Council to ban cars from O'Briens & Salmon Weir bridge, and 7 streets

talking_walnut

FortySeven wrote: »

I know 7 people who availed of this scheme. 3 used it to buy lawnmowers, the other 4 don't cycle to work.

Anne Handsome Sawhorse wrote: »

Have to agree on the cycle to work, the majority of people I know who bought bikes on it bought road bikes for weekend cycling etc particularly people who are living miles from where they work and could never cycle there even if they wanted.

I've always thought the same but when I stopped to think about it, most people I know that availed of it actually use their bike to commute to work at least some of the time. I don't assume that's the norm though. Just sharing my own fascinating observations

I don't blame anyone for not cycling to work though. The roads are lethal for bikes. Bike lanes seem to be causing more issues than they solve.

John_Rambo

John_Rambo wrote: »

Yeah, but you guys live rural don’t you? I live urban, different scene and attitude altogether, thousands availing of the cycle to work scheme honestly and using the bikes to commute. Cleaner lifestyle and good for the environment.

Some are people I know through work who live in urban areas who walk to work and bought the bike for road/mountain biking/pleasure cycling though yes a lot are people living in rural areas.

I do agree its a great scheme though, I bought a bike on it myself less than half price and meant revenue robbing less tax from me.

?Cee?view

And yet again a potentially interesting thread descends to bike users versus the rest...

FortySeven

Here's a challenge.

Everyone go and photograph the bike park at their work and post it up here with number of employees and we can decide for ourselves how much credence we give to cyclists.

My work. 55 employees, no bike park because nobody cycles.

FortySeven

?Cee?view wrote: »

And yet again a potentially interesting thread descends to bike users versus the rest...

The rest are not trying to restrict cyclists movements.

talking_walnut

?Cee?view wrote: »

And yet again a potentially interesting thread descends to bike users versus the rest...

I tried to steer it back on track by asking those who are against this proposal to say what they'd rather see, but so far nobody has.

FortySeven wrote: »

Here's a challenge.

Everyone go and photograph the bike park at their work and post it up here with number of employees and we can decide for ourselves how much credence we give to cyclists.

My work. 55 employees, no bike park because nobody cycles.

But the whole point of the proposal is to increase bike and public transport usage because we're over-reliant on personal car usage. Not sure what your suggestion would do other than confirm that not enough people cycle.

?Cee?view

?Cee?view wrote: »

And yet again a potentially interesting thread descends to bike users versus the rest...

The thing is in this forum there is actually a high percentage of people anti-car. In the real world they they would make up such a small percentage of the Galway city and county population that it could be described as negligible. I don't think anyone minds people cycling, I even do it myself but I totally disagree with prioritising cycling, walking and public transport at the expense of driving.

talking_walnut

Anne Handsome Sawhorse wrote: »

The thing is in this forum there is actually a high percentage of people anti-car. In the real world they they would make up such a small percentage of the Galway city and county population that it could be described as negligible. I don't think anyone minds people cycling, I even do it myself but I totally disagree with prioritising cycling, walking and public transport at the expense of driving.

But the councils job shouldn't be to do what "most people want". It should be making the city a better place to live. They're actually trying to do this for once by looking at moving people instead of just moving cars. It's mainly a public transport overhaul, that happens to include some cycling overhauls.

What's the alternative to this plan? More of the same? Is there anybody out there that thinks the traffic in Galway is fine?

FortySeven

talking_walnut wrote: »

I tried to steer it back on track by asking those who are against this proposal to say what they'd rather see, but so far nobody has.






But the whole point of the proposal is to increase bike and public transport usage because we're over-reliant on personal car usage. Not sure what your suggestion would do other than confirm that not enough people cycle.

A new bridge over the river. A large bypass to divert traffic from going into town. This would free up road space for existing public transport and cyclists to move more freely.

Over reliance on car usage is not going to change. It's a minority pushing against a majority. We put up with it right up until we don't.

Mrs OBumble

FortySeven wrote: »

Here's a challenge.

Everyone go and photograph the bike park at their work and post it up here with number of employees and we can decide for ourselves how much credence we give to cyclists.

About 500 people on-site at my current gig.

Three separate cycle racks, I can't get them all in one photo. Usually each is about 80% full. I'm not posting a photo, because that would identify where I work - not sure that the company would be happy about that.

A significant number also catch the bus. A few live close enough to walk and usually do.

If they all brought cars to work, the car-park would not be large enough/

talking_walnut

FortySeven wrote: »

A new bridge over the river. A large bypass to divert traffic from going into town. This would free up road space for existing public transport and cyclists to move more freely.

Over reliance on car usage is not going to change. It's a minority pushing against a majority. We put up with it right up until we don't.

But as cgcsb pointed out, more roads just results in more congestions (you actually replied to his posts about this). Do you just not believe this is true?

Has it been stated that the bridge/bypass isn't going ahead?

Mrs OBumble

FortySeven wrote: »

Where do any people go when construction projects compulsory purchase homes? Somewhere else.

I'm aware of the universties and hospitality. I'm also aware of the transient nature and short term leases of those individuals.

Yeah - but where specifically to you think that students would live? We already have some of them in backpacker hostels for a good part of the year, because there isn't enough student housing. And if they moved to McMansions out in the countryside, that would be even more traffic which we don't have space for already!

And so what if they're transient: a city always has a certain proportion of people who are coming and going again in a few months/years. That doesn't make them any less important people.

Also, fyi there are a small number of long term (as in all their lives) people living in Woodquay - yes I can name a few. And a lot more in Bohermore - all the flags up there at the weekend didn't come from students!

FortySeven

Mrs OBumble wrote: »

About 500 people on-site at my current gig.

Three separate cycle racks, I can't get them all in one photo. Usually each is about 80% full. I'm not posting a photo, because that would identify where I work - not sure that the company would be happy about that.

A significant number also catch the bus. A few live close enough to walk and usually do.

If they all brought cars to work, the car-park would not be large enough/

3 racks of bikes 80% full. About 40 bikes? On a nice day. There is a bus. How many actually use it? They carry about 70 people. So let's say even 1 full bus (which is doubtful) and a few that walk.

That's about 140 people out of 500. Let's say half of them are doing it through choice and not poverty.

70 people out of 500.

The other 430 people can't have a say on how Galway develops because?

FortySeven

talking_walnut wrote: »

But as cgcsb pointed out, more roads just results in more congestions (you actually replied to his posts about this). Do you just not believe this is true?

Has it been stated that the bridge/bypass isn't going ahead?

No. I dont believe more roads cause more congestion. Population increase and lack of development causes congestion. I'm not going to multiply my car if a new road appears.

There used to be all kinds of congestion on the road to Dublin. New motorway, not so much.

I reckon about a quarter of workers in my office walk or cycle to work. (10/40)

talking_walnut

FortySeven wrote: »

No. I dont believe more roads cause more congestion. Population increase and lack of development causes congestion. I'm not going to multiply my car if a new road appears.

There used to be all kinds of congestion on the road to Dublin. New motorway, not so much.

But all the research I can find suggests otherwise. You might not "multiply your car" but you'll use it more (and by "you" I mean people in general). Meanwhile if the bus is going to get you to work at the same time (or faster) then people will leave their car at home and take that instead. There's a good explanation of it here and there's links to the original source journal articles within. Your anecdotal observations don't make things true.

Your motorway example doesn't make any sense here as that's a motorway crossing the country. We're talking about city transport. I don't think the people of Dublin would think that the motorway has helped their city traffic.

FortySeven

talking_walnut wrote: »

But all the research I can find suggests otherwise. You might not "multiply your car" but you'll use it more (and by "you" I mean people in general). Meanwhile if the bus is going to get you to work at the same time (or faster) then people will leave their car at home and take that instead. There's a good explanation of it here and there's links to the original source journal articles within. Your anecdotal observations don't make things true.

Your motorway example doesn't make any sense here as that's a motorway crossing the country. We're talking about city transport. I don't think the people of Dublin would think that the motorway has helped their city traffic.

Cannot agree that I would use my car more. For what exactly? Also cannot agree that I would choose to use public transport. No matter how great it was. I've served my time with that and never again.

The study you posted was very clear that the key to any transpot solution is bottleneck management. Galways troubles largely come from bridges across the river. This proposal will close two of them.

Great plan.

talking_walnut

FortySeven wrote: »

Cannot agree that I would use my car more. For what exactly? Also cannot agree that I would choose to use public transport. No matter how great it was. I've served my time with that and never again.

The study you posted was very clear that the key to any transpot solution is bottleneck management. Galways troubles largely come from bridges across the river. This proposal will close two of them.

Great plan.

Once again your focussing on your own anecdotal opinion being the way things are. I specifically stated that "you" referred to people in general, but all your responses were "I wouldn't do this and I wouldn't do that". You can drive all you want, nobody is stopping you. But I'd prefer if my cities transport network was based on something more substantial and research based than what some guy in the internet wants to do. Even if most people would rather drive, it doesn't mean it's a better system and it doesn't mean it's one we should try and implement. What this research is telling us is that human nature will cause people to gravitate towards driving if we build more roads and towards alternatives if they're available and useful.

The bottleneck is caused by thousands of cars crossing the river. Cars take up a lot of space. Taking an extreme example, if we all had to walk to work tomorrow, nobody would be complaining about the congestion coming across the river. A bus might be big, but the density of people it can transport blows a car out of the water.

Finally, does anyone actually have any information to suggest that the bypass/bridge isn't going ahead? I'm fairly sure it's still on the plans.

Unrealistic

FortySeven wrote: »

3 racks of bikes 80% full. About 40 bikes? On a nice day. There is a bus. How many actually use it? They carry about 70 people. So let's say even 1 full bus (which is doubtful) and a few that walk.

That's about 140 people out of 500. Let's say half of them are doing it through choice and not poverty.

70 people out of 500.

The other 430 people can't have a say on how Galway develops because?

I'm not sure I understand what you mean by the bolded part above. That people who opt to not own a car for financial reasons, rather than some philosophical preference, are not entitled to be considered in determining how our transport infrastructure is developed?

Think of the benefits for yourself #47.

More people using public transport means less driving. Less congestion for you. Easier parking. More reliable journey times.

Practically how often do people use those bridges?

I live outside town now and drive in - I rarely cross the Salmon weir bridge and I don't know if I have ever driven over O'Briens bridge.

galwaycyclist

talking_walnut wrote: »

Finally, does anyone actually have any information to suggest that the bypass/bridge isn't going ahead? I'm fairly sure it's still on the plans.

Yes it is with the, arguably false, qualification that the GTS says the bypass is needed first and then afterwards we can do something for other transport modes.

So again other forms of transport are being held to ransom by the car/roads lobby.

gordongekko

talking_walnut wrote: »

Finally, does anyone actually have any information to suggest that the bypass/bridge isn't going ahead? I'm fairly sure it's still on the plans.

The last one was in planning for over 20 years only for some cotton to finally put the idea back to square one. I can't see the new bypass built anytime soon.

talking_walnut

gordongekko wrote: »

The last one was in planning for over 20 years only for some cotton to finally put the idea back to square one. I can't see the new bypass built anytime soon.

Fair point, but is that not going to happen anyway?

Mrs OBumble

galwaycyclist wrote: »

Yes it is with the, arguably false, qualification that the GTS says the bypass is needed first and then afterwards we can do something for other transport modes.

So again other forms of transport are being held to ransom by the car/roads lobby.

Ahh, I didn't see the draft GTS documents actually say that. The screenshots I posted some pages ago show a number of short term steps that are expected to happen long before the bypass is built.

The current status of the M20 Cork to Limerick is suspended. It has a higher cost-benefit than the Galway "outer bypass" (sic). I don't see how the latter can go ahead before the former.

Unrealistic

Unrealistic wrote: »

I'm not sure I understand what you mean by the bolded part above. That people who opt to not own a car for financial reasons, rather than some philosophical preference, are not entitled to be considered in determining how are transport infrastructure is developed?

I don't think is not opting to use it it's not being able to afford it. I would say the vast majority of people who use busses for example do so as they are too young to drive or cannot afford to own and run a car. Cycling and walking to work are a bit different in that you are covering much smaller distance and people may opt for it instead of taking the car im good weather, if they are going to the pub after work etc etc but traversing longer distance that people use a bus for I'd imagine the vast majority would prefer to be in a car if they could.

galwaycyclist

Mrs OBumble wrote: »

Ahh, I didn't see the draft GTS documents actually say that. The screenshots I posted some pages ago show a number of short term steps that are expected to happen long before the bypass is built.

The current status of the M20 Cork to Limerick is suspended. It has a higher cost-benefit than the Galway "outer bypass" (sic). I don't see how the latter can go ahead before the former.

Page 79 in the technical report - will post a screen shot later

talking_walnut

Anne Handsome Sawhorse wrote: »

I don't think is not opting to use it it's not being able to afford it. I would say the vast majority of people who use busses for example do so as they are too young to drive or cannot afford to own and run a car. Cycling and walking to work are a bit different in that you are covering much smaller distance and people may opt for it instead of taking the car im good weather, if they are going to the pub after work etc etc but traversing longer distance that people use a bus for I'd imagine the vast majority would prefer to be in a car if they could.

I took the bus last week because my bike was out of action. It took an hour and a half to get home instead of 20-30 mins! Craziness. I drove the next day

The bus has no chance though. It has to travel on the same road as the cars and take a route that goes through heavily populated areas. Without dedicated bus routes/roads, it's always going to be a painful experience.

galwaycyclist

galwaycyclist wrote: »

Page 79 in the technical report - will post a screen shot later

They are trying to say congestion will get worse without the ring road regardless of other measures. Also congestion for who? At the moment everyone is blocked by traffic is this really necessary already?

Now many people who live in the city when the schools are off can see the problem with this. There is a marked difference in traffic when the schools are off - are we to understand that getting more children walking and cycling to school will not have any effect on congestion? Many of the measures to support walking cycling and public transport should not require any reallocation of road space from private cars - why would more road capacity be needed?

Also why would anyone use Park and Ride if the city is putting in a ring road to cater for commuter traffic?

connemara man

Galway needs all of the things people are talking about here

a ring road. I drive from. Dublin to Connemara a lot an id love to avoid headford Rd and Westside if possible. But I do tend to time my journeys to avoid traffic. But I can see the benefits of people who live in knocknacarra who work in parkmore using a rd like this.

A car less zone for through traffic. The city centre should have as little traffic as possible IMO which would help in the viability of public transport and make the city a nicer place to be in less noise etc.

Proper bus lanes all the way along routes. I lived in renmore in college and it was quicker to walk in than get the bus. And I doubt it's improved in the recent times.

Helped by above reliable bus times and frequency. The amount of anecdotal evidence of busses not showing up or two or three arriving together is ridiculous. Especially in a society where I can give my nephew a watch that will let me know his exact location.

Galways biggest issue is its Geography. Wrapped around a body of water ie Galway bay and a river running through it would make it a nightmare to plan 50 years ago if someone could see where the city was going. Let alone now when all that damage is done.

Discodog

connemara man wrote: »

Galway needs all of the things people are talking about here

a ring road. I drive from. Dublin to Connemara a lot an id love to avoid headford Rd and Westside if possible. But I do tend to time my journeys to avoid traffic. But I can see the benefits of people who live in knocknacarra who work in parkmore using a rd like this.

A car less zone for through traffic. The city centre should have as little traffic as possible IMO which would help in the viability of public transport and make the city a nicer place to be in less noise etc.

Proper bus lanes all the way along routes. I lived in renmore in college and it was quicker to walk in than get the bus. And I doubt it's improved in the recent times.

Helped by above reliable bus times and frequency. The amount of anecdotal evidence of busses not showing up or two or three arriving together is ridiculous. Especially in a society where I can give my nephew a watch that will let me know his exact location.

Galways biggest issue is its Geography. Wrapped around a body of water ie Galway bay and a river running through it would make it a nightmare to plan 50 years ago if someone could see where the city was going. Let alone now when all that damage is done.

Totally agree but my view doesn't count because I don't live in the City. I am the pariah who needs to get to the City to work or cross the City. I will sit on a packed single lane ring road with an empty bus lane next to me. If you want a job done in the City or on the other side of the City, be ready to be charged a whole lot more.

Yes the "planners & environmentalists" will win because the chaos won't effect them. Galway will divide in two. If you need a service then you will need to chose someone on your side.

The anti car brigade will say that the bypass won't last long - if it ever gets built. They are right because it will be, at best a dual carriageway with the mandatory bus lane. Cities like Oxford built proper full three lane by passes & they still cope just fine.

I feel sorry for all of my neighbours who will have to grin & bear it as they are forced into the East side to get work. I'll tell my clients that I will no longer cross the river. Try putting tools etc on a bus.