Ruhanna wrote: » "Cycling is not for everyone" is a meaningless platitude. Nobody expects "everyone" to cycle.
Ruhanna wrote: » Galway already has a ring road, like many European cities. Galway is also stupidly car dependent, unlike many European cities.
Ruhanna wrote: » It's a nonsense view, like something you'd get from Top Gear. An Irish Jeremy Clarkson, with none of the entertainment value.
Jazmin Harsh Gold wrote: » I would be confident in saying my views would be held by the vast vast majority of people and you would find it very hard to find more people to agree with you outside of the few posters on this thread who do so.I have never spoken to anyone in person on this topic who isn't massively in favour of the bypass/ ring road (who cares what its called).
?Cee?view wrote: » Yes, you'll really persuade people with your winning ways and arguments...:rolleyes:
Ruhanna wrote: » Which response? Have you got the requested evidence to back your claims? Yes or no? If yes, please link to where you posted it. If no, then you have no such evidence. End of story.
timmyntc wrote: » I agree with pretty much everything you said, except: Blatantly untrue. Bothar na dTreadbh and the QC Bridge are not a ring road, it pretty much cuts right through the middle of the city.
Jazmin Harsh Gold wrote: » I would be confident in saying my views would be held by the vast vast majority of people and you would find it very hard to find more people to agree with you outside of the few posters on this thread who do so. I have never spoken to anyone in person on this topic who isn't massively in favour of the bypass/ ring road (who cares what its called).
Ruhanna wrote: » So much wrong with that it's hard to take it all in. The date of infrastructure is irrelevant. What matters is efficiency. The Salmon Weir Bridge was built in the early 19th Century. It probably carried far more people per metre width back then. Why? Because most people would have been travelling on foot. Traffic congestion is a peak hour problem, and it's major causes are, in no particular order: car dependence, single occupant vehicles, lack of public transport, state failure to provide for cycling, school travel, excessive car use on short trips, over-supply free and/or cheap parking. There may be other reasons, but a lack of roads is not the main factor. If that was the case, why does traffic congestion effectively evaporate when schools are closed? Do business people suddenly move to a 4-day week, taking Fridays off? Galway motorists are not driving at a snail's pace. The classic driving behaviour in Galway is speeding from one queue of traffic to the next. "Cycling is not for everyone" is a meaningless platitude. Nobody expects "everyone" to cycle. Even more meaningless is your claim that the weather is "crazy" for half the year. It's simply not true, and in any case how does that explain Galway's car addiction during the half of the year when the weather is presumably uncrazy? There is no "outer bypass" project, so are we to logically conclude that you have been asleep, living offline in a cave or unable to read since the European Court of Justice issued its decision in 2013? Galway already has a ring road, like many European cities. Galway is also stupidly car dependent, unlike many European cities. The only people trying to ignore real alternatives are car addicts, libertarians and vested interests.
cooperguy wrote: » I have provided more evidence than you have thats for sure.
Ruhanna wrote: » Try evidence then, CV.
Ruhanna wrote: » So, no evidence to back your claims about the people-carrying capacity of bus lanes versus general traffic lanes? As expected.
Wombatman wrote: » The reality is drivers in the city spend an average of 43.5 hours per year sitting in rush hour traffic, the worst in Ireland (2017). This is a legitimate grievance by any standards. Suggesting the best way to solve the problem is to stop using cars is both condescending and naive.
Wombatman wrote: » Car addicts. Is car addiction a medical condition or something? The reality is drivers in the city spend an average of 43.5 hours per year sitting in rush hour traffic, the worst in Ireland (2017). This is a legitimate grievance by any standards. Suggesting the best way to solve the problem is to stop using cars is both condescending and naive. A 12 lane superhighway across the city would solve the traffic problems in an ideal world but that is about as realistic as suggesting everybody should bike to work or use non-existent public transport. The solution lies somewhere in the middle. Totally dismissing and resisting road infrastructure as a solution is wrong.
?Cee?view wrote: » Where is your evidence? You demand evidence from those with contrary views, but reject others' views as nonsense while demanding said evidence from them. I've no doubt that you can provide evidence to suit your agenda, but proffering it while being respectful to others would be preferable to merely demanding evidence to support counterarguments. Indeed, you're the one who wants change. Some would argue that if there's a burden of proof here, it should rest on those who want to disrupt most by causing change. In any event, logically, you can't win your argument unless you persuade those with opposing views.
Deleted User wrote: » I've said it before and I'll say it again, you have a distinct misconception of how CCTV monitored junctions work. There will never be someone watching a junction to make tiny adjustments in the sequence based on the flow of traffic in a single moment. That's not done anywhere in the world
xckjoo wrote: » What are you on about? They're all major. Look at the costs and effort involved. The motorway connects near the proposed ring road so how can you not count it? I'm including all the road infrastructure that were built so you can come on and off that motorway by the way. Do they not count either? What about all the roads east of the city that were little more than dirt tracks 20 years ago? Shop Street was only pedestrianised in the late 90's, which is only a little over 20 years ago. This is the most head-in-the-sand opinion I've seen in this thread and that's saying a lot
cooperguy wrote: » Did you read anything I said? I repeated *twice* that I am not talking about the theoretical maximum amount of seats that can fit in a bus lane, its not in question that a lane of buses has more people than a lane of cars. I am talking about how practical it is to transfer that 50% of car capacity into buses. How would that bus route work, where would it go? As expected, you have no answer. Just hope?
Ruhanna wrote: » If you don't want an echo chamber where people try to shout down others' opinions, try offering objective evidence of some sort, eg step in and show how converting a general traffic lane to a bus lane reduces its people-carrying capacity.
cooperguy wrote: » You would need to close down roads in order to introduce bus lanes to make them reliable. There would need to be a giant reduction in traffic to offset the reduced capacity.
?Cee?view wrote: » Please provide evidence to support your answer.
flynnlives wrote: » What Part of "city" do you not understand? Pedestrianising Shop happed in the 90s and is not infastructure.
Ruhanna wrote: » If sitting in traffic was so bad, car enthusiasts like Van Immense Bug wouldn't be telling us how wonderful private transport is, and how proposing alternatives is an assault on personal liberty. People who are sitting in cars, especially when travelling alone, are not stuck in traffic. They are traffic. When we drive, traffic is not other people; it's us. What's the legitimate grievance then? That the other people shouldn't all be driving at the same time? That all of us are somehow entitled to drive (most of us alone) all at the same time, and we are legitimately aggrieved because the public roads aren't big enough to accommodate our private desires to travel wherever we like, whenever we like, as fast as we would like? That's not an engineering deficit. It's an ideological demand.
Ruhanna wrote: » Earlier you were defending Van Immense Bug, whose views you appear to share. If you don't want an echo chamber where people try to shout down others' opinions, try offering objective evidence of some sort, eg step in and show how converting a general traffic lane to a bus lane reduces its people-carrying capacity.
Wombatman wrote: » Yeah. We should tell this to every truck driver, delivery man, bus driver, and taxi driver stuck in Galway City's chronic traffic. "It's all in your mind dude. Just change your ideology and the traffic will disappear". If a magic cross city metro appeared overnight do you think traffic as it stands would improve?
Jazmin Harsh Gold wrote: » This has been explained multiple times but you are just trolling really by point blank refusing to listen. How about you answer this. If you convert the QB to one lane and a bus lane and virtually no one who currently drives takes the bus (the almost guaranteed outcome) but now all traffic has to cross the bridge on one lane how will the volume of traffic crossing the bridge change? Would the number of people crossing the bridge every 15 mins at peak times increase (increase capacity) or decrease (reduce capacity)???
Wombatman wrote: » Yeah. We should tell this to every truck driver, delivery man, bus driver, and taxi driver stuck in Galway City's chronic traffic.