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

Dublin 15 is going to get a lot more congested.

Options
1…1314161819…27

Comments

  • Options
    #452
    Phibsboro
    Registered Users Posts: 1,349 ✭✭✭Phibsboro


    cython wrote: »
    http://phoenixpark.ie/opw-announces-social-distancing-plan-for-the-phoenix-park/

    Above states "Instillation (sic) of one-way cycle lanes on the hard shoulder of Chesterfield Avenue to facilitate 2m social distancing." which is pretty incompatible within allowing parking in same.

    Ah sure yes, but they are just temporary safety measures as that announcement itself makes clear. There is no plan to stop parking on Chesterfield Road beyond what we are seeing already.


  • Options
    #453
    Phibsboro
    Registered Users Posts: 1,349 ✭✭✭Phibsboro


    Hurrache wrote: »
    Throughway, you said it yourself. It's not a petition to close the park to traffic.

    I think in the context of the OP's post, where they spoke about the implications for other traffic and the trains I think either would apply. But yes the petition is only to stop through traffic, not access into the park itself.


  • Options
    #454
    hardybuck
    Registered Users Posts: 5,162 ✭✭✭hardybuck


    Phibsboro wrote: »
    I'm not sure if you aware, but there has been a big online petition over the last week to close the main throughway of the park, see here - https://www.irishtimes.com/news/environment/thousands-seek-end-of-through-traffic-in-dublin-s-phoenix-park-1.4254388

    Oh right. The Green Party.

    No, wouldn't be a fan of that. Maybe a segregated cycle track within the park - loads of space to do it.


  • Options
    #455
    Hurrache
    Registered Users Posts: 10,150 ✭✭✭✭Hurrache


    hardybuck wrote: »
    Oh right. The Green Party.

    No, wouldn't be a fan of that. Maybe a segregated cycle track within the park - loads of space to do it.

    No, it's actually driven by normal people, a casual browse through Twitter and the petition will tell you that.


  • Options
    #456
    hardybuck
    Registered Users Posts: 5,162 ✭✭✭hardybuck


    Hurrache wrote: »
    No, it's actually driven by normal people, a casual browse through Twitter and the petition will tell you that.

    What's with the attitude?

    Did you read the line in the article where it says, "A Green Party petition, initiated on Thursday evening by city councillor Michael Pidgeon"?


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #457
    Hurrache
    Registered Users Posts: 10,150 ✭✭✭✭Hurrache


    Just matching your dismissiveness of it.

    It was lobbiesld for, and supported by, various groups and ordinary Joe Soaps.


  • Options
    #458
    hardybuck
    Registered Users Posts: 5,162 ✭✭✭hardybuck


    Hurrache wrote: »
    Just matching your dismissiveness of it.

    It was lobbiesld for, and supported by, various groups and ordinary Joe Soaps.

    There's no need to get into a huff.

    I'm sure it's a fine petition from the Green Party.


  • Options
    #459
    liamog
    Moderators, Motoring & Transport Moderators, Regional East Moderators Posts: 7,813 Mod ✭✭✭✭liamog


    I do find a lot of the current demands to be quite anti-suburb. I'm all in favour of improving the city centre, but most of the ones I see can be summed up with, during lockdown it was nice to be rid of all the surbanites, how can we keep it this way?


  • Options
    #460
    hardybuck
    Registered Users Posts: 5,162 ✭✭✭hardybuck


    liamog wrote: »
    I do find a lot of the current demands to be quite anti-suburb. I'm all in favour of improving the city centre, but most of the ones I see can be summed up with, during lockdown it was nice to be rid of all the surbanites, how can we keep it this way?

    I'm not sure about the anti-suburb aspect, but I definitely think the proposals are very poorly thought out.

    To me it's saying "well cycling in the park has been lovely in the nice weather over the last few weeks, wouldn't it be lovely if it could be like this forever".

    And while it would be lovely to be cycling around the park in the nice weather all the time, the idea that through traffic is banned doesn't appear to consider how we deal with the consequences of the proposal - or even identify them. It doesn't even appear to consider other means to deliver the objective - having nice areas to cycle and walk in. The park is massive and there's space for both.

    It's like something a group of TY students would come up with.


  • Options
    #461
    Hurrache
    Registered Users Posts: 10,150 ✭✭✭✭Hurrache


    liamog wrote: »
    I do find a lot of the current demands to be quite anti-suburb. I'm all in favour of improving the city centre, but most of the ones I see can be summed up with, during lockdown it was nice to be rid of all the surbanites, how can we keep it this way?

    Not saying you're doing it, but there's a trend to misrepresent any of the plans. The plan is not to ban cars from the Phoenix Park, so there's nothing stopping people driving there. Same with the city, there's nothing stopping anyone driving to the city centre.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #462
    beauf
    Closed Accounts Posts: 22,651 ✭✭✭✭beauf


    The plans are simply to fix the issues with the current paths. Which have been an issue for some time.
    Part of that MAY be to remove commuters from parking on the main avenue.

    But as usual on boards, all reason goes out the window, and people who hardly ever been in the park, or live near it, or know anything about it, start pushing some extreme agenda.
    The OPW unfortunately (in my opinion) often has plans are not always fully thought through.


  • Options
    #463
    liamog
    Moderators, Motoring & Transport Moderators, Regional East Moderators Posts: 7,813 Mod ✭✭✭✭liamog


    Hurrache wrote: »
    Not saying you're doing it, but there's a trend to misrepresent any of the plans. The plan is not to ban cars from the Phoenix Park, so there's nothing stopping people driving there. Same with the city, there's nothing stopping anyone driving to the city centre.

    The same people campaigning for this, are also asking for car park closures, removal of "storage areas for personal vehicles". city center car bans. Whilst I agree with most of the aims, the bit that's missing is the calls for better transport links.

    My experience of other European cities is that they have really good park and ride schemes around the periphery. Park for cheap and travel into the city. We're quite woeful in that respect. There's Navan Road parkway, but it has quite a small car park and by the time you pay for parking plus transport, you may as well drive to the city and pay for a multistory. Similiar the park is quite inaccessible from the outer D15 side. From my house in Ongar to the Papal Cross is 11km. By public transport it's 1 hour and I can't take a dog with me.


  • Options
    #464
    Hurrache
    Registered Users Posts: 10,150 ✭✭✭✭Hurrache


    We're absolutely brutal for park and ride, I've said it many times before on this site.

    But I don't think it's correct to say that people that are campaigning for this are the same people looking for city centre cars bans. And nobody is looking to ban you and your dog driving to the park.

    There's been no mention at all of banning cars from the city centre in relation to this or anything else recently. There's obviously going to be a cross over of those agreeing with the petition with people who would think that, but by and large this is apolitical.


  • Options
    #465
    liamog
    Moderators, Motoring & Transport Moderators, Regional East Moderators Posts: 7,813 Mod ✭✭✭✭liamog


    Hurrache wrote: »
    We're absolutely brutal for park and ride, I've said it many times before on this site.

    But I don't think it's correct to say that people that are campaigning for this are the same people looking for city centre cars bans. And nobody is looking to ban you and your dog driving to the park.

    There's been no mention at all of banning cars from the city centre in relation to this or anything else recently. There's obviously going to be a cross over of those agreeing with the petition with people who would think that, but by and large this is apolitical.

    Could just be selection bias in my Twitter feed there's alot of cycling campaigners who tend too far toward the all bike sometimes, the same crowd that are anti e-scooter.


  • Options
    #466
    Hurrache
    Registered Users Posts: 10,150 ✭✭✭✭Hurrache


    They're a unique crowd alright, but this one certainly seems to be more grounded and there's been a swell of support over the last few weeks from a lot not associated with any sort of campaign group or affiliated with any political party.


  • Options
    #467
    beauf
    Closed Accounts Posts: 22,651 ✭✭✭✭beauf


    I'd be a big advocate of cycling. But the there is a hardcore element who lose all reason.


  • Options
    #468
    beauf
    Closed Accounts Posts: 22,651 ✭✭✭✭beauf


    Hurrache wrote: »
    They're a unique crowd alright, but this one certainly seems to be more grounded and there's been a swell of support over the last few weeks from a lot not associated with any sort of campaign group or affiliated with any political party.

    I dunno they seem to only be focused on high speed cycling.

    I've met similar on the road, or in the park, they think they have right of way to do 30 kph 6 inches from you on the cycling path. There's one Muppet I see a lot, anywhere from Castleknock college or in the park, who basically screams at anyone in his way.


  • Options
    #469
    ongarboy
    Registered Users Posts: 5,201 ✭✭✭ongarboy


    221 build to rent BTR apartments proposed for the Old School site on Porterstown Road in Clonsilla (by the level crossing). Lodged with An Bord Pleanala and decision due in September.

    Hopefully, they can preserve the old school house if it does get permission. Not sure if it's a protected structure. That road is quite narrow and with St Mochtas school just up from it, it wouldn't surprise me if it gets rejected for potential congestion issues!

    http://www.pleanala.ie/casenum/307464.htm


  • Options
    #470
    Pinch Flat
    Registered Users Posts: 7,761 ✭✭✭Pinch Flat


    Thats going to be a mess for traffic.


  • Options
    #471
    Brock Turnpike
    Registered Users Posts: 3,744 ✭✭✭Brock Turnpike


    221 apartments in that space is a complete eyesore. Given some of the ridiculous planning permissions that have been given in the area over the past 10-15 years, I wouldn't be surprised if this is approved.

    Honestly... Clonsilla has/is being ruined with the amount of construction.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #472
    Former Former
    Closed Accounts Posts: 7,728 ✭✭✭Former Former


    ongarboy wrote: »
    221 build to rent BTR apartments proposed for the Old School site on Porterstown Road in Clonsilla (by the level crossing). Lodged with An Bord Pleanala and decision due in September.

    Hopefully, they can preserve the old school house if it does get permission. Not sure if it's a protected structure. That road is quite narrow and with St Mochtas school just up from it, it wouldn't surprise me if it gets rejected for potential congestion issues!

    http://www.pleanala.ie/casenum/307464.htm

    It says on that link that it's a protected structure.

    200 apartments, f**king hell


  • Options
    #473
    Murt10
    Registered Users Posts: 1,189 ✭✭✭Murt10


    ongarboy wrote: »
    221 build to rent BTR apartments proposed for the Old School site on Porterstown Road in Clonsilla (by the level crossing). Lodged with An Bord Pleanala and decision due in September.

    Hopefully, they can preserve the old school house if it does get permission. Not sure if it's a protected structure. That road is quite narrow and with St Mochtas school just up from it, it wouldn't surprise me if it gets rejected for potential congestion issues!

    http://www.pleanala.ie/casenum/307464.htm

    http://www.askaboutireland.ie/reading-room/history-heritage/architecture/architecture-in-fingal-du/old-porterstown-national-/


  • Options
    #474
    ongarboy
    Registered Users Posts: 5,201 ✭✭✭ongarboy


    Brock Turnpike wrote: »

    Honestly... Clonsilla has/is being ruined with the amount of construction.

    Was out running today by the new Lidl under construction near train station and was quite shocked at how tall and overbearing it looks from the row of attractive bungalows across from it. It's like the rear of the supermarket is being built facing the street with huge windowless 3 storey walls. I hope the finished job looks more appealing.


  • Options
    #475
    beauf
    Closed Accounts Posts: 22,651 ✭✭✭✭beauf


    Hard to know where the housing estates end and the industrial estates begin now. Looks fantastic...


  • Options
    #476
    hardybuck
    Registered Users Posts: 5,162 ✭✭✭hardybuck


    Driving through Castleknock this weekend has been a pleasure compared to recent weeks. Long may it continue.


  • Options
    #477
    mattser
    Registered Users Posts: 2,206 ✭✭✭mattser


    Those lights at Coolmine Spar/Molloys are a disaster. Far too little time given to traffic on the main road.


  • Options
    #478
    IngazZagni
    Registered Users Posts: 1,586 ✭✭✭IngazZagni


    ongarboy wrote: »
    Was out running today by the new Lidl under construction near train station and was quite shocked at how tall and overbearing it looks from the row of attractive bungalows across from it. It's like the rear of the supermarket is being built facing the street with huge windowless 3 storey walls. I hope the finished job looks more appealing.

    Attractive bungalows? They are run down and ugly looking and are a complete waste of space in a suburban area like that.

    When has a construction site ever looked attractive? There are no 3 story windowless walls on this development although I can appreciate how it may look like this during construction. I think it will be a much appreciated facility for the local community and the design looks completely fine to me.
    hardybuck wrote: »
    Driving through Castleknock this weekend has been a pleasure compared to recent weeks. Long may it continue.

    The junction should have had the signalling changed from Covid sequencing this past week. For some bizarre reason this junction is controlled by DCC despite being within Fingals land area.


  • Options
    #479
    beauf
    Closed Accounts Posts: 22,651 ✭✭✭✭beauf


    IngazZagni wrote: »
    Attractive bungalows? They are run down and ugly looking and are a complete waste of space in a suburban area like that.....

    Maybe they should bulldoze everything older than 10yrs old and replace it with high density high rise concrete apartment blocks and industrial and retail parks. Recreate 1950s industrial UK and USSR everywhere. You'd get a good 200 apartments on the church and graveyard for starters.

    ....


  • Options
    #480
    Brock Turnpike
    Registered Users Posts: 3,744 ✭✭✭Brock Turnpike


    IngazZagni wrote: »
    Attractive bungalows? They are run down and ugly looking and are a complete waste of space in a suburban area like that.

    No, they aren't. The Lidl is an eyesore in the location it'll be in. Honestly, if I lived in one of the houses along Clonsilla road in that area I'd be fuming it was given the go ahead. Though I'm not surprised it was considering some of the dodgy permission there's been granted in the Clonsilla area over there years.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #481
    IngazZagni
    Registered Users Posts: 1,586 ✭✭✭IngazZagni


    beauf wrote: »
    Maybe they should bulldoze everything older than 10yrs old and replace it with high density high rise concrete apartment blocks and industrial and retail parks. Recreate 1950s industrial UK and USSR everywhere. You'd get a good 200 apartments on the church and graveyard for starters.

    ....

    Yes because bulldozing a church is exactly what I’m talking about...... I’m not advocating bulldozing anything. I am saying that just because there are bungalows with massive gardens in the area doesn’t mean that all developments in this area should be like this.
    Brock Turnpike wrote: »
    No, they aren't. The Lidl is an eyesore in the location it'll be in. Honestly, if I lived in one of the houses along Clonsilla road in that area I'd be fuming it was given the go ahead. Though I'm not surprised it was considering some of the dodgy permission there's been granted in the Clonsilla area over there years.

    An eyesore compared to the overgrown field that originally existed? This may have been the Countryside at one stage folks but it certainly isn’t now. It’s a medium density suburban area which is next to a train station and hopefully soon to be Dart station. The population is increasing and the needs of the residents need to be met with adequate shopping facilities. Just looking at the map I think there is a clear deficit of supermarkets in the area and having to drive long distances adding to traffic is in no ones interest.


Advertisement