City just crazy

fergiesfolly

Discodog wrote: »

That will never happen in Galway, whilst there is a lobby that think that banning cars is the answer, without a ring road. I drive through the town centre because it's quicker than the existing ring road.

Park & Ride can only work with a proper ring road. In Oxford the P&R buses have sensors that change the traffic lights as they approach so you never get held up. The carparks are huge & on the ring road with a bus always ready to leave. The buses drop you right in the main shopping street.

The anti car crowd think that you can remove every vehicle. You can't.

You're right. And if you go back over my other posts in this thread, you'll notice I mentioned having a proper ring road in conjunction with PnR, cycling lanes etc.
But as I said earlier the ring road isn't coming any time soon, so other transportation alternatives need to be implemented.

I'll be honest, what's happening in the city doesn't impact me or my family greatly. I work, can shop and the local school are all within walking/cycling distance.
On the few occasions where I've had to make the journey into the city centre or use major roads getting to the city outskirts, I looked around at fellow motorist/ cyclists/pedestrians and thought that this is a crazy, unhealthy, unsustainable system (or lack of) and change has to happen before the city chokes.
I'm a car owner but have realised that sometimes walking or cycling is just easier and faster. I rarely, if ever use a bus (hate them) so I'll cycle into town if I can. Small changes, but most can make them and if we all adapt a little, everyone benefits.

xckjoo

jjpep wrote: »

Yep, and something I can see myself doing in a few years time.

Also I think the limit of 25kmph to be fine. Anything faster and the user starts to become more of a potential danger to others.

Ya and it's probably more like 30 when you add the pedal-power to the mix. It's fast enough for traveling on a skinny piece of metal with no protection. And a consistent 25 will get you places a lot faster than any car sitting in traffic jams.

Mrs OBumble wrote: »

You really think that people should be able to travel at 45kmh with no licence or insurance? And likely no protective equipment either.

A decent cyclist will hit 45kmph without any assistance. But I do think 25 is the right limit for electric bikes. It's probably still too high for some of the lunatics you see on two wheels

Discodog wrote: »

Anti Car Crowd - name calling :pac:
There is a very vocal section who simply want to make life so hard for the car user that they are forced away from the city. The same thing is happening in Dublin & other cities. The city centre dies as a shopping destination & people will have to pay a lot more for services. Any new costs will have to be passed on to the consumer.

Your attitude of making them squeal until they are forced out is anti car - even if you do own one. I don't want to drive through Galway but I have to. A vehicle full of tools won't fit on a bus. People will take the easiest route. You want to make the easier route cost more before there is an alternative.
If it's a doddle to drive in the city then there can't be any traffic & during a large part of the day there isn't.

The Council love making plans - dozens of them. A plush brochure was released in 2009 showing proposed road improvements West of Galway. None will be built but people have had their planning applications turned down because of the brochure. That huge sign in Furbo is a classic example.

But anyone at a desk, factory line or most other industries have to bring little more than themselves. There should be more space on the roads for the likes of yourself that need a car.

what_traffic

xckjoo wrote: »

But anyone at a desk, factory line or most other industries have to bring little more than themselves. There should be more space on the roads for the likes of yourself that need a car.

True - it always surprises my how people really struggle with this? But what about.... Or another favorite chestnut is the weather. Always raining in Galway,
We know from the met.ie that its not going to rain Wednesday --> Saturday this week - but out of habit people it will not stop jumping into the car to do small distance trips.

McGiver

Mrs OBumble wrote: »

You really think that people should be able to travel at 45kmh with no licence or insurance? And likely no protective equipment either.

No, I was more talking about the power output 250W, which is bollocks. Most motors today can do much more and there is no reason to limit the motor to 250W and require plate (see L1e-A below). This power output was arbitrarily based on typical power output in 90s!

L1e-B (S-pedelec) has continuous power higher than 250W and pedal assist cut off at 45kmh. It is considered a "moped". You need a plate, insurance and a helmet. Can be used on road, only you can't use trails etc.

L1e-A has continuous power higher than 250W and pedal assist cut off at 25kmh. It is not considered a "moped", but you still need a plate and insurance. Don't think you need a helmet.

Anything which has a continuous power higher no higher than 250W and pedal assist cut off at 25kmh is just considered a bicycle. Almost all e-bikes fall within this category and have their motors intentionally capped at 250W (as well as pedal assist at 25kmh) even though the motor and batteries could do more, and all that simply because of the law to avoid not being categorised a bike.

Sorry for the off-topic

McGiver

ben.schlomo wrote: »

Unfortunately your rant applies to all road users, not just cyclists.

Exactly, that applies especially to car users. And pedestrians alike. But car users have much more potential for harm, right.

McGiver

xckjoo wrote: »

A decent cyclist will hit 45kmph without any assistance. But I do think 25 is the right limit for electric bikes. It's probably still too high for some of the lunatics you see on two wheels

25kmh pedal assist cut-off is the EU limit for e-bikes which are still considered "bicycles". Anything above is not and needs a plate, insurance etc. I don't think it's the right limit, the US federal law is more liberal and has the limit set at 20mph (32kmh), also they have the power capped at 750W. Both are more appropriate. EU went too strict with this imho.

xckjoo

McGiver wrote: »

25kmh pedal assist cut-off is the EU limit for e-bikes which are still considered "bicycles". Anything above is not and needs a plate, insurance etc. I don't think it's the right limit, the US federal law is more liberal and has the limit set at 20mph (32kmh), also they have the power capped at 750W. Both are more appropriate. EU went too strict with this imho.

IMHO 25 is fine. When you add in your own legs it's generally in the 30's. To be honest, the biggest advantage with them is getting you moving faster and maintaining speed (and less physical exertion!). Adding an extra few kmph won't really get you places faster as we're not on a track. Traffic, junctions, turns, lights, etc. are the bigger dictators of overall journey time.

Zzippy

xckjoo wrote: »

A decent cyclist will hit 45kmph without any assistance. But I do think 25 is the right limit for electric bikes. It's probably still too high for some of the lunatics you see on two wheels

Ah here. The average speed in the Tour de France is ~ 45kmh. A regular "decent cyclist" will very much struggle to hit that except going downhill. A good amateur cyclist will average 25-30kmh cycling on their own. That's on a light road bike with low wind resistance tight clothing, not a commuter bike and bulky raingear.

xckjoo

Zzippy wrote: »

Ah here. The average speed in the Tour de France is ~ 45kmh. A regular "decent cyclist" will very much struggle to hit that except going downhill. A good amateur cyclist will average 25-30kmh cycling on their own. That's on a light road bike with low wind resistance tight clothing, not a commuter bike and bulky raingear.

My bad. It was a guestimate. I'm not claiming to be hitting those speeds. Are we not all on boat-loads of EPO to get to work faster??

Discodog

xckjoo wrote: »

But anyone at a desk, factory line or most other industries have to bring little more than themselves. There should be more space on the roads for the likes of yourself that need a car.

Except that I & my customers will have to pay more as that's the preferred method to force others off the road

xckjoo

Discodog wrote: »

Except that I & my customers will have to pay more as that's the preferred method to force others off the road

Whatcha basing that statement on? I feel like most people are arguing for things like bus/cycle lanes, one-ways and priority on the road for public transport, but could be wrong.



If it is financial (dis)incentives, then they could make allowances for commercial vehicles. Would that change your opinion?

Discodog

Discodog wrote: »

Except that I & my customers will have to pay more as that's the preferred method to force others off the road

Actually you would be more likely to increase the amount of work you could do as you wouldn't spend as much time stuck in traffic

McGiver

[Deleted User] wrote: »

While you make some good points, name calling takes away from your argument.

I drive a car and I'm a firm believer that car access to the city centre should be reduced to a minimal level.... what does that make me?

It's been said time and time again that the city center has zero additional capacity for private cars. Given the population of Galway will be increasing by 50% over the next few decades, it's no longer feasible to keep the status quo.

Yes the bypass is definitely needed, but also, it should be made wholly unpalatable to want to drive into the city except in certain circumstances. The thoughts of it should make you groan and seriously hurt your pocket. Yes, P&R is an important part of the puzzle

The bypass is one element of a large amount of initiatives needed for Galway, but none will work as long as its a doddle to hop in the car and drive into the city.

Agree, it's just not sustainable and the reasons are as follows:
Only few bridges cross the Corrib
Very tiny city centre with many narrow roads
Unplanned city centre road network
Inability to use southern parts of the city (there's sea there)

McGiver

xckjoo wrote: »

IMHO 25 is fine. When you add in your own legs it's generally in the 30's. To be honest, the biggest advantage with them is getting you moving faster and maintaining speed (and less physical exertion!). Adding an extra few kmph won't really get you places faster as we're not on a track. Traffic, junctions, turns, lights, etc. are the bigger dictators of overall journey time.

You're on your own above 25kmh. The pedal assist turns off at 25kmh. But anyway you're right re journey time. What makes a difference is hills, shooting up hills 25kmh with one third of pedalling effort is really nice. Those 32kmh as in the US would be even better better Less effort, shorter time, no sweat.

McGiver

Zzippy wrote: »

Ah here. The average speed in the Tour de France is ~ 45kmh. A regular "decent cyclist" will very much struggle to hit that except going downhill. A good amateur cyclist will average 25-30kmh cycling on their own. That's on a light road bike with low wind resistance tight clothing, not a commuter bike and bulky raingear.

Regular "decent" cyclist can do 45kmh on flat for a few seconds with a lighter hybrid or road bike, but impossible to sustain that kind of speed for a longer time without suffering serious exertion and collapse. Judging by myself

Mrs OBumble

Deleted User wrote: »

I drive a car and I'm a firm believer that car access to the city centre should be reduced to a minimal level.... what does that make me?

....

The bypass is one element of a large amount of initiatives needed for Galway, but none will work as long as its a doddle to hop in the car and drive into the city.

A suburb dweller!

Which is great - if we had more people who could work, shop and educate their families within short distances of their housing and only travel to the centre for events, the city would be more liveable. But part of that includes making the city centre liveable for a good number of people too, and car banning or financial penalties or excessive bureaucracy stops that, and makes life difficult for people who occasionally need to bring a car in (eg taking elderly or disabled people to the hospital or to funerals or whatever)

It is already far from a doddle to drive into the city.

Mrs OBumble

Mrs OBumble wrote: »

A suburb dweller!

Nope, I live outside the city and it's serviced by buses and trains however none allow me to get home after I finish work so the car is my only option.

Which is great - if we had more people who could work, shop and educate their families within short distances of their housing and only travel to the centre for events, the city would be more liveable. But part of that includes making the city centre liveable for a good number of people too, and car banning or financial penalties or excessive bureaucracy stops that, and makes life difficult for people who occasionally need to bring a car in (eg taking elderly or disabled people to the hospital or to funerals or whatever)

It is already far from a doddle to drive into the city.

Sigh, I'll say it for a 4th or is it 5th time

The occasional NEED to drive in should still be possible but when you want to go, the car should be the WORST option from a list.

That list includes buses, trains, walking, taxis, cycling, P&R's etc

How many naysayers said the world would come crashing down when paid parking was introduced. What happened? People paid or didn't drive in

What about pedestrianisation? It led to hugely successful shopping areas literally everywhere its been done

Cycle infrastructure? Properly done, it leads to a massive surge in bike users

Public transport infrastructure? Same

Reducing private car usage in cities? Leads to an overall better quality of life for all. It honestly shocks me that you say that it would be decreased by reducing cars in the city. Are you seriously telling me that a city full of cars is more livable than one that has a minimal amount of cars in it?

Cars have their place into the transportation solution but they are going to be squeezed to the margins because just about every alternative is more efficient by a multitude of metrics

It comes down to space and throughput, as illustrated by image below

Discodog

The obvious way to reduce workers parking in the City is to charge little for 2 hours parking but a lot for 8 hours.

I imagine the vast majority of us who drive to work have free parking.

Discodog

[Deleted User] wrote: »

I imagine the vast majority of us who drive to work have free parking.

Is it taxed as a benefit?

Discodog

Discodog wrote: »

Is it taxed as a benefit?

Parking is non-taxable

https://www.revenue.ie/en/jobs-and-pensions/taxation-of-employer-benefits/non-taxable-employer-benefits.aspx

Mrs OBumble

Discodog wrote: »

The obvious way to reduce workers parking in the City is to charge little for 2 hours parking but a lot for 8 hours.

Who said that workers parking in the city is the cause of traffic problems?

Discodog

Mrs OBumble wrote: »

Who said that workers parking in the city is the cause of traffic problems?

Lots appear to be.

xckjoo

Discodog wrote: »

Lots appear to be.

Nah. It's people driving to those parking spots that's the problem. When they're parked they're usually not contributing too much to traffic.

what_traffic

xckjoo wrote: »

Nah. It's people driving to those parking spots that's the problem. When they're parked they're usually not contributing too much to traffic.

Of course they are, everybody who uses a car in this manner is contributing. Depending on the time of the day it will have a greater or lesser effect. But it always is having an effect. Ad all them up and we are creating CAR traffic.

what_traffic

Discodog wrote: »

The obvious way to reduce workers parking in the City is to charge little for 2 hours parking but a lot for 8 hours.

Another one is to make certain streets "Residents Only". Not like the current system of "Residents Permits" and "Pay and Display" mixed together.

Mrs OBumble

Discodog wrote: »

Lots appear to be.

Really? Most people don't even work in the city centre, because that's not where most jobs are.

xckjoo

what_traffic wrote: »

Of course they are, everybody who uses a car in this manner is contributing. Depending on the time of the day it will have a greater or lesser effect. But it always is having an effect. Ad all them up and we are creating CAR traffic.

My point is that it's not when they're parked that it's an issue. It's when they're in motion, or at least attempting to be.

what_traffic

xckjoo wrote: »

My point is that it's not when they're parked that it's an issue. It's when they're in motion, or at least attempting to be.

Afraid not, having car parking capacity affects car traffic. If you remove car parking capacity for car parking on a street - you affect the purpose of the street and the streets close to it. Such a street will no longer become a destination for cars. It does not matter if a car parking space is occupied or not.

Pugzilla

Mrs OBumble, are you a man or woman?