What should be done with the Salmon Weir bridge?

what_traffic

From todays Connacht Tribune:
http://connachttribune.ie/call-for-action-on-footbridge-across-salmon-weir/

New Bridge? New Footbridge and Cycle Way? Or Ban private car's from using it and make a bus lane out of it? any other solutions from the Galway City folk?

Bobeagleburger

Ban private cars? How about people that need to use it?

snubbleste

Nothing.
Been there for almost 200 years.

biko

Add a footbridge like for Wolf Tone. Currently the bridge footpaths are too narrow for the amount of traffic they get.

thesandeman

Anyone know what they mean where it says 'a buggy landed outside a CIE bus'?

yer man!

City council have been looking at building a parallel traffic only bridge for quite some time now. There was a plan of converting the bridge to pedestrian only and at one stage having a single tram line go over it.

jkforde

yer man! wrote: »

City council have been looking at building a parallel traffic only bridge for quite some time now. There was a plan of converting the bridge to pedestrian only and at one stage having a single tram line go over it.

anyone know what happened to this plan? seems they went so far with plan and then got cold feet... or was it purely 'lack of funds in the current financial year' and then the plan sits on shelf til someone gets injured or killed...

Eeden

I think plans were underway and then the recession hit.

charlie_says

It receives a seriously heavy amount of foot traffic between NUIG/hospital and the town.

Buses and large trucks swinging on to the bridge can swing ridiculously close to the pedestrian areas and sometimes buses in particular swing over it.

The wooden salmon statue on the court house side is a listed structure so that makes it more difficult to build anything there. Also I have heard that there were serious objections to removing that tree on the other side of the road right opposite the salmon.

Getting rid of the SW bridge is obviously a non starter. Another traffic bridge higher up the river to bypass Galway is badly needed and has been for years. At a minimum they should add a pedestrian walkway extension similar to the Wolfe Tone bridge, in my layman opinion.

shruikan2553

The road is too narrow for larger vehicles and the footpath is too narrow because people are unable to figure out how to walk in single file and every week has some idiot who thinks cycling on the footpath is a good idea. Either make a footbridge and then they can make the road a bit wider or make a new bridge for vehicles and make the salmon weir for pedestrians.

TCDStudent1

It needs a foot bridge badly.

It is not just larger vehicles that have a problem. I drive by there in my car fairly often and people walking often step on to the road without looking because somebody has stopped on the footpath and they need to get past them.

what_traffic

Anybody in favour of restricting private motor traffic on it? Highly unlikely it would happen in Ireland but it would seriously alter car traffic patterns on University Rd and Woodquay and make the entire area bus, pedestrian and cyclist friendly.

biko

Hell no. We need more car bridges, not less.

Iwannahurl

What does this mean?

it’s not an easy problem to solve as the river has to be protected.

http://connachttribune.ie/call-for-action-on-footbridge-across-salmon-weir/

A key problem, as is so often the case in Galway, is that there is too much motorised traffic.

For pedestrians and cyclists I would suggest a separate bridge, linked to the existing riverside route and greenway.

As for another bridge further up the river, that should be a greenway across the piers of the former Galway-Clifden rail line. However (if I recall correctly) such a proposal was shot down by private interests several years ago.

what_traffic

biko wrote: »

Hell no. We need more car bridges, not less.

Or else we just need less cars.

Iwannahurl

biko wrote: »

Hell no. We need more car bridges, not less.

Why would we need "more car bridges" when in fact national and EU policy is increasingly oriented towards reducing car use and car dependence?

snubbleste

Iwannahurl

biko

what_traffic wrote: »

Or else we just need less cars.

Iwannahurl wrote: »

Why would we need "more car bridges" when in fact national and EU policy is increasingly oriented towards reducing car use and car dependence?

We have a current situation and a proposal of a footbridge in the paper, let's attack the issue from that perspective instead of "how it should be".

Iwannahurl

biko wrote: »

We have a current situation and a proposal of a footbridge in the paper, let's attack the issue from that perspective instead of "how it should be".

Or shouldn't be?

biko wrote: »

Hell no. We need more car bridges, not less.

what_traffic

what_traffic wrote: »

Anybody in favour of restricting private motor traffic on it? Highly unlikely it would happen in Ireland but it would seriously alter car traffic patterns on University Rd and Woodquay and make the entire area bus, pedestrian and cyclist friendly.

Please, about 4 people (who all post here) would be in favour of an nonsensical backwards step like that.

Iwannahurl wrote: »

Why would we need "more car bridges" when in fact national and EU policy is increasingly oriented towards reducing car use and car dependence?

Most people don't agree with this stupid anti-car policy, we need more bridges around Galway so car traffic can get around the city easier.

biko

Well, the city centre is already too congested during the day and I don't think banning cars over that bridge will help.
What the article is about is an additional footbridge to protect pedestrians which is an excellent idea as the bridge right now is pretty dangerous for them.

Iwannahurl

I would be in favour of adding capacity for pedestrians, cyclists and bus users, as well as reducing traffic volume, on the route.

These would be mutually reinforcing objectives.

If recent policy decisions are anything to go by, Galway City Council clearly does not believe that the city centre is too congested with motorised traffic.

what_traffic

biko wrote: »

Well, the city centre is already too congested during the day and I don't think banning cars over that bridge will help.
What the article is about is an additional footbridge to protect pedestrians which is an excellent idea as the bridge right now is pretty dangerous for them.

But the car's are creating the congestion? It could help alleviating congestion by removing the capacity of private car's to use it. Could transform Woodquay as well. The article is not just about a proposed footbridge but it also suggests what other idea's that will make the bridge work for the local community and users of the bridge.

what_traffic

Iwannahurl wrote: »

I would be in favour of adding capacity for pedestrians, cyclists and bus users, as well as reducing traffic volume, on the route.
These would be mutually reinforcing objectives.

It could improve bus journey times to the West Side of the City?

what_traffic

what_traffic wrote: »

But the car's are creating the congestion? It could help alleviating congestion by removing the capacity of private car's to use it. Could transform Woodquay as well. The article is not just about a proposed footbridge but it also suggests what other idea's that will make the bridge work for the local community and users of the bridge.

And what about all the people who will be severely affected, people going about their business trying to get across the city? Cars are the most important form of transport and its totally unfair to even suggest making drivers life harder just because you have some crazy hatred for cars.

Luckily the decision makers agree that cars are vitally important and wont hinder their use too much.

These sorts of suggestion actually make me very very angry, I detest the anti-car brigade.

Mrs OBumble

Well I'm part of the reduced car-dependency brigade. (Not anti-car: hell I drove 1100km the other weekend, and a car was the only feasible mode for that trip.)

But even I don't support closing the bridge to private cars at them moment. The elephant in this discussion is the cathedral. Closing that bridge to cars would make it a lot harder for some to get to the cathedral, specially given how narrow the roadway is on Nuns Island. Likely it would make the overall traffic situation worse.

There's also the small matter of hospital access from the central city and in the even of a crash on the Quin Bridge.

And buses are actually part of the problem: as two-lane, the bridge is just too small for them.

IMHO what should happen is a 2nd bridge nearby, and make them both one-way. But good luck with selling that idea to the private interests mentioned above.

what_traffic

Landyn Rough Cowgirl wrote: »

And what about all the people who will be severely affected, people going about their business trying to get across the city? Cars are the most important form of transport and its totally unfair to even suggest making drivers life harder just because you have some crazy hatred for cars.

Luckily the decision makers agree that cars are vitally important and wont hinder their use too much.

These sorts of suggestion actually make me very very angry, I detest the anti-car brigade.

I don't have a hatred of cars. I own one myself. Stop with your nonsense and deal with your anger issues somewhere else.

MarysCurtins

Landyn Rough Cowgirl wrote: »

These sorts of suggestion actually make me very very angry, I detest the anti-car brigade.

Why get angry? It just their opinion. I find it funny that suggesting closing one of the 4 crossing points of the river could actually help alleviate congestion, a partial closure on any of the main routes (like a lane) for roadworks causes things to get even worse around the city than normal as is. Considering transport / commuting / infrastructure is something some people seem to have a keen interest in i'd have thought this would be easy to see, it makes it look like there is little understanding of the subject.

A pedestrian bridge and the removal of the footpaths would be best. It would be the safest option for pedestrians / cyclists because as mentioned the paths are narrow and people step onto the road without looking, buses can also be a danger to pedestrians occasionally when they swing around the corner from the courthouse, the front of the bus would cut onto the footpath slightly depending on how much space the bus driver has to work with in the other lane, cyclists will have more room and not be forced to cycle on the footpath.

Bobeagleburger

what_traffic wrote: »

Or else we just need less cars.

In theory less cars would be great.

However, in a city and country with an inadequate transport system it isn't feasible.

I'd happily use public transport Monday - Friday for work but alas there's none

Goofy

If you close this bridge to traffic the only access to nuns island by car is the university Road. A lot of people live on nuns island, you can't cut them off from the city like that. That would in fact ruin the area as nobody would want to live there anymore.