Roundabouts [or] lights?

extraice

which do you want ..... roundabouts r lights
sould the city drive have a say are the say off the City Council only ?

joeKel73

ful wrds r txt spk?

Full words please.

ciano1

i prefr trffic lites coz dey mke t ezier t crss da road.

softmee

Lights, lights, lights! Roundabouts are nightmare for learner driver. Chaotic unpredictable and scary, also for pedestrains and bicycles!
The one near GMIT, i have no idea how all students cross this street to get to bus. This is just crazy, how there can be no lights near school where so many people have to cross???

pleasant Co.

Rainbows plz

snubbleste

Monorail

galwegians

softmee wrote: »

Lights, lights, lights! Roundabouts are nightmare for learner driver. Chaotic unpredictable and scary, also for pedestrains and bicycles!
The one near GMIT, i have no idea how all students cross this street to get to bus. This is just crazy, how there can be no lights near school where so many people have to cross???

roundabouts if we get lights it will slow traffic down even more,
and if a learner driver cant handle a roundabout he/she should not be on the road,
and their are pedestrian crossings at all the roundabouts for pedestrians/and cyclists.
and as for the GMIT roundabout their is a perfectly good pedestrian crossing at dawn dairies for the students to cross, instead of running across in front of traffic like headless chickens.

cooperguy

Everything is scary for a learner at the beginning, if they are still scared after plenty of practice then they shouldnt be driving

Lights will ruin this city. They have already ruined on Junction!

Mr. Presentable

Even scarier if you can't read the question.

happyoutscan

Roundabouts as I have absolutely no faith in the muppets who will design and plan the new intersections. I'd also suggest putting up cameras at every roundabout in the city and fine every clown who:
- Doesn't indicate
- Doesn't use the correct lane
- Takes up 2 lanes
- Doesn't move when they have a chance

Our national debt would be wiped out in 2 weeks.





I can only dream....

aido76

Roundabouts for now until they build the outer bypass (when ever that will be):rolleyes:. Much less traffic using these roundabouts then, so should be safer for everyone. Moneenageisha hasn't really worked on traffic flow so don't have much confidence in getting anymore right. I think something needs to be done about the "Magic Roundabout" though!

yer man!

Lights will not work as there is simply far too many cars and too few approach roads actually coming into Galway. I think the council could do a lot better by improving the roundabouts and installing turning lanes etc.

[Embedded Image Removed]http://www.rorise.com/blog/2010/09/turbo-roundabouts/ also these could work as they would force people to use the correct lanes, increase capacity, reduce time, and cheap to introduce.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iMYib3IR43I

softmee

galwegians wrote: »

and if a learner driver cant handle a roundabout he/she should not be on the road,

and as for the GMIT roundabout their is a perfectly good pedestrian crossing at dawn dairies for the students to cross, instead of running across in front of traffic like headless chickens.

I know many experienced drivers who hate them and irish law is not my idea -according to it you can be on the road even when you cant start a car.
-and if something scares me a bit it doesnt mean i cant handle it.

-and yes, i can already see all the student crossing Dublin Road near Dawn Daries to get to bus... in your dreams :cool:

Wompa1

snubbleste wrote: »

Monorail

...I hear those things are awfully loud...

Mrs OBumble

galwegians wrote: »

and their are pedestrian crossings at all the roundabouts for pedestrians/and cyclists.

You must be smoking something impressive if you can see pedestrian crossings at the majority of Galway's roundabouts.

Yes, there a lights controlled crossings on the magic-roundabout.

But I can absolutely assure you that there aren't any on the Morris, Tuam Rd, or Briar Hill ones (though the latter does have a pedestrian underpass). Not 100% sure about the rest, but I don't think they have crossings.

emt16

roundabouts is the best way to keep trafic flowing.
Although the Irish have a major problem with being able to negotiate roundabouts safely and efficently

Also lights controled roundabouts or crossings slow down the flow and defeat the purpose of having a roundabout in the first place. if the junction, lead up and exit are planned properly, there is no need for lights

Iwannahurl

No question: roundabouts should be replaced with signalised junctions that maximise the safety of vulnerable road users such as pedestrians and cyclists.

According to An Garda Siochana, 25% of collisions in Galway City occur on roundabouts. That is reason alone to remove or radically redesign them.

Traffic flow is not superior to safety as a reason for keeping roundabouts.

The City Council's own research has shown that roundabouts are seriously problematic for many vulnerable road users. This has been validated by AGS and even by independent agencies such as Failte Ireland.

yer man!

Iwannahurl wrote: »

No question: roundabouts should be replaced with signalised junctions that maximise the safety of vulnerable road users such as pedestrians and cyclists.

According to An Garda Siochana, 25% of collisions in Galway City occur on roundabouts. That is reason alone to remove or radically redesign them.

Traffic flow is not superior to safety as a reason for keeping roundabouts.

The City Council's own research has shown that roundabouts are seriously problematic for many vulnerable road users. This has been validated by AGS and even by independent agencies such as Failte Ireland.

So instead of putting in a couple of pedestrian crossings around the place we should rip up roundabouts and replace it with a whole new junction..... they just need to be redesigned. They've had the same problem in Germany about people not using roundabouts correctly so they introduced the turbo roundabout in a few places to test if they work. They literally force you to use the roundabout correctly otherwise you mount a kerb and ruin your car. Also they put proper pedestrian crossings at every arm of the roundabout so the pedestrian has priority.

boreds11

The bypass is the only solution. I cant see lights making a lot of difference. Its really a mickey mouse job to waste a few million and block up the city while they build it. The only possible advantage to the lights is that they might help speed up the flow along the N6 to the detriment of the connecting roads.

someday2010

Iwannahurl wrote: »

No question: roundabouts should be replaced with signalised junctions that maximise the safety of vulnerable road users such as pedestrians and cyclists.

According to An Garda Siochana, 25% of collisions in Galway City occur on roundabouts. That is reason alone to remove or radically redesign them.

Traffic flow is not superior to safety as a reason for keeping roundabouts.

The City Council's own research has shown that roundabouts are seriously problematic for many vulnerable road users. This has been validated by AGS and even by independent agencies such as Failte Ireland.

Replacing the roundabouts with lights will be a disaster. The above mentioned do not pay any road tax so i dont see why the 60,000 plus people who travel through Galway every day should have more delay added to their journeys to benefit the cyclist who pays no road tax on their bike

c_man

galwegians wrote: »

and their are pedestrian crossings at all the roundabouts for pedestrians/and cyclists.

Must have missed that at the Quincentennial Bridge entrance to the Bodkin roundabout so...

schween

someday2010 wrote: »

Replacing the roundabouts with lights will be a disaster. The above mentioned do not pay any road tax so i dont see why the 60,000 plus people who travel through Galway every day should have more delay added to their journeys to benefit the cyclist who pays no road tax on their bike

What an idiotic argument!

The "above mentioned" pay VAT and possibly PAYE, PRSI and USC, along with other taxes. They have as much right to be on the road. Do you think that road tax alone pays for our roads?

Actually, we could save a fortune with this mindset! Every person on the dole now has less priority in our hospitals, schools etc etc!!

KevR

Lights are definitely better at peak times but they can be annoying off-peak when you get held up on a near empty road.

Galway drivers/people need to wake the f**k up though. The lights should be better than the roundabouts but they probably won't be because people take an age to move when the light goes green.

I was in a queue for the lights at the hospital on Saturday afternoon, traffic was heavy. A pedestrian presses the button but then decides to cross while the light was green for motor traffic. With it being Galway, two lanes of traffic decided to stop to let this person cross. Light goes red for motor traffic and green pedestrian light comes on (no pedestrians crossed during this time). The tailback should have been almost cleared by the green phase but it actually ended up being double in size! Imagine if the same thing happens a few phases in a row or at few sets of lights in the one area - a traffic jam quickly gets created because of ignorance, not because of traffic lights.

I'm not saying the cars should have run this person over but they shouldn't have stopped when he stepped onto the road. Slow down but keep moving so he is forced back onto the path, optional to beep at him.

Pressing the button and not waiting for the green pedestrian light is ignorant towards other pedestrians also. Someone coming along a short while later who actually wants to wait for the pedestrian light could well have to wait longer for the light because of it.


In terms of Galway's traffic problems being solved by raplacing roundabout with lights - it won't be. It's a really cheap attempt at a solution. The bypass is badly needed. If they bypass isn't going to happen then they need to look at flyover for the N6 (like what they are doing to the South Ring Road in Cork).

schween wrote: »

Do you think that road tax alone pays for our roads?

It does.

I remember figures being quoted a few years ago - over €7 Billion collected through motor tax, fuel duty....etc with only a little over €1 Billion being spent on roads in the same year. That gap has possibly even widened now because spending on roads has been cut and fuel duty + VAT on fuel has sky-rocketed..

dilallio

The 'green wave' works very well when the majority of traffic is coming from one direction. It doesn't work when you have equal amounts coming from 2 directions - if the next set of lights are synchronised with traffic coming from 1 direction into the preceding junction, then the other road of traffic coming into the preceding junction is guaranteed to hit 2 sets of red lights, causing further delays.

When they installed the lights at Moneenageisha, they tried to adapt the 'green wave' for traffic coming from college rd, but this caused traffic to build up onto the cemetery cross roundabout as well as chaos on the Wellpark rd, and they had to abandon the plan.

They will install the lights, and then keep adjusting the sequence to reduce the build up of traffic from all directions onto the junction. They will do the same at the next junction, without worrying that the lights are synchronised. Unfortunately without an outer bypass, the volume of traffic at peak times means that they will have no other option.

The bus service in Galway is a joke on certain routes, and the only option for many is to drive or cycle. Roundabouts are not cycle-friendly or pedestrian-friendly and need to be upgraded if the desire to get people away from cars, is to be realised. There is no way I would let any of my kids cycle to school on the galway roads, and it's unfair (and illegal) for them to take the safe option and cycle on the footpaths.

Iwannahurl

someday2010 wrote: »

Replacing the roundabouts with lights will be a disaster. The above mentioned do not pay any road tax so i dont see why the 60,000 plus people who travel through Galway every day should have more delay added to their journeys to benefit the cyclist who pays no road tax on their bike

That's a crock, as they politely say in the States.

Can you provide a link to some official information on the "road tax" you mention?

I am not aware of such a tax, nor am I aware of any special privileges associated with paying it.

Iwannahurl

yer man! wrote: »

So instead of putting in a couple of pedestrian crossings around the place we should rip up roundabouts and replace it with a whole new junction..... they just need to be redesigned. They've had the same problem in Germany about people not using roundabouts correctly so they introduced the turbo roundabout in a few places to test if they work. They literally force you to use the roundabout correctly otherwise you mount a kerb and ruin your car. Also they put proper pedestrian crossings at every arm of the roundabout so the pedestrian has priority.

Safety first. The welfare of vulnerable road users must not be compromised so that larger volumes of single-occupant cars can circulate with maximum convenience.

The Dutch have good roundabout designs too. They keep cyclists safely separated, though I'm not sure about pedestrians in the example below.

McTigs

someday2010 wrote: »

Replacing the roundabouts with lights will be a disaster. The above mentioned do not pay any road tax so i dont see why the 60,000 plus people who travel through Galway every day should have more delay added to their journeys to benefit the cyclist who pays no road tax on their bike

This is wrong on so many levels.


1. Many people on bikes own a car as well so they do pay motor tax.
2. Even if they don't, they probably pay many other forms of tax, which entitle them to the national facilities as much as anyone else.
3. Even if motor tax collected did go directly towards the roads (which it doesn't) why should cyclists pay it when they are not catered for by means of cycle lane or even permitted to cycle on motorways?
4. And just to be pedantic, it's motor tax not road tax. Bicycles have no motor.

Are there any particular roundabouts that will benefit from being converted to traffic lights?

The exit from Boston Scientific or Cemetery Cross?

Cemetery Cross is very small - would lights stop people driving onto the roundabout without being able to exit it going towards Moneenageisha?
Also as there is a school on the corner it would probably be safer for other road users.

Iwannahurl

KevR wrote: »

It does.

I remember figures being quoted a few years ago - over €7 Billion collected through motor tax, fuel duty....etc with only a little over €1 Billion being spent on roads in the same year. That gap has possibly even widened now because spending on roads has been cut and fuel duty + VAT on fuel has sky-rocketed..

I'd like to see some direct, comprehensive and authoritative evidence that motor tax pays for the entire costs of constructing and maintaining our road network, along with the other costs associated with car use (eg government administration, road casualties, public health, policing, CO2 emissions, land use efficiency etc).

For example, the economist Peter Bacon estimated over ten years ago that the total cost of road accidents in 1989 was £795 million (punts). Road casualties have decreased since then, but costs generally have greatly increased. Walking and cycling don't cause death and injury the way cars do, and active commuters have higher levels of health and lower levels of absenteeism overall than car commuters.

Here are links to just a few publications outlining the economic and societal benefits of cycling and walking:

National Cycle Policy Framework
The Economic Significance of Cycling
Cycling and Economics
The Benefits of Walking and Cycling
The Economic Value of Walkability
Health and Environmental Benefits of Walking and Bicycling





.

yer man!

One thing I noticed today at the moneen traffic light junction is the fact that only one arm is given the green light in any one cycle. This is pure crap. the dublin road in front of huntsman should be green to go straight on or left while the road coming from the tuam road roundabout on the top of the hill is given the green light to go straight ahead and left and do away with the right turn towards college road as is not used a huge amount. I think it really could make a difference to this junction. It would take fewer cycles for the college road arm to get a green light. Don't see why the council don't at least experiment with the sequencing. this whole self learning junction is seriously dumb....

KevR

yer man! wrote: »

One thing I noticed today at the moneen traffic light junction is the fact that only one arm is given the green light in any one cycle. This is pure crap. the dublin road in front of huntsman should be green to go straight on or left while the road coming from the tuam road roundabout on the top of the hill is given the green light to go straight ahead and left and do away with the right turn towards college road as is not used a huge amount. I think it really could make a difference to this junction. It would take fewer cycles for the college road arm to get a green light. Don't see why the council don't at least experiment with the sequencing. this whole self learning junction is seriously dumb....

+1

It's not necessary to allow all four arms of the junction to turn right.

They should get rid of Cemetary Cross --> College Road and Dublin Road inbound --> Wellpark Road.

I think it would greatly improve traffic flow at peak times and it would only cause a little inconvenience to a small minority in the process of doing so. It would also reduce wait times off-peak. The Quincentennary Bridge/Newcastle Road junction works very well - the layout is very similar to Moneen but there are no right turns at all.

Toon--soldier

Iwannahurl wrote: »

No question: roundabouts should be replaced with signalised junctions that maximise the safety of vulnerable road users such as pedestrians and cyclists.

According to An Garda Siochana, 25% of collisions in Galway City occur on roundabouts. That is reason alone to remove or radically redesign them.

Traffic flow is not superior to safety as a reason for keeping roundabouts.

The City Council's own research has shown that roundabouts are seriously problematic for many vulnerable road users. This has been validated by AGS and even by independent agencies such as Failte Ireland.

75% of collisions in Galway City occur don't roundabouts.

Luveen

Roundabouts - defineatly better!!

But unfortunatly the majority of drivers DO NOT know how to use them,
so lights couldnt be simpler for them drivers who havent a clue about basic road rules!!

But even when/if we get light you'll have the problems of people not knowing what lane, blocking yellow boxes .....etc

Iwannahurl

Toon--soldier wrote: »

75% of collisions in Galway City occur don't roundabouts.

Is that supposed to signify something important, or intelligible?

There are around 300km of road in Galway City, a very large number of ordinary junctions, and only 14 or so roundabouts (assuming they are all named after the Tribes).

If 25% of collisions are occurring in just a tiny fraction of all possible locations, then there is a problem. That's why AGS have highlighted the issue.

Iwannahurl

Luveen wrote: »

Roundabouts - defineatly better!!

How so? AGS, the City Council's own research, independent agencies and now the local authority's own engineering consultants indicate otherwise. Do you know something they don't?

Toon--soldier

Iwannahurl wrote: »

Is that supposed to signify something important, or intelligible?

There are around 300km of road in Galway City, a very large number of ordinary junctions, and only 14 or so roundabouts (assuming they are all named after the Tribes).

If 25% of collisions are occurring in just a tiny fraction of all possible locations, then there is a problem. That's why AGS have highlighted the issue.

A more helpful figure would be the amount of cars in a year that use the roundabout and are involved in a collision, and the amount of cars that use the roundabout and aren’t involved in collisions. It’s easy to say the 25% percent of collisions occur on roundabouts when nearly 100% of all city traffic must pass through a roundabout at some stage during the day.

Iwannahurl

Toon--soldier wrote: »

A more helpful figure would be the amount of cars in a year that use the roundabout and are involved in a collision, and the amount of cars that use the roundabout and aren’t involved in collisions. It’s easy to say the 25% percent of collisions occur on roundabouts when nearly 100% of all city traffic must pass through a roundabout at some stage during the day.

Unless the traffic is levitating elsewhere, then 100% of it also goes on roads and through normal junctions.

Your proposed comparison would yield no information as to the relative safety of roundabouts versus other junction types.

In addition to the Garda collision data there is also quantitative and qualitative information in the form of responses to a Council survey, indicating that roundabouts pose significant hazards to vulnerable road users. Interestingly, the Council's survey responses highlighted the problems caused by roundabouts, even though the questionnaire didn't even mention this junction type!

Toon--soldier

Iwannahurl wrote: »

Unless the traffic is levitating elsewhere, then 100% of it also goes on roads and through normal junctions.

Your proposed comparison would yield no information as to the relative safety of roundabouts versus other junction types.

QUOTE]

B]It would give the percentage of roundabout users involved in accidents, this information could then be compared to the amount of traffic light users invoved in accidents. [/B]

Iwannahurl

What you referred to earlier was "the amount of cars in a year that use the roundabout and are involved in a collision, and the amount of cars that use the roundabout and aren’t involved in collisions". That would be focusing on only one junction type.

Any research regarding the relative frequency of collisions would have to look at other junction types and road locations.

I still think it's significant that only 14 or so locations in the city feature one out of every four collisions.

Perceived safety is also very important, and respondents to at least two and possibly three surveys in the last few years have specifically highlighted roundabouts as being hazardous and intimidating.

Roundabouts have also been identified as problematic for buses (see Strategic Bus Study 2007, for example). Don't forget also that most bus users are pedestrians at the start and end of their journey, so infrastructure and traffic conditions that deter walking (and which do not sufficiently control the road network) will also adversely affect public transport.

Toon--soldier

Iwannahurl wrote: »

What you referred to earlier was "the amount of cars in a year that use the roundabout and are involved in a collision, and the amount of cars that use the roundabout and aren’t involved in collisions". That would be focusing on only one junction type.

I would only be delighted to compare these figures to the equivalent traffic light figures it would be the only fair comparison

Pesronally I feel the garda traffic collision figures are a poor reference to show the safety of one type of junction over another as they do not include the volume of traffic that passes through each type of junction, which can distort the figures greatly.

Iwannahurl

Roundabouts ought to be safer (according to research done in other countries) but in Ireland they are not. Design is critical, as not all roundabouts are the same, and the needs of vulnerable road users require special attention.

The Public Transport Feasibility Study published last year identified roundabouts as being problematic for pedestrians and disabled people, and also stated that multi-lane high-flow roundabouts (of the type typically seen in Ireland) have an accident rate for cyclists 14 to 16 times that of motorists.

dec25532

It is quite astounding that the City Council want to install lights instead of roundabouts when they have made a complete balls of the situation at Moneenageisha.
When the lights were installed, the signalling was supposed to be on a trial basis and the lights would then be synchronised to accommodate traffic coming from all directions. This has not been done.
The lights from the College Road/Lough Atalia Road side, for example, are a disaster and particularly when, in the evening times, cars cannot move even when they are governed by a green light. This is the worst possible example of replacing a roundabout with traffic lights.
And now they want to do the whole city. Fcuk off, no thanks. It will mean them erecting lights on "a trial basis" and then synchronising them once they determine the traffic flow which will not happen and result in even worse traffic delays.
Outer city bypass or nothing.

yer man!

Iwannahurl wrote: »

How so? AGS, the City Council's own research, independent agencies and now the local authority's own engineering consultants indicate otherwise. Do you know something they don't?

The council have done nothing in Galway BUT make things worse year after year. What ever advice they are getting, it sure as hell isn't good.

Iwannahurl

yer man! wrote: »

The council have done nothing in Galway BUT make things worse year after year. What ever advice they are getting, it sure as hell isn't good.

There is something in what you say. The dominant advice at present is that a Bypass should be built.

Iwannahurl

dec25532 wrote: »

It is quite astounding that the City Council want to install lights instead of roundabouts when they have made a complete balls of the situation at Moneenageisha.
When the lights were installed, the signalling was supposed to be on a trial basis and the lights would then be synchronised to accommodate traffic coming from all directions. This has not been done.
The lights from the College Road/Lough Atalia Road side, for example, are a disaster and particularly when, in the evening times, cars cannot move even when they are governed by a green light. This is the worst possible example of replacing a roundabout with traffic lights.
And now they want to do the whole city. Fcuk off, no thanks. It will mean them erecting lights on "a trial basis" and then synchronising them once they determine the traffic flow which will not happen and result in even worse traffic delays.
Outer city bypass or nothing.

How do you synchronise one set of traffic lights? I'm no roads engineer, but my understanding is that the excess of roundabouts reduces the ability to manage traffic. If roundabouts on key routes are replaced with controlled signalised junctions that can be monitored centrally, then traffic flow can be managed better.

With regard to the GCOB, the NRA are promising exactly that for the next decade or so: nothing.

If anyone is to blame for Galway's traffic congestion (and I believe there is) it is Galway City Council's "Planning" department and the elected members of the formerly dominant political parties in the Council, FF and FG.

This excerpt from the NRA's National Roads Traffic Management Study says it all:

In the absence of the GCOB, the Galway Ring Road continues to provide connectivity between the major radial routes. Nevertheless, although constructed as a City Bypass, the existing Ring Road (Bóthar na dTreabh) has supported significant growth in retail and low-density employment uses which have been displaced from the City Centre by this infrastructure. This has led to significant erosion in the level of service provided by the ring road, leading to an inability to achieve its originally desired function.

Bothar na dTreabh and Quincentenary Bridge were originally touted as solutions to growing problems of traffic congestion. Within ten years of the new bridge being opened, major development had been allowed in the vicinity and then the inevitable complaints about traffic congestion started again.

Now there's more clamouring and lobbying for a new Outer Bypass, and the speculators, developers and commercial interests, along with their good friends in Galway City Council, can already get the smell of the future money-making possibilities that they expect the Bypass to provide.

snubbleste

Good post.

yer man!

Iwannahurl wrote: »

How do you synchronise one set of traffic lights? I'm no roads engineer, but my understanding is that the excess of roundabouts reduces the ability to manage traffic. If roundabouts on key routes are replaced with controlled signalised junctions that can be monitored centrally, then traffic flow can be managed better.

With regard to the GCOB, the NRA are promising exactly that for the next decade or so: nothing.

If anyone is to blame for Galway's traffic congestion (and I believe there is) it is Galway City Council's "Planning" department and the elected members of the formerly dominant political parties in the Council, FF and FG.

This excerpt from the NRA's National Roads Traffic Management Study says it all:

In the absence of the GCOB, the Galway Ring Road continues to provide connectivity between the major radial routes. Nevertheless, although constructed as a City Bypass, the existing Ring Road (Bóthar na dTreabh) has supported significant growth in retail and low-density employment uses which have been displaced from the City Centre by this infrastructure. This has led to significant erosion in the level of service provided by the ring road, leading to an inability to achieve its originally desired function.

Bothar na dTreabh and Quincentenary Bridge were originally touted as solutions to growing problems of traffic congestion. Within ten years of the new bridge being opened, major development had been allowed in the vicinity and then the inevitable complaints about traffic congestion started again.

Now there's more clamouring and lobbying for a new Outer Bypass, and the speculators, developers and commercial interests, along with their good friends in Galway City Council, can already get the smell of the future money-making possibilities that they expect the Bypass to provide.

Well said altogether.

antoobrien

Iwannahurl wrote: »

Bothar na dTreabh and Quincentenary Bridge were originally touted as solutions to growing problems of traffic congestion. Within ten years of the new bridge being opened, major development had been allowed in the vicinity and then the inevitable complaints about traffic congestion started again.

Now there's more clamouring and lobbying for a new Outer Bypass, and the speculators, developers and commercial interests, along with their good friends in Galway City Council, can already get the smell of the future money-making possibilities that they expect the Bypass to provide.

What total and utter rubbish - there was housing development around the the new bridge and so called ring road (part of which passes through eyre square so ti can't be called a bypass) - long before they were built - and the bypass was being proposed before all the new estates starting spring up in Doughiska, Ballybrit, Ballybane and other such places (it was proposed first more than 10 years ago, a lot of housing estates there are 20 years old).

It was known within a year or two of construction that the new bridge wouldn't be able to cope with the amount of traffic that it was getting, and would be getting into the future.

I find it laughable that anyone can claim that retail has been displaced from the city center - it has moved away from it because people can't get into the city center - why else would dunnes and quinnsworth have set up in terryland (they're there as long as I can remember) in the first place?

Iwannahurl

antoobrien wrote: »

What total and utter rubbish - there was housing development around the the new bridge and so called ring road (part of which passes through eyre square so ti can't be called a bypass) - long before they were built - and the bypass was being proposed before all the new estates starting spring up in Doughiska, Ballybrit, Ballybane and other such places (it was proposed first more than 10 years ago, a lot of housing estates there are 20 years old).

It was known within a year or two of construction that the new bridge wouldn't be able to cope with the amount of traffic that it was getting, and would be getting into the future.

I find it laughable that anyone can claim that retail has been displaced from the city center - it has moved away from it because people can't get into the city center - why else would dunnes and quinnsworth have set up in terryland (they're there as long as I can remember) in the first place?

If you're going to make allegations about "total and utter rubbish" then it would help your case if you steered clear of it yourself.

I notice that you conveniently omit the NRA's own analysis from your post.

It is a matter of historical fact that Bothar na dTreabh and associated infrastructure led to increased development in its vicinity. This led to a reduction in the level of service that these roads were supposed to provide. If you have evidence that contradicts the NRA's analysis then you ought to submit it to them asap -- they pay good money for such expert consultancy. Please post a copy or a link here when you do so.

On the other hand, your reference to certain large retailers being there 'as long as you can remember' suggests that you may need to work a little harder for your expert status. And by the way, they didn't move from the city centre.

If it was known with a year or two of construction that the Quincentenary Bridge and Bothar na dTreabh would not cope with the level of traffic, then I would suggest that indicates a degree of failure in planning even greater than I had originally thought.

Are we to repeat the same unsustainable strategy again? Is that the best we can do?

It is clear that a primary purpose of the GCOB is to pave the way for development on the lands around it, and indeed in the city centre itself (currently stymied by traffic concerns). In early 2007, a director of Keane Mahony Smith was given two whole pages in the Galway Advertiser to tell us "What's Down The Road For Galway". Here's an excerpt:

Galway City and County is governed by development plans which have plan boundaries. If we were to compare what is happening in other towns and cities that have been bypassed, land tends to become zoned inside the ring road, bypass, etc and these roads tend to become the new plan boundary. Areas in Knocknacarra, Bushypark, Menlo, Castlegar, Barna and Briarhill will be opened up. Already there is a local area plan being prepared for a section of land between the Monivea Road, the Tuam Road and the Parkmore Road and inside the GCOB.

IMO, it simply not acceptable that the proponents of a new Outer Bypass can claim it is needed to relieve traffic congestion and yet at the same time deny or ignore that there are some who deliberately intend it to be used to create further development of the same kind that failed to deal with traffic congestion in the past. In fact that development directly led to more traffic congestion.

We've had more than enough of that greed, corruption and unsustainability in this country already, thank you very much. Indeed we'll be paying for it for decades.

Why should taxpayers' money be used to facilitate such private gain and unsustainable development?

antoobrien

Iwannahurl wrote: »

It is a matter of historical fact that Bothar na dTreabh and associated infrastructure led to increased development in its vicinity.

I live in Castlegar so I know the area being referred to very well, I call that utter hogwash. With the exception of Doughiska & Roscam (which started development approx 3 years after it was built) the vast majority of industrial and residential areas was already there.

How many new retail parks & industrial estates are there are there (less than 10 years old when the bypass was first suggested)? Most of them, such as Dunnes Shopping center, Sandy Road, Motorpark, Liosban, Mervue industrial estates, Ballybrit (APC, Boston etc), Parkmore West are all than 15 years old and some far longer than that. Sure I can pick out places like the car dealership and the place opposite the Galway Plate but the vast majority of facilities were already there, and were expanded.

How many new housing estates outside those two areas have been built along that route in the last 15 years? Ballinfolye, Crestwood, Sandyvale, Glenburn Park, Balybrit Hieghts, Lawns, Meadows, Gardens are all older than the dual carriage way that pass by them.

And older than the NRA.

Iwannahurl

antoobrien wrote: »

...I call that utter hogwash...

I would have to search for specific examples of the kind of retail development alluded to by the NRA. I don't have time just now, but as and when I think of examples I'll post them here.

However, one does spring to mind immediately. Galway Retail Park on the Headford Road, very close to the infamous Bodkin Roundabout (aka Circus of Horrors). That retail park is home to the Omniplex Cinema, which opened in 1993 I believe. IIRC the Quincentenary Bridge opened in 1987. The retail park was a traffic-generating development that was clearly allowed to occur in the immediate vicinity of a road that was supposed to relieve traffic congestion.

The Bodkin Magic Roundabout is also a very good example of the insanity of constructing such monstrosities in and around a city like Galway. The half-assed traffic signals are a botched attempt at putting a sticking plaster on an open sore.

As an example of car-dependent lunacy it's hard to beat the Retail Park and its relationship to the shopping centre across the road. If you park in either commercial centre and walk across the road to its opposite number, your car is liable to be clamped! To drive from the retail park to the shopping centre you have to turn left and go round the roundabout. If that kind of thing doesn't generate needless traffic congestion I don't know what does.

And what of the other developments in that area? There's the student accommodation just off the Bodkin Roundabout, from where 1 in every 5 students travels to NUIG by car either as a driver or passenger. There's the Menlo Park Hotel, opened in 1998 I believe (though I am open to correction on that). Then there was the hotel near the roundabout just off Bothar na dTreabh -- was it the Ibis? Now closed and serving as a centre for asylum seekers I believe.

By the way, when was The Plaza development (apartments, offices and shops) on the Headford Road constructed, and when did Argos and Lidl open their doors? I have no information on that, but my guess would be that the complex was built in the late 90s.

Am I just making this stuff up? Do you just dismiss these commercial and residential developments as being of no relevance and as having no impact on congestion since the 'traffic-relieving' Quincentenary Bridge opened?





EDIT: Another large development, constructed well after the Quincentenary Bridge opened, was Headford Point, featuring the Courtyard Marriott Hotel (now the Pillo).

The first Marriott property in the west of Ireland, the Courtyard Galway is part of Headford Point: a mixed-use building containing office space and retail shops. Situated on a roundabout on one of the main access roads to Galway...