bypasses in places like Cork and Galway? And what are the intended effects?

Iwannahurl

antoobrien wrote: »

You couldn't prove that by my, what with the attempt to "upgrade" Galway's roundabouts in support of a "PT friednly" traffic control system. Something that the mayor has apparently been told is unnecessary and the only reason for proceeding with it is the loss of 6m in funding.

No doubt she'll be revealing all the details of that professional advice soon.

I wonder (a) whether she paid for it out of her own pocket and (b) if it's on paper?

veryangryman

Iwannahurl wrote: »

What are the Irish values underlying the planning and construction of bypasses in places like Cork and Galway? And what are the intended effects?

Values? Really? These values are just the planners being practical - stop painting them as some airy fairy types that are holier than thou. Theyre normal regular joes like you and me.

Asides from the fact that your post meanders and repeats words over and over again, (IOU 1 Thesaurus signed God), its actually a head wreck at this stage reading it. Why do I? I like this forum. Most posters speak sense and help to educate one on infrastructural matters.

Zubeneschamali

Iwannahurl wrote: »

In the case of Athlone, the bypass didn't turn this small town into a "cycling Mecca" (3% modal share of commuters) despite the small distances involved and the nature of the terrain, eg not being hilly like Cork. Neither did this small town turn into a walking Mecca (15%) or a bus Mecca (3%).

Correct. In order to turn Athlone into a cycling, walking and bussing Mecca, you would have to introduce really oppressive, punitive anti-car measures, and massively upgrade pedestrian, cycling and public transport infrastructure.

This would be extremely expensive, and make you about as popular as Brian Cowen in the process, because Irish people like their cars.