Getting around Galway

i will check again, as i'm sure they don't provide the data only the their analysis.

so will give another look.

I'll check to see if their methodology is stated if no data. My issue with data is that its subjective and can tell the story you want to tell. From a work perspective i found when questioned holes can be found. Their methodology can be flawed and assumptions will be based on that which is what i want to question.

i know a few people in the council, there are some real good people there that carry the weight for the most of them there, overworked and undervalued. As a result there are a vast amount of them that are clueless and management continue to add to that and give them permanent status or issues in which HR should be involved for Performance Improvement Plan but cba. common approach is shrug their shoulders, ah its "x" what can you do…

my point is there is a a lot of commercial traffic that transverse galway city to get to west, a lot of business out there would have vans,HGV's to them daily. that accounts for 1%? i think that is a fair point to make

Am not sure its useful to focus so much on this 1% anyhow IMHO - but it does just re-confirm again that Galway City is the destination for the VAST amount of CAR traffic on the National and Regional Roads approaching the City from West, North, South and East.

Ya as stated already but shure will state it again - Galway City is the destination.

Yes some of those PEOPLE are going to those IDA Industrial Estates with very poor public transport infrastructure by Euro standards.

Other PEOPLE going to Hospitals

PEOPLE going to University's

PEOPLE Shopping Centres

etc

etc

Need to allow PEOPLE to move about IMHO - not just cars

I think it's been said before but people latching onto the 1% or 3%, whatever it is, are doing so to try suit their argument, not to look at this objectively. Just because most of the traffic on the road wouldn't use the full length of it, doesn't mean that it won't be of benefit.

Building this road will be an undoubted benefit to Galway. The west of Ireland gets very little capital infrastructure. The more it gets the better. Don't let perfect be the enemy of good.

its going to get worse if they do nothing. yes they have plans for PT but that only works if its ran regularly and competently which can't be done in Ireland.

a new route over or under the river is needed. if the first application didn't get stopped by some "potential" harm bog cotton habitats it would be built by now.

also the reason ask about the 1 or 3 % is if that is wrong what else is wrong, no way to verify if their whole methodology is wrong. not unheard of.

GLUAS as much as would like it… can't see it happening unless developers are allowed to build up. planners prefer an unplanned sprawl which is where we are at now.

its going to get worse if they do nothing. yes they have plans for PT but that only works if its ran regularly and competently which can't be done in Ireland.

Yup. We can see that because they've done almost nothing waiting on this lame duck idea and things have gotten worse. I take PT fairly regularly and it works fine outside of peak hours and that's because it's stuck in the same traffic as everyone else. Dedicate space would solve that.

a new route over or under the river is needed. if the first application didn't get stopped by some "potential" harm bog cotton habitats it would be built by now.

As Unrealistic pointed out, it's a capacity increase we really need and moving to more efficient forms of transport would achieve this without a new route. Or we could just have a better planned route/infrastructure.

The reason for the initial rejection is irrelevant if it's going to worsen things (which the official reports say is going to happen if it's build). If it had been built way-back when first proposed then by the councils own reports, we'd probably be here discussing the need for one more ring road to fix things.

also the reason ask about the 1 or 3 % is if that is wrong what else is wrong, no way to verify if their whole methodology is wrong. not unheard of.

That's bad reductionism. Because someone, somewhere once got something wrong, this whole thing could equally be wrong. I'll remind you again that this is the official calculation of the council who have been trying to get this built for decades. Not some hippy on a mission.

The methodology is 100% available and explained in great detail from what I remember. The data might not be but that's not the methodology and not needed unless you think the professional engineers can't apply the calculations they work with every day. You haven't given us one reason to doubt the calculation other than you don't feel it's right. Leave the emotions out of it. They don't build bridges based on feelings. At least none that stay standing

Unless your experience is as a professional transport infrastructure planner who found issues with this engineering companies work before, then I don't think it's applicable without an indicator of flaws in their methodology or other bodies of work. Feel free to add them if they exist.

Your points are all revolving around your feeling that it should be different so not sure how else to describe it. Feel free to substitute "feelings" if you don't like the word "emotions". But still not a sound way to build major infrastructure projects. Particularly when the numbers are indicating it'll worsen the problem.

One of us read the reports and the other still won't yet has already disregarded things they don't like because they "feel" it's wrong. It's why I've generally stopped debating this topic. There's a large cohort who won't engage with any of the thousands of pages of reports but discard all the analysis showing it's a bad plan because they feel it should be a different result. There's no point trying to discuss something with people that are emotionally attached to their presupposed solution and ignore the analysis.

I've no idea what that last sentence means or is trying to say.

I'll leave you to it. The reports are there if you want to verify things. And you can email the council questions and they'll probably reply.

Rule enforcement would improve traffic too. All those light jumpers, junction blockers and "just popping in" parking have big knock on effects.

Never seems to be discussed though

Do both! But do the road first given that so much capital and time and process has been put into it. When it's done all the other things become easier. It becomes easier to build density inside the road, easier to argue for and implement bus corridors and then restrict the number of cars in the city centre. Park and ride becomes easier. They are not one or the other. At the moment, the road is more advanced than any tram project so let's get that over the line rather than having the cost of more years of no capital transport investment in Galway.

Yeah that's not what I said. And building the road will absolutely improve Galway. 1 billion is peanuts given the improvements it would lead to. 1 billions isn't even 1% of what the state spends each year. The biggest cost of all is the lack of development.

That's about as clear an example of the sunk cost fallacy as I've ever seen.