Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

Galway traffic

Options
1172173175177178253

Comments

  • Registered Users Posts: 793 ✭✭✭CowboyTed


    It was a stupid place for a cycle lane... If want stuff you have to listen...

    Look to link Millers lane to Threadneedle, Dr Mannix Rd, Lower Salthill on a trail...

    This is realistic, less disturbance and should have much higher adoption... Increased cycle rates means more cycle lanes...

    This was a very disruptive endeavour with less adoption than linking the schools... Sorry but the whole thing was idiotic from the start...

    Some cyclists want to blame the Executive by saying they were against it from the start... The Executive have been incompetent for decades, they suddenly didn't become Machiavellian overnight... Sorry that looks stupid...

    Does that mean that the Executive don't get involved in petty politics? No...



  • Posts: 0 [Deleted User]


    "Look to link Millers lane to Threadneedle, Dr Mannix Rd, Lower Salthill on a trail..."

    You keep repeating this but I'm still waiting for answers to the above clarification questions.

    You're being listened to but you're not following up with any detail - I don't think it's the silver bullet you want it to be and very difficult to maintain a safe segregated primary route through there.



  • Posts: 0 [Deleted User]


    Also if it's detailed out and considered viable - why not try that for 3 months and the prom for 3 months and help identify where the permanent route should be.



  • Registered Users Posts: 4,955 ✭✭✭what_traffic


    All those Promenades over in Europe are stupid then? So many of them have this setup. If done right skateboarders and roller skaters would use it as well.

    Again why one v's the other, do all those roads.



  • Registered Users Posts: 793 ✭✭✭CowboyTed


    A few questions to tease it out...

    1. Are you still talking about a two-way segregated route? Or do you mean for two 1 way segregated routes? Or no segregation (painted line)?

    Eventually a segregated route but might be painted initially... There is space for cycling there while not interfering with the two way car route.

    Some of these depend on what you're thinking for #1...

    2. How do you intend to connect to Millers Lane? Through Manor Drive? How do you bridge that gap along Kingston Rd to Threadneedle? Appears to be limited space for new lanes without making car traffic one-way.

    Golf Course eventually... This can't be done temporarily

    3. How do cyclists go from Kingston to Threadneedle? (currently no right turn)

    I would see they would cross the road just up from manor drive and then turn down. Bus stop could be moved as well...

    4. Do you expect an issue with residents on Dr Mannix Rd having an issue with on-street parking being removed outside their homes? They have off-street parking but on-street is also used. (btw I don't have an issue with this, it's a public road)

    Very little parking on it today and it all doesn't need to be removed as there is space to keep some of it.

    5. How do you connect through on the other end to the city? How do you facilitate cycle lanes on Devon Park? And on Lwr Salthill Road - do you remove/reduce on-street parking?

    Reduce to remove parking in Lower Salthill on one side... Devon park is a slow choke point so cares slow down so Cars and Bikes can share for 30-40 yds.

    6. The big (and growing) population center of Knocknacarra is Cappagh, Ballymoneen and Clybaun roads. If someone is at Clybaun Road, how do they connect through to the city using this?

    Millers lane... But we could have another lane crossing fields further down and com ing out at St John's...

    All the above can be solved, just wondering how far you've considered it, from the practicalities of linking it up.

    Is definitely a great road for a cycleway but my initial thoughts are a secondary route to further link up schools and residential areas rather than a primary route.

    Dr Mannix Road itself has 6 junctions within the 900m and loads of driveways that would cross the cycleway, it is a quieter road but difficult to get the same level of segregation as a coastal route.

    Dr Mannix Road is a lot quieter and it is a residential area so cars go slower.

    The big thing I would be looking at is buying the driving range and swapping land and building a new hole for the golf course in the driving range. This can eventually allow the golf club to be able release land which they wouldn't need to offer a strip all the way down Kingston Rd which could be linked to go across the fields to St Johns National School (cira)....

    Yes, it need a bit of thought but I am not saying this must be the way it is but it gives cycling a lot with little interference to other road users...



  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 153 ✭✭ThePentagon


    "They they are lackies to the small number of locals and businesses that want to keep things as they are."

    I'm disappointed that no version of the cycleway will be installed now - I genuinely thought a shortened version of option 2 that did not close off westbound motor traffic on the R336 was a good compromise that would gain enough support. However, the fact is that the plans presented were massively unpopular with people who live in this area. Sometimes I think cycling advocates might be living in an echo chamber.



  • Posts: 0 [Deleted User]


    "However, the fact is that the plans presented were massively unpopular with people who live in this area. Sometimes I think cycling advocates might be living in an echo chamber."

    Surely the hypocrisy can't be missed here?

    Everyone is an echo chamber to some extent but claiming any plans are "massively unpopular" or "massively popular" just shows how deep into the chamber you are. A lot of people love the plan, a lot of people hate the plan, a lot of people are in the middle and can see both the merits and challenges.

    At least the cycling advocates proposed solutions to challenges and held meetings with community disability groups and tried at every turn to have meetings with business groups to discuss plans. They are local residents. And all of that despite the fact that this is NOT THEIR PLAN and had no consultation or input in the design, but they stepped up to solve problems introduced by the exec.



  • Registered Users Posts: 793 ✭✭✭CowboyTed


    Sorry but this was very unpopular with local residents...

    The cycling advocates seem to not understand that and didn't address there concerns...

    Didn't address the concerns of swimmers, more people will probably swim in the sea than go down the prom daily...

    And then there is the walkers, the largest group of the lot... They want to be able to park in off peak hours and just walk...



  • Registered Users Posts: 2,848 ✭✭✭?Cee?view


    That's a great idea. It won't suit the Greens or the Cycling Forum crowd though because it doesn't displace cars. Cycleway plans that cause inconvenience to others are all that are acceptable to them



  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 2,848 ✭✭✭?Cee?view


    Pauline O'Reilly just said on Today FM that it's not time for that "yet". That said, I tend not to believe a word she says.



  • Registered Users Posts: 2,848 ✭✭✭?Cee?view


    • 63% stated their preference not to proceed with either plan
    • The Groups regularly correspond with the Council and Executive on proposed plans and they have a direct line to the Mayor who pushed this through on their behalf.
    • A lot of their "solutions" were completely unworkable in the context of a temporary cycleway and they have to know this. They were pure propaganda tools. The so called design for more disabled spaces at Ladies could not go ahead with full planning and an EIS.


  • Posts: 0 [Deleted User]


    Sorry but this was very unpopular with local residents...

    Please stop saying this as you are attempting to group them all under one bucket. It was popular with many, and unpopular with many. Neither side can say it was 100% either way so please stop trying to assert otherwise.

    The cycling advocates seem to not understand that and didn't address there concerns...

    So 2 things

    1. The cycling advocates as you like to call them, were the only ones who actively offered, proposed and designed solutions to many of the issues highlighted, a lot of which they highlighted themselves right at the beginning once the drawings were made public.
    2. The cycling folks can't fix these things, its the councils role to take on board the feedback and adjust the scheme accordingly. They chose to throw it all in the bin instead of working to find solutions

    Didn't address the concerns of swimmers, more people will probably swim in the sea than go down the prom daily...

    Plenty of swimmers walk and cycle to do their swims. Plenty park their cars and swim. Some park right at Blockrock, some park at other locations. The location of a parking spot in a car park does not prevent swimming from occurring.

    And then there is the walkers, the largest group of the lot... They want to be able to park in off peak hours and just walk...

    They always could and they would be able to continue doing so as there would still be around 800 free spaces. Only difference would be that they wouldn't park on the road and instead would be in a car park. Again, the location of a parking spot in a car park does not prevent walking from occurring as evidenced by the many people doing this already.



  • Posts: 0 [Deleted User]


    The % is the %, but it wasn't a stop/go referendum. It's a design consultation.

    The rest is entirely untrue.



  • Posts: 0 [Deleted User]


    I think there is an element of posters probably on the fence about the initiative but are happy to see some of the soap box posters taken down a peg or two, these posters attempt to dominate this thread by spam posting and a serious arrogant posting style against anyone who disagrees to their view. There is a reason why only a handful of posters bother with this thread anymore.

    The most prolific poster of all dacore is not even from the area and neither lives there or within 100 miles of it. It just happens that this little corner of the internet allows him preach to anyone who uses a car, seriously odd choice of how to spend one’s spare time.



  • Registered Users Posts: 2,525 ✭✭✭at1withmyself


    I hear ya, really hate when people post data and facts backed up by links, bloody know it all's....



  • Registered Users Posts: 24,800 ✭✭✭✭zell12


    Walkers want to drive to their walk. LOL



  • Registered Users Posts: 1,278 ✭✭✭Unrealistic


    A neighbour used to work there and cycled from her home 12 minutes away. She got 'doored' on the way to work one morning and has driven to work ever since. It was the straw that broke the camel's back, rather than being an isolated incident, but it's a real life example of how lack of provision for cycling and lack of consideration for people on bikes directly results in there being more cars on the road every day.



  • Advertisement
  • Posts: 0 [Deleted User]


    It comes down to 1 question with 2 answers, depending on perspective

    • "What are you afraid of?"
    • Drivers: "Being inconvenienced"
    • Cyclists: "Being killed"

    The actions taken by those in power to address those answers determine how the city moves



  • Registered Users Posts: 3,078 ✭✭✭salonfire


    I had to look up what doored meant and saw some videos on YouTube. I always thought cyclists were morons risking their lives cycling in city traffic, those videos simply confirmed by suspicions. It was shocking, cyclists getting thrown under passing traffic after getting pushed out. Unless there is total segration between traffic and cycling, cyclists should not be allowed on the road. Or else severely speed restricted at least.



  • Registered Users Posts: 12,107 ✭✭✭✭ben.schlomo


    Are you suggesting the only way to protect cyclists, outside of the non existent infrastructure, is to essentially ban them from the roads. That's a new one.



  • Registered Users Posts: 3,078 ✭✭✭salonfire


    Yes. How else do you suggest doing it?

    Invent a device that locks car doors if there is a cyclist in the vicinity and retro-fit said device into all cars to monitor all four doors?



  • Posts: 0 [Deleted User]


    Sounds like something that might be proposed at a GCC council meeting to be honest, oh wait, forget I said that, they might actually do a vote on it



  • Registered Users Posts: 12,107 ✭✭✭✭ben.schlomo


    You do know that the people in the vehicle are supposed to use their mirrors to look for any hazards/other road users yes?



  • Registered Users Posts: 3,078 ✭✭✭salonfire


    Oh well, I'm sure the family of a cyclist flattened by a truck after getting doored will take great comfort at that little nugget of information.



  • Registered Users Posts: 12,107 ✭✭✭✭ben.schlomo


    Jesus wept. So for you the burden of responsibility for keeping cyclists safe lies solely with cyclists or the authorities. Drivers have no responsibility towards other road users in your eyes. Let's hope you're not usually in charge of any motorised vehicles.



  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 2,525 ✭✭✭at1withmyself


    I think your onto something good here. Let's remove cyclist as a few get killed each year from drivers but what's the solution to comfort the families of those killed in cars from other cars, segregated road lanes for each individual car.



This discussion has been closed.
Advertisement