Temp ban on general traffic threads

Sponge Bob

AH Ok Snubbleste, missed that. !

what_traffic

antoobrien wrote: »

Maybe - we could ask Belfast what they think. In 2009 they opened a bus lane on the Lisburn Rd.

Besides with a 250% increase in the number of traffic lights on the road, it's highly likely that traffic will be stopped more often than was previously the case. Sounds like lower capacity.

Agree regarding the lights and the time taken may increase for certain users of the scheme - but that still that does not mean that capacity will be lower. I'm counting all users of the scheme when talking about capacity.

Whats the current status on the Lisburn Rd in 2012? From link it was a before and after test. Have they added more Bus services on the route?

antoobrien

what_traffic wrote: »

Whats the current status on the Lisburn Rd in 2012? From link it was a before and after test. Have they added more Bus services on the route?

No idea - it just highlights the fact savings & congestion busting isn't automatic with the introduction of bus lanes.

Besides, extra bus services on a particular road might make the bus trips longer (extra buses on the same road leading to extra stops for buses that don't need to stop and all that).

?Cee?view

what_traffic wrote: »

Agree regarding the lights and the time taken may increase for certain users of the scheme ...

Surely all users? Won't bikes and buses have to stop at the lights as well.

what_traffic

churchview wrote: »

Surely all users? Won't bikes and buses have to stop at the lights as well.

Yes they will - it depends on the time of day. Unless volumes where huge for both these groups(i.e they where creating traffic jams within their own groupings during the standard rush hour) they are now both able to get to the top of the "traffic " Q's at rush hour much easier than prior to the SQR/BOD road works.Late at night/early in the morning - will take longer for buses and cyclists to navigate same stretch of road than prior to the SQR/BOD road works because more traffic lights.

what_traffic

antoobrien wrote: »

Besides, extra bus services on a particular road might make the bus trips longer (extra buses on the same road leading to extra stops for buses that don't need to stop and all that).

Agree on this - but it depends on a particular road and time of day. Yes it may take longer for a bus trip at certain times but would this not be considered increasing the capacity of the route for bus users if there are more potential pick up/drop off points for bus users. For bus users - increased frequency and time table reliability of services will outweigh this in terms of benefits rather than increased journey times.

what_traffic

FYI - I still think the current bus lane/cycle paths/lanes on SQR/BOD is an absolute mess, last two posts are in relation to the capacity argument of the new scheme.

Doc Ruby

what_traffic wrote: »

Agree regarding the lights and the time taken may increase for certain users of the scheme - but that still that does not mean that capacity will be lower. I'm counting all users of the scheme when talking about capacity.

Is this like that fantasy document held up by some backwater politico in the papers lately proudly proclaiming that "motorists would give up their cars if there were more buses"? Its growing more farcical by the day. Is some councillor's cousin selling traffic lights or what?

I only hope the government has enough money left over to finish the outer bypass when the emporer's new clothes are finally revealed, no matter what the worthies of Moycullen have to say on the matter.

Discodog

Doc Ruby wrote: »

I only hope the government has enough money left over to finish the outer bypass when the emporer's new clothes are finally revealed, no matter what the worthies of Moycullen have to say on the matter.

Galway is already two cites, East & West. Crossing the City for business is becoming impossibly costly so the divide is just being made worse. It is insane that they are making the problem worse during a recession. I feel huge sympathy for anyone who resorts to driving in the unused bus lane. Presumably we will soon have a system where business users have to pay to cross the City.

Doc Ruby

Discodog wrote: »

Presumably we will soon have a system where business users have to pay to cross the City.

Don't go giving them ideas for pity's sake.

Iwannahurl

Roll on congestion charges/road pricing, I say. It's a proven system, but Galway City's road network may make it impractical.

Shank's Pony totally unaffected by traffic lights. Guy walking from NUIG direction passed us out as we approached Gleann Dara. We'd seen him earlier back at the beginning of the SQR...

Also spotted a cyclist going the wrong way up the right-hand cycle path (heading West). I expect there'll be a lot more of this, as cyclists do their usual adaptations to the roundabouts at either end.

Iwannahurl

Pic from the Galway News report about the eight missed SQR completion deadlines.





Presumably there's a learner driver under instruction in that truck. Are they following the Rules of the Road?

Iwannahurl

Iwannahurl wrote: »

Pic from the Galway News report about the eight missed SQR completion deadlines.





Presumably there's a learner driver under instruction in that truck. Are they following the Rules of the Road?

Not sure what you mean. looks like he is overtaking a stopped bus. Nothing illegal in that.

Iwannahurl

Deleted User wrote: »

Not sure what you mean. looks like he is overtaking a stopped bus. Nothing illegal in that.

Penalty Points offence, AFAIK.

The fact that it's a driver under instruction makes me wonder.

EDIT: To clarify, what's a penalty point offence is entering a hatched area, not overtaking a bus in such a situation (whether in a proper bus stop or not).

what_traffic

Iwannahurl wrote: »

Pic from the Galway News report about the eight missed SQR completion deadlines.





Presumably there's a learner driver under instruction in that truck. Are they following the Rules of the Road?

I think you are looking at the wrong issue here. Is it not reasonable to expect traffic to cross the hatch marking rather than wait for the 404 bus to begin its route? + the bus is parked on double yellow lines? This bus stop is now the 404 TERMINUS stop. A layby should have been installed when the NEW footpath was being built in the past few months.

antoobrien

what_traffic wrote: »

I think you are looking at the wrong issue here. Is it not reasonable to expect traffic to cross the hatch marking rather than wait for the 404 bus to begin its route? + the bus is parked on double yellow lines? This bus stop is now the 404 TERMINUS stop. A layby should have been installed when the NEW footpath was being built in the past few months.

No, from IWH's POV common sense is not allowed and everybody has to wait for the bus regardless of the fact that the bus will be parked for a bit.:rolleyes:

You're right though, the problem here is the lack of communication between the transport quango (can't remember which one) which approved the route, the council which approved the road and the builder that didn't out in the proper facilities.

Sponge Bob

That bus could be parked up for the best part of an hour while the driver reads the star an sends a few texts hither and yon.

Everybody else should wait patiently in line for the bus to move off (except for cyclists who have 2 options)

1. Dismounting, walking along the footpath until they are past the bus and remounting once they have descended from the footpath.

2. Trying to squeeze between the continous white line and the bus, looks possible to me.

But cars, trucks , AMBULANCES and FIRE ENGINES are not allowed to overtake that bus ....no sirree bob!

Mrs OBumble

antoobrien wrote: »

the problem here is the lack of communication between the transport quango (can't remember which one) which approved the route, the council which approved the road and the builder that didn't out in the proper facilities.

The NTA approved the route ... but only after the garda approved the bus-stop.

I cannot see that it's the builder's fault, unless they chose not to build what they were contracted to build. In which case, it's the councils fault for not forcing them to do what was planned.

Discodog

The rules of the road don't mean that common sense has to go out of the window but planning departments & common sense never go together :pac:.

I would have some sympathy for the contractors - this project must be a nightmare. Looking at the total width available it could of been a proper dual carriageway with bus lanes or a three lane system geared to the rush hour - two lanes one way & one the other.

antoobrien

JustMary wrote: »

The NTA approved the route ... but only after the garda approved the bus-stop.

I cannot see that it's the builder's fault, unless they chose not to build what they were contracted to build. In which case, it's the councils fault for not forcing them to do what was planned.

Sorry should have clarified - there was a lack of communication between the NTA (thanks), the council & Coffey. The blame lies somehwere between the three.

I've heard it mentioned before that the council have no say in the location of bus stops, but have to facilitate their provisioning. I'd be more inclined here to blame the NTA for delaying the announcement of the route than anything. After all it was only recently announced, so the city council & Coffey wouldn't have as much time to provision it as would otherwise be the case.

I'm assuming that it's not part of the original plan, so with the way that Coffey are being screwed around by the council (lack of information with location of services, the land fiasco etc), I would be surprised if Coffey showed any goodwill and built it gratis (which might have happened otherwise).

Sponge Bob

Coffey never did gratis in their lives.

I assume the Guards sensibly refused to approve bus stops that did not exist to the NTA as part of the bus route licencing process...Coffey still has to build one up near Fort Lorenzo.

antoobrien

Sponge Bob wrote: »

Coffey never did gratis in their lives.

I assume the Guards sensibly refused to approve bus stops that did not exist to the NTA as part of the bus route licencing process...Coffey still has to build one up near Fort Lorenzo.

Probably the wrong way of putting it. If they were told about it in time, it'd probably have been cost neutral (less concrete to pour etc).

Iwannahurl

what_traffic wrote: »

I think you are looking at the wrong issue here. Is it not reasonable to expect traffic to cross the hatch marking rather than wait for the 404 bus to begin its route? + the bus is parked on double yellow lines? This bus stop is now the 404 TERMINUS stop. A layby should have been installed when the NEW footpath was being built in the past few months.

Could be just temporary, of course, but given the long-established state of some "bus stops" in Galway City, I wouldn't bet on it.

I have a vague recollection that overtaking of this sort may be illegal in Germany, though that's a country not known for its common sense, unlike this advanced European nation.

antoobrien wrote: »

No, from IWH's POV common sense is not allowed and everybody has to wait for the bus regardless of the fact that the bus will be parked for a bit.:rolleyes:

You're right though, the problem here is the lack of communication between the transport quango (can't remember which one) which approved the route, the council which approved the road and the builder that didn't out in the proper facilities.

Sponge Bob wrote: »

That bus could be parked up for the best part of an hour while the driver reads the star an sends a few texts hither and yon.
Everybody else should wait patiently in line for the bus to move off(except for cyclists who have 2 options)

1. Dismounting, walking along the footpath until they are past the bus and remounting once they have descended from the footpath.

2. Trying to squeeze between the continous white line and the bus, looks possible to me.

But cars, trucks , AMBULANCES and FIRE ENGINES are not allowed to overtake that bus ....no sirree bob!

Ah, shur it wouldn't be Boards if certain posters weren't (a) attacking the poster and not the post, (b) railing against alleged claims never actually made by another poster and (c) making stuff up in order to criticise it, aka straw man demolition.

Iwannahurl

Speaking of much maligned buses and coaches, here's a quiz on the International Road Transport Union website:

http://www.iru.org/en_dyk_2009?quiz_id=2#quiz

Post your score here. (I got two wrong, by underestimating)

I love their answer to question 5. Must remember to quote it again.

what_traffic

Iwannahurl - you have not explained what you believe the learner truck driver should do in this situation? plus I cannot see anything wrong with antoobrien statement.
"
No, from IWH's POV common sense is not allowed and everybody has to wait for the bus regardless of the fact that the bus will be parked for a bit.
"

Sponge Bob

Iwannahurl wrote: »

I have a vague recollection that overtaking of this sort may be illegal in Germany, though that's a country not known for its common sense, unlike this advanced European nation.

Keep it vague, don't share vagueness with us, especially German vagueness.

We have a LOWER death rate on our roads (per capita) than Germany or had you not noticed that vaguely inconvenient fact.

That despite the higher number of public transport users in Germany as compared to say Galway.

Therefore German car drivers are proportionately even more dangerous than ours are. This can be explained by the fact that most Galway cars are doing 5mph I suppose.

Ah, shur it wouldn't be Boards if certain posters weren't (a) attacking the poster and not the post, (b) railing against alleged claims never actually made by another poster and (c) making stuff up in order to criticise it, aka straw man demolition.

You are the one who claimed the overtaking of the bus was illegal....penalty point illegal.

Did you see the 2 yellow yokes underneath that bus at all because there are 2 yellow yokes where that bus is parked????? Do you know what the yellow yokes stand for?????

antoobrien

Iwannahurl wrote: »

Speaking of much maligned buses and coaches, here's a quiz on the International Road Transport Union website:

http://www.iru.org/en_dyk_2009?quiz_id=2#quiz

Post your score here. (I got two wrong, by underestimating)

Understandable, if one can't recognize a propaganda stunt to promote road based transport over rail and air travel.

Question 7 is particularly stupid - one has to take the practicality of taking the modes of transport, distances involved, number of people travelling and facilities available for the modes of transport mentioned..

Btw I got 7 (not hard just be cynical about the nature of the quiz).

Iwannahurl

Sponge Bob wrote: »

Keep it vague, don't share vagueness with us, especially German vagueness.

We have a LOWER death rate on our roads (per capita) than Germany or had you not noticed that vaguely inconvenient fact.

That despite the higher number of public transport users in Germany as compared to say Galway.

Therefore German car drivers are proportionately even more dangerous than ours are. This can be explained by the fact that most Galway cars are doing 5mph I suppose.

You are the one who claimed the overtaking of the bus was illegal....penalty point illegal.

Did you see the 2 yellow yokes underneath that bus at all because there are 2 yellow yokes where that bus is parked????? Do you know what the yellow yokes stand for?????

To clarify, what's a penalty point offence is entering a hatched area, not overtaking a bus in such a situation (whether in a proper bus stop or not). Relevant post edited accordingly.

I didn't mention road death stats at all.

My understanding is that in Germany drivers are meant to generally hold back and give buses priority. I originally heard that some years ago (from a German immigrant who was dismayed at Irish driver's lack of respect for cyclists, pedestrians and bus users) but I have no official source for such a claim.

I have made no statements about the HGV driver/instructor, AFAICR. What I have done is ask a few questions.

Here is one good answer from another Boards forum:

seamus wrote: »

Section 5 of the Road Traffic Bye-Laws states that the bye-laws do not apply where it is not possible to comply with them because of an obstruction to traffic.

This basically means that where an obstruction exists in your lane you are permitted to cross a continuous white line or enter a hatched area in order to get around it.

What constitutes an "obstruction" is really the kicker. A bus stopped for 5 minutes while they deal with a lot of difficult passengers clearly is. A bus stopped for ten seconds while they take on one passenger, maybe isn't.

The last paragraph is key, IMO. Is a bus at a bus stop an "obstruction"? In general I would argue not. However, does a badly designed/planned bus stop make it an obstruction, and therefore make the hatched area null and void?

If the latter, why have a hatched area at all?

Galway City is full of road markings like these -- including "yellow yokes" --that are rendered meaningless by (a) inconsistent road layouts, (b) incoherent "planning", (c) whatever-yer-havin-yerself Irish driving and (d) couldn't-be-arsed-to-do-my-job law [non]enforcement.

One example (among dozens, potentially) of a meaningless hatched area/continuous line is the one along Upper Newcastle Road. When travelling in the direction of Dangan at certain times, it's commonplace to find motorists zooming towards you along, or even well outside of, those markings in order to dodge the traffic waiting at the lights. Are they avoiding an "obstruction"? I would argue they are blatantly breaking the law purely for their own convenience. But of course the "everyone does it" excuse probably holds sway here, copperfastened by a lack of effective enforcement.

Meaningless "yellow yokes" around Galway City are too numerous to count. I've noticed a phenomenon whereby on certain occasions AGS or the Council put out traffic cones along stretches of road marked with "yellow yokes". In typical Irish style there seem to be at least two classes of restriction in this regard: No Parking, and No Parking At All At All.



.

Iwannahurl

antoobrien wrote: »

Understandable, if one can't recognize a propaganda stunt to promote road based transport over rail and air travel.

Question 7 is particularly stupid - one has to take the practicality of taking the modes of transport, distances involved, number of people travelling and facilities available for the modes of transport mentioned..

Btw I got 7 (not hard just be cynical about the nature of the quiz).

It's just a wee quiz.

For the record, this is the bit I like (and which led me to that little bit of IRTU PR): "... one coach can replace up to 30 cars while taking up the road capacity of only three cars."

It's a neat way of pointing out the value of reallocating road space to public transport.

Doc Ruby

Iwannahurl wrote: »

For the record, this is the bit I like (and which led me to that little bit of IRTU PR): "... one coach can replace up to 30 cars while taking up the road capacity of only three cars."

...which would work great if cars only ran along bus routes, or if buses traversed every single road and side street in the area. Urban planning: its trickier than catchy soundbites make it seem.