Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

DART coming to Maynooth line in 2024

Options
1…910121415…17

Comments

  • Options
    #332
    jam_mac_jam
    Registered Users Posts: 4,731 ✭✭✭jam_mac_jam


    Fiddle Castro wrote: »
    Attachment not found.

    Genuine question, is this a public open space or private?

    It's a public green that is being taken. That is used all the time. Most people in Station court don't have gardens and a lot of kids live there.


  • Options
    #333
    D15er
    Closed Accounts Posts: 94 ✭✭D15er


    Fiddle Castro wrote: »

    Genuine question, is this a public open space or private?

    That part is private.


  • Options
    #334
    Fiddle Castro
    Registered Users Posts: 78 ✭✭Fiddle Castro


    D15er wrote: »
    That part is private.

    There's a gate that leads directly to that area from the apartments, do residents not have access to it?


  • Options
    #335
    D15er
    Closed Accounts Posts: 94 ✭✭D15er


    Fiddle Castro wrote: »
    There's a gate that leads directly to that area from the apartments, do residents not have access to it?

    Yeah, I think so - sorry, what I meant by private is that's it isn't in public ownership and open to all.


  • Options
    #336
    Fiddle Castro
    Registered Users Posts: 78 ✭✭Fiddle Castro


    D15er wrote: »
    Yeah, I think so - sorry, what I meant by private is that's it isn't in public ownership and open to all.

    My fault for phrasing it badly.
    daymobrew wrote: »
    Ignoring Riverwood Court side of the bridge for a moment, I opposite the bridge because it removes the only open space area on the StationCourt side. That's an offensive proposal.

    In response to daymobrew it is a large, open space that Stationcourt has access to.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #337
    daymobrew
    Registered Users Posts: 6,505 ✭✭✭daymobrew


    Fiddle Castro wrote: »
    In response to daymobrew it is a large, open space that Stationcourt has access to.
    I stand corrected on my use of "only".

    It's a significant loss of open space then, 60% perhaps. Those closer to Clonsilla Road (St Mochta's) may not be able to access that bit. I still find the removal of that much open space area to be offensive.


  • Options
    #338
    blanch152
    Registered Users Posts: 27,901 ✭✭✭✭blanch152


    liamog wrote: »
    This is the stage 1 consultation to gather feedback, there will then be a stage 2 where they take on board the feedback provided. So for instance if someone provided the feedback that a bridge wouldn't work because the lights at the junction with Clonsilla Road only allow 4 cars out, they will be able to update the plan to account for this. This is why it's important to provide constructive feedback during the consultation.

    The amount of time needed for cars coming up the Clonsilla Road will be less because they won't have the same amount of traffic feeding in from Coolmine Road. That will allow more time for StationCourt Road.


  • Options
    #339
    liamog
    Moderators, Motoring & Transport Moderators, Regional East Moderators Posts: 7,971 Mod ✭✭✭✭liamog


    blanch152 wrote: »
    The amount of time needed for cars coming up the Clonsilla Road will be less because they won't have the same amount of traffic feeding in from Coolmine Road. That will allow more time for StationCourt Road.

    Yes I agree, right now I think the two junctions near each other leads to some very awkward flows, it may make sense to replace the Coolmine Rd/Station Court Rd junction with a roundabout.


  • Options
    #340
    daymobrew
    Registered Users Posts: 6,505 ✭✭✭daymobrew


    Someone pointed out to me that there already is a little rat run between Station Court and entrance to Coolmine Business Park (near Spar): https://www.gmap-pedometer.com/?r=7533010

    That will only get worse if the Station Court/Coolmine Road junction gets busy.


  • Options
    #341
    Rosser
    Registered Users Posts: 591 ✭✭✭Rosser


    daymobrew wrote: »
    No extra traffic coming into Riverwood Court but a big bridge in front of the windows of a number of houses along with the associated noise etc.

    I seem to recall you wanted the chicane at the end of Beechpark Avenue removed to allow traffic to flow better, seems a little bit NIMBY worrying about cars passing people’s windows when you didn’t mind them passing houses on Beechpark.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #342
    beauf
    Closed Accounts Posts: 22,648 ✭✭✭✭beauf


    daymobrew wrote: »
    Someone pointed out to me that there already is a little rat run between Station Court and entrance to Coolmine Business Park (near Spar): https://www.gmap-pedometer.com/?r=7533010

    That will only get worse if the Station Court/Coolmine Road junction gets busy.

    What congestion does that avoid? Seems like that would take longer than just using Clonsilla rd. Is Clonsilla rd backed up at peak?


  • Options
    #343
    daymobrew
    Registered Users Posts: 6,505 ✭✭✭daymobrew


    beauf wrote: »
    What congestion does that avoid? Seems like that would take longer than just using Clonsilla rd. Is Clonsilla rd backed up at peak?
    If a bunch of northbound traffic backs up at the Clonsilla Road junction then that rat run will help skip it.
    Even if it took as long, drivers won't see that because, in their minds, they are moving.
    Rosser wrote: »
    I seem to recall you wanted the chicane at the end of Beechpark Avenue removed to allow traffic to flow better, seems a little bit NIMBY worrying about cars passing people’s windows when you didn’t mind them passing houses on Beechpark.
    That is right, I would like that chicane removed. If nothing else it causes dangerous scenarios as some drivers bully their way through it, often putting pedestrians at risk.

    Beechpark Ave already has a lot of through traffic and traffic to/from the schools on the road - removing the chicane will not change the number of cars.
    The main benefit to removing that chicane is to improve flow on eastbound Castleknock Road. In the morning it can get backed up by those turning left onto Beechpark Avenue being blocked because of the chicane.

    It's different from Riverwood Court/StationCourt as the proposed bridge involves dramatically increasing the traffic along those roads.


  • Options
    #344
    beauf
    Closed Accounts Posts: 22,648 ✭✭✭✭beauf


    I still don't get. The only thing backing up Clonsilla road is traffic and lights. You avoid neither by that rat run.


  • Options
    #345
    beauf
    Closed Accounts Posts: 22,648 ✭✭✭✭beauf


    That chicane has nothing to do with this thread.


  • Options
    #346
    Rosser
    Registered Users Posts: 591 ✭✭✭Rosser


    You’ve got to be joking, you had a fit when you thought the pedestrian underpass was being removed at the tennis club when it never was.

    The chicane was put in precisely to discourage the traffic coming off Auburn which was designed to take the volume on to Beechpark which wasn’t. Furthermore Auburn has no housing facing on to it specifically for that reason. Your agenda was driven by YOUR access to Educate Together, the secondary school too lost interest too when CCC sorted you out.

    So you don’t want to be inconvenienced there and as long as it’s anyone else and away from Riverwood it’s all fine, NIMBYisim at it’s finest.

    The level crossings have to go ideally with as limited an impact as possible but that DART is needed as a solution to taking cars off the roads and out of the park too.


  • Options
    #347
    cython
    Registered Users Posts: 4,767 ✭✭✭cython


    beauf wrote: »
    I still don't get. The only thing backing up Clonsilla road is traffic and lights. You avoid neither by that rat run.

    The relevant word in the post you quoted was at - I think the poster was referring to traffic backing up towards St Mochta's and Stationcourt from the Clonsilla Road, which can happen due to a very short turn at thr lights coupled with inattentive drivers being slow off the mark.

    The lights at the other St Mochta's access seem to give longer, and can make some sense if heading westbound as it also takes a set of lights out of the equation.


  • Options
    #348
    daymobrew
    Registered Users Posts: 6,505 ✭✭✭daymobrew


    Rosser wrote: »
    You’ve got to be joking, you had a fit when you thought the pedestrian underpass was being removed at the tennis club when it never was.
    This is completely wrong. I knew that the underpass access would not be removed. In fact, I replied to many submissions to clarify that to those that thought it was.
    Rosser wrote: »
    Your agenda was driven by YOUR access to Educate Together, the secondary school too lost interest too when CCC sorted you out.
    I don't drive to ET, I cycle via the underpass. I want the chicane gone to help others.
    I don't know what secondary school you are talking about and what I supposedly did.
    Rosser wrote: »
    So you don’t want to be inconvenienced there and as long as it’s anyone else and away from Riverwood it’s all fine, NIMBYisim at it’s finest.
    My submission supports option 8 (lower rail track) and then option 7 (ped/cycle bridge). I can post it if you would like.
    Rosser wrote: »
    The level crossings have to go ideally with as limited an impact as possible but that DART is needed as a solution to taking cars off the roads and out of the park too.
    The DART won't help reduce car usage for the trips to the schools.


  • Options
    #349
    blanch152
    Registered Users Posts: 27,901 ✭✭✭✭blanch152


    daymobrew wrote: »
    If a bunch of northbound traffic backs up at the Clonsilla Road junction then that rat run will help skip it.
    Even if it took as long, drivers won't see that because, in their minds, they are moving.


    Using that rat-run makes no sense at all at the moment. Better to turn right and go left by Power City or further on at the Snugborough Road and straight up to Ongar if that's where you are going.


    daymobrew wrote: »
    That is right, I would like that chicane removed. If nothing else it causes dangerous scenarios as some drivers bully their way through it, often putting pedestrians at risk.

    Beechpark Ave already has a lot of through traffic and traffic to/from the schools on the road - removing the chicane will not change the number of cars.
    The main benefit to removing that chicane is to improve flow on eastbound Castleknock Road. In the morning it can get backed up by those turning left onto Beechpark Avenue being blocked because of the chicane.

    It's different from Riverwood Court/StationCourt as the proposed bridge involves dramatically increasing the traffic along those roads.


    That chicane discourages traffic from Beechpark Avenue, well worth using.

    The proposed bridge does increase the traffic along those roads, but it facilitates the closing of the level crossing, resulting in a net beneficial impact.


  • Options
    #350
    daymobrew
    Registered Users Posts: 6,505 ✭✭✭daymobrew


    blanch152 wrote: »
    Using that rat-run makes no sense at all at the moment. Better to turn right and go left by Power City or further on at the Snugborough Road and straight up to Ongar if that's where you are going.
    I was thinking of someone going north over the proposed bridge towards Clonsilla - over bridge, left into St Mochta's Green, Avenue, Road and left onto Clonsilla Road (at crossroads near Spar/Molloys).
    blanch152 wrote: »
    That chicane discourages traffic from Beechpark Avenue, well worth using.
    It should but I don't think that it does discourage traffic. Drivers seem content to sit in their cars for inordinate amounts of time. It's not something I can do.


  • Options
    #351
    beauf
    Closed Accounts Posts: 22,648 ✭✭✭✭beauf


    daymobrew wrote: »
    ... I don't drive to ET, I cycle via the underpass. I want the chicane gone to help others.
    I ...

    If you're cycling its even more irrelevant.

    There's no fixing that road for traffic. It either has to go down that road. Or is chosing that over the bottleneck that is Castleknock village. They just made that worse. So more traffic will choose to avoid it.


    None of this has anything to do with the Railway.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #352
    galtsdrift
    Registered Users Posts: 48 ✭galtsdrift


    D15er wrote: »
    Yeah, I think so - sorry, what I meant by private is that's it isn't in public ownership and open to all.

    Who owns it does anyone know


  • Options
    #353
    blanch152
    Registered Users Posts: 27,901 ✭✭✭✭blanch152


    daymobrew wrote: »
    I was thinking of someone going north over the proposed bridge towards Clonsilla - over bridge, left into St Mochta's Green, Avenue, Road and left onto Clonsilla Road (at crossroads near Spar/Molloys).

    It should but I don't think that it does discourage traffic. Drivers seem content to sit in their cars for inordinate amounts of time. It's not something I can do.

    If you can’t do it, you take an alternative route, win for the chicane.


  • Options
    #354
    daymobrew
    Registered Users Posts: 6,505 ✭✭✭daymobrew


    blanch152 wrote: »
    If you can’t do it, you take an alternative route, win for the chicane.
    I meant that *I* don't have the patience to sit in traffic. That's why I cycle or take public transport. I'm in the minority so it's only 1 in the "win" column with many many in the "lose" column. :-)


  • Options
    #355
    beauf
    Closed Accounts Posts: 22,648 ✭✭✭✭beauf


    The point remains regardless. It discourages drivers.
    Have to say it's never discouraged me. It does slow traffic I would assume. Only a local would know the impact of the before and after its installation. Been there 20yrs or so.


  • Options
    #356
    galtsdrift
    Registered Users Posts: 48 ✭galtsdrift


    The only people supporting this bridge at Coolmine must either not drive in the area and don't care about the area or don't own a car and still not care about the area.

    The bridge idea is an abomination and will not only destroy the houses around it, but it will also effectively make most of Carpenterstown a dump. Leo and the other TD's are right to oppose this as if they were to support it then it is a clear message they don't care for the area.


  • Options
    #357
    liamog
    Moderators, Motoring & Transport Moderators, Regional East Moderators Posts: 7,971 Mod ✭✭✭✭liamog


    galtsdrift wrote: »
    The only people supporting this bridge at Coolmine must either not drive in the area and don't care about the area or don't own a car and still not care about the area.

    The bridge idea is an abomination and will not only destroy the houses around it, but it will also effectively make most of Carpenterstown a dump. Leo and the other TD's are right to oppose this as if they were to support it then it is a clear message they don't care for the area.

    As someone who regularly drives in the area I couldn't disagree more, I'm not entirely sure how you think replacing the current access across Coolmine Crossing is going to magically turn the place into a dump. It's a two lane road with a bike lane not a new Westlink Bridge.


  • Options
    #358
    blanch152
    Registered Users Posts: 27,901 ✭✭✭✭blanch152


    galtsdrift wrote: »
    The only people supporting this bridge at Coolmine must either not drive in the area and don't care about the area or don't own a car and still not care about the area.

    The bridge idea is an abomination and will not only destroy the houses around it, but it will also effectively make most of Carpenterstown a dump. Leo and the other TD's are right to oppose this as if they were to support it then it is a clear message they don't care for the area.

    Nonsense. I support the bridge and I live in Dublin 15, walking distance from Coolmine Station.


  • Options
    #359
    IngazZagni
    Registered Users Posts: 1,595 ✭✭✭IngazZagni


    galtsdrift wrote: »
    The only people supporting this bridge at Coolmine must either not drive in the area and don't care about the area or don't own a car and still not care about the area.

    The bridge idea is an abomination and will not only destroy the houses around it, but it will also effectively make most of Carpenterstown a dump. Leo and the other TD's are right to oppose this as if they were to support it then it is a clear message they don't care for the area.

    This is just complete bonkers. I really can't get my head around opinions like this.

    Either way Dart expansion should not be delayed due to nimbys. If traffic chaos needs to happen with a level crossing closed most of the time at peak hours then so be it. Reap what you sow.

    I'm hoping the Ashtown underpass proceeds without as much trouble. I dont sense as much opposition to that.


  • Options
    #360
    daymobrew
    Registered Users Posts: 6,505 ✭✭✭daymobrew


    IngazZagni wrote: »
    I'm hoping the Ashtown underpass proceeds without as much trouble. I dont sense as much opposition to that.
    I saw a transcript of one of the webinars and the attendees don't want the tunnel - they fear that it will be an unsafe place for pedestrians. They want an automated level crossing.

    They also don't want Martin Savage Park turned into a drop off place with a lot of traffic in and out. They were saying that people could drop off to Navan Road Parkway station.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #361
    D15er
    Closed Accounts Posts: 94 ✭✭D15er


    IngazZagni wrote: »
    This is just complete bonkers. I really can't get my head around opinions like this.

    Either way Dart expansion should not be delayed due to nimbys. If traffic chaos needs to happen with a level crossing closed most of the time at peak hours then so be it. Reap what you sow.

    I'm hoping the Ashtown underpass proceeds without as much trouble. I dont sense as much opposition to that.

    Well, an underpass has much less visual impact than a bridge so it naturally would generate much less opposition. It is also rerouting the main traffic flow further away from residential areas. There is some loss of green space at Martin Savage Park which isn't ideal obviously.

    All in all, the Ashtown proposal looks like a good plan. It's a pity an underpass isn't viable at Coolmine because it would be a much easier sell.


Advertisement