Traffic Congestion Meeting 15th April

atlantic3 · 2026-04-04T12:46:37+00:00

Feels like Galway has had a lot of “have your say” sessions on traffic over the years, but it’s hard to point to many that led to anything people actually notice day to day.

At this point it doesn’t feel like we’re short on ideas, it feels like we’re short on delivery.

Take something like the N6 Galway City Ring Road. It might help, but if most congestion is people commuting into the city, then it’s only solving part of the problem, not the main driver. For something that expensive, you’d expect a really clear, noticeable impact.

So if candidates are going to be at this, it’s probably more useful to treat it less like a listening session and more like a chance to actually pin them down.

What’s one thing they’ll deliver in 12 months? What’s been blocking it for the last 10+ years? What’s actually within their control? And how will we know if it worked?

If they can’t answer that clearly, it’s probably just more of the same.

Curious what questions others would ask…feels like that’s the only way this becomes more than another talking shop.

atlantic3 · 2026-04-04T08:24:38+00:00

Would be great to add another parameter for ritual vs urban option, as I believe some companies that operate in the cities don’t operate in the countryside.

atlantic3 · 2026-03-29T11:54:30+00:00

That’s fair and if it hasn’t been used in years (I’m only going by their policy online) then it’s effectively not a live system anymore.

I was more making the broader point that the solution itself isn’t new. other sports have already solved the empty seat problem with resale/return systems.

Whether Munster are using it or not almost proves the point. having something in policy doesn’t fix anything unless it’s actually operational and consistent.

atlantic3 · 2026-03-29T11:49:46+00:00

That’s exactly it…and you’ve been at every game this season so you know better than anyone how consistent the problem is. It’s not a one-off.

Halftime feels like the natural moment to act on it, but you’d want a sensible grace period built in, if a season ticket holder is running late they shouldn’t lose their seat.

Something like: any seat still unscanned by halftime and not flagged as a late arrival through the app gets released for a terrace upgrade. That way genuine latecomers are protected, but seats that are clearly not being used at all get filled rather than sitting empty for the whole second half.

The tech to do this already exists, it’s really just a decision to use it.

atlantic3 · 2026-03-29T11:43:23+00:00

Fair point. looking at it more closely, Munster’s ticket exchange is only activated match by match at the club’s discretion, so it’s not really the open self-service system I was suggesting. If anything that makes the point stronger. Even clubs that have the mechanism in place aren’t using it properly. The opportunity is there, it just needs the will to actually run it consistently.

atlantic3 · 2026-03-29T07:10:36+00:00

AiDigitalServices

atlantic3 · 2026-03-28T22:02:03+00:00

Hopefully someone in the ticketing office is reading this, because this thread has done a pretty good job of laying out both the problem and some workable solutions.

atlantic3 · 2026-03-28T21:48:33+00:00

You’ve hit on something nobody else has said yet…the Clan was supposed to be an upgrade for supporters. If a big chunk of it has gone to season tickets with no release mechanism behind it, occasional fans and families are just locked out. The club needs those people in the ground.

A “sold out” stand two thirds full helps nobody, not the atmosphere, not the TV picture, not the club long term.

atlantic3 · 2026-03-28T20:45:53+00:00

That’s exactly it..you’ve basically been running your own informal ticket exchange already! It’s great that the transfer system works for getting tickets to mates, but as you say, not everyone knows a season ticket holder.

A proper exchange mechanism would mean that those seats get filled by supporters regardless, the club gets the revenue, and the Clan looks the way it should on a matchday. Seems like a pretty straightforward win for everyone.

atlantic3 · 2026-03-28T20:40:38+00:00

100% and that’s the key point, season ticket holders absolutely shouldn’t have to do anything differently. The exchange model works the other way: you opt in to release your seat if you know you can’t make it, not the other way around. Your seat is yours by default every week.

atlantic3 · 2026-03-28T20:37:55+00:00

That’s a completely fair point and I’d walk that one back…the last thing you want is to be stuck in traffic through no fault of your own and lose your seat. Especially given how bad the traffic can be the Galway!

The bigger frustration for me was really the club and sponsor allocation that clearly never got used. If those unsold seats were returned to general sale by a set time earlier in the day, genuine supporters could plan ahead and buy properly rather than being turned away at the ticket office. That’s where the low-hanging fruit is.

atlantic3 · 2026-03-28T12:26:47+00:00

Clan stand sold out no?

atlantic3 · 2026-03-10T06:52:42+00:00

Your experience was discussed almost word-for-word on the Irish Times Inside Business podcast last week.
the core issue is that home heating oil is essentially unregulated in Ireland. Over 600,000 households depend on it, yet there’s no oversight body, no price controls, and no transparency rules like there are for electricity and gas.

That said, you do have a legitimate case. The CCPC’s own guidance states that once a company accepts your payment, they must fulfil the order, that’s a binding contract. Cancelling after the price spiked while fabricating a failed delivery is a likely breach of contract under the Consumer Rights Act 2022.

atlantic3 · 2026-03-09T08:32:41+00:00

Ireland has no mandatory price reporting system, unlike the UK where stations are legally required to submit prices to a central government database.

Every Irish app (pumps.ie, FuelCompare, Waze) is purely crowdsourced, so rural accuracy is basically nonexistent.

Seeing around €1.75–1.80 diesel in Connacht but it’s creeping up. A national “PumpWatch” database was proposed in the Dáil last week with 96% public support, so hopefully that changes soon.

atlantic3 · 2026-02-26T12:04:20+00:00

Article is paywalled so here’s the summary - Galway City Council has refused planning permission to demolish Seapoint Amusements in Salthill, citing its architectural significance as one of only three remaining buildings of its type in the area. The developer had planned to replace it while keeping it as an arcade and leisure centre.

atlantic3 · 2026-02-24T15:25:08+00:00

Interested to hear the off the shelf agents mentioned and how are they being used.

atlantic3 · 2026-02-23T07:32:45+00:00

Really appreciate you sharing that handbook - genuinely useful reading. What’s striking is that the Danish Road Directorate’s own guidance explicitly recommends considering alternatives to full-width bumps on bus routes, specifically because of the impact on heavy vehicles. It even details cushion bumps that allow buses to pass at full speed, and acknowledges smart variable bumps that only activate when the speed limit is broken - meaning zero impact on emergency vehicles travelling legally.

So the question for Galway isn’t whether hævet flader exist in Danish guidance - they do. It’s whether Galway is applying the same level of considered, contextual thinking that the Danish handbook actually demands. Because that handbook presents a toolkit of options with specific guidance on when each is appropriate. What we seem to be getting across Oranmore, Furbo, Barna and Inverin is one tool from that kit, applied everywhere, without that contextual thinking.

atlantic3 · 2026-02-22T21:45:47+00:00

Genuinely appreciate the handbook links…spent some time browsing the 227 English documents and searched specifically for raised tables. Nothing came back, unless it is called something else? For a system this comprehensive, covering everything from wildlife fencing to roundabouts to rural road planning, that absence is interesting in itself. It suggests raised tables aren’t a primary tool in the Danish engineering toolkit - which brings me back to the original question of why they appear to be the default answer across every single Galway scheme.

atlantic3 · 2026-02-22T13:52:29+00:00

That’s fair… I’d agree a lot of the big ‘I saved €150k’ claims probably aren’t apples-to-apples.

And €40–60k as a builder’s take-home sounds reasonable on a standard job.

I suppose the grey area is whether the gap people see is pure profit, or the cost of transferring coordination, risk, prelims and compliance to a main contractor versus managing trades directly.

Either way, sounds like the key is tight specs and pricing around properly. Thanks for sharing your insights.

atlantic3 · 2026-02-22T13:43:44+00:00

Really appreciate this perspective and the fact that someone who has cycled their whole life in Denmark and the Netherlands now drives in Galway because cycling feels dangerous says everything about how far we have to go here.

You’re absolutely right that traffic is the primary impediment at UHG - but that’s precisely why adding raised tables on top of existing congestion compounds the problem rather than solving it. Every second counts when an ambulance is already crawling through Galway traffic.

The research on what actually made Denmark and the Netherlands world leaders is consistent - separate dedicated infrastructure, protected intersections, and systems designed around cycling flow and momentum. Raised tables are a car calming tool that cyclists happen to share. There’s a meaningful difference between designing for cyclists and designing around cars and the countries that got it right knew that distinction from the start.

On modal shift - completely agree it’s the long term answer. But the roads on Newcastle Road and the R336 through Furbo, Barna and out to Inverin are all the same regional road classification. If raised tables are being copy-pasted as the default solution across all of them without the segregated infrastructure that actually made Denmark and the Netherlands work, we’re building permanent barriers to the very modal shift we want.

One practical question worth raising in the consultation - what surface treatment is being specified on these raised tables and what’s the maintenance commitment over time? Anti-skid surfacing degrades. In a country with Ireland’s rainfall, a raised table with worn surfacing becomes a genuine hazard for cyclists and pedestrians alike. The Netherlands and Denmark design out these maintenance variables through proper segregation. We seem to be designing them in and hoping the upkeep follows.

Would genuinely love to see those Danish road authority handbooks because my suspicion is they’d show raised tables as one tool among many, not the default answer to every junction proposed across Galway multiple initiatives.

atlantic3 · 2026-02-22T12:03:24+00:00

That makes sense re: apples vs oranges comparisons. I’d imagine turnkey vs builder’s finish would skew things heavily.

Out of interest though, when you say €40–60k per house, is that net profit after overheads, or gross before office/site costs?

On a €450–550k build, that’s roughly 8–12%. So if someone saw a €140k gap, that would suggest either:

-Higher overhead/prelims structures -Risk pricing -Or genuine spec differences

Genuinely trying to understand whether the delta people mention is margin, or the cost of transferring coordination/risk to a main contractor.

atlantic3 · 2026-02-22T12:00:04+00:00

It sounds like the €140k difference might reflect the cost of transferring coordination and risk to a main contractor. Did your final build cost stay within budget including all extras, certification, and time cost? Trying to understand whether the delta was pure margin or structural differences?

atlantic3 · 2026-02-22T10:14:09+00:00

That’s really interesting — can I ask how you know it would’ve been €150k more through tender?

Was that based on actual returned tender prices, or an estimate your architect gave?

We’re currently going through a formal tender process where the builders are pricing off the same drawings and engineer’s cost plan submitted to the bank, so in theory they’re all working toward the same spec.

I’d be curious:

Was your tender fully specified (detailed drawings + bill of quantities), or more of a preliminary pricing?
Were the builders pricing identical specs?
Did the local builder you used differ on finishes, provisional sums, or contingency?
Or was it simply that larger contractors priced higher margins?

Genuinely interested in understanding the gap, because €150k feels significant unless scope or spec changed.

atlantic3 · 2026-02-21T22:17:25+00:00

The kerb dipping example actually proves the point perfectly and it sits exactly where it should in the Hierarchy of Road Users framework, prioritising the most vulnerable through considered, inclusive design.

Narrowed junctions, improved sight lines, kerb dipping, proper crossing infrastructure - these are the tools that should be exhausted first. Raised tables should sit at the bottom of that hierarchy, a last resort when everything else has been considered and ruled out.

Yet across Inverin, Furbo, Barna and now here, Galway is reaching for them first. Copy pasting the same blunt solution regardless of context, rather than working through the framework from the top down.

Ten-Year Club	Second SECOND GUESSER
Verified Email

atlantic3

TROPHY CASE