Cycling/Walking around the city

Iwannahurl

Mrs OBumble wrote: »

It's not often that I disagree with you - but in the name of all that is good - do not ever stop for a pedestrian while you are on a RAB. Because if you do, the change of a very nasty multi-vehicle pile up is enormous. Just keep going. The pedestrian would far rather wait for a gap to come - and I can assure you, it always does come, no matter how heavy traffic is. (And that's a comment from someone who is a frequent pedestrian, and who had a very unpleasant experience with being given-way to the first time I tackled the late-but-not-lameneted Morris TAB.)

I strongly disagree.

Firstly, even though Irish roundabout design is an abomination, speeds are generally lower on roundabouts than on the roads leading to them, and in this instance the speed limit was the default 50 km/h for urban areas.

Secondly, my speed when traversing a roundabout, especially taking a right or doing a u-turn, is typically no more than 30 km/h. In the situation I described above, I was already aware that there could be a pedestrian crossing (because it's a residential area close to shops and services, and there are frequently adults and children walking around) and therefore my speed would have been low for sure.

Do you really believe that there's an "enormous chance" of a "very nasty multi-vehicle pile-up" in such circumstances?

In any case, both the law and the RoTR appear to agree with me, and not with you or with the impatient motorists beeping angrily behind me because a pedestrian was allowed to cross.

Article 8(3) of the 1997 Traffic Regulations states that "a driver of a vehicle approaching a road junction shall yield the right of way to ... a pedestrian who has commenced to cross at the junction."

The Rules of the Road (page 121-122) warns that "vehicles do not have an automatic right of way on the road", and that "the overriding rule is, in all circumstances, proceed with caution."

It states quite plainly that "you must always yield to pedestrians already crossing at a junction".

The RoTR also reminds us that "to avoid doubt and in the interest of road safety a vehicle should always yield to pedestrians."

That all seems quite clear to me.

As I proceeded with caution through the roundabout, I saw that the woman had already started to cross, pushing a pram in front of her.

Are you saying that I should have just ignored her, the law and the RoTR guidelines and drove right past her and her child in the pram as they stood in the roadway?

How can that possibly be the right thing to do, "in the name of all that is good"?

If that is the prevailing wisdom, or dominant culture, in this city then it is no wonder that our numerous roundabouts are such hostile places for pedestrians and cyclists (especially children).

No offence or criticism intended towards yourself.

What was your unpleasant experience on the Morris roundabout?

Iwannahurl

Camilo Tight Shrew wrote: »

By simply walking behind the bus, truck or car. This is how it should be done. First car/ bus etc stops at the junction and pedestrians walk behind. For someone who appears to love walking you have a major problem with walking the few extra yards to walk around something.

irisheddie85 wrote: »

yes they are meant to wait for the gap that should appear once the large vehicle leaves the junction and the next car in line gives them right of way as they should.

...

Heavy traffic is an inconvenience for all road users be they driving walking or cycling. I dont think any road design could ever overcome this

your photo of the dutch rounabout actually shows what should happen at all junctions.

...

Unfortunately it looks as though if a truck or bus were using this junction they would still end up stopping blocking part of the crossing.

Earlier in this thread it was said that pedestrians should be able to cross corner to corner of the path but your picture of a good way to cross a road doesn't follow this it actually follows mrs o Bumble idea of crossing behind the first car.

What gap? Walk where behind the bus?

It doesn't work that way in real (Irish) life. Typically what happens is that, say, a HGV (which imo shouldn't be on the road during the school run or in residential areas in any case) stops and blocks the uncontrolled crossing. So the pedestrian can't cross while traffic is stationary. Meanwhile traffic comes up from the rear and closes the gap. When the truck (or any other vehicle) move forward, the following vehicles do the same.

Uncontrolled crossings do what it says on the tin. There are no controls or obvious "cues to action" that would increase the chances of pedestrians being able to cross. Traffic signals or Zebra crossings work better --though that is not always the case in the Irish context -- because there are obvious markings or signs that are meant to regulate behaviour.

It is naive, and self-evidently unworkable, to expect Irish-style "courtesy crossings" to work in favour of pedestrians.

Iwannahurl

SpaceTime wrote: »

Galway and Cork are *EXCEPTIONALLY* wet by almost any standards.
Their number of days of rain are also extremely high.
Dublin's significantly drier.

There's no myth, hear-say or anything else about it.

Number of days my kids have done the (morning) school run by car since end August 2013: Zero.

Number of times it rained during the morning school run in the same time period: I don't know and I don't care.

Question for you: what is the probability/odds ratio/risk of significant (or any) rainfall during any one trip to or from work or school?

Or to put it another way, how likely is it that I will be rained on as I walk to/from school or work?

It may rain frequently in Galway, but it does not rain constantly and the rainfall is not always heavy. Therefore it would be interesting to know whether I'm really likely to get a soaking if I commute by Shank's Pony within a walkable radius of school or work, say a distance of <=2 km or a duration of <=20 minutes.

EDIT: According to this website, the average annual monthly number of precipitation days (defined as the mean number of days with at least 0.1 mm of precipitation) is 15. That means there are, on average, 15 days every month with precipitation less than 0.1 mm. The rainiest month of October has 137.9mm and 17.4 days of precipitation. That's an arithmetical average of 7.9mm per precipitation day, or 0.33mm per precipitation hour, or 0.11mm per 20-minute precipitation period. Spreading those figures out over 30 days gives us the following: 4.6mm per day, 0.19mm per hour, 0.06mm per 20-minute period (137.9/30/24/3) .

That's all by way of arithmetical musing on the rainfall statistics. Someone correct my figures if they're wrong; I did the calculations in a hurry. The point is that in an 'average' 20-minute period on an 'average' day in the rainiest month of the year, you can expect 0.06mm of rain to fall on you as you walk a reasonable distance to work or school.

Also worth noting is that even if Galway City were the rain capital of Europe, never mind Ireland, two significant things are already occurring in real life: (1) lots of people still walk to work and school on rainy days, and (2) a lot more people still drive on fine days.

Iwannahurl

Iwannahurl wrote: »

What gap? Walk where behind the bus?

It doesn't work that way in real (Irish) life. Typically what happens is that, say, a HGV (which imo shouldn't be on the road during the school run or in residential areas in any case) stops and blocks the uncontrolled crossing. So the pedestrian can't cross while traffic is stationary. Meanwhile traffic comes up from the rear and closes the gap. When the truck (or any other vehicle) move forward, the following vehicles do the same.

Uncontrolled crossings do what it says on the tin. There are no controls or obvious "cues to action" that would increase the chances of pedestrians being able to cross. Traffic signals or Zebra crossings work better --though that is not always the case in the Irish context -- because there are obvious markings or signs that are meant to regulate behaviour.

It is naive, and self-evidently unworkable, to expect Irish-style "courtesy crossings" to work in favour of pedestrians.

That picture proves nothing, there could easily be space behind that bus to walk.

Look at the three pictures you posted earlier, in two of the three picture there would be enough space to drive a car behind the bus or car never mind walk across.

irisheddie85

Iwannahurl wrote: »

I strongly disagree.

Firstly, even though Irish roundabout design is an abomination, speeds are generally lower on roundabouts than on the roads leading to them, and in this instance the speed limit was the default 50 km/h for urban areas.

Secondly, my speed when traversing a roundabout, especially taking a right or doing a u-turn, is typically no more than 30 km/h. In the situation I described above, I was already aware that there could be a pedestrian crossing (because it's a residential area close to shops and services, and there are frequently adults and children walking around) and therefore my speed would have been low for sure.

Do you really believe that there's an "enormous chance" of a "very nasty multi-vehicle pile-up" in such circumstances?

In any case, both the law and the RoTR appear to agree with me, and not with you or with the impatient motorists beeping angrily behind me because a pedestrian was allowed to cross.

Article 8(3) of the 1997 Traffic Regulations states that "a driver of a vehicle approaching a road junction shall yield the right of way to ... a pedestrian who has commenced to cross at the junction."

The Rules of the Road (page 121-122) warns that "vehicles do not have an automatic right of way on the road", and that "the overriding rule is, in all circumstances, proceed with caution."

It states quite plainly that "you must always yield to pedestrians already crossing at a junction".

The RoTR also reminds us that "to avoid doubt and in the interest of road safety a vehicle should always yield to pedestrians."

That all seems quite clear to me.

As I proceeded with caution through the roundabout, I saw that the woman had already started to cross, pushing a pram in front of her.

Are you saying that I should have just ignored her, the law and the RoTR guidelines and drove right past her and her child in the pram as they stood in the roadway?

How can that possibly be the right thing to do, "in the name of all that is good"?

If that is the prevailing wisdom, or dominant culture, in this city then it is no wonder that our numerous roundabouts are such hostile places for pedestrians and cyclists (especially children).

No offence or criticism intended towards yourself.

What was your unpleasant experience on the Morris roundabout?

Your original post said you stopped to let her cross this one says she was already on the road these are 2 different situations. In the first you are wrong in the second you are right.

Approahing the junction was as you approached the roundabout not as you exit it. Once you are on the roundabout you are in the middle of the junction and shouldn't stop unnecessarily. I believe the rule is you shouldn't enter the junction unless your exit is clear.

Iwannahurl

irisheddie85 wrote: »

Your original post said you stopped to let her cross this one says she was already on the road these are 2 different situations. In the first you are wrong in the second you are right.

Approahing the junction was as you approached the roundabout not as you exit it. Once you are on the roundabout you are in the middle of the junction and shouldn't stop unnecessarily. I believe the rule is you shouldn't enter the junction unless your exit is clear.

Not sure I follow you. This is what I wrote earlier:

Iwannahurl wrote: »

I stopped to let a woman pushing a pram cross at a roundabout. She was already crossing as I exited the roundabout, so I stopped to let her continue, even though she was about to stop when she saw me.

I was turning off one road to enter another, ie at a junction. The pedestrian had already started to cross, pushing the pram in front of her with the intention of crossing.

Why would my entering or exiting the roundabout make a difference to the pedestrian? She still was trying to cross a road at a junction.

irisheddie85

Iwannahurl wrote: »

What gap? Walk where behind the bus?

It doesn't work that way in real (Irish) life. Typically what happens is that, say, a HGV (which imo shouldn't be on the road during the school run or in residential areas in any case) stops and blocks the uncontrolled crossing. So the pedestrian can't cross while traffic is stationary. Meanwhile traffic comes up from the rear and closes the gap. When the truck (or any other vehicle) move forward, the following vehicles do the same.

Uncontrolled crossings do what it says on the tin. There are no controls or obvious "cues to action" that would increase the chances of pedestrians being able to cross. Traffic signals or Zebra crossings work better --though that is not always the case in the Irish context -- because there are obvious markings or signs that are meant to regulate behaviour.

It is naive, and self-evidently unworkable, to expect Irish-style "courtesy crossings" to work in favour of pedestrians

IMO there should be a raised crossing at these junctions like the ones on dougishka road with amber lights.

But they need to be placed at least the lenght of a car from the actual junction not right on the corner like they are currently placed on roundabouts.

Bringing in the idea of banning hgv from the roads during the school run is a completely unworkable idea in the context of galway. Driving a hgv the last thing you would want to do is get caught up in school run traffic but due to the locations of schools in Ireland this is unavoidable. Most of the secondary school places in galway are in the city centre along side most of the businesses. Older schools outside the city centre tend to be built on main roads so they are easy to drive to but make it impossible to restrict hgv traffic. Fortunately new schools tend to be built actually in residential areas where you are unlikely to see many hgvs unless there is a local demand for it

irisheddie85

Iwannahurl wrote: »

Not sure I follow you. This is what I wrote earlier:



I was turning off one road to enter another, ie at a junction. The pedestrian had already started to cross, pushing the pram in front of her with the intention of crossing.

Why would my entering or exiting the roundabout make a difference to the pedestrian? She still was trying to cross a road at a junction.

I stopped to let a woman cross and a woman had already started to cross are 2 different situations.
Let's say it was a car trying to come on to the roundabout. I stopped to let them enter means a different thing to they had started to enter the roundabout so I stopped to let them continue.
The first is the wrong thing to do and would be dangerous to any car behind you. The second is still dangerous for cars behind you but the risk of running into the car in front is much higher so it is the right thing to do.

The way roundabout crossings are currently implemented in Ireland The pedestrian had no alternative. The alternative should be a crossing not placed directly at the exit, like your picture of the dutch roundabout.

Just to be clear the entire roundabout is the same junction. The entry and exit point are not 2 separate junctions. Once you entered the junction all you can do is exit the junction not stop in the middle of it. The place to legally stop to let her cross would be at the entry. Completely unrealistic but the legal way
The legislation quoted earlier in this thread was about a minor road meeting a major road. On a roundabout all roads are of equal importance so is a different situation

Iwannahurl

irisheddie85 wrote: »

I stopped to let a woman cross and a woman had already started to cross are 2 different situations.

I am concerned only with pedestrians here, and not with right of way for vehicles.

Article 8(3) of the 1997 Traffic Regulations states that "a driver of a vehicle approaching a road junction shall yield the right of way to ... a pedestrian who has commenced to cross at the junction."

There is no legal impediment to yielding when exiting a roundabout.

A woman was pushing her pram ahead of her with the intention of crossing the roadway, and I stopped to let her do so. Not just lawful but also the decent thing to do, I reckon.

That motorists not doing has become entirely normalised is the reason for Irish roundabouts being such hostile places for pedestrians, imo.

Luckily the new Design Manual for Urban Roads & Streets seems to take the same view, though I suspect it may well be several years before we see a sufficient level of remedial action.

irisheddie85

Iwannahurl wrote: »

I am concerned only with pedestrians here, and not with right of way for vehicles.

Article 8(3) of the 1997 Traffic Regulations states that "a driver of a vehicle approaching a road junction shall yield the right of way to ... a pedestrian who has commenced to cross at the junction."

There is no legal impediment to yielding when exiting a roundabout.

A woman was pushing her pram ahead of her with the intention of crossing the roadway, and I stopped to let her do so. Not just lawful but also the decent thing to do, I reckon.

That motorists not doing has become entirely normalised is the reason for Irish roundabouts being such hostile places for pedestrians, imo.

Luckily the new Design Manual for Urban Roads & Streets seems to take the same view, though I suspect it may well be several years before we see a sufficient level of remedial action.

46. (1) A pedestrian shall exercise care and take all reasonable precautions in order to avoid causing danger or inconvenience to traffic and other pedestrians.


(3) A driver of a vehicle approaching a road junction shall yield the right of way to another vehicle which has commenced to turn or cross at the junction in accordance with these Regulations and to a pedestrian who has commenced to cross at the junction in accordance with these Regulations.

The pedestrian is also required to follow the legislation. So be simply trying to cross I would say they caused an inconvenience to traffic, Not you but to the cars behind you and perhaps even a danger. But I wasn't there so I don't know if there was a danger or not.

(6) A driver approaching a road junction to which sub-article (5) does not apply shall yield the right of way to traffic and pedestrians approaching the junction from the right by another road.

Reading this part would say to me the pedestrian has right of way if they are coming from your right but not your left? or maybe all this talk of junctions in the legislation isn't really thought through properly in relation to roundabouts where the only reference to them in the entire act is:

Roundabouts

15. When entering a roundabout, a driver shall turn to the left.


Let me clear I have done exactly the same thing as you did many times driving around galway because it was the decent thing to do at the time. But I shouldn't have had to and the pedestrian shouldn't have had to cross at a dangerous location because this is just down to poor road design.
It is extremely unlikely that every single roundabout in galway will be replaced with traffic lights so perhaps the best option is to improve the roundabouts

Iwannahurl

It is reasonable to try to cross the road, even in places where the "planners" and roads engineers have left pedestrians with very little in the way of reasonable crossing points.

The alternative is to give up walking, which is not reasonable.

Iwannahurl

Iwannahurl wrote: »

A woman was pushing her pram ahead of her with the intention of crossing the roadway, and I stopped to let her do so. Not just lawful but also the decent thing to do, I reckon.

The intention to cross the road is not crossing the road.

Unless the wheels of the pram were on the road or a pedestrian has actually stepped onto the road then you do not have to yield to them nor should you in a situation where exiting a roundabout as it is very dangerous and as others have said could easily cause a crash where other drivers do not expect you to suddenly stop on a roundabout exit.

Iwannahurl

Camilo Tight Shrew wrote: »

The intention to cross the road is not crossing the road.

Unless the wheels of the pram were on the road or a pedestrian has actually stepped onto the road then you do not have to yield to them nor should you in a situation where exiting a roundabout as it is very dangerous and as others have said could easily cause a crash where other drivers do not expect you to suddenly stop on a roundabout exit.

Drivers do not expect me to "suddenly stop" on a roundabout exit because I do not suddenly stop when traversing roundabouts.

It's pointless repeating myself at this stage. I know what I know, and I saw what I saw.

Iwannahurl

Another motorist breaking the red light/green man as children walking to school were about to cross from Bishop O'Donnell Road to Threadneedle Road this morning.

Every morning is the same. What's the story with that junction?

zarquon

Camilo Tight Shrew wrote: »

The intention to cross the road is not crossing the road.

Unless the wheels of the pram were on the road or a pedestrian has actually stepped onto the road then you do not have to yield to them nor should you in a situation where exiting a roundabout as it is very dangerous and as others have said could easily cause a crash where other drivers do not expect you to suddenly stop on a roundabout exit.

There is a big difference between being courteous and strictly adhering to the priority rules on the roads. It is courteous to allow people to cross at roundabouts where no pedestrian crossing is available and i often do so during peak traffic. It is the same level of courtesy and decency that can be shown to other drivers to allow them to pull out into busy roads from minor road, there own houses/estates or car parks, filling station access, etc. Anyone that uses the yield, stop priorites to justify a lack of courtesy should also be adhering 100% to the other rules of the road such as speed etc. IMO, there is a tendancy to adhere to the rules of the road when it suits ones own purpose and ignore it when it doen't suit.

A little bit of common sense, courtesy and consideration for others goes a long way on Galway roads.

zarquon

zarquon wrote: »

There is a big difference between being courteous and strictly adhering to the priority rules on the roads. It is courteous to allow people to cross at roundabouts where no pedestrian crossing is available and i often do so during peak traffic. It is the same level of courtesy and decency that can be shown to other drivers to allow them to pull out into busy roads from minor road, there own houses/estates or car parks, filling station access, etc. Anyone that uses the yield, stop priorites to justify a lack of courtesy should also be adhering 100% to the other rules of the road such as speed etc. IMO, there is a tendancy to adhere to the rules of the road when it suits ones own purpose and ignore it when it doen't suit.

A little bit of common sense, courtesy and consideration for others goes a long way on Galway roads.

I have no problem being courteous and often usher people cross the road in front of me when driving, let people out from minor roads etc. But if traffic is moving at reasonable speed and not crawling along I think its a crazy thing to pull up at the exit of a roundabout where people are usually beginning to speed up on exiting and are not expecting someone to stop.

Unless a person was out in the road there is no way I'd pull up on the exit of a roundabout, I value the rear of my car.

irisheddie85

Iwannahurl wrote: »

Another motorist breaking the red light/green man as children walking to school were about to cross from Bishop O'Donnell Road to Threadneedle Road this morning.

Every morning is the same. What's the story with that junction?

As was discussed in the thread about that junction 2 weeks ago there is a plan to ban right turns coming from Kingston and Taylors Hill. And a couple of surveyors were there recently measuring and mapping everything from the roundabout at the WDR to the roundabout at Blackrock. Presumably to put in place some improvements.

But you already know this as you were posting in that other thread

Iwannahurl

I was thinking more along the lines of "what is it about the junction that makes so many drivers so quick to go through the red light/green man, even when lots of children are walking to school?"

I saw one motorist drive through on red this morning, and he seemed taken aback that children were trying to cross the road on the green man.

I'm aware that modifications are planned. Taking a while to materialise though. I'm full of impatient curiosity regarding how they're going to change the signals, signage, marking etc.

zarquon

Iwannahurl wrote: »

I was thinking more along the lines of "what is it about the junction that makes so many drivers so quick to go through the red light/green man, even when lots of children are walking to school?"

I saw one motorist drive through on red this morning, and he seemed taken aback that children were trying to cross the road on the green man.

I'm aware that modifications are planned. Taking a while to materialise though. I'm full of impatient curiosity regarding how they're going to change the signals, signage, marking etc.

I think the atitude can be summed up by "driver frustration". Right turning motorists holding up lanes and short green cycles mean that some motorists are frustrated to the point of jumping red lights which is extremely dangerous and stupid at a junction so close to a school.

takamichinoku

Here's as good a place as any to rant about it.

Dyke road is pretty terrible imo for a variety of reasons:
- There's always an incredibly large amount of dog sh*t on the footpath, you're just dancing your way around it all the way into town.
- If it rains consistently for more than an hour or so in a day, there's a huge gathering of water at one of the gates to Terryland Park that you run the risk of getting absolutely soaked from head to toe at even when the most careful driver goes past
- There's a reasonable patch of ground just after the football pitch and before Dun na Coiribe's entrance where there's no footpath at all on either side of the road
- There's an insanely large pothole near that bit of a bridge thing just after Dun na Coiribe
- Regularly seemed to bump into cyclists using the one footpath, Galway seems to have a pretty high number of cyclists on the sidewalks overall though.
- The footpath is generally narrow enough to be blocked by two people standing side by side and a lot of the time there's a fairly consistent flow of traffic going into the town so jumping out onto the road to overtake them isn't great for either the person who pops onto the road or any car they jump out in front of

snubbleste

I remember when there was no footpath on that stretch which would render your rant into finite perspective :cool:

Iwannahurl

Is the Dyke Road well travelled by pedestrians?

Where are they coming from?

what_traffic

Iwannahurl wrote: »

Is the Dyke Road well travelled by pedestrians?

Where are they coming from?

Dun na Coirbe - or the University (NUIG) via the Quincentenary Bridge

snubbleste

There are traffic counter wires strewn across the bridges, again.
On the Quinncentenary bike paths, the wires are protected by rigid black plastic, creating a ramp - liable to send you flying if you don't see it in time. If it was on the road, motorists would feel them pretty hard.
How do they get away with this?

Those hook boxes have yet to installed on Bodkin.
Also, when going from Bodkin towards Woodquay, the cars coming out from Tesco stop and block the bike path (and pedestrian crossing) and if that does not happen, the bike path suddenly ends afterwards - with no warning - and the road is not wide enough at that point to allow a car and a bicycle.
I think that stretch of the Headford road is far worse than before for all users due to the two new exits from the retail parks, and tightening of road space.

and a well done to the Council for cleaning up the leaves on the bike paths and road edges recently

Iwannahurl

snubbleste wrote: »

When going from Bodkin towards Woodquay, the cars coming out from Tesco stop and block the bike path (and pedestrian crossing) and if that does not happen, the bike path suddenly ends afterwards - with no warning - and the road is not wide enough at that point to allow a car and a bicycle.

I agree. This was the situation previously.

The engineers and "planners" have removed a pedestrian right-of-way (the continuous footpath along that stretch) and created a barrier for the many people walking that route every day.

In my opinion this new arrangement is an ugly mess, compounded by the behaviour of motorists who are now routinely obstructing pedestrians and often encroaching on the short strip of cycle lane which, with dire predictability, ends abruptly where cyclists are most under pressure from motor traffic.

In the Galway City road design lexicon this is known as an "upgrade". Who benefits?

And by the way, can anybody knowledgeable explain the position of the Stop sign relative to the line marking?

Iwannahurl

Galway Shopping Centre has got a new pedestrian entrance. I was surprised at the plaza-like expanse of concrete. I reckon it will look more impressive in time, given a bit of classy landscaping and some fine trees (ie not the usual staked and container grown quick-fix jobbies that turn into miserable stumps after a few years).

I'm not sure where the new path is going inside the GSC grounds, however. It just fizzles out into nothingness, with no crossings and no obvious route to follow. Are there plans to revise the layout and make it more pedestrian-friendly, I wonder?

WallyGUFC

Easy. Motorists should see the Stop sign and proceed to stop at the first line and let any pedestrians cross. If there are no pedestrians or cyclists the motorist must move up (there should maybe be another line after the pedestrian crossing?) It seems like a very wide pedestrian crossing judging from those pictures. Motorist behaviour is of course a major issue in Galway, as is the ludicrous location of that exit so close to the lights. It should (unfortunately) probably be a signalised junction, like the one at Dún na Coiribe, and located further down the road (I'd question the need for 2 exits from the SC onto the Headford Road tbh, especially considering there is one out onto Sean Mulvoy Road.)

As for the disappearing cycle lane, not the only example in Galway unfortunately. Tis a very narrow road with the island, would probably need to take a bit of footpath or just move the path in to make room for a cycle lane. Poor design it's fair to say.

Iwannahurl

WallyGUFC wrote: »

Easy. Motorists should see the Stop sign and proceed to stop at the first line and let any pedestrians cross.

If there are no pedestrians or cyclists the motorist must move up (there should maybe be another line after the pedestrian crossing?)

[...]

It should (unfortunately) probably be a signalised junction, like the one at Dún na Coiribe, and located further down the road (I'd question the need for 2 exits from the SC onto the Headford Road tbh, especially considering there is one out onto Sean Mulvoy Road.)

[...]

Poor design it's fair to say.

It certainly looks like a poor design to me. TBH I hadn't thought of that extra reason for questioning this new arrangement: the existing entrance/exit further down towards the Woodquay side.

The right turn towards the Bodkin replacement junction is bad enough, but why did the "planners" feel the need to provide a second left turn exit out of the shopping centre?

There are already four lines on the junction. The first on the right of photo is RRM 018 (Yield Line) I think. I don't know what the second is. The third seems to be a line for pedestrians. The fourth is presumably the Stop Line (RRM 017). All compliant with the traffic signs manual?



EDIT: I think I'm wrong re RRM 018. The first line, starting from the side furthest away from the main road, could actually be No Entry markings (RRM 019). I'm confused tbh. Whatever about signage and markings, the reality is that the junction is not working well, especially for pedestrians.

what_traffic

Iwannahurl wrote: »

Galway Shopping Centre has got a new pedestrian entrance. I was surprised at the plaza-like expanse of concrete. I reckon it will look more impressive in time, given a bit of classy landscaping and some fine trees (ie not the usual staked and container grown quick-fix jobbies that turn into miserable stumps after a few years).

I'm not sure where the new path is going inside the GSC grounds, however. It just fizzles out into nothingness, with no crossings and no obvious route to follow. Are there plans to revise the layout and make it more pedestrian-friendly, I wonder?

Wow that is alot of concrete alright?
Why? Is the really wide section sitting on the old road of the past infamous roundabout?
ballinadog might be able to explain the reason.
Would be up to the GSC too provide a crossing here(your last picture) - amazing though they did not get the Council to do this for them considering they took some land off the GSC

snubbleste

It is a gross misuse of space. It is not as though there is a heavy footfall at that location.
Farmers market location :cool: