Bodkin / Headford Road roundabout replacement [Lights are on!]

galwaycyclist

Patrickheg wrote: »

Note the way your video evidence has been ignored by the anti car lobby whereas jail was called for for the driver making an illegal left turn.

I'm sure our resident cameraman(still) would gladly ignore it too if he were at the scene and focus on other issues to suit his agenda

"Evidence" of what exactly? Are you suggestimg that something illegal is shown in the video and if so what?

If you have a complaint about the cyclist then the cyclists position suggests that he wishes to turn right up ahead and that the cycle lane- which he is under no legal obligation to use - does not serve the purpose of his journey.

We have already had complaints from Huggs2 etc about others turning from the wrong lane.

On the other hand if the cyclist was trying to merge accross to the cycle lane - say after having just turned right into this road - then the person in the car with the dashcam does not seem to have done much to let him get accross.

zarquon

It's difficult to know if the cyclist was turning right or just in the wrong lane due to incompetency. He certainly wasn't signalling to move out left so i don't know why a driver would try to help him into the cycle lane if he is not attempting to do so. I wouldn't leave loads of space for a car to change lane unless they are signalling to do so and it's not an RSA requirement to have a telepathic understanding of what cyclists who don't use hand signals want to do. In any case it is obvious that there is a subsection of motorists in galway who are incompetent on the road and likewise there is a section of cyclists who are also incompetent on Galway roads.

As a motorist i refuse to make excuses for bad drivers, however i do see an urge from some cyclists on this forum to make excuses for bad cyclists. Let's all be honest and start calling spades, spades, whether they be motorists or cyclists.

galwaycyclist

zarquon wrote: »

. In any case it is obvious that there is a subsection of motorists in galway who are incompetent on the road and likewise there is a section of cyclists who are also incompetent on Galway roads.

We are in complete agreement there.

As a motorist i refuse to make excuses for bad drivers, however i do see an urge from cyclists on this forum to make excuses for bad cyclists. Let's all be honest and start calling spades, spades, whether they be motorists or cyclists.

If someone being in the right-hand lane so that they can make a right-turn is seen as incompetence then the observer making that accusation needs to go back to driving school.

By all means make accusations of incompetence however base them on evidence. The video above provides no such evidence.

intellectual dosser

galwaycyclist wrote: »

If someone being in the right-hand lane so that they can make a right-turn is seen as incompetence then the observer making that accusation needs to go back to driving school.

By all means make accusations of incompetence however base them on evidence. The video above provides no such evidence.

I don't know why I'm joining in here, but you do you have evidence that the cyclist was turning right - or are you simply speculating?

Cleahaigh

intellectual dosser wrote: »

I don't know why I'm joining in here, but you do you have evidence that the cyclist was turning right - or are you simply speculating?

There's nothing to suggest he isn't. The burden of proof is on the person alleging wrongdoing.

Iwannahurl

Patrickheg wrote: »

Note the way your video evidence has been ignored by the anti car lobby whereas jail was called for for the driver making an illegal left turn.

I'm sure our resident cameraman(still) would gladly ignore it too if he were at the scene and focus on other issues to suit his agenda

Ignored? Jail?

Can you elaborate?

Or maybe not...

galwaycyclist

intellectual dosser wrote: »

I don't know why I'm joining in here, but you do you have evidence that the cyclist was turning right - or are you simply speculating?

I think we need to leave it to the people alleging or implying illegal behaviour to provide evidence or retract the allegations.

Anyway I came across the bridge (cycling) going East at about 8:25am this morning queueing (for cars) on that arm of the junction was minimal at that time. I went up Sean Mulvoy road - if you want to get out of the cycle lane before the danger zone you need to be pretty assertive as the cars are accelerating for the hill.

Queuing at cemetery cross was also minimal.

intellectual dosser

Cleahaigh wrote: »

There's nothing to suggest he isn't. The burden of proof is on the person alleging wrongdoing.

galwaycyclist wrote: »

I think we need to leave it to the people alleging or implying illegal behaviour to provide evidence or retract the allegations.

I don't know guys, the cyclists was on the opposite side of the road to the cycle lane. That's all the evidence we have and I think it's a legitimate grievance.

I used to be a regular cyclist in Galway and I agree with the assertion that "there are many incompetent motorists, and many incompetent cyclists"

snubbleste

galwaycyclist wrote: »

Anyway I came across the bridge (cycling) going East at about 8:25am this morning queueing (for cars) on that arm of the junction was minimal at that time. I went up Sean Mulvoy road - if you want to get out of the cycle lane before the danger zone you need to be pretty assertive as the cars are accelerating for the hill.

I would not go in the cycle lane at all there. I'd be in the left lane for motorists.

spurscormac

Same problem again this morning coming off the bridge in the slip lane. Hit Dun na Coiribe and it was a red light. Traffic backed up again on the slip road & even through the junction as the lanes from town now had a green.

Iwannahurl

I also agree with the observation that there are many incompetent cyclists on the road. I never got any formal training in how to cycle, but I recall that as I child I learned to cycle according to the Rules of the Road. TTBOMK formal training for cyclists is still not available in the city, though Galway traffic has become much heavier in the last, say, twenty years. According to the National Cycle Policy Framework there's supposed to be a national curriculum providing cycle training for children especially, but is there any sign of it appearing yet?

Roundabouts were always problematic, but this junction is large and complex for cyclists, and there is no homogeneous group of them out there who are all at the same level of competence and who can handle such a junction with the same level of skill or confidence. Galwaycyclist can correct me here if necessary, but my understanding is that roads, links or junctions can be graded according to different levels of cycling ability. In which case, how would this junction be graded from a cyclist's perspective?

Iwannahurl

Patrickheg wrote: »

I'm sure our resident cameraman(still) would gladly ignore it too if he were at the scene and focus on other issues to suit his agenda

zarquon wrote: »

It's difficult to know if the cyclist was turning right or just in the wrong lane due to incompetency. He certainly wasn't signalling to move out left so i don't know why a driver would try to help him into the cycle lane if he is not attempting to do so. I wouldn't leave loads of space for a car to change lane unless they are signalling to do so and it's not an RSA requirement to have a telepathic understanding of what cyclists who don't use hand signals want to do. In any case it is obvious that there is a subsection of motorists in galway who are incompetent on the road and likewise there is a section of cyclists who are also incompetent on Galway roads.

As a motorist i refuse to make excuses for bad drivers, however i do see an urge from some cyclists on this forum to make excuses for bad cyclists. Let's all be honest and start calling spades, spades, whether they be motorists or cyclists.

I had a look at the new junction recently, but I was pushed for time and couldn't stay long. My impression was that some cyclists are continuing to do more or less what they did when the roundabout was in place. If I had the time I would love to do an in-depth qualitative survey of cyclists and pedestrians, to find out why they do what they do, good or bad, right or wrong, illegal or illegal, sensible or silly. Ideally the Council should conduct or commission such research, as it is in everyone's interest to ensure that the junction is safe and convenient for vulnerable road users especially.

Anyway, here are a few photos illustrating some cyclist behaviour, as seen on Tuesday 5th November between 11:30 and 11:50 approximately.

Ped-cyclist-1: Why is this cyclist using the pedestrian crossings instead of the roadway? I have no idea, because I didn't ask him. However, I did ask another cyclist who had just crossed from the footway on the right-hand side of the Sean Mulvoy Road (approaching the new junction) why he had done so, and why he was continuing up the right-hand side of the QB against the directional arrows. He said that he had always traversed the Bodkin roundabout in that manner, and in any case it was easier for him, by travelling on the right-hand side, to reach his destination at the other end of the QB. Unfortunately I didn't think to ask him about the origin and destination of his journey.



Ped-cyclist-2: It took the cyclist pictured above two minutes to get this far. Why would a cyclist choose to spend this much time traversing pedestrian facilities when -- presumably -- he could cycle through the junction more quickly?



Ped-cyclist-3: Again, I have no idea why this particular cyclist is using the pedestrian crossings rather than the road (which might possibly be quicker) nor do I know why he's on the right-hand side of the roadway. However, cyclists regularly did the same thing in the same place on the Bodkin. One possibility is that he wants to avoid cycling through the junction for whatever reason. Another is that he has come from the Kirwan roundabout direction, using the footway or "cycle path" all the way. Or perhaps he's trying to avoid a right turn up ahead. Maybe it's just (lazy?) habit.



Salmon-cyclist-1: Why is this cyclist travelling west over the QB on the 'wrong' side? I don't know. Presumably if he was coming from Dun na Coiribe he would have used the pedestrian exit further up, as many cyclists do, going against the directional arrows as far as the signalised junction at Upper Newcastle. Or maybe he has come from the Castlelawn/Tirellan direction, and has used the right-hand footway or "cycle path" to avoid the Kirwan roundabout (as many cyclists have done for many years).



Left-turning-HGV-crosses-cycle-lane: This is one major reason why some cyclists avoid some cycle lanes: fear of traffic, especially HGVs. A Garda research report several years ago found that 3 out of every 4 cyclist fatalities in Dublin during the study period were killed by left-turning HGVs. This particular stretch of cycle path/lane on the new junction causes me quite a bit of concern. In addition to the collision risks posed by left-turning motorised traffic, I suspect that there could be (less serious) conflicts, at the point where the cycle path splits, between cyclists heading towards the junction and 'salmon' cyclists coming up the wrong way. I also suspect a lot of cyclists will avoid both the straight-on and right-turn cycle lanes, which require them to mix with heavy traffic, and will use the pedestrian crossings instead. Call me a purist, but that annoys me. It ought to be much easier for cyclists just to cycle, and they shouldn't have to adopt inconvenient and/or illegal manoeuvres to get through a junction without fear for their safety.

galwaycyclist

Iwannahurl wrote: »

I also agree with the observation that there are many incompetent cyclists on the road. I never got any formal training in how to cycle, but I recall that as I child I learned to cycle according to the Rules of the Road. TTBOMK formal training for cyclists is still not available in the city, though Galway traffic has become much heavier in the last, say, twenty years. According to the National Cycle Policy Framework there's supposed to be a national curriculum providing cycle training for children especially, but is there any sign of it appearing yet?

Roundabouts were always problematic, but this junction is large and complex for cyclists, and there is no homogeneous group of them out there who are all at the same level of competence and who can handle such a junction with the same level of skill or confidence. Galwaycyclist can correct me here if necessary, but my understanding is that roads, links or junctions can be graded according to different levels of cycling ability. In which case, how would this junction be graded from a cyclist's perspective?

It remains a complex junction and I would grade this as requiring the highest level of understanding or ability on the part of a cyclist. The presence of inappropriate slip roads makes it problematic. It would not be a location that could be recommended for novice or untrained cyclists. It will be better than the roundabout but still a challenging junction.

To an extent the challenge depends on what you are trying to do - left turns would be less challenging etc. Either way "better" does not make it generally suitable for less confident cyclists.

galwaycyclist

intellectual dosser wrote: »

I don't know guys, the cyclists was on the opposite side of the road to the cycle lane. That's all the evidence we have and I think it's a legitimate grievance.

I used to be a regular cyclist in Galway and I agree with the assertion that "there are many incompetent motorists, and many incompetent cyclists"

Ok to come at this from a different angle. You are driving along the Seamus Quirke Rd, you encounter a bus that is not using the bus lane.

Is there a legitimate grievance? If so why?

joeKel73

Bad fellow cyclists is a huge frustration when cycling across Galway. I'll never defend a bad cyclist that's running red lights etc.

I think you see a lot of cyclists using pedestrian crossings here as it's next to a huge amount of 1st/2nd year student accommodation where you'll have a lot of students who are new to cycling in a city and their experience is mostly limited to cycling the wrong way across the QB.

There should be formal training for cyclists.

Patrickheg wrote: »

Note the way your video evidence has been ignored by the anti car lobby whereas jail was called for for the driver making an illegal left turn.

Because the cyclist wasn't doing anything illegal....

intellectual dosser wrote: »

I don't know why I'm joining in here, but you do you have evidence that the cyclist was turning right - or are you simply speculating?

intellectual dosser wrote: »

I don't know guys, the cyclists was on the opposite side of the road to the cycle lane. That's all the evidence we have and I think it's a legitimate grievance.

Innocent until proven guilty...?

We can't see from the video that they don't intend to turn right ahead. If they do it's much safer to position themselves in the static traffic before the junction than trying to get across multiple lanes of moving traffic when he wants to take the right turn...

Iwannahurl

galwaycyclist wrote: »

It remains a complex junction and I would grade this as requiring the highest level of understanding or ability on the part of a cyclist. The presence of inappropriate slip roads makes it problematic. It would not be a location that could be recommended for novice or untrained cyclists. It will be better than the roundabout but still a challenging junction.

To an extent the challenge depends on what you are trying to do - left turns would be less challenging etc. Either way "better" does not make it generally suitable for less confident cyclists.

Of course "better", like "improved" or "upgraded", is not a neutral term. I wonder whether there any rules, criteria or guidelines specifying how to objectively quantify Level of Service for cyclists and pedestrians (including novices/children).

joeKel73

irisheddie85 wrote: »

t looked like the bus Lane ended at the slip road. I think that bit of Lane should be left turn only. Can't really see it speeding up buses trying to go straight through and it merges again too quickly the other side

I've come along here a few times now and that short bus lane has actually been well thought out.

On the approach from Dunnes going to Woodquay, the bus gets a green light a few seconds before the general traffic. So they can pull out straight past the other waiting cars then use the short bus lane on the Woodquay side to pull across into the main lane again as the cars get the green light behind them.



Since the cycle lane merges into this waiting bus lane - can cyclists go on the green bus light too?

galwaycyclist

J o e wrote: »

Since the cycle lane merges into this waiting bus lane - can cyclists go on the green bus light too?

Yes I noticed this as well.

I would speculate as follows - ie not a legal opinion.

If the light applies to "buses" then possibly no. If the light applies to the "bus lane" then yes, since cyclists are also designated users of bus lanes.

joeKel73

galwaycyclist wrote: »

If the light applies to "buses" then possibly no. If the light applies to the "bus lane" then yes, since cyclists are also designated users of bus lanes.

Well it has either a bus symbol or the word "Bus" as above, I can't quite remember. But I'm not sure if that's a reference to the bus or the bus lane.

galwaycyclist

J o e wrote: »

Well it has either a bus symbol or the word "Bus" as above, I can't quite remember. But I'm not sure if that's a reference to the bus or the bus lane.

It says "Bus". I would go with the "light controls the bus/cycle lane" explanation. Of course probably nobody thought about it.

irisheddie85

J o e wrote: »

I've come along here a few times now and that short bus lane has actually been well thought out.

On the approach from Dunnes going to Woodquay, the bus gets a green light a few seconds before the general traffic. So they can pull out straight past the other waiting cars then use the short bus lane on the Woodquay side to pull across into the main lane again as the cars get the green light behind them.



Since the cycle lane merges into this waiting bus lane - can cyclists go on the green bus light too?

Only went through that side once and had used the slip road. Didn't realise they had a separate light. in which case it is probably a good idea.

I would think it would be best for a cyclist to go on that Green. It would give them plenty of time to have the junction cleared and be in a safer position going past the gsc entrance than stuck between cars trying to come out and cars going to woodquay

_Puma_

J o e wrote: »

We can't see from the video that they don't intend to turn right ahead. If they do it's much safer to position themselves in the static traffic before the junction than trying to get across multiple lanes of moving traffic when he wants to take the right turn...

I cylce to and from the new junction at Ballyban, out of the Boston scientific arm to go through the junction to the right turn lane to go down the old monivae road on the ballyban arm.

At first I used to use the straight ahead cycle lane. However when you needed to leave the lane to get to the right turn lane it usually led to me having to stop in the cycle lane to wait for an opening, obstructing other cyclists and having to navigate 2 lanes of traffic and other vehicles coming out the monivae road side that would usually not see me intending to move out(Even with my right arm outstretched) It was not a safe manoeuvre.

I then started to stop using the cycle lane and take up position in the Bike box in the centre of the straight ahead lane at the BS arm. I would then gradually move through the junction and take up position on the right turn lane on the Ballyban arm(I would outstretch my right arm as I got through the junction to let drivers know my intentions so they can pass me on the left to go straight on). However it can lead to some nasty incidents with drivers blaring me out of it if I slow down their progress through the junction or squeezing by me to then cut in front to go straight on or right.

One memorable incident where as I was moving to the take position on the right turn lane, with a truck coming up behind on my left and BMW behind him. The BMW flew up the right side of me overtaking both me and the truck, missing me by millimetres to cut in front of me and the truck on the ballyban arm to and go straight on. IMO a case of Road rage at being held up by a cyclist.

In any case a lot of these type of incidents do spook cyclists so I can understand using the pedestrian crossings at these junctions as a cyclist.I don't know what the answer is in terms of the design of these junctions but I think a more pressing issue is education and more toleration of other road users for both cyclists and motorists. I am both a motorist and cyclist btw and find that having knowledge of both leads to a lot more consideration for the other road user type.

irisheddie85

galwaycyclist wrote: »

We are in complete agreement there.



If someone being in the right-hand lane so that they can make a right-turn is seen as incompetence then the observer making that accusation needs to go back to driving school.

By all means make accusations of incompetence however base them on evidence. The video above provides no such evidence.

There is no legal place for a motorist or cyclist to make a right turn on Sean Mulvoy Road until the roundabout. I can't imagine a cyclist trying to keep that position all the way up that road to go round the roundabout.
It looks to me like he came from Woodquay and turned right as the lights were nearly changing. Saw traffic catching up to him from the QB and rather than finish his maneuver to get to the left got caught out in the right hand side.

If this is what happened then the drivers were in the wrong as just because you get a green doesn't give you a right to plow through a junction if the are still people completing their traverse of the junction

El_Dangeroso

Can someone tell me what is so bad about 'salmon' cycling over the QB besides being against an arbitrary arrow?

I'm not a cyclist but I'm thinking of getting a bike soon. If I join the QB from the dyke road there is no way to cross that road safely to get to the 'proper side'. If I'm getting off the bike at the steps down to NUIG on the same side (which is the route I would plan to take), then how am I expected to achieve this in the 'correct' way?

This is a genuine question by the way so would appreciate if anyone who wants to soap box ignore my post, you know who you are.

galwaycyclist

irisheddie85 wrote: »

There is no legal place for a motorist or cyclist to make a right turn on Sean Mulvoy Road until the roundabout. I can't imagine a cyclist trying to keep that position all the way up that road to go round the roundabout.
It looks to me like he came from Woodquay and turned right as the lights were nearly changing. Saw traffic catching up to him from the QB and rather than finish his maneuver to get to the left got caught out in the right hand side.

If this is what happened then the drivers were in the wrong as just because you get a green doesn't give you a right to plow through a junction if the are still people completing their traverse of the junction

Ok my understanding of the video is that it involves the Headford Road not the Sean Mulvoy road.

While there might be no right turn available on Sean Mulvoy Rd would you really expect a cyclist, looking to access the retail park, to go up the hill, do a u-turn at the roundabout and come back down the hill.

Or would you expect them to pull accross to the central island somehow - dismount and walk accross.

antoobrien

galwaycyclist wrote: »

While there might be no right turn available on Sean Mulvoy Rd would you really expect a cyclist, looking to access the retail park, to go up the hill, do a u-turn at the roundabout and come back down the hill.

I did it more than a few times over the years, why should it be any different now?

galwaycyclist

El_Dangeroso wrote: »

Can someone tell me what is so bad about 'salmon' cycling over the QB besides being against an arbitrary arrow?

I'm not a cyclist but I'm thinking of getting a bike soon. If I join the QB from the dyke road there is no way to cross that road safely to get to the 'proper side'. If I'm getting off the bike at the steps down to NUIG on the same side (which is the route I would plan to take), then how am I expected to achieve this in the 'correct' way?

This is a genuine question by the way so would appreciate if anyone who wants to soap box ignore my post, you know who you are.

OK as a general rule cycling the wrong way against traffic is one of the more dangerous things you can do on a bike. By this I mean cycling on the right hand side of the road. The reason is that drivers entering from the side are not expecting something coming from the wrong direction on the wrong side of the road.

So cycling on a roadside cycle path against the flow of traffic is asscociated in the literature with up to 10 to 12 fold increase in your risk of collision with motor vehicles at side roads.

This does not really apply to crossing the bridge but it is important to set the context.

If you are cycling the wrong way you also represent a hazard to cyclists trying to use the path in the correct direction. The cyclists have to try and figure out what the salmon cyclist is going to do while also having the stress caused by the knowledge that there are speeding cars on your immediate right hand side. If you ask on the cycling forum here on boards you will find that, among the "roadies", particular contempt is reserved for salmon cyclists.

The bridge cycle paths are not really wide enough for two way use. If they were to be two-way they need to be wider and have a dotted line down the middle just like a road. This would still leave the issue of their "exposed" position.

You asked a reasonable question "how am I expected to achieve this in the 'correct' way?"

The fundamental issue is that the bridge and associated roads were incompetently designed from the very beginning with no thought given to how exactly cyclists were supposed to use the paths. (For example, it was pointed out to the council at the time - 1984 - that their design required separate traffic lights for cyclists.)

It is only in recent years that they even started putting in access to the bridge from the campus.

This was something that should have been done from the very start. From the beginning there should have been properly designed ramps up and down from both the North and South sides of the bridge and on both sides of the river.

irisheddie85

galwaycyclist wrote: »

Ok my understanding of the video is that it involves the Headford Road not the Sean Mulvoy road.

While there might be no right turn available on Sean Mulvoy Rd would you really expect a cyclist, looking to access the retail park, to go up the hill, do a u-turn at the roundabout and come back down the hill.

Or would you expect them to pull accross to the central island somehow - dismount and walk accross.

Sorry I watched the 2 videos together and got the road confused. It is headford Road so his positioning is stupid and dangerous for himself but not illegal as far as I know

joeKel73

El_Dangeroso wrote: »

If I join the QB from the dyke road there is no way to cross that road safely to get to the 'proper side'.

There is a ramp up to the QB on the north side and steps with a bike gully (term?) of sorts (not ideal) on the south side.

Iwannahurl

El_Dangeroso wrote: »

Can someone tell me what is so bad about 'salmon' cycling over the QB besides being against an arbitrary arrow?

I'm not a cyclist but I'm thinking of getting a bike soon. If I join the QB from the dyke road there is no way to cross that road safely to get to the 'proper side'. If I'm getting off the bike at the steps down to NUIG on the same side (which is the route I would plan to take), then how am I expected to achieve this in the 'correct' way?

This is a genuine question by the way so would appreciate if anyone who wants to soap box ignore my post, you know who you are.

galwaycyclist wrote: »

If you are cycling the wrong way you also represent a hazard to cyclists trying to use the path in the correct direction. The cyclists have to try and figure out what the salmon cyclist is going to do while also having the stress caused by the knowledge that there are speeding cars on your immediate right hand side. If you ask on the cycling forum here on boards you will find that, among the "roadies", particular contempt is reserved for salmon cyclists.

The bridge cycle paths are not really wide enough for two way use. If they were to be two-way they need to be wider and have a dotted line down the middle just like a road. This would still leave the issue of their "exposed" position.

You asked a reasonable question "how am I expected to achieve this in the 'correct' way?"

The fundamental issue is that the bridge and associated roads were incompetently designed from the very beginning with no thought given to how exactly cyclists were supposed to use the paths. (For example, it was pointed out to the council at the time - 1984 - that their design required separate traffic lights for cyclists.)

It is only in recent years that they even started putting in access to the bridge from the campus.

This was something that should have been done from the very start. From the beginning there should have been properly designed ramps up and down from both the North and South sides of the bridge and on both sides of the river.

I'm not sure where soap boxes come into this discussion, but with regard to salmon I have mixed feelings. I think rules and the observance of them serve a useful societal function, and road safety is one important area where such conventions have life-saving value. Road users who play fast and loose with the rules get up my nose, and the greater the risk they pose to others (especially the most vulnerable) the more angry I get. However, I also understand why less confident or experienced cyclists might adapt to road conditions in ways that are unorthodox, de facto illegal or unintentionally dangerous to self or others.

A salmon cyclist nearly crashed into me on the QB several months ago, as she bombed along towards the university with her head down and her earphones in. I was transporting a child at the time. She didn't hear my bell and only took notice when I roared at her to wake up. She then flew into a road rage when I insisted that she should be on the opposite side of the road or else cycling much more carefully when going in the 'wrong' direction.

So when I see cyclists going the 'wrong way' on the QB or SQR cycle paths/lanes, my first reaction is irritation. But then I have to stop and consider why they might be putting themselves in that position. Is it due to laziness, ignorance, anarchistic tendencies, fear or on-the-spot practicality? Not all cyclists might have the same motivation or excuses.

On the SQR, where salmon cycling is a daily occurrence, I suspect that the main motivation is avoidance of the roundabouts at either end. When the SQR modifications were planned, the Deane and Browne roundabouts were simply left out of the scheme, and no effort whatsoever was made to ensure continuity of the much-vaunted cycle lanes. The results were entirely predictable, in my view, but it's not as if anybody in City Hall or the NRA/NTA/ABP really cares enough to take the necessary remedial measures.

Should they care? In my view they should take it very seriously, yet at the same time I acknowledge that in many cases the salmon cyclists are doing no real harm and are not posing a risk to other road users. They are, however, endangering themselves in certain circumstances: they have a twelve-fold relative risk, or 1100% excess risk, of collision* on side-paths at junctions, as galwaycyclist has repeatedly pointed out.

The problem with cycle "facilities" that are planned, designed and constructed incompetently -- and Galway is well supplied with such delights, with more to come for sure -- is that they normalise incompetent or at least inappropriate cycling behaviours. Occasionally the Council will engage in a bit of tokenistic bodging to look as if they're doing something about it, but I doubt they consider it to be something worth bothering over. I recall a bit of a hoo-ha some years ago whereby the directional arrows on the QB cycle paths were repainted, as if that would make a blind bit of difference to anything, while nothing at all was done to improve access and safety for cyclists, which was (and maybe still is) the root cause of the salmon cycling 'problem'.

The same applies to other deficiencies in City Council provision for cyclists. Another significant cause of salmon cycling is the widespread imposition of one-way streets. The Council simply decreed a blanket prohibition on easy-access cycling in the city, and ignored the inevitable consequences. Their Irish solution to this particular Irish problem is to ignore it and turn a blind eye as cyclists adapt whatever way they can, such as by cycling on footpaths or by squeezing between parked cars and moving traffic while going the 'wrong way' up one way streets.



*EDIT: compared to with-flow on-road cyclists, presumably. Open to correction on that.