DART coming to Maynooth line in 2024

KGLady

beauf wrote: »

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.

I agree with you a 25 min walk isn't a hardship for the majority of able bodied healthy kids, but you add in the time it takes to get to your bus stop and its journey time and its overall taking even longer. Walking also takes longer because there are so many estates walled off with no pedestrian access to the main roads meaning a trudge through the entire estate to the front entrance. For the kids coming from Ongar/Clonee D15 end its going to be well over an hour of a LOCAL commute because the planning is so ****e and the school bus needs aren't been fulfilled. The kids going to school in town would get there faster. Or, a parent can drop you Ongar to LCC in 10-20 mins depending on traffic.

We're not that far at least, my own kid walks it and its 45mins because there's just no practical bus option and the roads are too hazardous for safe cycling. In Clonsilla they also struggle with cars going through reds at the pedestrian lights in the afternoon :mad: The solution really is dedicated school buses for cases where the catchment is wider that the immediate locality. It shouldn't be a logistical nightmare to just get to a school in the area. Everyone else commuting for work and local trips shouldnt have to suffer through lines of cars of kids who's parents don't have another option

beauf

Well there a bit of social responsibility here. I got a bus sometimes two, and then a walked 20~30 mins to school. Lots of urban kids do this. It wasn't and isn't unusual.
Its not unusual. We (the adults) have turned this into have to be driven to school.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IkVvXVDs5aI&ab_channel=CBSThisMorning
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=P7YrN8Q2PDU&ab_channel=TheFeedSBS

The we have decided to live in places where driving is the only option (at least in heads, but sometimes it is the only option). We (the adults) have decided to do that.
We also over state the dangers. Why do we do that?

We are not solving these problems. We are creating them, we are sustaining them. We have to take some responsibility here.

beauf

I'm not saying housing isn't an issue, obviously it is.

liamog

beauf wrote: »

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.

Hmm, I'm not sure if you are aware but the train line runs in an East West direction, and isn't going to do anything for people in D15 crossing the canal in a North South direction, tolling a suburban bridge is probably one of the craziest ideas I've ever seen on boards.

I believe I already covered why it's important to get this right in the context of both the rail upgrade and ensuring we don't further isolate D15 neighbourhoods, here's the post in case you missed it https://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=114722258&postcount=95

beauf

You were making point the the bridge isn't for peak time traffic, that is primary purpose use off peak permeability.
Which wouldn't be effected by a peak time toll. So you should have no issue with one. So its interesting you do.

liamog

beauf wrote: »

You were making point the the bridge isn't for peak time traffic, that is primary purpose use off peak permeability.
Which wouldn't be effected by a peak time toll. So you should have no issue with one. So its interesting you do.

I believe the point was that it wasn't primarily about peak time traffic relief and that off peak permeability was just as important.
Can you provide any examples of a time based toll operating on a suburban bridge of the like proposed as a replacement for Coolmine, I've honestly never heard of such a thing, I think it would be a massive waste of resources.

Why are you so intent in preventing people from crossing the canal and railway at this location?

beauf

Why are so focused on peak time traffic, if peak time traffic isn't the most significant issue.

No ones stopping people crossing the railway or canal, there a massive bridge already there that allows just this.

liamog

You are the person focussed on peak time traffic and using it as a justification to cut off access across the canal 24 hours a day.
You keep bringing the justification to not build a replacement at Coolmine to be their is too much peak time traffic.
Then when I point out that's not the only reason to replace the crossing you avoid the point.

beauf

liamog wrote: »

You are the person focussed on peak time traffic and using it as a justification to cut off access across the canal 24 hours a day.
....

When did this new bridge become the ONLY way to cross the Canal and Railway. Is there a new plan we missed.

lucernarian

There is a long distance between e.g. castleknock and Dr Troy bridge if Coolmine were closed. It seems like it would be an ideal avenue for local/feeder bus routes if there were was provision made for bikes, pedestrians and vehicles. Would also be nice to see something done about the canal pathway between castleknock and coolmine, which is currently in a dire state.

beauf

lucernarian wrote: »

There is a long distance between e.g. castleknock and Dr Troy bridge if Coolmine were closed. It seems like it would be an ideal avenue for local/feeder bus routes if there were was provision made for bikes, pedestrians and vehicles. Would also be nice to see something done about the canal pathway between castleknock and coolmine, which is currently in a dire state.

There's a thread somewhere on boards about that also...

https://irishcycle.com/2019/03/19/public-urged-to-support-royal-canal-greenway-proposals-as-opposition-mounts-in-dublin-15/

blanch152

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.

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.

That is a very good idea, and would preserve the Metro West alignment into the future.

beauf

lucernarian wrote: »

There is a long distance between e.g. castleknock and Dr Troy bridge if Coolmine were closed. It seems like it would be an ideal avenue for local/feeder bus routes if there were was provision made for bikes, pedestrians and vehicles. Would also be nice to see something done about the canal pathway between castleknock and coolmine, which is currently in a dire state.

The plan is to replace the level crossing with a pedestrian and cycle bridge.

Road bridge into Riverwood 500m away from the existing tiny road bridge.

https://www.google.ie/maps/@53.3778264,-6.4024583,3a,75y,354.2h,70.53t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1sseOCnMscOHBSEazPF0NM8w!2e0!6s%2F%2Fgeo0.ggpht.com%2Fcbk%3Fpanoid%3DseOCnMscOHBSEazPF0NM8w%26output%3Dthumbnail%26cb_client%3Dmaps_sv.tactile.gps%26thumb%3D2%26w%3D203%26h%3D100%26yaw%3D208.68843%26pitch%3D0%26thumbfov%3D100!7i13312!8i6656

blanch152

beauf wrote: »

When did this new bridge become the ONLY way to cross the Canal and Railway. Is there a new plan we missed.

Well, if it isn't the only way across, then it won't be overloaded. You have convinced me of the necessity for this new bridge.

beauf

blanch152 wrote: »

That is a very good idea, and would preserve the Metro West alignment into the future.

Maybe they should make the new bridge bus only.

beauf

Is there anything to be said for canal boats?

https://www.google.ie/maps/@53.3789336,-6.4020716,3a,75y,281.79h,90t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1sgjbwxu3WRxdpSm1gbEmojw!2e0!6s%2F%2Fgeo0.ggpht.com%2Fcbk%3Fpanoid%3Dgjbwxu3WRxdpSm1gbEmojw%26output%3Dthumbnail%26cb_client%3Dmaps_sv.tactile.gps%26thumb%3D2%26w%3D203%26h%3D100%26yaw%3D181.18086%26pitch%3D0%26thumbfov%3D100!7i13312!8i6656

lucernarian

beauf wrote: »

The plan is to replace the level crossing with a pedestrian and cycle bridge.

Road bridge into Riverwood 500m away from the existing tiny road bridge.

https://www.google.ie/maps/@53.3778264,-6.4024583,3a,75y,354.2h,70.53t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1sseOCnMscOHBSEazPF0NM8w!2e0!6s%2F%2Fgeo0.ggpht.com%2Fcbk%3Fpanoid%3DseOCnMscOHBSEazPF0NM8w%26output%3Dthumbnail%26cb_client%3Dmaps_sv.tactile.gps%26thumb%3D2%26w%3D203%26h%3D100%26yaw%3D208.68843%26pitch%3D0%26thumbfov%3D100!7i13312!8i6656

The replacement facility is not ideal for bikes and some pedestrians compared to existing crossing. It's sort of annoying that the road and pedestrian bridge cannot be built in-situ at the crossing.

liamog

lucernarian wrote: »

The replacement facility is not ideal for bikes and some pedestrians compared to existing crossing. It's sort of annoying that the road and pedestrian bridge cannot be built in-situ at the crossing.

Maybe that is the alternative, instead of building a new bridge through Riverwood, build it over the existing crossing.
In this diagram, red is the changes and required for a Riverwood bridge, yellow would be a bridge at the same gradient running through Coolmine Rd.



Excuse my mad paint skillz

beauf

Option 1 and 6 keep it in the same place.

https://www.irishrail.ie/Admin/getmedia/8b669bab-7b1c-4ef6-9667-d2494faae813/Preliminary-Options-Selection-Report_Main-Report.pdf

beauf

lucernarian wrote: »

The replacement facility is not ideal for bikes and some pedestrians compared to existing crossing. It's sort of annoying that the road and pedestrian bridge cannot be built in-situ at the crossing.

It would be better than carrying the bike over the pedestrian bike over bridge in the train station. That was no fun.

They have some convoluted engineering for the Greenway between Castleknock and Coolmine also.

Look at the national hospital. Square no, rectangle no, triangle no.
A freaking oval. If you wanted to a pick a shape that would be the most expensive to build you couldn't go far wrong with an oval.

None of these people had a lego set as a child.

Fiddle Castro

liamog wrote: »

Maybe that is the alternative, instead of building a new bridge through Riverwood, build it over the existing crossing.
In this diagram, red is the changes and required for a Riverwood bridge, yellow would be a bridge at the same gradient running through Coolmine Rd.



Excuse my mad paint skillz

This is option 1 and comes with the same problems as Riverwood (Height of bridge, removal of trees, demolition of properties etc.) as well as some of its own like the potential destruction the bridge & that there is
insufficient room with this option to accommodate dedicated cycle tracks without increasing the overall road
footprint and impact on the adjacent properties further.

liamog

Looks like the main benefit of Option 3 over Option 1 is that a Riverwood bridge can be built to wider standard, as such it can accommodate active travel modes as well as road traffic.
I wasn't aware that the existing bridge at Coolmine was listed and would cause complications.

Fiddle Castro

The full details of the options are available here -

https://www.irishrail.ie/Admin/getmedia/8b669bab-7b1c-4ef6-9667-d2494faae813/Preliminary-Options-Selection-Report_Main-Report.pdf

Go to page 133 for the options for Coolmine

liamog

I think the Clonsilla options were more interesting, would be some good joined up thinking to build the bridge for the future development of Kellystown

cython

Dr_Colossus wrote: »

New station in Porterstown? surely not as Clonsilla and Coolmine are already pretty close together.

Back when Metro West was still a thing, there was a plan for a Porterstown station as part of an interchange between that and the train line: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Porterstown_station

I'd agree that the necessity of same in isolation is pretty questionable, but were it ever to be built I couldn't see a scenario where people living near to and currently using either of Clonsilla or Coolmine would be willing to see one of those closed in exchange for Porterstown if the net result was a significantly longer walk or cycle to the station.

blanch152

liamog wrote: »

Maybe that is the alternative, instead of building a new bridge through Riverwood, build it over the existing crossing.
In this diagram, red is the changes and required for a Riverwood bridge, yellow would be a bridge at the same gradient running through Coolmine Rd.



Excuse my mad paint skillz

That was examined comprehensively by the study and ruled out for very good reasons.

beauf

They didn't have a yellow pen...

liamog

blanch152 wrote: »

That was examined comprehensively by the study and ruled out for very good reasons.

It was mostly ruled out because of the listed bridge and inability to provide adequate width for active travel modes.

lucernarian

liamog wrote: »

It was mostly ruled out because of the listed bridge and inability to provide adequate width for active travel modes.

The old bridge is mostly not visible except from certain specific angles. Normally I'd not want to see destruction of listed buildings but sometimes I want exceptions

ciaran76

Kind of lnked to the above.....


Fingal County Council is proposing to develop the Kellystown Road which will provide a link from Porterstown to Barnhill, to improve road safety & connectivity whilst allowing for the development of a new urban neighbourhood.

https://consult.fingal.ie/en/consultation/kellystown-road-%E2%80%93-non-statutory-public-engagement