[Article] Pedestrian struck by Dublin bus

markpb

IrishTimes wrote:

A pedestrian has been struck by a Dublin Bus vehicle in the city centre this morning.

The incident took place on Eden Quay in the bus lane. According to gardaí, the victim's injuries are not thought to be life threatening.

The bus lane is blocked, and as no buses will stop at Eden Quay, passengers are advised to get on and off at College Street. Gardaí are directing traffic at the Beresford Place/Eden Quay junction.

(c) Irish Times

Run_to_da_hills

I blame complacency, the pedestrian probably thought that the bus lanes were now a safe place to cross as the vehicles were traveling at no more than 18mph

Cookie_Monster

first victim of the new limit

rabble, rabble, rabble

Tarabuses

Are they going to report everytime a pedestrian is struck by a vehicle?

monument

Tarabuses wrote: »

Are they going to report everytime a pedestrian is struck by a vehicle?

It's a three / four line breaking news story online, not exactly that noteworthy say in the print edition. In a way, this thread could be seen as more over kill than the article.

thebman

Reduce speed limit to 10MPH, that is the problem :rolleyes:

Pedestrians can do no wrong are always in the right in city centre because they outnumber buses.

corktina

to stop buses hitting pedestrians, the obvious thing is to reduce the speed limit to below walking pace. Pedestrian fatalities then a thing of the past. Mind you, can we cope with all the "pedestrian hits dublin bus" headlines.:)

RasTa

Just ban all cars from the city or put in some sort of congestion charge for people traveling through. Motorbikes, buses, taxi's are fine.

KevR

[quote=[Deleted User];64354994]Just ban all cars from the city or put in some sort of congestion charge for people traveling through. Motorbikes, buses, taxi's are fine.[/QUOTE]

I think this plan might need a bit more thought. People in Ireland already pay high motor tax, the Port Tunnel and M50 are tolled. You can't have the City's ring road tolled and have a congestion charge for the City Centre. It can only be one or the other.

Contrary to what some people believe, the City Centre belongs to private motor traffic as well as pedestrians and cyclists.

It's funny how I'm a regular pedestrian in Dublin City Centre and yet I never felt in grave danger when the speed limit was 50kmh. I suppose that's because I'm a careful pedestrian who takes responsibility for my own safety. I also drive into Dublin City on occasion so I have a motorist's perspective. Some of the anti-motorist people clearly don't have any perspective when it comes to issues such as these, it's just narrow mindedness all the way.

SickCert

Eden quay should have 4ft high railings down most of it ~ were having near misses with junkies the rest of the day.

HydeRoad

SickCert wrote: »

Eden quay should have 4ft high railings down most of it ~ were having near misses with junkies the rest of the day.

If Eden Quay were just a bus terminus stop, rather than a mini bus depot, that might be feasible. Buses should pull in to their terminus stop, load up, wait a minute or two for departure time, and then go. There shouldn't be lines of parked, empty buses when there are at least two large bus yards within reasonable walking distance. Of course, Eden Quay is just another street where Dublin Bus have self perceived 'grandfather' rights to park at will, at no charge.

Why don't DCC charge Dublin Bus for parking space, at say, a fiver an hour per bus? They charge everyone else. Boy, wouldn't that solve one of the scourges of this city overnight?

Run_to_da_hills

SickCert wrote: »

Eden quay should have 4ft high railings down most of it ~ were having near misses with junkies the rest of the day.

Its worse since the Boardwalk, the place has become a supermarket for drug dealers.

HonalD

KevR wrote: »

Some of the anti-motorist people clearly don't have any perspective when it comes to issues such as these, it's just narrow mindedness all the way.

Democracy I think is what it is called

Jip

HydeRoad wrote: »

Of course, Eden Quay is just another street where Dublin Bus have self perceived 'grandfather' rights to park at will, at no charge.

Why don't DCC charge Dublin Bus for parking space, at say, a fiver an hour per bus? They charge everyone else. Boy, wouldn't that solve one of the scourges of this city overnight?

Spot on, the Marlborough Street/Lower Abbey Street area is another such area where they take over making a mess of the place. If there's nowhere to park a bus will regularly just stop on the road blocking traffic coming from behind until either a bus ahead moves out or the bus in question lets all its pedestrians off.

markpb

HydeRoad wrote: »

If Eden Quay were just a bus terminus stop, rather than a mini bus depot, that might be feasible. Buses should pull in to their terminus stop, load up, wait a minute or two for departure time, and then go. There shouldn't be lines of parked, empty buses when there are at least two large bus yards within reasonable walking distance.

The impact this would have on the city as a pedestrian space would be huge (and positive)! I know DB have had problems with congestion but the bus gate and other improvements have gone a long way towards fixing that.

Also as a cyclist, it's very dangerous having a line of buses to hide pedestrians, parked cars, cars coming out of alleys, etc.

KC61

HydeRoad wrote: »

If Eden Quay were just a bus terminus stop, rather than a mini bus depot, that might be feasible. Buses should pull in to their terminus stop, load up, wait a minute or two for departure time, and then go. There shouldn't be lines of parked, empty buses when there are at least two large bus yards within reasonable walking distance. Of course, Eden Quay is just another street where Dublin Bus have self perceived 'grandfather' rights to park at will, at no charge.

Why don't DCC charge Dublin Bus for parking space, at say, a fiver an hour per bus? They charge everyone else. Boy, wouldn't that solve one of the scourges of this city overnight?

To suggest that every bus is going to arrive one minute before departure is daft. Every bus operator will always build in "recovery time" into the schedule to allow for unforeseen delays etc, which is usually 5-10 minutes.

With any large city bus operation there will always be bus stands in the city centre where buses layover between trips - London being a prime example.

Eden Quay houses the 15s, 65s and 84 which will always account for a large number of buses due to the high peak vehicle requirement.

I seem to frequently remember Circle Line's buses being parked outside Nutgrove Shopping Centre between trips. The bus was never sitting there for just one minute as you would outline above.

markpb

KC61 wrote: »

With any large city bus operation there will always be bus stands in the city centre where buses layover between trips - London being a prime example.

TfL does not use city centre streets for bus layovers - they use local bus depots or parking areas at Tube stations.

I seem to frequently remember Circle Line's buses being parked outside Nutgrove Shopping Centre between trips. The bus was never sitting there for just one minute as you would outline above.

That's not ideal either but at least it's not the city centre. Having this in the city centre makes those streets less desirable for everyone. It reduces the amount of light (both natural and artifical) reaching the footpath which makes it feel run down and unsafe (especially at night). It reduces the visibility of shopfronts which hurts their business (there aren't many thriving businesses on Marlborough St). It limits the amount of place that taxies and other private cars can pull in to drop off. It's dangerous for cyclists. It's hard for pedestrians to cross the road. It also makes it harder for other buses to pull in to the kerb.

There are plenty of valid reasons for DB doing what they do (mostly caused by other peoples incompetence) but they really should be trying to reduce it (especially now with the bus gate and NTA). Ringsend and Broadstone are very close to the city centre - any bus with more than 10 minutes to wait should go there. I've often seen 27B drivers having a sleep in the 27B start point which means a) they're there for a while and b) the driver operating the next departure can't pull into the stop. That's just ridiculous.

As an example, Barina construction knocked an old garage on Dorset St between Blessington and Granby. They've realised it's not going to be built on for a while now so they're using it as a private car park. DB could use it for layovers and pay a small amount to the developer. It has easy access to Parnell Sq for southbound buses and is close enough to OCS and the Quays so buses would not be stuck in traffic getting to/from it.

Edit: I'm not blaming the 27b drivers here, they're just doing what they're told to.

AlekSmart

TfL does not use city centre streets for bus layovers - they use local bus depots or parking areas at Tube stations.

This is not strictly true,as a ramble around central London will throw up quite a few marked "Bus Stance" positions,usually in side-streets or wider locations.

However it is true to say that the demographics of London Bus depots makes it far easier to use these as the layover/break points,although the Thatcher era disposals of such prime locations brought with it the nightmare of scheduling services from out-of-town hard standing Industrial Estates.

Mind you the "old" CIE were intent on eliminating the very thing Markpb complains of with it`s Bachelors Walk trans-Liffey Transport Hub.
But as with many such worthwhile schemes,it fell foul of one of our more meteoric Taoisigh who saw much more potential in a Craic zone...

KC61

markpb wrote: »

TfL does not use city centre streets for bus layovers - they use local bus depots or parking areas at Tube stations.

Totally incorrect.

There are numerous bus stands in London city centre for layovers between journeys, on side streets usually.

markpb wrote: »

That's not ideal either but at least it's not the city centre. Having this in the city centre makes those streets less desirable for everyone. It reduces the amount of light (both natural and artifical) reaching the footpath which makes it feel run down and unsafe (especially at night). It reduces the visibility of shopfronts which hurts their business (there aren't many thriving businesses on Marlborough St). It limits the amount of place that taxies and other private cars can pull in to drop off. It's dangerous for cyclists. It's hard for pedestrians to cross the road. It also makes it harder for other buses to pull in to the kerb.

There are plenty of valid reasons for DB doing what they do (mostly caused by other peoples incompetence) but they really should be trying to reduce it (especially now with the bus gate and NTA). Ringsend and Broadstone are very close to the city centre - any bus with more than 10 minutes to wait should go there. I've often seen 27B drivers having a sleep in the 27B start point which means a) they're there for a while and b) the driver operating the next departure can't pull into the stop. That's just ridiculous.

As an example, Barina construction knocked an old garage on Dorset St between Blessington and Granby. They've realised it's not going to be built on for a while now so they're using it as a private car park. DB could use it for layovers and pay a small amount to the developer. It has easy access to Parnell Sq for southbound buses and is close enough to OCS and the Quays so buses would not be stuck in traffic getting to/from it.

Edit: I'm not blaming the 27b drivers here, they're just doing what they're told to.

The problem is if you bring buses beyond the city centre to depots such as Ringsend, Broadstone and Summerhill you then need more running time to get to/from the depot, which requires extra buses and therefore more drivers and more resources.

The buses do not necessarily have 10 minutes to wait - it is extra time built into the schedule for unforeseen delays. Some days it won't be needed, other days it will. Some routes currently do have far too much running time (such as the 14, 14a and 48a - but this is to be addressed as part of the network review I understand), while others are too tight.

If an optimum service is to be provided you will always need some city termini and bus stands. There was a plan for a bus station at Strand Street that would take a lot of buses off-street, but this seems to be on hold.

markpb

KC61 wrote: »

If an optimum service is to be provided you will always need some city termini and bus stands.

I'm not arguing with any of that. I just think there's more to a city than it's bus service. Strangling the life out of city centre streets to provide a decent bus service isn't a great compromise.

DB said for years that they couldn't run more cross city bus routes or far-side terminating routes because of congestion. Now that the bus gates solves a lot of that congestion, have they reacted at all?

KC61

markpb wrote: »

I'm not arguing with any of that. I just think there's more to a city than it's bus service. Strangling the life out of city centre streets to provide a decent bus service isn't a great compromise.

DB said for years that they couldn't run more cross city bus routes or far-side terminating routes because of congestion. Now that the bus gates solves a lot of that congestion, have they reacted at all?

I'm sure that the network review will address that - this is so fundamental that the company are (im my view quite rightly) taking time to get it right before implementing it. Getting scheules changed involves negotiating with the unions and the DoT/NTA - and as we all know that is not necessarily straightforward. I wish it was but it ain't.

And just to point out I was not criticising Circle Line - just making the point that every operator does have an element of recovery time in their schedule.

No one is disputing that schedules need updating and routes redesigned, but we know that changes are in the pipeline during 2010.

thebman

KC61 wrote: »

I'm sure that the network review will address that - this is so fundamental that the company are (im my view quite rightly) taking time to get it right before implementing it. Getting scheules changed involves negotiating with the unions and the DoT/NTA - and as we all know that is not necessarily straightforward. I wish it was but it ain't.

Translation, get so many people involved in various committees that it all gets arsed up and then everyone points the finger at the other guy until it leaves the press.

Good old fashioned Irish politics.

HydeRoad

KC61 wrote: »

To suggest that every bus is going to arrive one minute before departure is daft. Every bus operator will always build in "recovery time" into the schedule to allow for unforeseen delays etc, which is usually 5-10 minutes.

With any large city bus operation there will always be bus stands in the city centre where buses layover between trips - London being a prime example.

Eden Quay houses the 15s, 65s and 84 which will always account for a large number of buses due to the high peak vehicle requirement.

Give the average bus on the 15 route fifteen minutes layover at the outer end, where there is space to wait. Give it five minutes layover in the city, where space is at a premium. Simple. If the driver needs to hand over or have his lunch, then send him to Summerhill, where there is a large, empty bus depot. Eden Quay shouldn't be a bus depot. Anyway this is heading way off topic for this thread.

KC61 wrote: »

I seem to frequently remember Circle Line's buses being parked outside Nutgrove Shopping Centre between trips. The bus was never sitting there for just one minute as you would outline above.

I suggested an optimum layover of a minute or two. Obviously a bus on a two hour journey requires a little more. Circle Line buses waited one at a time at Nutgrove for departure, nothing more. They weren't abandoned there for shift changes, drivers having lunchbreaks, going home, whatever it is that Dublin Bus drivers park buses on Eden Quay for an hour or more do.

Anyway Circle Line went defunct two years ago, it's a bit of an irrelevance to bring it up now! The point is why Dublin Bus feel they have grandfather rights to park forty or fifty buses at a time all over the city, causing untold congestion, and wasting valuable space for everyone else. It might have a relevance to pedestrian safety in this city. I'm sure it has far more relevance than the 30kph speed limit, for instance.

HydeRoad

KC61 wrote: »

I'm sure that the network review will address that - this is so fundamental that the company are (im my view quite rightly) taking time to get it right before implementing it. Getting scheules changed involves negotiating with the unions and the DoT/NTA - and as we all know that is not necessarily straightforward. I wish it was but it ain't.

And just to point out I was not criticising Circle Line - just making the point that every operator does have an element of recovery time in their schedule.

No one is disputing that schedules need updating and routes redesigned, but we know that changes are in the pipeline during 2010.

I'm afraid I don't have your faith in the forthcoming network review, for a number of reasons.

First of all, it will be hamstrung by the current archaic fare collection arrangements, which are far and away the most inefficient and time consuming element of Dublin Bus operations. They really need to move to flat fare and smart card, and preferably a return to multi door on cross city routes. If that is out of their hands, well it still has a relevance to any network or operational reviews, which will suffer otherwise.

Secondly, Dublin Bus really need to get a handle on their garaging requirements. They really need to garage more routes at the outer ends, preferably smaller depots closer to individual routes, and hold Phibsboro as a kind of central garaging, canteen and headquarters. Summerhill could play a more useful role as a central garaging, service, fuel, canteen and rest facility for all the private operator and touring coaches that currently struggle to find streetside parking in most awkward and unsuitable locations. If there is no review of garaging requirements, then it means this is not a root and branch review, and is really just an exercise in PR.

Thirdly, of course, the unions. What can I say? The unions will oppose anything that is radical, that might be for the greater good for this city, so given that, I would say a few deckchairs will be moved, not too many to upset anybody, and that this review will be a waste of time. I await with interest.

_Kaiser_

KevR wrote: »

It's funny how I'm a regular pedestrian in Dublin City Centre and yet I never felt in grave danger when the speed limit was 50kmh. I suppose that's because I'm a careful pedestrian who takes responsibility for my own safety. I also drive into Dublin City on occasion so I have a motorist's perspective. Some of the anti-motorist people clearly don't have any perspective when it comes to issues such as these, it's just narrow mindedness all the way.

Just wanted to pick up on this from the last page... (warning: rant ahead!)

You've highlighted right there the crux of the entire problem (and to a larger extent Irish society today) - no one wants to take ANY personal responsibility for ANYTHING.

Whether it's being responsible for safely crossing the road (something which in my day we were taught as kids - and I'm only in my 30s!), or raising our kids with a bit of respect for themselves, others and the law, or politicians being accountable for their actions, Irish society today is run on the concept of "can't someone else do it?" (as Homer Simpson once said).

It's like we've nationally reverted to todder-level - unable (or unwilling) to take any control or responsibility for an increasing amount of our own lives.
We can't do it personally, so we don't expect any better from other people regardless of what position or (alleged) responsibilities they hold.

Personally I find it a disgusting by-product of the Americanised therapy/compo/touchy-feely mentality that started to influence most of the developed world from the late 80's onwards. Before too long we won't be able to tie our shoelaces without peer approval and a self-help guide :rolleyes:

KevR

When I was a youngster we were allowed to play out around the estate but my parents had it drilled into me that I had to be extremely careful on the roads in the estate which didn't (and still don't) have much traffic. I wasn't allowed near the main road - if I went near it and my parents found out I would have gotten the biggest boot up the arse ever!

These days, instead of parents warning/teaching their kids about roads, they campaign (harass the Council) for speed bumps or lower speed limits. There's a woman living across the road from me who lets her young toddler daughter run around in between parked cars and out onto the road (the mother just stands at the front door watching!). If anything ever happens to her daughter she will probably start complaining that people are driving too fast through the estate (they aren't by the way) instead of questioning her own parenting - I would put money on it.


PS - I hope nothing ever happens the toddler, it just really shocks me when I see her running out on to the road and her mother not batting an eye lid.

the_syco

RasTa wrote: »

Just ban all cars from the city or put in some sort of congestion charge for people traveling through. Motorbikes, buses, taxi's are fine.

A bus is what hit the ped, so I don't see your logic... :pac: