N6 - Galway outer bypass: Is it needed?

Victor

To_be_confirmed wrote: »

There wasn't the same level of hand-wringing going on when the Waterford bypass was discussed.

Waterford only has the two bridges - one in the city centre and one on the bypass. Galway effectively has four.

Waterford was never bypassed, whereas Galway was.

Much as Kilkenny County Council would like to change it, the vast majority of Waterford is on one side of the river.

But most importantly, there is something beyond Waterford - Tramore, Dungarvan and the rest of county Waterford and Cork and Kerry are connected to Wexford, Rosslare and parts of Kilkenny and Wicklow. Whereas in Galway, you have ribbon housing and Clifden.

That said, Waterford has made it's mistakes, e.g. the airport is in the wrong place to serve the wider south east region.

lucernarian

I don't think the existing N6 can be called a bypass when it passes so close to the city centre and surrounded by the admittedly bad planning decisions which are plain for all to see.

The rest of the bridges seem quite unsuited for long-distance traffic but then I'd dearly love to know what proportion of traffic and particularly vans and HGVs have much business in the area currently bound by the Seamus Quirke Road, the QB and the Ballybane Road.

But those are fair points concerning Waterford. I'll add it's not the only scheme where a large town has had an extra bridge crossing added nearby, that the "ring road" was choked with congestion or that there was environmental controversy surrounding the development. Did even Tara and the tolled M3 get this level of attention on boards? I know that's in a different context but I'm trying to highlight that the GCOB is not the first nor the last scheme to have proved controversial here. Between this and the Western Rail Corridor, I suspect there might be something in the water in Galway:pac:

Iwannahurl

To_be_confirmed wrote: »

I did ask you this earlier in a post today. Could you clarify for the sake of posterity, are you currently in favour or against the construction of the N6 GCOB as planned?

I have set out my position in the main GCOB thread and in other threads/forums, so I don't propose to rehash it here if at all possible.

I don't have time just now to find my early posts in the long-running Roads thread on the subject, but the following post is a good intro; you can start here and works backwards if you feel like it: http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=75477883&postcount=485

Much more recently, TINA1984 very articulately expresses a view on the GCOB that I would support.

http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=84192601&postcount=71

Iwannahurl

To_be_confirmed wrote: »

I don't think the existing N6 can be called a bypass when it passes so close to the city centre and surrounded by the admittedly bad planning decisions which are plain for all to see.

[...]

But those are fair points concerning Waterford.

[...]

According to the NRA the existing set-up (Quincentenary Bridge etc) was built as a ring-road but that its 'bypass' function was seriously eroded by car-dependent and traffic-generating development. That situation developed very rapidly, IIRC. I have referred to the NRA report in the main thread -- all there on the record somewhere.

There are GCOB advocates who see the function of a new bypass mainly as a means of alleviating the traffic generated by the last round of development following a major roads project. Their long-term view is that if/when the congestion-relieving effects of the GCOB are eroded or reversed then the solution is to construct new roads. And so on.

By the way, when was the Waterford bypass opened?

Iwannahurl

galwaycyclist wrote: »

But you see there are key people who are effectively claiming this. Joe Tansey, the head of the city transport unit, was trenchantly opposed to putting in bus lanes on the Seamus Quirke Road unless the bypass was built first. It was forced on him by the elected council. We now have a direct bus service from Knocknacarra to Ballybrit industrial estate running every 20 minutes.

I was speaking to someone in City Direct recently, who said that between CD and BE there is now a bus from Knocknacarra to/through the city centre every 15 minutes (at peak times presumably).

With regard to the SQR, I believe the City Council also wanted several roundabouts in the space of less than 2 km.

From the latest urban road design guidelines:

Large roundabouts are generally not appropriate in urban areas. They require a greater land take and are difficult for pedestrians and cyclists to navigate, particularly where controlled crossings/cycle facilities are not provided, and as such, vehicles have continuous right of way.

http://www.irishtimes.com/news/environment/roads-turnaround-blueprint-for-urban-areas-puts-cars-at-bottom-of-hierarchy-1.1361132#.UW0Tjg73JeU.email

lucernarian

Iwannahurl wrote: »

I have set out my position in the main GCOB thread and in other threads/forums, so I don't propose to rehash it here if at all possible.

I don't have time just now to find my early posts in the long-running Roads thread on the subject, but this post is a good intro.

You can start here and works backwards if you feel like it: http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=75477883&postcount=485

Much more recently, TINA1984 very articulately expresses a view on the GCOB that I would support.

http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=84192601&postcount=71

I emphasised the word "currently" for a reason. I wouldn't look at posts from 2011 to see what your current position is.

The latter post from TINA1984 suggests that you are opposed to this bypass pending an emphasis switch, if you will, to other more sustainable infrastructure development and planning within Galway and for the results of those measures to be borne out first.

Yet the contention here is that the GCOB is necessary regardless of every single other alternative measure. The sheer extent of Galway's traffic problems make me question whether a sufficiently large reduction in traffic volumes could be obtained, or if congestion can be eased to the same extent using alternative measures.

By the way, the Waterford Bypass opened in 2009.

antoobrien

TINA1984 wrote: »

Your point on population increases as a rebuttal to my point actually enhances it.

Not really, if you dig into the figures you'll find that the urban areas are growing far faster than the rural one offs, which some people would have us believe are the problem.

TINA1984 wrote: »

Let's do the math here: Taking Galway Citys population as 75k and Co. Galways as 175k. A 50% increase to 75k is ~37k population increase in the city. The County experienced a 35% increase means the county experienced an increase of ~60k people in the time period you mentioned.

Ignoring that fact that that growth was mostly not in one offs, which is your original point.

TINA1984 wrote: »

In the absence of any kind of meaningful LUTS strategy by local administration, and their fondness for granting PP for one-off housing and estates on the periphary of villages & towns, I'm going to presume that most of that 60k extra people in the county has been spread across the Co. Galway area surrounding the city in a haphazard disjointed manner in the small villages, towns and countryside of rural Co. Galway.

I suggest you get hold of the Galway co development plans then. As for the "estates on the periphary of villages & towns", did it cross your mind that these are the only locations where there is space to do so effectively?

TINA1984 wrote: »

Again you're ably demonstrating my point on the the non-existant planning policies in place which lead to poor population densities and a dependance on the car as the only means for travel. you've listed over half a dozen different places within the Galway 'metro' area which have experienced some population growth, but that not that much which can sustain nothing more then a rather limited, basic public transport infrastructure. As such car dependency is a given.

4!=6. The metro area is Bearna-Moycullen-Claregawaly-Oranmore. The other twons and villages are outside (by several miles) the metro area, so stop with the rubbish please.

TINA1984 wrote: »

It'll be as much outlying areas in the West as it will the towns and villages near Galway city which will be the net benficiaries of any GCOB & M17/18. It'll be possible to live even further away from Galway city and 'commute' - AKA driving a car - in then it is now. Farmers and other landowners in the deepest west must be salivating at the prospect of their construction!

I suggest you go read the M17/18 thread, becuase you'll find that among other things the farmers have already been apid and there is open debate as to how useful the road is to commuters. This is especially true considering that less than 1,000 commuters come from clare & limerick to Galway, yet the N18 south of Gort (i.e. traffic from clare/Limerick) is 10k. That's long distance traffic, not commuting traffic.

TINA1984 wrote: »

The WRC, as far as I can see, isn't used much because most Co. Galway commuters live nowhere near a WRC station, indeed it appears most Co. Galway commuters don't live near any reasonable public transport infrastructure full stop! Let's face it, the WRC timetable is as good as its going to get as it is what it is, a slow inter-city line with limited commuter demand at either end of the line and sparsely populated bits in between Athenry & Ennis.

No, it's because it very badly timetabled. There ar eplenty of letters to the editior in the lcoal papers deriding the fact that people can not use it to get to work early enough!

TINA1984 wrote: »

Remember that bizarre fantasy land I mentioned earlier? the one where I dreamt that a proper LUTS strategy was implemented? In that fantasy scenario the case for both phase's 1 & 2 of the WRC, as well both bits of the M17 & 18 would've been overwhelming if Galway local administration had got its arse in order and concentrated development in the city itself and in one or two nodes in the metro area.

That is a fantasy land, considering there are - East of the river - the towns/Villages of Claregalway, Oranmore, Clainbridge, Craughwell, Loughrea, Tuam, Athenry, Headford, Ballinasloe, Gort, Portumna & Mounbellew covering an area about the size of Co Meath. They all have needs and they are seeing businesses being lost and not replaced because of attitudes like yours, whcih is causing more traffic problems for Galway as more people come to Galkway looking for jobs.

West of the river we have Bearna, Spiddle, Indreabhan, Clifden, Oughterard and Moycullen, as well as the tourist spots like Roundstone & Maam.

That fantasy world you are planning can't cope with the sheer physical size of Galway, and Galway Co Co are smart enough to realise it for the fantasy that it is.

TINA1984 wrote: »

Your citation of N17/18 AADTs again shows the chronic level of one-off housing and dispersed population settlement inherent in the Co. Galway countryside.

Utter fail, south of Gort on the M18 is Crusheen Co Clare. I suggest you stop tring to find solutions base on maps and bad research

If you have some proof that it is one offs that are causing this especially when the numbers in the aggregate town areas are increasing - please show it.

antoobrien

Iwannahurl wrote: »

Yesterday, at short notice, I had to do the school run, and without thinking I made the stupid mistake of taking the car. Naturally I ended up stuck in traffic, and the trip took me twice as long as normal.

Given the very strong winds that were in Galway Tuesday morning (severely buffeting my 4 door), are you sure that it was as an unthinking ans stupid mistake to take the car? I saw several cyclists struggling to keep the bike straight on the roads & cyclepaths, so it would seem that putting your child in the back seat was in fact the smart safe move.


Wait, you constantly complain about people who "chose to be car dependent" and yet you have chosen to live in an area with inadequate public transport coverage for you to bring the young 'uns to school if the alternative (presumably a lift from a neighbour in a car) - making you dependent on a car on short notice.

Smells of hypocrisy.

Iwannahurl wrote: »

I had to do the school run again today, but this time I knew in advance. It was lashing rain, but having had the painful reminder the previous day, I took the bike. On the way there I was overtaken by a motorist driving at, by my conservative estimate, more than twice the posted speed limit

While I was out at the end of the morning rush there was no road east of the river where it was possible to reach 100km/h due to the levels of traffic (including the BNT). What alternative reality were you cycling in?

Your "conservative" estimates of speeds are skewed by the observation bias caused by the fact that you are travelling a much slower speed. While it looks extremely fast, the difference is almost never as severe as received.

Did you ever get the bike mounted radar gun?

Con Logue

TINA1984 wrote: »

Imagine a bizarre parallel Ireland, a land where thanks to strict planning laws, small towns & villages like Craughwell, Tuam, Athenry & Gort were designated as hubs for housing and economic growth within the Galway metro area, and were blossoming as a result.

Instead of the WRC being an irrelevance like it is now, and the M17/18 forever destined to have low AADTs primatily composed of people coming fron the country into Galway, the good burghers of these towns would be crying out for decent road and rail connections into a Galway city that hasn't been blitzed by lazy development west of the river.

In that instance, the WRC phases 1&2 as well as sections of the N17/18 would be truly deserving of an upgrade, CBA's for these projects would definitely be positive. But as I said thats in a bizarro-fantasy world.

No, instead we got a weird hybrid of Pierre Poujade and Antonio Salazar in rural Ireland, where selling the family farm for development explains the animosity towards any kind of spatial planning.

In other words, if the unholy alliance of rural kids who went to UCD and who were thrilled to be at the feet of Moore McDowell, their parents who owned "the land" and local politicians who faciliated narrow lane dual carriageways and breeze block industrial estates masquerading as shopping centres want a monument, let the chaos of Galway City be it. This is why the Western Rail Corridor has been targetted, it could be used as the backbone of a revolution in spatial planning. It doesn't fit into the existing model that leaves us with massively dispersed development.

galwaycyclist

antoobrien wrote: »

While I was out at the end of the morning rush there was no road east of the river where it was possible to reach 100km/h due to the levels of traffic (including the BNT). What alternative reality were you cycling in?

Your "conservative" estimates of speeds are skewed by the observation bias caused by the fact that you are travelling a much slower speed. While it looks extremely fast, the difference is almost never as severe as received.

Your post confirms one of the key arguments against the bypass. In the absence of an effective national police service it is the traffic congestion that is keeping a lid on traffic speeds in the city.

Take away that congestion and you make the roads more dangerous. If you want to see support for the bypass then show us a city-wide enforced speed management plan first (something that the city officials worked strenuously to keep out of the Walking and Cycling Strategy)

The danger posed by speeding cars is proportional to the square of the speed. The impact energy involved in an impact at 60km/h is substantially higher than that at 50km/h. For a pedestrian the "survivability" drops from around 50% to 10%.

Aidan1

Not really, if you dig into the figures you'll find that the urban areas are growing far faster than the rural one offs, which some people would have us believe are the problem.

Just because it's becoming less of a problem doesn't mean that it's not still a problem! Lets talk figures - "of the 20,560 persons commuting into the city 17,932 (87%) lived in Galway county ... Oranmore was the main feeder town for the city (1,211), followed by Athenry (597), Bearna (455) and Maigh Cuilinn (361)" (from the CSO - link below). Or, in other words, if you take the top three satellite towns feeding Galway, about 8% of the commuting population come from there. The rest comes from everywhere else, and from the map below, you will see that 'everywhere else' means quite literally that. Some will come from towns (centres of more than 1,500 people), some will come from rural one offs, and some will come from estates tacked on to small vilages and towns. The 2010 Review of the NSS categorised the problem as follows;

"Almost half (48%) of total urban population growth between 2002 and 2006 took place in urban areas with a population of less than 10,000 in 2006, although these towns accounted for only 28% of the national total. Essentially, despite the main cities and towns being the key centres for national employment growth, smaller towns and villages within a 50 to 80 km commuting range of major cities and towns have often been the destination of choice for many new home owners over more centrally located areas and for a variety of reasons including cheaper land and house prices, driven in turn by a very flexible local zoning process ...Much of the population growth that occurred in more rural areas within the commuting catchments of the Gateways and Hubs appears to have been urban generated and due to higher than average inward migration, with a lot of the associated employment focussed on the construction, manufacturing and services sectors. "

This is why spatial planning is so critical - if you allow people to build all over the place, you can never hope to provide them with public transport (or have critical mass for all other services). Nor does it mean that rural one offs are still not an issue, or are not being built, just that we built a stack of houses in small rural villages and towns that outweighed that build rate elsewhere.

Utter fail, south of Gort on the M18 is Crusheen Co Clare. I suggest you stop tring to find solutions base on maps and bad research

Not fail, win. In fact, it's a good example of the nature of the problem. According to the CSO figures, 1,098 workers commuted into Galway from Mayo on a daily basis, and 457 workers from Clare (p.23 at the link below). If you have a look at the maps at the link, you can see the spatial dispersion of the people commuting into Galway, including from Mayo and Clare - clearly these people are coming from a very wide area, outside the main towns - what is generally referred to as urban generated rural housing. Or at least urban supported rural housing.

http://www.cso.ie/en/media/csoie/census/documents/census2011profile10/Profile,10,Full,Document.pdf

lucernarian

galwaycyclist wrote: »

Your post confirms one of the key arguments against the bypass. In the absence of an effective national police service it is the traffic congestion that is keeping a lid on traffic speeds in the city.

Take away that congestion and you make the roads more dangerous. If you want to see support for the bypass then show us a city-wide enforced speed management plan first (something that the city officials worked strenuously to keep out of the Walking and Cycling Strategy)

The danger posed by speeding cars is proportional to the square of the speed. The impact energy involved in an impact at 60km/h is substantially higher than that at 50km/h. For a pedestrian the "survivability" drops from around 50% to 10%.

This is a counterintuitive suggestion, to say the least. That congestion and higher traffic volumes could make roads safer and easier to navigate by other road users? My experiences in Dublin has been markedly different. Unless there is some aspect of separation and enforcement applied, I can't see how congestion can help cyclists. I'm sick of cycling around Dublin in peak traffic while I have to take a line away from footpaths to avoid people and then have Mr. Motorist yell and beep at me for trying to cycle safely and also obey the rules of the road. I would never cycle down the quays in Dublin if the port tunnel hadn't been built. I find that the mere presence of trucks are an inevitable and severe risk to the safety of cyclists and the experience of Dublin in the last decade or two would bear this out.

Do trucks and other large vehicles form a big part of the traffic currently using the QB and Seamus Quirke road?

antoobrien

Aidan1 wrote: »

Not fail, win. In fact, it's a good example of the nature of the problem. According to the CSO figures, 1,098 workers commuted into Galway from Mayo on a daily basis, and 457 workers from Clare (p.23 at the link below).

Am no utter fail, the contetnion is that there will be low AADTs on the M18. Those figures show conclusively that there is not heaving commuting traffic coming from clare & and limerick - 457 commuters from approx 10k using the M18 south of gort with approx another 6-8k at clarinbdrige is proof that the N18 is not a commuter road.

Aidan1

Am no utter fail

*Bangs head on table*

Here's a thought experiment for you. We have a situation whereby people now choose to commute, on a bad and busy road, headlong into serious traffic. What will happen if and when the road is dramatically improved, and the GCOB is built, and in the absence of any measures to better plan housing development? Again, the M18 from Clare is just one example - the M17/M18 will reduce commuting times from a broad swath of rural Galway. Are you seriously suggesting that there will be no effect on the spatial pattern of development because of this?

Also, you wanted figures on housing sprawl in the commuting zone for Galway. You now have them, showing both the nature and extent of the problem. Any comment?

galwaycyclist

To_be_confirmed wrote: »

This is a counterintuitive suggestion, to say the least. That congestion and higher traffic volumes could make roads safer and easier to navigate by other road users? My experiences in Dublin has been markedly different. Unless there is some aspect of separation and enforcement applied, I can't see how congestion can help cyclists. I'm sick of cycling around Dublin in peak traffic while I have to take a line away from footpaths to avoid people and then have Mr. Motorist yell and beep at me for trying to cycle safely and also obey the rules of the road. I would never cycle down the quays in Dublin if the port tunnel hadn't been built. I find that the mere presence of trucks are an inevitable and severe risk to the safety of cyclists and the experience of Dublin in the last decade or two would bear this out.

Do trucks and other large vehicles form a big part of the traffic currently using the QB and Seamus Quirke road?

Not counterintuitive at all. There is a reason why rural collisions are more likely to be fatal - it is because the impact energies are higher. That road deaths fall with congestion is a widely reported effect. I didnt say it was necessarily easier - but congested lower speed traffic is much less threatening than cars skimming by you at 60-70km/h.

In some cases it may be easier. I would argue that, for cyclists and pedestrians, a roundabout that is locked up with traffic is less of a challenge than one where cars and trucks are taking a "racing line" through the junction at 60km/h or more.

The Port Tunnel in Dublin had that effect because a decision was made to exclude HGVs from the city. The Shannon Tunnel in Limerick has not had anything like that effect because it is tolled and because there was no strategy for keeping inappropriate traffic out of the city.

In Galway, the city officials fought to keep a HGV management strategy out of the Walking and Cycling Strategy. At a recent meeting a city engineer indicated that sludge lorries from Mutton Island were being directed out Threadneedle Road (Where there are two secondary schools and two nearby primary schools) during school travel times. When challenged on this his reply was that it was no different to sending Roadstone lorries out the same route.

Do not judge the rest of the country by what happens in Dublin

antoobrien

Aidan1 wrote: »

*Bangs head on table*

Keep banging it, the myths might dissipate.

Aidan1 wrote: »

Here's a thought experiment for you. We have a situation whereby people now choose to commute, on a bad and busy road, headlong into serious traffic. What will happen if and when the road is dramatically improved, and the GCOB is built, and in the absence of any measures to better plan housing development? Again, the M18 from Clare is just one example - the M17/M18 will reduce commuting times from a broad swath of rural Galway. Are you seriously suggesting that there will be no effect on the spatial pattern of development because of this?

Also, you wanted figures on housing sprawl in the commuting zone for Galway. You now have them, showing both the nature and extent of the problem. Any comment?

Aidan1 wrote: »

Just because it's becoming less of a problem doesn't mean that it's not still a problem! Lets talk figures - "of the 20,560 persons commuting into the city 17,932 (87%) lived in Galway county ... Oranmore was the main feeder town for the
city (1,211), followed by Athenry (597), Bearna (455) and Maigh Cuilinn (361). (from the CSO - link below". Or, in other words, if you take the top three satellite towns feeding Galway, about 8% of the commuting population come from there. The rest comes from everywhere else

Lets get realistic about the situation in Co Galway, it has always had a widely dispersed settlement pattern. Any kind of cursory glance of the historical records will show "sprawl" is nowhere near a recent phenomenon in Co Galway.

In 1956 there were 27 towns/villages in Co Galway that had populations of 200 or more - population 44791 including the (then) town of Galway. That leaves a "dispersed" or rural population of 110,762. That figure now stands at 135,578.

It should be noted that county Galway's population is now back where it was
in 1861.

The one off argument is hiding the fact that the center of employment has changed drastically over the past 30 years. How many factories have closed in places like Tuam, Loughrea, Ballinasloe? How many have been replaced in those towns? How many farmers are now supplementing their income by working?

Start getting to the bottom of these questions, then we start to see the real situation in Co Galway.

antoobrien

galwaycyclist wrote: »

Your post confirms one of the key arguments against the bypass. In the absence of an effective national police service it is the traffic congestion that is keeping a lid on traffic speeds in the city.

You got that from "you can't accurately guestimate the speed speed of a fast moving object from a slower one", well done.:rolleyes:

galwaycyclist wrote: »

Take away that congestion and you make the roads more dangerous. If you want to see support for the bypass then show us a city-wide enforced speed management plan first

There's no first/second about it, both are needed.

Aidan1

Any kind of cursory glance of the historical records will show that the "dispersed" natured of "development" is a myth.

Half right. Economic activity (manufacturing, services, higher order retail) has become urban focused (and thus less dispersed), but housing development has not, or at least not even nearly to the same extent. Instead, it has been allowed spread out over the entire county (not unique to Galway of course, it's a national issue). Again, this is a well understood and much studied phenomenon, and one that has some critical implications for infrastructure provision.

This has a load of downsides, even aside from the service and infrastructure provision question. The housing bubble was at it's most bubbly in those areas as the focus on construction activity completely distorted the local economy, and the effect of the collapse has been at it's worst in the outer periphery of the peri-urban region. Again, proper spatial planning would have prevented the worst of this.

antoobrien

galwaycyclist wrote: »

The Port Tunnel in Dublin had that effect because a decision was made to exclude HGVs from the city. The Shannon Tunnel in Limerick has not had anything like that effect because it is tolled and because there was no strategy for keeping inappropriate traffic out of the city.

In Galway, the city officials fought to keep a HGV management strategy out of the Walking and Cycling Strategy. At a recent meeting a city engineer indicated that sludge lorries from Mutton Island were being directed out Threadneedle Road (Where there are two secondary schools and two nearby primary schools) during school travel times. When challenged on this his reply was that it was no different to sending Roadstone lorries out the same route.

All of those are good arguments to having a minimum of bypass with a HGV free toll (e.g. DPT). The Limerick & Waterford bypasses show the folly of tolling full bypasses.

Just as a matter of curiosity, what's your alternative route for the HGVs that should avoid schools, since pretty much every major road in Galway has a school nearby?

galwaycyclist

antoobrien wrote: »

You got that from "you can't accurately guestimate the speed speed of a fast moving object from a slower one", well done.:rolleyes:

No I got it from this

antoobrien wrote: »

While I was out at the end of the morning rush there was no road east of the river where it was possible to reach 100km/h due to the levels of traffic (including the BNT). What alternative reality were you cycling in?
[/URL]?

Careful now Anto your straw men are starting to show.

antoobrien

Aidan1 wrote: »

Half right. Economic activity (manufacturing, services, higher order retail) has become urban focused (and thus less dispersed), but housing development has not, or at least not even nearly to the same extent. Instead, it has been allowed spread out over continued across the entire county as it always has.

FYP

Aidan1 wrote: »

This has a load of downsides, even aside from the service and infrastructure provision question. The housing bubble was at it's most bubbly in those areas as the focus on construction activity completely distorted the local economy, and the effect of the collapse has been at it's worst in the outer periphery of the peri-urban region. Again, proper spatial planning would have prevented the worst of this.

There's an industrial estate designated in Athenry that was built near the motorway - perfect site, easy access etc. No takers and no word of anyone that wants to go it it. Spatial planning can only go so far, you have to also try to direct demand and of course somehow make it all affordable.

One of the reasons I'm in favour of the two roads being argued for os the possibility of making the west more competitive and making that site in Athenry and others something that potential employers/investors will see as will be practical.

galwaycyclist

antoobrien wrote: »

All of those are good arguments to having a minimum of bypass with a HGV free toll (e.g. DPT). The Limerick & Waterford bypasses show the folly of tolling full bypasses.

Just as a matter of curiosity, what's your alternative route for the HGVs that should avoid schools, since pretty much every major road in Galway has a school nearby?

I would have thought it was obvious. If a road is clearly a school route then during school travel times 8:30-9:30 and 15:00 to 17:00 you don't get to use it in a HGV.

Children walking or cycling to school are fulfilling a legal obligation placed on them by the state. They have absolutely no choice about when they travel.

Adults who need HGVs for some reason have loads of choices about when they travel and there is no net societal benefit that I can see from giving them unrestricted access to public roads.

antoobrien

galwaycyclist wrote: »

No I got it from this



Careful now Anto your straw men are starting to show.

IWH posted that the car in question had to be going at least twice the speed limit. Given the fact that the general speed limit is 50km/h (are there any 30km limits in the city?) that means a minimum of 100km/h, a speed I never hit even when driving on the N6 outside the racecourse (which is usually possible) yesterday at the tail end of rush hour.

The straw man is somehow getting your post from pointing out the factual flaws in IWH's "observation".

antoobrien

galwaycyclist wrote: »

I would have thought it was obvious. If a road is clearly a school route then during school travel times 8:30-9:30 and 15:00 to 17:00 you don't get to use it in a HGV.

So you're talking no access anywhere across the city to the any goods or passenger vehicle of 3,500kg laden weight between those times. Very good, carry on.

lucernarian

galwaycyclist wrote: »

Not counterintuitive at all. There is a reason why rural collisions are more likely to be fatal - it is because the impact energies are higher. That road deaths fall with congestion is a widely reported effect. I didnt say it was necessarily easier - but congested lower speed traffic is much less threatening than cars skimming by you at 60-70km/h.

In some cases it may be easier. I would argue that, for cyclists and pedestrians, a roundabout that is locked up with traffic is less of a challenge than one where cars and trucks are taking a "racing line" through the junction at 60km/h or more.

The Port Tunnel in Dublin had that effect because a decision was made to exclude HGVs from the city. The Shannon Tunnel in Limerick has not had anything like that effect because it is tolled and because there was no strategy for keeping inappropriate traffic out of the city.

In Galway, the city officials fought to keep a HGV management strategy out of the Walking and Cycling Strategy. At a recent meeting a city engineer indicated that sludge lorries from Mutton Island were being directed out Threadneedle Road (Where there are two secondary schools and two nearby primary schools) during school travel times. When challenged on this his reply was that it was no different to sending Roadstone lorries out the same route.

Do not judge the rest of the country by what happens in Dublin

It was merely my opinion that I found it counterintuitive. You saying otherwise doesn't change this. Let's not fool ourselves, the perception among the population is that congestion and high traffic volumes makes pedestrian and bicycle movement less safe. Vehicle speed and congestion are not the exact same issue even though they overlap and this is particularly true in the case of Galway and the current QB arrangement. A congested Seamus Quirke might be safer than one where traffic may speed whenever it's empty but is it safer than a Seamus Quirke road which has less traffic AND is subjected to stringent speed controls and prioritisation of cycling and pedestrian-friendly measures? I don't think so.

galwaycyclist

To_be_confirmed wrote: »

It was merely my opinion that I found it counterintuitive. You saying otherwise doesn't change this. Let's not fool ourselves, the perception among the population is that congestion and high traffic volumes makes pedestrian and bicycle movement less safe. Vehicle speed and congestion are not the exact same issue even though they overlap and this is particularly true in the case of Galway and the current QB arrangement. A congested Seamus Quirke might be safer than one where traffic may speed whenever it's empty but is it safer than a Seamus Quirke road which has less traffic AND is subjected to stringent speed controls and prioritisation of cycling and pedestrian-friendly measures? I don't think so.

With regret you have missed the point. Where are you getting this from?

"AND is subjected to stringent speed controls and prioritisation of cycling and pedestrian-friendly measures?"

As I made clear am talking about having less traffic in a situation where there is a general absence of speed controls and there is official opposition to having a speed management strategy - the result will inevitably be higher free speeds of traffic. Therefore the result is more danger.

As for prioritisation of cycling. I am appending pictures of new cycle lanes at traffic lights along the Seamus Quirke road. The lights work off detector loops in the road surface. These detect waiting traffic and change the lights. If you look closely you will see that the sensor loops have not been continued into the cycle lanes. Nor are there separate sensor loops for the cycle lanes*. It appears that it is the intent of the designers that the lights should not change for cyclists unless a car comes along to trigger the lights.

This is a design that, to work for cyclists, apparently relies on having consistently high levels of car traffic.

* Yes they can be tuned to detect most bikes -in fact they can be tuned to detect a safety boot.

galwaycyclist

antoobrien wrote: »

So you're talking no access anywhere across the city to the any goods or passenger vehicle of 3,500kg laden weight between those times. Very good, carry on.

Where did I say anywhere? Mind those strawmen Anto. There is already established precedent for closing certain roads in the city at certain times of the day. Shop street, Mainguard St, Abbeygate St, High St and Quay St are all closed to HGVs at certain times of the day. The sky hasnt fallen and the world hasnt stopped spinning.

Excluding HGVs from identified school routes for much shorter periods is merely a variation on the same thing.

antoobrien

galwaycyclist wrote: »

Where did I say anywhere? Mind those strawmen Anto

I can't think of too many ways of navigating town without crossing a school. It's a bit like Bloom's trek across Dublin or trying to get the solution to the wandering salesman.

Can you show me one?

TINA1984

antoobrien wrote: »

Not really, if you dig into the figures you'll find that the urban areas are growing far faster than the rural one offs, which some people would have us believe are the problem.

Not sure what you're getting at here. You originally countered my point that there has been more growth in the hinterlands of urban area's then the urban area's themselves with polished stats to suggest otherwise in Galways case. Of course when you put your % through the ringer, the opposite was the case.

antoobrien wrote: »

Ignoring that fact that that growth was mostly not in one offs, which is your original point.

Almost 2/3 of all residential planning permission granted by Galway Co.Co over the past decade or so has been for one off housing, the only other local authority in the state with a higher % is Mayo CC!

antoobrien wrote: »

I suggest you get hold of the Galway co development plans then. As for the "estates on the periphary of villages & towns", did it cross your mind that these are the only locations where there is space to do so effectively?

On development plans, 2 point spring to minds:

Firstly, development plans are aspirational documents generally ignored by Councillors at will.

Any local newspaper circa 2000 -2007 "Councillors have voted for a material contravention of the development plan...."

Secondly, Outside the GDA, only the Cork local authorities have made a concerted effort to implement an appropriate LUTS and stick to it.

antoobrien wrote: »

4!=6. The metro area is Bearna-Moycullen-Claregawaly-Oranmore. The other twons and villages are outside (by several miles) the metro area, so stop with the rubbish please.

I used the term 'metro' Galway loosely, hence the comma marks, as there doesn't appear to be a defined metro Galway area beyonds cursory mentions in your beloved development plan.

When the Galway councils get their arse in order and come up with an appropriate LUTS for the metro Galway area - which they actually intend to implement as opposed to paying lip service to- then perhaps we can start taking seriously the idea of a metro Galway and can fund appropriate road and public transport infrastructure.

As already mentioned Western politicians are adept at championing & securing infrastructure funding from the state, but not so great at putting in appropriate planning measures for best use of said infrastructure.

antoobrien wrote: »

I suggest you go read the M17/18 thread, becuase you'll find that among other things the farmers have already been apid and there is open debate as to how useful the road is to commuters. This is especially true considering that less than 1,000 commuters come from clare & limerick to Galway, yet the N18 south of Gort (i.e. traffic from clare/Limerick) is 10k. That's long distance traffic, not commuting traffic.

As pointed out, farmers and landowners can look forward to a bonanza as it'll be possible to build a one-off somewhere in deepest NW Co. Galway/Mayo and still commute in a reasonable time into Galway city & surrounds once the GCOB and M17/18 are built.

antoobrien wrote: »

No, it's because it very badly timetabled. There ar eplenty of letters to the editior in the lcoal papers deriding the fact that people can not use it to get to work early enough!

You could put a half hourly service for 20 hours a day on the WRC and it'll still have astonishingly poor loadings for the same reason it does now. Namely, not many people live in the bustling metropolis' of Gort, Craughwell etc.

antoobrien wrote: »

That is a fantasy land, considering there are - East of the river - the towns/Villages of Claregalway, Oranmore, Clainbridge, Craughwell, Loughrea, Tuam, Athenry, Headford, Ballinasloe, Gort, Portumna & Mounbellew covering an area about the size of Co Meath. They all have needs and they are seeing businesses being lost and not replaced because of attitudes like yours, whcih is causing more traffic problems for Galway as more people come to Galkway looking for jobs.

Y'know county Meath has far, far more people living in it then in the area you've mentioned right? To take your example to an extreme, Co. Kerry is bigger then Meath, should we build some motorway there as well?

FYI businessess are being "lost" everywhere in Ireland right now.

antoobrien wrote: »

Utter fail, south of Gort on the M18 is Crusheen Co Clare. I suggest you stop tring to find solutions base on maps and bad research

y'know an invisible county border doesn't automatically demarcate a boundary where people will stop commuting to a city or town?

antoobrien wrote: »

If you have some proof that it is one offs that are causing this especially when the numbers in the aggregate town areas are increasing - please show it.

Hmm lets see, 2/3 of all Co. Galway PP granted is for one-off housing. Do you really think these people living in all these new one-offs - remember Galway county population has expanded by 60k -are just locals who aren't commuting to the major employment centres? I think not.

Victor

To_be_confirmed wrote: »

I don't think the existing N6 can be called a bypass when it passes so close to the city centre and surrounded by the admittedly bad planning decisions which are plain for all to see.

But it was the edge of the city when it was built.

To_be_confirmed wrote: »

The rest of the bridges seem quite unsuited for long-distance traffic

But perfectly good for local use.

But those are fair points concerning Waterford.

Oh, also, the bridge in Waterford was subject to occasional lifts to allow ships and barges by.