Seamus Quirke roadworks merge

Iwannahurl

zarquon wrote: »

I noticed that too. It's amazing how natural traffic flow eases congestion in that area when the lights are off on that roundabout

What does "natural" traffic flow do for pedestrians and cyclists on that Circus of Horrors?

Enable them to sprint even faster than they do in between signal changes, perhaps?

Iwannahurl

Storm 10 wrote: »

Just on radio now the road will not open fully until the new year, Now there is a surprise, anyone could have seen that they are way behind schedule, not even transferred to the far side yet.

I went down there for a look recently and it wasn't exactly a hive of activity.

I remember having a similar reaction when the Luas was being built. Seeing just two guys in hard hats working quietly on the line outside Heuston didn't inspire confidence that the contractors meant business.

emptybladder

No surprises that the Council is now saying four extra months for completion. And the project is already €1m over budget.

twitter.com/galwaynews

galwaynews ConnachtTribuneGroup

RT @endacunningham EXCLUSIVE: Quirke Road project at least 4 months behind schedule and will run €1m over its €10m budget. #Galway (1/2)

1 hour agoFavoriteReplyDelete

»


galwaynews ConnachtTribuneGroup



RT @endacunningham New delays on Quirke Road scheme caused by serious new problems. See City Tribune tmrw #Galway#traffic (2/2)

1 hour agoFavoriteReplyDelete

Iwannahurl

The perpetually outraged Cllr Padraig Conneely says that "their measurements were out by two metres at Corrib Park" (page 3 of today's City Tribune -- I had it sent to me by long-distance cycle courier dontcha know).

There's a rule of thumb in carpentry that you measure twice and cut once.
Two metres is a large margin of error. In roads engineering terms, how can that happen?

Storm 10

Fair play to Padraig he is the only one in the City Council that calls things as they are, Eyre Square,Seamus Quirke, Art House Cinema (Disgrace nothing happening yet) the HSE etc, talks a lot but he is spot on on most things that are wrong in the City

Sponge Bob

They designed a road to go where the Corrib Park trees are and were forced to go 2m to the south when they belately found out the pesky trees were there.

The €1m would relate to overruns caused by the Corrib Park 'oops who put a tree there' moment and the land they inconveniently hadn't bought up at the student flats near the Oaks Hotel and 'traffic management' issues for which they coughed an extra €300-400k.

Anyone who thinks that this job will finish in February 2012, 4 months after the original October 2011 target, is simply delusional.

DanielI

Slightly off topic...

Are we getting some sort of fixed safety camera at the N59/N6 Quincentenary Bridge Junction?

I noticed two odd looking metal poles being installed before and after the junction going eastbound. There are also two poles like these after the junction going westbound.

zarquon

DanielI wrote: »

Slightly off topic...

Are we getting some sort of fixed safety camera at the N59/N6 Quincentenary Bridge Junction?

I noticed two odd looking metal poles being installed before and after the junction going eastbound. There are also two poles like these after the junction going westbound.

It would be a a massive cash cow to put a speed camera on the bridge. There's not many that stick to 50kph on that road.

Storm 10

As far as I am aware they are the cameras that will be used to monitor traffic and control the lights if its heavy, they will be controlled from City Hall but that would not make things any better the way they opearte up there.

Iwannahurl

Would be great if the cameras could also monitor speeding.

Traffic speeds on the bridge are just crazy. Probably the majority are well in excess of the limit.

what_traffic

DanielI wrote: »

Slightly off topic...

Are we getting some sort of fixed safety camera at the N59/N6 Quincentenary Bridge Junction?

I noticed two odd looking metal poles being installed before and after the junction going eastbound. There are also two poles like these after the junction going westbound.

Could they be camera's for RLJ's on the N6?

KevR

Iwannahurl wrote: »

Would be great if the cameras could also monitor speeding.

Traffic speeds on the bridge are just crazy. Probably the majority are well in excess of the limit.

Majority suggests that the limit is too low. Why else would the majority reject this limit? They should change the limit to something a bit more realistic and then enforce it. The 50kmh limit will never be obeyed and it will never be enforced.

zarquon

KevR wrote: »

Majority suggests that the limit is too low. Why else would the majority reject this limit? They should change the limit to something a bit more realistic and then enforce it. The 50kmh limit will never be obeyed and it will never be enforced.

80K would be okay on that stretch. I've seen plenty of squad cars whizz across that bridge at double the limit while ignoring their fellow road users doing the same speed.:) There is the issue though with the odd student who decides it's too much hassle to cross at the end of the bridge and so decides to dart across 4 lanes of traffic:mad:

what_traffic

zarquon wrote: »

There is the issue though with the odd student who decides it's too much hassle to cross at the end of the bridge and so decides to dart across 4 lanes of traffic:mad:

Try looking at the cause first - then come up with a solution. Have you asked yourself why are they doing this? Can you see the logic of not adding 500m to a journey on foot by doing the actions you propose? Could the solution be that if there was an additional pedestrian stairwell from the NUIG underpass i.e have a stairwell on BOTH sides of the underpass (also need this for the Dyke Road underpass - i.e have a stairwell on BOTH sides of the underpass ) that this might eliminate this behaviour?

Iwannahurl

KevR wrote: »

Majority suggests that the limit is too low. Why else would the majority reject this limit? They should change the limit to something a bit more realistic and then enforce it. The 50kmh limit will never be obeyed and it will never be enforced.

zarquon wrote: »

80K would be okay on that stretch. I've seen plenty of squad cars whizz across that bridge at double the limit while ignoring their fellow road users doing the same speed. There is the issue though with the odd student who decides it's too much hassle to cross at the end of the bridge and so decides to dart across 4 lanes of traffic

This thread is about the SQR (which may or may not have a similar problem) so I won't go into depth on the speeding issue.

RSA free speed surveys have on occasion found a large majority of motorists speeding on certain road categories, including 50 km/h residential streets.

Does that mean the 50 km/h limit is too low in residential areas? Of course not (and I would argue 50 km/h is too high in many cases). It simply means that a large proportion of motorists are breaking the law and that AGS are ignoring them.

Roads like the SQR, Quincentenary Bridge and the Sean Mulvoy Road are used by a significant number of pedestrians and cyclists. Whatever about the design speed of these roads, a higher speed limit (eg 80 km/h) is not appropriate, IMO. The routine failure of AGS to enforce the law does not justify motorists' behaviour. Who should decide what speed is appropriate: a "majority" of motorists or a "majority" of vulnerable road users including cyclists and pedestrians?

And yes, I've been overtaken by squad cars and Garda vans travelling well in excess of the speed limit without sirens or flashing lights. Perhaps they're the same Garda drivers who park on footpaths and don't signal on roundabouts...



.

zarquon

I quite agree 80kph would be far too much for the SQR due to the amount of pedestrians. Hopefully they will install proper pedestrian crossing to near the browne roundabout as that is badly needed.

Head The Wall

zarquon wrote: »

I've seen plenty of squad cars whizz across that bridge at double the limit while ignoring their fellow road users doing the same speed.

Sorry, does not compute :eek:

Iwannahurl

Head The Wall wrote: »

Sorry, does not compute :eek:

In what sense?

antoobrien

Iwannahurl wrote: »

In what sense?

Gardaí not enforcing a law - or even breaking one it can't be true:eek:

KevR

what_traffic wrote: »

Try looking at the cause first - then come up with a solution. Have you asked yourself why are they doing this? Can you see the logic of not adding 500m to a journey on foot by doing the actions you propose? Could the solution be that if there was an additional pedestrian stairwell from the NUIG underpass i.e have a stairwell on BOTH sides of the underpass (also need this for the Dyke Road underpass - i.e have a stairwell on BOTH sides of the underpass ) that this might eliminate this behaviour?

I thought there were plans to do this..

Hopefully they will build a second stairwell. It's a no brainer and long overdue.

KevR

Iwannahurl wrote: »

This thread is about the SQR (which may or may not have a similar problem) so I won't go into depth on the speeding issue.

RSA free speed surveys have on occasion found a large majority of motorists speeding on certain road categories, including 50 km/h residential streets.

Does that mean the 50 km/h limit is too low in residential areas? Of course not (and I would argue 50 km/h is too high in many cases). It simply means that a large proportion of motorists are breaking the law and that AGS are ignoring them.

Roads like the SQR, Quincentenary Bridge and the Sean Mulvoy Road are used by a significant number of pedestrians and cyclists. Whatever about the design speed of these roads, a higher speed limit (eg 80 km/h) is not appropriate, IMO. The routine failure of AGS to enforce the law does not justify motorists' behaviour. Who should decide what speed is appropriate: a "majority" of motorists or a "majority" of vulnerable road users including cyclists and pedestrians?

And yes, I've been overtaken by squad cars and Garda vans travelling well in excess of the speed limit without sirens or flashing lights. Perhaps they're the same Garda drivers who park on footpaths and don't signal on roundabouts...

.

Then we may as well say that any road which has cyclists or pedestrians should have a really low limit regardless of the design spec of the road. So, apart from motorways (where peds and cyclists are banned), every road in the country should have a speed limit of 50kmh or less?! Nonsense.

The Quincentenary is a high spec road. It was specifically designed to carry large volumes of traffic at a reasonable speed.

I cycled across the bridge daily for 5 years and I never had an issue with the speed of motor vehicles. Likewise, I don't find motorists speed to be a problem whenever I walk across the bridge.

If you want to erect a steel barrier on the edge of the foot/cycle path to make sure motor traffic can never mount the pavement, be my guest. The primary use for the bridge is motor traffic (whether you like it or not) - to make it safer for pedestrians and cyclists you can't make it worse for motorists. A steel barrier would not make it worse for motorists and it would offer protection to peds/cyclists but has been enough cases of kerb-mounting over the years to justify it?

Iwannahurl

KevR wrote: »

Then we may as well say that any road which has cyclists or pedestrians should have a really low limit regardless of the design spec of the road. So, apart from motorways (where peds and cyclists are banned), every road in the country should have a speed limit of 50kmh or less?! Nonsense.

The Quincentenary is a high spec road. It was specifically designed to carry large volumes of traffic at a reasonable speed.

I cycled across the bridge daily for 5 years and I never had an issue with the speed of motor vehicles. Likewise, I don't find motorists speed to be a problem whenever I walk across the bridge.

If you want to erect a steel barrier on the edge of the foot/cycle path to make sure motor traffic can never mount the pavement, be my guest. The primary use for the bridge is motor traffic (whether you like it or not) - to make it safer for pedestrians and cyclists you can't make it worse for motorists. A steel barrier would not make it worse for motorists and it would offer protection to peds/cyclists but has been enough cases of kerb-mounting over the years to justify it?

I sincerely hope the SQR modifications are not "specifically designed" to encourage (and justify) high speed in this university town with so many cyclists and pedestrians.

The Quincentenary Bridge, Headford Road (between the Bodkin and Kirwan roundabouts) and the Sean Mulvoy Road have some design features in common. They are not safe for vulnerable road users, and excessive speed increases both the actual and perceived danger for cyclists and pedestrians especially. Whatever about their design speed and the unforgiveable lack of enforcement, a 50 km/h limit for these roads is appropriate in the circumstances.


Two killed in horror car smash on bridge
Connacht Sentinel, December 11, 2007

***

€3m for student badly injured by car
Irish Times, July 14, 2011

***

Pedestrian seriously injured in city collision
Galway News, February 24, 2009

***

Safety steps urged at 'death trap' crossing on city road
Connacht Sentinel, September 21, 2010

***

Driver killed in three-car smash at rush hour
Irish Independent, December 13, 2008

Woman jumped to safety from out-of-control car, jury hears
Galway Advertiser, November 26, 2009

The jury in a trial heard yesterday how a young woman narrowly avoided being crushed by an out-of-control vehicle by leaping into a stairwell and then cowering from a shower of broken car parts.

The driver of the vehicle, which was left almost cut in two after slamming and embedding itself into a signpost, was not so fortunate. Nineteen-year-old Patrick Browne from Dangan Court in Galway lost his life in a three vehicle road traffic accident at Sean Mulvoy Road on December 12, 2008.

...

One witness, Sarah Kenny, spoke of how close she came to being seriously injured. The pedestrian had been texting on her phone when she looked up and saw two cars coming at her at “fairly fast speed”. She had just reached the ESB offices when she saw the Honda Civic “wobbling” and hitting the other car clipping the back of it. The two cars started spinning and then the Honda Civic came towards Ms Kenny.

dloob

I don't think a lower or more enforced limit would have made any difference to selfish suicidal drivers or boy racers racing who luckily only killed one of themselves.

There is certainly an argument for another underpass with bridge level access and more traffic calming on the approach to the terryland crossing.

KevR

The examples you gave don't really backup your point that the 50kmh is the correct speed limit..

Iwannahurl wrote: »

I sincerely hope the SQR modifications are not "specifically designed" to encourage (and justify) high speed in this university town with so many cyclists and pedestrians.

The Quincentenary Bridge, Headford Road (between the Bodkin and Kirwan roundabouts) and the Sean Mulvoy Road have some design features in common. They are not safe for vulnerable road users, and excessive speed increases both the actual and perceived danger for cyclists and pedestrians especially. Whatever about their design speed and the unforgiveable lack of enforcement, a 50 km/h limit for these roads is appropriate in the circumstances.


Two killed in horror car smash on bridge
Connacht Sentinel, December 11, 2007

Speeding driver pulling handbrake cause of Quincentenary Bridge collision, inquest hears
"The court heard that Mr Broderick, who had visited his ex-wife and children prior to the accident, may have taken alcohol earlier that day but seemed to be in a fit state on leaving the house. However, a number of witnesses, including student Garda Declan Lamb, testified to having seen the silver car speed over the bridge and drive erratically in the lead up to the collision."

***

€3m for student badly injured by car
Irish Times, July 14, 2011

***

Pedestrian seriously injured in city collision
Galway News, February 24, 2009

Build a pedestrian bridge! Why are pedestrians crossing 4 lanes of traffic at road level on the busiest road in the city? It's ridiculous.

***

Safety steps urged at 'death trap' crossing on city road
Connacht Sentinel, September 21, 2010

Same as above.

***

Driver killed in three-car smash at rush hour
Irish Independent, December 13, 2008

Woman jumped to safety from out-of-control car, jury hears
Galway Advertiser, November 26, 2009

The jury in a trial heard yesterday how a young woman narrowly avoided being crushed by an out-of-control vehicle by leaping into a stairwell and then cowering from a shower of broken car parts.

The driver of the vehicle, which was left almost cut in two after slamming and embedding itself into a signpost, was not so fortunate. Nineteen-year-old Patrick Browne from Dangan Court in Galway lost his life in a three vehicle road traffic accident at Sean Mulvoy Road on December 12, 2008.

...

One witness, Sarah Kenny, spoke of how close she came to being seriously injured. The pedestrian had been texting on her phone when she looked up and saw two cars coming at her at “fairly fast speed”. She had just reached the ESB offices when she saw the Honda Civic “wobbling” and hitting the other car clipping the back of it. The two cars started spinning and then the Honda Civic came towards Ms Kenny.

You missed a very important bit: “They were driving very close, It was like they were racing.”

Iwannahurl

KevR wrote: »

The examples you gave don't really backup your point that the 50kmh is the correct speed limit..

Really?

There is no justification, IMO, for a higher speed limit on city centre roads in residential areas featuring substantial pedestrian and cycle traffic.

The "correct" speed limit is what optimises safety for vulnerable road users, not what motorists think they deserve, IMO. The design speed of the road is another matter. Galway City Council have a long and ignoble track record of imposing infrastructure with an inappropriately high design speed that is inherently hostile to vulnerable road users. Additionally, AGS have an established track record of not effectively enforcing road traffic law in the city. Speed checks within the city are as rare as hen's teeth.

The relationship between speed and the risk/severity of collisions is well established. As vehicle speed increases the potential impact on pedestrians in the event of a collision increases exponentially. If hit by a vehicle travelling at 40 mph (60 km/h) a pedestrian has an 85% chance of being killed. IMO, this speed-severity causal association is justification enough for a 50 km/h maximum speed on roads such as the SQR and other arterial routes through built-up, city-centre and residential streets.





IMO your question ("why are pedestrians crossing 4 lanes of traffic at road level on the busiest road in the city?") illustrates the thinking that has dominated Galway City traffic and transportation policy for decades.

Perhaps the question could be reframed something along these lines: how come vulnerable road users -- such as pedestrians, cyclists, bus users, children, disabled people and senior citizens -- are expected to cope with heaviy-trafficked high-speed roads infrastructure in residential areas in a small university city like Galway?

AFAIK, the SQR modifications were originally proposed as a dual carriageway with several new roundabouts over a distance of 1.5-2 km. IIRC, the City Council had to be dragged kicking and screaming to consider the access needs of the local community, as well as the mobility and transportation needs of people other than car users.

Iwannahurl

dloob wrote: »

I don't think a lower or more enforced limit would have made any difference to selfish suicidal drivers or boy racers racing who luckily only killed one of themselves.

There is certainly an argument for another underpass with bridge level access and more traffic calming on the approach to the terryland crossing.

Lower average speed is inherently safer.

BTW, what was the speed of the 'non-suicidal' driver in the horrific incident referred to earlier?

KevR

Iwannahurl wrote: »

IMO your question ("why are pedestrians crossing 4 lanes of traffic at road level on the busiest road in the city?") illustrates the thinking that has dominated Galway City traffic and transportation policy for decades.

So you would be against a pedestrian bridge in that location and in other locations? I think we can all agree that a pedestrian bridge would make it a great deal safer for pedestrians so I'm interested to know why you don't want one. Is it because a pedestrian bridge would also benefit motorists (in the form of slightly better traffic flow) and you're against that?

what_traffic

KevR wrote: »

I thought there were plans to do this..

Hopefully they will build a second stairwell. It's a no brainer and long overdue.

Dyke Road should have had these installed on both sides when they built the Quincentenary. Thats about 27 years ago now?

University Underpass - was the Underpass in place when the Quincentenary bridge was built? Or was it tunelled subsequently?

antoobrien

what_traffic wrote: »

Try looking at the cause first - then come up with a solution. Have you asked yourself why are they doing this? Can you see the logic of not adding 500m to a journey on foot by doing the actions you propose? Could the solution be that if there was an additional pedestrian stairwell from the NUIG underpass i.e have a stairwell on BOTH sides of the underpass (also need this for the Dyke Road underpass - i.e have a stairwell on BOTH sides of the underpass ) that this might eliminate this behaviour?

I don't get this, why do we need stairways on both sides of the road to prevent students from crossing. I've jumped the rail more times than I can remember (it's fun too) on the side where there's no steps.

The only reason I can see for attempting to cross the road is access to Dun Na Coiribe. This is already facilitated by the existing steps, what with them being on the same side of the road and all that.

galwaycyclist

what_traffic wrote: »

Dyke Road should have had these installed on both sides when they built the Quincentenary. Thats about 27 years ago now?

University Underpass - was the Underpass in place when the Quincentenary bridge was built? Or was it tunelled subsequently?

That underpass was built at the time as I recall - it was there in the 1990s anyway. Within the scale of the costs of the project at the time - putting in ramps to access the campus and the Dyke Rd would have been a trivial additional cost. The fact that this was not done reinforces the impression that those responsible for this road viewed the needs of pedestrians and cyclists with considered contempt.