This thread discusses the Content article:
Shop forced to close up
With all respect for the loss of business of Mr. Fitzpatrick, but to say that he only got to know about this road closure in the media is a bit of a lame excuse.
First of all, it was known since last year that these works had to be carried out. Fortunately, the Council was compelled to delay those works until the Bypass was connected to the Tulla Road! Otherwise the effect would have been much more desastrous!
But I agree totally, that there should have been a proper traffic management plan set out, because of the expectable impact on business as well as on traffic.
The signs announcing the closure of the Tulla Raod Railway Underbridge are really useless, especially those on the Tulla Road between Spancilhill and the bypass. There is simply too much text on it to be read by drivers passing by at 80 km/h - they would have to stop completely to be able to read and digest it.... Yet later on, the signs are quite clear about the road closure and local access only, but still, some people seem not able to read (how they got their driving license is beyond me) and still drive all the way into the Tulla Road, only to end up having to turn around, or worse, trying to find an "escape" road in the many neighbourhoods along the road. The same is true for traffic from the town side of the Bridge.
In my opinion, the work should have benn undertaken in such a way that at least one lane would always stay open - it would have just been a matter of of proper planning. It's simply unheard of (but not surprising in this country) to close an important main road completely within a town right at a very volatile bottleneck with diversions going only to be many, many kilometers long.
Fortunately for me, they kept at least a path for pedestrians and cyclists open... yet apparently only because some council members insisted on it....
Favoured: 0
