GrahamH wrote:The bollards are fancy, but are they needed? I thought it was DCC policy, or should that be best practice, to limit the alterations, i.e incisions, to original paving? In all fairness, if you're walking along the kerbline with that vast extent of paving to walk on, you deserve to be clipped by a bus.
Slightly off-topic, perhaps, but I wanted to highlight this nevertheless.
I've been mulling over this comment for the last couple of days, Graham, and I still can't figure out whether you were being facetious or serious when you said pedestrians deserved to be hit by the bus if they walked too close to the edge. Usually, you'd put a smiley beside it to signify the gag, but there's none. Equally, this isn't the kind of comment I'd expect from you. Hence the query.
Speaking as a daily pedestrian, as someone who has been hit by the wing mirror of a bus on Clare Street as I was walking along the kerb (in the same direction as the bus, so I was hit from behind on the back of the head), and as someone who has a professional interest in pedestrian planning in Dublin, I disagree strongly with your statement.
This is the footpath, which is the designated area for walking. The walking area extends to the edge of the kerb. Period. No debate. Etc.
There is no law against walking on any part of the footpath (unless it's an off-road cycle lane- a separate matter entirely). And there are no bonus points in life for walking further away from the carriageway.
If a bus hits a pedestrian who is walking on the footpath, the bus is automatically, a priori
at fault- the implication being that the bus was too close to the pedestrians, which constitutes dangerous driving.
And (quite tenuous, I know) buses on this stretch of Dame Street should be leaving room for bikes on the inside.
Lastly (even more tenuous, perhaps), if someone walks down the middle of the road, drivers don't have the right simply to run them over on the grounds that they were walking where they shouldn't. Oh I've been tempted alright, such as when joggers take up the full width of the bike lane, to give them a fright, but I know that it's not allowed. Simple as that.
I too have an issue with the bollards, but it's more to do with their safety re cycling (in addition to their conservation implications). Many bollards and footpath guardrails in town are too close to the edge of the footpath and as a result jeapordise cyclists- one clip of the handlebar and you can say goodnight. One might argue that, if buses should move out from the kerb (as I advocated) then cyclists should too, but that ignores the provisions re cycle tracks and the safety of cyclists who aren't in lanes where provided- I have too many examples of drivers trying to 'educate' me on where I should be riding, using their vehicles as teaching aids.
If I've misunderstood, sorry for the rant.