DART coming to Maynooth line in 2024

Brock Turnpike

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118215738#Comment_118215738

When they close the level crossing, they will put in a roundabout for cars to swing back around and back up to Clonsilla Rd. The lands for which the apartments are planned basically forms part of the lands in scope for both Dart+ and WI Greenway, and the response to the application suggests that neither have been considered by the applicant.

HMS Erebus

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118011767#Comment_118011767

Unnecessary to single out Leo Varakar when every single Councillor and TD objected on behalf of the residents.

On the other hand a Bridge at that spot was on the cards when I lived in St. Mochta's Grove in the early 00s, I knew it as did the majority of my neighbours (there and in Riverwood) so it's a bit rich hand ringing now, it was the perfect location and the road all the way to Station Court Way was set up for it.

IE & or Fingal should have stuck to their guns and pushed it all the way. Same as people who buy houses beside airports with pre-existing well circulated plans for secondary runways - total BS.

From Dr Troy Bridge to Castleknock is screwed at rush hour, no joined up thinking and not a fu@k given, terrible cycling infrastructure too, try to improve it and everyone becomes a tree specialist and ties ribbons to any twig that moves.

Flinty997

...there's too much traffic. So lets add even more traffic and see if that helps....

...but this time we are adding a bridge...

...last time you added a bridge (dr Troy) what happen...

...more traffic and gridlock...

...If you didn't want a bridge you shouldn't have moved there before they came up with the idea of a bridge...

...maybe you shouldn't have moved to location with history of traffic and obvious bottlenecks....

Flinty997

"From Dr Troy Bridge to Castleknock is screwed at rush hour, no joined up thinking"

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.

HMS Erebus

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118411054#Comment_118411054

...there's too much traffic. So lets try to relieve that 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

...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

...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.

...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?

HMS Erebus

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118411090#Comment_118411090

You're obsessed with more traffic, treat the patient don't say 'Oh well but he might get cancer'

Flinty997

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118411773#Comment_118411773

I didn't bump the thread. Its just amusing how people thing more cars (throughout) will do anything other than add more traffic.

Flinty997

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118411768#Comment_118411768

...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.

This phenomenon, more correctly called "induced traffic" or consumption of road capacity, 

...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.

Flinty997

Of course that doesn't account for all city centre Kellystown traffic will mostly all exit at the foot of Dr Troy, and a few hundred metres later at the foot of this new bridge. Plus any rat-running traffic that flows into Kellystown in the morning.

This free flowing future you have in your imagination doesn't exist.

Flinty997

Of course there always the opposite approach...

Studies[edit]

In 1994, the UK advisory committee SACTRA carried out a major review of the effect of increasing road capacity, and reported that the evidence suggested such increases often resulted in substantial increases in the volume of traffic.[20] Following this, London Transport and the Department of the Environment, Transport and the Regions commissioned a study to see if the reverse also occurred, namely that when road capacity was reduced, there would be a reduction in traffic. This follow-up study was carried out by Sally Cairns, Carmen Hass-Klau and Phil Goodwin, with an Annex by Ryuichi Kitamura, Toshiyuki Yamamoto and Satoshi Fujii, and published as a book in 1998.[27] A third study was carried out by Sally Cairns, Steve Atkins and Phil Goodwin, and published in the journal Municipal Engineer in 2002.[28]

The 1998 study referred to about 150 sources of evidence, of which the most important were about 60 case studies in the UK, Germany, Austria, Switzerland, Italy, The Netherlands, Sweden, Norway, the US, Canada, Tasmania and Japan. They included major town centre traffic schemes to make pedestrian areas closed to traffic, bus priority measures (especially bus lanes), bridge and road closures for maintenance, and closures due to natural disasters, mostly earthquakes. The 2002 study added some extra case studies, including some involving cycle lanes. The Annex by Kitamura and his colleagues reported a detailed study of the effects of the Hanshin-Awaji earthquake in Japan.

Taking the results as a whole, there was an average reduction of 41% of the traffic flows on the roads whose capacity had been reduced, of which rather less than half could be detected as reappearing on alternative routes.[citation needed] Thus, on average, about 25% of the traffic disappeared. Analysis of surveys and traffic counts indicated that the disappearance was accounted for by between 15 and 20 different behavioural responses, including changing to other modes of transport, changing to other destinations, a reduction in the frequency of trips, and car-sharing. There was a large variation around these average results, with the biggest effects seen in large-scale pedestrianisation in German town centres, and the smallest seen in small-scale temporary closures with good alternative routes, and small reductions in capacity in uncongested streets. In a few cases, there was actually an increase in the volume of traffic, notably in towns which had closed some town centre roads at the same time as opening a new by-pass.

Cairns et al. concluded that:

...the findings reinforce the overall conclusion of the original study—namely, that well-designed and well-implemented schemes to reallocate roadspace away from general traffic can help to improve conditions for pedestrians, cyclists or public transport users, without significantly increasing congestion or other related problems.[28]

The European Union have produced a manual titled "Reclaiming city streets for people"[29] that presents case studies and methodologies for traffic evaporation in urban areas.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Induced_demand

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

daymobrew

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118412158#Comment_118412158

BTC = Blanchardstown Town Centre.

As you said building more road infrastructure brings more cars because they all think they can now get places quicker. We should look at getting people out of their cars.

While I cycle everywhere (and, you're right, I'm generally not impacted by traffic jams), most people are probably too scared to cycle. I understand this. We should work on this. It will take a while and there will be people that simply won't or cannot cycle but authorities should help those that can and want to.

Flinty997

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.

HMS Erebus

So faster more frequent train services are not a solution, vastly improved cycling infrastructure (which is badly needed) is not a solution and improved roads are not a solution - what do you suggest? (that’s rhetorical because it’s clearly we’re not going to align)

I actually am afraid to let my boys cycle to Castleknock College from Laurel Lodge because the youngest had his collar bone broken getting knocked off his bike when a motorbike turned left across him approaching a roundabout.

I lived in London for 9 years and despite having a parking spot at work I travelled from South Kensington to Vauxhall by Tube everyday. I’m not imagining this stuff, kind of have lived a bit of it.

Maybe I’m totally wrong, wouldn’t be the first time, but for me make cycling, rail and buses top priority, sort congestion locally and bring in a congestion charge for the city centre.

Thats me done!

Flinty997

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...

daymobrew

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118424597#Comment_118424597

In case @HMS Erebus doesn't know the Bramley shortcut, here's the route: https://www.gmap-pedometer.com/?r=7633340

It still puts you on the road for a good bit, but using the footpath might be a solution. A entrance from Collegefort would be brilliant but I'm sure Collegefort residents would object to the pedestrian traffic (and the car drop off traffic).

The surprising thing is that Whites Road to Carpenterstown Road is marked as a PRIMARY cycle route in the Transport strategy for Greater Dublin Area!! Obviously added by people that have never cycled that hostile route.

Flinty997

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.

HMS Erebus

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118425998#Comment_118425998

Thanks Daymobrew that’s much appreciated and I wasn’t aware of it, definitely a case of getting back in the saddle as I’d have much more confidence now.

HMS Erebus

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118424597#Comment_118424597

Weirdly enough closing a level crossing and not making a provision for it makes no sense. The bridge is instead of not in addition to, I’m home based, don’t have a dog in the fight during rush hour but I don’t think screwing existing motorist is a great plan, new motorists can be controlled in different ways e.g. a congestion charge

LXFlyer

Surely most of the motor traffic in the area that would be affected by the level crossing closure is (traditionally) principally either local or orbital in nature rather than city centre bound?

Flinty997

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118426850#Comment_118426850

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.

Flinty997

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118427287#Comment_118427287

On all the major roads across D15, and even on the Dr Troy direction there is large bias City Centre to the traffic.

Not that there isn't local or orbital traffic, or that is isn't significant. But I would say its a fraction of the City Centre Bias.

Its got more confusing of late as traffic crisscrosses the wider D15 trying to get in or out of it. People go sideways trying to find a better route.

I'm sure google would have stats to know how many journey start and end in D15 and how many just pass through it. Or in this case how many start and end near the crossing, or how many don't. Or just the flows. if you happen to be on the outskirts of D15, say the backroads from Clonee or Lucan, there just a constant stream of traffic heading into D15.

LXFlyer

I just find it rather difficult to believe that it is mainly city centre bound traffic given the large number of bus routes and the railway already covering trips to the city.

I would have thought that given the number of schools in the area, the shopping centre, and all of the business parks in West Dublin, coupled with the current lack of north/south orbital bus services in west Dublin, that it would be far more local and orbital journey dominated.

Flinty997

Its hard to know. You'd have to a traffic flow study at a much wider catchment to see the directional patterns to the traffic. All you can tell at this point is all the traffic is concentrated at the points at which you've deliberately concentrated it. If you had roads in the shape of a H and took count in the middle you'd assume all the traffic flows horizontally not vertically. But its because you've forced it horizontally down that route.

Its a bit like assuming all the traffic coming off the N3 at the Blanch shopping center on a Monday evening is going to the center. But it actually just trying to get into D15, but they have to pass through the center to do it.

When they close the crossing at Clonsilla, and there is no bridge from Kellystown to Clonsilla Rd. Where will it cross. Will it cross at Dr Troy because its local to Dr Troy.