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

Royal Canal Greenway

Options
1161719212226

Comments

  • Moderators, Category Moderators, Arts Moderators, Sports Moderators Posts: 48,482 CMod ✭✭✭✭magicbastarder


    exactly, they'd be cycling through a reasonably remote unlit area of the park. wouldn't be used.



  • Registered Users Posts: 11,627 ✭✭✭✭Flinty997


    Well thats flip side of greenways, canals etc. You have to say there's a lot of potential permeability and paths, hidden behind massive stone walls, and hedgerows. Perhaps if they were moved back 10ft or so, opened up, and lit, you'd create a lot of amenity and safe walking and cycling routes.

    If you look at the area with the satellite view on lots of potential routes open up.



  • Moderators, Category Moderators, Arts Moderators, Sports Moderators Posts: 48,482 CMod ✭✭✭✭magicbastarder


    i'd suggest (just taking a very brief look at the map) if you were to cross the M50, going from college gate to park avenue would be a good option?

    i'm not sure who owns the building across the road from myos, but it's really the only road block preventing that as a through way to castleknock village. it's derelict but sits square across the end of church court. i'm sure the locals would love my suggestion, too.



  • Registered Users Posts: 11,627 ✭✭✭✭Flinty997


    I would lay strong odds thats a protected building of some sort. If would be lovely if done up.

    I think you'd have less objections if your proposed routes goes past less houses and less cul de sacs.



  • Registered Users Posts: 6,494 ✭✭✭daymobrew


    It might be easier to link College Gate and Bracken Park to the open space at the end of Castleknock Way. This would give access to the proposed bridge over M50 to Park Avenue. See attached screenshot.

    Even without the bridge over the M50 it makes it easy for people from College Gate and Bracken Park to get to Scoil Thomais and Laurel Lodge Shopping Centre, and 37 bus.

    Following on from what Flinty997 says about objections, I cannot picture Church Court residents being happy about increased pedestrian or bicycle traffic (even though the access would benefit them too).

    Cycling via Park Avenue to the Beechpark Avenue junction will be okay because it would bring you to cycle tracks along Castleknock Road (designated a Primary Radial route). Of course none of this infrastructure will be built for decades because NTA and other such bodies only specialise in producing nice maps.



  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 11,627 ✭✭✭✭Flinty997


    I think the Carpenterstown road is a pivotal route for cyclists passing through. Not simply local traffic. I can't see this traffic, deciding to route down the middle of Laurel Lodge to avoid traffic. If you are commuting cyclist you'll just take the road and live with if for 5 mins. I completely accept local cyclists, kids and families between LL and Castleknock going through estates is a preferred route. I'm not sure thats enough to justify a bridge. Maybe because I'm more likely to do a family cycle to the park, or commuting.



  • Registered Users Posts: 6,494 ✭✭✭daymobrew


    The Consultation Report is now available at: https://www.fingal.ie/royalcanalurbangreenway/consultationreport

    Summary of changes since the consultation:

    • The number of accesses to the greenway via Delwood and Brompton has been reduced from 6 to 3
    • The bridge access route/ramp from the Brompton Green area has been shifted further west, with the bridge route/ramp meandering through the wooded area, which should act to screen the bridge access ramp from the Roselawn properties
    • The access point into the Brompton green area has been shifted eastwards to respect the privacy of adjacent properties
    • To prevent the greenway overlooking the back gardens of the residents of Delwood Park and for security reasons, the ground level of the greenway is proposed to be lowered to match, or be lower than, the existing ground level of the adjacent back gardens and a 2m high timber palisade fence provided, with an anti-climb wire mesh fence.
    • The design now includes a 2m high fence line to be maintained along the southern side of the greenway along the Brompton green area. To provide further privacy to the Brompton residents, planting and railings will be provided on the Brompton side of the greenway through the Brompton green area


  • Moderators, Category Moderators, Arts Moderators, Sports Moderators Posts: 48,482 CMod ✭✭✭✭magicbastarder


    i see the only access to delwood would be via delwood close, i'd like to see more but i suspect that's an uphill struggle.



  • Registered Users Posts: 11,627 ✭✭✭✭Flinty997


    Its not really much of a compromise though. Its basically what they wanted all along only very slightly modified.

    I think there are less confrontational ways of doing things.



  • Registered Users Posts: 4,051 ✭✭✭muckwarrior


    As someone who's just moved to one of those estates, I'm delighted. It'll be great to have the greenway on my doorstep. Have lived beside a different section of it for years and it's a fantastic amenity.



  • Advertisement
  • Moderators, Category Moderators, Arts Moderators, Sports Moderators Posts: 48,482 CMod ✭✭✭✭magicbastarder


    now you need to join the resident's association and start introducing some pro-greenway vibes into it!



  • Registered Users Posts: 27,237 ✭✭✭✭blanch152


    The residents have got some of what they want, I suspect it won't be enough for them. However, the greenway will be less pleasant to walk on, but a balance has to be struck and this may be the best one.



  • Registered Users Posts: 11,627 ✭✭✭✭Flinty997


    I'm curious what you think the residents wanted that you think they got?

    I was trying to find a list of issues for both sides. Best I could find was they both want it on different sides of the canal and either want no access or access through the estate.

    Because multiple access through the estate and path on estate side seems like there was no comprise at all.

    Build a fence a bit higher and move the bridge slightly seem to make negligible difference to that. More of a sop than a compromise.



  • Registered Users Posts: 27,237 ✭✭✭✭blanch152


    Three accesses instead of six is an improvement for the residents.

    Measures to reduce overlooking is also an improvement.

    The South option was never technically feasible and would have destroyed the look of the Deep Sinking.



  • Registered Users Posts: 5,548 ✭✭✭Former Former Former


    All of those were in the previous proposal though. As far as I can see, there has not been one single change to the proposals following the 2021 consultation. Any questions about the glaring omissions from the design were met with "this will be addressed at a future stage".

    Which might be fair enough, but then you'd have to ask what they've been doing for the last year.



  • Registered Users Posts: 27,237 ✭✭✭✭blanch152


    • "To prevent the greenway overlooking the back gardens of the residents of Delwood Park and for security reasons, the ground level of the greenway is proposed to be lowered to match, or be lower than, the existing ground level of the adjacent back gardens and a 2m high timber palisade fence provided, with an anti-climb wire mesh fence."

    Are you saying that was in the previous report?



  • Registered Users Posts: 5,548 ✭✭✭Former Former Former




  • Registered Users Posts: 11,627 ✭✭✭✭Flinty997



    Its effectively just lip service. I don't care which side its on. But even I can see they either have no intention of taking the residents seriously, or are intentionally picking a fight, so they don't have to do it. End result nothing will happen. Which I kinda half care about.

    But tbh if cycling to town, you wouldn't go this route, through the park is much faster. TBH you can just cycle/walk west from Coolmine and not bother with the deep sinking. So I have little interest in it.

    But its fascinating how these things play out. Its real Machiavellian way of dealing with it.



  • Moderators, Category Moderators, Arts Moderators, Sports Moderators Posts: 48,482 CMod ✭✭✭✭magicbastarder


    many of the residents do want it on the delwood side; but from what i can see, the residents association decided to oppose it without a huge amount of consultation, and are being very vocal about it; i've talked to a couple of people who would welcome it on the delwood side but are keeping their heads down because they want an easy life.



  • Registered Users Posts: 5,548 ✭✭✭Former Former Former


    In fairness, this document is a summary of the consultation process, thus changes to design would be out of scope.

    But it's pretty obvious that the design is set.



  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 11,627 ✭✭✭✭Flinty997



    I think if you want to involved you would make it your business to be involved or heard. Either through the association or outside of it.

    If you don't I think you've voted by your inaction.


    This isn't really a consultation, its a Fait accompli. They are just rearranging the curtains, hey look we've changed it...very slightly...



  • Moderators, Category Moderators, Arts Moderators, Sports Moderators Posts: 48,482 CMod ✭✭✭✭magicbastarder


    I think if you want to involved you would make it your business to be involved or heard. Either through the association or outside of it.

    i suspect most people doing so are doing it through filling out the consulation forms, etc.; they probably don't want to piss of some of their vocal neighbours by forming an active campaign. as we all know, the nays in this sort of campaign are louder than the yays; i see it where i live too, where the local residents association were opposing the design of metrolink, even though nearly all the neighbours i know were happy about it.



  • Registered Users Posts: 480 ✭✭getoutadodge


    The south side option was never feasable given the proximity to the train track and the depth of the Deep Sinking. Getting more restrictions into and out of Delwood is more than adequate. Waterways Ireland should immediately enforce thru the courts any landgrab no matter how "historical" or inadvertant. Same should apply to the north side off the canal of the what I think is an old Anglo estate from the the Ashtown Lock heading towards Castleknock/Blanch. CPO if necessary. This was always about NIMBYism with the hope of killing off a really great initiative to bring the canal walkway back to use for the general public. Many will prefer it to cutting thru the Phoenix Park especially if Kildare CC get off their arse and complete their section enabling a completed cycleway from Celbridge and Maynooth etc to the Docks. I got some creative line of bullshit from a Kildare CC official as to why the Kildare stretch is on hold yet a great job was done in St Catherines Park? These cycling/walking routes like the Canals or the Tolka and Dodder are a huge improvement. The Islandbridge to Chapelizard one on the Liffey is great. Roll on the new Liffey bridge proposed for there and at the Red Bridge in the Strawberry Beds at the back of Farmleigh which would connect Palmerstown and beyond to the Park.



  • Registered Users Posts: 27,237 ✭✭✭✭blanch152


    If you read the report, there are huge technical issues with the south side, it just isn't possible, and would make DART+ West impossible. For the people of Dublin 15 overall, it is a good outcome, even if the small number of local residents affected by it are unhappy.



  • Registered Users Posts: 27,237 ✭✭✭✭blanch152


    That area is developing a reputation for NIMBYism. They opposed the bridge at Riverwood Ct/Stationcourt Way as part of DART+ West and we have been left as a result with a monstrosity of a bridge at Coolmine Station.

    When that happens, other concerns as with encroachment on the canal in other places will be brushed aside.



  • Registered Users Posts: 11,627 ✭✭✭✭Flinty997


    I think you are trying extrapolate a majority consensus from thin air. :)

    I think the way these things work, is they get so little official response they don't take the numbers literally but as representative sample. So even a small number of replies has an effect on the process.



  • Registered Users Posts: 5,548 ✭✭✭Former Former Former


    They opposed the bridge at Riverwood Ct/Stationcourt Way as part of DART+ West and we have been left as a result with a monstrosity of a bridge at Coolmine Station.

    Nope. The monstrosity at Coolmine Station was in the original plan, it was always planned in addition to the Riverwood Bridge.



  • Moderators, Category Moderators, Arts Moderators, Sports Moderators Posts: 48,482 CMod ✭✭✭✭magicbastarder


    i don't think it's just about the technical issues though (and i know this has been done to death on this thread), but putting the greenway between the canal and the railway line would lock it off from most casual use by people in delwood and brompton.

    for example, if someone in delwood or brompton wants to go for a walk along the canal, without retracing their steps, it's a 4km walk, but if the greenway opened up on the northside, with access points, it'd be much easier to get to.



  • Moderators, Category Moderators, Arts Moderators, Sports Moderators Posts: 48,482 CMod ✭✭✭✭magicbastarder


    i'm not trying to claim a minority or majority either way; my point is that AFAIK no-one knows, and the resident's association are claiming a mandate they may not have.



  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 11,627 ✭✭✭✭Flinty997




Advertisement