Kirwin Action Group

dok_golf

Thats not actually true. There is nothing to stop anyone using a public road i.e. where the local authority pays for its upkeep. Whether it is morally correct is a different question

fergiesfolly

what_traffic wrote: »

The hint is in the name. "Local Roads". Unless you have business(does not mean shopping) in the locality, you should not be using them for your rat run commute to avoid the car traffic on the national roads.

Those roads are for everyone's use and there's no point in arguing otherwise. Haven't been on that road for a decade or more, as I live, work and shop in the city. But I might go for a spin some evening. As is my right.

xckjoo

Is there not a difference between what you can and can't do and what's sh1tty? Nobody should have to put up with large volumes of cars passing very close to their house at high speeds on roads that aren't even built to handle it. That's a fairly low bar to want for citizens of this country.

ronnie3585

Our local gombeen men (and women) have voted to turn the Kirwan roundabout into traffic light junction - http://galwaybayfm.ie/councillors-vote-favour-traffic-lights-menlo-park-roundabout-city/.

what_traffic

fergiesfolly wrote: »

Those roads are for everyone's use and there's no point in arguing otherwise. Haven't been on that road for a decade or more, as I live, work and shop in the city. But I might go for a spin some evening. As is my right.

I do not know why you quoted me. The point you make here shows perfectly acceptable behaviour. By your own admission you are not using this road as a daily rat run. Once off visits, spins etc is perfectly fine

Mrs OBumble

ronnie3585 wrote: »

Our local gombeen men (and women) have voted to turn the Kirwan roundabout into traffic light junction - http://galwaybayfm.ie/councillors-vote-favour-traffic-lights-menlo-park-roundabout-city/.

Good.

Roundabouts are not suitable where there are high volumes and pedestrians crossing double lanes.

ronnie3585

ronnie3585 wrote: »

Our local gombeen men (and women) have voted to turn the Kirwan roundabout into traffic light junction - http://galwaybayfm.ie/councillors-vote-favour-traffic-lights-menlo-park-roundabout-city/.

"Other councillors in favour of the traffic lights emphasised that the scientific data showed this to be the best solution"

As long as what they have said is true, I can't see why people are against this proposal. I'd rather trust scientific data, than some people on a forum

Zzippy

what_traffic wrote: »

I do not know why you quoted me. The point you make here shows perfectly acceptable behaviour. By your own admission you are not using this road as a daily rat run. Once off visits, spins etc is perfectly fine

Who decides who has legitimate business using a road? You? The council? The fact is the city has outgrown the infrastructure around it, and arterial roads are choked at rush hour. If people find an alternative route that saves them time they will use it. If they are obeying speed limits they are doing nothing wrong. The solution to increased traffic volumes is to provide alternatives such as better infrastructure, better traffic management, integrated public transport that works, better facilities for cycling, etc. to encourage them to use arterial routes or alternative modes of transport, and traffic management to discourage bad driving on "local" roads.

Criticising people who are doing nothing wrong won't get you anywhere.
Telling people "well you're fine cos it's only occasional, but you're a **** cos you're here twice a week" which is basically your attitude, is not going to win any arguments.

ronnie3585

Deleted User wrote: »

"Other councillors in favour of the traffic lights emphasised that the scientific data showed this to be the best solution"

As long as what they have said is true, I can't see why people are against this proposal. I'd rather trust scientific data, than some people on a forum

I recall the many references that were made to 'scientific data' when the SQR development was proposed, which turned out to be one of the greatest fu*k ups in the city's sad infrastructural history.

ronnie3585

ronnie3585 wrote: »

I recall the many references that were made to 'scientific data' when the SQR development was proposed, which turned out to be one of the greatest fu*k ups in the city's sad infrastructural history.

Sure the construction had its problems, but the end result is better for the majority of users

xckjoo

Zzippy wrote: »

Who decides who has legitimate business using a road? You? The council? The fact is the city has outgrown the infrastructure around it, and arterial roads are choked at rush hour. If people find an alternative route that saves them time they will use it. If they are obeying speed limits they are doing nothing wrong. The solution to increased traffic volumes is to provide alternatives such as better infrastructure, better traffic management, integrated public transport that works, better facilities for cycling, etc. to encourage them to use arterial routes or alternative modes of transport, and traffic management to discourage bad driving on "local" roads.

Criticising people who are doing nothing wrong won't get you anywhere.
Telling people "well you're fine cos it's only occasional, but you're a **** cos you're here twice a week" which is basically your attitude, is not going to win any arguments.

I'd criticise the system that causes people to use those roads, not the road users.

Separately though, individuals are responsible for how they drive in terms of speed, care, etc. I'm not familiar with the road but based on how people drive in general, I'm going to guess that there's a lot of cars flying through as fast as they can. I'm not sure if those issues are related or not but it would be nice if we could keep cars and people more separate than they currently are.

ronnie3585 wrote: »

I recall the many references that were made to 'scientific data' when the SQR development was proposed, which turned out to be one of the greatest fu*k ups in the city's sad infrastructural history.

What's the SQR development?

what_traffic

I would not have guessed there would be many rat runners on this forum, would not have thought so for a City Forum. If it was the Galway Country forum then would understand the hostility.

If we had functioning local Government, then it would be the Council that should decide what roads should be for local access only, this is not unusual and is common in other European country's. I am not re-inventing the wheel, just taking best practice from elsewhere.
However it is not in Galway City Councils financial interest to do this as they currently make most money (independently of Central Government) from Car Parking, they need and want to funnel as much cars into the City Centre as possible.

what_traffic

Zzippy wrote: »

Criticising people who are doing nothing wrong won't get you anywhere.
Telling people "well you're fine cos it's only occasional, but you're a **** cos you're here twice a week DAY" which is basically your attitude, is not going to win any arguments.

I corrected that for you.
I am talking about Daily Rat Running on local roads in the vicinity of Galway City. Every day, for many people it is now 6 out of 7 days a week that this occurs in there locality.
I may not win arguments with the rat runners themselves, but hopefully will win arguments with people who have to live on such local roads and who have to put up with this daily issue.

what_traffic

xckjoo wrote: »

What's the SQR development?

SQR = Seamus Quirke Road (scheme referred too by ronnie3585 also includes Bishop O Donnell Road)

Robbo

Zzippy wrote: »

Who decides who has legitimate business using a road?

A man in a hi-viz; wearing plastic pants and wielding a flask of Bovril.

D Trent

Robbo wrote: »

A man in a hi-viz; wearing plastic pants and wielding a flask of Bovril.

With three cigarettes hanging off the bottom lip...

joeKel73

ronnie3585 wrote: »

Our local gombeen men (and women) have voted to turn the Kirwan roundabout into traffic light junction - http://galwaybayfm.ie/councillors-vote-favour-traffic-lights-menlo-park-roundabout-city/.

Great news.

That roundabout is a disaster for cyclists, a challenge for a lot of commuters that are coming from town or over the bridge and heading towards Parkmore.

Every day there's a steady stream of motorists coming from Dunnes/Town and using the outside lane all the way around to the Bothar na dTreabh exit. This means cyclists (and rule-abiding motorists) can't move to the outside lane of the roundabout to take that exit and end up in the fast/overtaking lane on Bothar na dTreabh, often with motorists overtaking on the left.

Mrs OBumble

what_traffic wrote: »

I would not have guessed there would be many rat runners on this forum, would not have thought so for a City Forum. If it was the Galway Country forum then would understand the hostility.

Oh dear - I'm a public transport advocate, and only an occasional car-user. But even I think that attempting to vilify people as RATS is the wrong approach: if a local road attracts traffic away from a main road, then the right approach is systemic eg traffic calming, not name calling or rules ( which people routinely ignore anyway).

Or maybe the local road needs upgrading - i can think of one place in the east of the city where what you call rat running actually cut two troublesome intersection out of the journey of people living one suburb over, so the council upgraded the boreen to make it better for everyone.

I don't follow why this group seem to be against the proposed upgrade of the Kirwan roundabout.

If all goes to plan cars should move through the junction more efficiently reducing the need to rat run and they will have an additional lane approaching town to reduce the length of the queue.

Do they believe that people presented with two additional sets of traffic lights rather than one roundabout will avoid the lights?

Zzippy

what_traffic wrote: »

I corrected that for you.
I am talking about Daily Rat Running on local roads in the vicinity of Galway City. Every day, for many people it is now 6 out of 7 days a week that this occurs in there locality.
I may not win arguments with the rat runners themselves, but hopefully will win arguments with people who have to live on such local roads and who have to put up with this daily issue.

So, NIMBYism is fine then? This isn't a housing estate we're talking about, this is a public road which is an alternative route from Ballindooley Cross to Woodquay that removes traffic, one roundabout and at least 4 sets of traffic lights from the same journey. That's a problem with the infrastructure, not with people. If people are speeding on the road then they should be punished. If they are driving under the limit you have zero argument. I guess it's easier lazier to call people rats than look at the bigger picture of why they're using the road and campaign on that issue.

what_traffic

Zzippy wrote: »

So, NIMBYism is fine then? This isn't a housing estate we're talking about, this is a public road which is an alternative route from Ballindooley Cross to Woodquay that removes traffic, one roundabout and at least 4 sets of traffic lights from the same journey. That's a problem with the infrastructure, not with people. If people are speeding on the road then they should be punished. If they are driving under the limit you have zero argument. I guess it's easier lazier to call people rats than look at the bigger picture of why they're using the road and campaign on that issue.

Correct its not a housing estates, its a rural village where people live.
Also rat runnign does not remove car traffic. That is false. You are just re-routing car traffic from a national road onto local roads. Rat running is the common term people use in this country to describe this process. I am not inventing a new word - is that the lazy ref?

what_traffic

Mrs OBumble wrote: »

Oh dear - I'm a public transport advocate, and only an occasional car-user. But even I think that attempting to vilify people as RATS is the wrong approach: if a local road attracts traffic away from a main road, then the right approach is systemic eg traffic calming, not name calling or rules ( which people routinely ignore anyway).

Or maybe the local road needs upgrading - i can think of one place in the east of the city where what you call rat running actually cut two troublesome intersection out of the journey of people living one suburb over, so the council upgraded the boreen to make it better for everyone.

What road are you referring too? "Upgrading" can be a double edge sword. So a local boreen road has been widened to facilitate this through traffic now?

FYI. I drive as well, I just do not engage in rat running in and around Galway City. If it means sitting in car traffic for an extra 5mins-10mins then so be it. Also please do not give me the credit of inventing the term and definition of rat running. The term was around before I was even born.

Zzippy

what_traffic wrote: »

Correct its not a housing estates, its a rural village where people live.
Also rat runnign does not remove car traffic. That is false. You are just re-routing car traffic from a national road onto local roads. Rat running is the common term people use in this country to describe this process. I am not inventing a new word - is that the lazy ref?

Calling it a village is a bit of a stretch, but in any case, it has the same legal protection as other urban areas in that the speed limit is 50kmh. Just because you call it a village does not confer upon it any protected status or restrictions on traffic volume.
And thanks for completely misrepresenting what I said, but I'll spell it out, slowly, for you. The Menlo road removes the traffic and junctions from a person's journey, I did not say it removed traffic overall. But to address your point, re-routing traffic from one road to another certainly does remove traffic from the first road.
Anyway, you go on carping at the road users and keep ignoring the infrastructural and organizational deficits that impact on their decisions. It's like blaming people for swimming in the sea where a local authority can't be arsed to operate proper sewage works that would protect water quality.

I've found this thread hilarious to read.
As someone travelling into Parkmore each morning, sometimes from the East of the city via the M6, and other times from Knocknacarra, I partake in driving on the backroads every single morning, and I'm not alone.

The M6 is a disaster from 8am until 9am ever since the new motorway opened.
Getting out of Knocknacarra is a disaster from 8am to 9am.

Why, as a motor tax payer, should I not use a road that has built to transport motor vehicles, regardless of the nature of the road?

The roads exist. They are open to the public. And they save me approx 20 minutes in commuting everyday. (That's a little under 2hours a week, or about 4 days of my life a year.
I see arguments that the roads were not designed to carry as much traffic as they do. Neither was the quincentenary bridge. Should I stop using that? Who decides upon who is allowed to use these roads and who is not?

xckjoo

Deleted User wrote: »

I've found this thread hilarious to read.
As someone travelling into Parkmore each morning, sometimes from the East of the city via the M6, and other times from Knocknacarra, I partake in driving on the backroads every single morning, and I'm not alone.

The M6 is a disaster from 8am until 9am ever since the new motorway opened.
Getting out of Knocknacarra is a disaster from 8am to 9am.

Why, as a motor tax payer, should I not use a road that has built to transport motor vehicles, regardless of the nature of the road?

The roads exist. They are open to the public. And they save me approx 20 minutes in commuting everyday. (That's a little under 2hours a week, or about 4 days of my life a year.
I see arguments that the roads were not designed to carry as much traffic as they do. Neither was the quincentenary bridge. Should I stop using that? Who decides upon who is allowed to use these roads and who is not?

You can use them but can the people that live there not complain about the traffic passing their homes and want better for them and their families? Presumably you drive carefully and at a sufficiently slow speed to respond to unexpected events on these roads.



As an aside, why do people always bring up motor tax as if it gives them special rights????

what_traffic

Deleted User wrote: »

Why, as a motor tax payer, should I not use a road that has built to transport motor vehicles, regardless of the nature of the road?

You destroy your own argument here. Many of these boreen roads you rat run on were built way before the motorcar was invented. Up until the 1950s many of these roads just had horse and cart on them.
Motor tax is not used for roads - it just gets thrown into the general taxation pot.

what_traffic

Zzippy wrote: »

Calling it a village is a bit of a stretch, but in any case, it has the same legal protection as other urban areas in that the speed limit is 50kmh. Just because you call it a village does not confer upon it any protected status or restrictions on traffic volume.
...
It's like blaming people for swimming in the sea where a local authority can't be arsed to operate proper sewage works that would protect water quality.

Well if Village is not good enough, then how about "Sraid Bhaile". Mionloch or Menlo is in the Gaeltacht after all. Never said the Village should get protected status - what I said was that rat running should be removed from local roads especially when a National Road exists for this car traffic

I would only be blaming the "people" for swimming in the sea if they were NOT putting pressure on the local authority to change the status quo. However the people swimming in the **** - still have the choice to do it though. Same as the rat running motorists have the choice to rat run on local roads to avoid car traffic on National Roads.

fergiesfolly

what_traffic wrote: »

Well if Village is not good enough, then how about "Sraid Bhaile". Mionloch or Menlo is in the Gaeltacht after all. Never said the Village should get protected status - what I said was that rat running should be removed from local roads especially when a National Road exists for this car traffic

And how do you police that?
Garda checkpoint at the crossroad..."Are you local??...No????. Back you go"

You cannot and will not stop people using a public road when it's shorter or faster than the alternative. Upgrading the road network, making it safer for ALL road users is the best you can realistically hope for.

I don't know how the change to the Kirwan roundabout will affect the traffic flow, but it seems to be happening, so I think the people opposing it would be better off trying to make sure the new layout benefits all.

Zzippy

what_traffic wrote: »

Well if Village is not good enough, then how about "Sraid Bhaile". Mionloch or Menlo is in the Gaeltacht after all. Never said the Village should get protected status - what I said was that rat running should be removed from local roads especially when a National Road exists for this car traffic

I would only be blaming the "people" for swimming in the sea if they were NOT putting pressure on the local authority to change the status quo. However the people swimming in the **** - still have the choice to do it though. Same as the rat running motorists have the choice to rat run on local roads to avoid car traffic on National Roads.

So the onus is on the swimmers/drivers to ensure the local authority is carrying out its statutory remit? And if they don't they're at fault? Mind you don't fall off that high horse up there... :rolleyes:

what_traffic

fergiesfolly wrote: »

And how do you police that?
Garda checkpoint at the crossroad..."Are you local??...No????. Back you go"

Just Copy and Paste what they do in Germany etc etc