Merrion Gates removal scheme

Sam Russell

NuMarvel wrote: »

Pretty much. The 84 Nitelink goes through it, but that's only three times a night for two nights. Other than that, there are no other scheduled services.

Also the 47 goes through Sydney Parade LC, and quite a bit more often than the nitelink.

4ensic15

Sam Russell wrote: »

Also the 47 goes through Sydney Parade LC, and quite a bit more often than the nitelink.

Blocking up the Merrion gates wouldn't affect that.

Sam Russell

4ensic15 wrote: »

Blocking up the Merrion gates wouldn't affect that.

Increasing the frequency of trains would and probably mean the gates would hardly open - end of bus service and considerable inconvenience to emergency ambulances heading for St Vincent's University Hospital.

4ensic15

Sam Russell wrote: »

Increasing the frequency of trains would and probably mean the gates would hardly open - end of bus service and considerable inconvenience to emergency ambulances heading for St Vincent's University Hospital.

What is to stop the buses and ambulances using Sydeny Parade if the Merrion gates were gone?

Sam Russell

4ensic15 wrote: »

What is to stop the buses and ambulances using Sydeny Parade if the Merrion gates were gone?

They do use Sydney Parade. If the frequency goes above 10 mins, the gates will not open much if at all. The Merrion Gates bridge would make the Sydney Parade LC would effectively become local access only.

4ensic15

Sam Russell wrote: »

They do use Sydney Parade. If the frequency goes above 10 mins, the gates will not open much if at all. The Merrion Gates bridge would make the Sydney Parade LC would effectively become local access only.

Trains have to stop at Sydney parade, unlike the Merrion Gates. A platform could be built at each side of the gates so that the gates can open whenever a train stops. The train frequency could be maintained as well as access.

Sam Russell

4ensic15 wrote: »

Trains have to stop at Sydney parade, unlike the Merrion Gates. A platform could be built at each side of the gates so that the gates can open whenever a train stops. The train frequency could be maintained as well as access.

There is no possibility of building new platforms, and anyway the gates close 3 min before the train arrives because the train may overshoot the station. Plus not every train stops at Sydney Parade.

Clearly SP is a foreign land.

4ensic15

Sam Russell wrote: »

There is no possibility of building new platforms, and anyway the gates close 3 min before the train arrives because the train may overshoot the station. Plus not every train stops at Sydney Parade.

Clearly SP is a foreign land.

Road traffic can go through while the train is stopped.

josip

Sam Russell wrote: »

... the gates close 3 min before the train arrives because the train may overshoot the station...

Can you explain the logic behind the above please?
How long before the southbound Dart arrives do the gates close at SP?

Carawaystick

Sam Russell wrote: »

. No homes lost and little CPO.
?

Theres very few homes (if any) being cpo'd. there's a plan to cpo some front gardens, and a car-park and an office building.

TJJP

Umihotaru....

https://www.umihotaru.com/en/

On the Tokyo Bay Aqualine.

https://www.japanvisitor.com/tokyo/aqualine

Sam Russell

josip wrote: »

Can you explain the logic behind the above please?
How long before the southbound Dart arrives do the gates close at SP?

The South bound train arrives two minutes after the gates close and the gates close once the train passes. The North bound train arrives three minutes after the gates close and opens about twenty seconds after the last carriage crosses the gates which is probably four minutes total time closed because of the dwell time.

There is only IR logic for this. The Merrion gates close at the same time as the Sydney Parade ones do for North bound trains. I cannot imagine why this would be so but it is.

josip

Sam Russell wrote: »

The South bound train arrives two minutes after the gates close and the gates close once the train passes. The North bound train arrives three minutes after the gates close and opens about twenty seconds after the last carriage crosses the gates which is probably four minutes total time closed because of the dwell time.

There is only IR logic for this. The Merrion gates close at the same time as the Sydney Parade ones do for North bound trains. I cannot imagine why this would be so but it is.

Thanks.
It's the reasoning behind the extra minute closing to cater for a potential overshoot that I don't understand.
What is the benefit of that extra minute?

Or is that 3 minutes a co-incidence of scheduling so that both north and south bound darts get through SP and MG LCs at the same closing and there isn't any additional time actually required for a potential overshoot?

Sam Russell

josip wrote: »

Thanks.
It's the reasoning behind the extra minute closing to cater for a potential overshoot that I don't understand.
What is the benefit of that extra minute?

Or is that 3 minutes a co-incidence of scheduling so that both north and south bound darts get through SP and MG LCs at the same closing and there isn't any additional time actually required for a potential overshoot?

The logic on the gates is complicated. The gates close on demand of the train. So the gates could be closed for five minutes under worst case.

There is an attempt to minimise the closing of Merrion Gates - that is if trains are on time, N and S bound trains will cross at the same through MG.

However, rarely will more than one each N and S bound trains will pass without the gates opening at SP. It can happen but not often and usually only when trains are backed up.

There is no logic for closing SP and MG at the same time for N bound trains.

specialbyte

I have some bad news folks. I got word through the grape vine that the Merrion Gates overpass is being officially put on hold for now. Expect a public announcement in the next few weeks when the NTA relaunch some S2S plans. The NTA go far too many negative comments during the public consultation last time around. It's a real shame. Closing Merrion Gates was going to have a huge safety benefit for train passengers and reduce some of the traffic congestion around there.

NTA are still pushing forward with 10 minute DART service though. 10 minute service will mean that the gates are closed a lot more often then they are now. So being a little cynical now, it wouldn't surprise me if their plan is to just sit back and watch the vehicle traffic build up at Merrion Gates. Then once residents and commuters complain about the congestion they come back with the same overpass in the same location.

marno21

specialbyte wrote: »

I have some bad news folks. I got word through the grape vine that the Merrion Gates overpass is being officially put on hold for now. Expect a public announcement in the next few weeks when the NTA relaunch some S2S plans. The NTA go far too many negative comments during the public consultation last time around. It's a real shame. Closing Merrion Gates was going to have a huge safety benefit for train passengers and reduce some of the traffic congestion around there.

NTA are still pushing forward with 10 minute DART service though. 10 minute service will mean that the gates are closed a lot more often then they are now. So being a little cynical now, it wouldn't surprise me if their plan is to just sit back and watch the vehicle traffic build up at Merrion Gates. Then once residents and commuters complain about the congestion they come back with the same overpass in the same location.

Good to have the 10 minute DARTs. It may teach some of the locals that you can't have your cake and eat it. It might encourage some people out of their cars also given the enhanced rail service

Sam Russell

marno21 wrote: »

Good to have the 10 minute DARTs. It may teach some of the locals that you can't have your cake and eat it. It might encourage some people out of their cars also given the enhanced rail service

Well, actually I am a local. The project was not a 'close Merrion Gates' project, it was part of a €40 million cycling initiative, with this as a sub-project. Much of the cycling project involved cpo activity of people front gardens and parking spaces.

If it was a simple case of an overpass through the car parks, then the level of complaints would have been less (except for the church goers who lost their car park) and perhaps they could go ahead with it, but NIMBY rules. I think it was a very intelligent to the problem at a significantly over-engineered alternative with overpasses looping left and right at twice the cost, plus infringing on Merrion Strand. The proposal was costed at €5m, vs €12 m and €15 m for the alternatives.

marno21

Sam Russell wrote: »

Well, actually I am a local. The project was not a 'close Merrion Gates' project, it was part of a €40 million cycling initiative, with this as a sub-project. Much of the cycling project involved cpo activity of people front gardens and parking spaces.

If it was a simple case of an overpass through the car parks, then the level of complaints would have been less (except for the church goers who lost their car park) and perhaps they could go ahead with it, but NIMBY rules. I think it was a very intelligent to the problem at a significantly over-engineered alternative with overpasses looping left and right at twice the cost, plus infringing on Merrion Strand. The proposal was costed at €5m, vs €12 m and €15 m for the alternatives.

The issue with it proceeding as just a Merrion bypass is that while there may be less objections, there would be a more straightforward case to block it as it's against current policy to increase roadspace/traffic flow within the M50. A case could very well be brought against the NTA (would the NTA even be able to advance a road project, would that not be the job of the local authority - I can't find a map to confirm which local authority) that they are facilitating private motorists which is against policy.

I understand there are issues around CPO's especially for the cycle route but it would be difficult to get any Merrion Gates proposal through based purely on road traffic benefits.

Sam Russell

marno21 wrote: »

The issue with it proceeding as just a Merrion bypass is that while there may be less objections, there would be a more straightforward case to block it as it's against current policy to increase roadspace/traffic flow within the M50. A case could very well be brought against the NTA (would the NTA even be able to advance a road project, would that not be the job of the local authority - I can't find a map to confirm which local authority) that they are facilitating private motorists which is against policy.

I understand there are issues around CPO's especially for the cycle route but it would be difficult to get any Merrion Gates proposal through based purely on road traffic benefits.

It is Dublin City Council.

It would be done as a safety issue, or as a railway project - Dart 10 min upgrade - something like that. There have been many accidents at the Merrion Gates causing injury, and significant delays to Darts. Apparently, truck drivers do not realise that the gate closes more from one side than the other as it closes, and it does not bend, it breaks.

The CPO for this current plan would be just two car parks. If it were done as an underpass, then many of the objections that were related to visual impact would melt away.

I think it would solve many of the level crossing problems in the area. IR are doing a lot of work in eliminating LCs across the network.

monument

Sam Russell wrote: »

Well, actually I am a local. The project was not a 'close Merrion Gates' project, it was part of a €40 million cycling initiative, with this as a sub-project. Much of the cycling project involved cpo activity of people front gardens and parking spaces.

If it was a simple case of an overpass through the car parks, then the level of complaints would have been less (except for the church goers who lost their car park) and perhaps they could go ahead with it, but NIMBY rules. I think it was a very intelligent to the problem at a significantly over-engineered alternative with overpasses looping left and right at twice the cost, plus infringing on Merrion Strand. The proposal was costed at €5m, vs €12 m and €15 m for the alternatives.

Where are you getting the idea that it is mainly a “cycling initiative”?

The NTA webpage on the project is clear that it is a multi-mode (rail, cycle, bus) corridor improved project.

Sam Russell

monument wrote: »

Where are you getting the idea that it is mainly a “cycling initiative”?

The NTA webpage on the project is clear that it is a multi-mode (rail, cycle, bus) corridor improved project.

http://www.thejournal.ie/strand-road-plans-3048689-Oct2016/

monument

Sam Russell wrote: »

http://www.thejournal.ie/strand-road-plans-3048689-Oct2016/

Even that mainly focuses on the railway level crossing closure.

It also wrongly doesn’t have any great focus on the Merrion Road etc bus corridor upgrade — which also included cycling elements but of poor quality and the bus was the main focus. Much of the cycling element along the bus route was nearly in the same vain as the QBN office’s work (ie get cyclists out of the way).

Sam Russell

I was under the impression it was funded by a cycling based initiative that was to provide a cycleway from Sutton to Sandycove.

From the article above:

It’s long been proposed to develop a continuous coastal recreational promenade and cycleway from Sutton on the north side of Dublin to Sandycove on the south side.

I think it was wrapped up on this to move it out of a railway based upgrade into another heading just to hide it.

It is needed, even on its own. Traffic backs up from Ringsend to the Merrion Gates in the evening, and from Booterstown in the morning. With 10 min Darts, it will be much worse. The backup in the evening on the Merrion Road goes back to Pembroke Road in Ballsbridge. Something must be done - more than just this part of the project.

Claw Hammer

The main cause of traffic backing up is bus lanes. If the Merrion Gates become virtually permanently closed except in the small hours, then the bus lanes on the Merrion Road should be removed and right turns allowed off the Merrion Road.

buffalo

Claw Hammer wrote: »

The main cause of traffic backing up is bus lanes. If the Merrion Gates become virtually permanently closed except in the small hours, then the bus lanes on the Merrion Road should be removed and right turns allowed off the Merrion Road.

I would've thought the main cause of traffic backing up is too many people in (often single-occupancy) cars trying to use the road at the same time?

josip

Claw Hammer wrote: »

The main cause of traffic backing up is bus lanes. If the Merrion Gates become virtually permanently closed except in the small hours, then the bus lanes on the Merrion Road should be removed and right turns allowed off the Merrion Road.

Yes the bus lanes and all those people on the Dart requiring the gates to be closed so often.
Don't get me started on cyclists holding up the cars behind them.

Bits_n_Bobs

josip wrote: »

Yes the bus lanes and all those people on the Dart requiring the gates to be closed so often.
Don't get me started on cyclists holding up the cars behind them.

Not to mention the occasional pedestrian with their slow "walking" across busy roads....can't understand why their isn't a minimum speed limit imposed so they move their asses out of the way of cars in a hurry

NuMarvel

josip wrote: »

Yes the bus lanes and all those people on the Dart requiring the gates to be closed so often.
Don't get me started on cyclists holding up the cars behind them.

Pedestrians too. Who do they think they stopping traffic, just so they can cross the road safely. This is taking 23 seconds out of my day!!!!

Sam Russell

Mod: Can we leave the jokes at the gate please.

Sam Russell

There is a planning application in for Merrion Hall that might affect the plans for the bridge across the Dart.

See: http://www.dublincity.ie/swiftlg/apas/run/WPHAPPDETAIL.DisplayUrl?theApnID=2669/18&SearchID=2