at1withmyself wrote: » Absolutely pointless arguing against each other. Doesn't everyone here ultimately want the same thing to reduce Galway Traffic, well then its the combination that will achieve this!
Johnny_BravoIII wrote: » These types of people occupy key decision-making positions locally. They defy common sense for their car love. My view is the city will remain choked for decades and suffer the consequences. I don't see any signs of the council considering a progressive approach.
TwoWheeledTim wrote: » CowboyTed is there any chance you're a Project Manager? Getting awful flashbacks to non-technical PMs I've worked with that only want percentages and numbers but have little to no understanding of the realities of ongoing projects!
TwoWheeledTim wrote: » 10km is very managable for a daily commute. But you're also picking the far ends of the city, there are huge numbers doing even shorter commutes and trips into town/shops/cafes so we should scrap any future plans for them too? OK, well let's use your own example above. O'Connell Street to Sandyford is 91m of climbing. Knocknacarra to Ballybrit is 49m of climbing, almost half. You're talking out of your exhaust...
CowboyTed wrote: » Again what is the realistic target for Cycling in what timeframe, with what infrastructure? This is not Field of Dreams with build it and they will come...
CowboyTed wrote: » Again what is the realistic target for Cycling in what timeframe, with what infrastructure?
TwoWheeledTim wrote: » You've repeatedly talked about a glorious 10km continual cycle way, I've responded to the issues with maintenance and how it's disjointed and throws the cyclists into traffic or through very dangerous junctions. You've ignored and repeated along with a new fantasy that they're poorly maintained because there's no cyclists. Chicken/egg. You've said that cyclists already have good facilities and it has been tried but failed yet on other posts you've said cycling in Galway City is dangerous.
CowboyTed wrote: » Before any infrastructure was built 12 years ago it was 1% lower... Since then a full cycle lane has been completed between Knocknacarra and Ballybrit. Threadneedle road has a lane.
what_traffic wrote: » This is false statement again. There is NO "full" anything. Former service ducting path now marked as a "cycle path" does not make a continuous cycle network when we have multilane roundabouts scatterred along your fantasy route.
Jazmin Harsh Gold wrote: » God forbid they would have to cycle around a roundabout! Christ its would boil your brain listening to cyclists.
TwoWheeledTim wrote: » Doing anything beyond a 12 o'clock exit is especially dangerous.
TwoWheeledTim wrote: » Thankfully these are being replaced, very very slowly but surely.
Jazmin Harsh Gold wrote: » One of the worst decisions in the history of Galway traffic. Things were far better traffic wise without traffic lights bloody everywhere.
NeftDaslari wrote: » Not for us that have to walk everywhere
Jazmin Harsh Gold wrote: » Things were far better traffic wise without traffic lights bloody everywhere.
TwoWheeledTim wrote: » It's OK(ish) for experienced assertive cyclists but a real deterrent for newer cyclists. Its limiting growth of commuters. Doing anything beyond a 12 o'clock exit is especially dangerous.
TwoWheeledTim wrote: » The Bodkin roundabout was regularly locked up, blocking up the bridge and was replaced in 2013. Throughput over the bridge increased right after the conversion. More info: https://platform.yourdatastories.eu/DataStories/niallob/impact-replacing-roundabout-smart-traffic-lights-galway-city
Jazmin Harsh Gold wrote: » A lot more to do with more people on the road due to the economy recovering than the removal of roundabouts.
What we found was that traffic flow over the Quincentenary bridge decreased by 4.7% during the construction work but increased by an average of 12.7% two years later (See table 1 below). We checked out a similar project on the old Dublin Road at Moneenageisha completed in 2009. Once complete the maximum deviation in terms of traffic flow at this junction was less than 4% year on year. Without any material changes to a junction, this is what we would expect. As such, it would appear that increases to traffic flow on the N6 in 2015 are as a result of the improvement works on the junction.
gordongekko wrote: » But you've told us all its pointless in building more cycle lanes and ignored the reasons why the one example you used hasn't worked. You told us we must just build more PT but ignored that its failure rate in knocknacarra is worse than the cycle lane usage. You ignore anything that doesn't agree with your argument and just keep saying the same thing over and over again. We haven't built the cycling infrastructure while we have build the PT infrastructure , The vast majority of PT has failed. Is cycling a failure? We cant tell because we haven't tried it.
TwoWheeledTim wrote: » This again? I'm not engaging with your percentages game yet because you based that discussion with references to percentages in a report or document which I've repeated asked for a link/reference to but you've ignored. Where are you even getting your current percentages from? I've responded to your query about topography... and your response is looking for share percentages. You've said Dublin is flatter, when challenged you've ignored. I've responded to your ebike issues and asked what your issues are with legislation, you've ignored. You've repeatedly talked about a glorious 10km continual cycle way, I've responded to the issues with maintenance and how it's disjointed and throws the cyclists into traffic or through very dangerous junctions. You've ignored and repeated along with a new fantasy that they're poorly maintained because there's no cyclists. Chicken/egg. You've said that cyclists already have good facilities and it has been tried but failed yet on other posts you've said cycling in Galway City is dangerous. You've said cycling is almost non existent yet some cyclists don't go out in bad weather which is clear from the much heavier traffic those days... contradicting yourself again. You're going in circles because people are responding to you, you're ignoring and responding with different issues which have already been addressed and you've evaded those responses.
at1withmyself wrote: » Thanks for adding this, I have cycled in many cities (and the non cities) around Ireland and would never say Galway has many hills! I have no idea how someone can use that as a negative, the weather I get as an challenge but the so called hills! Why can't Galway have upgrades for Public Transport, Cycling & Walking. Why must we chose one, the idea is to update them all simultaneously. Absolutely pointless arguing against each other. Doesn't everyone here ultimately want the same thing to reduce Galway Traffic, well then its the combination that will achieve this!
CowboyTed wrote: » At 5% galway doesn't owe cycling mush more on it's transport routes
TwoWheeledTim wrote: » Or at 5% Galway clearly owes cycling much more on its transport routes. Out of interest, I'll just ask again, where is the 5% from? I want to read more on detailed traffic counts etc but not a lot of data openly available.
CowboyTed wrote: » Comes from the Corpo....