Public Meeting re. Kirwan Roundabout

There will be a public meeting about the proposed changes to the Kirwan roundabout (the one by the Menlo Park hotel/Pillo Hotel/Ford Garage)

14 March 2012
Notice is hereby given that Galway City Council will host a Public Meeting on the proposed changes to the N6 Kirwan Roundabout on Tuesday, 20th March, 2012 at 7.30p.m. in the Pillo Hotel, Headford Point, Headford Road, Galway.
Members of the public are welcome to attend.

http://www.galwaycity.ie/GeneralNews/140312_03.html

I went to a previous one of these and found it interesting - all the views expressed on here were present along with some others.

snubbleste

Will it be an on-site event?
We will sit at the window looking at the speeding motorists and the pedestrians trying to cross at night as we listen to the presentation..

antoobrien

snubbleste wrote: »

Will it be an on-site event?
We will sit at the window looking at the speeding motorists and the pedestrians trying to cross at night as we listen to the presentation..

FFS don't start that you'll get the thread locked.

snubbleste

Last time I attended a Council meeting in the Pillo, it was on the upper floors with floor to ceiling windows and you had a panoramic view of the surrounding transport network.
Interesting location choice.

Sponge Bob

Kirwan = Sandyvale. The work is not scheduled to begin until the mid-late autumn...around the same time as the work on the Corrib Park roundabout which latter project will probably be the subject a separate public meeting quite soon ( hopefully not before the first of June lads.)


Schedule

http://www.galwaycity.ie/N6/130212_04.pdf

snubbleste

This meeting is on tonight

ben.schlomo

Ya heard about it at the weekend, interesting that the road up by The Menlo will be gone(as such) and a new t junction put in opposite St Anthonys b&b which will be the new route for anyone currently turning left going out the Headford Road.

galwaycyclist

ben.schlomo wrote: »

Ya heard about it at the weekend, interesting that the road up by The Menlo will be gone(as such) and a new t junction put in opposite St Anthonys b&b which will be the new route for anyone currently turning left going out the Headford Road.

Strong opposition to this arrangement at the meeting. Seems to be a view that Menlo was getting shafted to facilitate Liosban estate. Some of the claims being made by the engineers were hotly disputed. I suspect its back to the drawing board.

Sponge Bob

The corpo is far more likely to simply try to railroad their plans through as a Part 8 motion in a monthly meeting to accept the plans as they stand. The officials will bleat that they will lose their funding and that a yes vote is urgent and cannot be put back to a later meeting. Once the councillors pass it it will be their fault not the officials fault.

Its off with the residents to their councillors if the locals want to change the layout and prioritisation. If the Part 8 is not passed then it is back to the drawing board as you say.

You would be surprised how fast they can work when they have to.

galwaycyclist

There is a fly in the ointment for the officials because to get to the part eight process they have to get the elected city council to approve changes to the city development plan first. When they put their plans together it would seem the officials neglected to tell the councillors they were planning to put roads through lands zoned recreation and amenity.

Sponge Bob

Again it is up to those affected in the general area to chase their own councillors. The Castlelawn and Menlo traffic is to come out here is it??


Does Hildegaarde not live near that roundabout too...I know she represents the west part of the city.??

galwaycyclist

The council want to have a four arm junction. To allow this they considered options on how to close one of the arms.

At the start of the meeting they outlined lots of other options and explained why they aren't suitable.

The proposed solution is to move the Menlo exit north up the Headford road to about here maps.google.ie

galwaycyclist wrote: »

Strong opposition to this arrangement at the meeting. Seems to be a view that Menlo was getting shafted to facilitate Liosban estate. Some of the claims being made by the engineers were hotly disputed. I suspect its back to the drawing board.

I'm not so sure - the other options were already considered.

The strong opposition was because the audience was almost entirely residents of Menlo, Castlelawn and Crestwood. They feared that it would be dangerous for them to have to turn right across the Headford road to get to the new junction.

Sponge Bob wrote: »

Again it is up to those affected in the general area to chase their own councillors. The Castlelawn and Menlo traffic is to come out here is it??
Does Hildegaarde not live near that roundabout too...I know she represents the west part of the city.??

No - this was decided against as the it would create another junction on a small stretch of the N6 (there would then be lights at the galway shopping centre, dun na coiribe/dunnes, circus field and new junction). It would also involve taking lots of private land.

Sponge Bob

We shall see. I'd say one arm of the Corrib Park Roundabout is for the chop too...once that goes to public display over the next few months. The lower part of the Old SQR will be sent 'via' the Hospital I reckon.

antoobrien

galwaycyclist wrote: »

There is a fly in the ointment for the officials because to get to the part eight process they have to get the elected city council to approve changes to the city development plan first.

That's hardly a problem - remember when bertie's burners were rejected 15-0? The govt councilors were told in no uncertain terms to change their vote. 6 months later it was passed 9-6.

Sponge Bob

Sponge Bob wrote: »

We shall see. I'd say one arm of the Corrib Park Roundabout is for the chop too...once that goes to public display over the next few months. The lower part of the Old SQR will be sent 'via' the Hospital I reckon.

Yes - it was confirmed last night.

antoobrien

Are there any maps/drawings of the proposals (here and corrib park) available - can't see any on the city council website?

Not that I am aware - the meeting last night was for a change to the city plan to rezone the land being used.

Once this is approved it will move onto planning and detailed maps will be made available.

Corrib park was only mentioned as being another five arm roundabout that will be reduced to a four arm crossroads - no other detail was given.

Separately - from what I could see there wasn't much argument over the benefit of roundabouts over signalised junctions - the debate was over the moving of the Menlo exit.

The Briarhill junction carries 30% more traffic at peak hours now it seems with shorter queues.

biko

antoobrien wrote: »

FFS don't start that you'll get the thread locked.

Thread moved to Infrastructure from Galway city.
Once work is about to commence on this specific roundabout a thread in Galway is welcome as it will inform the commuters of the work as it progresses.
At the moment this is something planned and may yet not happen and it also deals with traffic work generally all over the city.

Sponge Bob

You must have seen this Biko

http://www.galwaynews.ie/24893-public-shows-opposition-removal-city-roundabout

Up to 300 city residents have shown their opposition to the planned removal of the Kirwan roundabout at the Menlo Hotel.

It follows a public meeting in the Pillo Hotel last evening where a large group of local residents voted to reject the planned traffic light changeover.

The gathering was also attended by city officials Cairán Hayes and Joe Tansey who were asked to reconsider the proposal.

Of the seven councillors in attendance, five declared their opposition to the changeover.

City Fine Gael Cllr Frank Fahy says a solution is needed which considers the needs of the local residential area.

That's enough councillors to block a rezoning I think.

Irish and Proud

I think this thread should be moved over to roads and expanded to include all the improvements concerning Bothar Na dTreabh - this would probably lead to a change in the title.

A thread like this is needed!

mad to think the locals objecting to this are the same ones who take their lives into their hands when trying to cross on foot

this will end up going ahead regardless. It's been stated plenty of times, all these RAB's are for the chop, just a matter of when and what form it will take, but they'll all be gone within 12-18 months

antoobrien

Deleted User wrote: »

mad to think the locals objecting to this are the same ones who take their lives into their hands when trying to cross on foot

That might tell you that the locals don't consider it as bad as the blowins who just drive past.:rolleyes:

In fairness the objection is to do with closing off access to the Menlo area north of the RAB because they've no reasonable alternative. the other access roads to Menlo are the Dyke rd (other side of the Headford Rd RAB/Bodkin & all the shopping centers) and some country lanes from Ballindooley cross.

I'd much rather see sandy Rd be made a cul de sac at the rear entrance to Dunnes, if all they're worried about is the traffic flow, then they should put their trust in the lights they're saying is going to solve all Galway's traffic ills (after saying 20 years ago that RABs will do it).

Closing the Sandy road and keeping Menlo would put all the arms on the one side of the junction.

Article from galwaynews.ie

City Council backs down to ‘power of the people’
Plans to replace Galway’s roundabouts with a series of coordinated signalised junctions across the city received a fresh set-back this week when city officials bowed to public pressure by abandoning their proposals for the Kirwan Roundabout on the Headford Road.

I'm not sure what the alternative would be - putting lights at the Menlo/Headford road junction or moving the junction further up and joining it with the Tirellan exit?

antoobrien

Is that drawing available anywhere, the only place I've seen it is in the article?

emptybladder

OK, remember the last time Mr Ciaran Hayes, Director of Services for Roads admitted a balls-up with two roundabouts:

Traffic plan to miss Volvo race deadline by months

October 28, 2011 - 6:15am

Red-faced City Council officials admit new junctions will not be ready in time



BY ENDA CUNNINGHAM
Red-faced City Council officials are facing their second major roads debacle in a fortnight, after it emerged their plan to remove city roundabouts is facing delays of up to seven months and will not be completed ahead of the Volvo Ocean Race next summer.
The Galway City Tribune can reveal that potential problems with two of the roundabouts have arisen because of the Council’s own City Development Plan, and they may not be replaced by junctions until November 2012.
It’s now likely that variations to the Development Plan will have to be drawn up and voted on by councillors because the junctions will encroach on open space and possibly even privately-owned land.
The issues have arisen because there are five exits off the Corrib Park and Menlo Park roundabouts, which have to be reduced to four-way junctions.
It means Galway is facing traffic chaos during the Volvo Ocean Race – which will attract more than 600,000 visitors to the city – and the Galway Races because the new €6m Urban Traffic Control system will not be fully in place.
Director of Transport and Infrastructure, Ciarán Hayes admitted this week that there would be an impact on traffic because of the delays, but insisted that motorists will be able to see the benefits from the removal of the first four (of six) roundabouts in the scheme.
The new high-tech ‘intelligent’ traffic light system was supposed to be in place by April, but is now highly unlikely to be finished before November next year.
The embarrassing realisation for the Council comes just a fortnight after it admitted the Seamus Quirke Road project will be delayed by at least six months, and it does not know what the final cost of that scheme will be.
Just eight weeks ago, the Council maintained the new traffic light system – which will be linked to a manned control centre in City Hall and includes CCTV at all junctions on the N6 route into the city – would be in place by Easter, and any teething problems would be ironed out well in advance of the Volvo Ocean Race finale.

http://www.galwaynews.ie/22370-traffic-plan-miss-volvo-race-deadline-months



Well..... look at what's gone and happened to him now:

City Council backs down to ‘power of the people’ ]

March 23, 2012 - 7:15am Proposals for key city roundabout abandoned after public meeting


BY CIARAN TIERNEY
Plans to replace Galway’s roundabouts with a series of coordinated signalised junctions across the city received a fresh set-back this week when city officials bowed to public pressure by abandoning their proposals for the Kirwan Roundabout on the Headford Road.
Local residents expressed vehement opposition to the plans to convert a five-exit roundabout into a four-lane junction at Menlo Park during a heated meeting which was attended by more than 200 people from the area.
City officials, who organised the public meeting at the Pillo Hotel on Tuesday night, took heed of ‘people power’ and agreed to revisit the plans. They caused huge controversy because they would not have allowed traffic from the Menlo and Tirellan direction direct access onto the main junction on the Headford Road.
The about-turn by officials looks set to further delay the implementation of the €6 million Urban Traffic Control System, monitored from a control room at City Hall, which was originally due to be up-and-running by next month.
The delay is set to turn the new control system into disarray, as five of the six roundabouts along the route will be converted into signalled junctions – preventing staff at the nerve centre in City Hall from improving traffic flow across the N6.
“The plans are now out-of-date and we are going to have to go back to the drawing board, having regard to the strong feelings which were expressed by local residents at the meeting,” admitted Director of Transport and Infrastructure Ciaran Hayes yesterday.

Seriously. I think it's hilarious now. I've given up being infuriated with that guy. He and his department are a comedy of errors.

http://www.galwaynews.ie/24935-city-council-backs-down-%E2%80%98power-people%E2%80%99

It was shown at the meeting but I haven't found it anywhere else until it popped up on Galwaynews.

Edit: As this is now in infrastructure for those who aren't familiar with it the roundabout being replaced is here:
maps.google.ie

It is where the cross town N6 meets the N84 Headford/Ballinrobe road.

There are also roads leading to a commercial/retail area off the Sandy Road (Dunnes and the Liosbaun estate aswell as to council yards) and another leading to a residential area.

antoobrien

Deleted User wrote: »

It was shown at the meeting but I haven't found it anywhere else until it popped up on Galwaynews.

As this is now in infrastructure the roundabout being replaced is here:
maps.google.ie

Thanks, I know the existing layout, its the new one I'm looking for.

Oh well just have too wait for them to get the finger out.

I don't see what your point is. One thing has nothing to do with the other

They held a public meeting to get feedback, they got the feedback and are going to alter the plans based on that same feedback

Seriously, no pleasing some people :rolleyes:

yer man!

I can't see how they could improve on the current plans much more. it has to be a four arm junction and they can't just get rid of the sandyroad exit......

snubbleste

600k visitors to visit Galway during the VOR :eek:

dubhthach

Mod

Merged threads and moved them to Roads as it's more relevant then parent Infrastructure forum

kippy

Deleted User wrote: »

I don't see what your point is. One thing has nothing to do with the other

They held a public meeting to get feedback, they got the feedback and are going to alter the plans based on that same feedback

Seriously, no pleasing some people :rolleyes:

Lets look at this from a logical point of view.
Having public meetings and using feedback from those meetings is a good thing, no doubt.
HOWEVER - this whole scheme (the replacement of roundabouts will signalled junctions) is completely reliant on ALL the roundabouts being replaced. Otherwise the system wont work properly.

One would have thought, that before starting the first roundabout-signal they would have had meetings with the public to highlight any potential issues, thus all issues were ironed out at the planning phase before any work had begun on the project.
Now, this particular roundabout could be the last one to get done, months behind the rest, negating the "benefit" of this controlled system.

yer man!

kippy wrote: »

Lets look at this from a logical point of view.
Having public meetings and using feedback from those meetings is a good thing, no doubt.
HOWEVER - this whole scheme (the replacement of roundabouts will signalled junctions) is completely reliant on ALL the roundabouts being replaced. Otherwise the system wont work properly.

One would have thought, that before starting the first roundabout-signal they would have had meetings with the public to highlight any potential issues, thus all issues were ironed out at the planning phase before any work had begun on the project.
Now, this particular roundabout could be the last one to get done, months behind the rest, negating the "benefit" of this controlled system.

I think they wanted to do just that but if they delayed the scheme any longer the funding for said scheme would have been retracted so they (the council) had very little choice. Same thing happened with the greenway to connemara, funding was provided and then retracted at the end on 2011 as it had not been claimed because thing wasn't fully planned so they couldn't claim. There's a lot of flaws with this rigid system.

kippy

yer man! wrote: »

I think they wanted to do just that but if they delayed the scheme any longer the funding for said scheme would have been retracted so they (the council) had very little choice. Same thing happened with the greenway to connemara, funding was provided and then retracted at the end on 2011 as it had not been claimed because thing wasn't fully planned so they couldn't claim. There's a lot of flaws with this rigid system.

Are these flaws or just incompetence at work?

If you were to use the excuse above, you would have to ask, when was the funding applied for (I assume it had to be applied for)?
Surely the request for funding could have been built into the project plan and all times for these meetings, designs etc built around this?

I agree to an extent, the system is too rigid however when you look at the gross time and money overspends that have happened in the past decades when it comes to work that has been undertaken in this city, you have to ask yourself, are these jobs being properly project managed, properly scoped and properly planned?
I have no confidence in any major (or even small piece of work - bus shelter in Parkmore for an example) done in this city as a result of what has happened in the past number of years and to blame it all on budgetary issues is to be overly kind to those who have been involved in planning and execution.

KevR

kippy wrote: »

Lets look at this from a logical point of view.
Having public meetings and using feedback from those meetings is a good thing, no doubt.
HOWEVER - this whole scheme (the replacement of roundabouts will signalled junctions) is completely reliant on ALL the roundabouts being replaced. Otherwise the system wont work properly.

I have said all along that there is no point in doing the Galway Shopping Centre roundabout if the Menlo Park roundabout is not done also. At peak times, traffic backs up all the way along the Headford Road from the Menlo Park roundabout and it blocks the flow of traffic on the Galway SC roundabout.

The Menlo Park junction can't handle the volume of traffic that is currently being pushed through from the Galway SC roundabout. It would make no sense to upgrade the Shopping Centre junction and increase throughput.
The Menlo Park roundabout has to be upgraded also.

Just me, but I don't see anything wrong with the proposed design..

antoobrien

KevR wrote: »

Just me, but I don't see anything wrong with the proposed design..

It's not clear from the tiny drawing that was in the paper, but it looks like they're moving the exit from Menlo maybe 100m out the Headford Rd. It'll be like the entrance to Liosban & Riverside if they're not careful.

KevR

antoobrien wrote: »

It's not clear from the tiny drawing that was in the paper, but it looks like they're moving the exit from Menlo maybe 100m out the Headford Rd. It'll be like the entrance to Liosban & Riverside if they're not careful.

http://www.galwaynews.ie/24935-city-council-backs-down-%E2%80%98power-people%E2%80%99
Click on the small image in the article to get a larger image.

I don't think there will be a set of lights at the Menlo / Headford Road junction.

antoobrien

KevR wrote: »

http://www.galwaynews.ie/24935-city-council-backs-down-%E2%80%98power-people%E2%80%99
Click on the small image in the article to get a larger image.

I don't think there will be a set of lights at the Menlo / Headford Road junction.

A jaysus that's worse than parkmore used to be before they put the lights in over 5 years years ago - traffic on the Monviea Rd use to prevent right turns to get to the dual carriageway. This will prevent the residents from accessing the N6.

antoobrien

If they want to fix this a possible compromise would be to consolidate the entrances to Sandyvale & Tirellan Heights into one entrance controlled by lights. Instead of sending the Castlewn/Crestwood traffic over onto the HR, divert it onto the road along the front of Tirellan Heights (road improvements probably required)

Here's a couple of options they could use

galwaycyclist

antoobrien wrote: »

Here's a couple of options they could use

Yes the red link was in the "alternatives" that they considered but they went for the black and priority only - no traffic lights.

This was considered to be manifestly dangerous by several contributors at the meeting.

antoobrien

galwaycyclist wrote: »

Yes the red link was in the "alternatives" that they considered but they went for the black and priority only - no traffic lights.

This was considered to be manifestly dangerous by several contributors at the meeting.

Which one the proposed (black) route or the other(s)?

Sponge Bob

They could go to the yellow junction and signalise Sandyvale along with it.

antoobrien

Sponge Bob wrote: »

They could go to the yellow junction and signalise Sandyvale along with it.

That one has a problem in that the traffic would be brought past the school (located between the Red & Yellow junction options).

Edit: location of school added to map for visibility in map mode.

Sponge Bob

Ah!, is that where it is. Point taken.

antoobrien

It appears that the city council suggested a load linking the Liosban estate to BNT, creating a new junction - the businesses were not impressed.

There's no indication of where the new jucntion may go, but here are a couple of possibilities.

Now the city council are throwing the toys out of the pram because people are telling them what they think.

Sponge Bob

The yellow option is the most likely Anto. Ciarán Hayes fair got busy bossing his councillors around didn't he. The howling has moved across from the residents on the Castlelawn side to the businesses in the Liosbán.

what_traffic

antoobrien wrote: »

It appears that the city council suggested a load linking the Liosban estate to BNT, creating a new junction - the businesses were not impressed.

There's no indication of where the new jucntion may go, but here are a couple of possibilities.

Now the city council are throwing the toys out of the pram because people are telling them what they think.

Agree re your "toys out of pram" they are always using that excuse. I say your on the money re the possibilities, probably the yellow route. Any links or how would one view the "8" suggested plans mentioned in the last Sentinel (paper edition)

antoobrien

what_traffic wrote: »

Agree re your "toys out of pram" they are always using that excuse. I say your on the money re the possibilities, probably the yellow route. Any links or how would one view the "8" suggested plans mentioned in the last Sentinel (paper edition)

Sorry, can't see anything on the Galway city website (then again I couldn't get anything about the original plans either).

yer man!

So this means another set of lights on a national primary road then? great.... if they connected the castlelawn road into the headford road and signalised that junction before it gets to the N6 would that not work? Surely if traffic is seen to move better through the junction in plan A then there would be less ppl using the dyke road as a shortcut so this road would be much quieter. The sandyroad exit would be used just as much as it is now, which is a lot. Would the N6 not run more efficiently if it is running straight through the junction rather than making a turn like From the Dublin road to College road in moneenageisha? I think they may make a disaster of this junction.

Leonard Hofstadter

Some day they will get rid of the Joyce roundabout as well - now that is one pain in the you know what to negotiate in busy traffic, especially if you need to use the inside lane!

antoobrien

yer man! wrote: »

So this means another set of lights on a national primary road then?

Yup.

yer man! wrote: »

great.... if they connected the castlelawn road into the headford road and signalised that junction before it gets to the N6 would that not work?

No they want to turn it into a 4 arm junction (it's 5 now, due to the Sandy Rd) - they can't do that without closing either Castlelawn or Sandy Rd. Personally I don't see why they can't turn it into a proper signal controlled RAB, like Lisenhall on the M3 or the M3/M50 jnunction (which is still in operation, as well as the new freeflow junctions).

yer man! wrote: »

Surely if traffic is seen to move better through the junction in plan A then there would be less ppl using the dyke road as a shortcut so this road would be much quieter.

The dyke rd traffic isn't the problem here, the objections are from the local residents. Under the orignal plan they were going to be effectively cut off from the headford Rd. The design of the new junction was piss poor.

yer man! wrote: »

The sandyroad exit would be used just as much as it is now, which is a lot.

Personally I think they should close off this road entirely, but the businesses in the area think that'll screw up their business.

yer man! wrote: »

Would the N6 not run more efficiently if it is running straight through the junction rather than making a turn like From the Dublin road to College road in moneenageisha? I think they may make a disaster of this junction.

The junction is currently a right turn, what they're trying to do is make it into a straight on in the same style as Briarhill.