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
Hi all! We have been experiencing an issue on site where threads have been missing the latest postings. The platform host Vanilla are working on this issue. A workaround that has been used by some is to navigate back from 1 to 10+ pages to re-sync the thread and this will then show the latest posts. Thanks, Mike.
Hi there,
There is an issue with role permissions that is being worked on at the moment.
If you are having trouble with access or permissions on regional forums please post here to get access: https://www.boards.ie/discussion/2058365403/you-do-not-have-permission-for-that#latest

Bodkin / Headford Road roundabout replacement [Lights are on!]

13567…19

Comments

  • #102
    what_traffic
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 5,002 ✭✭✭what_traffic


    antoobrien wrote: »
    Seriously, you can't see how it acts just like bodkin when trying to turn right from Islandbridge or the N4 (I can't see how you'd turn right from Kilmainham, then again I don't think I've tried)?

    Talk about blinkered.

    Ya its a "halfabout" i.e not a full roundabout.
    You cannot do a full 360 coming from Hueston.
    The example you give you will go through 3 sets of traffic lights to do a 360 coming from Islandbridge.


  • #103
    snubbleste
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 31,117 ✭✭✭✭snubbleste


    Noticed that a driver got disqualified and fined for travelling at 119kph in a highly publicised 50kph zone on the Quinncentenary Bridge in the paper today. Defence said it in mitigation that it was 0140 with no traffic about. Judge rightly noted that this stretch has seen a number of road deaths in the past.


  • #104
    antoobrien
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 6,106 ✭✭✭antoobrien


    snubbleste wrote: »
    Noticed that a driver got disqualified and fined for travelling at 119kph in a highly publicised 50kph zone on the Quinncentenary Bridge in the paper today. Defence said it in mitigation that it was 0140 with no traffic about. Judge rightly noted that this stretch has seen a number of road deaths in the past.

    In no way am I defending speeding and with all due respect and sympathies to all involved but to my recollection there as been a single fatal crash on the QB in the past 10 years in which two people died (in 2007).


  • #105
    what_traffic
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 5,002 ✭✭✭what_traffic


    snubbleste wrote: »
    Noticed that a driver got disqualified and fined for travelling at 119kph in a highly publicised 50kph zone on the Quinncentenary Bridge in the paper today. Defence said it in mitigation that it was 0140 with no traffic about. Judge rightly noted that this stretch has seen a number of road deaths in the past.

    Anybody know what the original design speed of the Quinncentenary Bridge was? Did they always have it at 50kph?


  • #106
    antoobrien
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 6,106 ✭✭✭antoobrien


    what_traffic wrote: »
    Anybody know what the original design speed of the Quinncentenary Bridge was? Did they always have it at 50kph?

    It's probably considerably higher, but since the road is inside the city boundary it's a moot point.

    I don't have a source but I remember a discussion about the speed limits on the QB and BNT between the Headford & Tuam Roads being too low for the roads in question. IIRC the defense was that because they're within the city the limits have to be 50km/h.

    Besides, if you raised the limit on the BNT the Gardaí would run out of funding in the morning.


  • #107
    Sponge Bob
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 25,234 ✭✭✭✭Sponge Bob


    what_traffic wrote: »
    Anybody know what the original design speed of the Quinncentenary Bridge was?
    Looks like a 60kph to me save near the lights at both ends.
    Did they always have it at 50kph?
    Yes.


  • #108
    Iwannahurl
    Closed Accounts Posts: 8,156 ✭✭✭Iwannahurl


    snubbleste wrote: »
    Noticed that a driver got disqualified and fined for travelling at 119kph in a highly publicised 50kph zone on the Quinncentenary Bridge in the paper today. Defence said it in mitigation that it was 0140 with no traffic about. Judge rightly noted that this stretch has seen a number of road deaths in the past.




    I saw that in the Advertiser (delivered by Pony Express this morning).

    Caught by AGs with a speed camera in the wee small hours, which is good to see. More please, at all hours including "rush" hour. The speeding on the QB is crazy, as it is on some other roads in the vicinity.

    Not safe for vulnerable road users at all: http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=75141816&postcount=413

    Anyway, that's one less twenty-something potential killer on the roads, at least for the next two years.


  • #109
    what_traffic
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 5,002 ✭✭✭what_traffic


    antoobrien wrote: »
    It's probably considerably higher, but since the road is inside the city boundary it's a moot point.

    I don't have a source but I remember a discussion about the speed limits on the QB and BNT between the Headford & Tuam Roads being too low for the roads in question. IIRC the defense was that because they're within the city the limits have to be 50km/h.

    Agree that it has a higher design speed was just wondering did it always have the 50kph signs. I thought the speed limit was set to 50kph because of the footpaths / cyclepaths and the lack of hard shoulders rather than QB and BNT dual carraigeways being within the city boundary?


  • #110
    antoobrien
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 6,106 ✭✭✭antoobrien


    what_traffic wrote: »
    Agree that it has a higher design speed was just wondering did it always have the 50kph signs. I thought the speed limit was set to 50kph because of the footpaths / cyclepaths and the lack of hard shoulders rather than QB and BNT dual carraigeways being within the city boundary?

    I think it's more to do with (the city) bye-laws than road standards.

    Take a look at the Monivea Rd. Between Ballintemple & Carnmore cross (nice wide road with hard shoulders) the limit is 60km/h, whereas from Carnmore Cross out (far narrower with no hard shoulders) the limit is 80 km/h.

    Plus IIRC there are villages on the N61 between Athlone & Roscommon that have 100 km/h limits with footpaths on either side of the road.


  • #111
    antoobrien
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 6,106 ✭✭✭antoobrien


    Iwannahurl wrote: »
    Not safe for vulnerable road users at all: http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=75141816&postcount=413

    I'm struggling to equate the apparent lack of safety of this road with the 13m+ journeys that happen each year apparently without incident.

    Does anyone have any (publicly available) figures for accidents on the QB (not on the Headford Rd or Sean Mulvoy).


  • Advertisement
  • #112
    KevR
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 3,110 ✭✭✭KevR


    Iwannahurl wrote: »
    I saw that in the Advertiser (delivered by Pony Express this morning).

    Caught by AGs with a speed camera in the wee small hours, which is good to see. More please, at all hours including "rush" hour. The speeding on the QB is crazy, as it is on some other roads in the vicinity.

    Not safe for vulnerable road users at all: http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=75141816&postcount=413

    Anyway, that's one less twenty-something potential killer on the roads, at least for the next two years.

    You should really have posted the responses to your post in the above thread as they provide some context for the accidents. Your post alone does not provide any context.

    For anyone who is interested, you can see the responses here


  • #113
    ciotog
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 670 ✭✭✭ciotog


    antoobrien wrote: »
    I'm struggling to equate the apparent lack of safety of this road with the 13m+ journeys that happen each year apparently without incident.

    Does anyone have any (publicly available) figures for accidents on the QB (not on the Headford Rd or Sean Mulvoy).
    That's a fair point to make but I'm not sure if it's possible to get hold of those numbers. The Gardai might be able to provide some numbers but they would be recorded incidents only. That's significant because the HEA published a report earlier in the year where they noted the issue of under reporting for road incidents involving cyclists and pedestrians. I believe the level of under reporting for cycling incidents was 10:1. Gardai seem to discourage cyclists from reporting from the experience of two friends in the past 8 weeks (cyclist assaulted and the other knocked of bike in a side swipe).

    A second point might be (hard to measure) the issue of perceived safety for pedestrians i.e. they perceive the road to be unsafe and so stop using the area as a pedestrian. I think it's fair to thus argue the safety of the road while there not being record safety incidents. I don't have numbers for that argument so I'm just putting it out there for consideration.


  • #114
    ciotog
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 670 ✭✭✭ciotog


    antoobrien wrote: »
    To me (I've used it from all directions) it behaves like a signal controlled RAB most of the time. the only time it doesn't is if you're going North/South e.g. Islandbridge to Kilmanham (or vice versa).

    The HRR is a very similar setup the the junction I'm talking about and the lights aren't ad-hoc, they're just not comprehensive enough. They're placed to allow movement onto the RAB and then keep exits clear. Somebody tried to strike the best of both worlds and failed miserably. That they aren't kept clear is a policing matter (breaking red lights, entering a junction you can't clear etc).
    I argue ad-hoc on the basis that they neither control the movement onto the roundabout or the traffic on the roundabout and the mix of both was an ad-hoc arrangement rather than a methodical strategy.
    I'm looking at making a submission on this (since I've actually seen these plans early enough, unlike the ones for Briarhill - the notice for which was hidden in the access to the tunnel). The basis of it will be based on the observations below.

    IMO there are two big problems - the entrance to GSC off the RAB and the entrances off the headford Rd to Dunnes, Dun na Coirbe, Argos & Lidl, GSC and the retail park.

    I don't know what can be done for argos/lidl.

    To improve this area for pedestrians:
    Close the entrance to GSC & the exit from the retail park
    Add a 4th "entrance" light just before the outbound entrance from the HRR and to the entrance itself
    Link the to the "entrance" traffic lights to pedestrian signals e.g. no traffic should be allowed off HRR outbound for a period of 45s to allow pedestrians cross from HRR to traffic Island on QB - this should be done for all 4 exits (assuming GSC is closed).
    Consolidate the entrances and exits from GSC & the retail park to the existing entrance to the retail park (move the one from GSC) - controlled by lights
    Consolidate the entrances & exits to Dunnes & Dun na Coirbe at the site of the current entrance to Dunnes (eliminating the other entrances/exits & the pedestrian crossing) - controlled by lights
    Excellent that you're making a submission. It's important that the GTU are sent people's views and reminded that we're entitled to have a say.
    To improve this junction for wheeled road users the Gardai should actually start doing their jobs and hand out some on the spot fines for breaking the rules of the roads - all of them, not just motorists but pedestrians & cyclists as well.
    Quick point here, I completely agree with you but they can't issue on the spot fines and so red light jumping cyclists for example have to be sent a summons. Given Gardai often can't attend court when a motorist is summonsed I wonder how many show up when it's a cyclist.


  • #115
    antoobrien
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 6,106 ✭✭✭antoobrien


    ciotog wrote: »
    That's a fair point to make but I'm not sure if it's possible to get hold of those numbers. The Gardai might be able to provide some numbers but they would be recorded incidents only. That's significant because the HEA published a report earlier in the year where they noted the issue of under reporting for road incidents involving cyclists and pedestrians. I believe the level of under reporting for cycling incidents was 10:1. Gardai seem to discourage cyclists from reporting from the experience of two friends in the past 8 weeks (cyclist assaulted and the other knocked of bike in a side swipe).

    That may be true, but there are often incidents of assault that aren't reported to Gardaí (party not injured etc). As for Gardaí discouraging reporting of such things, not in my experience.
    ciotog wrote: »
    A second point might be (hard to measure) the issue of perceived safety for pedestrians i.e. they perceive the road to be unsafe and so stop using the area as a pedestrian. I think it's fair to thus argue the safety of the road while there not being record safety incidents. I don't have numbers for that argument so I'm just putting it out there for consideration.

    I realise that it's not easy to get those figures, when I posted my original comment I could only find 1 article directly related to a road death on the QB.

    My concern is that there appears to be a concerted effort by some posters to make roads & junctions in Galway appear more dangerous than most people (I have talked to) have experienced.

    I wonder what cyclists would have to do if they had to cycle past tom hogan motors & the exit from ballybane industrial estate every day like I did for several years.


  • #116
    antoobrien
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 6,106 ✭✭✭antoobrien


    ciotog wrote: »
    I argue ad-hoc on the basis that they neither control the movement onto the roundabout or the traffic on the roundabout and the mix of both was an ad-hoc arrangement rather than a methodical strategy.

    Fair enough - I'd use incomplete rather than ad-hoc tho.
    ciotog wrote: »
    Quick point here, I completely agree with you but they can't issue on the spot fines and so red light jumping cyclists for example have to be sent a summons. Given Gardai often can't attend court when a motorist is summonsed I wonder how many show up when it's a cyclist.

    They can issue "on the spot fines" - unmarked cars stopping for speeding is an example of this, they can't collect the fine on the spot. It'd be easy enough to get photographic proof of somebody jumping red lights.

    The real logistical problem would come from cyclists/pedestrians not having id with them (they're not required to, unlike motorists). Then you get into the possible situation of giving false names etc.

    If attendance of a garda is required then the courts service should work with the gardai to ensure that the scheduling is suitable for the garda who issued the fine. However that's neither here nor there.


  • #117
    ciotog
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 670 ✭✭✭ciotog


    antoobrien wrote: »
    That may be true, but there are often incidents of assault that aren't reported to Gardaí (party not injured etc). As for Gardaí discouraging reporting of such things, not in my experience.
    It's mixed, the two incidents I'm referring to involved Mill Street. An incident I had and which involved Moycullen was a model experience of how it should be.
    I realise that it's not easy to get those figures, when I posted my original comment I could only find 1 article directly related to a road death on the QB.

    My concern is that there appears to be a concerted effort by some posters to make roads & junctions in Galway appear more dangerous than most people (I have talked to) have experienced.

    I wonder what cyclists would have to do if they had to cycle past tom hogan motors & the exit from ballybane industrial estate every day like I did for several years.
    Definitely don't want to create the impression that the daily commute by bike is a near death experience :) You do need to have your wits about you (along with a good sense of courtesy and empathy) but I wouldn't be a cycling advocate if I didn't love cycling in Galway.


  • #118
    antoobrien
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 6,106 ✭✭✭antoobrien


    ciotog wrote: »
    Definitely don't want to create the impression that the daily commute by bike is a near death experience :)You do need to have your wits about you (along with a good sense of courtesy and empathy) but I wouldn't be a cycling advocate if I didn't love cycling in Galway.

    both of which are often lacking from all road users.


  • #119
    Iwannahurl
    Closed Accounts Posts: 8,156 ✭✭✭Iwannahurl


    antoobrien wrote: »
    I wonder what cyclists would have to do if they had to cycle past tom hogan motors & the exit from ballybane industrial estate every day like I did for several years.




    They would just get on with it, as I did. I went round the back of (the newly resurrected) Tom Hogan Motors, by the way.

    Dangerous overtaking, especially on roundabouts, is commonplace.

    On one occasion, when attempting to traverse the Morris Roundabout from the Monivea Road (R339) side as I normally did on my commute, I had a serious near miss when the driver of a large jeep tried to overtake me dangerously at speed and cut across me at an exit. It was Race Week so there was a motorbike Garda on duty. I had the reg of the jeep so I reported the incident. His response was unsympathetic and non-committal. After making a few notes, he told me to leave the matter with him, and advised me to cycle on the footpath (advice he also said he gave to his own sons). I never heard from him subsequently.


  • #120
    Iwannahurl
    Closed Accounts Posts: 8,156 ✭✭✭Iwannahurl


    ciotog wrote: »
    That's a fair point to make but I'm not sure if it's possible to get hold of those numbers. The Gardai might be able to provide some numbers but they would be recorded incidents only.

    That's significant because the HEA published a report earlier in the year where they noted the issue of under reporting for road incidents involving cyclists and pedestrians.

    I believe the level of under reporting for cycling incidents was 10:1. Gardai seem to discourage cyclists from reporting from the experience of two friends in the past 8 weeks (cyclist assaulted and the other knocked of bike in a side swipe).

    A second point might be (hard to measure) the issue of perceived safety for pedestrians i.e. they perceive the road to be unsafe and so stop using the area as a pedestrian. I think it's fair to thus argue the safety of the road while there not being record safety incidents. I don't have numbers for that argument so I'm just putting it out there for consideration.



    I presume that's just a typo or something? There was a HSE report published in May of this year which showed that the level of hospital admissions for road traffic collision injuries was 3.5 times larger overall than what was reported in Garda statistics.

    That's injuries serious enough to require hospitalisation, not "incidents" and not just injuries mild enough to be treated without admission to hospital or without recourse to A&E departments.

    Significantly, the HSE data show that the number of injured cyclists admitted to hospital is nearly ten times the level suggested by Garda stats.

    News story: Many more road injuries than reported, says HSE

    HSE report: Admission to Acute Hospitals for Injuries as a Result of Road Traffic Collisions in Ireland 2005–2009






    .


  • Advertisement
  • #121
    antoobrien
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 6,106 ✭✭✭antoobrien


    Iwannahurl wrote: »
    They would just get on with it, as I did. I went round the back of (the newly resurrected) Tom Hogan Motors, by the way.

    The back - no fun - on the DC please were the rest of us play in traffic


  • #122
    antoobrien
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 6,106 ✭✭✭antoobrien


    Iwannahurl wrote: »
    I presume that's just a typo or something? There was a HSE report published in May of this year which showed that the level of hospital admissions for road traffic collision injuries was 3.5 times larger overall than what was reported in Garda statistics.

    That's injuries serious enough to require hospitalisation, not just "incidents" and not just injuries mild enough to be treated without admission to hospital or without recourse to A&E departments.

    Significantly, the HSE data show that the number of injured cyclists admitted to hospital is nearly ten times the number of injured cyclists reported in Garda stats.


    News story: Many more road injuries than reported, says HSE

    HSE report: Admission to Acute Hospitals for Injuries as a Result of Road Traffic Collisions in Ireland 2005–2009

    How many incidents? 100, 1,000, 10,000? Per week/year? Vs 13 million journeys per year - how unsafe is the behaviour really with such a small number of incidents?


  • #123
    Iwannahurl
    Closed Accounts Posts: 8,156 ✭✭✭Iwannahurl


    Another key point, in the context of roundabouts such as Bodkin, is vulnerable road users' perception of safety and experience of apparent risk.

    Many current and potential pedestrians, bus users and cyclists (including children and their parents) are thoroughly intimidated by roundabouts. This point has been made repeatedly, eg in the Council's own research, in various consultants' studies, and by community groups.

    Incidentally, the Council's own Walking & Cycling Survey (which they conducted in 2009 and is long closed), didn't even feature a question on roundabouts. Despite this odd omission, IIRC a significant percentage of respondents identified roundabouts as a barrier. The online survey was conducted as part of their Smarter Travel application and its findings regarding roundabouts were supported by the feedback they received in subsequent workshops.

    According to the Council's own analyses, approximately 40% of accidents involving pedestrians and cyclists occur on the main roads and roundabouts approaching the City Centre. The likely contributory factors are identified as junction layout, inadequate facilities for pedestrians and cyclists, and the high speed and traffic volumes through each junction.

    Their consultants also concluded that safety at junctions -- most especially on roundabouts -- is one of the greatest barriers facing active transport modes in Galway City and its environs. Lack of continuity of routes for pedestrians and cyclists, removal of priority, and the speed and volume of motorised traffic are all cited as presenting considerable challenges.






    .


  • #124
    antoobrien
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 6,106 ✭✭✭antoobrien


    Iwannahurl wrote: »
    Incidentally, the Council's own Walking & Cycling Survey (which they conducted in 2009 and is long closed), didn't even feature a question on roundabouts. Despite this odd omission, IIRC a significant percentage of respondents identified roundabouts as a barrier. The online survey was conducted as part of their Smarter Travel application and its findings regarding roundabouts were supported by the feedback they received in subsequent workshops.

    So no numbers then, just perceptions.

    The use of the perceptions of a lobby group is something you have a problem with when motorists perceived gripes about traffic lights are aired.

    Stop being hypocritical and back it up with figures that can be confirmed -you know the type of information you're asking off motorists then ignore when its provided because it doesn't suit your premise.


  • #125
    cL0h
    Registered Users Posts: 250 ✭✭cL0h


    Iwannahurl wrote: »
    Have you tried crossing from the Dun na Coiribe side to the Omniplex side when two lines of vehicles are accelerating towards you, potentially from different angles?


    And have you tried cycling through it in all possible directions?

    The "correct" way for a pedestrian to cross through in that direction is to use the pedestrian crossing back in front of Dunnes and then use the pedestrian crossings to cross the Sean Mulvoy entrance road. Sounds insane but what else could the planners have envisioned for a shopping laden buggy. Certainly crossing at the Quincentennial side is taking your life in your hands.

    As for cycling. From some directions it is fine and from others it's a nightmare. Cycling from the Quincentennial and intending on going straight ahead on the Sean Mulvoy towards Cemetry Cross is a total nightmare as you are basically dumped onto the slip road. Cycling the opposite direction is easy.
    The main problem for cyclists is that that roundabout tends to raise people's adrenalin levels and (while that's like nitro for a cyclist) your average motorist is a pent up ball of unreleased adrenalin at the best of times.


  • #126
    Sponge Bob
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 25,234 ✭✭✭✭Sponge Bob


    cL0h wrote: »
    your average motorist is a pent up ball of unreleased adrenalin at the best of times.
    You average motorist simply thinks 'Look!, a cyclist, bet it will do something stupid and unpredictable any minute'

    Generally the well visible and well lit ones are less stupid and less unpredictable. They also tend to cycle quite fast and motorists tend to let them pass and give them room to weave in and out.

    Stupid and unpredictable is a given when you see some idiot in dark clothes and no light ( sometimes no reflector even) on the bike as you do every evening in Galway. :(

    You really want to get past that thing as fast as you can and once you do you do not leave it room to pass on the inside later.

    Then the stupid and unpredictable ones sometimes come onto boards to give out about motorists beeping them .....for being stupid and unpredictable. :D


  • Advertisement
  • #127
    cL0h
    Registered Users Posts: 250 ✭✭cL0h


    Sponge Bob wrote: »
    ...
    You really want to get past that thing as fast as you can and once you do you do not leave it room to pass on the inside later...

    ahem.. pent up ball of adrenalin! :D


  • #128
    Iwannahurl
    Closed Accounts Posts: 8,156 ✭✭✭Iwannahurl


    antoobrien wrote: »
    So no numbers then, just perceptions.

    The use of the perceptions of a lobby group is something you have a problem with when motorists perceived gripes about traffic lights are aired.

    Stop being hypocritical and back it up with figures that can be confirmed -you know the type of information you're asking off motorists then ignore when its provided because it doesn't suit your premise.




    Not for the first time, you are missing or ignoring the key message.

    A range of sources -- Garda stats, consultants' analyses (eg Strategic Bus Study, Public Transport Feasibility Study), City Council surveys/reports (eg Smarter Travel, draft Walking & Cycling Strategy), independent studies (eg Failte Ireland), community groups (eg City Forum) and anecdotal reports -- all of these point in the same direction: Galway City's roundabouts are problematic.

    The N6 Multimodal Corridor Improvement Scheme, the core of which is the removal of several roundabouts, also suggests that even the roundabout-friendly NRA agrees at least in part.

    If quoting all of these sources suits my "premise" (whatever you imagine that might be) then so be it.

    No amount of complaining about alleged hypocrisy or motorists' gripes, perceived or otherwise, alters the fact that Galway City roundabouts have been repeatedly identified by a range of stakeholders as being a significant barrier to active commuting and sustainable transport, as well as to particular groups such as children and disabled people travelling by means other than the private car. Such modes of travel, by their very nature and of necessity, have to constitute a significant part of any efforts to tackle Galway's chronic traffic congestion and to maximise access and mobility for vulnerable road users who not only don't add to the congestion but are actually helping to solve it.

    If even senior members of the GTU are now admitting (at last) that the original intended purpose of roundabouts was always to prioritise motorised traffic flow, that certain roundabouts are now a cause of congestion at peak times, and that they are hostile to active commuters, then it seems the game is up IMO.

    Progress is all too slow, as well as being mired in controversy and incompetence, but we may well be seeing the beginning of the end of Galway's doomed love affair with roundabouts. The removal of a few key ones is a good start, but there are many more that need serious remedial works, such as the addition of pedestrian priority crossings. The GTU mandarins' innate resistance to such measures hasn't gone away you know, but maybe, just maybe, the momentum is in the right direction for once.

    Incidentally, I sincerely hope the new AUTC will be used to maximise safety and convenience for active commuters and bus users, and that it won't be misused to boost motorised traffic flow at their expense.


  • #129
    Iwannahurl
    Closed Accounts Posts: 8,156 ✭✭✭Iwannahurl


    Sponge Bob wrote: »
    You really want to get past that thing as fast as you can and once you do you do not leave it room to pass on the inside later.




    Galway driving in a sentence.


  • #130
    Sponge Bob
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 25,234 ✭✭✭✭Sponge Bob


    Simple solution, put a light on the bike...and yourself. Then you become a road user not a dangerous invisible nuisance.


  • #131
    Iwannahurl
    Closed Accounts Posts: 8,156 ✭✭✭Iwannahurl


    That would be a solution for the common problem (commonly ignored by the enforcers) of unlit cyclists.

    Mind you, if lights are attached to cars at the manufacturing stage, why should bikes be different? If it was made illegal to sell bikes without lights attached the problem would be significantly reduced or possibly even eliminated overnight.

    Can you imagine the scene on Irish roads if it were left up to drivers to attach lights to their cars after buying them?

    I always use lights front and rear, the bike has reflectors, I wear a Sam Browne, I put a a hi-viz cover on my rucksack, the trailer is brightly coloured and has reflectors and a flag. I still get overtaken dangerously, far more often than is tolerable.

    The standard of driving in Ireland (and Galway) is generally appalling, and is all the more dangerous and intimidating in the vicinity of vulnerable road users. Some of the dangerous drivers are very well lit.


  • Advertisement
  • #132
    Sponge Bob
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 25,234 ✭✭✭✭Sponge Bob


    Iwannahurl wrote: »
    the trailer is brightly coloured and has reflectors and a flag. I still get overtaken dangerously, far more often than is tolerable.
    Trailer :eek: Only place I seen one of those recently was in Barna.


  • #133
    antoobrien
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 6,106 ✭✭✭antoobrien


    Iwannahurl wrote: »
    Not for the first time, you are missing or ignoring the key message.

    No that would be ignoring your propaganda the way you ignore anything that doesn't have statistics that are up to your standard.

    Now sod off and get some.


  • #134
    Iwannahurl
    Closed Accounts Posts: 8,156 ✭✭✭Iwannahurl


    antoobrien wrote: »
    Now sod off and get some.





    Post reported.


  • #135
    antoobrien
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 6,106 ✭✭✭antoobrien


    Iwannahurl wrote: »
    Post reported.

    Why? it's not as arrogant as your posts and demand for statistics.


  • #136
    Iwannahurl
    Closed Accounts Posts: 8,156 ✭✭✭Iwannahurl


    antoobrien wrote: »
    Why? it's not as arrogant as your posts and demand for statistics.




    Jeasus would you ever stop f***ing complaining. You obviously have not got the ability to read official reports and appear to think no one else in Galway can.


  • #137
    antoobrien
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 6,106 ✭✭✭antoobrien


    Iwannahurl wrote: »
    Jeasus would you ever stop f***ing complaining. You obviously have not got the ability to read official reports and appear to think no one else in Galway can.


    Care to supply some official figures to back up your assertions.

    No, didn't think so.

    Why do you keep asking motorists to back up their assertions when you will soapbox your own without any figures, just your opinions?


  • #138
    ciotog
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 670 ✭✭✭ciotog


    antoobrien wrote: »
    So no numbers then, just perceptions.

    The use of the perceptions of a lobby group is something you have a problem with when motorists perceived gripes about traffic lights are aired.

    Stop being hypocritical and back it up with figures that can be confirmed -you know the type of information you're asking off motorists then ignore when its provided because it doesn't suit your premise.
    There are some numbers from a survey that the council did (linked later in the thread) but the survey results weren't made public. I've seen the numbers relating to those who cite roundabouts as a barrier to cycling but the only source I can find is an unpublished document. That's a perception statistic so I'm not sure if you'd be interested in that in this current line of discussion. What is published from the survey is in part of the Smarter Travel bid (http://www.galwaycity.ie/SmarterTravel/GMSTA_01.pdf) - again perceptions e.g. "75% said poor connectivity at junctions presented safety issues for pedestrians and cyclists;" on page 15. There are some numbers for pedestrian traffic volumes around the Bodkin roundabout at http://www.galwaycity.ie/GeneralNews/281011_02.pdf along with a chart on cyclist traffic. I can have a hunt through (cycle campaign) email to see if there's anything else - if there's anything specific you're after (I understand this is just a part of your discussion with Iwannahurl but I thought I'd make the effort to point some data out)


  • #139
    ciotog
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 670 ✭✭✭ciotog


    Sponge Bob wrote: »
    Generally the well visible and well lit ones are less stupid and less unpredictable. They also tend to cycle quite fast and motorists tend to let them pass and give them room to weave in and out.

    Stupid and unpredictable is a given when you see some idiot in dark clothes and no light ( sometimes no reflector even) on the bike as you do every evening in Galway. :(
    I was behind one of them coming past the Galway Shopping Centre this evening, not a light or any kind of reflective material to be seen. Not a great idea as we were both overtaking a long, long line of cars from about Argos to where the road splits into three lanes.


  • #140
    galwaycyclist
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 2,912 ✭✭✭galwaycyclist


    From July 2001
    A Foras Forbartha study on cycling in Galway in 1979 specifically raised the issue of the safety of cyclists and the roundabouts that were then being proposed for the city. At that time, in afternoon traffic in Galway, there was 19km travelled by bicycle for every 100km by car. [5] The national design manual RT 181 Intersections at Grade itself queries the suitablity of using roundabouts at locations where there might be cyclists turning right. [6] (It doesn't specify whether a University town with 12,000 third level students might fit this description.)

    A study on roundabouts in Swords in county Dublin in 1987 (R.286) found that two-wheeler casualties were five times higher than expected.  "The high incidence of two wheeler accidents on the Swords bypass allied with similar findings in the major accident study carried out by the TRRL on roundabouts shows that roundabouts on high speed roads do not provide a safe environment for two wheelers and consequently give serious reservation as to their use where high numbers of this road user class is expected". [2] In terms of pedestrians R.286 states that for the Swords by pass "The low level of pedestrians involved in personal injury accidents on the by-pass primarily relates to the provision of overbridges and signalised control facilities away from the roundabout and should not be taken as indicative of pedestrian safety at roundabouts in general".  There are no overbridges in Galway and only one signalised crossing, the situation for pedestrians on Galway's roundabouts is best demonstrated by examining the attached photographs.   It is arguable that using any high capacity roundabouts in a town like Galway shows at best incompetence and at worst a considered contempt for the most vulnerable residents.    It is clear that there are serious questions to be asked regarding how it is that any roundabouts were ever constructed either in, or near, Galway city.

    More here:
    http://www.oocities.org/galwaycyclist/roundabout/roundabout01.html


  • #141
    Iwannahurl
    Closed Accounts Posts: 8,156 ✭✭✭Iwannahurl


    antoobrien wrote: »
    Care to supply some official figures to back up your assertions.

    No, didn't think so.

    Why do you keep asking motorists to back up their assertions when you will soapbox your own without any figures, just your opinions?




    I have referenced various sources repeatedly across various threads.

    Which assertions?


  • Advertisement
  • #142
    biko
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 81,220 ✭✭✭✭biko


    This thread is just going round in circles.
    When work on the RB is actually commencing a thread may be started again.


  • #143
    biko
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 81,220 ✭✭✭✭biko


    A user notified me that the upcoming work has now been given a contractor. http://www.galwaynews.ie/26989-notorious-roundabout-bite-dust-next-month
    Work on the Galway Shopping Centre Roundabout is set to commence in August with Clare Civil Engineering the contractors lined up for the project, estimated to cost in the region of €2 million.
    Motorists can expect some traffic disruption through the construction period but most of the ‘heavy work’ will be take place during the night-time period.


  • #144
    snubbleste
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 31,117 ✭✭✭✭snubbleste


    OMG..August?
    Isn't that when traffic completely jams up the town because of people buying schoolbooks? I'm too lazy to search but wasn't that the excuse last August when tin boxes were lined up in neat order for hours?


  • #145
    Mrs OBumble
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 26,084 ✭✭✭✭Mrs OBumble


    snubbleste wrote: »
    OMG..August?
    Isn't that when traffic completely jams up the town because of people buying schoolbooks? I'm too lazy to search but wasn't that the excuse last August when tin boxes were lined up in neat order for hours?

    Yes.

    But when do you want them to start? This week or last (arts fest)? Before that (VOR)? Next week (races)? September (when school / college starts)? October (so it's not finished before Christmas)?


  • #146
    snubbleste
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 31,117 ✭✭✭✭snubbleste


    I'm well aware there's never a good time for this in Galway...I should've added a shiny smilie ;)
    I predict utter chaos followed by an imminent breakdown in society.


  • #147
    Iwannahurl
    Closed Accounts Posts: 8,156 ✭✭✭Iwannahurl


    Or perhaps an eminent breakdown? ;)

    Eye ee a certain Councillor flying into a state of stratospheric apoplexy...


  • #148
    KevR
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 3,110 ✭✭✭KevR


    Any update on when the adjacent Menlo Park roundabout is going to be upgraded?


  • #149
    planetX
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,441 ✭✭✭planetX


    Dread.


  • #150
    Sponge Bob
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 25,234 ✭✭✭✭Sponge Bob


    I THINK Menlo will be upgraded late this year and Corrib Park possibly at the same time or possibly next year. No plans published for Corrib Park yet. No tender has issued for either.

    The intention was to finish them all by end 2012


  • Advertisement
  • #151
    dloob
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,831 ✭✭✭dloob


    Sponge Bob wrote: »
    I THINK Menlo will be upgraded late this year and Corrib Park possibly at the same time or possibly next year. No plans published for Corrib Park yet. No tender has issued for either.

    The intention was to finish them all by end 2012

    They need a vote on a contravention of the city development plan to be passed for the menlo park one.
    That won't be until October. So no work before then at least.


This discussion has been closed.
Advertisement