STUPIDLY EXPENSIVE crossings, legal status? —Not universally recognised road markings

zebra-crossing-by-marian-kamensky-caglecartoons-com-1The urban design team(?!) lost it before they ever got it.

At Facebook, Alan Wilson says: “My concern is the cost. $140,000 for two crossings. Too many other things need money spent on upgrading”

Tony McAuliffe says: “….The Zebra crossing works, in part, ’cause they’re universally recognised for what they are. But 3-D pedestrian crossings? While they look fantastic, how will they perform functionally? If they don’t – and (hypothetically) a pedestrian gets clobbered because a driver fails to perceive them for what they’re meant to be – who’s prepared to answer the awkward questions?”

Too right. Bullshit City: Walk this way: 3-D crossings set to dazzle (ODT)
“Crossing the road in Dunedin’s tertiary precinct will be much more fun from this week, with the installation of two 3-D pedestrian crossings in Clyde St.”

Nothing grey pavement paint can’t remove on a dark night.

The frigging murals like a hippy rash about town are bad enough. A couple of internationally-authored ones are ‘art’, but the rest count as amateur copyist dross (mostly by technically challenged locals) wrecking our unique urban vistas.

****

mural-applied-to-raw-red-brick-alley-next-to-104-bond-st-guy-mauve-at-flickr-comThanks to irresponsible building owners and ‘know-it-all-bend-the-rules’ city officials (friends of the irresponsible owners), this mural was applied to raw red brick in the side alley at 98 Bond St —contrary to the Dunedin City District Plan for listed precincts. This industrial building, a rare remnant, dates to the 1860s.
SHAME ON ALL INVOLVED.

Posted by Elizabeth Kerr

This post is offered in the public interest.

*Images: caglecartoons.com – Zebra Crossing by Marian Kamensky | flickr.com – mural at 98 Bond St by Guy Mauve

Advertisements

12 Comments

Filed under Architecture, Business, DCC, District Plan, Dunedin, Economics, Electricity, Finance, Heritage, Heritage NZ, Infrastructure, Media, New Zealand, OAG, Ombudsman, People, Perversion, Pet projects, Politics, Project management, Property, Proposed 2GP, Public interest, Resource management, Site, Town planning, Travesty, Urban design, What stadium

12 responses to “STUPIDLY EXPENSIVE crossings, legal status? —Not universally recognised road markings

  1. Elizabeth

    At Facebook:

  2. In general I like the street art that now adorns many Dunedin buildings. It has given my home town a lift and an attitude it hasn’t had for many years. The street art does point to beyond the narrow provincialism so often evident in Dunedin. On my last visit back, I made a special effort to visit as many of these street art works as I could. I liked them all.

    That being said, I did wonder about the 3D pedestrian crossing and whether it would lead to increased risk when crossing. Maybe, maybe not. Perhaps we should see.

    I hadn’t realised that there were restrictions against painting on raw red brick and think you have a definite point.

    Nonetheless I prefer a city trying new things and experimenting with public art. Dunedin has a rich history and so much to be proud of. I’d like to think the new wave of street art adds to that tradition, rather than detracting from it – missteps notwithstanding.

  3. Hype O'Thermia

    We already have uncertainty around the tiled “crossings” that aren’t crossings in the CBD. They are, apparently, suggestions that drivers might perhaps like to give way to people crossing the street but they don’t have to. Some pedestrians, from their behaviour, appear to think the bands of tiles ARE pedestrian crossings therefore there is no need to look, nor to take the earplugs out. Do we really need more “is it or isn’t it” crossings? Least of all in the student area where there are so few young people who were taught how to cross a road, before their adoring families sent them to Otago University for higher education.
    And as for the cost of this road decor – there seem to be a few people in the DCC and Council who haven’t heard the city is in the carmine to scarlet pulsating red-for-$danger, so all cute ideas need to be stashed in a banana box under the bed for the foreseeable future.

  4. photonz

    How about the insanely stupid (to the point of being criminally negligent) council act of putting slippery smooth green paint right in front of the pedestrian crossings at Cargills Corner.

    It’s so slippery in the wet, that cars spin up on it just trying to take off.

    As the slippery area is right in front of the pedestrian crossing, you’d have to ask if they are deliberately trying to kill people.

    • Elizabeth

      Thanks photonz, will check these out and do followup with DCC.

    • Hype O'Thermia

      It’s the Dunedin Way, photonz. It’s our Culture.
      Why put cycle lanes along state highway? Why(2) when it involves narrowing vehicle lanes till a skilled truck driver can j-u-s-t fit their vehicle within the lines?
      Why build traffic islands so emergency vehicles can’t get past?
      It must be the 10,000 jobs plan – don’t do it once, right. Do it wrong, then more people get involved in the project, designing, doing, un-doing, re-designing, re-doing … and there’s always a chance of ambos and other emergency services getting some work out of it too.
      There are many bizarre things done in the name of “culture”. Let’s not even think about what’s claimed to be “student culture”!

  5. Pb

    The big paintings are nice, but normally public largesse follows wealth creation. Got cause and effect backwards Dunedin! When a big employer leaves we should dress the buildings in the black of mourning. Behave like we mean it.

    DCC mantra should be: How many sustainable long term jobs did I help generate today. If answer=none then keep deleting red tape till you do.

    Not fluff projects. All this stuff is fluff. Too many overheads. A visit to the tip in Queenstown $4. A visit to the tip in Dunedin $19. Overheads are killing us.

  6. Max

    I see in the paper today the DCC is trying to decide whether to spend 200k of a building maintenance fund on ‘environmental’ and ‘food resilience’ projects, as opposed to, well, building maintenance which will naturally be ‘deferred’.

    The details of the ‘food resilience’ project remain elusive but according to an Otago Daily Times article from January 28 2014 it seems to involves the following:

    The work would include co-ordinating a cross-council group to ensure ”more joined-up thinking” and decision-making around existing food-related council work, working with city ”stakeholders for food”, and developing options and mechanisms to address the challenges, risks and opportunities around food…..

    Ok, ok, enough. It’s like something Stalin might of broadcast to political prisoners as they waited to be shot. Suffice to say nothing seems to have come of it in the last 3 years except to cost more for, well, what exactly?

    Now, keeping food resilience in mind, I am a regular library user who is aware that the main staff lift breaks down on more than a weekly basis and has done so for many months. I am also aware that it is the view of at least one repair person that the lift is stuffed and needs to be replaced. I am aware of these things because I talk with people when I visit and most of these people keep saying the same thing. I am also aware that the lift occasionally traps people inside, including an incident within the last few weeks where a person was either having or about to have an asthma attack while trapped in the lift, reportedly without their inhaler. Needless to say, if you were a normal person you would probably think that something needed to be done. But no. no. Nanny DCC knows best. Under their watchful eye apparently nothing needs to be done except siphoning off the cash as discreetly as possibly and quickly spending it on some stupid little gig that produces absolutely nothing. Oh, and deferring building maintenance.

    https://www.odt.co.nz/news/dunedin/council-decide-maintenance-fund-use

    • Elizabeth

      I just assumed the money siphoned today was to employ ex-councillor Jinty MacTavish within the environment strategy or the food resilience strategy – all of which are absolute shite and which she championed.

      But perhaps she’s earning too much per day as a councillor commissioner on the 2GP hearings panel.

      Nevertheless her name keeps cropping up for a DCC position by salary or contract. Mind you, other rumours are she wants to make babies as is her womanly right.

      I will pop in a LGOIMA request about the Library lift asap.

      Where does it end.
      DCC has no grip on Health and Safety whatsoever.

      I hope DCC has not tried to pay off the person who had his eye damaged by the (amateur? or less than H&S minded…) fireworks company used at New Year’s. Must print their name and details that I received via LGOIMA some time ago.

  7. Elizabeth

    Bravo David Cockerill – oh, but look at all the stupid responses got from the idiot authorities.

    [3D crossings just add to the dumb and blind DCC culture : No H&S for cyclists (see turning directions on the proposed cycleways), no H&S for Delta linesmen (and god forbid Aurora could publish any explicit practical and proven H&S safety guidelines for the general public), no H&S at DCC-led fireworks displays, no H&S at Wall Street or the Dunedin Town Hall complex (no building WoFs), etc etc]

    At Facebook:

    Sat, 25 Feb 2017
    ODT: Claim ‘rocky river’ crossing unsafe
    By Shawn McAvinue
    Fears have been raised that motorists might fail to recognise a 3-D crossing in North Dunedin, putting pedestrians at risk. […] Dave Cockerill, of Dunedin, said he was happy with the crossing with the feet, as it looked similar to a traditional pedestrian crossing, with appropriate warning signs either side, and motorists were stopping to allow pedestrians to cross. However, the absence of traditional lines and warning signs at the river crossing confused motorists and many were failing to stop for pedestrians. Cont/

    • Hype O'Thermia

      It is clearly not a pedestrian crossing. It lacks all the features that distinguish a pedestrian crossing from other road markings or surfaces. There is no reason for motorists to stop for pedestrians any more than on any other section of road or highway.

  8. Elizabeth

    At Facebook [Video]:

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s