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
12467…17

Comments

  • Options
    #92
    lucernarian
    Registered Users Posts: 9,235 ✭✭✭lucernarian


    D15 suffers from enough permeability issues without introducing another Berlin wall style "solution" a la Snugborough road beside the shopping centre. This is only to sustain existing road capacity, not expand it. Even if this crossing was some magical 2+2 design, it would make no difference as the existing roads all around in all directions can't even bring enough traffic to take advantage of the grade separation using one lane each direction. There's simply no basis in this case to say this will encourage meaningfully more traffic to take this route.


  • Options
    #93
    beauf
    Closed Accounts Posts: 22,648 ✭✭✭✭beauf


    If you mean a bus I would say it's going to pointlessly stuck in traffic on all roads to and from the bridge.

    Its interesting how in a grand plan to improve the train network. All most people are concerned about is how they can keep using their cars.


  • Options
    #94
    beauf
    Closed Accounts Posts: 22,648 ✭✭✭✭beauf


    lucernarian wrote: »
    ...There's simply no basis in this case to say this will encourage meaningfully more traffic to take this route.

    Except common sense and years of experience, and a bridge right beside it. But yeah if you ignore all that no basis what so ever.


  • Options
    #95
    liamog
    Moderators, Motoring & Transport Moderators, Regional East Moderators Posts: 7,971 Mod ✭✭✭✭liamog


    beauf wrote: »
    If you mean a bus I would say it's going to pointlessly stuck in traffic on all roads to and from the bridge.

    Its interesting how in a grand plan to improve the train network. All most people are concerned about is how they can keep using their cars.

    The two are extremely tied together, the primary blocker to improvement to improving the service in D15 is removal of the level crossings, doing so in a way that creates the least disruption for people who live in D15 should be a goal of the project. Not everybody benefits from the Maynooth line, if you want to artificially increase
    the separation between sides of the railway because of an anti car agenda at least be honest about it instead of making claims about lack of planning, bridge gradients, shallow bends, and plans to cut off roads.


  • Options
    #96
    lucernarian
    Registered Users Posts: 9,235 ✭✭✭lucernarian


    beauf wrote: »
    If you mean a bus I would say it's going to pointlessly stuck in traffic on all roads to and from the bridge.

    Its interesting how in a grand plan to improve the train network. All most people are concerned about is how they can keep using their cars.
    This is honestly not the hill, or bridge, to die on for advocating more non-motorised travel in D15. This inherently cannot allow more motor traffic to use the route than is already the case, as you've indirectly implied above. Reducing permeability of any kind, even motor traffic, should be a last resort, and to meaningfully diversify modal share, it is not helpful to use basically NIMBY arguments when the benefits to rail transport, safety, and pedestrians and moreso cyclists all benefit from grade separation.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #97
    lucernarian
    Registered Users Posts: 9,235 ✭✭✭lucernarian


    beauf wrote: »
    Except common sense and years of experience, and a bridge right beside it. But yeah if you ignore all that no basis what so ever.

    Bridge right beside it... Yeah right. As someone who cycled through Coolmine regularly, that is a disingenuous claim. No one in their right mind would cycle from coolmine to the shopping centre or millennium park via the Luttrelstown bridge.


  • Options
    #98
    beauf
    Closed Accounts Posts: 22,648 ✭✭✭✭beauf


    lucernarian wrote: »
    Bridge right beside it... Yeah right. As someone who cycled through Coolmine regularly, that is a disingenuous claim. No one in their right mind would cycle from coolmine to the shopping centre or millennium park via the Luttrelstown bridge.

    Considering there will be a cycle bridge at coolmine, what are you talking about?

    Even if there wasn't. It's such a tiny diversion. Especially so on a bicycle where traffic has no effect on your journey time.


  • Options
    #99
    beauf
    Closed Accounts Posts: 22,648 ✭✭✭✭beauf


    liamog wrote: »
    The two are extremely tied together, the primary blocker to improvement to improving the service in D15 is removal of the level crossings, doing so in a way that creates the least disruption for people who live in D15 should be a goal of the project. Not everybody benefits from the Maynooth line, if you want to artificially increase
    the separation between sides of the railway because of an anti car agenda at least be honest about it instead of making claims about lack of planning, bridge gradients, shallow bends, and plans to cut off roads.

    The vast majority of the traffic crossing at coolmine at peak are heading to the city centre. The train goes to the city center.

    Few here are using the train hence the lack of interest in a park and ride or knowledge about parking at the stations. It's very obvious.

    Off peak there is no issue using the Dr Troy bridge. A lot people would use it (or Castleknock bridge) to avoid getting caught at the level crossing anyway. Have done for decades.


  • Options
    #100
    beauf
    Closed Accounts Posts: 22,648 ✭✭✭✭beauf


    lucernarian wrote: »
    This is honestly not the hill, or bridge, to die on for advocating more non-motorised travel in D15. This inherently cannot allow more motor traffic to use the route than is already the case, as you've indirectly implied above. Reducing permeability of any kind, even motor traffic, should be a last resort, and to meaningfully diversify modal share, it is not helpful to use basically NIMBY arguments when the benefits to rail transport, safety, and pedestrians and moreso cyclists all benefit from grade separation.

    I've not implied it. I've said it will increase traffic and given examples that did the same.

    Pedestrians and cyclists will have a bridge at coolmine and porterstown. Their route will be unchanged. What issues of permeability?

    This only effects cars, and then only at peak, which is mostly commuter traffic. Since off peak its a negligible division for cars.


  • Options
    #101
    beauf
    Closed Accounts Posts: 22,648 ✭✭✭✭beauf


    Makes little difference to me. I avoided both Coolmine and Dr Troy at peak for years. I will continue to do so if this bridge is built.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #102
    liamog
    Moderators, Motoring & Transport Moderators, Regional East Moderators Posts: 7,971 Mod ✭✭✭✭liamog


    This does seem to be quite a common theme on boards, only concentrating on connections during rush hour. I'm far more interested in ensuring places are connected during the other 21 hours of the day.
    The argument is don't build bridge, will cause traffic, coupled with people can just drive the longer way round (i.e. cause more traffic).

    Seems there isn't much downside to building the bridge at rush hour, and as discussed better connectivity during the non-rush hour is something that D15 sorely needs.


  • Options
    #103
    beauf
    Closed Accounts Posts: 22,648 ✭✭✭✭beauf


    There is a certain amount of irony complaining diversion causing off peak traffic, when a) there isn't traffic off peak. b) you are that traffic.

    Likewise say its not about peak times. When the only reason for the bridge is that Dr Troy bridge can't handle the volume at peak.


  • Options
    #104
    liamog
    Moderators, Motoring & Transport Moderators, Regional East Moderators Posts: 7,971 Mod ✭✭✭✭liamog


    beauf wrote: »
    There is no issue off peak. Its a 5 min car journey.

    Yes there is, its an unnecessarily circuitous route like most of D15.


  • Options
    #105
    beauf
    Closed Accounts Posts: 22,648 ✭✭✭✭beauf


    liamog wrote: »
    Yes there is, its an unnecessarily circuitous route like most of D15.

    LOL. You should start a campaign for more short journeys in cars, and building shortcuts for cars though estates so people can save minuscule amounts of time driving.


  • Options
    #106
    blanch152
    Registered Users Posts: 27,901 ✭✭✭✭blanch152


    beauf wrote: »
    The vast majority of the traffic crossing at coolmine at peak are heading to the city centre. The train goes to the city center.

    Few here are using the train hence the lack of interest in a park and ride or knowledge about parking at the stations. It's very obvious.

    Off peak there is no issue using the Dr Troy bridge. A lot people would use it (or Castleknock bridge) to avoid getting caught at the level crossing anyway. Have done for decades.

    That is not my experience I have to say. Access to Castleknock College, Castleknock Community College and Diswellstown School for people heading across is one issue in the morning, travelling the other way are people heading for Blanchardstown.

    An awful lot of people work in Blanchardstown and live in the general Luttrellstown area. The local bus routes proposed under Bus Connects will help them, but for the moment they also are a large part of the car community.


  • Options
    #107
    liamog
    Moderators, Motoring & Transport Moderators, Regional East Moderators Posts: 7,971 Mod ✭✭✭✭liamog


    It's a much better option than the ghettoisation of estates that we have in D15. Part of the reason the 39A is so useless coming out of Ongar is that it takes 20 mins to circles its way around D15 and covers 8.5km to perform a trip to a location that is 3km away.


  • Options
    #108
    beauf
    Closed Accounts Posts: 22,648 ✭✭✭✭beauf


    blanch152 wrote: »
    That is not my experience I have to say. Access to Castleknock College, Castleknock Community College and Diswellstown School for people heading across is one issue in the morning, travelling the other way are people heading for Blanchardstown.

    An awful lot of people work in Blanchardstown and live in the general Luttrellstown area. The local bus routes proposed under Bus Connects will help them, but for the moment they also are a large part of the car community.

    Drive the kids to school, drive all short journeys. People wonder where the traffic comes from.

    Interesting how people outside the catchment of the schools live so far away they have to drive to it. Meanwhile people in the catchment can't get places.


  • Options
    #109
    mickey15ie
    Registered Users Posts: 325 ✭✭mickey15ie


    Will it be any quicker to get into the city than current trains?


  • Options
    #110
    liamog
    Moderators, Motoring & Transport Moderators, Regional East Moderators Posts: 7,971 Mod ✭✭✭✭liamog


    beauf wrote: »
    Drive the kids to school, drive all short journeys. People wonder where the traffic comes from.

    Interesting how people outside the catchment of the schools live so far away they have to drive to it. Meanwhile people in the catchment can't get places.

    Our crappy school placement system isn't going to be fixed by making people drive the long way round.


  • Options
    #111
    Brock Turnpike
    Registered Users Posts: 3,745 ✭✭✭Brock Turnpike


    liamog wrote: »
    Our crappy school placement system isn't going to be fixed by making people drive the long way round.

    Maybe parents not driving oversized SUVs, that they are incapable of driving correctly, might help. If they walked their kids to school (who are supposed to be in the catchment area) it would reduce the traffic massively.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #112
    beauf
    Closed Accounts Posts: 22,648 ✭✭✭✭beauf


    No one gets into these schools without having making a deliberate choice to do so.

    If some made the choice to drive the kids to school outside their area, through an area of high congestion,
    you'd have to assume they don't have a problem with spending time in the car.
    They aren't overly concerned with traffic either, since they are causing it.

    Again shows that the concern here has nothing to do with the train, or off peak permeability. It right back to be about the peak time commuting.


  • Options
    #113
    liamog
    Moderators, Motoring & Transport Moderators, Regional East Moderators Posts: 7,971 Mod ✭✭✭✭liamog


    beauf wrote: »
    Again shows that the concern here has nothing to do with the train, or off peak permeability. It right back to be about the peak time commuting.

    The only person who seems to be focussing on peak time commuting is yourself. Do you not travel in D15 outside of commuting hours?
    As per your own comments, a new Coolmine Crossing, doesn't change the peak time scenario much at all, but it does have benefits for the other periods of the day/weekend.


  • Options
    #114
    beauf
    Closed Accounts Posts: 22,648 ✭✭✭✭beauf


    liamog wrote: »
    The only person who seems to be focussing on peak time commuting is yourself. Do you not travel in D15 outside of commuting hours?
    As per your own comments, a new Coolmine Crossing, doesn't change the peak time scenario much at all, but it does have benefits for the other periods of the day/weekend.

    How about we close the new bridge during peak times then? Make a toll like the port tunnel at peak times. €10. If its main use if off peak that would keep you all happy.....:D


  • Options
    #115
    Bigmac1euro
    Registered Users Posts: 1,466 ✭✭✭Bigmac1euro


    I think it’s bad planning like everything in the country.
    Guys please use the link below and vote against it.
    Will only take 10 seconds.

    https://riverwoodbridge.glideapp.io/


  • Options
    #116
    liamog
    Moderators, Motoring & Transport Moderators, Regional East Moderators Posts: 7,971 Mod ✭✭✭✭liamog


    Bigmac1euro wrote: »
    I think it’s bad planning like everything in the country.
    Guys please use the link below and vote against it.
    Will only take 10 seconds.

    https://riverwoodbridge.glideapp.io/

    Any particular reason you think it's bad planning, or is just another anti car argument?


  • Options
    #117
    Bigmac1euro
    Registered Users Posts: 1,466 ✭✭✭Bigmac1euro


    liamog wrote: »
    Any particular reason you think it's bad planning, or is just another anti car argument?

    I’m not anti-car.
    Literally bought a house where I’ll be paying the mortgage for the next 35 years in the immediate area and my front door will be a car park if this goes ahead.
    The traffic is already a little bad and we’re in covid and I’m WFH.

    Do you want to assume anything else about me while you’re at it buddy?


  • Options
    #118
    beauf
    Closed Accounts Posts: 22,648 ✭✭✭✭beauf


    mickey15ie wrote: »
    Will it be any quicker to get into the city than current trains?

    Should be. The new signaling should eliminate the delays in the line you'd hope.


  • Options
    #119
    Polar101
    Registered Users Posts: 3,847 ✭✭✭Polar101


    mickey15ie wrote: »
    Will it be any quicker to get into the city than current trains?

    Good question, you'd expect less waiting to get into Connolly, but on the other hand there's going to be more stations (Pelletstown, Porterstown) - so maybe not really?


  • Options
    #120
    Dr_Colossus
    Registered Users Posts: 3,151 ✭✭✭Dr_Colossus


    Polar101 wrote: »
    there's going to be more stations (...,Porterstown)
    New station in Porterstown? surely not as Clonsilla and Coolmine are already pretty close together.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #121
    liamog
    Moderators, Motoring & Transport Moderators, Regional East Moderators Posts: 7,971 Mod ✭✭✭✭liamog


    Bigmac1euro wrote: »
    I’m not anti-car.
    Literally bought a house where I’ll be paying the mortgage for the next 35 years in the immediate area and my front door will be a car park if this goes ahead.
    The traffic is already a little bad and we’re in covid and I’m WFH.

    The last arguments which attempted to use "bad planning" eventually turned into just didn't like cars, reportedly the area is already a car park and couldn't possibly handle the current volume of traffic that goes through the Coolmine crossing. Overall volume shouldn't change much based on the capacity of the roads on either side of the railway, so other than an immediate 200m of road south of the canal, and about 400m heading towards the canal the net change will likely be minimal.


Advertisement