Ravens Terrace traffic route change

ratracer · 02-04-2014 12:38pm

@ iwannahurl:

Thr rat run is an every day occurence, I would even suggest that it is almost an every light change occurence. I work down that area and have been paying particular attention to the traffic flows since the change.

Mrs OBumble · 02-04-2014 1:47pm

Iwannahurl wrote: »

So are the removable bollards across the entrance/exit to Raven's Terrace? I was down there a couple of weeks ago and the only bollards I saw were along both sides of Raven Terrace, parallel to the roadway.

There are fittings in the roadway that allow bollards to be put in place at the end beside McGuire's shop (I don't know whether to call that the entrace or the exit these days!).

When I was there at the weekend, there were no bollards in these fittings.

I do not know when/if they are are planned to be used.

serfboard · 02-04-2014 7:06pm

Mrs OBumble wrote: »

There are fittings in the roadway that allow bollards to be put in place at the end beside McGuire's shop (I don't know whether to call that the entrace or the exit these days!).

When I was there at the weekend, there were no bollards in these fittings.

I do not know when/if they are are planned to be used.

The fittings are supplied by this crowd. As you say, there are two on the road, and there are others on the footpath.

The nice man in McGuires (Mr. McGuire?) told me that what was planned was a shared space, so that the road and footpath merges. The tar on the road part will be (and is now in part) printed to look brick-like.

The day I saw the bollards in place was the day they were doing work there. Apparently, the retractable bollards might be installed for things like festivals etc. where the street could be closed off (and then the Salt House could put tables outside

).

Not sure if it was done to avoid the lights but today I saw a car come up Raven Terrace, exit at the Fr. Griffin Rd exit and turn right :eek:. Between this and the other rat run descibed in the thread, I can see the Fr. Griffin Rd. exit being closed off altogether.

serfboard · 07-04-2014 5:39pm

More work on Raven Terrace today - they are finishing off the shared space look on the street itself and it looks quite nice, IMO.

Again today I saw a van exit at the Fr Griffin Rd side, despite there being a no exit sign there.

Iwannahurl · 07-04-2014 8:52pm

Does anyone know whether the new induction loops associated with this "traffic calming" scheme are configured to detect bicycles?

I was attempting to turn right into Lower Fairhill Road (towards Monroe's) today and got no green arrow.

what_traffic · 18-09-2014 10:24am

@Ballinadog Any idea when the bike parking will be re-instated on Raven Terrace? Only car parking is provided for in the scheme.

snubbleste · 02-10-2014 7:23pm

ratracer wrote: »

Thr rat run is an every day occurence, I would even suggest that it is almost an every light change occurence. I work down that area and have been paying particular attention to the traffic flows since the change.

It was ridiculous earlier. Rat run from
WolfTone Fr Griffin to LwrFairhill,
LwrFairhill to FrGriffin WolfTone,
Ravens to FrGriffin.

It's a wonder there are no accidents!

ballinadog · 02-10-2014 7:33pm

It wasn't part of our contract to remove and replace the bike parking. the council would have removed them and stored them in one of their depots prior to us commencing that project. I'd imagine they will re erect in time. One hold up (obviously I cant speak on behalf of them) I imagine with them re erecting them, is that the Bike Scheme stands (for the hirable electic bikes) is currently being installed there at the mo and I'd imagine their is a good chance they will place the ordinary bike parking stands in the vicinity of these hirable ones. So basically just waiting to see what space/constraints exist upon completion of the electric bikes.

Iwannahurl · 02-10-2014 7:57pm

Welcome back ballinadog.

Care to comment on this? Basically what we have here is a weird hybrid signalised-for-cars-but-uncontrolled-for-pedestrians crossing at the bottom of Fairhill Road. Also no pedestrian crossing provided for people wanting to walk to or from "Claddagh House". What's the rationale for such omissions in a scheme referred to as an "improvement", "upgrade" or something of that sort?

Iwannahurl wrote: »

There are three places outside the Fire Station where pedestrians need to cross: Fr Griffin Road (x 2) and Fairhill Road.

Only one signalised pedestrian crossing has been provided as part of the new "upgrade/enhancement/improvement" scheme, ie the one between that bird sculpture (or whatever it is, on the site of snubbleste's tree ) and the footpath outside the Fire Station doors.

AFAIK neither of the others has a signalised crossing phase (or crossing place) specifically for pedestrians.

ballinadog · 02-10-2014 8:56pm

Iwannahurl wrote: »

Welcome back ballinadog.

Care to comment on this? Basically what we have here is a weird hybrid signalised-for-cars-but-uncontrolled-for-pedestrians crossing at the bottom of Fairhill Road. Also no pedestrian crossing provided for people wanting to walk to or from "Claddagh House". What's the rationale for such omissions in a scheme referred to as an "improvement", "upgrade" or something of that sort?

I've never been away!! My initial comments of any real importance would be that I am not the designer of said scheme, I only help install/construct what we are supposed to. As a result, my own personal thoughts on your photos of which I should be concerned is thankfully it looks like we tied into existing old kerbs in the top photo thus that puddle is not something we created/could have solved. (if we had laid new kerbs and still left a puddle Id have questions to answer.) Now, with regards the pedestrian crossings, I dont know why there was no pedestrian crossings installed however I can think of a few reasons why they might be omitted; space (sight lines), AADT (traffic volumes), NRA standards, cost, etc. As pointed out in earlier posts above, the term upgrade or improvement is subjective. I personally think its an improvement.

Iwannahurl · 02-10-2014 10:12pm

ballinadog wrote: »

with regards the pedestrian crossings, I dont know why there was no pedestrian crossings installed however I can think of a few reasons why they might be omitted; space (sight lines), AADT (traffic volumes), NRA standards, cost, etc. As pointed out in earlier posts above, the term upgrade or improvement is subjective. I personally think its an improvement.

I think we can rule out space as a factor. It's just that the existing space has not been modified to facilitate pedestrians to cross.

What is the relevance/applicability of AADT and NRA standards? Can you elaborate a bit more on those factors?

To save you the bother, or to augment your explanation, are there any guidelines or other documentation setting out the criteria for installing/not installing controlled crossings in such situations?

galwaycyclist · 02-10-2014 10:27pm

Iwannahurl wrote: »

Welcome back ballinadog.

Care to comment on this? Basically what we have here is a weird hybrid signalised-for-cars-but-uncontrolled-for-pedestrians crossing at the bottom of Fairhill Road. Also no pedestrian crossing provided for people wanting to walk to or from "Claddagh House". What's the rationale for such omissions in a scheme referred to as an "improvement", "upgrade" or something of that sort?

Uh actually this is not correct. The junction is controlled for all road users. That is to say that in the absence of a specific signal for pedestrians - then they are supposed to work off the signals for their direction of travel.

It may be that this would be poorly understood by some motorists, who might expect to turn without conflict with pedestrians, but as far as I know thats the legal situation.

Furthermore, if we take into account the recent discussions on the walking and cycling thread this could be superior treatment from the perspective of the pedestrians.

As we now seem to be in the process of establishing, at many signal controlled junctions in the city pedestrian signals are being used in a manner that obstructs and delays people on foot for no good reason.

So clearly, in the context of city council practice, the absence of pedestrian signals might be the better solution for people on foot.

ballinadog · 02-10-2014 10:35pm

Iwannahurl wrote: »

I think we can rule out space as a factor. It's just that the existing space has not been modified to facilitate pedestrians to cross.

What is the relevance/applicability of AADT and NRA standards? Can you elaborate a bit more on those factors?

To save you the bother, or to augment your explanation, are there any guidelines or other documentation setting out the criteria for installing/not installing controlled crossings in such situations?

i wouldnt rule out space so quickly, the central island would need to be enlarged for example so the additional traffic signal heads could be accommodated, likewise (bear in mind i'm not outside looking at it on the ground) what width is the footpath either side of junction? poles need be set back 750mm from kerb to prevent signal heads being clipped by lorries and then you need a min 1.2m between pole and wall for wheelchairs on the footpath. again I'm not a designer but id imagine a pedetsrian crossing would result in stop line being further back from the junction and thus sightlines might be an issue with the lights being so close to the bend on fairhill rd. reason i mentioned AADT is what volume of traffic goes up fairhill rd? if volumes were low, could be deemed not necessary to warrant one? also, the junction is quiet large from point of view of distance traffic needs to travel to cross junction, the all red time may already suffice for pedestrians to cross safely. not every crossing requires a dedicated pedestrian crossing with a push button. again, i stress, your q's are directed at the designers of such schemes, of which i am not one.

jkforde · 03-10-2014 1:53am

with sincere respect but what proportion of able bodied Irish people actually follow the guidance of pedestrian lights? in my experience it is less than 10% with a slighter higher proportion of cyclists obeying the actual traffic signals.... Irish pedestrians and cyclists just seem to find pleasure in beating the system just like they do in every walk of Irish life.... it defines us.

galwaycyclist · 03-10-2014 7:30am

jkforde wrote: »

with sincere respect but what proportion of able bodied Irish people actually follow the guidance of pedestrian lights? in my experience it is less than 10% with a slighter higher proportion of cyclists obeying the actual traffic signals.... Irish pedestrians and cyclists just seem to find pleasure in beating the system just like they do in every walk of Irish life.... it defines us.

This is the whole point generations of Irish roads engineers have been trying to use pedestrian signals as a means of managing and controlling people on foot for the benefit of motor traffic.

Pedestrian crossings are used in a way that imposes delay and diversion on walkers often for no good reason.

Several generations of "Irish" roads engineers have been training several generations of Irish people to ignore pedestrian crossings..

Iwannahurl · 03-10-2014 10:14am

ballinadog wrote: »

i wouldnt rule out space so quickly, the central island would need to be enlarged for example so the additional traffic signal heads could be accommodated, likewise (bear in mind i'm not outside looking at it on the ground) what width is the footpath either side of junction? poles need be set back 750mm from kerb to prevent signal heads being clipped by lorries and then you need a min 1.2m between pole and wall for wheelchairs on the footpath. again I'm not a designer but id imagine a pedetsrian crossing would result in stop line being further back from the junction and thus sightlines might be an issue with the lights being so close to the bend on fairhill rd. reason i mentioned AADT is what volume of traffic goes up fairhill rd? if volumes were low, could be deemed not necessary to warrant one? also, the junction is quiet large from point of view of distance traffic needs to travel to cross junction, the all red time may already suffice for pedestrians to cross safely. not every crossing requires a dedicated pedestrian crossing with a push button. again, i stress, your q's are directed at the designers of such schemes, of which i am not one.

To my eye there seems to be lots of space.

There are poles in place already.

The stop line is already set back, as evidenced by the pedestrian's line of travel across Fairhill Road.

Are you aware of any documentation providing guidelines on the use of AADTs when deciding whether to install pedestrian crossings?

Iwannahurl · 03-10-2014 10:20am

jkforde wrote: »

with sincere respect but what proportion of able bodied Irish people actually follow the guidance of pedestrian lights? in my experience it is less than 10% with a slighter higher proportion of cyclists obeying the actual traffic signals.... Irish pedestrians and cyclists just seem to find pleasure in beating the system just like they do in every walk of Irish life.... it defines us.

I agree that there is an Irish culture of ignoring or bending rules.

But how do we change culture? By (pardon the pun) giving cultural signals.

If the lights are designed to accommodate and facilitate pedestrians and cyclists then we can reasonably expect a culture change. In fact we should demand it.

Are Irish pedestrians and cyclists culturally different from Irish motorists? I doubt it, yet most motorists obey red lights (whatever about road markings, parking regulations etc).

Mrs OBumble · 03-10-2014 1:06pm

jkforde wrote: »

with sincere respect but what proportion of able bodied Irish people actually follow the guidance of pedestrian lights?

However things need to be designed for the less-than-able-bodied.

I've spent some time with knee problems, absolutely knowing that if anything went wrong while crossing the road etc I would not be able to get out of the way. So I have a fair degree of sympathy with older people etc who have similar issues.

jkforde wrote: »

rish pedestrians and cyclists just seem to find pleasure in beating the system just like they do in every walk of Irish life.... it defines us.

And it served you very well when England was "the man" and sticking it to the man was a survival strategy.

However times have now changed, and sticking it to yourselves isn't such a useful approach.

Iwannahurl · 03-10-2014 8:46pm

Iwannahurl wrote: »

Are Irish pedestrians and cyclists culturally different from Irish motorists? I doubt it, yet most motorists obey red lights (whatever about road markings, parking regulations etc).

Did I speak too soon?

http://www.irishtimes.com/news/environment/garda%C3%AD-identify-dublin-s-top-10-speeding-blackspots-1.1951025

galwaycyclist · 03-10-2014 9:52pm

Mrs OBumble wrote: »

And it served you very well when England was "the man" and sticking it to the man was a survival strategy.

However times have now changed, and sticking it to yourselves isn't such a useful approach.

And I previously wrote

galwaycyclist wrote: »

Several generations of "Irish" roads engineers have been training several generations of Irish people to ignore pedestrian crossings..

There was a reason why I put quotes around the term "Irish" when discussing roads engineers. This is one aspect of Irish life where quite literally the English never left.

The Irish civil engineering and particularly roads engineering professions do not have some separate Irish or European identity or vision of themselves. There has been little attempt by this branch of engineering to look around for other ways of doing things or to develop a distinct philosophy.

Instead this part of the profession quite self-consciously see themselves as an extension or appendage of English or British practice. So the Irish version of the profession has picked on arguably the worst example in Northern Europe for transport policy and traffic management. Not only that but in some prominent cases (Galway) they seem to have been actively picking out the worst aspects of British practice while dropping the more tolerable bits.

Its as if they were trying to be more "British" than the British themselves.

Many of the consultants who are brought in to advise in Galway work for branches of British companies and are supervised by managers in the UK. And of course UK practice is the worst in Northern Europe and the UK is one of the most car dependent countries in Europe.

So when Irish pedestrians ignore the ridiculous controls being placed on them it is not some throwback or historical echo - it is a continuation of a process that did not end in 1922.

Bear in mind also that the British establishment could be just as nasty to their own as to us. The UK historically had one of the highest child pedestrian death rates in Europe.

Ravens Terrace traffic route change

Comments