Legality of putting Speed Ramps in Private Housing Estates

Hello123 · 16-04-2015 10:39am #1

Hi there
I would like to see speed ramps in our estate. I know that the council will never do it for us, so I am wondering, with the backing of the residents, is it legal to attempts this ourselves?

Lucena · 16-04-2015 10:42am

Who owns the roads in the estate?

Hello123 · 16-04-2015 10:51am

Well I guess the council although we have to pay for the upkeep of the green areas ourselves.

seamus · 16-04-2015 10:58am

If the council owns the roads, then no you cannot do this yourselves.

Not only will the council come in and remove them, they will bill you for the cost of removing them.

Aside, there is a lot of debate right now around the use of speed bumps and their apparent failure to actually save any lives. In fact, there are arguments that installing speed bumps causes more accidents as drivers focus on the bump rather than scanning for children who might run out of the road.

There's no doubting that they slow down traffic, but there's no evidence that they lead to a reduction in accidents.

death1234567 · 16-04-2015 11:01am

Just what the world needs, more speed ramps.

Hello123 · 16-04-2015 11:13am

seamus wrote: »

speed bumps causes more accidents as drivers focus on the bump rather than scanning for children who might run out of the road.

When you put it like that, yes it does mean that drivers might be distracted and could hit a child. However, they would most likely be at a much slower speed and so reduce the injury.

Hello123 · 16-04-2015 11:14am

death1234567 wrote: »

Just what the world needs, more speed ramps.

What the world needs drivers with more care :rolleyes:

Hello123 · 16-04-2015 11:15am

Anyway, since the council won't allow it, then I may as well forget about it.

Lucena · 16-04-2015 11:16am

Have you been in contact with either the Council or the Gardai regarding the problem? They might be able to advise you on other ways of slowing people down.

Hello123 · 16-04-2015 11:20am

I have asked the council some time ago and was basically told they would look into the issue.
The Gardai might be a good idea. I'm also thinking of better signage to warn motorist to slow down.

gaz wac · 16-04-2015 11:25am

Just make sure the council actually does own the road. I asked our management comp for more ramps but the only thing stopping them was the mang comp funds. She said that there was more important items to buy but that they had installed new ramps in other estates.

We have the "built in" ramps, just tarmac, which are quite wide and low, you really need those black and yellow plastic ones, jees you have to be nearly stopped before you go over them! The speed people go when kids are around is redic, few of us even talked about buying 1 or 2 of them ourself, just for the entrance of the green area to kill the speeders!!

Hello123 · 16-04-2015 11:29am

gaz wac wrote: »

The speed people go when kids are around is redic, few of us even talked about buying 1 or 2 of them ourself, just for the entrance of the green area to kill the speeders!!

This is exactly my concern!! thanks

gaz wac · 16-04-2015 11:35am

tbh a note on the regular offenders windscreen also helped ;-)

There must be about 20-30 kids out on our green/roads, which is great to see, but we have had about 2/3 near misses, just kids running to get the ball etc scary stuff......the signs are a waste of time and money !!!

Hello123 · 16-04-2015 11:47am

30+ kids on our road alone! Even with supervision, it is impossible to control their every footstep.
I am more concerned with cars not familiar with the estate speeding iykwim, but it drives me CRAZY when residence speed without care

L1011 · 16-04-2015 12:05pm

Hello123 wrote: »

When you put it like that, yes it does mean that drivers might be distracted and could hit a child. However, they would most likely be at a much slower speed and so reduce the injury.

You can't "reduce" from zero - if the injury wasn't going to happen in the first place and now has there is no mitigation.

16-04-2015 8:13pm

Chicanes work well too if positioned properly

Iwannahurl · 17-04-2015 12:35am

seamus wrote: »

Aside, there is a lot of debate right now around the use of speed bumps and their apparent failure to actually save any lives.

In fact, there are arguments that installing speed bumps causes more accidents as drivers focus on the bump rather than scanning for children who might run out of the road.

There's no doubting that they slow down traffic, but there's no evidence that they lead to a reduction in accidents.

Have you any authoritative and evidence-based sources for those assertions?

SeanW · 17-04-2015 11:14am

Iwannahurl wrote: »

Have you any authoritative and evidence-based sources for those assertions?

Dunno about the OP, but speed bumps do indeed kill, according to the chairman of the London Ambulance Service.

http://www.bromleytransport.org.uk/Ambulance_delays.htm

Research in the USA supports these claims. One report from Boulder, Colorado suggests that for every life saved by traffic calming, as many as 85 people may die because emergency vehicles are delayed. It found response times are typically extended by 14% by speed-reduction measures. Another study conducted by the fire department in Austin, Texas showed an increase in the travel time of ambulances when transporting victims of up to 100%.

The study main consisted of asking 36 paramedics from different parts of the country for their experiences, and their response to humps. For example, 66% would deviate to avoid humps even when on emergency calls, and half of them were willing to add 2.5 minutes to the response time as a result.
88% of paramedics felt that speed humps interfered with CPR or other medical procedures. All respondents considered that a number of patient conditions were affected detrimentally by speed humps, particularly spinal or back injuries, and fractures generally.
In summary, it was clear that ambulance staff take a very dim view of the impact of speed humps on their ability to do their job, and that there are negative implications for patients.

So if you're happy to kill and maim far more (as many as 85x) people than you save, keep calling for more traffic calming.

Iwannahurl · 17-04-2015 11:42am

Hello123 · 17-04-2015 11:46am

Well if my children are out playing and an ambulance is racing to a house on my road then I definitely want them to slow down.

SeanW · 17-04-2015 12:41pm

Hello123 wrote: »

Well if my children are out playing and an ambulance is racing to a house on my road then I definitely want them to slow down.

If your child is not old enough to understand that big blue flashing lights and sirens mean "something very bad is happening, GTFO out of the way" like everyone else, then he/she shouldn't be on the road. And you really have no business expecting emergency service vehicles on a call to be babysitters.

Hello123 · 17-04-2015 12:53pm

SeanW wrote: »

If your child is not old enough to understand that big blue flashing lights and sirens mean "something very bad is happening

Big blue flashing light can panic anyone, and cause them to do something out of character. Anyway, I see your point.

Its the age old issue of trying to slow drivers & make them more aware in housing estates where children are out playing. Even parental supervision can't control the movements of drivers.

spacetweek · 17-04-2015 12:54pm

I have read numerous times (can't cite you chapter and verse off the top of my head though) that speed bumps don't work.
What happens is that drivers make up for the time they lost slowing down for the bump by speeding up between bumps.
Another issue is corner curves when turning a corner. These are designed for particular speeds. Drivers often enter residential streets by coming around the corner at high speed if the curve is wide. This is very dangerous because children don't have time to see the car coming.

In residential areas, the Dutch use chicanes instead of bumps, tight curves on street corners to force motorists to drive very slowly around the corner, and stone blocks for the surface instead of tar - these rattle when you drive on them and signal to the driver that they're going too fast.
Newer parts of Dublin have some of these features - example. Note the tight corners, narrow street and bump that covers the whole junction.

Sam Russell · 17-04-2015 12:56pm

I remember when they put speed bumps on Nutley Lane, one of the main ambulance routes to Vincent's University Hospital. The Dublin Firebrigade ambulance service complained and the Council said to was to reduce accidents, but there have never been ANY accidents on the road.

Iwannahurl · 17-04-2015 4:11pm

spacetweek wrote: »

I have read numerous times (can't cite you chapter and verse off the top of my head though) that speed bumps don't work.

What happens is that drivers make up for the time they lost slowing down for the bump by speeding up between bumps.

I have seen such claims numerous times too. Boards is full of such unsubstantiated chat.

If motorists can speed up between traffic calming measures then there isn't enough traffic calming.

There is more than one type of traffic calming of course. Enforcement also has a role, as do education and culture change.

Iwannahurl · 17-04-2015 4:14pm

Sam Russell wrote: »

I remember when they put speed bumps on Nutley Lane, one of the main ambulance routes to Vincent's University Hospital. The Dublin Firebrigade ambulance service complained and the Council said to was to reduce accidents, but there have never been ANY accidents on the road.

There haven't been any "accidents" in our estate yet. Traffic calming is still required.

Are we expected to wait until a child dies before we say, "hang on a minute, what about prevention?"

If so, whose family should have to make that sacrifice, yours or mine?

Sam Russell · 17-04-2015 5:19pm

Iwannahurl wrote: »

There haven't been any "accidents" in our estate yet. Traffic calming is still required.

Are we expected to wait until a child dies before we say, "hang on a minute, what about prevention?"

If so, whose family should have to make that sacrifice, yours or mine?

The point about putting speed bumps on the route to Vincent's was the hazard caused to patients inside the ambulance, plus the delay in arrival at the hospital.

These speed bumps were unnecessary and inappropriate anyway as this is a major through route for traffic, not just a cul de sac on an estate. There never have been ANY accidents on this road - ever.

I can understand that the situation in an estate where children play may well call for them, but they might as well put them on the N11 if they consider Nutley Avenue requires them. It was highlighted by Pat Kenny on his radio show at the time.

spacetweek · 17-04-2015 5:47pm

Iwannahurl wrote: »

I have seen such claims numerous times too. Boards is full of such unsubstantiated chat.

If motorists can speed up between traffic calming measures then there isn't enough traffic calming.

There is more than one type of traffic calming of course. Enforcement also has a role, as do education and culture change.

Didn't hear it on Boards. Would you have the whole estate be ramps everywhere? It would be better to just build it as Dutch style.

Enforcement is rarely a good idea. It's a very labour intensive way of encouraging compliance with laws. Would you have gardai patrolling a residential area making sure locals are complying with traffic laws? Better to build low-speed into the roads themselves by making it impossible to drive around the area at high speed. The best kind of society is one in which laws are self-enforcing.

Iwannahurl · 17-04-2015 8:35pm

Sam Russell wrote: »

The point about putting speed bumps on the route to Vincent's was the hazard caused to patients inside the ambulance, plus the delay in arrival at the hospital.

These speed bumps were unnecessary and inappropriate anyway as this is a major through route for traffic, not just a cul de sac on an estate. There never have been ANY accidents on this road - ever.

I can understand that the situation in an estate where children play may well call for them, but they might as well put them on the N11 if they consider Nutley Avenue requires them. It was highlighted by Pat Kenny on his radio show at the time.

The alleged non-occurrence of "accidents" is not the only issue of concern. There have been no "accidents" on numerous streets in my neighbourhood either, and traffic calming is still needed.

Are you (and Pat Kenny) suggesting that Nutley Avenue and the N11 are somehow equivalent?

Iwannahurl · 17-04-2015 8:39pm

spacetweek wrote: »

Didn't hear it on Boards. Would you have the whole estate be ramps everywhere? It would be better to just build it as Dutch style.

Enforcement is rarely a good idea. It's a very labour intensive way of encouraging compliance with laws. Would you have gardai patrolling a residential area making sure locals are complying with traffic laws? Better to build low-speed into the roads themselves by making it impossible to drive around the area at high speed. The best kind of society is one in which laws are self-enforcing.

There is more than one way to calm traffic. Enforcement also has a role, as do education and culture change. The Irish culture of habitual non-compliance with the law is very different from the Dutch and German culture of compliance, I'll bet.

markpb · 17-04-2015 8:52pm

Sam Russell wrote: »

I remember when they put speed bumps on Nutley Lane, one of the main ambulance routes to Vincent's University Hospital. The Dublin Firebrigade ambulance service complained and the Council said to was to reduce accidents, but there have never been ANY accidents on the road.

I'd be very surprised if the Dublin Fire Brigade which is a part of Dublin City Council and almost entirely funded by Dublin City Council objected publicly to an action taken by DCC. I'm open to bring corrected.

Also, I'd be very surprised if DCC went to the expense of fitting speed ramps for no reason. I know Irish people are (sometimes excessively) cynical of public bodies but it would be nice if, just occasionally, we opened our minds to the possibility that things happen for a reason, even if that reason is not immediately obvious to us.

I don't know the reason but it could be because it's a relatively wide road and people were speeding because of the nature of the roads it links. Maybe people were speeding and it was causing problems for ambulances emerging from the hospital. Maybe the mixture of regular traffic (driving at the road limit) and people unfamiliar with the area looking for the hospital (and driving slowly) was unsafe. Maybe TDs were finding it difficult to get out of Montrose because people were going too quickly ;o)

There's a difference between not knowing what the reason is and there not being a reason. Unless you're the engineer who decided to install the ramps, you're speaking from a position of zero information.

Sam Russell · 18-04-2015 8:49am

Iwannahurl wrote: »

The alleged non-occurrence of "accidents" is not the only issue of concern. There have been no "accidents" on numerous streets in my neighbourhood either, and traffic calming is still needed.

Are you (and Pat Kenny) suggesting that Nutley Avenue and the N11 are somehow equivalent?

My mistake. It is Nutley LANE I am talking about - the one that connects the N11 to Vincents. Nutley Avenue could well deserve speed bumps. Hence my comparison with the N11. (By the way, that in no longer the N11 because it has been renumbered but not re-signed).

Speed bumps are generally put on estate roads when locals campaign for them, or on roads when an accident occurs that could be justification for then. Nutley Lane does not fill either case. It is a through commuter route for traffic going from the N11 to the Merrion Road and Ballsbridge. It is an alternative to the Rock Road/Merrion Gates (heard on AA Road Watch every morning) and the right turn at Donneybrook Church and Anglesea Road.

Sam Russell · 18-04-2015 9:06am

markpb wrote: »

I'd be very surprised if the Dublin Fire Brigade which is a part of Dublin City Council and almost entirely funded by Dublin City Council objected publicly to an action taken by DCC. I'm open to bring corrected.

Also, I'd be very surprised if DCC went to the expense of fitting speed ramps for no reason. I know Irish people are (sometimes excessively) cynical of public bodies but it would be nice if, just occasionally, we opened our minds to the possibility that things happen for a reason, even if that reason is not immediately obvious to us.

I don't know the reason but it could be because it's a relatively wide road and people were speeding because of the nature of the roads it links. Maybe people were speeding and it was causing problems for ambulances emerging from the hospital. Maybe the mixture of regular traffic (driving at the road limit) and people unfamiliar with the area looking for the hospital (and driving slowly) was unsafe. Maybe TDs were finding it difficult to get out of Montrose because people were going too quickly ;o)

There's a difference between not knowing what the reason is and there not being a reason. Unless you're the engineer who decided to install the ramps, you're speaking from a position of zero information.

Whatever the reason for their installation (it was stated by DCC, according to Pat Kenny's piece as being ' to reduce accidents', but following Pat Kenny's airing of the stupidity of them on a primary ambulance route and is also a bus route. and the fact that their had never been any accidents, they (DCC) came out and defended them and then went and re-profiled them to reduce their impact so effectively removing them.

Iwannahurl · 18-04-2015 9:01pm

Sam Russell wrote: »

My mistake. It is Nutley LANE I am talking about - the one that connects the N11 to Vincents. Nutley Avenue could well deserve speed bumps. Hence my comparison with the N11. (By the way, that in no longer the N11 because it has been renumbered but not re-signed).

Speed bumps are generally put on estate roads when locals campaign for them, or on roads when an accident occurs that could be justification for then. Nutley Lane does not fill either case. It is a through commuter route for traffic going from the N11 to the Merrion Road and Ballsbridge. It is an alternative to the Rock Road/Merrion Gates (heard on AA Road Watch every morning) and the right turn at Donneybrook Church and Anglesea Road.

I did a quick check of Nutley Lane using Google Maps, and found the following (open to correction):

4 junctions with residential roads
28 private residential entrances
3 RTE entrances/exits
1 Golf Club entrance/exit
1 hospital entrance/exit
1 shopping centre entrance/exit

So that's perhaps 38 locations where motorists, cyclists and pedestrians need to access or perhaps cross Nutley Lane, which as far as I can make out is just 850 metres long.

If there was speeding on Nutley Lane (which is pretty much standard just about everywhere else in this country) then traffic calming is fully justified, if only to give some respite to people who live, work, shop or spend their leisure time in the area.

Impatient motorists, and their cheerleader Pat Kenny, need to get a grip. Travelling 850 metres at an average 50 km/h takes about a minute. Driving at 40 km/h takes just 16 seconds longer, while reducing the average speed to 30 km/h adds only another 25 seconds on top of that.

Sam Russell · 19-04-2015 2:31pm

The hospital entrance has traffic lights controlling it, which applies a level of traffic calming on the whole road. There are traffic lights on both ends which has a similar effect. There is parking on the length from the hospital entrance to the entrance of Elm Park golf club which tends to reduce options for motorists. There is also the high level of congestion at most times which tends to have an effect. It is not a street that would have kids playing. On the whole the money should have been better spent elsewhere.

I do not know who lobbied for traffic calming measures but they got their way - friends in high places. The measure was not appreciated by the ambulance drivers.

Iwannahurl · 19-04-2015 9:25pm

Sam Russell wrote: »

The hospital entrance has traffic lights controlling it, which applies a level of traffic calming on the whole road. There are traffic lights on both ends which has a similar effect. There is parking on the length from the hospital entrance to the entrance of Elm Park golf club which tends to reduce options for motorists. There is also the high level of congestion at most times which tends to have an effect. It is not a street that would have kids playing. On the whole the money should have been better spent elsewhere.

I do not know who lobbied for traffic calming measures but they got their way - friends in high places. The measure was not appreciated by the ambulance drivers.

According to your own account there are three sets of signals and a "high level of congestion at most times", which has a traffic calming effect.

Did ambulance drivers complain about the traffic lights and the congestion? And if traffic was already slowed up as you describe, what was their complaint about the speed ramps?

Sam Russell · 19-04-2015 10:06pm

Iwannahurl wrote: »

Did ambulance drivers complain about the traffic lights and the congestion? And if traffic was already slowed up as you describe, what was their complaint about the speed ramps?

They complained about the bumps jolting their injured and ill patients, and causing them to slow down more than they would without the bumps.

The traffic is there during busy times, the bumps are there all the time.

Carawaystick · 20-04-2015 9:05am

Iwannahurl wrote: »

1 hospital entrance/exit

Impatient motorists, and their cheerleader Pat Kenny, need to get a grip. Travelling 850 metres at an average 50 km/h takes about a minute. Driving at 40 km/h takes just 16 seconds longer, while reducing the average speed to 30 km/h adds only another 25 seconds on top of that.

I'm glad you think slowing emergency traffic getting to a hospital is a good thing. I hope you never are delayed when getting there, or are suffering pain travelling over the ramps in an ambulance.

Iwannahurl · 20-04-2015 10:26am

Carawaystick wrote: »

I'm glad you think slowing emergency traffic getting to a hospital is a good thing. I hope you never are delayed when getting there, or are suffering pain travelling over the ramps in an ambulance.

There are far more people killed and injured by speeding motor vehicles than there are injured or discommoded in ambulances slowed down slightly by traffic calming.

City of York Council wrote:

It is generally accepted that the safety benefits of vertical traffic calming far outweigh any negative impact.

http://www.york.gov.uk/downloads/file/16751/traffic_calming_review_2014

Much of the bleating comes from self-centred motorists who complain about anything that slows them down even a tad, yet if most drivers travelled at a legal and appropriate speed there would be no need for traffic calming and there would be far fewer people needing to be carried to A&E by ambulance. The juvenile L(l)ibertarians who huff and huff ineffectually about traffic calming are often the same ones regurgitating dumb witterings from the internet about those awful oppressive speed cameras.

With a bit of planning and consultation it's possible to have both effective traffic calming and adequate access for emergency services. Motorists' moaning is of no relevance in such consultations.

http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm200304/cmselect/cmtran/105/105we64.htm

http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm200506/cmselect/cmsctech/900/900we19.htm

L1011 · 20-04-2015 10:37am

Claiming that opinions that differ from your own (and the many links you paste to back them up, often of little to no relevance or are actually contradictory) are "moaning" and "bleating" or "dumb witterings" really shows the quality of your debating tactics.

Particularly claiming that one set of people quoting others is "regurgitating dumb witterings" when your posts on the topic rarely consist of anything other than such!

Carawaystick · 20-04-2015 10:56am

Iwannahurl wrote: »

There are far more people killed and injured by speeding motor vehicles than there are injured or discommoded in ambulances slowed down slightly by traffic calming.

Much of the bleating comes from self-centred motorists who complain about anything that slows them down even a tad, yet if most drivers travelled at a legal and appropriate speed there would be no need for traffic calming and there would be far fewer people needing to be carried to A&E by ambulance. The juvenile L(l)ibertarians who huff and huff ineffectually about traffic calming are often the same ones regurgitating dumb witterings from the internet about those awful oppressive speed cameras.

With a bit of planning and consultation it's possible to have both effective traffic calming and adequate access for emergency services. Motorists' moaning is of no relevance in such consultations.

You do realise most people brought to Vincent's hospital in ambulances are not coming from car crashes, let alone car crashes on Nutley lane.

Vincent's hospital is the main emergency hospital for east Wicklow and Dun Laoghaire Rathdown county. That's a population of ~280k. I don't see how its bleating or huffing to have an access route free of speed restrictions for emergency lifesaving cases.

Aard · 20-04-2015 3:11pm

There are many ways of implementing traffic calming (itself a contentious term), one of which is vertical deflection. Vertical deflections are appropriate in certain instances, such as in already low-speed areas and usually at pedestrian crossing points at that.

Often the simplest way of implementing traffic calming is reducing traffic lanes to 3m-3.5m depending on the traffic type expected (eg buses, trucks etc).

I would seriously question the wisdom of having vertical deflections on a main road with a hospital entrance.

Iwannahurl · 20-04-2015 3:47pm

L1011 wrote: »

Claiming that opinions that differ from your own (and the many links you paste to back them up, often of little to no relevance or are actually contradictory) are "moaning" and "bleating" or "dumb witterings" really shows the quality of your debating tactics.

Particularly claiming that one set of people quoting others is "regurgitating dumb witterings" when your posts on the topic rarely consist of anything other than such!

This drivel is rehashed all over the interwebz.

I support my arguments with reference to evidence, best practice and policy wherever possible. You rarely if ever do the same.

Iwannahurl · 20-04-2015 3:57pm

Carawaystick wrote: »

You do realise most people brought to Vincent's hospital in ambulances are not coming from car crashes, let alone car crashes on Nutley lane.

Vincent's hospital is the main emergency hospital for east Wicklow and Dun Laoghaire Rathdown county. That's a population of ~280k. I don't see how its bleating or huffing to have an access route free of speed restrictions for emergency lifesaving cases.

Nutley Lane is approximately 850 metres long. In a conurbation the size of "East Wicklow and Dun Laoghaire Rathdown county" with a population of "~280k" that's a vanishingly small proportion of the road network. Ambulances will experience cumulatively far more delay due to general traffic congestion. Even the lack of postcodes is a factor, although that's changing. And here's a related link for the Daily Mail lovers, who appear to be numerous on Boards: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/health/article-55521/Thousands-die-ambulance-delays.html

Here's an Irish link: http://www.independent.ie/irish-news/ambulance-holdups-at-aes-causing-critical-shortage-for-999-calls-30790063.html

And here's another one. Prime Time Investigates went undercover last year to see what was going on in the Ambulance Service, and found, among other scandals, senior managers using rapid response vehicles as personal transport, making the vehicles unavailable for service: http://www.thejournal.ie/ambulances-prime-time-1385569-Mar2014/

http://www.rte.ie/news/player/prime-time-web/2014/1202/

In my experience the emergency services argument is usually invoked as an excuse for not putting in traffic calming measures. The same is often applied to illlegal parking: motorists absolutely must be allowed to park up on footpaths, otherwise people will burn or bleed to death blah blah etc.

Aard wrote: »

There are many ways of implementing traffic calming (itself a contentious term), one of which is vertical deflection. Vertical deflections are appropriate in certain instances, such as in already low-speed areas and usually at pedestrian crossing points at that.

Often the simplest way of implementing traffic calming is reducing traffic lanes to 3m-3.5m depending on the traffic type expected (eg buses, trucks etc).

I would seriously question the wisdom of having vertical deflections on a main road with a hospital entrance.

There is a sore need generally for traffic calming. In any one location vertical deflection is just one engineering option. Maybe speed cameras would do the job just fine. That would silence the speed ramp critics, and as sure as night follows day it would have the speed camera hysterics up in arms.

.

Carawaystick · 20-04-2015 4:48pm

Iwannahurl wrote: »

Nutley Lane is approximately 850 metres long. In a conurbation the size of "East Wicklow and Dun Laoghaire Rathdown county" with a population of "~280k" that's a vanishingly small proportion of the road network. Ambulances will experience cumulatively far more delay due to general traffic congestion.

But the vast majority of ambulances will travel this route bringing emergency patients to hospital.
I have no real grief with traffic calming on residential or other routes. I have direct experience of pain suffered due to speed ramps on Nutley lane, in an ambulance going to Vincents hospital.

Maybe you think the hospital is remiss in not slowing ambulances down further once they get onto the hospital grounds to safely allow visitors stroll from their bike parking places to the main hospital doors.

Sam Russell · 20-04-2015 5:01pm

Carawaystick wrote: »

Maybe you think the hospital is remiss in not slowing ambulances down further once they get onto the hospital grounds to safely allow visitors stroll from their bike parking places to the main hospital doors.

Actually, St Vincent's hospital has implemented speed bumps on its own property, so they do not listen to the ambulance men either.

L1011 · 20-04-2015 6:23pm

Iwannahurl wrote: »

This drivel is rehashed all over the interwebz.

I support my arguments with reference to evidence, best practice and policy wherever possible. You rarely if ever do the same.

I don't provide shopping lists of articles I haven't read (but which superficially look like they support my pre-determined opinion). There's quite a difference between those and actual evidence.

Can you provide something - other than your own opinion - to show that that link is "drivel" or is is decreed that it is because you said so?

Accusations of "drivel", "moaning", "bleating", "wittering" and your new one for this thread of "hysterics" with nothing to support them do not make for a debate. Reasoned arguments you disagree with are not "hysterics" and cannot be dismissed as such, even though you're trying to do so in pretty much every post.

SeanW · 20-04-2015 9:03pm

Iwannahurl wrote: »

Nutley Lane is approximately 850 metres long. In a conurbation the size of "East Wicklow and Dun Laoghaire Rathdown county" with a population of "~280k" that's a vanishingly small proportion of the road network.

It's also a key point in the ambulance system, a key link from St. Vincents to the main road.

When you're dealing with heart attacks, strokes and the like, seconds are lives. I don't want ambulances having to slow down to 5MPH and/or risk people with spinal injuries getting bashed about the place, to satisfy some jumped up "speed is bad" warrior who, by the looks of it, would not be satisfied by anything.

Ambulances will experience cumulatively far more delay due to general traffic congestion.

Accepted, which is why most of us also advocate other stuff, like public transport. I was a part of Platform 11 (now Rail Users Ireland) Extend the Dart campaign, which, had it been successful and the DART underground been built during the 'Tiger', would have given people real transport service, real alternatives to road based travel.

And here's another one. Prime Time Investigates went undercover last year to see what was going on in the Ambulance Service, and found, among other scandals, senior managers using rapid response vehicles as personal transport, making the vehicles unavailable for service: http://www.thejournal.ie/ambulances-prime-time-1385569-Mar2014/

http://www.rte.ie/news/player/prime-time-web/2014/1202/

Noone here is going to defend that ... so I'm not sure why it's an argument?

There is a sore need generally for traffic calming. In any one location vertical deflection is just one engineering option. Maybe speed cameras would do the job just fine. That would silence the speed ramp critics, and as sure as night follows day it would have the speed camera hysterics up in arms.

By all means if the speed limit is proportionate, back it up with a permanent marked speed camera so that motorists slow down but emergency vehicles can ignore it.

fenris · 20-04-2015 9:30pm

Having had the privilege of traveling nutley lane in the back of an ambulance with some serious fractures, I remember being warned to brace myself before crawling over each speed bump, I can confirm that the main thing on my mind as I felt the pieces of my broken pelvis grind against each other was a fervent wish that whatever brown envelope wielding clowns were responsible for putting the speed bumps on a main hospital access road should die slowly and screaming.

Speed bumps have a major impact on ambulances patients as you are lying down flat and get the full benefit of the bump on both sets of wheels no matter how slowly the driver crosses them.

Speed bumps are not a substitute for parental responsibility, they are an attempt to push traffic elsewhere, which is grand until we reach peak NIMBY and the alternative routes have equivalent inconvenience loading and as has been pointed out drivers make up time between bumps.

Nutley lane is a monument to pull and privilege in that the bumps were put there in the first place and also in the fact that they are still there.

Iwannahurl · 20-04-2015 10:42pm

fenris wrote: »

Speed bumps are not a substitute for parental responsibility, they are an attempt to push traffic elsewhere, which is grand until we reach peak NIMBY and the alternative routes have equivalent inconvenience loading and as has been pointed out drivers make up time between bumps.

Nutley lane is a monument to pull and privilege in that the bumps were put there in the first place and also in the fact that they are still there.

Who was the NIMBY with pull and privilege who had these ramps installed in the grounds of Vincent's? Are they still there (I have no idea)?

Unfortunately speeds bumps are a substitute for motorist responsibility and institutional accountability, both of which are sadly lacking in this country.

My sympathies on your ordeal due to pelvic injuries. The worse I've had to experience is a severely prolapsed/herniated intervertebral disc.

Unfortunately for all of us the bigger picture includes, for example, the number of vulnerable road users (children and elderly) who fell victim to motor vehicles over the years. Some of them don't feel anything any more, because they are dead. According to the RSA, 262 children were killed and 1,115 seriously injured 1997-2012, yet outside Dublin just 14% of residential estates have traffic calming and only 1.5% have a 30 km/h limit (legislation for which has been in place for over a decade).

Sam Russell · 20-04-2015 10:51pm

Iwannahurl wrote: »

Who was the NIMBY with pull and privilege who had these ramps installed in the grounds of Vincent's? Are they still there (I have no idea)?

They were installed following the building of the new extension (the big shiny multistorey granite structure with the big canopy) that includes the new improved A+E dept. They were installed by the hospital, and are on the route ambulances take on their way to the A+E. Just to make sure, they have other ones if the come into the hospital coming from the Merrion Road entance next to Breastcheck.

You could not make this up.

Legality of putting Speed Ramps in Private Housing Estates

Comments