"N6 Galway City Transport Project"

Banjoxed

Iwannahurl wrote: »

The whole purpose of the bypass, aka "the only show in town", was (is?) to make driving more convenient. The claim was/is that a bypass would remove "cars that don't want to go anywhere near the city" and "commuter and personal traffic that does not want or need to go through the City, but has no choice", thereby improving driving condition for cars that do "want" or "need" to be in the city.


An additional selling point, still being repeated, is that a bypass would free up space for public transport, walking and cycling. The idea was/is that motorists get their bypass first, then the other modes can be catered for.


I believe this is a flawed and possibly even dishonest premise. It is also environmentally unjust, and likely to be counterproductive.


A "bypass" will free up more road space within the city, by removing commuter traffic as well as "by-passable traffic", which will make driving around town more convenient, not less. In my opinion, it is simply not plausible to suggest that (a) people will suddenly switch from car commuting to walking, cycling and public transport once free-flow driving conditions are achieved, and (b) that the powers that be will suddenly feel compelled to at last cater properly for congestion-busting modes of travel, after the traffic congestion has been relieved by the construction of a bypass.


What would be the motivation in each case, when chronic traffic congestion is not enough to encourage modal shift at present? Are we really expected to believe that people will feel less like driving when using a car will be a lot less hassle in a supposedly congestion-free post-bypass situation? Pull the other one, I say.


In any case, if "commuter and personal traffic that does not want or need to go through the City" is removed, where are the commuters going to come from who will provide the customer base for the expansion of bus services, for example?

Much and all as I would like to see enhanced public transport in any Irish context, any bypass of Galway would be in keeping with decades of cute hoor planning where the Galway hinterland and further afield consists of scattershot housing.

It is no wonder that 1. Any attempt to reconfigure public transport in the West to lead town style planning gets opposed and
2. Folks wet themselves over potential motorways
And therefore
3. Vested interests in scattershot planning have too much to lose by encouraging improved public transport.

That's my logic anyway.

spacetweek

The bypass is needed in order to enable long-distance motorists to avoid Galway. Apart from that, it will have no noticeable impact on congestion in the city. It will not sort out city-city journeys or suburb-city.
It must be accompanied by a major reorganisation of road space to add bus and cycle lanes to all distributor roads, a big increase in bus frequency, and odds and ends like shelters.
It must be accompanied by a serious effort at enforcement of traffic and parking laws.
Longer term it must be accompanied by restrictions in the building of one-offs in the countryside.

lucernarian

spacetweek wrote: »

The bypass is needed in order to enable long-distance motorists to avoid Galway. Apart from that, it will have no noticeable impact on congestion in the city. It will not sort out city-city journeys or suburb-city.
It must be accompanied by a major reorganisation of road space to add bus and cycle lanes to all distributor roads, a big increase in bus frequency, and odds and ends like shelters.
It must be accompanied by a serious effort at enforcement of traffic and parking laws.
Longer term it must be accompanied by restrictions in the building of one-offs in the countryside.

Sounds reasonable. Are there any ways to make the building of any new roads cheaper? E.g. lower spec / narrower width?

Iwannahurl

spacetweek wrote: »

1. The bypass is needed in order to enable long-distance motorists to avoid Galway. Apart from that, it will have no noticeable impact on congestion in the city. It will not sort out city-city journeys or suburb-city.

2. It must be accompanied by a major reorganisation of road space to add bus and cycle lanes to all distributor roads, a big increase in bus frequency, and odds and ends like shelters.

3. It must be accompanied by a serious effort at enforcement of traffic and parking laws.

4. Longer term it must be accompanied by restrictions in the building of one-offs in the countryside.

1. Except the "bypass" is being sold as a solution (indeed, the only solution) to congestion within the city. Additionally, a huge amount of the demand for the bypass is coming from within the city and from people living in "rural" areas on the fringe of the city, ie commuters.

2. Why can't we have bus/cycle lanes, more frequent and reliable bus services, bus shelters, pedestrian crossings, traffic calming etc etc etc now? €30 million would buy an awful lot of that stuff, and €300 million would be utterly transformative (if Galway City Council and other agencies could be trusted to spend it properly).

3. Why can't traffic and parking laws be enforced now? Some of the laws have been in place for decades, and don't require a €300 million budget to enforce.

4. Why can't "one-offs" be restricted now? Of course, it's too late to deal with the many thousands of "one-offs" already in existence, which will be forever generating traffic in the "rural" hinterland of Galway City.


EDIT: Just found this while perusing old Boards comments on the original bypass proposal.

"A bypass would take at least 80% of those cars out of this area [Kirwan/Bodkin Roundabout etc] and allow a much better public transport system to operate." ~Frank Fahey TD, April 2010.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lzemTC_JsGU

lucernarian

Iwannahurl wrote: »

1. Except the "bypass" is being sold as a solution (indeed, the only solution) to congestion within the city. Additionally, a huge amount of the demand for the bypass is coming from within the city and from people living in "rural" areas on the fringe of the city, ie commuters.

2. Why can't we have bus/cycle lanes, more frequent and reliable bus services, bus shelters, pedestrian crossings, traffic calming etc etc etc now? €30 million would buy an awful lot of that stuff, and €300 million would be utterly transformative (if Galway City Council and other agencies could be trusted to spend it properly).

3. Why can't traffic and parking laws be enforced now? Some of the laws have been in place for decades, and don't require a €300 million budget to enforce.

4. Why can't "one-offs" be restricted now? Of course, it's too late to deal with the many thousands of "one-offs" already in existence, which will be forever generating traffic in the "rural" hinterland of Galway City.


EDIT: Just found this while perusing old Boards comments on the original bypass proposal.

"A bypass would take at least 80% of those cars out of this area [Kirwan/Bodkin Roundabout etc] and allow a much better public transport system to operate." ~Frank Fahey TD, April 2010.

http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=93868568&postcount=18

I'm still waiting for your responses, though I suspect they will be numbered and will arbitrarily break up the points I make.

I think the "why can't" questions are better directed at the powers that be. If they're not rhetorical. I really don't think some posters on Boards can answer you when it's a decision that Galway City Council or the NTA or the Gardaí or the Dept. of the Environment or the NRA are all variously better placed to answer.

Also many of those proposals are worth exploring and indeed prioritising, especially the enforcement of parking laws. But if people feel forced to leave their cars at home on the school run, more people and kids will automatically be using the other modes to get there. That does imply that other measures would have to be carried out at the same time. E.g. improved bus frequencies and freeing up more road space for cyclists etc.

The first point you make is just a perception, really. I don't live in Galway and I don't really know what it's being sold as or being sold to. I don't think it's important to consider now that the ECHR has knocked the current plan on the head. It won't change the overall merits of various alternative plans. Every piece of the puzzle has to be carefully adjusted to let the other pieces fit in, as I crudely showed in my previous paragraph.

Either a new route for through-traffic and HGVs etc from outside Galway and not stopping there is needed, or it's not. If all the routes pass through residential/central areas, what is an acceptable level of trucks etc using them? If another route is needed, what kind of route is needed? Just because people might want to hijack a project to further their own agenda, doesn't make a project itself bad!!

Iwannahurl

lucernarian wrote: »

Just because people might want to hijack a project to further their own agenda, doesn't make a project itself bad!!

I'm interested in the opinions of other posters regarding the questions I posed. Some were at least partly rhetorical, ie I see no reason why illegal parking cannot be enforced now, and why school traffic (responsible for 25-33% of traffic on key routes) cannot be tackled now, especially since it has not been tackled for many decades.

If you want to know my opinion on specific issues just ask some specific questions.

As for a "hijacked" project not being intrinsically bad, what matters is the outcome. Use determines function, so a "good" project is one that cannot be hijacked or otherwise misused.

lucernarian

Iwannahurl wrote: »

I'm interested in the opinions of other posters regarding the questions I posed. Some were at least partly rhetorical, ie I see no reason why illegal parking cannot be enforced now, and why school traffic (responsible for 25-33% of traffic on key routes) cannot be tackled now, especially since it has not been tackled for many decades.

If you want to know my opinion on specific issues just ask some specific questions.

As for a "hijacked" project not being intrinsically bad, what matters is the outcome. Use determines function, so a "good" project is one that cannot be hijacked or otherwise misused.

I did. But as I explained here, numbering some segments of my post and replying to those selectively doesn't make much of a discussion rather than an echo chamber. We'd all end up talking to ourselves. In my last big reply, the third paragraph onwards had a few questions.

Iwannahurl

lucernarian wrote: »

I did. But as I explained here, numbering some segments of my post and replying to those selectively doesn't make much of a discussion rather than an echo chamber. We'd all end up talking to ourselves. In my last big reply, the third paragraph onwards had a few questions.

Let me know if your questions below, and my answers, are complete:

Regarding alternatives, can anybody tell me what minor infrastructural works can be undertaken?

Why minor? €30 million, never mind ten times that sum, would provide a massive amount of serious infrastructure to facilitate, and provoke a modal shift to, public transport, walking and cycling. For instance, how much would it take to fix this junction, to focus on just one junction among hundreds that has never been modified, despite being on a route to several schools?

Can a bridge or relief road be built here and there?

Perhaps, but why? Bridges and roads, in this country and elsewhere, are primarily supply-side measures intended to facilitate private motor vehicles. That does not reduce car use, car dependence and traffic generation -- in fact the opposite is the case.

Regarding schools and car-driving habits, the data referred to here suggests that a quarter to third reduction in motorised traffic results in congestion almost vanishing. I'm guessing that Galway has a higher proportion of car usership than other Irish cities but how much of an improvement can be expected in the near future?

Expected? Not a lot, given (a) that there isn't much political will to do so, (b) the car habit is now deeply ingrained, and (c) many people are hoping the bypass will fix the problem without anyone having to change their behaviour, ie using the car for ~70% of trips, or more in some areas. A lot more could be achieved, but there has been no proper effort made to tackle the school travel issue in decades, or ever in fact. Why bother, when there's a holy grail that will magic it all away? You may not like anecdotes, perhaps, but here's one anyway. I once tried to reason with a Garda sergeant about the need to enforce parking regulations, around schools and other locations, where there is a direct link between lack of parking control, traffic congestion and danger to children walking and cycling. She had no intention of doing so, and one of her excuses was "we need a bypass". It's as if any serious effort to curb car use and car dependence, and to stop the inevitable squeezing out of other modes, is only permissible once the Big Prize (a shiny new road for car commuters) is awarded first.

Even though bad planning seems to be a factor, the congestion problems in Galway seem to be particularly awful for a city of its size. Even if big ticket road projects in Galway are opposed by some, is it fair to do so when clearly the vast majority of elected representatives have made it clear they would support the GCOB?

Answered previously, by the ECJ.

One other thing, are upgrades possible to the Seamus Quirke road that can make it much safer for pedestrians and cyclists and also cater for truck and tractor usage? All while allowing for efficient bus transport that will be superior to other Irish cities?

The SQR has already been modified, with the addition of bus lanes, despite the reluctance of some in City Hall and elsewhere. Dire predictions that it would grind to a halt have proved false. People sitting in cars still grumble that "empty" buses are passing them by, but perhaps that kind of thinking could be analysed in another suitable forum. Galway City could do with a HGV management strategy, and has needed one for many years. None has been forthcoming. Why? My guess: "we'll have a look at it when we get our bypass." Meanwhile I encounter HGVs every morning while doing the school run by bike.

What have traffic studies, ANPR, Park and Rides and ribbon development got to do with if there is a non-city-centre route available for land-based modes of transport?

Because the complex problem of traffic congestion needs to be studied properly in order to devise sustainable solutions. Some of the more voluble bypass advocates have claimed that "80%" of traffic could be removed from The Auld Triangle referred to earlier. Such bypass enthusiasts really don't care where that traffic is coming from, where it is going, who the car occupants are or why they are in cars in the first place. From this perspective the solution to traffic congestion is more road space for cars. And when that road space fills up, build another road. Simple, really.

But you say that the Transport Project claims that bypassable traffic is in conflict with internal traffic but isn't that a little perjorative?

What exactly is pejorative? It's one of the main planks of the pro-bypass lobby. However, the conflict in question must be analysed in great detail to see what exactly is occurring. It is not enough to refer to x AADT on route A and y AADT on route B, and to show that the two traffic streams are in conflict. What is the precise nature of the traffic mix on each route, why is it there in the first place, and what can be done to reduce the traffic volume, so that the conflict is mitigated? TTBOMK no detailed figures have been published showing precisely the origins and destinations of "bypassable" and "internal" traffic. Leaving aside the huge issue of work travel, I have argued repeatedly that the relief in traffic congestion which occurs without fail when the schools are off gives us a big hint with regard to what could be achieved by a comprehensive Transportation Demand Management strategy. If the right people got the job and there was a budget of €300 million, what could be achieved?

Again, it may not need a €300 million bypass but what do posters here feel is the correct way to solve this specific issue?

TDM for starters. Unfortunately, nothing substantial has been tried. Ever. Even the €25 million Smarter Travel Plan, which I'm told is still policy, and about which some are highly sceptical, remains on hold. The "N6 Galway City Transport Project" is supposed to study all viable alternatives, but I'll believe that when I see it.

I made similar points before about the N2 Slane Bypass and while most here accept it's completely unfit for modern traffic, some argued that alternative routes do exist (e.g. M1 Drogheda) and a weight limit/HGV ban should be used. In the case of Galway, what's the alternative route?

The term "alternative route" presupposes that the primary solution will be a new bridge and a new road. That may or may not be the case, ultimately. I would argue that much of the emphasis on finding an alternative "route" is from people who still believe that a bypass is "the only show in town". In my book, that is not indicative of a serious attempt at considering alternative solutions.

munchkin_utd

lucernarian wrote: »

This thread does read like many others about the GCOB scheme. Regarding alternatives, can anybody tell me what minor infrastructural works can be undertaken? Can a bridge or relief road be built here and there? Regarding schools and car-driving habits, the data referred to here suggests that a quarter to third reduction in motorised traffic results in congestion almost vanishing. I'm guessing that Galway has a higher proportion of car usership than other Irish cities but how much of an improvement can be expected in the near future?
<snip>

firstly, the outer by pass is not a soluion anyhow, as it will not have the junctions to enable commuters go to the industrial areas on the west of the city.
So, its 300 million to solve commuter congestion, that doesnt solve commuter journey times or congestion.
Youre essentially saying that conemara people going to Dublin or Limerick, once taken out of the city, will leave the roads empty for people to get across town quickly and easily at rush hour.

anyhow, youre going to need a range of measures, something along the lines of
- express busses cross town at peak times from west side to GMIT/ industrial areas.
- more bus lanes, traffic lights to give priority to busses and where possible dedicated bus roads where needed.
- inprove the river crossing for busses. Possibly eeking out an extra central lane for busses by dropping the wide cyclepaths (eastbound for morning peak, westbound for evening- a concept to be found occasionally abroad where peaks are directional).
- investigate a new public transport river crossing near the cathedral, i.e. where the old railway bridge once ran (and abutments still stand) with dedicated bus lane to the headford roundabout, so east west busses could bypass the centre but still serve the hospital/ UCG and justify their existance with passenger numbers.

you could go on with other ideas like this, and if done as a whole you'd link up Galway city much better and be more useful to galway city residents than a €300 million Connemara expressway will.

Iwannahurl

munchkin_utd wrote: »

firstly, the outer by pass is not a soluion anyhow, as it will not have the junctions to enable commuters go to the industrial areas on the west of the city.
So, its 300 million to solve commuter congestion, that doesnt solve commuter journey times or congestion.
Youre essentially saying that conemara people going to Dublin or Limerick, once taken out of the city, will leave the roads empty for people to get across town quickly and easily at rush hour.

I think this requires much greater attention. There may actually be a case for a true bypass, but many people seem to believe that what they need, and what they are getting, is a ring/relief road.

I see two problems with this:

1. If it's a true bypass, then the anticipated relief effect on intra-city traffic will encourage more car use, not less. This is the expectation of Galway Chamber of Commerce, for example. The rhetoric about more space for public transport etc is just carrot-dangling and box-ticking, imo.

2. If it's not to be used as an actual bypass, then one of its main functions will be to re-route commuter traffic around the city. This will have the effect of undermining policy objectives to reduce car use and car dependence and bring about a major modal shift to public transport, walking and cycling. Plus it will free up more road space within the city for more car use, much to the delight of Galway City Council (parking charges and fines) and Galway Chamber (tills ringing).

veryangryman

Iwannahurl wrote: »

2. If it's not to be used as an actual bypass, then one of its main functions will be to re-route commuter traffic around the city. This will have the effect of undermining policy objectives to reduce car use and car dependence and bring about a major modal shift to public transport, walking and cycling. Plus it will free up more road space within the city for more car use, much to the delight of Galway City Council (parking charges and fines) and Galway Chamber (tills ringing).

Less cars on the roads in the city mean more cars in the car park? Really?

Id be quite sure that with the extra available space, the city would use it for cycling lanes/bus lanes, maybe even Gluas if the economy improved enough.

Iwannahurl

Not necessarily the same cars.

Galway Chamber equate cars with the sound of cash registers ringing, and their own campaign for the bypass is built on the premise that getting 'unwanted' traffic out of the city will make space for new cars to come in.

I'd be quite sure that the extra space will not be used for bus lanes etc.

More to the point, where will the passengers come from?

Right now the biggest disincentive to car use is traffic congestion, which is why motorists and various vested interests are complaining about it all the time.

Are we really expected to believe that once "80%" of the traffic is removed from city centre roads that (a) people will suddenly stop wanting to use their cars and (b) that there will be hordes of commuters waiting to pack all the new buses?

Can you please explain that scenario to me, in detail?

Padkir

Iwannahurl wrote: »

I made similar points before about the N2 Slane Bypass and while most here accept it's completely unfit for modern traffic, some argued that alternative routes do exist (e.g. M1 Drogheda) and a weight limit/HGV ban should be used. In the case of Galway, what's the alternative route?

The term "alternative route" presupposes that the primary solution will be a new bridge and a new road. That may or may not be the case, ultimately. I would argue that much of the emphasis on finding an alternative "route" is from people who still believe that a bypass is "the only show in town". In my book, that is not indicative of a serious attempt at considering alternative solutions.

So, in other words, you have no alternative route.

veryangryman

Iwannahurl wrote: »

Right now the biggest disincentive to car use is traffic congestion, which is why motorists and various vested interests are complaining about it all the time.

Reminds me of a quote from Futurama...Nobody drives a car in New York. Too much traffic!

Iwannahurl

Padkir wrote: »

So, in other words, you have no alternative route.

No comprendo.

Though their repeated use of the terms "N6" and "route" indicates that their main focus is on road-building, the "N6 Galway City Transport Project" consultants are required by the legal process to consider all possible alternatives and to assess their viability.

That may or may not mean a new bridge/road, so an "alternative route" is just one of several possible solutions. And presumably whatever "alternative solutions" are ultimately chosen may be adopted singly or in combination. Such an all-eggs-in-one-basket approach is not good, from my perspective -- see above and various threads in the Roads forum.

Iwannahurl

veryangryman wrote: »

Reminds me of a quote from Futurama...Nobody drives a car in New York. Too much traffic!

Which reminds me of a story in The Onion: "98 Percent Of US Commuters Favor Public Transport For Others".

spacetweek

veryangryman wrote: »

Id be quite sure that with the extra available space, the city would use it for cycling lanes/bus lanes, maybe even Gluas if the economy improved enough.

Never mind Gluas. That would be hugely overscaled for a city the size of Galway. The only reason people talk about that is because creating a proper bus network sounds like it would take space away from cars and motorists don't like that. A luas would presumably be built away from roads so people could continue driving everywhere.

Iwannahurl

I don't think that true about the "Gluas" idea. I'm not an advocate of the proposal, but that's only because I haven't studied it and so I don't feel I have an informed opinion.

However, I understand that

• There are dozens of towns/small cities in Europe, of a similar size to Galway, that are successfully using light rail
• Light rail would attract more passengers because it has a higher status and a greater level of customer satisfaction than buses
• Consequently "Gluas" would be expected to entice people out of their cars
• Gluas would run along existing routes, not "away from roads".

I'm open to correction on any or all of the above, especially the last point.

cgcsb

spacetweek wrote: »

Never mind Gluas. That would be hugely overscaled for a city the size of Galway. The only reason people talk about that is because creating a proper bus network sounds like it would take space away from cars and motorists don't like that. A luas would presumably be built away from roads so people could continue driving everywhere.

GLuas would take the sam/more space away from road users in central Galway because it requires a large amount of segregation from car traffic to achieve it's optimum frequency. In Dublin we're in the process of radically reducing the amount of space available to cars through various measures:

Luas BXD
Increased pedestrianisation, foot path widening, cycle lanes etc.
On Pearse Street there's now a double bus lane, i.e. a regular bus lane and an overtaking bus lane.

No doubt the NTA would like to do similar in Galway but then there is the obsticle of Galway City Council.

cgcsb

Iwannahurl wrote: »

I don't think that true about the "Gluas" idea. I'm not an advocate of the proposal, but that's only because I haven't studied it and so I don't feel I have an informed opinion.

However, I understand that

• There are dozens of towns/small cities in Europe, of a similar size to Galway, that are successfully using light rail
• Light rail would attract more passengers because it has a higher status and a greater level of customer satisfaction than buses
• Consequently "Gluas" would be expected to entice people out of their cars
• Gluas would run along existing routes, not "away from roads".

I'm open to correction on any or all of the above, especially the last point.

Agreed, an obsticle to Gluas, aside from the large capital cost is poor planning. Cities in more advanced parts of Europe expanded in line with development plans where by a local authority requires a number of new homes/business, they select a development zone based on geographical convenience and ease of service provision and they build at a suitable density that will accommodate growth well into the future, while simultaneously providing supporting infrastructure. Here we just build houses in any old place and expect everyone else to fork out for bypasses and broadband.

Padkir

Iwannahurl wrote: »

No comprendo.

Though their repeated use of the terms "N6" and "route" indicates that their main focus is on road-building, the "N6 Galway City Transport Project" consultants are required by the legal process to consider all possible alternatives and to assess their viability.

That may or may not mean a new bridge/road, so an "alternative route" is just one of several possible solutions. And presumably whatever "alternative solutions" are ultimately chosen may be adopted singly or in combination. Such an all-eggs-in-one-basket approach is not good, from my perspective -- see above and various threads in the Roads forum.

Ok, fine. Ignore all of their repeated use of terms and answer two questions for me (real answers not waffly politician answers). I'll even number them for you as you seem to like that.

1) If a vehicle (assume journey begins and ends further away so that public transport is not a feasible option) wants to travel from Doughiska to Barna / Moycullen, what are the current alternatives to going through the city centre (and I include Terryland in the city centre)?

2) Do you think it's right / safe that this extra traffic is going through city centre areas with high levels of pedestrians, cyclists, etc, rather than having an outer route?

Most of the points you make are valid, but the fact is that removing through traffic from the city centre will make it a safer place to be, and will allow improvements to the public transport network to take place (i.e. more bus lanes / cycle lanes, better bus service, etc.) without disproportionately affecting drivers.

lucernarian

Iwannahurl wrote: »

Let me know if your questions below, and my answers, are complete:

Regarding alternatives, can anybody tell me what minor infrastructural works can be undertaken?

Why minor? €30 million, never mind ten times that sum, would provide a massive amount of serious infrastructure to facilitate, and provoke a modal shift to, public transport, walking and cycling. For instance, how much would it take to fix this junction, to focus on just one junction among hundreds that has never been modified, despite being on a route to several schools?

Again, answering questions with more questions in various cases. I don't drive and I don't have an agenda in this unlike many of the more entrenched views here. What reason do you have to get hung up about the word "minor"?? It wasn't meant to be perjorative if that's what you're getting at. For what it's worth, the Swiftway scheme in Dublin/Swords seems to involve minor or indeed pathetic adjustments to road layouts and offers bad choices for other road users, i.e. cyclists. This half baked scheme alone is expected to cost either €180 million or €200 million, I forget which. Knocknacarra to Oranmore would be of a similar length, to use an example of a similar BRT route in Galway. I'm pretty sure €30 million would also encourage big improvements but costings for other improvement works for cyclists in Dublin (very limited schemes too) and Cork would swallow that up more quickly than you suggest. That's before we get to improving various aspects of bus infrastructure in a meaningful sense be it with new vehicles and higher frequency and shelters for most stops etc. What I mean is that methods that don't just improve cycling access and pedestrian access but also bus transport along with safer methods for HGV vehicles etc to travel need to be looked at as one combined and symbiotic set of measures and need to be costed appropriately. There is low-hanging fruit of all kinds to be seen over Galway but I wanted to know of more particular examples and what specifically should be done, not just pointing out flaws. Constructive ideas or proposals regarding what I termed "minor infrastructure" would help here. You're asking how much would a junction cost to fix as if you don't want to venture an idea and then you claim with some authority that €30 million would encourage a massive modal shift, even though I never brought money into the question. I *feel* that you're right on many things but you have made claims that need more backup.

Perhaps, but why? Bridges and roads, in this country and elsewhere, are primarily supply-side measures intended to facilitate private motor vehicles. That does not reduce car use, car dependence and traffic generation -- in fact the opposite is the case.

Why build them, you mean? Why did I ask? Why what?? This has already been addressed by me in bold. If there is traffic such as HGVs and tractors and trailers and suchlike unsuited to residential or central areas crossing the River Corrib, then that is a specific need which hasn't been addressed up to now. Either they do have an alternative route, or some kind of new route needs to be provided.

Expected? Not a lot, given (a) that there isn't much political will to do so, (b) the car habit is now deeply ingrained, and (c) many people are hoping the bypass will fix the problem without anyone having to change their behaviour, ie using the car for ~70% of trips, or more in some areas. A lot more could be achieved, but there has been no proper effort made to tackle the school travel issue in decades, or ever in fact. Why bother, when there's a holy grail that will magic it all away? You may not like anecdotes, perhaps, but here's one anyway. I once tried to reason with a Garda sergeant about the need to enforce parking regulations, around schools and other locations, where there is a direct link between lack of parking control, traffic congestion and danger to children walking and cycling. She had no intention of doing so, and one of her excuses was "we need a bypass". It's as if any serious effort to curb car use and car dependence, and to stop the inevitable squeezing out of other modes, is only permissible once the Big Prize (a shiny new road for car commuters) is awarded first.

I agree re a). b) is not so certain and other parts of Ireland have experienced a modal shift in recent years. I suspect there's truth in "build it and they will come" for cycle lanes as much as the GCOB c), you are referencing "the problem" but "car congestion" is not the only problem I see in Galway by any means. There are safety matters that need addressing as well as more sustainable decisions across transport in Galway that need to be taken.

Answered previously, by the ECJ.

I don't think you understood my question. When I am highlighting their support for the GCOB, I am highlighting their support for *a bypass* of some kind. As the garda sgt said, she said "we need a bypass". Not "we need the GCOB". I think my point was obvious, concerning the ECJ didn't ban any and all possible bypasses for some or all of Galway.

Galway City could do with a HGV management strategy

It could indeed. E.g. for adjusting the hours that they can drive on problematic roads for when less residents and cyclists are using those and nearby roads. Otherwise unless the total number of HGVs are reduced magically, they will end up using the Seamus Quirke Road (they couldn't use the more coastal routes). Again, the lack of an alternative route. The rest of this point is hard to get my head around. What have bus lanes got to do with lorry and HGV safety? Or grumblings about said bus lanes? And your guess that Galway City Council are waiting for a bypass? Again, I feel you could be right but you're lacking proof or evidence so far.

Because the complex problem of traffic congestion needs to be studied properly in order to devise sustainable solutions. Some of the more voluble bypass advocates have claimed that "80%" of traffic could be removed from The Auld Triangle referred to earlier. Such bypass enthusiasts really don't care where that traffic is coming from, where it is going, who the car occupants are or why they are in cars in the first place. From this perspective the solution to traffic congestion is more road space for cars. And when that road space fills up, build another road. Simple, really.

I agree that it needs to be studied properly and it's dismaying that more hasn't been done to assess the types of traffic and walking etc from different points along the SQR.
All this talk about these fifth column bypass supporters and car occupants still isn't an answer to my question. You started out talking about "traffic" and then moved on to cars. Again, If there is traffic such as HGVs and tractors and trailers and suchlike unsuited to residential or central areas crossing the River Corrib, then that is a specific need which hasn't been addressed up to now. Either they do have an alternative route, or some kind of new route needs to be provided.

What exactly is pejorative? It's one of the main planks of the pro-bypass etc etc etc.

It's perjorative because it's a claim when in my mind it's technically correct to say that the existence of even one vehicle or certainly HGV making the trip would result in a conflict with internal traffic. A dangerous conflict that residents, vulnerable road users and indeed other motorists shouldn't be exposed to. I don't care as much about AADTs etc. in deciding specifically if new roads or a new bridge is needed or not.

The term "alternative route" presupposes that the primary solution will be a new bridge and a new road.

We are talking about alternative routes for HGVs too and the safety and sustainability aspects of this. Simply asking about alternative routes doesn't presuppose anything. In the case of Slane anyway, the current situation is that there is no new bridge in the pipeline and alternative routes do exist depending on who you asked and how far out of the way you wanted to travel. In the case of Galway, then probably. Is any level of HGV usage on the SQB a safe level of usage? I can't speak authoritatively but it's hard to argue that any number of HGVs should drive through urban and residential areas beyond immediate deliveries. Can you answer the question regarding what the alternative route for trucks is in Galway, if it is too unsafe to use the overdeveloped quasi-urban SQR?

munchkin utd wrote:

anyhow, youre going to need a range of measures, something along the lines of
- express busses cross town at peak times from west side to GMIT/ industrial areas.
- more bus lanes, traffic lights to give priority to busses and where possible dedicated bus roads where needed.
- inprove the river crossing for busses. Possibly eeking out an extra central lane for busses by dropping the wide cyclepaths (eastbound for morning peak, westbound for evening- a concept to be found occasionally abroad where peaks are directional).
- investigate a new public transport river crossing near the cathedral, i.e. where the old railway bridge once ran (and abutments still stand) with dedicated bus lane to the headford roundabout, so east west busses could bypass the centre but still serve the hospital/ UCG and justify their existance with passenger numbers.

I like the sounds of those measures. Some of them would make real sense and would greatly help with the bus experience and commuting times etc. But sadly those measures don't address the specific issue of safety and HGV/truck/tractor traffic. That is something the €300 million now rejected scheme had going for it.

Iwannahurl

There's a half-page Public Notice, placed by Galway County Council, on page 33 of today's Advertiser, announcing "N6 Galway City Transport Project, Route Selection, Public Consultation No. 2".

I've had a quick look but I cannot see anything on the Galway Co Co website or the "N6 Galway City Transport Project" website.

Four public consultation sessions are to be held:

28 & 29 January, 2-8pm, Westwood Hotel, Dangan
3 & 4 February, 2-8pm, Menlo Park Hotel, Terryland

By the by, I notice that the image has been given a little polish. The first line of the postal address has been changed from "N6 Galway City Outer Bypass Project Office" to "N6 Galway City Transport Project Office".

Iwannahurl

I'll try to respond to the above posts later.

While doing the school run this morning I noticed a major lack of traffic congestion. Normally traffic is backed up about 1.3 km from a particular junction, and indeed beyond the same junction.

This morning the 50 km/h urban road was so clear that city-bound traffic could actually break the speed limit by a substantial margin. One car, a single-occupant Range Rover, passed us doing around 70 I reckon. We passed it at the next junction.

The only traffic obstacle we encountered was a bunch of cars, three deep like sardines in a tin, obstructing access to a dished kerb.

Anyone care to identify what might have suddenly changed traffic-wise today?

Iwannahurl

R336 Spiddal/Barna Road also free-flowing this morning, I have been informed.

For the same obvious reason.

Oh yes, and certain parts of Salthill totally free of congestion around 15:30. Ditto.

Mrs OBumble

Iwannahurl wrote: »

Anyone care to identify what might have suddenly changed traffic-wise today?

I'll bite: My guess is that it was because very few school student's decided to join the teachers who were picketing outside their workplaces yesterday.

I wonder how much it would cost to put an effective school-transport system in place, vsi a by-pass?


(For the record, I support putting another bridge over the Corrib: the roading system is very fragile without it. But I'm not sure that characteristing it as an "outer by-pass" is honest, because of the way development here tends to cluster around such roads.

I also work actively to improve public-transport take-up.)

Iwannahurl

This was the scene at Threadneedle Road* yesterday at half past three, with roadworks under way.

What will it be like this afternoon, I wonder?



*For those unfamiliar, there are two secondary schools on this road, with over 1000 students between them afaik.

Iwannahurl

The photo below shows the scene on Threadneedle Road, at the same hour today (3.30pm, as the schools closed). Yesterday not even roadworks were enough to cause delays. Today the cars were four-deep in places, with vehicles parked (legally and illegally) on both sides, and two-way traffic between them. This afternoon the traffic was backed up 600 metres from the Threadneedle/Kingston/Taylor's Hill junction, and that was just while I was there, which means that a substantial volume of traffic had already passed through, with more on the way afterwards. This situation will have been replicated around the other secondary schools in the city.



The significant reduction in traffic congestion on the west side was due solely to secondary schools being closed. Primary schools were still open, yet there were no hold-ups. A proportion of the school traffic shown above will have crossed town, since it is known that some students attending secondary school in Salthill travel from parts east.

The strike serves to conclusively demonstrate in a 48 hour period a phenomenon well known to occur during the summer, ie that traffic congestion is massively eased, with the exception of major traffic-generating events such as the Galway Races.

Any serious and genuine attempt to solve Galway's traffic congestion (and the endemic car dependence which causes it) must take account of the massive effect of school travel. In my opinion, this also points to what could be achieved with work travel, which apparently affects the east of the city to a greater extent.

A major effort to address car travel to school, university and work could be expected to achieve an impact on city-wide traffic congestion at least equivalent to that inadvertently created by the secondary teachers' strike.

lucernarian

Iwannahurl wrote: »

The photo below shows the scene on Threadneedle Road, at the same hour today (3.30pm, as the schools closed). Yesterday not even roadworks were enough to cause delays. Today the cars were four-deep in places, with vehicles parked (legally and illegally) on both sides, and two-way traffic between them. This afternoon the traffic was backed up 600 metres from the Threadneedle/Kingston/Taylor's Hill junction, and that was just while I was there, which means that a substantial volume of traffic had already passed through, with more on the way afterwards. This situation will have been replicated around the other secondary schools in the city.
<snip>

The significant reduction in traffic congestion on the west side was due solely to secondary schools being closed. Primary schools were still open, yet there were no hold-ups. A proportion of the school traffic shown above will have crossed town, since it is known that some students attending secondary school in Salthill travel from parts east.

The strike serves to conclusively demonstrate in a 48 hour period a phenomenon well known to occur during the summer, ie that traffic congestion is massively eased, with the exception of major traffic-generating events such as the Galway Races.

Any serious and genuine attempt to solve Galway's traffic congestion (and the endemic car dependence which causes it) must take account of the massive effect of school travel. In my opinion, this also points to what could be achieved with work travel, which apparently affects the east of the city to a greater extent.

A major effort to address car travel to school, university and work could be expected to achieve an impact on city-wide traffic congestion at least equivalent to that inadvertently created by the secondary teachers' strike.

I'm sure there's nothing sinister behind this, but the EXIF data of the two photos shows that "Adobe Photoshop Elements..." as the program entry under the "origin" section for the two photographs. I know you didn't photoshop any traffic Just curious why that mention is there.

Iwannahurl

lucernarian wrote: »

I'm sure there's nothing sinister behind this, but the EXIF data of the two photos shows that "Adobe Photoshop Elements..." as the program entry under the "origin" section for the two photographs. I know you didn't photoshop any traffic Just curious why that mention is there.

Here are a few more pix (cropped, tweaked and sharpened using Adobe Photoshop Elements) from this afternoon's car-nival outside just two of Galway's 11 secondary schools.