JC Decaux signs start appearing - Shocking.

spockety

This is already over on Motors, but I'm sure a lot of you don't read that forum regularly.

It's pretty flabbergasting, and everyone with an interest in commuting and road safety in general should see what we're up against from our own authorities.

http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=2055329731

AlekSmart

Incredible stuff.This just HAS to be stopped in it`s tracks immediately before the City Councils actions are DIRECTLY responsible for serious injury or death.

Surely as City Manager,Mr Tierney is required to exercise some form of professional overview over his councils decisions ?

Let there be NO doubt but that in the event of any such serious accident in the vicinity of these Advert Frames then the City Manager PERSONALLY will have to account for his PERSONAL decision to ignore and,it would appear,subvert the planning and approval process which is there to PREVENT scenario`s such as this occurring.

The actions of Dublin City Council under his stewardship has allowed this scheme to proceed in the face of serious concerns from within and without the council chamber.

Whilst I am prepared to live with that fact I most certainly am not prepared to accept what has materialized whereby a Statutory Body blatently ignores the rules of Commonsense and places it`s citizens at hugely increased risk of death or injury !

markf909

Surely the Guards can be notified of this?

If they can be responsible to the placing of bus poles then they ought to be able to do something about this calamity.

paulm17781

Out of curiosity, why are these even here? Is it for the council to get some extra revenue? They're awful looking things, I've seen 2 so far and they do an excellent job of being in the way.

L1011

paulm17781 wrote: »

Out of curiosity, why are these even here? Is it for the council to get some extra revenue? They're awful looking things, I've seen 2 so far and they do an excellent job of being in the way.

Its for the council to get free BIKES...

Hotblack Desiato

AlekSmart wrote: »

Incredible stuff.This just HAS to be stopped in it`s tracks immediately before the City Councils actions are DIRECTLY responsible for serious injury or death.

Arguably the city council's O'Connell Street project has already caused needless deaths. Having no differentiation between road and pavement is madness. Nothing happened as a result of that tragedy so...

Surely as City Manager,Mr Tierney is required to exercise some form of professional overview over his councils decisions ?

They just do not care about road safety. Cyclists think that DCC just doesn't care about them, actually they don't show any evidence of caring about anyone. E.g. ped crossing buzzers switched off, ped crossing countdowns installed but not switched on, all sorts of hazards affecting motorists from bad signage to potholes to failure to ensure contractors leave the road in a fit state after opening it.

Let there be NO doubt but that in the event of any such serious accident in the vicinity of these Advert Frames then the City Manager PERSONALLY will have to account for his PERSONAL decision to ignore and,it would appear,subvert the planning and approval process which is there to PREVENT scenario`s such as this occurring.

I wish I could share your lack of cynicism, but I can't, he and DCC do not have to account for anything to anyone and they know it.

The actions of Dublin City Council under his stewardship has allowed this scheme to proceed in the face of serious concerns from within and without the council chamber.

It is an utter disgrace. The people of Dublin have been sold out by DCC.

Stark

MYOB wrote: »

Its for the council to get free BIKES...

Nice. A bicycle should come in handy for colliding with pedestrians stepping out from behind billboards.

I don't think the bikes are even free tbh. I think you have to pay a deposit and rental fee for them.

OTK

MYOB wrote: »

Its for the council to get free BIKES...

The bikes are not free. JC Decaux have agreed to supply a bike rental service in Dublin in exchange for the right to display millions of euro worth of advertising on these dangerous signs for a number of years. There are only a small number of bikes involved. The terms of the agreement are secret due to 'commercial sensitivities'. Both JC Decaux and Dublin city council have long histories of corrupt activities.

http://www.forbes.com/afxnewslimited/feeds/afx/2008/05/28/afx5055127.html
http://www.rte.ie/news/2003/1119/redmond.html

etc etc

IanCurtis

I saw one of these in Rathmines the other day and couldn't work out what it was for - now I know.

It is a disgrace to say the least. As someone pointed out, all they do is get in the way.

It's only a matter of time before someone takes a sledgehammer to them.

Bards

just sent the AA a mail making them aware of the thread. maybe we might see Conor Faughnan making a statement

MadsL

Right folks - I'm on the warpath now. I need your help. That's YOU, not someone else - "Ask not what your city can do for you......" [I suggest posting a thanks to say you have done your part - oh and spread the word]

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

Inner City Councillors:
Cllr Christy Burke 086 8126347
Cllr Aodhan O'Riordan 086 8190336
Cllr Mick Raffety 087 2351547
Cllr Tom Stafford 086 3036962
(I have left off Deputy Lord Mayor Emer Costello who has been very vocal on these)


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)

MadsL

A repost .... just for reference...
Now this is just taking the p1ss.... Dorset St/Synott Place

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?)


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 cycle lane...

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.

L1011

OTK wrote: »

The bikes are not free. JC Decaux have agreed to supply a bike rental service in Dublin in exchange for the right to display millions of euro worth of advertising on these dangerous signs for a number of years. There are only a small number of bikes involved. The terms of the agreement are secret due to 'commercial sensitivities'. Both JC Decaux and Dublin city council have long histories of corrupt activities.

http://www.forbes.com/afxnewslimited/feeds/afx/2008/05/28/afx5055127.html
http://www.rte.ie/news/2003/1119/redmond.html

etc etc

Free in the 'not costing the council cash' sense of free. Of course they'll find a way to screw over Joe Public in the process...

Metrobest

I don´t think the signs are really that bad... come on.. think of the benefits. FREE BIKES!!!!!!

In cases where the signs may impair the view of traffic lights, overhead traffic lights should be erected, which are easier for drivers to see.

A few minor adjustments might be needed here and there, but the advertisements are pretty small anyway so they don´t get in the way. It´s the same situation in Paris and Brussels and nobody´s complaining there. No doubt if Dublin city council decided to pay for the system out of public money there would be an outcry, so the trade off for these subtle ads is a free bike system for the city like Bicing here in Barcelona or Velib in Paris. Cyclists numbers will multiply and the city council will have the mandate to increase facilities for cyclists in the city.

MadsL

Just heard an emergency motion will be put to the Council tonight calling for a complete halt to all work until a Health and Safety review has been conducted.

Tune in ... they usually have to be taken before 9pm

Meeting just started

http://www.dublincity.public-i.tv/site/#webcast

Well done everyone!

Rawr

Clear Channel run a very similar system here in Oslo, Norway. You got citybikes hooked up to ad-panels all over the place. You have to pay the equivalent of a tenner for a pass that lasts the entire year.

Link: http://www.visitoslo.com/?cat=58934&tl=%3Fsp=GB%26dv_variables=visitoslo/inc/variables%26icp=visitoslo/produkt%26PR=23_7057_3

It is really handy.

But the bike racks here are usually placed away from the road in convenient locations (such as bus/tram stops). What I see in these images is just plain mad. That is obviously placed to advertise to passing motorists.

Has safety really been sacrificed to make a quick buck?

MadsL

I don´t think the signs are really that bad... come on.. think of the benefits. FREE BIKES!!!!!!

Don't be fooled. The bikes will not be free. In Paris (similar scheme)

"An annual pass for the pick-up and drop service costs €29 ($40) and a one-day pass is €1. The first half-hour of each journey is free; the users are then charged on a rising scale to encourage short bike usage. Accounts can be topped up by credit card at each bike station or on the website."

1. Not free - this is lost revenue to DCC of approx €100m-€150m over 15 years
2. Credit Card needed (In Paris it has to be French one - so no use to tourists)
3. It has been indicated that the deposit for the bikes with be €120 payable by credit card.
4. Paris got 13 bikes per advert, dublin was promised 4 per advert.
5. Originally removal of 100 48sheet billboards (often illegal anyway) 4 toilets, a wayfinding scheme and heritage trail were included in the deal - this has been 'trimmed' somehow to 50 48-sheets removed, no toilets, no wayfinding scheme.

Dublin City could have easily extended the free eco cabs scheme at much lower cost to our safety and the lost revenue to the city, or have implemented the bike scheme. 450 bikes is a joke - far too few.

MadsL

The City Council just passed a emergency motion (unanimously and agreed as without debate) that;

All work be halted on the JC Decaux scheme until a complete health and safety report has been issued (words to that effect)

One of the councillors mentioned the emails and texts that he received - so thank you all that made the effort.

:D:D

Rawr

MadsL wrote: »

The City Council just passed a emergency motion (unanimously and agreed as without debate) that;

All work be halted on the JC Decaux scheme until a complete health and safety report has been issued (words to that effect)

One of the councillors mentioned the emails and texts that he received - so thank you all that made the effort.

:D:D

Fair play to you MadsL, and everyone who sent a message in!
It's mad to think how effective Boards can sometimes be!!:D

KC61

MadsL wrote: »

The City Council just passed a emergency motion (unanimously and agreed as without debate) that;

All work be halted on the JC Decaux scheme until a complete health and safety report has been issued (words to that effect)

One of the councillors mentioned the emails and texts that he received - so thank you all that made the effort.

:D:D

Indeed, well done.

However, the City Manager pointed out that DCC is in a contractual situation with JC Deceaux which overrides any motion passed by the councillors.

He did, however, agree to examine the structure at this particular location as a matter of urgency.

MadsL

However, the City Manager pointed out that DCC is in a contractual situation with JC Deceaux which overrides any motion passed by the councillors.

This is the contract he won't allow the councillors to see......

smoke and mirrors?

jank

Credit Card needed (In Paris it has to be French one - so no use to tourists)

I was in Paris a few months ago and i got a bike via my irish credit card.

niall2j

Well done to all those who took action on this - the disregard for public safety by all involved in this scheme is truly shocking.

For what it's worth you have my full support!

monument

MadsL wrote: »

2. Credit Card needed (In Paris it has to be French one - so no use to tourists)

I used an Irish MBNA credit card on the Velib system just about two weeks ago.

MadsL wrote: »

4. Paris got 13 bikes per advert, dublin was promised 4 per advert.

...

450 bikes is a joke - far too few.

They're some of the main points on the billboards-for-bicycle dead and I think a new thread might be in order to talk about it more.

January

And yet, the structure is still there.

Run_to_da_hills

This whole bike thing is a scam to get more and more people into an in debt cashless society. Credit card dept alone is a very serious problem in Ireland and we could with less of it and NOT more of it. The vulnerable will be tempted to apply for Visa cards so that they can avail of these.

The commuters that will be using them will be the less well off that do not have their own scooters or bicycles or that cannot afford taxis. I have seen these same bicycles scattered about London Suburbs and many of them are compatible with certain issues of the London’s Oyster card.

spockety

As of this evening there is plastic fencing erected around the one on Dorset Street, or just beside it...

Rawr

Here in Oslo you can buy a special bike smart-card from assigned agents or their website.

It's a cheap subscription for the entire year, and only other major catch is that you are cycling a crazy bike with an advert on it's wheel (very like the image above.

http://www.visitoslo.com/?cat=58934&tl=%3Fsp=NO%26dv_variables=visitOSLO/inc/variables%26icp=visitOSLO/produkt%26PR=23_7057_3

I stand by this system (at least the one here), it works very well here and is incredibly handy. It's almost as fast as taking the bus / tram around town!

But there are several things that can seriously screw it up for Dublin. Some thoughts:
-It can be real dangerous to cycle in Dublin town
-The cyclelanes / tracks generally suck.
-Many know this and don't cycle in Dublin
-Tourists don't know this and may suffer seriously as a result
-Scumbags (both drunken and otherwise) will do their anti-socially best to destroy any city-bikes they encounter, dramatically shortening their operational life-expectancy.

Negitive stuff alas, but worth a head-scratching either way.

Run_to_da_hills

Rawr wrote: »

But there are several things that can seriously screw it up for Dublin. Some thoughts:
Negitive stuff alas, but worth a head-scratching either way.

You forgot to mention the Luas tram tracks :eek:

Hotblack Desiato

A bike-lending scheme was tried in Dublin before, they all ended up in the canal within a week.

Forget the bikes, they're just a smokescreen to get the highly intrusive and highly lucrative advertising in place. FFS it is actually aimed at motorists. Even if not obscuring traffic lights AND pedestrians AND junctions like the one pictured in this thread, they will still distract drivers.

Zoney

It is absurd that it was let get as far as even the concept drawing. There shouldn't have even been the remotest possiblity of this being a runner for the company, if we had sensible authorities.

monument

I'm open to suggestions of others, but the two major problems I see with the proposed bicycle rental system for Dublin is the deal with JC Decaux is a bad one (for DCC at least), and the scale of the system looks to be too small - evening accounting for the difference in the size of Paris and Dublin, the former started off with 10,000 bikes just last year and is now at 20,000 bikes.

Run_to_da_hills wrote: »

This whole bike thing is a scam to get more and more people into an in debt cashless society. Credit card dept alone is a very serious problem in Ireland and we could with less of it and NOT more of it. The vulnerable will be tempted to apply for Visa cards so that they can avail of these.

Forgetting about you're whole scam idea for a second... do you really think it's likely that "the vulnerable" will be tempted to apply for credit cards just so they can use a rental bike system?

Rawr wrote: »

But there are several things that can seriously screw it up for Dublin. Some thoughts:
-It can be real dangerous to cycle in Dublin town

Can you qualify that statement in any meaningful way? What does real dangerous mean?

-The cyclelanes / tracks generally suck.

Yeah, they do. But from my experience of spending most of my time on a bike in Paris on normal roads or in bus lanes, Dublin isn't too far behind.

-Many know this and don't cycle in Dublin
-Tourists don't know this and may suffer seriously as a result

Can you spell out what you're trying to suggest here?... I'm guessing you're not tying to say that tourists can't make up their own minds???

MadsL

Ok Dorset St looks like it is being removed. Now for the next one on Parnell St. This is a poor camphone image but notice the traffic light on the right is obscured except for the red. Which if you think about it means that there is only one effective amber light functioning for the ped crossing. :eek: :eek:

Also any pedestrians crossing behind this sign are hidden from oncoming traffic, the view of drivers turning right out of the carpark is also blocked.



Could someone post better pics if they work/live/drive in the area. Thanks.

Also pics needed of the one by the Bleeding Horse.

Also on the bikes debate - read this analysis on Paris.
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/world/europe/article4289943.ece

Key points:

Paris’s vélibs are used for 120,000 trips a day, each one averaging 22 minutes. However, the pedal boom has been attended by a jump in cycle deaths and injuries. Three vélib riders have been crushed under the wheels of heavy vehicles and about 70 have been injured since January this year. After a 35-year-old violinist was killed by a municipal bus in a bus lane in May, her father called on the Mayor to suspend the vélib scheme.

About 3,000 of the €400 (£320) bikes have been vandalised or stolen

The city of Paris has made about €30 million profit (Dublin is just giving this away in exchange for 450 bikes)

markpb

monument wrote: »

Can you qualify that statement in any meaningful way? What does real dangerous mean?

Cycle lanes in Dublin are poorly implemented, regularly put cyclists in a more dangerous road position than they would naturally cycle in, often have no legal standing and aren't enforced by the Gardai or DSPS. They are almost never segregated from the rest of the traffic.

Yeah, they do. But from my experience of spending most of my time on a bike in Paris on normal roads or in bus lanes, Dublin isn't too far behind.

True but they're trying. At least some of the bus and cycle lanes are segregated which means they're safer from regular traffic but at more risk from impatient bus drivers.

Can you spell out what you're trying to suggest here?... I'm guessing you're not tying to say that tourists can't make up their own minds???

He's saying that tourists might not realise that if you cycle in a dublin cycle lane drivers are quite happy to move into the lane and crush you. If you sit in the advanced stop boxes, you'll be out of the sight lines of HGVs. If you go at green lights, you're likely to be hit by someone running a red light in the opposite direction. You might mistakenly assume that cycling in Dublin is safe if the LA are being seen to encourage it.

I think DCC are stuck in catch 22. It's not worth spending money on cycle facilities because so few people cycle but it's also not worth getting free bikes because the cycle facilities are so poor. I'm not defending them though, I'd settle for a better deal from JCD (cash + same number of bikes) and them implementing cycle facilities with more than the 2 seconds of thought and planning they currently get.

Run_to_da_hills

monument wrote: »

Forgetting about you're whole scam idea for a second... do you really think it's likely that "the vulnerable" will be tempted to apply for credit cards just so they can use a rental bike system?

It’s just one more excuse for people to want a credit card. Notice in the picture I posted there are advertisements promoting VISA on the side of several bicycles. I’m sure the greedy banks will jump in on the bandwagon and will do great promotions to get 1st year students on to credit cards in their fresher year. i.e. free usage of bicycles for several months in exchange for signing up.

Another thing one must consider is the returning facilities, e.g., When these bikes are returned to a point, what would happen if there was a glut of bikes and not enough docking facilities, You can't just leave your bike or else you will lose your e150 deposit, you will end up cycling around the city looking for another one and walking 1/2 a mile back to the Dart station defeating the whole purpose. This has already being a major problem in Paris.

seamus

Run_to_da_hills wrote: »

It’s just one more excuse for people to want a credit card. Notice in the picture I posted there are advertisements promoting VISA on the side of several bicycles. I’m sure the greedy banks will jump in on the bandwagon and will do great promotions to get 1st year students on to credit cards in their fresher year. i.e. free usage of bicycles for several months in exchange for signing up.

People know that credit cards are a form of debt. If you're too stupid to manage your money correctly, then it's not the country's business to prevent you flushing it down the drain.

That's a total aside issue. My two main concerns with these bikes would be:

1. You swipe your card, take out the bike, then realise someone has kicked in the wheels, unhooked the brakes and let the air of the tyres. Good luck getting a refund.

2. It's somewhere else for fraudsters to attach their skimmers.

Stark

MadsL wrote: »

Also on the bikes debate - read this analysis on Paris.
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/world/europe/article4289943.ece

Key points:

Paris’s vélibs are used for 120,000 trips a day, each one averaging 22 minutes. However, the pedal boom has been attended by a jump in cycle deaths and injuries. Three vélib riders have been crushed under the wheels of heavy vehicles and about 70 have been injured since January this year. After a 35-year-old violinist was killed by a municipal bus in a bus lane in May, her father called on the Mayor to suspend the vélib scheme.

To be fair, that sounds like a problem with the city itself rather than the actual bikes. One thing I've found in my experience is that while Irish drivers can be clueless much of the time, French drivers can be complete psychopaths. The HGV accidents call for more cyclist education in my opinion. Countless lives are lost through people simply not realising the danger they put themselves in by sitting in a truck driver's blind spot.

Rawr

Run_to_da_hills wrote: »

Another thing one must consider is the returning facilities, e.g., When these bikes are returned to a point, what would happen if there was a glut of bikes and not enough docking facilities, You can't just leave your bike or else you will lose your e150 deposit, you will end up cycling around the city looking for another one and walking 1/2 a mile back to the Dart station defeating the whole purpose. This has already being a major problem in Paris.

This is a similar (and often annoying) downside to the system here in Oslo too. There is a city-bike rack near where I live, and another one not far from where I work.

It can very often happen that I'll grab a bike, and head downtown, only to find no docking space for my bike. Lucky, the docks themselves are very big (10+ per advert) and there are many in the area of the city centre. Thus you may end up spending another 2 - 5 minutes before getting to where you are going.

Furthermore, the system here offers a website + mobile phone service to help you find free docking spots and available bikes. The ad company also have trucks going around to regularly rotate the number of bikes at each dock, to ensure that there are always spaces and bikes at each.

The Dublin City-Bikes would at very least have to be run the same way.

Run_to_da_hills

seamus wrote: »

1. You swipe your card, take out the bike, then realise someone has kicked in the wheels, unhooked the brakes and let the air of the tyres. Good luck getting a refund.

I do believe that these bikes are totally incompatible with anything ever made, i.e. everything down to the last nut and bolt is unique to them. they also weigh an absolute ton, so I don't think the bikes nor their parts would be worth robbing, I would say most of them will eventually end up in the Liffey.

The only way that would encourage people to return bikes is to offer some kind of a no quibble reward like what they do with supermarket trolleys. I.e. the price of a packet of fags would be enough to get these bikes returned to a compound.

MadsL

Fresh controversy erupted over Dublin's "billboards for bikes" scheme after one of the new advert panels became an instant traffic hazard.

The sleek electronic "metropanel" was placed directly in front of a set of traffic lights and pedestrian crossing at a busy city junction.

Dublin City Council has ordered advertising giants JC Decaux to immediately remove the structure that outraged locals and councillors.

Calls have now been made for a halt to all work on the scheme until the newly-erected signs are safety-tested.

The 2.5-metre ad panel at the notorious junction of Dorset Street and Synott Place was one of a series of billboards being installed in a scheme backed by Dublin City Council.

The council has now requested the removal of the offending billboard and JC Decaux has undertaken to do so in the next 24 hours.

obstruction

"The sign was an obstruction to the traffic lights and as such its sitting was not in accordance with the terms of the grant of planning permission at this location", a council spokesman said.

"Recent improvement works along Dorset Street has altered the width and alignment of the footpath at this location resulting in the approved sign, which was erected in the correct location, obstructing views for pedestrians and motorists".

He stressed that a safety audit under the terms of the planning permissions granted is being compiled by JC Decaux and where any sign fails the audit they will be removed.

However, Councillor Emer Costello said: "I am outraged by what I have seen, especially as there has been a huge number of incidents at those particular traffic lights".

JC Decaux proposed funding a free bicycle scheme similar to other European capitals in return for around 150 billboards, though this was later dropped to under 100.

Dublin City Council eventually agreed to 72 sites and some were appealed. In February, An Bord Pleanala overturned permission for 18 billboards, but endorsed six of the 2.5-metre high structures.

http://www.herald.ie/national-news/city-news/billboards-that-caused-traffic-chaos-1430159.html

*Sigh* journalists...well done for picking it up but the picture doesn't exactly 'tell the story'.

"Sleek"???

He stressed that a safety audit under the terms of the planning permissions granted is being compiled by JC Decaux and where any sign fails the audit they will be removed.

The point (and the story!) is that the safety audit is only being done AFTER construction.

erected in the correct location

No it wasn't

Dublin City Council eventually agreed to 72 sites

No, they agreed too more - individuals paying almost €300 each in taking it to An Bord Pleanala reduced that number.

Who changed the road layout - DCC, who granted permission. DCC.

Hmmm...excuses.

seamus

Run_to_da_hills wrote: »

I do believe that these bikes are totally incompatible with anything ever made, i.e. everything down to the last nut and bolt is unique to them. they also weigh an absolute ton, so I don't think the bikes nor their parts would be worth robbing, I would say most of them will eventually end up in the Liffey.

The only way that would encourage people to return bikes is to offer some kind of a no quibble reward like what they do with supermarket trolleys. I.e. the price of a packet of fags would be enough to get these bikes returned to a compound.

I'm not talking so much about the users, but just random vandalism.

As anyone who's ever left their bike locked in public on a Friday or Saturday night knows, you're lucky to find a functional bike the next day after drunken scumbags have kicked the **** out of it.

MadsL

In Paris Decaux lost 3000 bikes in the first year

MadsL

There will be an item on this on the Breakfast Show on newstalk tomorrow (Thurs 10th July) at approx 8am.

Please send your comments to breakfast@newstalk.ie or text 53106


Appreciate your further support.

monument

markpb wrote: »

Cycle lanes in Dublin are poorly implemented, regularly put cyclists in a more dangerous road position than they would naturally cycle in, often have no legal standing and aren't enforced by the Gardai or DSPS. They are almost never segregated from the rest of the traffic.

I was really asking about Rawr's unqualified meaning of "real dangerous".

I far too many people over estimate how dangerous cycling is in Dublin and in Ireland in general.

markpb wrote: »

He's saying that tourists might not realise that if you cycle in a dublin cycle lane drivers are quite happy to move into the lane and crush you. If you sit in the advanced stop boxes, you'll be out of the sight lines of HGVs. If you go at green lights, you're likely to be hit by someone running a red light in the opposite direction. You might mistakenly assume that cycling in Dublin is safe if the LA are being seen to encourage it.

I think that's something like saying they stop people from walking in Paris because drivers often zoom past even after the light is showing a green man.

And on the bike rental systems, I think if Paris - with their crazy roads - can do it, we can in Dublin.

markpb wrote: »

I think DCC are stuck in catch 22. It's not worth spending money on cycle facilities because so few people cycle but it's also not worth getting free bikes because the cycle facilities are so poor. I'm not defending them though, I'd settle for a better deal from JCD (cash + same number of bikes) and them implementing cycle facilities with more than the 2 seconds of thought and planning they currently get.

Totally agree with you on that.

Run_to_da_hills wrote: »

....Another thing one must consider is the returning facilities, e.g., When these bikes are returned to a point, what would happen if there was a glut of bikes and not enough docking facilities, You can't just leave your bike or else you will lose your e150 deposit, you will end up cycling around the city looking for another one and walking 1/2 a mile back to the Dart station defeating the whole purpose. This has already being a major problem in Paris.

That's not such a large problem in Paris where there are so many stations. When you're at a station which is full there's normally another not too far away and/or somebody will come along to rent a bike.

If the stations in Dublin are spread out - and with a far smaller system to start with - this really might be a major problem.

And while this is something that can be a real problem in any system like this, it can be as simple as more docking bays being added to really busy stations.

seamus wrote: »

...That's a total aside issue. My two main concerns with these bikes would be:

1. You swipe your card, take out the bike, then realise someone has kicked in the wheels, unhooked the brakes and let the air of the tyres. Good luck getting a refund.

2. It's somewhere else for fraudsters to attach their skimmers.

As for 1: I'm open to correction on this, but if the Dublin rates is like the one Paris, you simple return the bike.

On 2: Taking into account that stations have far fewer card transactions compared to rentals (even day or week users don't enter their card each time), I think that's also a side issue.

Run_to_da_hills wrote: »

...I would say most of them will eventually end up in the Liffey.

The only way that would encourage people to return bikes is to offer some kind of a no quibble reward like what they do with supermarket trolleys. I.e. the price of a packet of fags would be enough to get these bikes returned to a compound.

The bike are not - as has been reported - free. You need a subscription, and if the bike is not returned a deposit will be take from you.

Sure, you all ready know you need a credit card to rent the bikes. So, I really don't know how you can back the above up.

monument

MadsL wrote: »

Also on the bikes debate - read this analysis on Paris.
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/world/europe/article4289943.ece

Key points:

Paris’s vélibs are used for 120,000 trips a day, each one averaging 22 minutes. However, the pedal boom has been attended by a jump in cycle deaths and injuries. Three vélib riders have been crushed under the wheels of heavy vehicles and about 70 have been injured since January this year. After a 35-year-old violinist was killed by a municipal bus in a bus lane in May, her father called on the Mayor to suspend the vélib scheme.

And the next paragraph of the same article...

The authorities are blaming the cyclists as well as the city’s notoriously aggressive drivers, although the overall accident rate has declined by 20 per cent. Many accidents involve inexperienced riders or careless tourists.

EDIT: Reading that (London) Times article fully... LOL!!!

Police are handing out football-style yellow cards this week to cyclists, drivers and pedestrians who commit minor but potentially dangerous offences. Last year 7,000 fines were issued to cyclists, double the previous year. Yet few riders of the vélibs bother to wear helmets or high-visibility attire and more than half do not stop at red lights.

... that's a very UK / Irish / US point of view. You won't see many helmets or high-visibility vests most of Europe, including cycling cultures like Denmark, the Netherlands, Germany etc.

And "and more than half do not stop at red light" looks like a stat picked out of thin air (from the polices' or the reporter's mind)

MadsL wrote: »

In Paris Decaux lost 3000 bikes in the first year

If you're taking that from the Times article, you should note that it's 3,000 vandalised or stolen. And that's out of a reported 20,000 Vélib bikes now in Paris...

JCDecaux, the firm which operates the bicycles in return for concessions in display advertising, acknowledges that it found the scheme tougher than it had expected. About 3,000 of the €400 (£320) bikes have been vandalised or stolen, it said.

Run_to_da_hills

monument wrote: »

The bike are not - as has been reported - free. You need a subscription, and if the bike is not returned a deposit will be take from you Sure, you all ready know you need a credit card to rent the bikes. So, I really don't know how you can back the above up.

I never once said in any of my posts that the bikes were free, infact I disputed the fact that credit cards were necessary to activate an account to hire them. I am talking about the oppertunist thief who nicks one of these to get to the pub and then dumps it, If some scanger then finds it rather than throwing it over the quays he can bring it to a compound and get a small token reward for it. They cannot make the reward too much as it would encourage theft. A Supermarket trolly would be in the reagion of e70 but a simple e2 deposit keeps them returned.

monument

Run_to_da_hills wrote: »

I never once said in any of my posts that the bikes were free, infact I disputed the fact that credit cards were necessary to activate an account to hire them. I am talking about the oppertunist thief who nicks one of these to get to the pub and then dumps it, If some scanger then finds it rather than throwing it over the quays he can bring it to a compound and get a token reward for it.

What are we talking about here?... stealing a locked bike? Opportunistically?

You seam to be over talking the likelihood of this, and other doomsday scenarios.

Run_to_da_hills

monument wrote: »

What are we talking about here?... stealing a locked bike? Opportunistically?

Read the end of the edited post. Any of the locking stations i have seen around railway stations Central London have a CCTV cam overlooking them. The locks at the docking stations are extremly robust and I dont think anyone would be stupid to risk trying to nick one for the sake of e5 or e10.

monument wrote: »

You seam to be over talking the likelihood of this, and other doomsday scenarios.

Leaving out the "doomsday sinarios" I am totally against the encouragement use of credit cards because they are one of the main causes of leading people into financial debt, Ie people are tempted to buy stuff they cannot really afford. There are plenty of people that have been turned away from future loans and mortgages because of being blacklisted by credit cards. The 3V cards are a good idea because one can only spend on what they have deposited in the account.

monument

If it's not stealing locked bikes, what exactly do you mean by "I am talking about the oppertunist thief who nicks one of these to get to the pub and then dumps it"?

Run_to_da_hills

monument wrote: »

If it's not stealing locked bikes, what exactly do you mean by "I am talking about the oppertunist thief who nicks one of these to get to the pub and then dumps it"?

Somewhere along the line someone will find these unlocked, happens all the time. outside shops,work places, in drive ways, etc. I had several bikes nicked in the past from just being careless. The oppertunist thief is not interested in going out of his way to rob, he will just take something when he sees it handy.

MadsL

Monument - do you think plonking advertising signs in dangerous locations is worth this bike scheme?

Don't get me wrong I support a bike scheme, just not this one, whose value to the city seems to be shrinking day by day.

Do you think it's worth what we are giving away in return?