Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie
Help Keep Boards Alive. Support us by going ad free today. See here: https://subscriptions.boards.ie/.
If we do not hit our goal we will be forced to close the site.

Current status: https://keepboardsalive.com/

Annual subs are best for most impact. If you are still undecided on going Ad Free - you can also donate using the Paypal Donate option. All contribution helps. Thank you.

M6 - Galway City Ring Road [planning decision pending]

1172173175177178190

Comments

  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 7,472 ✭✭✭Pete_Cavan


    Galway could have had plenty of infrastructure money but they chose to spend the last decade trying to ram through a project which obviously wasn't going to happen. They refused to even consider spending money on anything else.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 32 meat eating green


    lol

    They can’t even build a bicycle path in Galway

    They are doomed to gridlock

    It should be renamed Lucan-upon-sea but would reflect badly on that roundabout paradise



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 5,751 ✭✭✭veryangryman


    Waterford is in between a major port and a large city though so bypassing it is strategic for alot of non city traffic.

    Galway doesn't have enough non city traffic to justify building it before Waterfords.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 289 ✭✭scrabtom


    One minister but what a minister Martin Cullen was for Waterford. He was relentlessly focused on getting things built for Waterford. We got the M9 (without tolls), the Waterford bypass and the Waterford Ring Road all built in the time he was a minister. Obviously it would be better if ministers were more focused on the National picture but there's no doubt he had a huge impact on Waterford's transport infrastructure.

    I recommend this interview he did recently where he talks about his time as a minister in relation to Waterford, and particularly building the M9.

    https://open.spotify.com/episode/2WxuYaKzvYKseQ3w78nkPr?si=51920c2b0f0c4877

    For anything aside from the big projects the council is what is important though I agree and Waterford Council is pretty well regarded, especially compared to Galway City Council.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,768 ✭✭✭KrisW1001


    I’d argue that Cullen was good at delivery, full stop. His angling for Waterford pre-dates his time at Transport. The story you’re referring to isn’t in that episode, but in this one: 'Deise Today' special: Martin Cullen in studio with Damien Tiernan • Déise Today (from 23’00”)

    From the people he’s mentioning, it’s clear that he’s talking about the 1990s, not the 2000s. Summary: in late 1990s the original plan for Dublin to the southeast was to upgrade N11, Cullen lobbied for the N9 corridor to be used instead on the basis that it served more of the country, at planning, the design of the motorway sections was planned to start at Newbridge (he says “Naas”, but M9 already existed to south of Newbridge at this time) and move south, and he insisted that the design work should start at the Waterford end and move north instead.

    What’s untrue is the claim that an upgrade of N9 was excluded from the NDP, because here’s the text:

    image.png

    …yes, it wasn't drawn in on the map at the back as a “motorway”, but it was to be built as at least a dual carriageway, which is exactly what happened (there was no 2+2 type in those days: almost all of these roads except M1 were built as that “improved dual carriageway” standard, but then redesignated as motorway in 2009). I give credit to Cullen for making sure N9 was on that list, rather than N11, but by the time he was Minister for Transport, the plans were already in place and he didn’t have to do anything to “push” them.

    It’s debatable how much push was needed for N25 Waterford, as this was always a high-priority scheme, and the Waterford Outer Ring Road was the work of the City Council.

    I’m from Waterford but now live in Cork, and from following the growth of both cities over the last 20-30 years, it has always struck me just how much better Waterford’s land management and planning is compared to Cork’s (and in terms of civic spaces, Waterford is far ahead of Cork). Waterford County is pretty good too: compare the development of Tramore with that of Carrigaline. Galway’s ineptitude, however, makes Cork look like Helsinki by comparison.



  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 289 ✭✭scrabtom


    Interesting, thanks for the breakdown and apologies for linking the wrong episode.

    I think we do have to give him a lot of credit for starting construction of the M9 from Waterford at least. It's hard to think it wouldn't have been curtailed if it had started at the other end.

    I did hear from someone in Tramore involved in a civic organisation there that she was much happier since the councils were merged, as previously the County Council directed all of it's focus to the Western side of the County and tended to ignore Tramore. It is a lovely town though so they can't have been doing that bad of a job alright.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,768 ✭✭✭KrisW1001


    It was the design that started at the Waterford end: the two southern segments of M9 (Carlow-Knocktopher, Knocktopher-Waterford) were actually the last to be built. And yes, credit is due to Cullen for insisting on this order.

    From what I understand of the merger, former-City staff now have responsibility for the eastern half of the county, and former-County staff manage the west.

    To drag this back on topic (sorry everyone else), one problem with Galway is that it is still a City and County council, and with the best will in the world, that can lead to in-fighting. In what I think is an example of this, at its eastern side, the routing of N6 runs entirely within the City council boundaries rather than taking a wider orbit that would be more useful as a bypass. I can’t help thinking that this very urban route was chosen partly on the basis of keeping commercial rates income for any new development within the City Council area… I’m at a loss to see any other reason for making the road so much more expensive to build than an alternative routing to the east of the Galway Technology Park, rather than between that park and the Racecourse.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 3,704 ✭✭✭hans aus dtschl


    Your last paragraph is what I was going to post. The same issue affecting Galway is exactly what caused Cork to be such a historic mess. I believe that I've seen a big change in Cork since roughly the boundary re-drawing (2019?). The city council is focused on making the city work correctly and the county seems more interested in creating fully-functioning "market towns". We still have friction in places like Carrigtohill, Carrigaline (analogous to Oranmore, Claregalway) where the county is undermining the city but for the most part we're now seeing coherent overall transport and development plans with both councils better aligned.

    In Galway though I still see no signs of any strategic thinking on infrastructure. It's mostly still reactive. Outside of the GTS, Galway is where Cork was a decade or two ago.

    In terms of Cork benefitting from Dáil representation, I think the general consensus here is that Martin, Coveney, etc, have broadly been "country first" and ignored most local big topics. Events centre, NM20, N25, Luas, N40 North, etc, there's a long list of local projects they just didn't get behind or pull strings on. And to be honest I don't have strong belief that we'll see a Luas in Cork within 20 years.

    Our local authorities are better on infrastructure than Galways, but we're still not where we need to be.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,824 ✭✭✭Markus Antonius


    Was never going to happen with all the "Green" quackery going around Galway the last 10 years. Now that they have been successfully upgraded from the "endangered list" to "near extinct" we can finally get out of the 1980s.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,824 ✭✭✭Markus Antonius


    Yet another reason not to vote for Hildegarde. Was stuck in gridlock traffic one evening and saw her walking down the path from her office. She kept her face turned away from all the sardines trying float their way home. Must get some abuse shouted at her.



  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 7,688 ✭✭✭timmyntc


    The ring road is not going to make driving in the city centre any better. Galway's city centre will always be gridlock because there are too many cars for such narrow streets and too many people decide to drive in and out at rush hour.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 19 Jim Cryton


    Nonsense. A significant proportion is through traffic - going east to west or vice versa. Not to mention heavy vehicles like trucks. It won't totally solve city centre traffic but it will help to a major extent.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,768 ✭✭✭KrisW1001


    According to the traffic surveys for this project, just 5% of traffic in Galway crosses the Corrib.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 3,704 ✭✭✭hans aus dtschl


    Sadly according to the traffic modelling the majority of traffic originates and terminates in the city.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,499 ✭✭✭McGrath5


    More car infrastructure will only encourage more driving. If this road goes ahead all it will do is encourage more urban sprawl and more people driving into and around the city.

    The only way out of this mess for Galway is for proper alternatives like protected cycle lanes, bus priority & heavily restrict car access to the city.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 8,300 ✭✭✭Wompa1


    Why not both? Do what the Dutch have done with Utrecht. They famously actually removed a motorway that was going through the city to restore canal access and green areas. They put a focus on public transport and cycle infrastructure but also built up A2, A27, and N230. Their park and ride integration involves parking at the stops along the rail routes. People living on the outskirts can park up and jump on the train or cycle and hop on the train. We are missing all of it. Including the ring road that they have since their main roads go along the perimeter of the city.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 32 meat eating green


    that Sounds like an efficient green strategy to me

    … not for Galway then



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 103 ✭✭ultraviolence


    'More car infrastructure will encourage driving' so? and what's wrong with that ? driving is a valid mode of transport which people are allowed to choose and travel by.

    We had a general election in November where the majority voted for parties and td's that support the construction of 'car infrastructure'. Throughout the election campaign FF AND FG made it clear that there will be a heavy focus on road infrastructure, and people voted for that. Nowhere did they state no more roads. (and parties that did say no more roads, well, i guess there wasn't any demand for such views as they did not get enough seats to form a government)

    A few people on here may not like to see roads being built but your views are not reflected by the majority lol.

    And in galway's case, the election results speak for themselves.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 7,472 ✭✭✭Pete_Cavan


    And in galway's case, the election results speak for themselves.

    Well what speaks even louder than election results are court case results, and that's where the Galway Ring Road keeps failing. You can't just not comply with national or EU regulations because they don't suit you. Maybe they should start off by trying to design a solution which might actually clear all the necessary hurdles instead of spending years on something which they admit will do little to resolve Galway's traffic problems.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,451 ✭✭✭Consonata


    Building a giant road going around the city, is going to do sweet FA for the traffic going into the city. Where do you propose to dump these dual-carriageway worth of cars to?



  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 68 ✭✭jopper


    See it’s not solely about traffic going into the city centre. Yes city centre traffic might still be congested with a ring road but Look at the N17 with traffic out passed the racecourse entrance, Westside, Headford road, Quincentennial Bridge, Bóthar na dTteabh to name but a few all choked with traffic every single day! Many (I would personally say vast majority) are just trying to get from side to the other. With only 4 vehicle bridges crossing the river corrib only 1 of which being designed for modern day car use (built in 1984)!

    Look when it rains, when a car breaks down or a minor accident the traffic across the city comes to a standstill. And don’t get me started for big events, Macnas parade, big match day in Pearse stadium etc etc!

    A ring road is paramount to Galway’s development and was due 20 years ago! The ring road will also spur on and have a knock on effect of further developments and possibly new retail centres etc along the ring road further eliminating further traffic needs of going into the city.

    Then maybe then, once ring road is completed public transport can be really targeted. The previously tried park and ride from the racecourse with no bus lane for only the bus to be stuck in the same traffic you would be in anyway in your car…..



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 103 ✭✭ultraviolence


    Regardless if this project or any other project ends up at court does not negate the fact that there is public and political support for such schemes.

    The small but loud 'no more roads' group on here seem to want their views implemented by the government even though the government did not run on such views. Again, fine gael nor fianna fail have stated their objection to road infrastructure and im confused as to why they should listen to you and not the people that voted for them?

    Thats just my two cents… I've been reading the infrastructure section on here for the past few years and no matter what road project is being discussed, you will be subjected to anti road talking points.

    At the end of the day, if you don't want roads built then vote for political candidates with such views, but don't be surprised when they aren't elected, or if elected but dont have enough seats to form a govt.. ( as seen in the last general election ) and you find out that you're in the minority with such views



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,451 ✭✭✭Consonata


    As has already been said, only single digit &ages are traffic crossing the corrib, the vast vast majority is traffic into the city



  • Moderators, Motoring & Transport Moderators Posts: 14,120 Mod ✭✭✭✭monument


    This is one of the most inaccurate views of transport planning in Utrecht that I've ever seen.

    "They famously actually removed a motorway that was going through the city to restore canal access and green areas."

    That's not the half of it, Utrecht is systematically removing road capacity inside the motorway network, including a good bit out from the city centre and with no corresponding extra capacity being added to the motorway network. And nobody in authority in Galway has any kind of plan to have even a tiny sprinkling of the traffic reduction capacity reduction as has happened in Utrecht in the last 15 years.

    "They put a focus on public transport and cycle infrastructure but also built up A2, A27, and N230."

    Look at 100km radii around Utrecht, with some overlap -- there are 7-8 million people north of Utrecht, nearly 20 million people west of it, 16 million people south of it, and still over 5.6 million people east of it, around Amsterdam even tho most of the circle is in the sea. And both motorways in Utrecht are also part of a wider European network.

    West of Galway, there is only around 40k or 0.04m people west of Galway. So, you're talking apples and oranges even in terms of a pure motorway building mindset.

    As above, just 5% of traffic in Galway that crosses the Corrib is bypass traffic.

    As for "why not both" — the City of Utrecht and the Province of Utrecht are against the A27 widening and made the clear case that the national Dutch government's approach is about building more/wider roads and they are not providing for the public transport needed for the city's or regional's growth.

    The same apples in Galway — Galway is not getting a new motorway-like ring road to mainly serve the city, and also get the public transport it needs.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 8,300 ✭✭✭Wompa1


    How is it inaccurate? They did remove a motorway going through the city. The A2, A27 and N230 do form a perimeter around the city. Everything I said is true, regardless of whether people are against widening the roads there. It is still true. They can also take that position because they already have roads and public transportation options plus a world class cycling infrastructure. We don't have the roads, the cycling infrastructure or the public transports. All 3 have to be tackled.

    Councillors from Limerick, Cork and Galway all visited Utrecht including members of the transport strategy committee.

    Here is an excerpt from their study:

    Utrecht has a population of approximately 361,742 and would see themselves as leaders in terms of cycling. Helmets or high visibility clothes are not widely worn. Bicycles are cheap with an uncomplicated design. They are not anti-car. Over 50 % of houses have three bikes yet their car ownership is very high.They choose to cycle in the City Centre.

    Its estimated that close 2.7 million people from outside Galway visit the city each year as domestic or international tourists. The population in Galway was forecast to double by 2040 but since that forecast was published, the massive influx over the last 3 years occurred so it is going to outstrip that for sure. The rural bus network is hopefully getting massive improvements in the near future. Oranmore trains station is getting a passing track. Use of the train between Athenry and Galway and Oranmore and Galway has already increased by 25%+. No extra parking in sight for Athenry or Oranmore stations is a limiting factor as is the lack of work for Gort, Ardrahan and Craughwell. They did well by bringing ticket prices down. They also did well by increasing frequency already but a lot more is needed, imo including parking at the stations. As it is the illegal parking at Oranmore is a nuisance.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 5,045 ✭✭✭beggars_bush




  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 7,472 ✭✭✭Pete_Cavan


    There is no "'no more roads' group on here"' loud or otherwise, that is just you portraying yourself as a victim. People have been pointing out that what is proposed has serious flaws designed in (and the remedies inexplicably completely ignored in the design), such that it is likely incompatible with the laws it must comply with.

    You are just further pushing the fallacy that a small number of evil people are holding the GCRR back. The truth is that it is the design itself and the supporting documents prepared with it which are holding it back. Focusing on the current iteration (ignoring the previous proposal which wasted about a decade), it has been through ABP, then to the courts, currently back with ABP for reconsideration and will almost certainly go back to the courts (both Irish and European) after that. All because the project is fatally flawed and there is outright refusal to recognise this.

    Rambling on about public and political support is just a coping mechanism to continue the pretense that the design is sound rather than face reality.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 5,347 ✭✭✭what_traffic


    Oranmore train station might be getting a passing loop - but it will NOT be served by the LOCAL/City bus #404 into the station and the bus bay near the train platform will continue to be used for car parking in the train station. Bus users will have to walk 400 meters to the station to facilitate the convenience of car users at the station. It sums up Ireland when it comes to transport planning



  • Moderators, Motoring & Transport Moderators Posts: 14,120 Mod ✭✭✭✭monument


    "How is it inaccurate?"

    While loads of the facts you are mentioning are accurate, the picture you're cobbling together with them is very much so inaccurate. You're trying to portray Utrecht's approach as "both" and the Dutch motorway network as comparable to Galway and the area around it when:

    (1) Utrecht is systematically removing road capacity inside the motorway network, and nobody in authority in Galway has any kind of plan to do anything similar in Galway and, the planning files for the ring road show that many roads inside it will get busier after it is built,

    (2) that the Dutch motorways around Utrecht serve areas of tens of millions of people as well as international access to Dutch ports etc, vs 0.04m people west of Galway, and just 5% of traffic in Galway that crosses the Corrib is bypass traffic, so, the idea of bypass traffic in Galway is totally overstaed and the current ring roads are more than suited to the current and projected bypass traffic

    (3) that the City of Utrecht and the Province of Utrecht are against the A27 widening and made the clear case that the national Dutch government's approach is about building more/wider roads and they are not providing for the public transport needed for Utrecht's city or regional growth. Galway is the same — it's not going to get a new motorway-like ring road to mainly serve the city, and also get the public transport it needs.

    (4) Utrecht shows that a city can be rebalanced away from cars, with a huge reduction of car capacity, and the city can still grow and still the city centre is booming with shoppers, visitors etc. Clearly, Galway cannot take a leap the full way to where Utrecht is at but it provides an example of how the sky does not fall in when cars are restricted.

    (5) The issues you're mentioning with the need to fix public transport etc are not fixed by focusing on road building, see point number three above.



  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 103 ✭✭ultraviolence


    '' there is no "'no more roads' group on here"' loud or otherwise ''

    really? I must have read different comments these past few years then because its the same group of people stating on every road project thread that x y z shouldn't be built. ( even recently we see the usual lot complaining about the cabinet funding the ringaskiddy motorway project) So yes there is a group that think their views should be reflected in government policy even though the government does not support your views?

    The electorate voted in huge numbers for parties and tds that support building road infrastructure across the country. That is my main point. I responded to a general comment that said 'More roads will encourage driving'.(which i take it is directed to all* projects, not just this one) The people did not vote for no more roads or no more cars. That is all i have to say.



Advertisement