Legality of putting Speed Ramps in Private Housing Estates

Hello123

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

Who owns the roads in the estate?

Hello123

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

seamus

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

Just what the world needs, more speed ramps.

Hello123

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

death1234567 wrote: »

Just what the world needs, more speed ramps.

What the world needs drivers with more care :rolleyes:

Hello123

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

Lucena

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

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

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

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

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

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

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.

Chicanes work well too if positioned properly

Iwannahurl

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

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

Hello123

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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.