Royal Canal Greenway

Former Former

blanch152 wrote: »

That is ridiculous. There are hundreds and thousands of houses in Dublin 15 alone where a person can see into the bedroom of another house. Every house that backs onto another one in a normal housing estate is an example.

I have a number of neighbours to the back of me with attic extensions, they must be able to look downwards into the bedrooms at the back of my house.

I also cannot see how 10 houses will be affected.

I live in a house overlooked by three or four houses. Maybe 20 people live in said houses.

Fingal estimate/hope that the number of people using this path will run into the thousands every day.

Do you see the difference?

blanch152

abc_abc wrote: »

This is true. However, it is different to when you're buying a house knowing upfront what's there and what isn't. The majority of residents have lived there for 20-30 years with ensured privacy. Others bought houses recently and paid a high premium for seclusion and tranquility of the canal only to find out that there are plans which would likely change it. Roselawn Road is a busy road with cars parked in front of houses for train station and residents already have no privacy there; the prospect of having none at the back too is a concern.

Obviously you may say that's not your problem if you're not directly affected but to me they are quite valid concerns.

If people are getting so upset about a little cycle path, what is it going to be like when they try to put in the bus lanes to the city?

NIMBYism has really gone mad.

blanch152

Former Former wrote: »

I live in a house overlooked by three or four houses. Maybe 20 people live in said houses.

Fingal estimate/hope that the number of people using this path will run into the thousands every day.

Do you see the difference?

Nope, what about the people overlooked by new development every day somewhere else in the country?

You can't have improvements such as cycle lanes without affecting someone somewhere.

Former Former

blanch152 wrote: »

Nope, what about the people overlooked by new development every day somewhere else in the country?

You can't have improvements such as cycle lanes without affecting someone somewhere.

If this was your house, with a bridge being built to allow people to look into your bedroom, you'd object too.

I don't live down there, btw. The greenway won't come within a mile of my house regardless of which side it runs along. I just think it's an absolutely mad proposal when an easier option is staring them in the face that doesn't impinge on anyone's house. Fingal have made no comment on why they abandoned their earlier plan and the whole thing is very strange.

abc_abc

blanch152 wrote: »

You can't have improvements such as cycle lanes without affecting someone somewhere.

Keeping the route on the south between two train stations would do exactly that.

blanch152

Former Former wrote: »

If this was your house, with a bridge being built to allow people to look into your bedroom, you'd object too.

I don't live down there, btw. The greenway won't come within a mile of my house regardless of which side it runs along. I just think it's an absolutely mad proposal when an easier option is staring them in the face that doesn't impinge on anyone's house. Fingal have made no comment on why they abandoned their earlier plan and the whole thing is very strange.

abc_abc wrote: »

Keeping the route on the south between two train stations would do exactly that.

Keeping the route on the south doesn't work because of problems at Coolmine Train Station, as has been explained.

A few houses - two or three if you are honest - being affected by this (and not really affected) isn't sufficient to make it worthwhile stopping the project. It is NIMBYism gone mad.

Wait until all those people whose front gardens are taken over for bus lanes who will have bus passengers up against their front bedroom windows all day everyday. Will they have a right to stop the bus lanes as well?

ilsilenzio

Former Former

"Fingal have made no comment on why they abandoned their earlier plan and the whole thing is very strange."

Making no comment strange, refusing to do so is a bit more strange. There is an almost sinister lack of willingness to share with anyone details of background, prior discussions / plans/ reports/ opinions/ decisions (on preferred route) etc. This is supposedly a new format/ process, is non statutory, and appears designed to hide issues , nay decisions, rather than facilitate transparency. Had they gone about it in a more open manner the "promoters", whoever they are might not have built up the level of opposition they have. Wooly answers to most questions are their stock in trade.

beauf

blanch152 wrote: »

Keeping the route on the south doesn't work because of problems at Coolmine Train Station, as has been explained. ...

It hasn't really. They just said "major and expensive engineering works" which seems to be avoided by doing even bigger "major and expensive engineering works" on the other bank.

Considering people have used the route they are implying isn't viable for decades.

Maybe they are correct, but I haven't seen anything conclusive on this.

beauf

Former Former wrote: »

I live in a house overlooked by three or four houses. Maybe 20 people live in said houses.

Fingal estimate/hope that the number of people using this path will run into the thousands every day.

Do you see the difference?

Build a fence along the path and bridge. End of problem.

abc_abc

I know they talk about narrow exit around Coolmine Train Station. I walked there over the weekend and it looks to me that there is a fair amount of a buffer space between the fence and the canal. I'm no engineer so if there is a major problem with widening it I would like to know the details.

beauf

abc_abc wrote: »

I know they talk about narrow exit around Coolmine Train Station. I walked there over the weekend and it looks to me that there is a fair amount of a buffer space between the fence and the canal. I'm no engineer so if there is a major problem with widening it I would like to know the details.

They could remove that wall for starters.

Former Former

blanch152 wrote: »

Keeping the route on the south doesn't work because of problems at Coolmine Train Station, as has been explained.

A few houses - two or three if you are honest - being affected by this (and not really affected) isn't sufficient to make it worthwhile stopping the project. It is NIMBYism gone mad.

Wait until all those people whose front gardens are taken over for bus lanes who will have bus passengers up against their front bedroom windows all day everyday. Will they have a right to stop the bus lanes as well?

Nobody is saying stop the project.

Everyone acknowledges the issue at the station.

What is missing is an explanation as to how Fingal decided that the pinch point at the station is so insurmountable that everything else had to be worked around it.

Building a bridge, taking people's gardens, opening up cul de sacs, bulldozing hundreds of trees... It could all be avoided by just figuring out a solution at the train station.

beauf

The plan is to close that level crossing eventually, to be replaced with a new bridge going from station court road to river wood court.

There will be huge opposition to that too. Dr Troy bridge brings enough extra traffic as is.

daymobrew

Former Former wrote: »

I live in a house overlooked by three or four houses. Maybe 20 people live in said houses.

Fingal estimate/hope that the number of people using this path will run into the thousands every day.

Do you see the difference?

Former Former wrote: »

If this was your house, with a bridge being built to allow people to look into your bedroom, you'd object too.

It would be a miracle if thousands, even hundreds, used it every day.

Earlier someone said that it was for commuters. Commuters are going somewhere, not stopping on a bridge to have a look into back gardens.
Pedestrians, they're a different story, they're up to no good :-)

muckwarrior

Where I live overlooks the Greenway at Ashtown. You'd be lucky if you saw a person every 10 min at off peak times. Even at its busiest there aren't very many, maybe a cyclist every minute or so. Some people seem to think there'll be hoards of people with binoculars trying to peep into their bedrooms.

beauf

The canal route to town is longer and slower than just going direct via the park. It's a nice traffic free alternative. But it will never be the main route for cyclists for that reason.

Probably more pedestrian traffic would use it. Other green ways have been very successful no reason that this one won't be. Lots of runners, walkers etc.

Fighting Tao

It’s a wonder anything gets built in Ireland these days when objections seem to include that people will be looking into bedrooms. I live in a 2 bed apartment with open plan living room/kitchen. All rooms have windows taking up one full wall and overlooking a street. There are apartments across the road 15 metres away. People spend more time in them then those walking on the street below passing through as they will on the greenway. Certain times has a few hundred passing through due to local events which are very frequent. No one cares what you are at in your house. It’s not as bad as people fear!

The council should ignore that as an objection.

Grudaire

Former Former wrote: »

Building a bridge, taking people's gardens, opening up cul de sacs, bulldozing hundreds of trees... It could all be avoided by just figuring out a solution at the train station.

Are they taking people's gardens as well?



I'm a bit confused as to why building a bridge is considered unnecessarily complicated but a cantilevered path to the train station is simple..!

ilsilenzio

"they're up to no good".....maybe not meant to, but this succintly and very eloquently makes the Southside option obvious. Why inflict unnecessarily opening up such opportunities, through currently settled private residential estates, to ner' do wells to case , molest, burgle and escape through detested newly opened escape routes. And maybe stealing a bike from a passing cyclist to boot. Meanwhile the Gardai, when arriving must guess which of 3/4/5 pedestrian exit points are being used. Just one of the many reasons to "Support the Greenway enthusiastically, by improving the current tow path on the Southside." Reports are that the Gardai/ local policing committee were not consulted, asked for input.

Fighting Tao

ilsilenzio wrote: »

"they're up to no good".....maybe not meant to, but this succintly and very eloquently makes the Southside option obvious. Why inflict unnecessarily opening up such opportunities, through currently settled private residential estates, to ner' do wells to case , molest, burgle and escape through detested newly opened escape routes. And maybe stealing a bike from a passing cyclist to boot. Meanwhile the Gardai, when arriving must guess which of 3/4/5 pedestrian exit points are being used. Just one of the many reasons to "Support the Greenway enthusiastically, by improving the current tow path on the Southside." Reports are that the Gardai/ local policing committee were not consulted, asked for input.

I would argue the opposite. Isolated on the south side would make it more attractive to anyone up to no good and it would quickly become unuseable. I’m sure that there is a lot of hearsay going on as locals love to spread timers and false truths “reports are...” etc. Just like the bus connects project. Btw, I’m using the phrase “locals” in general as those who have new projects in their communities.

beauf

Its been isolated for decades and isn't unusable.

The alleyways have been an issue for decades in D15 which is why they were all closed.

Lots of past experience to refer to with regard to canal paths Greenway and alleyways. These are all known quantities.

Former Former

Grudaire wrote: »

Are they taking people's gardens as well?



I'm a bit confused as to why building a bridge is considered unnecessarily complicated but a cantilevered path to the train station is simple..!

Opening up access points at the cul de sacs would require taking part of gardens (I think). Not a big deal on its own I guess.

I have no idea of the complexity of building the bridge vs solving the issue at the station. Ideally Fingal would have explained their rationale but they chose not to.

Re: cantilevers. There is a perception out there, apparently shared by Fingal, that the North bank is level and graded, just slap down a few boards and it'll be grand. The reality is very different.

donaghs

beauf wrote: »

The canal route to town is longer and slower than just going direct via the park. It's a nice traffic free alternative. But it will never be the main route for cyclists for that reason.

Probably more pedestrian traffic would use it. Other green ways have been very successful no reason that this one won't be. Lots of runners, walkers etc.

Meant to point that out too. Its not the quickest way to town for most people on the route.
Also, the current trail is actually better for walkers and runners.

mattser

blanch152 wrote: »

Keeping the route on the south doesn't work because of problems at Coolmine Train Station, as has been explained.

A few houses - two or three if you are honest - being affected by this (and not really affected) isn't sufficient to make it worthwhile stopping the project. It is NIMBYism gone mad.

Wait until all those people whose front gardens are taken over for bus lanes who will have bus passengers up against their front bedroom windows all day everyday. Will they have a right to stop the bus lanes as well?

Less of the NIMBY sh1t if you please. A lot more than 2 or 3 houses being affected by this.

magicbastarder

putting the path in its entirety on the south bank is stupid. apart from the issues with the slope and possible impact on, or of, future electrification work on the railway line, it'd almost certainly 'trap' the greenway between the canal and railway line. the reason there's no local objection to this is precisely because there would be no access possible to the greenway between the humpback bridge and coolmine.

magicbastarder

Bargain_Hound wrote: »

I grew up there and spent many years playing on that green before the fences were installed. I do recall there always being a climb to get up to where the trees were beyond where the fence is installed now. Someone may correct me if I am wrong, though.

if memory serves, there was a bit of a climb, but nothing like the climb on the southern bank as you get nearer coolmine.
we used to go fishing in the canal, getting through to it through the undergrowth just off the green at brompton (despite parental warnings about 24 hour cider parties in there)

magicbastarder

donaghs wrote: »

Meant to point that out too. Its not the quickest way to town for most people on the route.
Also, the current trail is actually better for walkers and runners.

coolmine to o'connell bridge, according to google maps - 10.3km going through the phoenix park.
11.4km going along the canal and coming off at cross guns bridge (and that's avoiding the deep sinking which probably add a couple of hundred metres).

i know which option i'd take.

abc_abc

magicbastarder wrote: »

apart from the issues with the slope and possible impact on, or of, future electrification work on the railway line

Irish Rail confirmed they never had and still don't have issues with the path on the south side.

Fingal plan it as 4m wide urban greenway and this obviously won't fit in. For comparison, busy section in Ashtown is 3m wide.

magicbastarder

cheers, it had been mentioned to me that there was a possible issue re electrification.

daymobrew

magicbastarder wrote: »

coolmine to o'connell bridge, according to google maps - 10.3km going through the phoenix park.
11.4km going along the canal and coming off at cross guns bridge (and that's avoiding the deep sinking which probably add a couple of hundred metres).

i know which option i'd take.

For those staying northside (DCU, Phibsborough, Drumcondra, Fairview, Clontarf) it might be a great option.
15 years ago I cycled from Carpenterstown to Fairview for work. I used the towpath from Ashtown to Drumcondra. It was great. I never encountered any trouble ever.

Former Former wrote: »

Opening up access points at the cul de sacs would require taking part of gardens (I think). Not a big deal on its own I guess.

I don't think that it would - it should just mean opening the space where the road meets the existing fencing.

ilsilenzio wrote: »

"they're up to no good".....maybe not meant to, but this succintly and very eloquently makes the Southside option obvious. Why inflict unnecessarily opening up such opportunities, through currently settled private residential estates, to ner' do wells to case , molest, burgle and escape through detested newly opened escape routes. And maybe stealing a bike from a passing cyclist to boot. Meanwhile the Gardai, when arriving must guess which of 3/4/5 pedestrian exit points are being used.

The majority cannot be ruled my the behaviour of the minority.
If I extend your logic we should make every roadway a cul de sac with only 1 entrance and exit. And maybe gate that entrance.

I live near the tennis courts in Riverwood. If I see people playing football there I tell them that only tennis is permitted. Most stop immediately. Rarely they don't and get cheeky or threatening. Someone suggested locking the gate to the tennis courts and directing people to call into a nearby resident for the key. While I hate having to go over to the courts as I don't know what attitude or reaction I'm going to get, I would never support such an inconvenience for legitimate users of the courts.