Cycling/Walking around the city

sonandheir

Thanks Pauric looks interesting, will defo try to make it tomorrow night.

galwaycyclist

The city council is proposing changes to the junction at the Firestation.

Announcement
http://www.galwaycity.ie/GeneralNews/240713_01.html
Drawing
http://www.galwaycity.ie/AllServices/RoadsandTraffic/Publications/TrafficCalmingMeasures/RT01.pdf

It has been getting discussion on Commuting and Transport and also in this cycling blog http://cyclingindublin.com/2013/08/19/in-the-name-of-traffic-calming-but-galway-city-cant-be-blamed-for-this-cycling-unfriendly-design/

galwaycyclist wrote: »

Two views of the same junction taken this morning.

Looking towards city centre from Salthill


Looking towards Salthill from city centre


What the designers tried to do was to put in two straight on stacking lanes to encourage cars to take up as much space as possible at the junction. Thereby also removing road capacity from cyclists.

However there is no advantage to doing this as the exit to the junction is single lane. Two lanes have to become one again on the far side. Drivers in the left-hand lane are out of the main traffic stream and have to try and negotiate their way back in to get through the junction. So they try not to use the leftmost lane.

The net effect is that there is still room for cyclists to keep moving on the inside.

The implied effect of the proposed changes will be to push the main traffic queue onto the leftmost lanes.

Within the Cycling Campaign our view is that the proposed changes will have the effect of "blocking out" cyclists on a main cycling route in and out of the city centre. The likely effect will be to push a proportion of cyclists up onto the footpaths. The closing date for submissions is today but its still worth highlighting here as it probably still has to go to the council.

This is the kind of place where cycle lanes are needed to keep cyclists moving.

Iwannahurl

From the relevant legislation:

“traffic calming measures” means measures which restrict or control the speed or movement of, or which prevent, restrict or control access to a public road or roads by, mechanically propelled vehicles (whether generally or of a particular class) and measures which facilitate the safe use of public roads by different classes of traffic (including pedestrians and cyclists) and includes the provision of traffic signs, road markings, bollards, posts, poles, chicanes, rumble areas, raised, lowered or modified road surfaces, ramps, speed cushions, speed tables or other similar works or devices, islands or central reservations, roundabouts, modified junctions, works to reduce or modify the width of the roadway and landscaping, planting or other similar works.

The Fr Griffin Road/Raven Terrace scheme doesn't seem to fit into that definition, imo.

what_traffic

http://www.galwaycity.ie/GeneralNews/080813_01.html
Public Notice: Regional Bicycle Share Scheme – Public Display

08 August 2013


Please be notified that drawings and photomontages of the forthcoming Public Bicycle Share Scheme in Galway City Centre will be available for inspection at Galway City Council, Transportation, Infrastructure, Recreation and Amenity Section, Yeats College Annex, College Road, Galway during normal office hours, from 9.00a.m. to 4.00p.m., Monday to Friday, from Friday, 9th August to Friday, 23rd August, 2013.
On Thursday, 15th August, 2013, between the hours of 5p.m. and 8p.m. an informal information session will be held on the scheme in the Council Chamber, Galway City Council, City Hall, College Road, Galway.
Please address any comments or queries to ntabicyclesharescheme@arup.com; this email address will remain active until Friday, 30th August, 2013.

###########
Friday is the deadline for comments on the scheme. What do boardies think of the locations? See the attached PDF

snubbleste

I got a puncture hitting this yesterday :mad:

what_traffic

snubbleste wrote: »

I got a puncture hitting this yesterday :mad:

Another good reason(broken glass and reduced priority) to avoid using any of the so called bicycle lanes/paths in Galway City.

what_traffic

This might help snubbleste if you want to learn about fixing that puncture on your bike.
Came across this website last night.

http://www.fixbikes.ie/

Based in Ballybane.

Iwannahurl

snubbleste wrote: »

I got a puncture hitting this yesterday :mad:

I recommend puncture-resistant tyres. Pricey but effective.

Cycle lanes are rarely swept, cyclepaths never. Given the ubiquitous broken glass strewn on the lanes/paths puncture-resistant tyres will pay their way before long.

topcat77

Glass will always find it's way through puncture resistant tyres. check your tyres every couple of days and pick the buggers out before they force themselves through.

Iwannahurl

Thanks for the tip.

There are all sorts of things waiting to ravage bicycle tyres. My kid's bike got a puncture recently, caused by a rusty, and perfectly bent, 'safety pin'.

Since when is a puncture a big deal??

Sh1t happens

snubbleste

Deleted User wrote: »

Since when is a puncture a big deal??
S**t happens

Since the Council put those horizontal, dished, slippery, not fully aligned with the path, beige coloured yokes in place. They are completely unnecessary and dangerous imho.

Cleahaigh

snubbleste wrote: »

Since the Council put those horizontal, dished, slippery, not fully aligned with the path, beige coloured yokes in place. They are completely unnecessary and dangerous imho.

They warn blind people that they're wandering onto a cycle path. I've never heard of any other instance of them causing a puncture.

Cleahaigh

Iwannahurl wrote: »

I recommend puncture-resistant tyres. Pricey but effective.

Cycle lanes are rarely swept, cyclepaths never. Given the ubiquitous broken glass strewn on the lanes/paths puncture-resistant tyres will pay their way before long.

The cyclepaths are swept reasonably frequently since the council got a mini road sweeper after the new Bishop O'Donnell road was conpleted. It would be in a right state if they didn't.

Seaneh

Just don't use the cycle lanes, all the lanes in Galway are rubbish.

Cleahaigh

Seaneh wrote: »

Just don't use the cycle lanes, all the lanes in Galway are rubbish.

They're fine bar poor detailing at the old roundabouts. If they sort those out then they will be grand. Obviously not for lycra-clad, sponsorship riddled MAMILs but there you go.

Seaneh

Cleahaigh wrote: »

They're fine bar poor detailing at the old roundabouts. If they sort those out then they will be grand. Obviously not for lycra-clad, sponsorship riddled MAMILs but there you go.

They are a hazard. Stop and start, join the road at junctions ever 10 yards and are strwen with people walking along them as well being full of derbies.

If you're moving at more than 10pkh it's a lot quicker, safer and less stressful to just use the road, as you are perfectly entitled to do.

Galway is even worse than Dublin for badly designed and maintained cycle lanes, and that takes some beating.

what_traffic

Seaneh wrote: »

Just don't use the cycle lanes, all the lanes in Galway are rubbish.

Agree 100%
I cycle about 100km a week in the city and really go out of my way to avoid cycle paths and lanes in the city even if it adds 1/2km to a journey.
They have poor surfaces, loose gravel and glass. Have only had one puncture this year by avoiding them.

CiaranMT

Seaneh wrote: »

They are a hazard. Stop and start, join the road at junctions ever 10 yards and are strwen with people walking along them as well being full of derbies.

If you're moving at more than 10pkh it's a lot quicker, safer and less stressful to just use the road, as you are perfectly entitled to do.

Galway is even worse than Dublin for badly designed and maintained cycle lanes, and that takes some beating.

I arrived in Galway at the start of the summer from Limerick, and let me tell you that you don't know how good you have it up here! Some of the cycle 'paths' down there would either make you laugh or cry.

BeardySi

tbh, if a bit of textured pavement is causing you punctures, you're either on very unsuitable tyres or there's something wrong with them...

jkforde

Cleahaigh wrote: »

The cyclepaths are swept reasonably frequently since the council got a mini road sweeper after the new Bishop O'Donnell road was conpleted. It would be in a right state if they didn't.

yeah, that is good but they should lay off using the brush on the cycle lanes at it seems to break up the surface.... the surface of the section of cycle lane at the glass bank near Knocknacarra Dunnes is in a very broken state from what i presume is the road sweeper using its brush because of the amount of glass next to the glass bank. glass and grit don't need the brush, just a decent vacuum.

Clr Connolly is a regular cyclist around town, maybe any suggestions or comments vis-a-vis cycle lanes should be brought to her attention.

snubbleste

jkforde wrote: »

...
Clr Connlly is a regular cyclist around town, maybe any suggestions or comments vis-a-vis cycle lanes should be brought to her attention.

That's akin to saying Cllr Conneely is a regular motorist and any suggestions...

snubbleste

Treadhead wrote: »

tbh, if a bit of textured pavement is causing you punctures, you're either on very unsuitable tyres or there's something wrong with them...

The edge of it is not totally aligned to the rest of the bike path, you can see the cement applied at the edge in my photo, and if you hit it on the wrong part then you may get a puncture.
Also some of them are coming apart, the one at the Dyke Rd bridge heading eastbound has a loose slab that pops up occasionally - a lawsuit waiting to happen.

at1withmyself

snubbleste wrote: »

The edge of it is not totally aligned to the rest of the bike path, you can see the cement applied at the edge in my photo, and if you hit it on the wrong part then you may get a puncture.
Also some of them are coming apart, the one at the Dyke Rd bridge heading eastbound has a loose slab that pops up occasionally - a lawsuit waiting to happen.

If not already done so you should notify the council and ask them to review. I have done so before to no avail but perhaps after a few emails they might review them and do a re-design.

snubbleste

How am I supposed to navigate through this? I don't sit on the road and obstruct your way etc etc

joeKel73

He could have placed the boot contents somewhere better but as a cyclist I think he did the right thing pulling up there... he would have caused much greater disruption (and a put himself in a lot of danger) if he attempted to change the wheel on that road. It will only cost a few cyclists a couple of extra seconds to get around him, give the lad a break.

snubbleste

Meh.

McTigs

pop down on the road and give him a good boot up the hole as you're passing

Iwannahurl

McTigs wrote: »

pop down on the road and give him a good boot up the hole as you're passing

Or a hole in his (car) boot.

J o e wrote: »

He could have placed the boot contents somewhere better but as a cyclist I think he did the right thing pulling up there... he would have caused much greater disruption (and a put himself in a lot of danger) if he attempted to change the wheel on that road. It will only cost a few cyclists a couple of extra seconds to get around him, give the lad a break.

Seriously though, I do have a modicum of sympathy for the driver, in that it's clearly a breakdown situation (more than just a puncture perhaps). However, the decision of both drivers to place their vehicles on the foot/cycle path, and your use of the term "much greater disruption" shows the standard thinking in such situations: pedestrian and cyclist space can or even should be taken over at will in order to accommodate motorists in a wide range of circumstances, from popping in to the shops, to using a mobile phone, to dropping Sophie and Jack 5 metres from the school gate, to changing a wheel. The main objective is: whatever else you do, don't hold up other motorists. Is that the thinking, and if so why?

There are two roadway lanes available and it's a 50 km/h limit, so motorised traffic will only take a second or two to pass. Or maybe they could restrict their incursion over the kerb to two wheels? Or use the grass margin?

I don't think it's a legal requirement, but the driver(s) could also usefully deploy equipment of this sort while dealing with the breakdown on the road:



I ecountered a broken-down car recently which was parked on the footpath right on the corner of a busy roundabout in the morning, in a location where motorised traffic routinely passes by at speed and where pedestrians (including children walking to school) are given no help to cross. There was barely room for a buggy to squeeze past over some rough ground, and a wheelchair could not have done so. Had the occupant(s) tried a little harder, they could have pushed the car onto the rough ground beside the footpath or else moved it further up the road away from the corner. In any case, motorised traffic had two lanes on the roundabout, whereas pedestrians had only one footpath and no proper crossing.

My perception is that the default solution in nearly all these cases is to take over pedestrian or cyclist space, whereas with a little more thought and effort on the part of motorists, pedestrians need not be always the ones that have to compromise. Often it's merely about attitude, not necessity. Just a thought.

yer man!

Iwannahurl wrote: »

Or a hole in his (car) boot.






Seriously though, I do have a modicum of sympathy for the driver, in that it's clearly a breakdown situation (more than just a puncture perhaps). However, the decision of both drivers to place their vehicles on the foot/cycle path, and your use of the term "much greater disruption" shows the standard thinking in such situations: pedestrian and cyclist space can or even should be taken over at will in order to accommodate motorists in a wide range of circumstances, from popping in to the shops, to using a mobile phone, to dropping Sophie and Jack 5 metres from the school gate, to changing a wheel. The main objective is: whatever else you do, don't hold up other motorists. Is that the thinking, and if so why?

There are two roadway lanes available and it's a 50 km/h limit, so motorised traffic will only take a second or two to pass. Or maybe they could restrict their incursion over the kerb to two wheels? Or use the grass margin?

I don't think it's a legal requirement, but the driver(s) could also usefully deploy equipment of this sort while dealing with the breakdown on the road:



I ecountered a broken-down car recently which was parked on the footpath right on the corner of a busy roundabout in the morning, in a location where motorised traffic routinely passes by at speed and where pedestrians (including children walking to school) are given no help to cross. There was barely room for a buggy to squeeze past over some rough ground, and a wheelchair could not have done so. Had the occupant(s) tried a little harder, they could have pushed the car onto the rough ground beside the footpath or else moved it further up the road away from the corner. In any case, motorised traffic had two lanes on the roundabout, whereas pedestrians had only one footpath and no proper crossing.

My perception is that the default solution in nearly all these cases is to take over pedestrian or cyclist space, whereas with a little more thought and effort on the part of motorists, pedestrians need not be always the ones that have to compromise. Often it's merely about attitude, not necessity. Just a thought.

So if you had a puncture while driving on that road, would you change it on the road? I do remember that's how a mother got killed years and years ago, she stopped on the road, put hazards on and went to check her baby. Car came along and collided with her. People do not go 50km/h on that road, I think i'd prefer to play it safe and get off it than remain there out of principle....