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

Merrion Gates removal scheme

Options
13567…10

Comments

  • Options
    #62
    Sam Russell
    Moderators, Science, Health & Environment Moderators Posts: 19,378 Mod ✭✭✭✭Sam Russell


    Mod: Can we leave the Luas and travelling time for another thread. Equally comments about travelling time by bike.

    This thread is about the Merrion Gates and their removal/upgrade as part of the Sandymount / Merrion to Blackrock Corridor Study.

    This study is attempting to improve cycling for commuting and for leisure. If you wish to discuss the cycling aspect of this study outside the Merrion Gates proposal, please start a new thread.

    Thank you.

    Sam


  • Options
    #63
    NuMarvel
    Registered Users Posts: 3,279 ✭✭✭NuMarvel


    The NTA are holding two information evenings this week in the Tara Towers Hotel on Merrion Road:

    Tuesday 22nd November from 7pm to 9.30pm: and
    Wednesday 23rd November from 7pm to 9.30pm.

    Information on the proposals will be available at both sessions, and members of the NTA plus the design team will be available to answer queries on both evenings.


  • Options
    #64
    Sam Russell
    Moderators, Science, Health & Environment Moderators Posts: 19,378 Mod ✭✭✭✭Sam Russell


    The information meeting is on tonight (Tuesday) or tomorrow (Wednesday) in the Tara Towers - just up from the Merrion Gates.

    Start time is 7 PM.


  • Options
    #65
    Sam Russell
    Moderators, Science, Health & Environment Moderators Posts: 19,378 Mod ✭✭✭✭Sam Russell


    Went to the information evening.

    A bit of a disappointment as there was no formal presentation, just a wall of maps and a number of represents of the proposers. I got the impression that they thought they had got the best possible proposal and anything else was restricted by conservation of the bay, budgets, etc. etc.

    I like the proposal re: Merrion Gates, and re: bikes.

    Not sure about the traffic managements aspects though. If the toll was removed to make it more favourable for cars to be routed across it, it would help the flow of traffic in the morning, particularly Beckitt bridge. In the evening, Blackrock is the problem as is the Stillorgan dual carriageway - not much in this to help with either of those.


  • Options
    #66
    Carawaystick
    Registered Users Posts: 8,779 ✭✭✭Carawaystick


    Sam Russell wrote: »
    Went to the information evening.

    A bit of a disappointment as there was no formal presentation, just a wall of maps and a number of represents of the proposers.
    That's always the way at these consultation meetings


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #67
    Idbatterim
    Registered Users Posts: 17,839 ✭✭✭✭Idbatterim


    If the toll was removed to make it more favourable for cars to be routed across it, it would help the flow of traffic in the morning, particularly Beckitt bridge.
    is removing the toll on the cards? i definitely think it should be gotten rid of, its an absolute joke trying to get over the macken street bridge east bound, at most times of the day...

    also as the m50 is such a joke, I wonder would some people start to use the port tunnel while it is at the lower fee, to avoid the m50 when heading to sandyford etc?


  • Options
    #68
    L1011
    Moderators, Business & Finance Moderators, Motoring & Transport Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 67,765 Mod ✭✭✭✭L1011


    The toll is now under the control of the Corpo so there is always a chance of it being removed but currently they're happy to take the income.


  • Options
    #69
    lucernarian
    Registered Users Posts: 9,235 ✭✭✭lucernarian


    L1011 wrote: »
    The toll is now under the control of the Corpo so there is always a chance of it being removed but currently they're happy to take the income.
    The east link is already fully congested at peak times. Removing the toll wouldn't improve much.

    The widening and signalling project at the Point itself is not going to help matters for bridge-bound traffic.


  • Options
    #70
    Sam Russell
    Moderators, Science, Health & Environment Moderators Posts: 19,378 Mod ✭✭✭✭Sam Russell


    lucernarian wrote: »
    The east link is already fully congested at peak times. Removing the toll wouldn't improve much.

    The widening and signalling project at the Point itself is not going to help matters for bridge-bound traffic.

    The congestion is caused by the toll booths and the roundabout on North Wall Road. That needs to be sorted out. The toll booths have three lanes going north narrowing into one lane - a source of significant frustration for drivers. If the booths were removed, one lane would be all that was needed removing the problem.

    I am not aware of the project at the Point.

    The relief would be felt at the Beckett bridge, and Macken St.


  • Options
    #71
    Kitsunegari
    Closed Accounts Posts: 314 ✭✭Kitsunegari


    Deedsie wrote: »
    The congestion is caused by unsustainable number of single occupant private cars in the city centre. The toll should be kept to discourage them from entering the city, congestion charge. Wont work unfortunately.

    They can't do that as public transport is already at a stand still and doesn't have the capacity to absorb the extra demand should DCC impose a congestion charge on the city.

    Huge expenditure is needed on public transport. Then incentivise people to leave the cars at home through both a decrease in the cost of public transport and the introduction of a congestion charge. The media don't care about public transport so it isn't a big issue for them and the NTA don't care what the public think about how badly transport works in the greater Dublin area.

    We'll still be giving out about the same issues in 20 years becuase we are absolutely useless at long term planning in this country.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #72
    Sam Russell
    Moderators, Science, Health & Environment Moderators Posts: 19,378 Mod ✭✭✭✭Sam Russell


    Deedsie wrote: »
    The congestion is caused by unsustainable number of single occupant private cars in the city centre. The toll should be kept to discourage them from entering the city, congestion charge. Wont work unfortunately.

    The toll causes people to go over the Beckett bridge. This in turn cause backups onto Macken St, and Guild St which causes further congestion into Butt Bridge and so on. Removing the toll allows traffic along East Wall Rd onto Strand Road and past Merrion Gates. With Merrion Gates gone, traffic flows would ease - at least as far as that.


  • Options
    #73
    Sam Russell
    Moderators, Science, Health & Environment Moderators Posts: 19,378 Mod ✭✭✭✭Sam Russell


    Deedsie wrote: »
    The toll is already there. People talking about DCC removing the toll are being unrealistic. There is plenty of room on buses and trains coming into Dublin. If you want to use your car in Dublin City Centre you should be charged for the privilege.

    Fair enough, but toll the Beckett bridge as well - or instead.


  • Options
    #74
    marno21
    Moderators, Entertainment Moderators, Science, Health & Environment Moderators Posts: 14,345 Mod ✭✭✭✭marno21


    Public transport needs massive improvement to incentivise people to use it.

    Considering the obscene congestion on the M1, N3, N4, N7 & N11 every morning it speaks volumes about how poor PT is that people are willing to sit in their car for that long.


  • Options
    #75
    Sam Russell
    Moderators, Science, Health & Environment Moderators Posts: 19,378 Mod ✭✭✭✭Sam Russell


    Mod: Can we return to the discussion of the Merrion Gates scheme. It only effects traffic from Blackrock to the Eastlink bridge. Thankyou.


  • Options
    #76
    Sam Russell
    Moderators, Science, Health & Environment Moderators Posts: 19,378 Mod ✭✭✭✭Sam Russell


    The Merrion Gates scheme is open for submissions until 16th December 2016.

    Written submissions and observations may be made

    Through the online form in the “Public Consultations” section of our website ie/consultations/nta-opens-consultation-on-ambitious-proposals-to-tackle-merrion-gate-bottleneck/
    By email: to eastcoast@nationaltransport.ie
    By post to: East Coast Consultation, NTA, Dun Scéine, Iveagh Ct, Harcourt Lane, Dublin 2, D02 WT20


  • Options
    #77
    strassenwo!f
    Registered Users Posts: 1,512 ✭✭✭strassenwo!f


    MYOB wrote:
    The toll is now under the control of the Corpo so there is always a chance of it being removed but currently they're happy to take the income.

    I'd say it's sensible for it to remain as a toll. It can represent a significant saving on time, and many people are happy to pay for that. If it wasn't tolled it'd be swamped and make it less desirable.


  • Options
    #78
    Idbatterim
    Registered Users Posts: 17,839 ✭✭✭✭Idbatterim


    I'd say it's sensible for it to remain as a toll. It can represent a significant saving on time, and many people are happy to pay for that. If it wasn't tolled it'd be swamped and make it less desirable.

    strassenwo!f is offline Report Post

    It would probably take a look of traffic off macken street and pearse street, which is an absolute joke...


  • Options
    #79
    L1011
    Moderators, Business & Finance Moderators, Motoring & Transport Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 67,765 Mod ✭✭✭✭L1011


    strassenwo!f wrote: »
    I'd say it's sensible for it to remain as a toll. It can represent a significant saving on time, and many people are happy to pay for that. If it wasn't tolled it'd be swamped and make it less desirable.

    Is there a reason you deliberately altered that post to "quote" an obsolete username of mine?


  • Options
    #80
    Sea point
    Registered Users Posts: 54 ✭✭Sea point


    Does anyone know when the NTA are going to share the results of the consultation and let people know what the current or emerging preferred options are?


  • Options
    #81
    CatInABox
    Moderators, Computer Games Moderators, Recreation & Hobbies Moderators Posts: 10,235 Mod ✭✭✭✭CatInABox


    The Merrion gates project seems to be in disarray due to local objections. Irish times has more here.

    I can somewhat understand their objections due to the CPOs for gardens and building, and certainly a new overpass is less than ideal, but then they go on about how this will make traffic worse. I'd really have to scoff at that, removing the main reason for traffic there in the first place, a slow turn across a main road followed by highly used railway tracks will only make things better.

    It'll be interesting to see what the effect of ten minute DART timetable will have on the area, my guess is that traffic will be backed up for miles around.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #82
    Bray Head
    Registered Users Posts: 892 ✭✭✭Bray Head


    I think the scheme has been mis-sold.

    It has been sold as a cycling scheme while really it has very little to do with cycling. It is really about rail capacity. The less level crossings you have, the more trains can pass. It would also greatly reduce traffic.

    The bridge near Merrion Gates would also allow the closure of the Sandymount Avenue LC, although obviously they are being coy about this. Long-term, you could replace either Landsdowne Road LC or Serpentine Avenue LC with a bridge or tunnel, and close the other.


  • Options
    #83
    bk
    Moderators, Motoring & Transport Moderators, Technology & Internet Moderators Posts: 22,484 Mod ✭✭✭✭bk


    Bray Head wrote: »
    It has been sold as a cycling scheme while really it has very little to do with cycling. It is really about rail capacity. The less level crossings you have, the more trains can pass. It would also greatly reduce traffic.

    Isn't the scheme being sneakily paid out of the cycling infrastructure budget?

    I could be wrong, but I think that is why it was sold as a cycling project.

    I agree that in reality it has little to do with cycling, but then it should come out of the rail budget and not cycling one. I think they might have shot themselves in the foot here.


  • Options
    #84
    4ensic15
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 4,691 ✭✭✭4ensic15


    The sensible thing to do would be to tunnel under the beach from the car park at the Martello Tower to the car park at Booterstown Dart Station.


  • Options
    #85
    CatInABox
    Moderators, Computer Games Moderators, Recreation & Hobbies Moderators Posts: 10,235 Mod ✭✭✭✭CatInABox


    bk wrote: »
    Isn't the scheme being sneakily paid out of the cycling infrastructure budget?

    I could be wrong, but I think that is why it was sold as a cycling project.

    I agree that in reality it has little to do with cycling, but then it should come out of the rail budget and not cycling one. I think they might have shot themselves in the foot here.

    It is, as part of the Dublin Bay cycle track.

    It's an accounting fudge that Donald Trump would be proud of.


  • Options
    #86
    Bray Head
    Registered Users Posts: 892 ✭✭✭Bray Head


    I am not sure there really is a 'rail' and 'cycling' budget.

    It all comes the Department of Transport's capital budget via the Exchequer one way or the other. It may be part of a notional cycling envelope but it's all the same money.


  • Options
    #87
    CatInABox
    Moderators, Computer Games Moderators, Recreation & Hobbies Moderators Posts: 10,235 Mod ✭✭✭✭CatInABox


    4ensic15 wrote: »
    The sensible thing to do would be to tunnel under the beach from the car park at the Martello Tower to the car park at Booterstown Dart Station.

    Sensible perhaps, but extremely costly, which is the still the main sticking point for every project in Ireland now.


  • Options
    #88
    LeinsterDub
    Registered Users Posts: 8,229 ✭✭✭LeinsterDub


    4ensic15 wrote: »
    The sensible thing to do would be to tunnel under the beach from the car park at the Martello Tower to the car park at Booterstown Dart Station.

    Surely that would be prohibitively expensive ?
    In a recent letter to Labour Senator Kevin Humphreys, the NTA said it had been unable to come up with an alternative scheme because of EU protections on the seafront.

    “Because of those environmental constraints we do not yet see a viable alternative scheme that complies with current environmental law. Yet the problems of increasing congestion remain.”


  • Options
    #89
    Bray Head
    Registered Users Posts: 892 ✭✭✭Bray Head


    4ensic15 wrote: »
    The sensible thing to do would be to tunnel under the beach from the car park at the Martello Tower to the car park at Booterstown Dart Station.
    I think there is reference in the article about how this cannot be done for environmental law reasons*. Flooding might be an issue too.





    *Even though the construction of the Dublin and Kingstown Railway in the 1830s made big changes to the foreshore. The birds, over the decades, have adapted.


  • Options
    #90
    Sam Russell
    Moderators, Science, Health & Environment Moderators Posts: 19,378 Mod ✭✭✭✭Sam Russell


    Bray Head wrote: »
    I think the scheme has been mis-sold.

    It has been sold as a cycling scheme while really it has very little to do with cycling. It is really about rail capacity. The less level crossings you have, the more trains can pass. It would also greatly reduce traffic.

    The bridge near Merrion Gates would also allow the closure of the Sandymount Avenue LC, although obviously they are being coy about this. Long-term, you could replace either Landsdowne Road LC or Serpentine Avenue LC with a bridge or tunnel, and close the other.

    The Merrion Gates scheme was to be part of the cycling project but should have been a stand-alone traffic/railway project. Personally, I would favour an underpass as it would be lesser visual impact with little difference to the project. That could be built without the effect on local properties as that part of the project was to do with provision of bus lanes and cycle lanes.

    The impact on the other four LCs would be small unless it was a huge success in solving the throughput of traffic through the new connection, rendering the remaining LCs as purely local access traffic.

    There is no possibility of doing much about Lansdowne RD LC - if anything was to be done, it should have been done as part of the new stadium construction.

    Raising or dropping the line would be a huge undertaking that would be an unrealistic capital cost given other projects requiring funding. The Dart needs 5m of clearance, as does traffic, so a net 5m has to be achieved and I do not see how that could be achieved.

    It is not a small project (unlike the bridge) and for what would be a small gain. Trains get priority, not cars, so it would not affect the trains at all.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #91
    4ensic15
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 4,691 ✭✭✭4ensic15


    Can't be much dearer than the proposal being floated. A short tunnel, even to the Jacobs building car park from the Sandymount car park would only involve some land reclamation, would not involve CPO of any free-standing buildings and would not impact on the amenities of the area. The tunnell could be built with a cut and cover approach so would be easily and cheaply done.


Advertisement