Comment & Analysis: Forty-five million euro – that’s how much has been spent by successive governments over the past 25 years on plans for a second bypass in Galway City – think of it as 134 Leinster House bike shelters, although to be fair, at least the €336,000 spent on the Leinster House bike shelter has left us with a functioning asset.
The €45 million spent to date on trying to build another ring road around Galway has left us with nothing but a history of failed planning applications and lost court cases, with no end in sight.
As we await yet another submission by Galway County Council to An Bord Pleanála, it’s worth taking stock of how we got here.
We can trace the origins of the current proposal back almost forty years. In 1987, the Quincentenary Bridge across the river Corrib was opened. It was the first new crossing of the river since the Galway to Clifden Railway opened in 1895, and it was deemed a necessary piece of infrastructure to take Connemara-bound traffic out of the city centre (sound familiar?).
And it worked…for a while…but as with all new road projects, the effects of induced demand were soon felt and by 1992, councillors in the then Galway Borough Council were calling for the establishment of a Transportation Committee to address congestion in the city.
Seven years later, in 1999, the Galway Transportation and Planning Study (GTPS) was published. It recommended a second bypass be constructed. It also recommended an improved bus service, the introduction of park-and-ride facilities, a new town of 20,000 people at Ardaun, and a demand-responsive rural bus service – all to be delivered at a cost of £169 million (€215 million).
26 years later, none of these measures have been delivered, and the price tag for building just the bypass element of this plan is estimated to be about €1 billion.
The focus over the intervening 26 years has been almost entirely on the delivery of a second bypass around the city. In 2004, Galway City Council and Galway County Council agreed to jointly progress the Galway City Outer Bypass with the then National Roads Authority (now Transport Infrastructure Ireland).
An Bord Pleanála granted planning permission for this project four years later in 2008, but this decision was appealed to the High Court and subsequently to the Supreme Court, which in turn referred it to the European Court of Justice. In 2013, almost a decade after the project was initiated, the ECJ ruled against the An Bord Pleanála decision on the grounds that the proposal would have a severe impact on a protected natural habitat.
At that stage, €14.7 million had been spent on the project, and the councils were back to square one.
Undeterred by this setback, the two councils immediately appointed a consultant team to develop a new proposal for a bypass. An initial public consultation process for the N6 Galway City Ring Road (GCRR) took place in 2015.
After a three-year design process followed by a further three-year planning process, An Bord Pleanála again granted planning permission for the road in 2021, and again, this was challenged at the High Court, which ultimately quashed the decision of An Bord Pleanála for failing to take the national Climate Action Plan into consideration.
In 2021, Galway West TD, Noel Grealish, noted in a Dáil question that €20 million had been spent on the GCRR project to date. Since then, a further €10.4m has been allocated to the project – €2m in 2022, €3m in 2023, €3m in 2024, and €2.4m in the most recent 2025 funding announcement by the Department of Transport.
This week, it has been reported that Galway County Council are on the verge of submitting revised documentation to An Bord Pleanála, which will presumably attempt to make the case that the road is aligned with the Climate Action Plan.
Given that the initial planning application predicted a 37% increase in CO2 emissions, the challenge ahead of them is a big one, with no guarantee of success. Based on the history of the project to date, it is not unreasonable to expect that even in the event of approval by An Bord Pleanála the decision will be challenged in the courts which is likely to add another three to five years to the project, and which will undoubtedly add to the costs of the project.
Given current levels of funding, we could see a total spend of up to €60 million before we are even ready to start the detailed design of the project. At some point, we need to ask ourselves, is this cost really worth it?
And the cost of the project to date is not just the money spent by the government to bring the project to this point. There is also an opportunity cost in having sunk all our hopes in a bypass as a solution to Galway’s transport problems to the exclusion of all other measures.
Over the last 26 years we have had report after report telling us that we need a public transport solution in Galway, from the 1999 Galway Transportation and Planning Study to the 2002 GTPS Integration Study, the 2007 Strategic Bus Study, the 2010 Public Transport Feasibility Study, the 2016 Galway Transport Strategy, the 2021 Five Cities Demand Management Research Report, the 2024 Light Rail Feasibility Study, and the long awaited but not yet published Galway Metropolitan Area Transport Study.
The message has been consistent across all reports “the need to reduce reliance on travel by private car…the need to improve accessibility for sustainable travel modes”. In those 26 years, we have all but ignored public transport and active travel and focused our energies and resources solely and entirely on the bypass.
And this focus has permeated the broader approach to planning in the city. We have planned the city over the last four or five decades with the private car as the primary mode of transport.
The city is surrounded by low-density suburban housing estates and dispersed rural communities which are difficult to service with an efficient, frequent and reliable bus service. There has been very little active travel infrastructure built in the city, and recent attempts to deliver such infrastructure have been stymied by a lack of political courage among both local and national representatives.
The result is high levels of car-dependency and high levels of stress at the congestion caused by this planning failure.
Thankfully, there has been some progress on the public transport front in recent years, led notably, not by the councils or Transport Infrastructure Ireland, but by the National Transport Authority who have expanded the Local Link service, are heading the BusConnects project, and have produced a feasibility study for light rail in Galway. The Local Link improvements have already started to have an impact on travel patterns within the city and environs.
The failure to develop sustainable transport solutions has also had an impact on the City Council’s ability to deliver housing at scale in the city – several developments have been refused planning permission by An Bord Pleanála in recent years because of a lack of available public transport or active travel infrastructure.
The uncertainty over the ring road has also played a part in stymying residential development. We have also seen An Bord Pleanála refuse permission for private housing developments because of the potential impact on a future ring road. The promise of the Ring Road has become an albatross around the neck of Galway City Council, and it is this uncertainty about the road, rather than the lack of it, that is holding back the development of the city.
It has often been suggested over the last two decades that the failure to deliver a ring road is a barrier to the growth of business in the city, but the evidence suggests otherwise. In 2019, the World Bank described Galway as “the most efficient” Irish city in which to start a business. In 2022, a Financial Times report listed Galway as one of Europe’s “best micro-cities for investment”.
Companies like Genesys and Dexcom have invested hugely in the region in recent years, seemingly unbothered by the concerns about the existing road infrastructure.
The shortage and the high cost of housing in the city means that people working in the large multinational companies in Galway are travelling from a wide hinterland. In fact, 50% of the working population in Galway travels from outside the city, with some travelling from as far away as Ballyvaughan, Co Clare, and Ballinrobe, Co Mayo.
The lack of sustainable transport options is hindering the development of housing, the lack of housing is pushing people further out of the city, and this, in turn, is increasing car-dependency, which fuels calls for more roads to be built. But clearly what is really needed is what we have been repeatedly told in successive reports over the last quarter of a century — a sustainable transport system that reduces car-dependency and allows for more dense development within the city boundaries.
We now find ourselves in a situation where we are continuing to spend millions of euro annually on a project which it is now estimated will cost upwards of €1 billion, with no clearly defined need for the project, with cheaper, better, less destructive and more sustainable alternatives available, and in the knowledge that the continued pursuit of the project is damaging to the development of the city.
At what point do we cut our losses and admit to ourselves that this road is going nowhere?
Ciarán Ferrie is an architect and transport planner.
Great piece, thank you!
The ring road is certainly needed. As more people achieve greater financial security, and as well paying tech jobs come to Galway in the form of Dexcom and other companies referenced, people can afford cars and free themselves from the constraints of public transportation routes and schedules. Many people value the independence that comes with having their own car. So whilst public transportation is important and necessary, so is a road infrastructure for private cars and commercial vehicles that facilitates efficient movement in and around the city.
There’s very little freedom or independence to be found in sitting in a car in stationery traffic not knowing when you are going to reach your destination. A transport system that prioritises the private car ignores a significant portion of the population. Remember that some 24% of the population is under 18 years of age, 60% of women aged 18 to 24 do not hold a driving licence, and 56% of women over 75 do not hold a licence.
A properly functioning public transport system that has road priority over private cars and which is frequent and reliable, and an active travel network that provides safe walking and cycling routes, can offer a lot more freedom of movement for people of all ages and abilities and especially for people who can’t, or would rather not, use a car.
Unfortunately we’re not going to be able to deliver such a system as long as we continue to prioritise private car transport on the urban road network.
I can’t see this getting permission (or if it did not getting over turned after yet another judicial review). But even if Galway County Council are sitting on some magic carbon capture technology the race course also took a judicial review against the original decision and that never seems to have been resolved.
The ring road is most certainly needed. It doesn’t just concern city dwellers, those who live within ‘the city boundaries.’ Half the county, Conamara, is cut off from the rest of the country. The author has mentioned companies like Dexcom and Genesys who have located in the city and to the east of the city because the traffic situation prevents them from locating to it’s west. The ring road would allow for employers to locate in Conamara, provide local employment to sustain local communities, identity and language, and contribute to the environment by reducing traffic and travel times through the city and limit urban sprawl. A ring road would free up inner roads from cars, to allow for a properly planned public transport system, that would provide bus corridors, light rail or cycle lanes. It could also be completed quicker with the built ring road providing an alternative route for existing traffic. It angers me that the whole narrative on the ring road has been controlled by the environmental lobby. It is their objections that have delayed and added considerable cost to this much needed infrastructure.
A lot of what you’re saying makes no sense whatsoever. For example, can you explain how “Conamara, is cut off from the rest of the country”?
What you actually mean is that there’s a time delay to cross a city at peak times. That happens with bypasses too — so the idea that a bypass will give lasting time savings is not based on the real world.
You can get from, for example, the TG4 studios in Conamara to for example Dublin.
There’s also nothing to show that the ring road will free up roads within in — in fact, the traffic model shows that most main roads will be busier after the second ring road is opened.
Thanks for your response, Breandán. I completely agree that we need to limit urban sprawl and provide a properly planned public transport system. Unfortunately, I’m not convinced that the Ring Road project is going to deliver that, in fact I think it will actually work against that aim. As Cian has said, the traffic modelling for the Ring Road shows increased peak time traffic on many arterial routes into the city, including the N59, Letteragh Road and Rahoon Road, as well as increased traffic on roads within the city itself. For more detail on this I refer you to this piece I wrote five years ago https://irishcycle.com/2020/03/26/galway-city-ring-road-a-20th-century-solution-to-a-21st-century-problem/
Add to that the fact that both politicians and estate agents in Galway have long spoken about how the ring road will open up development land and my concern is that it will lead to increased car-dependency, increased urban sprawl and reduce the capacity for public transport and active travel solutions. I’m not coming at this from an “environmental” position although that is obviously part of the concern here, I’m looking at it purely in transport planning terms – and in that context it just doesn’t stack up for me.
You can’t build road faster than cars. Until Galway has better planning/development and non car based transport infrastructure you’re going to make the problem worse. Developers lined up to build more car dependant housing for vulture funds to rent back us at new suburbs along this proposed road. All those missed years of waiting for this that could have been used to develop infrastructure like cycle facilities and bus services.
It’s a land grab. It’s always been about opening up that land to development. I don’t think it’s into tin foil hat territory to suggest a major driver why this project cannot be abandoned is because people who’ve speculated on land bordering the route would lose significant sums of money.
Tinfoil hat or not – its a major “driver” on the “built more roads” approach.
In 2018, in an interview with Galway Bay FM, then Taoiseach (and former Minister for Transport) Leo Varadkar explicitly stated that part of the purpose of the ring road was to open up development land. Estate agents in Galway have long talked about the development potential the road would bring.
Looking at a city the size of Galway , basically split across the Corrib and with most things within 5-10k it should be an absolute hub for cycling – but in fact very little has been done to make cycling in Galway safer with cycle lanes disappearing at junctions, the city centre being dangerous and limited bike parking – a small portion of the bypass costs could make Galway a great cycling city to live in. But then to do that you would have to take space from cars !?
The 37% increase in carbon emissions comes from the Business Case in February 2017 supporting the Ring Road. By the time the An Bord Pleanala Inspector considered the Statements of Evidence at the Oral Hearing the increase in carbon emissions associated with the Ring Road was 49%. The Inspector did not express the increase in Carbon Emissions in her report in June 2021 as a %.
Thanks for the clarification, Brendan
I think there’s a few points worth considering before people consider the Galway Ring Road as a hill to die on in progressing Ireland’s climate objectives.
Galway has a major infrastructure deficit compared to Ireland’s other Cities, and that’s across all aspects of transport – road, active travel and public transport. The Greater Dublin Area had more money thrown at it (per capita) than anywhere else in the state and has both road and rail service to show for it. Beyond that though compare Galway’s road infrastructure to that of Waterford’s. It’s much easier in Waterford to have a focus on re prioritisng road infrastructure within the City toward public transport and active travel when the City is totally bypassed to the north and west, and has a major distributor road across the southern suburbs.
Each regional City needs game changing investment in public transport beyond just bus connects, and much more ambitious approaches to proposals for light rail and commuter rail. But Galway also has a major deficit in its road infrastructure compared to the others which can’t be ignored.
Beyond Ireland, we often cite the fantastic European examples of Aarhuas, Frieburg or Vitoria Gasteiz as Cities that are prioritising active and sustainable travel. Look at these Cities though and what you’ll nearly always find is that they have a comprehensive orbital road network which keeps regional road traffic out of the City itself.
Another big issue is the sheer scale of future growth of Galway needs to be considered. The NPF is aiming for 40% growth up to 2040, while the wider metropolitan region is also likely to grow in excess of 20%. Even with a significant modal shift, that will mean that an already over-congested road network will never be fit for purpose.
With or without the ring road, the key issue that will dictate levels of sustainable travel is where and how new development is delivered. Deliver higher densities within the City, and this will support active travel and public transport. Focus on predominantly lower density sprawl out by the the ring road or other areas, and people will focused into their cars.
Thanks for your considered response, Caoimhín. I understand your point about the European examples but I think there are a couple of fundamental differences between the cities you reference and Galway. Firstly, there is the size of the city – even if we meet the 2040 population target of 120,000 people, Galway will still be considerably smaller than all the examples you mention. But more significantly, in each of those examples the city is located on the route between two other large cities (Copenhagen – Aalborg; Basel – Karlsruhe; Madrid – San Sebastian) where there is of course a high demand for road transport and a the case for a bypass is more easily justifiable.
In the case of Waterford, the bypass can be justified by the need to link Cork to Rosslare Port. By contrast, there is no major city or port to the west of Galway and in fact the entire population of Connemara is just 32,000. Add to that the fact that only 3% of the traffic in Galway is actually bypassing the city – the rest is travelling to, from or within the city boundaries – and it is much harder to justify the need for a road of this scale.
Solving Galway’s traffic congestion problem shouldn’t require a one billion euro investment. We do it every mid-term break when the schools are closed. It requires us to tackle the car-dependency and, as you say, the low density sprawl, that has blighted the city for decades. The National Planning Framework that was signed off by the government yesterday focuses on compact urban development and sustainable transport solutions for Galway but still, oddly, includes the Ring Road as a key enabler to that end. My fear is that it will actively work against those endeavours and continue the cycle of car dependency and dispersed settlement.