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
12357…17

Comments

  • Options
    #122
    beauf
    Closed Accounts Posts: 22,648 ✭✭✭✭beauf


    ".. Likely be..."

    Translation have no idea so let's just guess...

    But you don't need to guess. There's already plenty of experience with the current bridge. It's unlikely to have a different outcome. You can predict what is going to happen by looking at what happens last time.

    "...Those who cannot learn from history are doomed to repeat it.."

    Induced demand.

    https://www.wired.com/2014/06/wuwt-traffic-induced-demand/


  • Options
    #123
    blanch152
    Registered Users Posts: 27,901 ✭✭✭✭blanch152


    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.

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

    So NIMBYism then. Fair enough, but the benefits to Dublin 15 of closing the level crossings and replacing with bridges are many and significant.


  • Options
    #124
    beauf
    Closed Accounts Posts: 22,648 ✭✭✭✭beauf


    liamog wrote: »
    .... just didn't like cars ....

    So the queue's around the area don't exist. We only think they exist because we hate cars. Makes perfect sense.


  • Options
    #125
    beauf
    Closed Accounts Posts: 22,648 ✭✭✭✭beauf


    blanch152 wrote: »
    So NIMBYism then. Fair enough, but the benefits to Dublin 15 of closing the level crossings and replacing with bridges are many and significant.

    But its not replacing them. It's closing multiple crossing's and replacing them with fewer bridges (crossings). It's been suggested that volume of traffic will be no greater than the current crossing at coolmine. So where will the the cars that used the crossing's that's aren't being replaced go? If they go to the new bridge then it volume can't equal what crossed at coolmine.


  • Options
    #126
    beauf
    Closed Accounts Posts: 22,648 ✭✭✭✭beauf


    Incidentally how can the current Dart line have high frequency but have retained its level crossings.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #127
    blanch152
    Registered Users Posts: 27,901 ✭✭✭✭blanch152


    beauf wrote: »
    But its not replacing them. It's closing multiple crossing's and replacing them with fewer bridges (crossings). It's been suggested that volume of traffic will be no greater than the current crossing at coolmine. So where will the the cars that used the crossing's that's aren't being replaced go? If they go to the new bridge then it volume can't equal what crossed at coolmine.

    Coolmine is being replaced, Clonsilla is being replaced, Ashtown is being replaced, are you suggesting that the volume of traffic through the Porterstown crossing is such that a new bridge is needed there?


  • Options
    #128
    blanch152
    Registered Users Posts: 27,901 ✭✭✭✭blanch152


    beauf wrote: »
    Incidentally how can the current Dart line have high frequency but have retained its level crossings.

    It doesn’t have high frequency, and it doesn’t have high speed.


  • Options
    #129
    BonnieSituation
    Registered Users Posts: 19,068 ✭✭✭✭BonnieSituation


    beauf wrote: »
    Incidentally how can the current Dart line have high frequency but have retained its level crossings.

    Because those LCs are battlegrounds that have been ongoing for years and the locals have cashmoney.
    IR, like in the case of Porterstown and Coolmine just need to say "I told ya so" and show people that the gates are going to be down almost permanently with frequency improvements.


  • Options
    #130
    beauf
    Closed Accounts Posts: 22,648 ✭✭✭✭beauf


    blanch152 wrote: »
    It doesn’t have high frequency, and it doesn’t have high speed.

    What will be the highest frequency on the Maynooth line after this upgrade and what is the highest frequency on the current Dart line.


  • Options
    #131
    beauf
    Closed Accounts Posts: 22,648 ✭✭✭✭beauf


    BonnieSituation wrote: »
    Because those LCs are battlegrounds that have been ongoing for years and the locals have cashmoney.
    IR, like in the case of Porterstown and Coolmine just need to say "I told ya so" and show people that the gates are going to be down almost permanently with frequency improvements.

    You misunderstand me. I'm not arguing to keep the level crossing. I don't disagree that is local pressure that keeps those crossings on the Dart line open. But the look at the frequency they have.

    If you use the Maynooth line. Two significant delays are getting into Connolly and the Trains crossing from the Houston line. As soon as that started we started having delays. The new signaling should solve that.

    I don't see anyone arguing to keep the coolmine crossing open. Close it tomorrow. See how far back the queue goes.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #132
    StoptheClocks
    Registered Users Posts: 215 ✭✭StoptheClocks


    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/

    What is the alternative? To stop the upgrade on the line or keep the crossing as it is? Just put up with it being closed more often?
    I understand not wanting the bridge if the traffic will increase on the road you live on but If you living else where in the area this would be an improvement.


  • Options
    #133
    beauf
    Closed Accounts Posts: 22,648 ✭✭✭✭beauf


    StoptheClocks wrote: »
    What is the alternative? To stop the upgrade on the line or keep the crossing as it is? Just put up with it being closed more often?
    I understand not wanting the bridge if the traffic will increase on the road you live on but If you living else where in the area this would be an improvement.

    The only thing people don't want is the bridge. Everything else isn't an issue. Even then it's only the location of the bridge that's an issue.

    That said they'll railroad this in eventually. They generally keep trying till they get it. Regardless of the implact.


  • Options
    #134
    BonnieSituation
    Registered Users Posts: 19,068 ✭✭✭✭BonnieSituation


    beauf wrote: »
    The only thing people don't want is the bridge. Everything else isn't an issue. Even then it's only the location of the bridge that's an issue.

    That said they'll railroad this in eventually. They generally keep trying till they get it. Regardless of the implact.


    They only think they don't want the bridge now. But watch what happens as soon as this is done with no bridge. First thing that will happen is people complaining that the traffic in the area is worse since the railway got better frequency and why didn't they put another bridge in.

    People are idiots. The naas bypass debacle and the Harcourt street traders moaning during the Luas works being a prime example of this.


  • Options
    #135
    beauf
    Closed Accounts Posts: 22,648 ✭✭✭✭beauf


    BonnieSituation wrote: »
    ...

    People are idiots. The naas bypass debacle and the Harcourt street traders moaning during the Luas works being a prime example of this.

    Why did they have the experience of a second bypass and second Luas line being added after lots of problems with the first?

    Because if they didn't then it's nothing like this situation.


  • Options
    #136
    BonnieSituation
    Registered Users Posts: 19,068 ✭✭✭✭BonnieSituation


    beauf wrote: »
    Why did they have the experience of a second bypass and second Luas line being added after lots of problems with the first?

    Because if they didn't then it's nothing like this situation.

    I don't think you got the right end of the stick on either of those two situations.


  • Options
    #137
    beauf
    Closed Accounts Posts: 22,648 ✭✭✭✭beauf


    BonnieSituation wrote: »
    I don't think you got the right end of the stick on either of those two situations.

    Just pointing out, those situations were not a repeat of what happened before.


  • Options
    #138
    blanch152
    Registered Users Posts: 27,901 ✭✭✭✭blanch152


    beauf wrote: »
    The only thing people don't want is the bridge. Everything else isn't an issue. Even then it's only the location of the bridge that's an issue.

    That said they'll railroad this in eventually. They generally keep trying till they get it. Regardless of the implact.

    If they don’t put in the bridge, the people living in Riverwood will be first to complain that it takes them forever to get to the centre.


  • Options
    #139
    beauf
    Closed Accounts Posts: 22,648 ✭✭✭✭beauf


    blanch152 wrote: »
    If they don’t put in the bridge, the people living in Riverwood will be first to complain that it takes them forever to get to the centre.

    You're a few years late to that party. Lol.


  • Options
    #140
    BonnieSituation
    Registered Users Posts: 19,068 ✭✭✭✭BonnieSituation


    beauf wrote: »
    Just pointing out, those situations were not a repeat of what happened before.

    What?


  • Options
    #141
    liamog
    Moderators, Motoring & Transport Moderators, Regional East Moderators Posts: 7,971 Mod ✭✭✭✭liamog


    beauf wrote: »
    The only thing people don't want is the bridge. Everything else isn't an issue. Even then it's only the location of the bridge that's an issue.

    What's wrong with the location of the bridge as a proposed replacement for the Coolmine crossing, it's approximately 180m up the canal from the current location. Do you think the traffic situation and the connectivity of those living south of the canal would improve if the Coolmine crossing was permanently closed with no replacement bridge at all?


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #142
    beauf
    Closed Accounts Posts: 22,648 ✭✭✭✭beauf


    liamog wrote: »
    What's wrong with the location of the bridge as a proposed replacement for the Coolmine crossing, it's approximately 180m up the canal from the current location. Do you think the traffic situation and the connectivity of those living south of the canal would improve if the Coolmine crossing was permanently closed with no replacement bridge at all?

    I assume it will have the same effect as the last bridge they built, 500m from this new location.


  • Options
    #143
    liamog
    Moderators, Motoring & Transport Moderators, Regional East Moderators Posts: 7,971 Mod ✭✭✭✭liamog


    beauf wrote: »
    I assume it will have the same effect as the last bridge they built, 500m from this new location.

    The big difference is one bridge was a new addition, this is a replacement to existing infrastructure, it's clear lot's of people need to cross the canal in this area, removing their options to do so isn't going to improve their quality of life.


  • Options
    #144
    beauf
    Closed Accounts Posts: 22,648 ✭✭✭✭beauf


    I'm not sure how sitting in the queues on Dr Troy bridge, and queuing to get on it is improving anyone's life.

    Interesting times ahead...

    https://www.irishtimes.com/news/environment/dublin-air-pollution-breaching-eu-limits-epa-warns-1.3950575
    https://www.rte.ie/news/ireland/2019/0708/1060952-nitrogen-oxide/

    https://irishcycle.com/2020/05/13/more-cars-in-dublin-city-centre-post-lockdown-is-knee-jerk-solution/
    https://irishcycle.com/2020/05/12/dublin-retailers-linked-to-car-park-lobby-group-could-face-boycott/


  • Options
    #145
    KGLady
    Registered Users Posts: 338 ✭✭KGLady


    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.

    Just to broaden the perspective there a bit ... there's more than one school on the LCC campus and they've a huge catchment area. D15s only Gaelcholaiste is located there and its got irish speaking kids coming from all over the wider area, and the request for a school bus for the kids was declined by Dublin Bus. There's very limited options to safely get to school especially for the 12/13 yr olds in first year who live too far to walk and the cycle infrastructure just isn't there. If you get the 39 you'll have to go all over the area and then get off at Coolmine/Millenium Pk/Clonsilla Village and still have a ~25min walk to get to school.

    There may be some school admissions policy issues, but the limited transport options faced by kids getting to the schools next to the gridlocked bridge are not down to lazy parents/kids.


  • Options
    #146
    liamog
    Moderators, Motoring & Transport Moderators, Regional East Moderators Posts: 7,971 Mod ✭✭✭✭liamog


    beauf wrote: »
    I'm not sure how sitting in the queues on Dr Troy bridge, and queuing to get on it is improving anyone's life.

    So then why do you want to cut off the access at Coolmine Crossing and force more people to use those routes, which as you've claimed multiple times are already overloaded?


  • Options
    #147
    beauf
    Closed Accounts Posts: 22,648 ✭✭✭✭beauf


    KGLady wrote: »
    Just to broaden the perspective there a bit ... there's more than one school on the LCC campus and they've a huge catchment area. D15s only Gaelcholaiste is located there and its got irish speaking kids coming from all over the wider area, and the request for a school bus for the kids was declined by Dublin Bus. There's very limited options to safely get to school especially for the 12/13 yr olds in first year who live too far to walk and the cycle infrastructure just isn't there. If you get the 39 you'll have to go all over the area and then get off at Coolmine/Millenium Pk/Clonsilla Village and still have a ~25min walk to get to school.

    There may be some school admissions policy issues, but the limited transport options faced by kids getting to the schools next to the gridlocked bridge are not down to lazy parents/kids.

    Broaden it slightly more. You have...

    LCC,
    Gaelcholaiste,
    St Mochtas,
    St Patricks
    CCCs
    Scoil Thomais

    … all more or less beside each other.

    You have to wonder at the "planning" that put all these more or less beside each other, often at the fringe of their catchments, in a bottleneck so that everyone driving is funneled into the same bridge and feeder roads. Overlapping with all the peak time commuters and all at the same time.

    How do make this better? Push more traffic right into the center of it, right at the same bottleneck. They did the same at Castleknock village. That was a disaster at pre lockdown. As was predicted, but that was also shouted down as NIMBYism.

    The whole school admission thing, well the schools played a part in that. They complain about all the cars, but then they created admission policies that caused much of the traffic. Excluding local kids, and admitting in kids which have to driven into the area, while locals now have to be driven out it.

    Granted the cycling infrastructure and planning is pretty shambolic. But its not impossible for kids to get around cycling, and 25min walk is nothing for kids in secondary school, even after a bus journey. We all did it. The whole world does it. There something wrong with our society that everyone has to be driven everywhere. But thats a larger discussion.

    It very hard to complain about traffic gridlock and limited transport options when we are the traffic and we are not actively promoting for better options.

    https://www.irishexaminer.com/news/arid-30942858.html
    https://www.independent.ie/irish-news/education/number-of-teenagers-riding-bike-to-school-falls-sharply-38712256.html
    https://www.thejournal.ie/drop-in-number-of-girls-cycling-4899097-Nov2019/

    Not that everyone can cycle. Thats also fair.


  • Options
    #148
    beauf
    Closed Accounts Posts: 22,648 ✭✭✭✭beauf


    liamog wrote: »
    So then why do you want to cut off the access at Coolmine Crossing and force more people to use those routes, which as you've claimed multiple times are already overloaded?

    "claimed" :)

    Great. If they are not overloaded. Then use them, you don't need another bridge 500m from an existing one.

    https://www.rapidtransition.org/stories/reducing-roads-can-cause-traffic-to-evaporate/


  • Options
    #149
    liamog
    Moderators, Motoring & Transport Moderators, Regional East Moderators Posts: 7,971 Mod ✭✭✭✭liamog


    beauf wrote: »
    "claimed" :)

    Great. If they are not overloaded. Then use them, you don't need another bridge 500m from an existing one.

    How are you trying to have it both ways, also it's probably worth noting that the current bridge is 1.1km away from the current location when travelled by road rather than bird.

    This is why I think you are just anti car rather than bringing constructive discussion to the concept of a replacement crossing for Coolmine. Your argument against the replacing the crossing is their is too much traffic today on the bridge and existing level crossing. So instead of trying to meet the needs of residents south of the canal, who clearly show a desire to cross the canal, you instead want to isolate them further.

    The ship has long since sailed on us developing this suburb with a high car dependency, by all means propose measures to make it better (Using the Metro West reservation for a BRT would be an idea) but there is no need to cut people off in some misguided attempt to force a modal switch without any plans to provide alternatives.


  • Options
    #150
    beauf
    Closed Accounts Posts: 22,648 ✭✭✭✭beauf


    liamog wrote: »
    How are you trying to have it both ways, also it's probably worth noting that the current bridge is 1.1km away from the current location when travelled by road rather than bird.....

    It worth nothing that the new bridge won't be in the same location as the current crossing. ;)

    Seems like it you who want it both ways. Won't cause gridlock. Won't cause extra cars. There is no gridlock. But need a new bridge for the gridlock that isn't there.

    Well if there is no gridlock, and there won't be extra cars, you don't need an extra bridge. So I'm just agreeing with you.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #151
    beauf
    Closed Accounts Posts: 22,648 ✭✭✭✭beauf


    liamog wrote: »
    ....
    The ship has long since sailed on us developing this suburb with a high car dependency, by all means propose measures to make it better (Using the Metro West reservation for a BRT would be an idea) but there is no need to cut people off in some misguided attempt to force a modal switch without any plans to provide alternatives.

    Not sure why you are anti train. This thread is about the new Dart. But almost all are focused on still driving everywhere.

    If people won't stop driving, they won't be incentivized out of their car, then won't be discouraged by inconvenience. No one has any interest in alternatives.

    TBH when an alternative like a peak time toll is suggested, you just ignore any alternative than just driving everywhere.


Advertisement