Roundabouts on the Quay

Kxiii

tonc76 wrote: »

I think the technical name is "eggabout" :pac:

Or Oblongabout.

That really needs to be re done, I don't how many times I've had to slam on the brakes when trying to go right from the Folly to Ballytruckle when someone going straight through to the inner ring road cuts me up.

Anyone else think one place a roundabout is needed is going from Poleberry onto Ballytruckle. It might do something to alleviate the Q in Poleberry in the evenings.

dayshah

Joey leBlanc wrote: »

The Quay is one the City's great assets & moves to upgrade it are most welcome. The sight of cruise ships dropping anchor across on the North Wharf is surely not the most inviting introduction to Waterford; however if they were to dock on The Quayside it would provide easy access to the city, reg's tower, city hall, wfd crystal etc.

I think that might need significant investment, the south quays aren't suitable at the moment. It's probably cheaper just to make the north quays look decent.

Joey leBlanc wrote: »

Something that really should be sorted out it the number of traffic lights pedestrian crossings on the Quay. From the Bridge to the Tower Hotel there are 5 sets of lights! Just when u negotiate one set another turns red. A better solution would be to construct undergound walkways underneath the road; you see these all over the world & would prevent the constant starting & stopping that currently exists. As for car parks instead of building multi storey eyesores again go undergound!

Underground walkways by the quay might be prone to flooding. I suppose pumps could help. An underground car-park (somewhere elevated like the Glen or Ballybricken) would be a really good idea. They do it in other cities to great effect.

thomasm

Can see the benefit of these roundabouts after passing emergency services who looked like they were cutting someone out of a car down by the turn onto the Quay from O'Connell St closest to the Bridge at lunchtime. Looks like someone pulled out and got a right whack of a car\truck (big roadstone tipper truck right beside car that got the belt).

fricatus

Joey leBlanc wrote: »

The Quay is one the City's great assets & moves to upgrade it are most welcome. The sight of cruise ships dropping anchor across on the North Wharf is surely not the most inviting introduction to Waterford; however if they were to dock on The Quayside it would provide easy access to the city, reg's tower, city hall, wfd crystal etc.

Very true...

Joey leBlanc wrote: »

Something that really should be sorted out it the number of traffic lights pedestrian crossings on the Quay. From the Bridge to the Tower Hotel there are 5 sets of lights! Just when u negotiate one set another turns red.

The Quay is a whole kilometre long, and runs through the heart of the city. Remember that your number of five crossings includes both ends, so it's really only three. If anything, it needs more pedestrian lights, not fewer. The evidence for this is the large number of people you see daily waiting in the middle, running the gauntlet of huge trucks, crossing near places like Gladstone St, Keizer St and Conduit Lane.

You can make the argument that those are just silly people who should jolly well walk to the nearest pedestrian crossing, but I think that's a flawed argument when it's the city centre that you're talking about. Pedestrians, not vehicles, need to be given priority in the centre of town, especially given the volume of parking and the number of bus stops on the river side.

In my view, what's needed is a loading/short-term parking "lane" on the city side. The next lane out should be a single westbound lane. The next out from that should be a combination of trees, a pedestrian refuge, and right-turn slips for traffic. The next lane out then can serve eastbound traffic.

In addition to this, there should be flashing-amber crossings at the end of every street, giving priority to pedestrians. This would reduce the speed of traffic, as drivers would have to watch for every crossing, but it would also allow a reasonable degree of traffic flow.

Joey leBlanc wrote: »

A better solution would be to construct undergound walkways underneath the road; you see these all over the world & would prevent the constant starting & stopping that currently exists.

No, definitely not. Yes, they work in big cities, where there's a reasonable number of pedestrians day and night. In somewhere like Waterford though, they'd just be a magnet for trouble. You do see them all over the world (e.g. Milton Keynes or Coventry), but that doesn't make them a good idea. Even in somewhere like Madrid, the crossing under calle Alcalá is full of drug addicts. Putting this in place would be turning the Quay into even more of a motorway, which is precisely the direction we don't want to go in.

Joey leBlanc wrote: »

As for car parks instead of building multi storey eyesores again go undergound!

That's definitely a good idea though.

mike65

Underpasses are the devils work. Every watch the movies? only bad stuff happens in them! Even if its only severe claustrophobia.

junkster12345

instead of an underpass , make a foot bridge over the road somewhere near the bus depot , im sure thats where most of the pedestrian traffic would need to cross

dayshah

junkster12345 wrote: »

instead of an underpass , make a foot bridge over the road somewhere near the bus depot , im sure thats where most of the pedestrian traffic would need to cross

They said they are going to put some sort of 3 metre wide island in the middle. If traffic is reduced to one lane in either direction that should make it easy enough to cross. You'd only need to clear one lane at a time, whereas now you have to clear 4 lanes.

Hoffmans

the dutch owners of the new bypass continue to put pressure on the powers that be to force more traffic over their loss making toll bridge....

this is all another mad idea like the dunmore road mess lanes on lanes
bus lanes?? theres only 4 buses an hour passing along:rolleyes: its not dublin ffs...

so with all other routes for hgvs blocked off with bye laws (which is good)
the remanining route is to be reduced to a cowpath........

Bards

Hoffmans wrote: »

the dutch owners of the new bypass continue to put pressure on the powers that be to force more traffic over their loss making toll bridge.... ....

CRG is made up of

NTR - Irish 33.33%
Dragados - Spanish 33.33%
Royal BAM - Dutch 33.33%

I don't see why only one of the 3 consortia would try to put pressure on the City Council when the COmpany that controls the toll is Southlink which is a subsidary of CRG and surely it is this company that would be in discussion with the City Council

Beeker

Bards wrote: »

CRG is made up of

NTR - Irish 33.33%
Dragados - Spanish 33.33%
Royal BAM - Dutch 33.33%

I don't see why only one of the 3 consortia would try to put pressure on the City Council when the COmpany that controls the toll is Southlink which is a subsidary of CRG and surely it is this company that would be in discussion with the City Council

Off topic I know but can anyone tell me who is responsible for the road signs on the new bypass, NRA or Waterford City Council? I am specifically interested in the signs on the double roundabout joining the bypass just after the new WIT campus.

tonc76

Beeker wrote: »

Off topic I know but can anyone tell me who is responsible for the road signs on the new bypass, NRA or Waterford City Council? I am specifically interested in the signs on the double roundabout joining the bypass just after the new WIT campus.

NRA would have initially produced specimen design for the scheme to be included in tender package. Contractor's (Dragados) designer would have produced sign design for constuction which required NRA sign-off before being erected. Waterford City Council's input (regarding signs) would have been during contract document preparation.

Beeker

tonc76 wrote: »

NRA would have initially produced specimen design for the scheme to be included in tender package. Contractor's (Dragados) designer would have produced sign design for constuction which required NRA sign-off before being erected. Waterford City Council's input (regarding signs) would have been during contract document preparation.

Thanks for that but wondering who is now responsible for them, removing or adding to them?

tonc76

Beeker wrote: »

Thanks for that but wondering who is now responsible for them, removing or adding to them?

Depends on where you are talking about. Signs on the scheme itself are dealt with by Southlink/CRG (the operators). Signs outside the scheme are under the control of the Local Authorities. All signs outside the scheme should have been upsated to reflect teh change of route numbers i.e. from N25 to R680 etc

Beeker

tonc76 wrote: »

Depends on where you are talking about. Signs on the scheme itself are dealt with by Southlink/CRG (the operators). Signs outside the scheme are under the control of the Local Authorities. All signs outside the scheme should have been upsated to reflect teh change of route numbers i.e. from N25 to R680 etc

The one's I am interested it are on the two small roundabouts at the junction of the bypass and the road leading to Waterford {South} just before the roundabout at the new WIT campus.

Joey leBlanc

How about no road signage on any of our roads & let's have one big magical mystery tour eh? Who knows where one could end up of a Sunday afternoon? Another solution would be to let them settle it between themselves old style;
The N25 -vs- R680 Cage Match - Fight to the Death # 1!

tonc76

Beeker wrote: »

The one's I am interested it are on the two small roundabouts at the junction of the bypass and the road leading to Waterford {South} just before the roundabout at the new WIT campus.

What's wrong there/what do you want to see/what do you think needs to be done?

Beeker

tonc76 wrote: »

What's wrong there/what do you want to see/what do you think needs to be done?

I will start a new thread on this called the Tale of two Signs.:)

Daysha

Anyone know what's the story with this then? The article said work would begin in September.

Psychedelic

Daysha wrote: »

Anyone know what's the story with this then? The article said work would begin in September.

Some work was supposed to start before Christmas, with the majority of the work to be started in January. All the work should be finished by Easter time I think.

Chris P. Bacon

Can't wait to see what the quays are going to be like around Christmas time,if they do start that work.

JohnC.

So this is actually happening then? I sort of assumed it was one of those plans which surface from time to time which never actually happen.

Trick of the Tail

Unbelievable. Money is tight, so we're told, yet funds are available for this project which is wholly unnecessary.

It might be nice but not necessary.

And of course there'll be huge wastage because several things will be done incorrectly and have to be re-done, as usual when any roads alterations are carried out in Waterford.

A waste of taxpayers' money, designed by incompetents.

Modern day Ireland in a nutshell.

A.

Bards

alinton wrote: »

Unbelievable. Money is tight, so we're told, yet funds are available for this project which is wholly unnecessary.

It might be nice but not necessary.

And of course there'll be huge wastage because several things will be done incorrectly and have to be re-done, as usual when any roads alterations are carried out in Waterford.

A waste of taxpayers' money, designed by incompetents.

Modern day Ireland in a nutshell.

A.

In order to attract more tourists and market Waterford as a destinition to visit. THhs MUST be done. We cannot tollerate a Dual Carriageway running down our Quays for a minute longer, and hopefully it will force more through traffic to use the Bypass for which it was designed.

I have every faith in the City Manager as he has proven his ability in a very short space of time.

rayc

Bards wrote: »

In order to attract more tourists and market Waterford as a destinition to visit. THhs MUST be done. We cannot tollerate a Dual Carriageway running down our Quays for a minute longer, and hopefully it will force more through traffic to use the Bypass for which it was designed.

I have every faith in the City Manager as he has proven his ability in a very short space of time.

Have to agree, look at practically any city in the world with a waterfront and it's one of the main features of the city. Now look at the Quay (although in fairness they have been doing decent work of late on it).

In fact I was in Newcastle this year and Frankfurt a few years ago and in both places they closed down a large part of the quays every Sunday for marketplaces. It was a really nice feature.

Trick of the Tail

Bards wrote: »

In order to attract more tourists and market Waterford as a destinition to visit. THhs MUST be done. We cannot tollerate a Dual Carriageway running down our Quays for a minute longer, and hopefully it will force more through traffic to use the Bypass for which it was designed.

I have every faith in the City Manager as he has proven his ability in a very short space of time.

What rubbish. More tourists will come if the main road through the town is less than four lanes? (It's not a dual carriageway now).

I can see the tourist brochures now: "Come to Waterford. Our main road only has two lanes!"

Agreed, more traffic should use the bypass, but that would happen by reducing or 'sensibilising' the punitive tolls.

What would bring more tourists and revitalise the city centre is to rethink all the city council's policies which have destroyed it in the first place.

Not spending scarce money on vanity schemes that will actually do no good. What we need are less empty buildings and for sale/to let signs everywhere. Visitors to Waterford have told me that its this which makes the place look run-down and forsaken.

The Quay should have been prettied up several years ago when the country was awash with money, not now the country is broke.

A.

Daysha

alinton wrote: »

Agreed, more traffic should use the bypass, but that would happen by reducing or 'sensibilising' the punitive tolls.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but wouldn't the Government have to pick up the bill from the toll operators for any reduction in toll prices since it was built as a PPP?

If so, there isn't a hope in hell of that happening anytime soon.

tonc76

Daysha wrote: »

Correct me if I'm wrong, but wouldn't the Government have to pick up the bill from the toll operators for any reduction in toll prices since it was built as a PPP?

If so, there isn't a hope in hell of that happening anytime soon.

You sir are correct! The reason that this work is being carried out now is in order for the City Council to expend its full allocation of Government funding for this fiscal year. If the Government allocation is not spent in full next years allocation will be less. There's nothing new in this - take a look here .... Ireland is there somewhere

rayc

An improved quayside isn't going to draw tourists here on it's own, but it does add (potentially significantly) to the overall attractiveness of the city, which in turn gives the visitors who leave here a better view of the place. Thats how anywhere builds a reputation for being a good place to go.

If anyone asks me where's a good city/town to visit in Ireland my answer straight out is Galway, if you were to ask me why I probably wouldn't be able to answer you. It's just years of people talking it up and from my own good experiences there.

wellboy76

It all sounds good.

Whats the betting some dickhead will come along in a hi-viz vest and shovel and dig a big hole as soon as its finished!

Trick of the Tail

tonc76 wrote: »

You sir are correct! The reason that this work is being carried out now is in order for the City Council to expend its full allocation of Government funding for this fiscal year. If the Government allocation is not spent in full next years allocation will be less.

Of course that's the case, but that methodology is crazy and has no place these days.

What incentive is there for public bodies to economise?

Madness. And no-one reaslises. Guess why Ireland is f***ed.

A.