Pedestrian managment

Saruman

I was just thinking. Since the new 30kmh limit in Dublin is to prevent the deaths of pedestrians (mostly) and since its usually because they decide to cross the road etc when and where they should not...
Would it not be a good idea to put in barriers, you know railings or fence or whatever you want to call it on any dangerous pavements? For instance all along the quays forcing pedestrians to walk to the nearest crossing.

Sure a few will jump over yes but most will walk to the junction and cross there.

Its not perfect as they can still cross without waiting for a green light but its better than nothing.
It would also protect pedestrians from an out of control car mounting the kerb and hitting them.
Not everywhere is suitable but a lot of places are. O'Connell street would also be perfect and pedestrians love to walk out all along it.
Personally i think no traffic should be allowed there but while there is traffic, keep the pedestrians away from it as much as possible.

BostonB

My bugbear is those that decide to cross right through in the middle of busy junctions. Or those that decide to cross at the blind side of turning vehicles.

Seth Brundle

Thread moved from Motors to Commuting/Transport

cyclopath2001

Saruman wrote:

I was just thinking. Since the new 30kmh limit in Dublin is to prevent the deaths of pedestrians (mostly) and since its usually because they decide to cross the road etc when and where they should not...
Would it not be a good idea to put in barriers, you know railings or fence or whatever you want to call it on any dangerous pavements? For instance all along the quays forcing pedestrians to walk to the nearest crossing.

This may make sense if you're a motorist, but if you're an elderly pedestrian with limited mobility it's pure fascism.

The barriers would be a hazard to cyclists when they're forced up against the kerb by cars and trucks that have illegally overtaken them. And, I'd suggest these barriers might cause difficulties for traders taking deliveries.

Alun

cyclopath2001 wrote:

This may make sense if you're a motorist, but if you're an elderly pedestrian with limited mobility it's pure fascism.

?? I'm sure that if I was an elderly pedestrian with limited mobility the very last thing I'd be wanting to do was jaywalk my way across a busy road at a place where there wasn't a proper crossing, so whether there were barriers in place to channel people to cross at the proper place wouldn't bother me in the least!

mikemac

An excellent example of this in Nenagh, Co. Tipp

There's a mini roundabout on the junction of Pearse St and Kickam St. And yes, a lot of drivers don't know how to use these mini roundabouts.;)

Anyways, there are three exits on this roundabout and a pedestrian crossing 10metres from each exit.
So as you swing off the roundabout and start to accelerate you have to be sure to watch for the pedestrian.
There were issues with pedestrians basically running across the road. Not sure about accidents but I'd be suprised if there was none.

So the Council put metal barriers on each side of the pedestrian crossings. It's now impossible (bar jumping the barrier) to cross the road without using a designated pedestrian crossing.

Yes, there was moaning and whinging about it but it's safe, looks well and no accidents lately afaik.

Edit: I'll try a get a pic

cyclopath2001

Alun wrote:

?? I'm sure that if I was an elderly pedestrian with limited mobility the very last thing I'd be wanting to do was jaywalk my way across a busy road

It's only jay-walking if it's within 15 metres of a pedestrian crossing.

The needs of pedestrians, particularly the elderly, are mostly ignored when the positioning and timing of crossing 'faciliities' are decided.

godtabh

micmclo wrote:

So the Council put metal barriers on each side of the pedestrian crossings. It's now impossible (bar jumping the barrier) to cross the road without using a designated pedestrian crossing.

Each side of the pedestrian crossing but not each side of the road.

If the crossing is greater than 12m there should be an island 3 m wide with railings.

A good idea which i've seen used abroad is that a median is used. This median is designed so that people cant get over it easily be it with shrubs, railings etc.

On a side note the 30kph speed limit is designed to work on estate roads that are single lane and rudced width. The reduced width causes channelisation which drivers find more difficult to drive through and in theory slow down.

On wide roads I'm not sure if this will work to well

A Dub in Glasgo

Pedestrian Management?

Easiest way is to pedestrianise the city centre

cyclopath2001

kearnsr wrote:

A good idea which i've seen used abroad is that a median is used. This median is designed so that people cant get over it easily be it with shrubs, railings etc.

OK, then how about a compromise? You can have your barriers, but there must be a crossing point every 15 metres and the signal should activate in favour of pedestrians within 30 seconds of the button being pushed?

That'll result in only minor inconvenience for pedestrians.

Zoney

The current environment of our towns and cities is not condusive to fostering good pedestrian behaviour. People are just going to do their own thing considering how poor street design is with regard to peds. I use the term "street design" hesitantly of course - mostly it's a miracle there's a line down the middle to indicate lanes of opposing traffic. Nevermind handling parking etc.

As regards peds, the councils should put in proper zebra crossings instead of these fake two white line jobs. I highly doubt any study is mostly done for the placement of the latter, and they generally don't have warning signs (although in a few places the councils have gone to great lengths to put up ped crossing signs but not put zebra stripes or flashing lights).

Pelicans are only really useful in places where traffic is heavy enough that it's unlikely to stop without the force of a red light. Zebras by contrast basically allow people to cross as they do now except motorists are given warning that people will be crossing at that location - and of course in theory traffic should stop for peds readying to cross. Well-placed zebras are great to use as a pedestrian.

jrar

Look at any street shots from Tokyo, Brussels etc. to see cities who have ped. crossings on ALL junctions

lostexpectation

what really annoys me is busy junctions where there don't have ped crossing lights going everyway so you can get stuck on the wrong side and you just have to leg it across a busy road...

cyclopath2001

lostexpectation wrote:

what really annoys me is busy junctions where there don't have ped crossing lights going everyway so you can get stuck on the wrong side and you just have to leg it across a busy road...

The authorities main concern for decades, has been not to cause inconvenience to motorists and to make pedestrians pay the price.

The law even requires pedestrians who find themselves at a junction with only three sides covered by crossing 'facilities', to cross three times to reach their destination, waiting at each junction until it is the pleasure of motorists to stop & and also not obstruct the crossings.

Christchurch is an example where the most popular crossing point has no facility and, because of traffic islands, a pedestrian may have to make 6 crossings and wait at each one so as to comply with the pro-motorist laws.

At junctions where there is no crossing 'facility', pedestrians are permitted to cross in the same direction as the currently active line of traffic. Any vehicle turning across the pedestrian is required to give way.

murphaph

A Dub in Glasgo wrote:

Pedestrian Management?

Easiest way is to pedestrianise the city centre

Exactly. It's ridiculous that we still find (recently opened!) multi-storey carparks en-masse in and around the very core of the city. If this doesn't send out a clear message then what does. Time to hand the city back to us-people. Public transport of course must be allowed free passage but the city council and bus operators must look at alternatives to forcing every bus through the centre north-south axis.

monument

Here's a suggestion - Forget about congesting charging, how about just banning most cars from large parts of the city centre?

The north quays are a good example - in one lane you have cars with hardly a few with more then one person in them, and then the buses in other lane (even when there's only a few people in them) take up less space.

The same can be said of the amount of people served by road or on street parking space compared to the amount of people on packed footpaths - and that's in places all around the city centre.

Same goes for Luas or future tram lines, potential disruption of cars should only be slightly be taken into account when planning any new lines.

It would kill business in the city centre I can hear somebody say already... well that's the kind of bull shlt that was said before many pedestrian streets were instated, on a larger scale it was the said think said about Bordeaux before they installed new tram lines and put in a city centre ban.

Re: A Dub in Glasgo's post - I should have read the whole thread before posting

HonalD

I was just thinking. Since the new 30kmh limit in Dublin is to prevent the deaths of pedestrians (mostly) and since its usually because they decide to cross the road etc when and where they should not...

I'd be interested to know who has given this as the primary reason for the speed limit reduction! Obviously, first and foremost the reason is to slow vehicular traffic down and if successful, the number and severity of pedestrian injuiries will decrease.

The idea of channelisation of pedestrians is useful at certain junctions but is restrictive in a city centre environment....after all God gave us two legs to walk with not just to push accelerators with!!!!!! Now there's someone else to blame............

corktina

in my view, pedestrians should have priority over cars at all times and if one wishes to cross the road anywhere, the traffic should have to stop to allow them to......the motor car is to much of a god nowadays.

BostonB

People/driver don't react instantly and cars, buses and trucks don't stop instantly.

daymobrew

cyclopath2001 wrote:

OK, then how about a compromise? You can have your barriers, but there must be a crossing point every 15 metres and the signal should activate in favour of pedestrians within 30 seconds of the button being pushed?

+1 from me.

Zoney wrote:

As regards peds, the councils should put in proper zebra crossings instead of these fake two white line jobs.

On one side (and only one side unfortunately) of Blanchardstown shopping centre there is a zebra crossing (in front of the library). I love it. Minimal inconvenience to pedestrians (and motorists for that matter).
On the opposite side of the Centre (in front of PC World/Dunnes), Centre Management switch off the pedestrian crossing lights (well, it sticks on green for cars) so as not to inconvenience the cars. :rolleyes:

monument

corktina wrote:

in my view, pedestrians should have priority over cars at all times and if one wishes to cross the road anywhere, the traffic should have to stop to allow them to......the motor car is to much of a god nowadays.

Anywhere?

daymobrew wrote:

On one side (and only one side unfortunately) of Blanchardstown shopping centre there is a zebra crossing (in front of the library). I love it. Minimal inconvenience to pedestrians (and motorists for that matter).
On the opposite side of the Centre (in front of PC World/Dunnes), Centre Management switch off the pedestrian crossing lights (well, it sticks on green for cars) so as not to inconvenience the cars. :rolleyes:

While they did close off one side, the removal of the zebra crossings at Eyre Square in Galway was the worst part of the redesign of the square.

corktina

yes anywhere.....why not!...oh and there should be a guy with a red flag walking in front of the cars and they should all have to ahve a bale of hay in the boot too.....:cool:

cyclopath2001

corktina wrote:

there should be a guy with a red flag walking in front of the cars

Let's be serious. It's time to say to motorists 'the party is over', respect for others is the future, not the past.

luckat

I really don't know what everyone's on about. I drive around the city, and rarely if ever have any trouble avoiding pedestrians. Sure, people sometimes cross against the lights - but only when there's no traffic near, or when the traffic's held up.

Perhaps the reason I don't have problems is that I drive at a safe speed?

Pedestrians are only going to be in the way/a danger to motor traffic, if the driver is going too fast for safety.

cyclopath2001

luckat wrote:

I really don't know what everyone's on about.

I think the title of the thread 'Pedestrian Management', says it all. It smacks of apartheid.

daymobrew

corktina wrote:

in my view, pedestrians should have priority over cars at all times and if one wishes to cross the road anywhere, the traffic should have to stop to allow them to......the motor car is to much of a god nowadays.

In California there is an implied pedestrian crossing at every junction i.e. it's there even if not marked.
On quieter streets, as a pedestrian approaches a junction cars will often stop to let you cross. Ah, the effect of lawsuits!

Zoney

daymobrew wrote:

In California there is an implied pedestrian crossing at every junction i.e. it's there even if not marked.
On quieter streets, as a pedestrian approaches a junction cars will often stop to let you cross. Ah, the effect of lawsuits!

In theory, even in Ireland if you as a pedestrian are already crossing at a junction, motorists should stop for you - priority is given to pedestrians already crossing the road at the junction.

Saruman

cyclopath2001 wrote:

I think the title of the thread 'Pedestrian Management', says it all. It smacks of apartheid.

As opposed to "Traffic management" of course :rolleyes:

cyclopath2001

Saruman wrote:

As opposed to "Traffic management" of course :rolleyes:

'Traffic management' is the administration of the privilege of road use by vehicles. 'Pedestrian Management' is the curtailment of a basic human right in order to facilitate vehicle users.

monument

Oh, come on, driving is a basic human right, it's in the constitution... err, somewhere.

corktina

aw feck..im agreeing with cyclopath..

..its like this...we're all road users...why should one group have priority over another simply because they are driving lethal weapons?

gjim

Forgot it. Barriers and the like were part of the "auto city" dream of the modernist architects and planners. This idea died 20 or 30 years ago and good riddance. We can see it's results in Dublin places like Christchurch, Cork St. and a few small sections of the quays. Luckily we were too poor at the time to implement modernism on a large scale unlike what happened in the UK, for example, where countless cities were destroyed by the planning equivalent of Marxism. Go to nearly any UK provincial city and you can see the results of this disastrous planning movement: nasty segregated urban environments with metal barriers everywhere, pedestrian subways, dual-carriageways criss-crossing the centres of towns, dead high-streets and an environment actively hostile to pedestrians, cyclists and social interaction.

The future for city centres is the very opposite of this with the streets being given back to pedestrians and cyclists and cars having to work their way around pedestrians instead of the other way around.

Saruman

Simply because we are driving lethal weapons.
A pedestrian who walks out in front of a car without looking, or oblivious to the fact there is a car turning can be injured or killed.
Since so many people in Diblin blindly just walk out in front of cars then its for their own safety that they be guided to safe areas to cross.

One simple reason is a bunch of drunks stumbling around the city falling all over the place and even on to the roads. Its for their safety. Comparing it to Apartheid is just ridiculous.

By the way i agree that much of the city centre should be pedestrianised. O' Connell street, College Green etc. However if this is not going to be done then safety for pedestrians should be paramount.

Does not matter if the speed limit is only 30kph. If some drunk falls onto the road just as a car is passing then he will be badly injured or even killed. He might then wish there had been something there to stop im falling onto the road.

Del2005

They should enforce the laws we already have , ie jaywalking, breaking red lights by cars and bikes, instead of making up new laws to be ignored. If there was proper enforcement of the current rules with consistant punsihment then things would improve. But there is little chance of that happening.

corktina

i always thought it would be a good idea to build a dam up by Guinnesses and drain the Liffey through the city centre and use that for traffic and car parking, freeing up the quays for pedestrians....loads of room just being wasted there at the momnet...






talking about being wasted..... :-)

BostonB

Del2005 wrote:

They should enforce the laws we already have , ie jaywalking, breaking red lights by cars and bikes, instead of making up new laws to be ignored. If there was proper enforcement of the current rules with consistant punsihment then things would improve. But there is little chance of that happening.

What we're saying is we can't police the roads. So lets slow everything down so that when there are accidents people are injured, but not killed. The problem with that logic is if people don't obey the current rules and common sense, why will they obey the new rules? Will enforcement change? There will be lip service for a couple of months I expect.

lostexpectation

Saruman wrote:

By the way i agree that much of the city centre should be pedestrianised. O' Connell street, College Green etc. However if this is not going to be done then safety for pedestrians should be paramount.

Does not matter if the speed limit is only 30kph. If some drunk falls onto the road just as a car is passing then he will be badly injured or even killed. He might then wish there had been something there to stop im falling onto the road.

or is dundrum town centre, private town centres/shopping centres,

surely it isn't about crashes but the business of town, perhaps we should pedestrian congestion charges...?

cyclopath2001

BostonB wrote:

What we're saying is we can't police the roads. So lets slow everything down so that when there are accidents people are injured,

Making drivers slow down brings more benefits than just a reduction in the severity of injury.

Del2005

BostonB wrote:

What we're saying is we can't police the roads. So lets slow everything down so that when there are accidents people are injured, but not killed. The problem with that logic is if people don't obey the current rules and common sense, why will they obey the new rules? Will enforcement change? There will be lip service for a couple of months I expect.

If they can't police the roads now what makes you think throwing more laws at it is going to do anything. If the speed limit is 30kph and no-one enforces it there may as well be no speed limit. I'm all for slowing traffic down and making things safer for peds but there is absolutely no point in making up new laws that aren't enforced. There are plenty of laws that would save peoples lives if properly enforced, but because everyone knows that the chances of getting caught are slim no one pays any head. Any country that has reduced road deaths has only done it with a big stick as the carrot never works.

Off topic, but remember when a couple of years ago when they brought in the new laws to stop people being drunk in pubs to replace the law against being drunk in a pub. Did anyone else notice that there is now no more drunks in pubs. No cause the law was never enforced and on the night it came into affect I was listening to the radio and the head of the Garda the covers Temple Bar said that they wouldn't arrest anyone.

cast_iron

BostonB wrote:

What we're saying is we can't police the roads. So lets slow everything down so that when there are accidents people are injured, but not killed. The problem with that logic is if people don't obey the current rules and common sense, why will they obey the new rules? Will enforcement change? There will be lip service for a couple of months I expect.

Well said.

The only thing this will serve is to make it even easier to get 2 penalty points around town. During busy times, you'll be doing well to see 18mph. But at 3am, tootling along at 18mph without a pedestrian in sight, except the Gardai ready to slap you a fine.

It's the usual excuse - we can't enforce the current laws, so lets make more draconian ones to make it look like we are doing something. Pedestrian safety my arse. How many pedestrians are actually killed in the proposed area each year? Show me some qualitative analysis on those accidents showing 20km/h reduction would have saved them and I may reconsider my opinion on this.

BostonB

Del2005 wrote:

If they can't police the roads now what makes you think throwing more laws at it is going to do anything. If the speed limit is 30kph and no-one enforces it there may as well be no speed limit. I'm all for slowing traffic down and making things safer for peds but there is absolutely no point in making up new laws that aren't enforced. There are plenty of laws that would save peoples lives if properly enforced, but because everyone knows that the chances of getting caught are slim no one pays any head. Any country that has reduced road deaths has only done it with a big stick as the carrot never works. ...

That was my point?

Bit like mobiles. You can stand on any street on Dublin and see every 10th car or so, someone has a mobile clamped to their head. Usually your attention is brought to it by their erratic driving. Ditto unrestrained kids in the car.

Zoney

The State is not currently properly policed at all, nevermind road traffic offences. That does not mean one should give up on the idea of policing the State.

Neither should we give up policing the roads.

We need thousands more Gardaí, we do not have a remotely normal police : population ratio.

Tea drinker

Some road users are pretty dumb, but definately the dumbest are cyclists.
My mother was ran down by a cyclist in a pedstrian area. They don't give a damn about their own safety or anyone elses. Once they start pedallin the adrenalin is pumping and brains replaced with testicles.
They should have insurance, and should pay for any damage they do to motorists or pedestrians.
People seem to forget the consequences of their actions, if someone on a bike or walking wanders in front of a car, the drivers concentration is on them, and have poorer reactions for another obstacle, like a child running out. Accidents are usually caused by a number of circumstances coming together to funk you up.
I am in favour of more pedestrian friendly junctions, underground tunnels, and very high visibility traffic (and pedestrian) lights.
To make the city centre car free is a joke, they might as well move the zoo there.

monument

Tea drinker wrote:

To make the city centre car free is a joke, they might as well move the zoo there.

Do please tell why it would be a joke?

HonalD

Quote:
Originally Posted by Tea drinker
To make the city centre car free is a joke, they might as well move the zoo there.


Do please tell why it would be a joke?

I'm not one to jump on the bandwagon...but what is the joke? It better be funny? Can't see how it can be sane though! Give the City Centre back to the people - A connection from St. Stephen's Green to O'Connell Street, via College Green and Westmoreland Street - One pedestrian linkage nirvana......it WILL happen....someday......

jman0

I agree that the title of this thread is a little flakey.
We are all pedestrians and we don't need to be corralled like cattle into specified areas of public space. We should be free to choose the most efficient route.
Having said that, it is a matter of design to insure those efficient routes really are efficient.

People vote with their feet; how many times have we seen footpaths carved into the ground by people treading there, even tho there actually are concrete footpaths in the vicinity... only they are laid in such a manner (following a road or whatever) that it's more efficient to cut across the field.

In Galway at the Bodkin Roundabout (the confusing one outside Terryland - Galway Shopping Centre) is an example of particularly poor planning in respect to the accomodation of the numbers of people traversing it by foot, nevermind cycling.

I haven't read this book yet, but it looks good:
http://www.amazon.co.uk/Car-Sick-Solutions-Car-addicted-Culture/dp/190399876X

I'd like to see progressive planning like these living streets i read about
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Living_street

OTK

One of the reasons not to build safety barriers in cities is that drivers naturally travel at the fastest speed they judge safe. Traffic speeds rise following the introduction of pedestrian barriers to a level where the accident rate remains the same as before.

I have to smile at the guy suggesting that pedestrian tunnels are a good idea.