MadsL Registered User
#1

Ok, I was annoyed enough with these things sprouting up - Now this is just taking the p1ss.... Dorset St/Synott Place. This is anglegrinder time.

Planning Montage - note the scale is wrong on the structure (compare height with traffic lights)


As erected;


Establishing shot - Spot the child in a buggy anyone (how about at 50kph?) Seriously take extra extra care at this junction, you might just find a ped under your wheels. This cannot be allowed to remain, this is rocks in the head stuff.


Stepping out...


Erected in the wrong place.


You have to be kidding me......

5. The developer shall comply fully with the following requirements of the Roads & Traffic Planning Division; a) The proposed structure shall not impede any road signs, traffic lights, pedestrian crossings, vision along kerb edge lines or any other road infrastructure. This may require a slight adjustment in the proposed location as submitted.


Slight adjustment I would recommend here would be about 3 metres to the left....into a skip!


From the pedestrian crossing...taken whilst standing on the tactile ped crossing surface.....



Completely obscures oncoming traffic...

Motorists viewpoint



Spot the ped walking out?


This goes beyond the argument of advertising on our footpaths. This is criminal negligence on the part of DCC, JCDecaux and the contractor. Someone will die at this crossing unless this is removed NOW!

These structures have been slammed by the Dublin Transportation Office, described as a road safety hazard by An Bord Pleanala, a report on their safety has been requested by a city counciller to which no response has been given. If I were a lawyer representing a injury or death compensation claim at this point. I would also be citing the Corporate Manslaughter Bill 2007



Grossly negligent management causing death:
A high managerial agent may be guilty of grossly negligent management causing death if he knew or ought to have known of a substantial risk of death or personal harm and failed to take reasonable efforts to eliminate that risk. Penalties for grossly negligent management include:

A fine; and/or
Up to 12 year's imprisonment; and or
A Disqualification Order whereby the managerial agent may be disqualified from acting in a management capacity by the court for a period not exceeding 15 years.

Breach of the order gives rise to a fine of €3,000,000 and/or 2 years imprisonment and/or further disqualification for 10 years.

207 people have thanked this post
Hanley Banned
#2

That is absolutely astounding.

Great post.

RedorDead Registered User
#3

Hanley said:
That is absolutely astounding.

Great post.


+1

Unbelievable how little regard for human safety these muppets have.

Did you send to Dublin City Council as well?

#4

Excellent post.

Does anyone have email addresses for The Sun or Herald? I'd say they'll cover that!

WetDaddy Registered User
#5

It's been said already, but this is a fantastic post. Because you went to such detail, it's had an actual affect on me. Nice work, I hope the relevant parties are made aware of this...

superjosh9 Registered User
#6

+100!

Absolutely brilliant post, and you went to great trouble too - well done.

Maybe send this to Gay Byrne and all those at the RSA or whatever they call themselves. And don't forget, it's speeeeeed that kills... yeh right. This place is a joke.

skibum Registered User
#7

Excellent post, your evidence is very well presented. Don't quit now, push this on other media.

#8

+1 and from a biker, Its difficult enough not being seen without this ignorance. Someone could be in for a good lawsuit against DCC, JCDecaux and its contractors if this is the cause of an accident.

MySelf56 Registered User
#9

On the other note I never ever understand why Dublin City Council always Worried about water scarcity
<rant>
FFS every summer here its flipping Indian Monsoon anyway, to make more depressing. Last summer they had big water proof banners in Liffey. The funniest part is after two days those banners drowned not coz high tide in liffey, it coz of too much Monsoon rains here. I think Dublin City Council has huge amount cash to splash on stupid meaning less adverts. Dublin City Council has colluded with ad agencies money is straight going to drains. Instead if they could spend small amount in filling pot holes Merion square and other places. Improve sporting facilities for kids.

A perfect example of naked corruption in City council. Tap tips my back side!!
</rant>
Sorry for the rant!

Cionád Registered User
#10

I can't get over how inept that planning montage is. It's hilarious actually.

Steve Life is hard, deal with it.
#11

Great thread starter.

This BS is all too common in Dublin.
Whatever about this example, there are loads of examples of signs obscuring traffic lights, trees obscuring signs, conflicting information being displayed... it goes on.

pvt.joker Registered User
#12

great post. You'd have to wonder at the intelligence of people who erect these things.

mondeo Registered User
#13

Make a complaint asap and have it sorted out before some scruffy yabbo might see this as a free holiday and stage an accident..

MadsL Registered User
#14

Right folks - I'm on the warpath now.

Below are the mobile numbers of the Inner City councillors who have bullied by dublin city management into accepting this deal with JC Decaux. If you feel as I do that this should be removed then call or text them: (send an email to your friends pointing them to this thread)

Don't wait for 'someone else' to do this, and don't rely on 'the media' - It's your city, and these are your councillers. Be polite - but insist on action NOW! (tonights full council meeting) before someone gets hurt. Tell them you will be watching tonight's council meeting on the web.
http://www.dublincity.public-i.tv/site/#webcast

MODEDIT
mobile phone numbers deleted

POSTEREDIT - public record of councillors mobiles - that's what they are for!
http://www.dublincity.ie/YourCouncil/Councillors/YourLocalCouncillors/centralcouncillors/Pages/default.aspx


Details of consistant failure to address this safety issue;
Dublin City Council at various fora have been repeatly warned of this danger.

John Henry of the Dublin Transportation Office warned Dublin City Council on 7th March 2007 (at the time planning applications were made) that this type of structure "constituted a traffic hazard" I have attached his letter to the Planning Office outlining the DTO stance on this type of structure and the dangers both to pedestrian safety and the risks of driver distraction.
http://www.dublincity.ie/AnitePublicDocs/00066031.pdf

On 9 th, 10th and 11th October, 2007 at the An Bord Pleanala Oral Appeal Hearing of the the grant of planning permission of 24 advertising structures again the submission of the Dublin Transportation Office highlighed their concern on basis of traffic hazard.

In relation to one case of the 24 that were brought before the board, that of a sign outside BDO Simpson Xavier on Mercer Street similarly sited at the kerb edge, Mr. Eoin Madden, Senior Engineer, Traffic & Roads, conceded the appeal;

"With regard to implications for the safety of pedestrians, Mr. Madden for the planning authority stated that the proposed sign would not pass a road safety audit and accepted the case made in the appeal at the oral hearing as endangerment to pedestrian safety in that the sign would block pedestrian views towards oncoming traffic exiting the two public carparks."
http://www.pleanala.ie/documents/reports/223/R223148.pdf

The Inspectors Report following the hearing re-enforced these public safety concerns:

"In spite of the cases made in the oral hearing submissions and the reference to the prevalence of similar signage in other cities, I am not convinced that adverse risk of distraction to motorists or other road and footpath users leading to endangerment of public safety can be eliminated."
http://www.pleanala.ie/documents/reports/223/R223101.pdf

Following the findings the concerns of the An Bord Pleanala Inspector were voiced in Council in March 2008, a report was requested on the Health and Safety aspects by Cllr Emer Costello in relation to these findings. To date that report has not been published.

Yet the planning authority have decided to take a 'suck it and see' approach to road safety, there is a perfectly adequate methodoly to conduct a Stage 2 road safety audit prior to construction, however in this case have opted to only insist on a Stage 3 road safety audit (in other words construction followed by audit - in the meantime while we are waiting for this audit, lives are endangered)

#15

I've e-mailed Today with Pat Kenny with the thread link.

Mike.

1 person has thanked this post

Want to share your thoughts?

Login here to discuss!