DART coming to Maynooth line in 2024

The posters who've never set foot in D15 stand out a mile. Bus Connects won't make any difference to anything.

Aside from the fact that people are never going to take two buses to go about their daily suburban business of school runs, shopping and going to the gym, closing all these crossings actively militates against Bus Connects.

The Fr Troy bridge was never built to be the only crossing point of the canal. It is a single lane in both directions and there is no way to widen it. What that means is pouring a load of extra cars into it will play havoc with the buses too. The Granard Bridge at Castleknock was built for horses and carriages so it's even worse. If there is no pressure release valve available in being able to take a different crossing, one broken down car will throw the entire place, buses and cars alike, into chaos.

IE want to close the crossings because it makes life easier for them. I absolutely see their point, but the trade-off for everyone else is pretty significant.

As far as I can see that survey is not capturing the traffic going through one area to the next. So traffic from elsewhere that comes through Dublin 15 is not captured. So if you survey people in Dublin 15 about traffic, you'll get a distorted stats of journeys times. The traffic on all borders of D15 is crazy.

These new bridges are so far west that they're completely irrelevant to 90% of D15 inhabitants though.

The proposed replacement bridge at Coolmine was never viable. IE knew that and it was an underhand tactic to float it in the first place.

The Fingal Development Plan includes local objectives to 1) prohibit a new bridge at the proposed location and 2) maintain the road crossing at the existing location.

They'll also bring more traffic into D15 those heading towards city center in the morning.

A Railway Order will easily override these non-binding objectives. They are really there to allow a councillor score votes.

Yes, I know. To be absolutely clear here - the post I was responding to said that building the new bridge between Stationcourt and Riverwood was a Fingal CoCo plan. I was just pointing out that this was absolutely not the case.

The problem is people can't connect the problem of driving at peak is causing the traffic at peak. They are one and the same.

You can type your D15 journey into Google maps and see how long it takes at different times of the day.

Rush hour isn't simply school times.

That's not a great argument - just because people disagree with you doesn't mean they don't live in the area.

Right now, public transport in D15 is pretty poor. If you happen to live close to a train station, or your destination happens to be on the one bus route that passes close to your door, it's a bit better. If you head towards the city, the public transport is a decent option - going anywhere else, it's not great. With BusConnects, there will be more options with the new orbital lines - so you can get to other destinations than the ones on your existing radial bus line, easier. If you have working bus interchange stations such as the one that they'll build in Blanch SC, then people will absolutely take two buses to their destinations - they're just used to taking the one bus because that's been the only option. Because there's no way to reliably change to a different bus, and you have to pay twice.

Car traffic in the area is pretty much at saturation point. Public transport is at capacity too, but that can be expanded (car traffic generally can't, there's no more room for roads) - that's why we really need the Dart upgrade and a much better bus system. BusConnects isn't that much better a system, but at least it should be better than what is in place now. Cycling infrastructure is getting better too.

Are people still afraid/embarrassed to sit beside stranger's on the train, I see lots of empty seats in the morning and more and more people standing.

No, I'd say about 50% on the m3 docklands Tuesday Wednesday Thursday and 30% Monday Friday, and guessing the same for the maynooth line.

How does it impact them? Just curious.

You have three ways into town. Chapelizod, Navan Rd, Castleknock Village. Three single lane roads.

There is no way to push more traffic through these bottlenecks like a Tokyo Train pusher.

...So lets try to relieve that traffic....

You can't it has nowhere to go to. Also they have plans to add more traffic to it. They've admitted this a traffic blackspot, both here and Dr Troy. They are planning to put even more traffic through it, more housing etc. That's the plan. More traffic.

...but this time we are adding a bridge...well no we're replacing a level crossing which stops existing traffic with a bridge which will allow it to flow - think of it as putting the stopper back in an emptying bath every 5 minuets

They already effectively bypassed the level crossing with Dr Troy bridge. Traffic just increased to fill the capacity. That what it does. It also drew new traffic to it. I would guess as much 80%+ of the traffic on Dr Troy is just passing through, and does not originate or terminate anywhere near the bridge.

...last time you added a bridge (dr Troy) what happen...Allowed people in Carpenterstown get to the BTC without waiting at the Clonsilla level crossing. It didn't magic up new traffic, building persistently in Dublin West without investing in public transport did that

What's the BTC? They didn't build a massive bridge just for one or two small estates. Traffic (like water) flows to the path of least resistance until it fills up, then stops. Off peak there is no issue with traffic. So it not local traffic, its mostly commuting traffic just passing through.

...more traffic and gridlock...better access via the DART which will remove traffic off the road just like a Metro would do, unless of course journey times are rubbish because level crossings have to close. The new Cardiff's Bridge between Finglas & Cabra transformed the congestions (for the better) by closing a level crossing and putting traffic (cars, bikes & pedestrians) over it.

This is all bogus. See if you are driving, you've no intention of getting the train. Likewise cycling. Cyclists aren't held up by traffic, its a non-issue for them. That there almost no cycling paths on the existing roads, and what there have woeful transitions shows how little focus there is on cycling or getting the train there is in all this. Its solely about driving.

Journey times (for cars) are rubbish because there's too many cars. They are causing their own problem.

...If you didn't want a bridge you shouldn't have moved there before they came up with the idea of a bridge...Or like me you thought that'll be handy but then it got delayed for 20 years but yes that too.

...maybe you shouldn't have moved to location with history of traffic and obvious bottlenecks....If you can't stand the heat or how about resolve the exiting issues or would you rather we just throw our hands up?

I'm pointing out you won't resolve traffic problems by adding more traffic. Adding one super wide bridge will do nothing. If you put an 8 lane bridge right at the crossing, it will all still have to filter back into to a single lane and into another queue. it has to do that in every direction of the compass from the crossing. Single lane, straight into a signal junction.

Of course there always the opposite approach...

The real solution is just avoid the whole sorry mess by avoiding the route, or avoiding the need the journey in the first place.

I don't think this is really a cycling issue. Its more of trying to fit a gallon into a pint pot. I think people who bring cycling into as a reason for the bridge are being (with respect) disingenuous. Going a slightly different route isn't the same thing for a cyclist as a driver. You can tell people suggesting it as cycling issue are thinking like a driver not a cyclist.

This is not bad design problem, poor junction or such where a flyover or ring road, filter or in this case a bridge will fix it. I know thats in people heads. But going via the level crossing is a bad choice of route. People are trapped in the hamster of wheel that this is their only route. That getting past this point fixes the route. It doesn't.

Even if you believe that a making a new road, bridge, doesn't attract new traffic to that. Ok. But you can't ignore the plans for Kellystown and the wider area that has just a vast amount of new development either started or planned. It all has to go somewhere. Its not going to go some circular route to get to city centre.

Weirdly enough none of that has anything to do with the proposed bridge.

There will be a seperate bridge for pedestrians and cyclists at the crossing. Traffic is a non issue for them anyway. Trains don't need the bridge. They'll work just fine without it.

This bridge isn't on the route between LL and Castleknock College. So this does nothing for cyclists on that route. Going from LL to Castleknock College there's no need to go near any roundabouts. You can cut through Bramley.

Castleknock College could open a entrance into College Gate to avoid the woeful front entrance access. In addition a pedestrian, cycling route across the M50 near College gate to College wood, or through the Castleknock College (Greenway on the boundary) would provide a very nice safe route for walkers and cyclists from Carpenterstown Road to Castleknock and the Phoenix Park.

..and yet the focus is another bridge for cars...

The Irony being there is no continuous cycle path from Dublin 15 to the Phoenix park. Every route has a narrow unpleasant stretch.

None near the Level Crossing, and where they do exist in the vicinity of Dr Troy bridge, Riverwood, they don't join up, have 6" kerbs and poor surfaces, completely inconsistent standards, dangerous transitions between path and road. At every roundabout they have a different way of dealing with cyclists/Cycle lanes. In some cases its one side of the roundabout has a entirely different layout to the other. The only thing thats consistent is the lack of consistency.

Its like they had running joke to never do things the same way twice. I can think of no other way to achieve this level of randomness.

Certainly its counter intuitive. But it has a basis in transport theory (and in real world experience backed up by studies)

Reduced demand

Just as increasing road capacity reduces the cost of travel and thus increases demand, the reverse is also observed – decreasing road capacity increases the cost of travel, so demand is reduced. This observation, for which there is much empirical evidence, has been called disappearing traffic,[7] also traffic evaporation or traffic suppression, or, more generally, dissuaded demand. So the closure of a road or reduction in its capacity (e.g. reducing the number of available lanes) will result in the adjustment of traveler behavior to compensate – for example, people might stop making particular trips, condense multiple trips into one, re-time their trips to a less congested time, or switch to public transport, carpooling, walking, bicycling or smaller motor vehicles less affected by road diets, such as motorcycles, depending upon the values of those trips or of the schedule delay they experience.

A toll at peak seems a reasonable compromise to me. But there is no way thats a runner, due the infrastructure needed for that.

But again there will be a bridge at the crossing for cyclists and pedestrians. So its not that will be no provision. Just no provision for cars. So this whole conversation is solely about cars. And cars at peak, since off peak you can go over Dr Troy no problem.