Galway Ring Road- are there better ways to solve traffic?

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120293056#Comment_120293056

What conspiracy theory? It’s pretty evident that Galway’s traffic issues is generating a lot of comment from the anticar ….Grouping… from beyond Galway. The reams and reams and reams of threads here and in other places are evidence of that. I’m just asking why Galway and not the other cities of Ireland? Why does Galway get the focus? (Not to say the questions aren’t getting answered, just extending out the thinking behind them)

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120293346#Comment_120293346

What evidence do you have of that? That none of the other road works listed on this page will up emissions or that the council are hellbent on prioritising cars?

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120293342#Comment_120293342

Thread. The Galway thread. The only one that’s closed, moderated, and split into two. Unlike the other threads which have none of the massive political focus upon them.

TnxM17

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120293397#Comment_120293397

The thread was closed because of trolling - nothing to do with any anti car or whatever agenda.

Seth Brundle

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120293385#Comment_120293385

Have you actually read anything about the road because you continue to seem completely uninformed about it?

When the plans were submitted and subsequently discussed/reviewed, they confirmed that there would be an increase in emissions and in the number of vehicle KMs travelled.

This was widely reported on, e.g.

It points out that official documents supporting plans for the new road confirm it will increase CO2 emissions by 37%.

The 37% increase in CO2 was stated in the government-approved Business Case for the proposed road, released to Cosain following a Freedom of Information request. This was subsequently confirmed by Transport Infrastructure Ireland (TII) in a letter to Catherine Connolly TD, who had submitted a Parliamentary Question on the subject.

TII stated that approximately 26,000 tonnes of CO2 would be generated by the proposed road in the opening year, and 35,800 tonnes by 2039 “with the main contributory factor being an increase in vehicle kilometres travelled”.

The document also projected that modal share for peak hour car commuting would increase to 67.3% by 2039, while just 5% of all commutes would be by bus. The modal share for cycle commuting would reduce, decreasing to 2.8% in 2039.

It all comes down to the hard-learned understanding that youo cannot solve traffic congestion by making it more attractive to drive!

https://connachttribune.ie/city-council-warned-ring-road-would-increase-carbon-emissions-099/

As for you asking me how I know that the council are "hellbent on prioritising cars" - well, they're telling us this. They will look at some vague plans to encourage cycling and public transport once the road is complete.

To push it back to you, what options for public transport and active travel have been put forwards and are being actively implemented? What is the projected reduction in car journeys from these projects? How will these current projects benefit those in Galway who actually need to drive?

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120293438#Comment_120293438

Finally, some pertinent questions. I don’t have the answers for them. I’m expecting the Council to come back with how they plan to proceed given their rejection at ABP, which I expect to go into the other thread when it’s opened up.

whether that’s enough or not will be up for interpretation. On a personal level I prioritise the opening of another river crossing for vehicular traffic north of the City above all else, for reasons already stated. And I will support any and all projects that will bring that distinct criteria until the first one of them delivers it in reality. If it’s part of a ring road I back the ring road. If it’s by itself then I back it.

If it’s already on the board & has considerable legal works done behind it then I back it ahead of theoretical ones that have yet to start.

Deliver the bridge. Save lives. None of this theory bullsh*t matters.

hans aus dtschl

SeaSlacker, I can't tell whether you have people on mute, who are replying to you, that are answering your direct questions, or whether you're ignoring their answers.

Either way, just a heads-up it's making it a bit difficult to know whether to respond to you.

Long story short, Galway appears to be one of the few local authorities in Ireland (and I'd wager one of few in Europe) who are saying that they will consider alternative modes AFTER the roads projects are complete, and that is likely why this road in particular gets a near-unanimous negative response in a forum where almost everyone comes on to discuss roads projects favourably. There's very few people in this forum "anti car". I probably come across as one of them, and yet I'm in favour of the Dunkettle scheme, the N/M20, the M28, N22 (all schemes), N17, N26, N72, N2, etc etc.

I'm not even against a Galway bypass, as I've said a few times. This planned road isn't a bypass.

Seth Brundle

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120293553#Comment_120293553

The project application is being reviewed by ABP given that they didn't consider the Climate Action Plan when considering the application.

The City & County Councils however are still holding the view that the ring road is the way forwards. There currently are no alternative plans. So given that they aren't looking at alternatives, it could be years before they finally change tact and do something that will have tangible benefits to all.

Sam Russell

@[Deleted User]

Mod: This is not a thread for support for the GCRR - that thread is currently closed because the project is suspended, and so there is currently a fact free space on it.

This thread is for discussing alternative ways of reducing congestion by other means. That means that cycling infrastructure should be proposed, plus other active travel options.

I do not want to lead this discussion as a mod, but I will comment as a poster.

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120293556#Comment_120293556

Seth is a mod so I cannot mute him in case he speaks as a mod. I have no way of discerning that without unmuting him.

Sam’s right that this place isn’t for discussing the ring road, so i will leave you unanswered.

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120293586#Comment_120293586

What evidence have you that the ring road is everything? Is there nothing on other matters? The new Salmon Wier bridge? The bus gate? The bus lanes? Are they things I just imagine?

KrisW1001

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120292841#Comment_120292841

There’s been plenty of discussion of ways to reduce traffic on the threads for Limerick Northern Distributor Road, Cork N40 North, Cork Northern Distributor, and the M4 lane improvements threads, the Adare bypass/Foynes scheme, N/M20... I could go on. Posters there say the same things as are said about the Galway Ring Road, but because people generally stay on topic here, there’s almost no mention Galway at all.

I don’t know of a “National Solutions” thread on the Roads forum, so I can’t comment. But each city’s difficulties are different. Galway’s problems, which I think are the worst of any city in the state, for its size, are a combination of difficult geography and decades of criminally lax land-use planning that has created a sea of car-dependant super-low-density housing to the West; Cork’s problems are are down to a historical hijacking the national road network to use as a suburban commuter road network, creating the growth of car-dependent exurbs (what has happened with N40 after its many upgrades is the reason I changed my mind about N6 and now believe it’s a bad idea). Dublin has Cork’s problems multiplied, plus a strong anti-bus lobby in its more affluent areas, but Dublin at least has ambitious plans for public transport..

But we discuss those cities in their own threads. This one is about Galway, so you won’t hear much about those other places here.

Seth Brundle

What evidence have you that the ring road is everything? Is there nothing on other matters? The new Salmon Wier bridge? The bus gate? The bus lanes? Are they things I just imagine?

Can you show me actual coherent plans and how they will improve travel movements (although I probably shouldn't use the word "movement")?

Regarding the Salmon Weir Bridge work, have a read through this thread...

https://twitter.com/IrishCycle/status/1569403990466592768?s=20

That’s fair. I would have made the new bridge vehicular for busses & made the Salmon Wier for pedestrians & cyclists.

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120293706#Comment_120293706

That was everyone's thoughts on the new bridge but the cheaper option was chosen i.e. it's far cheaper to build a walking/cycling bridge than one that needs to be able to support the weight of buses etc

xckjoo

Is there any alternative traffic solutions being implemented by GCC at the moment that aren't being forced on them at a national level? Struggling to think of any. 30kmph speed limit might fit loosely in that category. The footbridge is one but with the problems outlined above. I doubt Bus Connect would be happening if they didn't have to. Have we had any new bus lanes, bus routes, cycle ways or footpath improvements in recent years? I'm sure there's something but I can't think of them.

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120293859#Comment_120293859

And I suppose that’s my point. “If you want action, you need to do it by force.” Council. Public. It’s all about what can be done to force them to live right.

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120293859#Comment_120293859

They've done a load of half measures. Even the GTS is full of them

Some good stuff they've done is around permeability and reopening of laneways

But then when people ask for pedestrian crossing, they build them, but not where they are needed i.e. away from desire lines, all in a bid to keep car drivers happy, the recent one at Blackrock is a good example of this

Even looking at some of the junctions which replaced the RAB's, they haven't put crossings on all arms. Tuam Rd is a good example, where a pedestrian ahs to go through 7 crossing, yes 7, to cross a road. Someone timed it previously, came in at 14 mins or something stupid like that, see the route from A to B below

Then there is the whole debacle around kissing gates. GCC were talking for years around doing survey because they didn't know where they all were. I went and did the survey myself and made a map of them, 70+.

GCC took the map, did up a report (phase 1) and said "yeah we should do another review (phase 2) to see which ones we are responsible for and then another report (phase 3) to see which ones they might actually, possibly, maybe, remove

In the meantime, they continued installing them around the city

serfboard

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120293634#Comment_120293634

I think it's worthwhile mentioning Dublin and Cork from this point of view - the roads that should have been bypasses, the M50 and N40, instead ended up becoming Ring Roads because of the fact that there are far too many junctions on them.

By contrast, the Waterford and Limerick bypasses are proper bypasses. The Waterford Bypass has four junctions, three of which connect to national roads and the fourth to the inner ring road - and that's it.

Ditto with Limerick, which has six junctions, five of which connect to National Roads, and one which connects to an inner ring road.

Using the above two models, Galway's original Outer Bypass plan (IIRC), followed the Waterford and Limerick models, whereas the new Ring Road is a junction for everyone, Cork/Dublin type of design.

GCC could have gone the right way (junctions at Furbo, Newcastle (N59) and Doughiska), but chose not to.

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120294684#Comment_120294684

I’m not one to go past a mod instruction, so I’d hope this question gets put in its rightful place or removed if needs be for the thread’s intent.

I take it the difference between Bypass & Ring Road is a RR has more junctions. What’s to stop any extraneous junctions becoming busgated to make the road a bypass in effect?

KrisW1001

Calling a road a “Ring road” (or “Orbital”) just describes the path that the road takes; it says nothing else about it. “Ring” roads go around the centre of a town or city, rather than into and out of the centre (those would be “Radial” roads). It doesn’t have to be a closed circle to be a “ring”, either, which is why some people prefer to describe these as “Orbital” routes to avoid the “but it’s not a circle” objections..

On the other hand, names like “Bypass”, “Distributor”, “Relief Road” describe the function of the road:

• A “Bypass” gives a way for long-distance traffic that has no interest in the town or city to completely avoid going near it. Usually it will be a good distance from the town with few intermediate junctions, very far apart (maybe just one for each side of the town).
• A “Distributor” (or “Collector/Distributor”, C/D) is more local, and is mainly for traffic in and around the city. It provides an express route from one part of a city to another. These can be any level of capacity, and they aren’t bad in themselves - especially if they act as public-transport and active-travel backbones, but high capacity, car-only C/D roads are a sign of car-dependency problems elsewhere.
• A “Relief Road” is smaller scale again, and usually provides a new route for traffic so that it will avoid a particularly congested street or streets.

These functions don’t have hard boundaries, and some roads will fit in two categories: Cork’s N40 provides a Bypass for East-West traffic in South Munster but it also acts as a Collector/Distributor for the southern suburbs. The N22 Macroom Bypass is a good example of a bypass road - it isn’t much benefit to people in and around Macroom except that it takes all the Cork/Kerry through-traffic out of their town’s main street.

The problem with calling Galway’s N6 a “Bypass” is that there’s nowhere beyond Galway that produces anything like the amount of traffic that would justify a road of this size. Functionally, it’s a Collector/Distributor, and it’s a huge one at that - the Eastern end is as wide as N40, for a city with less than half the population of Cork, and no through traffic.

A bypass of Galway would be very useful, and is needed, but it does not have to be a huge motorway.

there’s more to add re: the “no through traffic” lie (the phrase “chicken and egg “ come to mind)- but I’m restained by instruction from discussing it.

To bring things back on track as it were I wonder what people think of light rail on the Western side of the city? Where should it go?

Sam Russell

I would put a Luas from Claregalway to city centre, with a second line from Coolagh following B na dT to Knocknacarra, crossing the Corrib near the QCBridge. Of course a BRT or just buses would be just as good, and cheaper.

P&R provision spread across the route as appropriate.

Public transport is the key to solving congestion. Single occupancy cars take up too much road space to be sustainable - whether they are diesel or electric/battery powered.

xckjoo

I'd think buses would be the way to go too in terms of ease to implement but light rail is probably a better solution. I read something a few years ago about how we should be letting our transport infrastructure dictate the housing and not the other way round. Basically if we built light rail stations, new housing would naturally cluster near it. Right now we build housing and then scramble to supply it with bigger roads, etc. So if we were looking for new housing developments (e.g.) west of the city, start with picking a location for the station and then comes the planning permission for what would essentially be a village around it. Now you've new homes that aren't completely tied to using cars.

I thought it was an interesting point and a more forward thinking approach. But I doubt it would fly in Galway. GCC aren't exactly forward thinking.

serfboard

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120296423#Comment_120296423

There is no point in talking about light rail since it is not on offer to Galway from TII - Cork may get one in a decade's time, and Galway would be far behind that.

Also, there is very little evidence that GCC, even if they were to plan sensibly, would then actually provide the public transport corridor, or the public transport. Let's not forget that the WDR was designed to allow for future expansion to include Bus Lanes but, what, two decades later(?), there is no sign of any Bus Corridor on that road.

Adamstown in Dublin is an example of what you're talking about, but almost twenty years after it started, only a quarter of the planned houses were built.

xckjoo

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120297903#Comment_120297903

Oh ya. To be clear I don't think what I said is a runner in Ireland. We aren't organised enough for something like that. It would need a high level of long-term planning and inter-departmental cooperation and coordination between governmental/council bodies. We're also too invested in the private developer. I just thought it was an interesting take on how planning should probably work. It would be nice to see a bit of that mentality being adopted.

what_traffic

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120297903#Comment_120297903

13 years ago Council submitted a Bid to Dept for Transport for bus and cycles paths along full length of WDR for a mere €10million as part of Smarter Travel bid. No action on that since - but they have put in raised crossings along length of WDR at Roundabouts which have been great have to say.

serfboard

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120297953#Comment_120297953

Ah now - you're talking about proper planning and you're talking about Ireland. You only have to look at all the ribbon development in County Galway to realise that we don't go in for that kind of thing at all.

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120298202#Comment_120298202

I was pleased to see those raised crossings going in, but given a car can easily drive over them at close to 50k without issue, I wonder is a redesign in order. It should not be possible to drive over such a speed control at or close to the max speed limit

what_traffic

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120298373#Comment_120298373

I think I would narrow the carriageway first. Put in wider and raised cycle paths along WDR first before modifying the raised crossings themselves. Do get some vehicles speeding between the roundabout junctions but the raised crossings themselves have certainly reduced speeds that vehicles are taking the roundabout at.

SeanW

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120292412#Comment_120292412

I don't see how a city-wide 30kph limit is going to "solve traffic" considering that in traffic 30kph is a dream anyway. This just confirms my view that the only reason to have 30kph speed limits is to punish drivers. Sometimes 30kph limits are promoted on the basis of road safety, but these days road fatalities are so rare that they can be expressed in terms of low single digits per billion vehicle-kilometres. So that's BS. The environmental case does not exist either because holding to a 30kph limit over any distance uses more fuel than driving at a sensible speed. So that's a terrible idea unless you do not believe in anthropogenic climate change and think that petrol grows on trees. So that just leaves punitive value - lower speed limits disproportionately to punish people for driving.

Thanks for the confirmation.

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120303631#Comment_120303631

Again, it's really very simple

• Impacts at 30k lead to almost no deaths where the opposite is true at 50k
• Injuries in survivors of impacts at 30k are a lot less severe whereas injuries suffered from being hit at 50k can have life altering consequences
• Cycling in 30k traffic is a lot more appealing to a lot more people than cycling in 50k traffic
• Also less noise
• Less emissions

There's a lot to like.

SeanW

First of all, the question was of how to solve traffic. It's in the thread title: Galway Ring Road- are there better ways to solve traffic?

30kph has nothing to do with this because speed limits are theoretical when nobody is moving. As to your points:

• Point 1 is largely irrelevant in the Irish context where fatalities of any case are incredibly rare. Point 2 is broadly similar.
• As to cyclists, I never understood why they harp on about speed limits so much considering that they just use the footpath whenever they feel like it.
• As to emissions, that's a demonstrable falsehood. Holding a 30kph speed for any length of time wastes fuel. I proved that.

So there is no reason to apply 30kph limits on a broad basis. That just leaves a punitive case, which you expressly make by putting 30kph limits under the heading of "Making the car the least attractive option." I understand your logic - if you have rules that serve no purpose except to cause frustration and waste people's time and fuel, then yes, that may indeed disincentivise some from driving. But it won't to anything about traffic congestion, will have a negative effect on the climate, won't make any difference to lawbreaking cyclists, and won't do very much for road safety considering that almost all drivers in this country will never even be involved in - let alone the cause of - a fatal incident of any description.

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120303928#Comment_120303928

Nope, to, well, all of that

Incidentally your opinion is not shared by GCC and Councillors as they have already approved the 30k limits, they're just working on the finer details before it gets applied in 2024

https://www.galwaydaily.com/news/council-votes-to-include-30km-h-speed-limits-for-schools-in-review/

SeanW

No, to, well, what exactly? As to Galway City Council introducing 30kph limits, that doesn't prove it's a good idea, lots of bad ideas have been implemented throughout history for various reasons.

xckjoo

A slower speed improves flow and reduces the bottlenecks. It's the same reason you're told not to run to the exit in a fire.

It wouldn't have the same effect as something like improved PT but it would improve things. That's assuming it's enforced and people stick to it. The other thing that would help is stopping red light jumpers and people blocking junctions. That has a huge knock on impact. And people moving off faster when the lights go green. Don't think that last one is a law, just reduces the junction throughput and is really annoying 😁

KrisW1001

^^@xckjoo Exactly!

Under a lower, 30km/h limit, you do have slower travel time between each light-controlled junction, but in most urban areas, waiting at lights is the larger contributor to journey times, so there’s no actual loss of time, and there will usually be a gain, as the lower speed makes the junctions more efficient (as you say, lower limits reduce the number of people running red lights, which is a major problem in congested streets, and can quickly reduce a whole neighbourhood to a standstill as more people ignore the traffic lights and just go whenever there’s a space), so overall you will probably get through the area slightly faster than if a 50km/h limit applied. And as a bonus, you use less fuel. And another advantage: you’ve more time to react to hazards. And again: even if someone does something completely reckless and you end up in a crash, the chances are nobody will be seriously injured.

The only disadvantage is that Jeremy Clarkson hates the-- no, hang on, that’s another advantage.

TnxM17

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120303631#Comment_120303631

This is a quote from the article that you linked to:

"For velocities below 30 km/h the fuel consumption is quite high (above 8 l/100km – 29.34 mpg). Unfortunately this speed range is typical for cars circulating in a city – urban environment. Cars are subjected to a continuous start and stop motion due to junctions and traffic lights. Furthermore, at the main city roads (at the center of the city for example) there is very often traffic congestion. These two parameters – as well as some others – lead to a very low average speed, and, consequently, to high fuel consumption and emissions."

SeanW

A lot to unpack here. Firstly the fire exit example. I'm familiar with the idea and something like that is being tried on the M50 with variable speed limits. The difference though is that the hypothetical fire exit is clear and the idea on the M50 is to keep things moving continuously. That's not the case where a group is going to end up waiting at lights no matter what, and it remains true that most won't get anywhere near either 30kph or 50kph during serious congestion. The other problems identified by both @xckjoo and @KrisW1001 are not directly connected, e.g. red light running and yellow box junction blocking. They should be addressed separately.

As to the comment that: "even if someone does something completely reckless" again this does not really apply to Ireland. For reference, when last the RSA published statistics, there were a little over 2.5 million Fully Category B (car) licenses in this country, and a total of just over 2.8 million people with some kind of license (Full Motorcycle, Bus, Truck, Learner permit for something etc) as of 2016. The odds of any driver being involved in - let alone the cause of - a serious incident during a journey are infinitesimal, even over a driver's lifetime very small, and it's very difficult on a factual basis to claim that road safety in this country is a wide scale systemic issue. Serious/Fatal incidents are so rare in this country that an argument can be made that we should punish those who cause them, rather than 2.5 or 2.8 million people that were not involved in, let alone the cause of them.

As for the argument that we should force 2.8 million people to crawl everyone for no reason just to piss off Jeremy Clarkson ... frankly I'm having difficulty figuring out how best to respond to something so moronic and puerile.

Finally, it is not true of every road in an urban area that one is subject to continuous stop-start motion. In Ireland there are many roads in urban areas that have urban limits where you may be able to travel anywhere from 500M - 2KM at a continuous speed, and the data are clear that in these cases, higher speeds are more fuel efficient up to around 60kph. One example is in Galway, the N59 from the last set of traffic lights to the city limits at the Glenlo Abbey, or in Dublin the R109 between Islandbrige and Chapelizod. Go around the country to smaller, less dense urban areas and you will find plenty more of such roads. Again, a broad application of 30kph limits on routes like these will cause more emissions, not less due to the laws of physics.

what_traffic

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120306891#Comment_120306891

Your Galway example is perhaps not that useful. You are not travelling through sets of traffic lights. Probably better example is an area with many traffic lights like Terryland or Seamus Quirke Road, or roads with lots of juctions/houses on it like Bohermore or Shantall Road. Most of the traffic lights in the City are currently configured for a 50kmph average speed. They can also be adjusted to 30kmph if need be.

Definitely the 30kmph ZONE that the City Council are proposing should also include the Roads on the perimeter which is been kept at 50kmph. Especially roads like the Lower and Upper Newcastle Road. Spanish Arch, Wolfe Tone Bridge, Fr Griffen Road .

Any wide Roads will need to re-engineered to be 30kmph - for example the Siobhan McKenna Road in Westside for it to be an effective 30kmph ZONE

Unrealistic

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120306891#Comment_120306891

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120306942#Comment_120306942

That Galway example is also very badly chosen when you consider that only a few weeks have passed since a lady crossing the road at that location was killed by a driver..................

what_traffic

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120307115#Comment_120307115

True. Just trying to cross a very wide road. The N59 within the City Boundary needs to be given a major road diet. Needs re-engineering IMHO and then put in 30kmph. The Cycle paths will narrow the carriageway widths. Thomas Hynes Road and Clifden Road are ideal for it - will be cheap enough to do. TII would need to get on board.

Going back to why lower speed limits are used in an urban area, one of the main reason the roads engineers do it, it's not for people on foot or bike but to get greater throughput of vehicles through the junctions.

Unrealistic

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120306891#Comment_120306891

@SeanW "The odds of any driver being involved in - let alone the cause of - a serious incident during a journey are infinitesimal, even over a driver's lifetime very small, and it's very difficult on a factual basis to claim that road safety in this country is a wide scale systemic issue. Serious/Fatal incidents are so rare in this country that an argument can be made that we should punish those who cause them, rather than 2.5 or 2.8 million people that were not involved in, let alone the cause of them."

You can keep repeating your argument that there is some tiny minority of drivers with an exceptionally dangerous driving style that makes them stand out from all the rest, and that serious injuries and deaths on Irish roads are caused by this identifiable tiny cohort, but no matter how many times you repeat it, it's still nonsensical.

Collisions generally happen because of dangerous behaviour that is exhibited by huge swathe of drivers on our roads. Most times they get away with it but then, that one time, some other circumstance works against them and the results are catastrophic. One example from personal experience; I cycle to work most days along a stretch of country road with four blind bends in relatively quick succession. At least once on every journey a driver will decide to gamble that there is no one coming around the bend towards us and overtake me on the bend, rather than waiting a few seconds until we're back on a straight section and they can pass safely. If another driver is coming around the bend, and is still just out of sight while the overtaking driver has gone past the point of no return, then the outcome is likely to be fatal for someone (me most likely seeing as I'm the one not in a protective metal box). Doing this manoeuvre is completely illegal but most of the time there are no consequences, other than to my blood pressure, because there isn't a car coming around the corner. Sometimes there are close calls where an oncoming car has to hit the brakes and/or the overtaking driver has to brake hard and pull back in behind me. Two of those have been very close, one van driver very narrowly avoiding a head on collision because the oncoming driver braked to a complete stop so quickly, and the reckless driver of an ancient Toyota coming within inches of taking me out when she had to brake hard and pull left as a car came around the corner.

A close relative of mine, and those in the car with her, were seriously injured by an oncoming driver taking a chance and overtaking when he couldn't see enough clear road to be sure he could complete the manoeuvre safely. More recently, in Wexford last week, a man was tragically killed and two other drivers and two kids were seriously injured in a collision involving two cars and a tractor. We won't know the full details until an inquest is held but the details already released make it sound like it has many similar elements. These collisions don't happen because a tiny minority of drivers do something astoundingly reckless that the rest of the drivers in the country wouldn't dream of doing. They happen because a huge number of drivers every day break the law and take a gamble that there won't be another vehicle, or a person walking or on a bike, in a particular space and moving at particular trajectory. The drivers who lose that gamble aren't aberrations and your call to punish those for whom the gamble has not paid but ignore the many other drivers exhibiting similar behaviour, is completely wrongheaded.

Lastly, regarding the assertion that "it's very difficult on a factual basis to claim that road safety in this country is a wide scale systemic issue", I think you've been called up on this before but it's worth repeating if you are going to continue to make this groundless claim. Road safety is not just about reducing the deaths and serious injuries that do happen. It's also about addressing the journeys that don't happen at all because the roads here are so hostile. Ireland has some of the worst stats in Europe for the proportion of short journeys undertaken by car, for the number of kids being driving to school etc. A huge part of that is that parents feel compelled to drive their kids to school because they perceive the roads to be too dangerous for them to walk or cycle, and adults cite safety fears around driver behaviour and poor infrastructure as the primary reasons why they choose not to cycle on short journeys, leaving the weather in third place. It's not my analogy, but it's a good one; you don't judge the safety of a shark infested swimming pool by its low number of drownings. Allowing people to feel they can comfortably choose to walk or ride a bike to get to where they need to go is a critical measure of road safety.

SeanW

@what_traffic the N59 in Galway is basically a rural road, with one-off houses, farms, leading out to what looks like a high end rural retreat ...

@Unrealistic I'm not going to defend genuinely dangerous drivers. If someone is going to do crazy things like regularly overtake on blind bends, they shouldn't be on the road. But if the roads were as full of reckless gamblers as you claim, it would be borne out in statistics. It's not. And I never claimed that there was an identifiable cohort of maniacs that could be easily identified, only that fatal/serious incidents are so rare in this country that virtually all drivers will never even be involved in one let alone the cause - which is an irrefutable fact. My opinion thusly is that this cohort - almost the entirety of the 2.5/2.8 million - should not be collectively punished for the small number of incidents that do occur, instead the culpable parties should be.

Regarding the "sharks in a swimming pool" analogy, my first answer to that would be the fact that people are not dying is ipso facto a good thing. My second answer to that is that is that those using the analogy to promote 30kph speed limits are trying to punish 2.5/2.8 million motorists for accidents that not only were they not involved in, but that only ever happened in someone's mind! And as a routine pedestrian, I find the case overstated in any event. Granted this is anecdotal, personally there are only a handful of types of environments I would not walk in, such as main roads in rural areas with no hard shoulder or footpath, but I have little cause do so in any case.

Regarding your point about schools, none of the usual complaints about 50kph speed limits or "car centric culture" or whatever explain some of the issues surrounding schools. I've referenced in other threads how other countries plan education such that even if their society is dramatically more car centric than Ireland, they don't have the same problems at schools. I have specific evidence for root causes that are not transport related, but as I regard it as off-topic, I may post another thread about it.

TnxM17

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120307675#Comment_120307675

Serious question, where is it that you (or these motorists) going to that they need to drive up to 50kph in a city centre?

Cities should be for people to live, work, socialise, shop around - having a 30kph limit would improve the quality of life within the city, as well as the safety benefits.

SeanW

My objection is to a broad application of 30kph limits, such as the idea of 30kph as default. They have a place for sure, residential estates, some core central streets, some places where there is some specific problem etc. But on arterial roads, especially further from core central areas they would do nothing but waste people's time and fuel.

markpb

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120307720#Comment_120307720

There’s a reasonable amount of evidence that at lower average speeds, drivers are more likely to be courteous to other road users (including other drivers). More likely to let pedestrians cross the road, more likely to wait for cyclists until there’s room to get past safety, more likely to let drivers join from a side road, etc. So it’s not entirely true to say that lower speeds wastes people’s time, it saves other people time too. And given that average speed in cities dictated primarily by stopping time, not moving speed, a higher speed limit has very little ability to save a driver time at all.

KrisW1001

@SeanW The Jeremy Clarkson comment was clearly humorous: I’m disappointed that you decided to take it seriously.

When I said “do something reckless” I was referring to pedestrians and cyclists, who often put themselves directly in the path of oncoming cars though a lack of observation.

You don’t give a number for “serious/fatal accidents” when you claim they’re vanishingly rare, so let me add some data: The latest data, 2022, is 156 fatalities in 150 incidents. Drivers were are the most often killed (60), then pedestrians (42, a more than doubling of 2021) [source: PowerPoint Presentation (rsa.ie)]. However, this is incomplete data, and 2022 was still not a “normal” year.

In 2019, the last year for which figures are available, and the last “normal” year until this one, there 129 fatal incidents, and 140 people killed, but there were also 5,700 non-fatal collisions, causing injuries to 7598 people. Taking your 2.8 million figure for licence-holders (which is correct for 2019, by the way), that’s one collision causing injury per 491 licenced drivers. “Infinitesimal” is definitely not the right word. [and here’s the source for those figures: road-casualties-and-collisions-in-ireland-2019.pdf (rsa.ie) ].

And the argument for 30 km/h limits is not a blanket one, and never has been. Setting speed limits based on observed traffic flow is standard practice, not some shadowy “punishment”. Where there are areas that are under 50 km/h limits but have average traffic speeds below 30 km/h, then setting the lower limit in these cases has been shown, time and time again to improve throughput. Your core argument seems to be that slowing traffic down in these cases will cause needless delays and wasted fuel; if that is your objection, it is baseless.

what_traffic

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120307675#Comment_120307675

No its not. The N59 in Galway City is of a National Road Standard construction within the Galway City. It ONLY gets "rural" at the very perimeter of the City Boundary at Bushypark, West of Kelehans pub where the City Boundary actually ends (Glenlo Abbey Hotel is in the County). A lot of ribbon development on roads off the N59 in this area for sure.

On a side note Kelehans pub which is currently getting renovated and will reopen soon.

Great news since the Westwood Hotel was demolished and in its place we now have Student Apartments in Dangan.

xckjoo

A few general comments.

1) 30kmph shouldn't be blanket applied but should be where applicable for safety and efficiency. 2) Even minor fender benders have a bit impact on traffic so should be reduced as much as possible (and slower speeds help this). 3) stop-starting is massively inefficient and speeding increases this. There's multiple streteches of road around the city with lights at each end that are timed to match max speed limits but people don't notice because they speed on the road and then sit at a red light and slowing things down. There's also good videos online showing the ripple effect on traffic if drivers have to make big adjustments like rapid slow downs. 4) improving driving standards would reduce traffic a lot but it's a difficult one to tackle. Enforcement of existing rules would be the easist start. 5) I've no problem with Bothar na dTreabh speed limit being increased but also have not problem with it staying the same. Speed limits should probably be reviewed regularly and adjusted on the basis of safety and efficiency.

There's no silver bullet to fix the traffic issues in the city but there's lots of small things that can be done to improve it. Things that GCC could be pursuing now without any changes to road infrastructure

Sam Russell

Quote: There's no silver bullet to fix the traffic issues in the city but there's lots of small things that can be done to improve it. Things that GCC could be pursuing now without any changes to road infrastructure

Mod: That is precisely the point of this thread - not complaining about speed limits, or other actions suggested by posters.