[Article] Estate piles on pain for Luas passengers by closing them out

markpb

Someone on the RUI forum found this article in the Herald:

A councillor has criticised residents of a leafy Dublin suburb for preventing access to a Luas station through their estate. Residents in Mount St Annes in Milltown are refusing to let the public get to the local Luas station via their complex. Labour councillor Dermot Lacey has condemned the move, saying people have to make long detours as a result.

"There is a spine road running through the estate to the stop. Access to the station from this point is only available to residents using a swipe card and is denied to the vast majority of residents of Milltown," Mr Lacey told the Herald. "The residents in the rest of Milltown have to go half-a-mile longer to get to the station. I think that's wrong," he said.

[...]

However, in a subsequent letter to the council, the Mount St Annes Management Company made clear its position. "The board (of the management company) unanimously agreed that the owners and residents of Mount St Annes would not agree to allow public access through their development to the Luas station," the company stated.

I think Cllr Lacey raises an interesting point here. It's the first time I've heard any politician in Ireland mention the issue of pedestrian access and it needs to be raised a lot more and enforced through by the planning authorities.

In this case though, it was the same planning authority (or maybe Dublin Corporation planning department) who issued permission to build a gated estate. I'm not sure how far on the plans for the light rail line was at that stage so perhaps they didn't know about it but it was still a bad decision. Even ignoring the rail line, they still granted permission for a gated estate which would exclude the public and impose it's own complications and more onerous obligations on the management company.

thomasj

it has me wondering if the gate with swipe card access would have been in the plans......

have to see the plans though?

Fratton Fred

If my neighbour left his side and rear gates open, it would cut my walk to the pub in half....

seamus

thomasj wrote: »

it has me wondering if the gate with swipe card access would have been in the plans......

have to see the plans though?

If it's private property they would be well within their rights to erect access-controlled gates at the entrance to the property.

The real contention here is whether an existing wayleave or similar agreement existed, or whether it was purely something that people took for granted.

I can see how having fifty people pile off a Luas every five minutes and marching through your carpark/by your house would be very annoying.

markpb

thomasj wrote: »

have to see the plans though?

I think the planning permission is file 3097/97 on this site. The only reference I've found so far is

All with vehicular access off realigned and widened Milltown Road at lighted junction and with pedestrian access to future LUAS line with associated landscaping and site works

There is a condition that

Access to the proposed Light Rail alignment shall occur at one point only. The location of this access point to be agreed in writing with the Light Rail Project Officer, CIE

and also that

the Corporation will not be taking the development in charge, the developer shall enter into a management agreement [...] shall cover roads, footpaths, carpark and all services both over and underground, together with soft and hard landscaping excluding private areas, and shall make it clear that the Corporation shall have no responsibility in these areas.

murphaph

block up the direct access to the estate and make the residents take a detour as well, nimbys.

A similar thing happened in Fingal when the Ongar Distributor Road was opened. Initially the plans for Portersgate housing estate (which has been taken in charge!) included a gate onto the proposed new road. The gate was built onto the wasteland the road would occupy and remained locked (supposedly until the new road was built) thereafter. The road has been open now for years and the gate remains locked, with the sanction of FCC whose nimby fellating councillors sanctioned the extinguishment of the right of way, requiring Hartstown residents to detour around the estate to reach Clonsilla Station.

AlekSmart

the Corporation will not be taking the development in charge, the developer shall enter into a management agreement [...] shall cover roads, footpaths, carpark and all services both over and underground, together with soft and hard landscaping excluding private areas, and shall make it clear that the Corporation shall have no responsibility in these areas.

This reads very much to me as if the development IS indeed private property and the Luas pedestrian access mentioned is for residents of that development in the main.

It would appear then that those outsiders who use it do so on a Grace & Favour basis.

I don`t think the residents are off-beam at all...I`d be far more critical of major-league Official Bodies such as the RPA not doing their job regarding access to their Tramway in the first place ?

Fratton Fred

So let me get this right.

These people bought properties in a gated development and the developer agreed with the council that the residents would be responsible for the up keep of the communal areas/utilities etc. and effectively keep them private.

They have security gates on the development so that their houses are extra secure and no doubt the area is safe for their children to play out in the street. something they pay for.

these people should now be blockaded in/out of their properties because it is a short cut to the Luas stop?

get real.

Cookie_Monster

More bad planning decisions and pandering to vested interests.

Why was it not made a public right of way when the station was first built, insane to block a viable exit just to suit a few private interests, and only because the council won't fufil their role and take over the estate mgt.

Poster King

Firstly, Mount St Anne's is not a gated community. The vehicular entrance off Milltown Road has traffic lights, a pedestrian crossing across Milltown Road to assist residents and defo no gates. I also know that for quite some time after the development was finished and the Luas was finished, that the above mentioned access gate to the Luas stop was permanently locked to everyone, including residents, and it took quite a bit of negotiating and persuasion etc. to get the management company to agree to allow residents to use the gate at the back of the development.
It is quite a peculiar set-up. I have no real view myself on the rights and wrongs of the current arrangement. I can certainly understand the frustration of the residents of Milltown that they have to walk around. It seems like bad planning on the part of the Luas people that some sort of access was not made available.

Capt'n Midnight

Cookie_Monster wrote: »

More bad planning decisions and pandering to vested interests.

Why was it not made a public right of way when the station was first built, insane to block a viable exit just to suit a few private interests, and only because the council won't fufil their role and take over the estate mgt.

If the gates have been open for the year or whatever then it's now a right of way and they would have to apply to the council to have it made private again

If the gates have been closed often enough to deny the right of way then it's not a right of way and they can be as selfish as they like.

I hate when you have to go around gettos, fine if you have transport but hoofing it in the rain isn't pleasant :mad:

Fratton Fred

Poster King wrote: »

Firstly, Mount St Anne's is not a gated community. The vehicular entrance off Milltown Road has traffic lights, a pedestrian crossing across Milltown Road to assist residents and defo no gates. I also know that for quite some time after the development was finished and the Luas was finished, that the above mentioned access gate to the Luas stop was permanently locked to everyone, including residents, and it took quite a bit of negotiating and persuasion etc. to get the management company to agree to allow residents to use the gate at the back of the development.
It is quite a peculiar set-up. I have no real view myself on the rights and wrongs of the current arrangement. I can certainly understand the frustration of the residents of Milltown that they have to walk around. It seems like bad planning on the part of the Luas people that some sort of access was not made available.

so the only gate is at the entrance to the Luas?

Jebus, complicated stuff. was the estate there before the Luas?

dynamick

Fratton Fred wrote: »

so the only gate is at the entrance to the Luas?

Jebus, complicated stuff. was the estate there before the Luas?

It was in planning at the same time as the Luas and completed a couple of years before the Luas opened. I'll have a look at the planning permission documents when I get a chance but it seems to be a case of the planning authority not mandating the developer to build a public right of way.

The council should always consider pedestrian routes when granting permissions for estates and ensure that walking is a feasible option and not blocked off arbitrarily by some wall. If a CPO is possible for a road or railway I don't see why it isn't possible for a footpath.

monument

The main entrance to Mount St Anns, clearly no gates. From Bing maps bird's eye view.

But according to Google Maps the route from the main entrance of the estate to the Milltown Luas stop via Mount St Anns lands is around 2590 ft, and the long way -- from the main entrance to the Luas stop via the road is around 2490 ft. So, only 90 ft or 27 meters in the difference? Or am I getting something wrong here???

If I'm correct, when did 27 meters become half-a-mile?

Other notes:

And even shorter is from the main entrance of Mount St Anns to the Cowper Luas stop (around 2236 ft), but poor planning has allowed a wall to be left in the way of pedestrian access.

A route from Mount St Anns main entrance to Milltown Luas via the grounds of Alexandra College would be the shortest (around 1695 ft), shorter than the other routes, but this also seems gated.

dynamick

Looks like your right. Alexandra college is usually open, I don't know if they ever lock up the front gates

Victor

It is a bit more complicated than that, from the Luas stop to the river is a severe hill and then back up again from the church to the shops although not so bad. Best demonstrated here: http://www.bing.com/maps/?v=2&cp=swjqt3ggcbts&scene=56729796&lvl=2&sty=o

If the gate location is as suggested, it actually does a dis-service to the Mount St. Anne's residents by forcing them to walk further than they need to. Moveing the gate to the southwest of the site would chop about 200-250m off the walk for some.

When the lands east of what is now Luas were mainly institutional and most people used the bus and the bus had a decent service it wasn't so bad. However, like Hospital and Cookstown on the Red Line, the stops fail to integrate with their surroundings.

The problem is a planning one and land ownership one. The main problem is that the council should ahve insited on a more or less straight road between these two points, avoiding the listed buildings. This would mean moving the Luas stop slightly and splitting the Alexandra College grounds (a land swap could have been done).

---

There are some profoundly messed up trip options in the area.

http://maps.google.com/maps?f=d&source=s_d&saddr=Milltown+Rd&daddr=Milltown+station&hl=en&geocode=FTh-LQMdG62g_w%3BFZxxLQMdE5ug_ymLQ9uWUwlnSDF2JUHdHu8nIg&mra=dme&mrcr=0&mrsp=0&sz=15&sll=53.311288,-6.251736&sspn=0.010256,0.023174&ie=UTF8&ll=53.311365,-6.254096&spn=0.010256,0.023174&z=15

http://maps.google.com/maps?f=d&source=s_d&saddr=Abbeyfield&daddr=Unknown+road&hl=en&geocode=FdSHLQMdbKig_w%3BFeqKLQMdqJSg_w&mra=dme&mrcr=0&mrsp=1&sz=16&dirflg=w&sll=53.31489,-6.25092&sspn=0.005128,0.011587&ie=UTF8&ll=53.314314,-6.250105&spn=0.010255,0.023174&z=15

http://maps.google.com/maps?f=d&source=s_d&saddr=Unknown+road&daddr=Unknown+road&hl=en&geocode=FRSLLQMd45ag_w%3BFdaKLQMdNJCg_w&mra=ls&sll=53.318313,-6.248517&sspn=0.010255,0.023174&ie=UTF8&ll=53.318698,-6.254869&spn=0.010254,0.023174&z=15

http://maps.google.com/maps?f=d&source=s_d&saddr=Unknown+road&daddr=Unknown+road&hl=en&geocode=FRSLLQMd45ag_w%3BFdaKLQMdNJCg_w&mra=ls&dirflg=w&sll=53.318698,-6.254869&sspn=0.010254,0.023174&ie=UTF8&ll=53.316339,-6.253667&spn=0.010255,0.023174&z=15

BluePlanet

I know this area.
That estate is not a "gated estate".
It's just the pedestrain entrance onto the Luas line that is gated.
It's totally ridiculous that only the estate residents can use it.

The road leading to the pedestrain gate is wide, with nice wide footpaths, it's not like some narrow little quaint lane.
It's basically at the end of Milltown Ave, where it meets Merton Walk.
http://maps.google.com/maps?source=s_q&hl=en&q=milltown+luas+stop&sll=53.311641,-6.250727&sspn=0.004186,0.012306&ie=UTF8&split=1&radius=0.3&filter=0&rq=1&ev=zi&hq=milltown+luas+stop&hnear=&ll=53.313628,-6.252143&spn=0.004186,0.012306&t=h&z=17

Its absurd that these residents are allowed their own private walk along the Luas line to Milltown Luas stop.
(The pedestrain gate doesn't put you directly onto the Luas Platform, rather you have to walk along the Luas line to reach it)

If you pan that Bing map that Victor has posted, you can actually see the gate concerned.
It's the very end of Milltown Ave.

BluePlanet

dynamick wrote: »

Looks like your right. Alexandra college is usually open, I don't know if they ever lock up the front gates

iirc they actually have signs up at the entrance saying No Pedestrian access.

seamus

BluePlanet wrote: »

Its absurd that these residents are allowed their own private walk along the Luas line to Milltown Luas stop.

How so? It's private property.

Imagine you had a house in a street, you never bother to close your back gate, and you have no front gate. People realise this and start using your side entrance as a through-way to get to the local shops behind your house. Would you be happy to leave that back gate open? Is it absurd that you have a "private walk" to the local shops when everyone else has to go around?

Only the scale here is different, but the annoyance is the same. They're probably also finding that an insane amount of people are parking their cars all day in Mount St. Anne's and walking through to the Luas stop.

What I can see ultimately happening though is that some Luas passengers will get annoyed and break the gate on a constant basis, and the management company will find it easier to just leave it alone eventually.

Fratton Fred

Maybe they should just get rid of the gate, that way everyone suffers equally. Much better than a few people have an perk.

Personally, I would hate lots of people parking outside my house and walking to the Luas, especially as it would be free parking as the council have no remit to put in meters.

I suppose they could put up signs and employ clampers, but what a lot of hassle for what is a storm in a tea cup.

foggy_lad

it looks to me like the gate enters onto the luas line which is veolia/private property and maybe they have stipulated that residents can use it for access only and nobody else is allowed use it and it must be kept locked? it does not open onto the luas platform which would possibly be a different senario where veolia might not object to it being used by everyone?

BluePlanet

seamus wrote: »

How so? It's private property.

Imagine you had a house in a street, you never bother to close your back gate, and you have no front gate. People realise this and start using your side entrance as a through-way to get to the local shops behind your house. Would you be happy to leave that back gate open? Is it absurd that you have a "private walk" to the local shops when everyone else has to go around?

It's not the same thing.
Did you bother to see the gate in the Bing map?

I empathise with the parking.
In the estate i live in we have to display a parking disc provided by the managment co. Any car that doesn't have one is liable to be clamped.
It's low tech but it seems to work.

BluePlanet

foggy_lad wrote: »

it looks to me like the gate enters onto the luas line which is veolia/private property and maybe they have stipulated that residents can use it for access only and nobody else is allowed use it and it must be kept locked? it does not open onto the luas platform which would possibly be a different senario where veolia might not object to it being used by everyone?

I think there's something about that alright.
The gate does not open to the platform.
But there is a bit of footpath extending from the platform and terminates at that private gate.
Maybe we should get the council to block the footpath from the end of the platform.
This would allow the residents their private gate - to no where.

Victor

seamus wrote: »

How so? It's private property.

No, he's talking about the footpath on the RPA side of the wall. If your garden backed onto, say the Phoenix Park, would it be a good use of public funds for the OPW to build a path across the park right up to your rear boundary, for your exclusive use?

As monument points out, its actually a bit moot. The reality is that the RPA, the developer, the purchasers, the council and the councillors messed up.

Jimicito

Victor wrote: »

As monument points out, its actually a bit moot. The reality is that the RPA, the developer, the purchasers, the council and the councillors messed up.

Not quite the case Victor, In fact the RPA wanted this route opened up but this was opposed fiercely by the residents of the Development at the inquiry and the decision from the Judge was for the gate to be private.

By the way a similar situation existed at Sandyford where the residents also fought against the RPA's proposals for a gate to provide access directly to the stop.

As I recall in both cases the argument revolved around nuisance parking !

Jimicito

dynamick

Jimicito wrote: »

Not quite the case Victor, In fact the RPA wanted this route opened up but this was opposed fiercely by the residents of the Development at the inquiry and the decision from the Judge was for the gate to be private.

Which inquiry?

In 1997, there were no residents when the builder applied for planning permission and there was no Luas so this was the time for the council to require a public route to the Luas stop as a condition of grant of planning permission.

-edit-
the argument about parking is a red herring because it's trivial to employ a clamper like NCPS to clamp non resident cars and no commuter will park in a clamping area.

seamus

dynamick wrote: »

the argument about parking is a red herring because it's trivial to employ a clamper like NCPS to clamp non resident cars and no commuter will park in a clamping area.

However, the legality of clamping is disputable and it often causes more problems for residents than it solves. It's an additional yearly cost too for the residents, whereas a gate isn't.

Cookie_Monster

seamus wrote: »

However, the legality of clamping is disputable and it often causes more problems for residents than it solves. It's an additional yearly cost too for the residents, whereas a gate isn't.

it will be with all the vandalism of it to try and break the locks and keep it open.

The res assoc where my Gf's parents live have illegally gated a public right of way and they give out keys to residents. The gate and lock are constantly broken though to prevent it from being locked.

Jimicito

dynamick wrote: »

Which inquiry?

.

The Railway Order inquiry for the Luas line which to my recollection was in 1999. Totally agree that Council lost the opportunity to condition the planning permission but such short sightedness has resulted in similar lack of connectivity elsewhere. Back then even the local Authorities were not convinced Luas would ever happen.