Galway traffic

flazio

jammiedodgers wrote: »

I'm sure I could find 100's of thousands more who were in favour of it who didn't know about it. See, I can make up numbers too.



Are politicians elected to represent business interests or to represent the people that voted for them?

Business owners have the same vote as you do.

ben.schlomo

?Cee?view wrote: »

Would that be such a bad thing? Back to one way down Shop Street with plenty of room for segregated bike lanes and footpaths. It would ease traffic around the Square, Francis Street and University Road considerably.

Galway City Centre before pedestrianisation was a far nicer and characterful place than the mess it is now. Now it’s pretty much the same as any UK High Street; dominated by international multiples and phone shops.

So you're gonna magically fit a lane for cars, a bike lane, two footpaths and room for social distancing queues outside all the businesses. I'm assuming your post was sarcasm or tongue firmly in cheek. If not don't tell the buskers, they thought the previous restrictions on them were bad.

jammiedodgers

flazio wrote: »

Business owners have the same vote as you do.

Based on this decision it would seem their vote is worth a lot more than mine.

?Cee?view

ben.schlomo wrote: »

So you're gonna magically fit a lane for cars, a bike lane, two footpaths and room for social distancing queues outside all the businesses. I'm assuming your post was sarcasm or tongue firmly in cheek. If not don't tell the buskers, they thought the previous restrictions on them were bad.

You do know that it was a two way street?

Different kind of emails going to the Councillors on the other side of the country

https://twitter.com/DeirdreNiF/status/1283151336230592514?s=19

ben.schlomo

?Cee?view wrote: »

You do know that it was a two way street?

Matters what it is now, the times we are in. Not what it was 20/30/40/50 years ago. If you can fit all the above things in I'd be amazed. All a moot point anyway as it wouldn't happen, isn't needed and would be a retrograde step.

Mrs OBumble

fergiesfolly wrote: »

You're attitude to this city is so selfish as to be unbelievable. You moved here some years ago and so the city has to develop around your own little agenda.
You live in a city centre you expect noise.
Most cities want more people to live, work and shop in the city centre. The best way to do that for everyone's benefit is pedestrianisation.

Yes, I'm an immigrant. How dare I express an opinion. Indeed. How dare I notice the people living around me - or advocate for people living in the city centre (eg the elderly and disabled in the council houses) rather than just partying there. This, frankly, is the absolute opposite of selfish. As I've said like a zillion times, I don't even own a car. I walk a lot. I used shared transport. But I don't expect that everyone can do the same as me, all the time.

Of course I expect noise. Street sweepers at 5am. The "I'lll kill you" warriors at 3am. Hordes coming out of nightclubs at 2am. Deliveries from 7am. Glass bins about 9am. Scrap-steel being loaded onto boats in the docks at any time, due to tides. Roadworks often at night, because traffic won't allow them during the day. But that doesn't mean it's ok to design every single semi-residential street as an area where people are encouraged to gather and make even more noise.

We have seen, very graphically, what happens in pedestrian areas in this country. Large drunken crowds gather. People p*ss, puke, and sh*t in whatever spots are available - including other people's front doors. Doesn't matter whether the area is called Dame Lane, or Claddagh Quay, or Shop Street in Race Week.

Current public health requirements mean that we need to design to discourage this from happening.

And rampant pedestrianisation is not the way to design an area for everyone's benefit, or make it possible for more people to live there. It very explicitly makes a place un-liveable for people at times in their lives when they cannot walk much, or cannot carry stuff. It makes ground floor units even less attractive to live in .

fergiesfolly wrote: »

Also, who plans a city around a once in a generation pandemic?
So, you're planning for the next 12-18 months. What about the next 20-30 years?

Honestly, I cannot decide if you're totally self absorbed, or trolling.

Are you having a laugh? Pandemics have historically had a great deal of impact on city design. Start reading about it here - https://www.ucdavis.edu/curiosity-gap/how-have-pandemics-historically-changed-cities/ - there are plenty of other articles if you google 'em. There's no reason to believe that this one will be any different, or that it's impact will magically be gone in 18 months.

Having different opinions to yours, and being willing to express them, is not trolling.

fergiesfolly

Mrs OBumble wrote: »

Yes, I'm an immigrant. How dare I express an opinion. Indeed. How dare I notice the people living around me - or advocate for people living in the city centre (eg the elderly and disabled in the council houses) rather than just partying there. This, frankly, is the absolute opposite of selfish. As I've said like a zillion times, I don't even own a car. I walk a lot. I used shared transport. But I don't expect that everyone can do the same as me, all the time.

Of course I expect noise. Street sweepers at 5am. The "I'lll kill you" warriors at 3am. Hordes coming out of nightclubs at 2am. Deliveries from 7am. Glass bins about 9am. Scrap-steel being loaded onto boats in the docks at any time, due to tides. Roadworks often at night, because traffic won't allow them during the day. But that doesn't mean it's ok to design every single semi-residential street as an area where people are encouraged to gather and make even more noise.

We have seen, very graphically, what happens in pedestrian areas in this country. Large drunken crowds gather. People p*ss, puke, and sh*t in whatever spots are available - including other people's front doors. Doesn't matter whether the area is called Dame Lane, or Claddagh Quay, or Shop Street in Race Week.

Current public health requirements mean that we need to design to discourage this from happening.

And rampant pedestrianisation is not the way to design an area for everyone's benefit, or make it possible for more people to live there. It very explicitly makes a place un-liveable for people at times in their lives when they cannot walk much, or cannot carry stuff. It makes ground floor units even less attractive to live in .





Are you having a laugh? Pandemics have historically had a great deal of impact on city design. Start reading about it here - https://www.ucdavis.edu/curiosity-gap/how-have-pandemics-historically-changed-cities/ - there are plenty of other articles if you google 'em. There's no reason to believe that this one will be any different, or that it's impact will magically be gone in 18 months.

Having different opinions to yours, and being willing to express them, is not trolling.

Last point first... There is no need in the modern era to change this citys design to to cope with Covid. This current pandemic will be history within 18 months. To plan a city around it's impact is absurd.

The elderly, invalid and physically disabled live in pedestrianised areas of towns and cities all over the world and they're catered for. The same can be done here. My parents are in their 80s and get around just fine with public transport, walking etc.
There are elderly people living in the city centre their entire lives and I bet they don't complain about it as much as you.

The vast majority of people enjoying nights out are well behaved and respectful but you always have those who can't/ won't consider others. You manage and police areas and people. Extra policing in problem areas, early morning clean up crews.
This is a young people's city. It's reputation is built on having a young vibrant population who enjoy life and celebrate. To change that destroys the city.

You'll only be happy when the rest of us tiptoe in at 9am each morning, tiptoe out again at 6pm and leave you to enjoy city living in peace and quiet.

xckjoo

fergiesfolly wrote: »

Last point first... There is no need in the modern era to change this citys design to to cope with Covid. This current pandemic will be history within 18 months. To plan a city around it's impact is absurd.

The elderly, invalid and physically disabled live in pedestrianised areas of towns and cities all over the world and they're catered for. The same can be done here. My parents are in their 80s and get around just fine with public transport, walking etc.
There are elderly people living in the city centre their entire lives and I bet they don't complain about it as much as you.

The vast majority of people enjoying nights out are well behaved and respectful but you always have those who can't/ won't consider others. You manage and police areas and people. Extra policing in problem areas, early morning clean up crews.
This is a young people's city. It's reputation is built on having a young vibrant population who enjoy life and celebrate. To change that destroys the city.

You'll only be happy when the rest of us tiptoe in at 9am each morning, tiptoe out again at 6pm and leave you to enjoy city living in peace and quiet.

I mentioned this before somewhere but stopping walking is a major issue for the elderly and has serious consequences for their health; cognitive and physical. One of the primary drivers for it is fear. Fear of not being able to safely walk without falling. It leads a lot of them to lean heavily on driving everywhere or just not leaving the house. Or pedestrian infrastructure is so god awful it's amazing we don't have more injuries. Similarly with the disabled. If you've ever tried getting a buggy around this city you'll know how difficult it is. Constantly having to out onto the road to get around cars parked on footpaths, etc. I don't know how anyone with reduced mobility ever ventures outside in this city. We all have to walk at some stage in our journeys, unless we make every business a drive-thru....

fergiesfolly

Well I know my mother walks the length of town, going to mass, shopping, going for a coffee. Her biggest worries in town are around the Latin quarter where cars zip around alongside walkers and cyclists. She's never sure where the next car will appear from.
Getting the elderly out and about, keeping them mobile is vital. Hard to do when they're fearing for their safety.

?Cee?view

fergiesfolly wrote: »

There is no need in the modern era to change this citys design to to cope with Covid. This current pandemic will be history within 18 months. To plan a city around it's impact is absurd.

At best that's a pretty naive view. I'm no scientist, but through work I work with epidemiologists and biologists of various different types. Sure, Covid may be "history" in 18 months (not very likely), but our future will see far more occurrences such as we've seen over the last few months. Our "new normal" will be having to change our lives and the way we live to avoid endemic disease becoming epidemic. The surge in international travel over the last generation or two, and the societal changes we have seen have contributed to where we are now. Disease spreads far too easily.

I distinctly recall a conversation with a US epidemiologist about two years ago when he was slagging their buffoon of a President. His take was that Trump and Cos. climate denialism was pretty irrelevant anyway. The likelihood was that a viral illness would wipe us out before climate change has the chance.

We need to design how we live and move people around this future.

fergiesfolly

?Cee?view wrote: »

At best that's a pretty naive view. I'm no scientist, but through work I work with epidemiologists and biologists of various different types. Sure, Covid may be "history" in 18 months (not very likely), but our future will see far more occurrences such as we've seen over the last few months. Our "new normal" will be having to change our lives and the way we live to avoid endemic disease becoming epidemic. The surge in international travel over the last generation or two, and the societal changes we have seen have contributed to where we are now. Disease spreads far too easily.

I distinctly recall a conversation with a US epidemiologist about two years ago when he was slagging their buffoon of a President. His take was that Trump and Cos. climate denialism was pretty irrelevant anyway. The likelihood was that a viral illness would wipe us out before climate change has the chance.

We need to design how we live and move people around this future.

In the context of this thread about TRAFFIC in Galway, can you give some examples of how we'd need to change the layout of the city and transport network to cope with this and possible future pandemics.

Can you show me where other cities have changed their layouts and transport networks because of Covid.

And could we just imagine Shop Street of the 70s and 80s where there was large volumes of traffic and all pedestrian traffic was on two narrow footpaths. How would social distancing work in that scenario.

CowboyTed

xckjoo wrote: »

So as I said before, that 20% number was a national target set by the government in 2008/2009. AFAIK there was never a serious attempt to achieve this by GCC. I'll be gracious to them and point out that we entered a serious recession around the time this target was set out so a lot of budgets were tightened. But I've never seen a single document where they set out a plan to achieve this target. I haven't read them all though so am open to correction on this if someone has a link.



60% of commutes are by car because there's no serious alternative for most people, not because it's the optimum solution to move people around. I think the proof of that is all the moaning people do about traffic and the number of hours of peoples lives spent in it. At the moment the options are 1) sit in your car in traffic going directly to/from work, 2) wait for a bus, sit on a bus in the same traffic and take an indirect route to work or 3) cycle past the traffic but risk injury from other road users. If the bus was going to get you to work faster would you not take it? Yes the population density is an issue and that's what's led to this situation where the whole city is constantly clogged with cars and more and more road space is given over to them. But if we had Park and Ride hubs outside the city, people could drive to them to get the bus, much like people in the city would need to walk to the bus stop and not expect it to pick them up at their door.



I wouldn't have a problem with the bridge being built if I saw any reason to believe it will help with traffic. But even the engineers hired to justify its existence seriously struggled to come up with anything. All their research pointed towards it exacerbating the problem.






I do feel for the businesses in that their probably struggling and so fearful that any change will harm them, but they're doing themselves no favors. Any research I've seen has found that this kind of thing would increase spending. And I'd think the business in Salthill would be particularly suited to foot traffic. There's nothing I can think of that would need a car to carry the things home (e.g. homeware, appliances and supermarkets). They might lose nox as a customer but he's gone to ground anyway so his one man crusade to keep Galway businesses alive is on hold

What I am saying before we go all out on millions for new cycle lanes, lets just ask why the ones already built aren't being used...

What is a realistic target for cycling in Galway? Public transport too...

When some one writes down 20% they have stated something unrealistic and unrealistic target leads to unrealistic plans... Unrealistic plans means no plan at all... We need a plan...

What is the purpose of a cycle lane from Salthill to Wolftone bridge if cycling doesn't increase?

?Cee?view

fergiesfolly wrote: »

In the context of this thread about TRAFFIC in Galway, can you give some examples of how we'd need to change the layout of the city and transport network to cope with this and possible future pandemics.

Refer to Mrs. OB's comments on PT and pedestrianisation

fergiesfolly wrote: »

Can you show me where other cities have changed their layouts and transport networks because of Covid.

No

fergiesfolly wrote: »

And could we just imagine Shop Street of the 70s and 80s where there was large volumes of traffic and all pedestrian traffic was on two narrow footpaths. How would social distancing work in that scenario.

It wouldn't. So?

xckjoo

"State’s sustainable transport ‘failure’ reported to OECD
An Taisce says goals including a reduction in car commuting, have not been achieved"



Some quotes (emphasis mine in case people think it's all "hippy environmental sh1t")

“The results of failed transport policy action and investment will now bear long term cost in greenhouse gases, air and noise pollution, congestion, car based sprawl, and inadequate safe walking,cycling and public transport investment. Walkers and cyclists will face increased injury risk, and those who would like to cycle are discouraged by an unsafe polluting car based environment,”he said.

“The 2009 sustainable mobility targets were not advanced because an ‘All of Government ’ policy for an entire decade was not put in place. Instead investment was wasted in over scaled road projects such as providing extra lanes on the M7 from Naas to Newbridge and entering into a contract for a dual carriageway from Castlebar to Westport, which will simply increase car traffic and congestion,” Mr Lumley said.

Thargor

"Rampant pedestrianisation" lol.

Ah Westport, the prettiest car park in Ireland

ben.schlomo

CowboyTed wrote: »

What I am saying before we go all out on millions for new cycle lanes, lets just ask why the ones already built aren't being used...

What is a realistic target for cycling in Galway? Public transport too...

When some one writes down 20% they have stated something unrealistic and unrealistic target leads to unrealistic plans... Unrealistic plans means no plan at all... We need a plan...

What is the purpose of a cycle lane from Salthill to Wolftone bridge if cycling doesn't increase?

The current cycle lanes are mostly a disaster. The one on Doughiska road runs through bus stops, at which point there is no cycle lane, so that renders it unusable and dangerous in terms of potential collision with bus users. No others on the East side of the city, at all! I don't count bus lanes as you're treated like a nuisance when using them. The Headford rd one is decent and I don't go over the Westside often enough to comment. There's another classic from the Galmont down as far as Mor Oil, an absolute waste of time as it just starts and stops into the road. Build proper cycle lanes and they'll be used, simple.

gordongekko

CowboyTed wrote: »

What I am saying before we go all out on millions for new cycle lanes, lets just ask why the ones already built aren't being used...

They arent used because they dont go anywhere unless you want to merge into heavy traffic at a busy roundabout or a busy main road.

You cant get from the centre of town to anywhere via a cycle lane.

CowboyTed

gordongekko wrote: »

They arent used because they dont go anywhere unless you want to merge into heavy traffic at a busy roundabout or a busy main road.

You cant get from the centre of town to anywhere via a cycle lane.

ben.schlomo wrote: »

The current cycle lanes are mostly a disaster. The one on Doughiska road runs through bus stops, at which point there is no cycle lane, so that renders it unusable and dangerous in terms of potential collision with bus users. No others on the East side of the city, at all! I don't count bus lanes as you're treated like a nuisance when using them. The Headford rd one is decent and I don't go over the Westside often enough to comment. There's another classic from the Galmont down as far as Mor Oil, an absolute waste of time as it just starts and stops into the road. Build proper cycle lanes and they'll be used, simple.

They are fair points but I see no changes to these in the plans...

I will point out that there is a cycle lane from Knocknacarra to Ballybrit Industrial Est.

That is full Cycle Lane all the way... Sorry just look at it's usage... It is pitiful...

This very heavy traffic during peak hours... Please explain that...

Sorry but I must ask again. How can we keep spending money on an unrealistic target. Thus an unrealistic plan...
Doing this means we have no cost benefit analysis. This is incompetence..

This is not anti Cycling, it is about behaving professionally...

gordongekko

CowboyTed wrote: »

They are fair points but I see no changes to these in the plans...

I will point out that there is a cycle lane from Knocknacarra to Ballybrit Industrial Est.

That is full Cycle Lane all the way... Sorry just look at it's usage... It is pitiful...

This very heavy traffic during peak hours... Please explain that...

Sorry but I must ask again. How can we keep spending money on an unrealistic target. Thus an unrealistic plan...
Doing this means we have no cost benefit analysis. This is incompetence..

This is not anti Cycling, it is about behaving professionally...

That's a crazy cycle to do daily if your company doesn't have showers.

xckjoo

CowboyTed wrote: »

They are fair points but I see no changes to these in the plans...

I will point out that there is a cycle lane from Knocknacarra to Ballybrit Industrial Est.

That is full Cycle Lane all the way... Sorry just look at it's usage... It is pitiful...

This very heavy traffic during peak hours... Please explain that...

Sorry but I must ask again. How can we keep spending money on an unrealistic target. Thus an unrealistic plan...
Doing this means we have no cost benefit analysis. This is incompetence..

This is not anti Cycling, it is about behaving professionally...

As I already pointed out, there isn't a cycle lane from Knocknacarra to Ballybrit. There's a series of unconnected cycle lanes that are poorly designed, maintained and often leave you in a very vulnerable position on the road. What you're highlighting without realising is just how haphazard and tokenistic the GCC attempts have been to provide cycling infrastructure in the city. In spite of this we still have people cycling daily. Imagine what might happen if we had infrastructure that didn't make you feel like you were risking your life every time you left the house.


There has been no serious attempt by GCC to achieve any targets in terms of alternative means of transport other than private car usage, so zero euros have spent. If you have evidence to the contrary please share it as I've looked and haven't found anything. Where's the cost benefit analysis to the continued prioritisation of private car usage over all other forms of transport? Everything I've seen has suggested it's has the highest cost to communities, retail and commute times so I'd love to see it.

gordongekko wrote: »

That's a crazy cycle to do daily if your company doesn't have showers.

In an old job I had, one of the senior managers used to cycle to Ballybrit every day from somewhere around Moycullen. Admittedly there was a shower, but an ebike would effectively remove the need for that if needs be.

ben.schlomo

CowboyTed wrote: »

They are fair points but I see no changes to these in the plans...

I will point out that there is a cycle lane from Knocknacarra to Ballybrit Industrial Est.

That is full Cycle Lane all the way... Sorry just look at it's usage... It is pitiful...

This very heavy traffic during peak hours... Please explain that...

Sorry but I must ask again. How can we keep spending money on an unrealistic target. Thus an unrealistic plan...
Doing this means we have no cost benefit analysis. This is incompetence..

This is not anti Cycling, it is about behaving professionally...

The stretch of it on Bothar na dTreabh is very badly maintained, glass and debris strewn over the surface, the surface worn away in places, roots growing through the surface. Why would you use this when it's detrimental to your bike and possibly your safety.

ratracer

CowboyTed wrote: »

They are fair points but I see no changes to these in the plans...

I will point out that there is a cycle lane from Knocknacarra to Ballybrit Industrial Est.

That is full Cycle Lane all the way... Sorry just look at it's usage... It is pitiful...

This very heavy traffic during peak hours... Please explain that...

Sorry but I must ask again. How can we keep spending money on an unrealistic target. Thus an unrealistic plan...
Doing this means we have no cost benefit analysis. This is incompetence..

This is not anti Cycling, it is about behaving professionally...

My brother uses that route very regularly, as it’s faster to cycle than travel by car. Unfortunately the cycle lane ends at Ballybrit and then has to travel in the hard shoulder of the dual carriageway until western motors, where cars looking to turn left always use the hard shoulder as an extra lane without a care in the world for anyone else.

I would also comeback to a point mentioned earlier, that you and others refer to frequently. Motorists sitting in traffic say the bus lane is empty/ no cyclists etc, IMO, that’s because those lanes don’t back up and hence seem underused. I see plenty of cyclists commuting along that cycle corridor, and also out the Dublin Rd to Oranmore.

CowboyTed

gordongekko wrote: »

That's a crazy cycle to do daily if your company doesn't have showers.

Absolutely agree... Maybe we should be looking at other ways to help...

I am not saying do this instead but we can't keep building empty cycle lanes...

Realistic targets and then lets ask the question you did there...

There is also the legislation around E-bikes... There is ten times more e-bikes sold in Germany than E-Cars(I was told)...

CowboyTed

ratracer wrote: »

My brother uses that route very regularly, as it’s faster to cycle than travel by car. Unfortunately the cycle lane ends at Ballybrit and then has to travel in the hard shoulder of the dual carriageway until western motors, where cars looking to turn left always use the hard shoulder as an extra lane without a care in the world for anyone else.

I would also comeback to a point mentioned earlier, that you and others refer to frequently. Motorists sitting in traffic say the bus lane is empty/ no cyclists etc, IMO, that’s because those lanes don’t back up and hence seem underused. I see plenty of cyclists commuting along that cycle corridor, and also out the Dublin Rd to Oranmore.

I said Ballybrit... It would be very easy to put a cycle lane to the back of the racetrack and link Parkmore... There should be no reason to use hard shoulder if that was done.

As for sitting in traffic... I have sat in it... We are talking really low numbers... On westside we have a joke if you see a cyclist during peak hours... cyclists should be passing you out, they just aren't...

It shows in the numbers...

gordongekko

CowboyTed wrote: »

we can't keep building empty cycle lanes...


..

We've not and we dont

TwoWheeledTim

CowboyTed wrote: »

As for sitting in traffic... I have sat in it... We are talking really low numbers... On westside we have a joke if you see a cyclist during peak hours... cyclists should be passing you out, they just aren't...

What time do you commute? Anywhere I've worked out that way the cyclists normally commuted 1-2hrs earlier, and either left earlier or got through town before it choked. They'd normally get in early for a shower and breakfast before starting work. You'll see a lot more cyclists going over "the bridge" between 6.30-7.30am than you will 7.30-8.30am.

I think the conversion of the Kirwan Roundabout will make a big difference on that route. A lot of cyclists wouldn't dare tackle it. If you go the alternative route (up Sean Mulvoy Road and Tuam Road) the cycle lane just disappears into the kerb and you're pushed into a lane with cars that are after rushing through the lights - it's lethal.

TwoWheeledTim

ben.schlomo wrote: »

The stretch of it on Bothar na dTreabh is very badly maintained, glass and debris strewn over the surface, the surface worn away in places, roots growing through the surface. Why would you use this when it's detrimental to your bike and possibly your safety.

When flying past in a car, this looks like a perfectly good cycle lane so I can understand why motorists think cyclists have quality facilities.

Here's the reality, this is a part of the cycle lane on Bothar na dTreabh, dangerous if you hit this on a road bike.



Google Street View (wide angle to doesn't even look as bumpy as reality)

CowboyTed

CowboyTed wrote: »

Absolutely agree... Maybe we should be looking at other ways to help...

I am not saying do this instead but we can't keep building empty cycle lanes...

Realistic targets and then lets ask the question you did there...

There is also the legislation around E-bikes... There is ten times more e-bikes sold in Germany than E-Cars(I was told)...

CowboyTed wrote: »

I said Ballybrit... It would be very easy to put a cycle lane to the back of the racetrack and link Parkmore... There should be no reason to use hard shoulder if that was done.

As for sitting in traffic... I have sat in it... We are talking really low numbers... On westside we have a joke if you see a cyclist during peak hours... cyclists should be passing you out, they just aren't...

It shows in the numbers...

Problems and solutions

Problem #1: Your strongest argument for not building lanes is nobody uses them.

Solution First off, thats false and I refer you back to the many posts that have pointed out why you were wrong when you made the same statement re: bus lanes.

However, lets change the problem definition to "there's not enough cyclists" instead. For that I ask you to go compare 2 groups of cities, you choose. First group are to have built next to no cycle lanes, and the second group are to have a comprehensive network. Then look at the figures of how many folks cycle in each of those groups. Then lastly, try to understand the correlation between these 2 facts.

I could post all the info here for you, but I think at this stage you really need to go and educate yourself on the matter and I don't say that as a dig, more that you are using your own lack of comprehension, understanding and knowledge of the topic as a basis for a justification on why to not implement more infrastructure.

Problem #2: Below is the existing bike lane network in Galway. Its piss poor by all accounts for all the reasons already outlined over the last few pages. That being said, I will concede that it provides a segregated route for cyclists along some portions but unless you live on those portions and your destination is along those portions, your going to be mixing with fast moving motor vehicles

However for the most part is pretty much just dangerous and poor design due to prioritizing motor vehicles over people



Solution Protected cycling infrastructure means protection from interaction with motor vehicles and pedestrians. Check out the Chorlton CYCLOPS (Cycle-Optimised Protected Signals) junction which recently opened in Manchester. You will see a route that is controlled (clearly defined and designated routes for pedestrians, cyclists & cars), segregated (no group interacts with each other when traversing the junction) and protected (lights for pedestrians, cyclists and cars). This is the first one completed but there's a load more in the works all over the UK.

Problem #3 There's hardly any cyclists on the roads anyway

Solution Check out "induced demand". Its a term related to motor traffic but it also applies to bike traffic. the fundamental is basically, the more infrastructure you build, the more people will want to use it, be that roads, bike lanes or paths.

Lastly, to leave on a lighter note, what are you looking for man?!?!? A traffic jam in the bike lane!!