"N6 Galway City Transport Project"

RogerRumsoaker

My 5 cents worth...

The problem with Galway is that almost all the industry is in the east and there is masses of housing in the west. Loads of it all the way to Spiddal, Oughterard and beyond. The problem is then compounded by the fact that most of the schools, a lot of business and the hospital etc are in and around the city centre.

A bypass is meant to facilitate the movement of traffic around a city, bypass it, but in Galway all the traffic is trying to move in the same direct at the same time. The number of people going from the east side of the city to Barna, Knocknacarra etc in the morning is negligible. The number of people going from Barna, Knocknacarra etc to the east or the city centre is HUGE. Anyone who lives on the east side of the city knows that all roads in the east are already gridlocked in the morning. This isn't people trying to get across the river to go to work on the west side of the city who will benefit from a bypass, it is people trying to get to the industrial areas on the east side or into the city centre. I fail to see how building a bypass that will facilitate the movement of cars from the west into an already existing traffic jam is going to solve Galway's traffic problem.

To solve this we are going to have to see some real imagination and some brave moves from public figures. Somehow I think this is unlikely. The posters that give a cynical nod to having reviewed other options are a farce. Getting the Department of Transport logo slapped onto the posters is laughable. The project is being run by the National Roads Authority through the National Roads Project Office of Galway County Council. This is never going to be an holistic view of actual transport solutions when it is being run by a government department and engineers set up to develop roads.

.... I might have got a bit carried away there, I'll blame the wine.

galwaycyclist

RogerRumsoaker wrote: »

My 5 cents worth...

The problem with Galway is that almost all the industry is in the east and there is masses of housing in the west. Loads of it all the way to Spiddal, Oughterard and beyond. The problem is then compounded by the fact that most of the schools, a lot of business and the hospital etc are in and around the city centre.

A bypass is meant to facilitate the movement of traffic around a city, bypass it, but in Galway all the traffic is trying to move in the same direct at the same time. The number of people going from the east side of the city to Barna, Knocknacarra etc in the morning is negligible. The number of people going from Barna, Knocknacarra etc to the east or the city centre is HUGE. Anyone who lives on the east side of the city knows that all roads in the east are already gridlocked in the morning. This isn't people trying to get across the river to go to work on the west side of the city who will benefit from a bypass, it is people trying to get to the industrial areas on the east side or into the city centre. I fail to see how building a bypass that will facilitate the movement of cars from the west into an already existing traffic jam is going to solve Galway's traffic problem.

To solve this we are going to have to see some real imagination and some brave moves from public figures. Somehow I think this is unlikely. The posters that give a cynical nod to having reviewed other options are a farce. Getting the Department of Transport logo slapped onto the posters is laughable. The project is being run by the National Roads Authority through the National Roads Project Office of Galway County Council. This is never going to be an holistic view of actual transport solutions when it is being run by a government department and engineers set up to develop roads.

.... I might have got a bit carried away there, I'll blame the wine.

No its not the wine - I was at the consultation event in the Westwood Hotel last night and I agree with your concerns.

I saw nothing there that will address the issue of the school run.

The suggestions on cycling seemed to be focused on what will primarily be leisure routes for recreational cycling. As for walking ......

It came accross as a profoundly cynical exercise. Transport project - not.

Actually: Now that I have had another look at the blurb I brought home - their suggestions for walking are the same as those for cycling. So Bearna woods, Terryland forest park, Merlin greenway, Moycullen greenway, Oranmore greenway, Dublin Greenway.

what_traffic

PDF's at the link below are exact same as presented at the Public Consultation
http://www.n6galwaycity.ie/phase-2/public-consultation-number-2-display-graphics/


Amount of information provided is negligible

SeanW

Iwannahurl wrote: »

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

But is that not the thrust of your argument? There's no need for a bypass because if you take out all the school traffic, put everyone on bicycles etc, then there will be loads of room to funnel long distance traffic through the city centre?

galwaycyclist

SeanW wrote: »

But is that not the thrust of your argument? There's no need for a bypass because if you take out all the school traffic, put everyone on bicycles etc, then there will be loads of room to funnel long distance traffic through the city centre?

There is no long distance traffic as such. The only source or destination for long distance traffic coming through Galway City is South/West Conemara which has a negligible population.

The arguments around the by pass seem to centre on the idea that, of itself, it is valid means of managing traffic that has its destination within the city.

This is a ridiculous idea.

A "bypass" or ring route in some form may form part of a solution for such traffic but only if accompanied by a range of other measures. Many of which could be applied now without blowing more state funds on an over-engineered road.

Iwannahurl

Some interesting (and amusing) bypass-related quotes in today's Galway Independent.

Cllr Pearce Flannery wrote:

"Galway is a habitat."

Cllr Frank Fahy wrote:

You're destroying communities. There's no use in having bog cotton and butterflies if there's no-one there to protect them."

A variation of the original route, he B]Cllr John Walsh[/B said, would avoid the destruction of the racecourse, the destruction of Menlo Village and the destruction of the state of the art Kingfisher Gym.

Galway City Council Director of Services for Planning & Transportation wrote:

People in Knocknacarra are not going to go out by Moycullen. It [a bypass] has to be close enough to the city to attract people to it.

Emphasis added by me.

Regarding that last quote: attract what people? What has a "bypass" to do with "people in Knocknacarra"?

cgcsb

I've become convinced through these discussions that there are sinister forces at work. increased car dependency is effectively economic stimulus for oil producing gulf states and the German/Japanese/French car manufacturers. The environmental and economic consequences of car dependence in Ireland are paid for solely by the Irish public.

We have a transport policy that's costing us billions in imports and billions in more and more roads to feed the habit.

Our current policy of increasing car use is either the result of high up hands being in high up pockets or sheer idiocy. I have no doubt that the oil industry has useful idiots in it's pockets. How else could we possibly be considering a €300mil-€750mil road for a City of 75,000 people without hardly a whimper about reducing car dependence??

Aard

It's important to remember as well that it is Govt policy to have 10% of all trips (not just commuter trips) made by bike by 2020. This means that urban areas will need to have more than 10% of trips to make up for the lower likely rate in rural areas (perfectly understandable). Atm the rate of cycling in Galway is 4.9%. Assuming a bypass is built -- it is most likely that those who currently drive will have no incentive to switch to sustainable transport modes, and it is likely that new commuters (recent graduates, migrants, etc) will choose the car since there will suddenly be a lot of excess capacity. That 10% figure, let alone a higher percentage to account for Galway's urban status, is unlikely to be reached any time soon.

L1011

cgcsb wrote: »

I've become convinced through these discussions that there are sinister forces at work.

This isn't the conspiracy theory forum - and the rest of your post is pretty much entirely suited for there, not here.

Iwannahurl

cgcsb wrote: »

I've become convinced through these discussions that there are sinister forces at work. increased car dependency is effectively economic stimulus for oil producing gulf states and the German/Japanese/French car manufacturers. The environmental and economic consequences of car dependence in Ireland are paid for solely by the Irish public.

We have a transport policy that's costing us billions in imports and billions in more and more roads to feed the habit.

Our current policy of increasing car use is either the result of high up hands being in high up pockets or sheer idiocy. I have no doubt that the oil industry has useful idiots in it's pockets. How else could we possibly be considering a €300mil-€750mil road for a City of 75,000 people without hardly a whimper about reducing car dependence??

No need for the word "sinister" at all. Just substitute "political and economic" for that term and you can justifiably reach the same conclusion.

In Ireland, national and local government is entirely addicted to private transport (eg revenue streams) and our society is utterly addicted to oil. Even though, in order to address the urgent need to mitigate climate change, we cannot afford to burn half the world's reserves of fossil fuels, the juggernaut of private car transport and rampant energy consumption just goes on and on.

My guess would be that only a tiny fraction of GCOB enthusiasts are even aware of the exigencies of climate change, never mind ready to change their behaviour accordingly, and the rest couldn't give a toss.

As for politics, our "leaders" are mainly focused on their usual horizon, which is the next election.

galwaycyclist

L1011 wrote: »

This isn't the conspiracy theory forum - and the rest of your post is pretty much entirely suited for there, not here.

Perhaps not. However, if the public consultation is to be complete then in my view the public are entitled to be told who has an interest in any lands that might be opened up for development by the proposed routes.

Because be in no doubt that was also one of the arguments that has openly given in the media for building the new road.

Although that now seems to have gone a bit quiet.

cgcsb

Aard wrote: »

It's important to remember as well that it is Govt policy to have 10% of all trips (not just commuter trips) made by bike by 2020. This means that urban areas will need to have more than 10% of trips to make up for the lower likely rate in rural areas (perfectly understandable). Atm the rate of cycling in Galway is 4.9%. Assuming a bypass is built -- it is most likely that those who currently drive will have no incentive to switch to sustainable transport modes, and it is likely that new commuters (recent graduates, migrants, etc) will choose the car since there will suddenly be a lot of excess capacity. That 10% figure, let alone a higher percentage to account for Galway's urban status, is unlikely to be reached any time soon.

In Dublin, cycling is really taking hold in spite of the government's efforts to maintain car dominance. At one of Dublin's most notorious junctions, George's Street/Dame Street, 20% of movements are cyclists, 50% pedestrian and about 5% are bus (although buses contain many people)

despite this, almost all the road space is for the car, only one bus lane for buses turning right from George's to Dame st. No cycling facilities and footpaths as narrow as 1metre.

Iwannahurl

The dominant culture does not permit it, in the same way that the dominant culture seeks to sideline or silence debate about it.

Victor

L1011 wrote: »

This isn't the conspiracy theory forum - and the rest of your post is pretty much entirely suited for there, not here.

Constructive posts only please.

Moderator

galwaydemocrat

I've been following this thread with interest. The N6 project is now really taking on some legs, or rather "wheels". At a community meeting in Galway last night we learned that the entire scheme is being driven by the National Roads Authority (NRA), who have no mandate from Galway City & Council. It appears the NRA are invoking a little used European Directive which allows them to take direct action to enforce a piece of infrastructure development, in contravention of Galway's 2011-2017 Development Plan. This is supposed to be "in the public interest". But who's public interest -- the occasional visitor from D4 who likes to bypass Galway on her way to a holiday home in Spiddal?

It looks like the people of Galway are not bright enough to plan the development of our own city. So the nice folks from the NRA will do it for us -- they know best! They obviously have a grand vision for the future of our city, one that includes a €500-700 million ring-road motorway to perpetuate year's of bad regional planning. This will allow us to build even more houses on the West of the city and provide a motorway to connect them all to work on the East side, while ignoring the obvious elephants in the Council chamber -- the lack of road infrastructure on the East of the city; the lip service to public transport; oh, and what about that Dockland Development Plan -- is there a road for that..? Makes sense..?

Now that the NRA is going to write our new Galway Development Plan, does this mean that we can retire our entire Galway City and Council..? Makes the Irish Water mess look like a Monet!

Had a spiel ready then I checked your account, 1 post troll, so meh, why bother

veryangryman

galwaydemocrat wrote: »

I've been following this thread with interest. The N6 project is now really taking on some legs, or rather "wheels". At a community meeting in Galway last night we learned that the entire scheme is being driven by the National Roads Authority (NRA), who have no mandate from Galway City & Council. It appears the NRA are invoking a little used European Directive which allows them to take direct action to enforce a piece of infrastructure development, in contravention of Galway's 2011-2017 Development Plan. This is supposed to be "in the public interest". But who's public interest -- the occasional visitor from D4 who likes to bypass Galway on her way to a holiday home in Spiddal?

It looks like the people of Galway are not bright enough to plan the development of our own city. So the nice folks from the NRA will do it for us -- they know best! They obviously have a grand vision for the future of our city, one that includes a €500-700 million ring-road motorway to perpetuate year's of bad regional planning. This will allow us to build even more houses on the West of the city and provide a motorway to connect them all to work on the East side, while ignoring the obvious elephants in the Council chamber -- the lack of road infrastructure on the East of the city; the lip service to public transport; oh, and what about that Dockland Development Plan -- is there a road for that..? Makes sense..?

Now that the NRA is going to write our new Galway Development Plan, does this mean that we can retire our entire Galway City and Council..? Makes the Irish Water mess look like a Monet!

National Road authority funnily enough, have juristiction over national roads. Especially Primary ones with high traffic volumes that clearly require upgrade or replacement.

Galway CC can work on the city itself outside of this.

monument

[Deleted User] wrote: »

Had a spiel ready then I checked your account, 1 post troll, so meh, why bother

Calling people trolls in C&T is not allowed.

Beside: We get many new users and many long-term users started posting on a heated enough topic or at least on a topic which there was strong disagreement on -- single issues sometimes turns lurkers to posters or brings in people who do not post regularly.

View the above as a warning.

Do not reply to this post.

-- moderator

SeanW

galwaycyclist wrote: »

There is no long distance traffic as such. The only source or destination for long distance traffic coming through Galway City is South/West Conemara which has a negligible population.

False. Virtually all of Western Galway county can only reach points East by going through Galway City. Everything as far North and West as Clifden on the N59.

The arguments around the by pass seem to centre on the idea that, of itself, it is valid means of managing traffic that has its destination within the city.

This is a ridiculous idea.

Equally ridiculous is the idea that all that East-West traffic should not only continue to be driven through Galway City (e.g. Clifden-Dublin, Spiddal-Athenry etc), but that this traffic should be subject to congestion charging, 30kph speed limits, bus lanes and other "traffic demand management" strategies. Which is the position of the main bypass detractor on boards.

A "bypass" or ring route in some form may form part of a solution for such traffic but only if accompanied by a range of other measures. Many of which could be applied now without blowing more state funds on an over-engineered road.

Bypasses are only concerned with the removal of long distance traffic from towns/cities they have no business in. Nothing else.

What is done with the bypassed space is by default a separate issue, by defintion not the concern of a bypass.

Mrs OBumble

galwaydemocrat wrote: »

It looks like the people of Galway are not bright enough to plan the development of our own city.

... while ignoring the obvious elephants in the Council chamber -- the lack of road infrastructure on the East of the city; the lip service to public transport; oh, and what about that Dockland Development Plan -- is there a road for that..? Makes sense..?

You make some good points (though I'm not so sure about lack of road infrastructure in the east).

But re your first sentence, ahh, history would seem to indicate that this is true. We couldn't even manage to start a bike-rental scheme by ourselves!

what_traffic

SeanW wrote: »

False. Virtually all of Western Galway county can only reach points East by going through Galway City. Everything as far North and West as Clifden on the N59.

You will need to re-read the sentence again from galwaycyclist. You are trying to counter argue on a statement that is not related to the point they are making? The never state that one can reach points in the East of the County by NOT going via Galway City?

Can you elaborate further on the following sentence:

What is done with the bypassed space is by default a separate issue, by
defintion not the concern of a bypass.

Does not make sense to me?

veryangryman

National roads authority are responsible for National roads. What goes on in a city itself is not their concern. If the current N6 road is shown to be not fit for purpose, there becomes an argument to upgrade or replace it.

I've said it before and ill say it again, I cannot wait to see this road open, ESPECIALLY for commuters. Bring it on.

Iwannahurl

veryangryman wrote: »

I've said it before and ill say it again, I cannot wait to see this road open, ESPECIALLY for commuters. Bring it on.

From the Galway Independent, 11th February 2015, page 4 ("Galway facing 'civil war' over bypass project"):

Eileen McCarthy, project manager for Arup consulting engineers, pointed out that just 5% of commuters along the proposed route would travel the entirety of the journey, while 58% of trips across the River Corrib were entirely within Galway City. This, she said, meant that an Outer Bypass was not the solution to Galway's traffic woes.

Well well well.

Let's just consider that again. Arup's analysis indicates that "just 5% of commuters" would travel "the entirety of the journey". My understanding of this figure is that only five in every hundred trips on an "outer bypass" would comprise motorists actually bypassing Galway en route to other destinations.

Meanwhile, 58% of trips across the river (many via The Auld Triangle, presumably) are "entirely within Galway City".

The implication, according to the project consultants quoted in the article, is that an Outer Bypass is not the solution to Galway City's absurd levels of car traffic.

We have had for years, in this thread and elsewhere, repeated claims that (a) an "outer bypass" is needed to rescue all those unfortunates in Connemara who are "cut off" from the rest of the country, and (b) that "traffic that doesn't need or want to be there" is the cause of all the traffic congestion.

Now it turns out that the volume of car commuting within the city is more than ten times greater than that due to "bypassable" traffic, and that's just cars crossing the river.

So it seems that, all along, many if not most "bypass" advocates were really looking for the expenditure of €300 million (2010 estimate), and now €500-750 million, to enable them to stay in their cars while travelling at most 13 km across, or within, a small west European town of around 75,000 people.

Is that what we are proposing to tell the EU when attempting to justify a major road-building project? Or is there some new spin that will explain away the 58% of within-city trips and the consultants' reported warning that "an Outer Bypass is not the solution"?

SeanW

what_traffic wrote: »

You will need to re-read the sentence again from galwaycyclist. You are trying to counter argue on a statement that is not related to the point they are making? The never state that one can reach points in the East of the County by NOT going via Galway City?

Galwaycyclist said that only Connemara was of importance. That is false, there are a number of small towns affected by the current setup, physically it's also an extremely large area to be so affected.

Can you elaborate further on the following sentence:
...
Does not make sense to me?

It's very simple.

A bypass has one function. To redirect long distance traffic out of a city/town. Nothing else.

Those opposing a bypass have been trying to confuse the issue by wondering what the bypass is going to do for their agenda (IWH, I'm looking at you) or against it. Some have made it clear that they want the traffic mess to continue - including the inappropriate routing of long distance traffic through city streets - until their agenda (bus lanes, cycle lanes, congestion charging) has been implemented as the "solution" and possibly forever. We are supposed to believe that Clifden-Leinster traffic should be dealt with by congestion charging, reallocation of N6 capacity to bus/cycle lanes, 30kph speed limits and so on, because the alternative is to cook the planet with global warming, more so than the 2 or 3 coal fired power plants the Indians/Chinese add to their grids every week ...

cgcsb

SeanW wrote: »

Galwaycyclist said that only Connemara was of importance. That is false, there are a number of small towns affected by the current setup, physically it's also an extremely large area to be so affected.

It's very simple.

A bypass has one function. To redirect long distance traffic out of a city/town. Nothing else.

Those opposing a bypass have been trying to confuse the issue by wondering what the bypass is going to do for their agenda (IWH, I'm looking at you) or against it. Some have made it clear that they want the traffic mess to continue - including the inappropriate routing of long distance traffic through city streets - until their agenda (bus lanes, cycle lanes, congestion charging) has been implemented as the "solution" and possibly forever. We are supposed to believe that Clifden-Leinster traffic should be dealt with by congestion charging, reallocation of N6 capacity to bus/cycle lanes, 30kph speed limits and so on, because the alternative is to cook the planet with global warming, more so than the 2 or 3 coal fired power plants the Indians/Chinese add to their grids every week ...

As ARUP have determined, only 5% of traffic would be made up of people avoiding Galway. You just can't justify a €300m-€750m spend on taking a few minutes off less than 1,000 irregular journeys.

BRT, park 'n' ride, removal of City Centre parking and strict planning laws are the long term solution to congestion and car dependency.

Carawaystick

The number IWH quoted would exclude traffic from Bearna goin to the tuam road; all traffic on the Headford road and Clifden road.

Mrs OBumble

Carawaystick wrote: »

The number IWH quoted would exclude traffic from Bearna goin to the tuam road;

Rightly so - because this traffic would not by bypassing the city.

Carawaystick wrote: »

The number IWH quoted would exclude ... all traffic on the Headford road and Clifden road.

Traffic on the Headford Rd has very little to gain from a bypass, and would be by-passing very little of it.

Traffic on the Moycullen / Oughterard / Clifden Rd would have something to gain though, and IMHO should be included in the "genuinely bypassing the city" category. But if Barna + Spiddal etc to the other side traffic is only 5%, then I'm finding it hard to imagine that traffic ex Clifden et al is a lot more.

And if the existing roads were freed up by providing mode-shifts for intra-city travelers, then these people would get the benefits of the bypass without the huge costs.

galwaydemocrat

Urban development is not simply a zero-sum game with Pro and Anti development factions. We need development and investment in Galway to create an attractive and economically viable small city. But we need the right investment on sound projects that will lead to sustainable returns on taxpayers money. Earlier posters have highlighted the stupidity of building a €500-700m Galway by-pass for less than 5% of the traffic. Sounds like the same logic that drove the €105m waste of money on the Western Rail Corridor. Just goes to show -- the pro-rail and pro-automobile lobbies are capable of the same cognitive dissonance.

KevR

Iwannahurl wrote: »

The implication, according to the project consultants quoted in the article, is that an Outer Bypass is not the solution to Galway City's absurd levels of car traffic.

The new road not being a solution to Galway's traffic problems is your opinion.

Adding significant extra East-West road capacity in Galway will dramatically relieve congestion on existing routes. Therefore, it is a good solution to Galway's traffic problems.

Not really sure what your actual issue is with a new road being built. Does it all boil down to environmental concerns? If so, that is absolutely valid. Hypothetically...if there was a widespread shift towards electric cars powered by clean green energy, would you still be militant against cars and new roads, or would you ease off a bit?

I do think it's a bit of a waste of your own energy objecting against car use and roads. I just don't ever see there being a modal shift to the point that will make you happy. When you outline the various ways in which people can be 'discouraged' from their cars, you are basically admitting that private car transport is better than all of the alternatives. Why else would people need to be discouraged??

Without doing anything to discourage car use, can the alternatives be improved to the point where they compete with private car use in terms of convenience, comfort and flexibility?

Galway - Dublin coach services have improved immensely since the motorway between the two cities opened. Go Bus and City Link are legitimate contenders to people getting into their cars and driving to Dublin. This was not achieved by introducing anti-car measures. It was only possible by increasing road capacity four-fold on the route (and spending a lot of money in the process)! Do you think that a significant capacity increase in Galway City will offer nothing to bus operators?? To me, it's quite clear that bus operators will benefit greatly.

I get the impression that you think it has to be new road or public transport. It is definitely not a case of "either or". If bus operators in the city have their act together, they will be able to market/offer faster and improved bus services from the day that the new road opens.

Iwannahurl wrote: »

Is that what we are proposing to tell the EU when attempting to justify a major road-building project?

We don't have to justify road projects to the EU.

We built 1000km of motorway in the past decade or so. Why would the EU care about a 20km road in Galway if impact on the conservation area can be minimised? Even if they do care, they might not be given a say - if I am not mistaken, the Supreme Court is under no obligation to refer a case to the ECJ..

SeanW

cgcsb wrote: »

As ARUP have determined, only 5% of traffic would be made up of people avoiding Galway. You just can't justify a €300m-€750m spend on taking a few minutes off less than 1,000 irregular journeys.

As I showed in the other thread, the Arup report, or IWHs spin on it, or - more likely - both, are skewed to the point of absurdity. As are your contributions.

1. The 5% figure applies only to "commuters" but the roads are not just used for commuting, they are also used for leisure, business and social purposes, all modes. The M7/M8 motorway was built the whole way between Dublin and Cork, did that have anything to do with "commuters" or did that have more to do with the need to provide a safe, fast, road appropriate for long distance usage?
2. The figure also excludes legitimate bypass-ey usage that would not use the entire scheme. For example, for a bypass extending from the current M6 to the Connemara road, the Clifden-Leinster route would not use all of the bypass, just the bit between the N59 junction and the M6 tie-in. The same is true of a routing such as Tuam-Spiddal, which would not use the section leading to the M6 tie-in. By virtue of "not using the whole journey" would traffic on this routing be excluded from the 5% figure? If it is, that's a second good reason to disregard the Arup report as being slanted, your/IWHs analysis of it, or both.
3. Your and IWHs analysis assumes that any off-label use would necessarily be a bad thing. This too is questionable for two reasons:
   1) The Chamber of Commerce has already said they hope that diverting traffic out of town will bring in more shoppers. Retail business is a key part of any regions health and their position should be considered fairly. IWH treats them with contempt
   2) It would be much easier to get to Salthill, which is a major part of Galway's tourist industry. Currently, daytrippers and the like must travel through lots of residential zones to get to the Salthill prom. Would a route involving more motorway and less residential streets not be in everyone's interest?
4. It has been repeatedly stated that the current N6 is not fit for purpose - mostly by those on your side. IWH complained bitterly about some roundabouts that were subsequently removed, as being hostile to pedestrians etc, and also about some 100kph on the better sections of the N6 in the city as being hostile to the locals. This is notan approriate way to treat a National Primary road - either it is fit for its purpose as a long distance route (in which case it should be purposed primarily for that), or it is not (which means it should be replaced with a route that is appropriate). Which is it?