Merrion Gates removal scheme

LeinsterDub · 05-04-2018 1:18pm

Poster King wrote: »

I don't believe the environment would be "ruined". A very small strip of beach will be impacted for a period of probably 3 years, the environment will adapt and return to it's previous state very quickly and once the job is complete the tunnel will be hidden

I think hold the EPA, NTA and EU's opinion in higher regard that someone who's just said "awh sure it will be grand" on the internet.

josip · 05-04-2018 1:18pm

Go Dutch and build a dyke from Poolbeg to Seapoint.

Sell the reclaimed land to developers.
Houses for everyone.
Surface level Eastern Motorway.
Keep some of the proceeds to pay the EU fines and the court challenges from twitchers.
Regret it all in 50 years time for some reason.

prunudo · 05-04-2018 1:20pm

A road tunnel sounds like a hugely over engineered solution to a pretty simple problem.

LeinsterDub · 05-04-2018 1:28pm

josip wrote: »

Go Dutch and build a dyke from Poolbeg to Seapoint.

Sell the reclaimed land to developers.
Houses for everyone.
Surface level Eastern Motorway.
Keep some of the proceeds to pay the EU fines and the court challenges from twitchers.
Regret it all in 50 years time for some reason.

No need for DU either build an entirely new surface level line.

4ensic15 · 05-04-2018 1:36pm

LeinsterDub wrote: »

Budget blown, environment ruined, cycle lane not implemented.
Other than that completely feasible

What budget ruined. Going under the beach does not ruin the environment. No effect on the cycle lane. Don't dump your bicycle clips yet.

LeinsterDub · 05-04-2018 1:56pm

4ensic15 wrote: »

What budget ruined. Going under the beach does not ruin the environment. No effect on the cycle lane. Don't dump your bicycle clips yet.

The budget for this project. A tunnel would be many multiples more expensive.
The beach will be dried out for several years , neither you or I would know what's living their we just know it's protected. I would assume for a good reason.
So we are still building the tunnel under the DART line?
I don't own clips?

4ensic15 · 05-04-2018 7:41pm

LeinsterDub wrote: »

The budget for this project. A tunnel would be many multiples more expensive.
The beach will be dried out for several years , neither you or I would know what's living their we just know it's protected. I would assume for a good reason.
So we are still building the tunnel under the DART line?
I don't own clips?

A tunnel can't be more expensive than paying numerous D$ landowners compensation. Why would the beach be dried out? Nothing living there would be killed, it would just be shifted slightly. You are just scaremongering.

marno21 · 05-04-2018 7:47pm

4ensic15 wrote: »

A tunnel can't be more expensive than paying numerous D$ landowners compensation. Why would the beach be dried out? Nothing living there would be killed, it would just be shifted slightly. You are just scaremongering.

Unfortunately, such a proposal would be ok in the 1970s but not nowadays. There are several EU directives which will stop any attempt to disturb the seafront. The only viable option is the option the NTA have chosen

4ensic15 · 05-04-2018 7:52pm

marno21 wrote: »

Unfortunately, such a proposal would be ok in the 1970s but not nowadays. There are several EU directives which will stop any attempt to disturb the seafront. The only viable option is the option the NTA have chosen

If the entry and exit are on land and the tunnel is under the beach there would be no disturbance of the seafront.

LeinsterDub · 05-04-2018 10:21pm

4ensic15 wrote: »

A tunnel can't be more expensive than paying numerous D$ landowners compensation. Why would the beach be dried out? Nothing living there would be killed, it would just be shifted slightly. You are just scaremongering.

The original project was priced to include the compensation.
You've to dry the beach if you want to build a cut and cover tunnel. If you're talk TBM then it's several multiples more again.

How would you shift the marine wildlife?

I'm not scaremongering unless you've a marine biology degree then you don't know what will happen where as I'm basing my opinion on what the NTA have said.

Green Party: Ossian Smyth · 06-04-2018 12:19am

I want to see the S2S go ahead whether or not this flyover is built. Later this month, I am meeting with the NTA, Irish Rail and other pro-S2S elected representatives from all parties to see how we can progress this. I would like to see the DART moved to a 10-minute frequency. The S2S public consultation was started in late 2016 and my fear is that the NTA is losing interest in urban greenway projects in Dublin (river, canal, coastal) with a view instead to designing cycle lanes tacked on to revamped bus lanes as part of Bus Connects. Bus Connects is likely to announce the road infrastructure stage of their project in June.

A report on grade-separated alternatives to a level-crossing is here:
http://www.ossiansmyth.ie/wp-content/uploads/2018/04/s2sPart_D_Appendices.pdf

They looked at two tunnel options and several other choices.

and their preferred option:

Bray Head · 06-04-2018 8:49am

On the basis of those options it's fair to say that:
-The selected route is the least obtrusive visually and least environmentally disruptive.
-The selected route will carry the least volume of traffic - T-junction with traffic lights on the Merrion side will be slower than the grade-separated slip roads.

Middle Man · 06-04-2018 9:13am

Just grade separate the railway and don't disturb the shoreline - to hell with property - I'd even four track the line if I could get away with it.

Sam Russell · 06-04-2018 10:50am

The preferred option will not cause less traffic flow, because at PM busy times, the back-up is all along the Rock Road and backs up to the Canal.

The existing setup has a slip road that does not work because the traffic is already backed up and the sight lines for traffic is all wrong.

I would modify the preferred solution by making it an underpass rather than a bridge as it would reduce the visual impact while not impacting the design much. I]The road has to rise or fall by 5m to clear the railway or to allow clearance under the railway[/I.

It should go ahead without the cycling and bus lane options in the interim as most complaints are about the effects on property. The underpass at the existing Merrion Gates could be constructed as part of the cycling infrastructure.

If built, Sydney Parade LC would be basically for local access.

Claw Hammer · 06-04-2018 4:14pm

I would close the Merrion gates completely. I would continue the curtain walls around the rail track in place of the gates. That would turn the end of Strand Road into a cul de sac. Problem solved. Cost about 10K.

vrusinov · 06-04-2018 4:19pm

How to you propose traffic from south get to east point in this case?

Remember this includes public transport like those long aircoach buses.

Claw Hammer · 06-04-2018 4:24pm

vrusinov wrote: »

How to you propose traffic from south get to east point in this case?

Remember this includes public transport like those long aircoach buses.

On the public roads. It is just one less option. Nobody would be cut off from anywhere.

NuMarvel · 06-04-2018 4:36pm

Claw Hammer wrote: »

On the public roads. It is just one less option. Nobody would be cut off from anywhere.

One of the most notorious bottlenecks in the city, and you think we can just redirect the traffic to other roads with no ill effects?

Riiiiight.....

Sam Russell · 06-04-2018 5:04pm

Actually, Aircoach (the blue coaches referred to above) no longer go through the Merrion Gates. As far as I know, no scheduled buses use the Merrion Gates.

NuMarvel · 06-04-2018 7:15pm

Sam Russell wrote: »

Actually, Aircoach (the blue coaches referred to above) no longer go through the Merrion Gates. As far as I know, no scheduled buses use the Merrion Gates.

Pretty much. The 84 Nitelink goes through it, but that's only three times a night for two nights. Other than that, there are no other scheduled services.

Sam Russell · 06-04-2018 7:42pm

NuMarvel wrote: »

Pretty much. The 84 Nitelink goes through it, but that's only three times a night for two nights. Other than that, there are no other scheduled services.

Also the 47 goes through Sydney Parade LC, and quite a bit more often than the nitelink.

4ensic15 · 06-04-2018 8:11pm

Sam Russell wrote: »

Also the 47 goes through Sydney Parade LC, and quite a bit more often than the nitelink.

Blocking up the Merrion gates wouldn't affect that.

Sam Russell · 06-04-2018 8:14pm

4ensic15 wrote: »

Blocking up the Merrion gates wouldn't affect that.

Increasing the frequency of trains would and probably mean the gates would hardly open - end of bus service and considerable inconvenience to emergency ambulances heading for St Vincent's University Hospital.

4ensic15 · 06-04-2018 8:16pm

Sam Russell wrote: »

Increasing the frequency of trains would and probably mean the gates would hardly open - end of bus service and considerable inconvenience to emergency ambulances heading for St Vincent's University Hospital.

What is to stop the buses and ambulances using Sydeny Parade if the Merrion gates were gone?

Sam Russell · 06-04-2018 8:21pm

4ensic15 wrote: »

What is to stop the buses and ambulances using Sydeny Parade if the Merrion gates were gone?

They do use Sydney Parade. If the frequency goes above 10 mins, the gates will not open much if at all. The Merrion Gates bridge would make the Sydney Parade LC would effectively become local access only.

4ensic15 · 06-04-2018 8:42pm

Sam Russell wrote: »

They do use Sydney Parade. If the frequency goes above 10 mins, the gates will not open much if at all. The Merrion Gates bridge would make the Sydney Parade LC would effectively become local access only.

Trains have to stop at Sydney parade, unlike the Merrion Gates. A platform could be built at each side of the gates so that the gates can open whenever a train stops. The train frequency could be maintained as well as access.

Sam Russell · 06-04-2018 8:50pm

4ensic15 wrote: »

Trains have to stop at Sydney parade, unlike the Merrion Gates. A platform could be built at each side of the gates so that the gates can open whenever a train stops. The train frequency could be maintained as well as access.

There is no possibility of building new platforms, and anyway the gates close 3 min before the train arrives because the train may overshoot the station. Plus not every train stops at Sydney Parade.

Clearly SP is a foreign land.

4ensic15 · 06-04-2018 8:52pm

Sam Russell wrote: »

There is no possibility of building new platforms, and anyway the gates close 3 min before the train arrives because the train may overshoot the station. Plus not every train stops at Sydney Parade.

Clearly SP is a foreign land.

Road traffic can go through while the train is stopped.

josip · 06-04-2018 9:05pm

Sam Russell wrote: »

... the gates close 3 min before the train arrives because the train may overshoot the station...

Can you explain the logic behind the above please?
How long before the southbound Dart arrives do the gates close at SP?

Carawaystick · 06-04-2018 9:29pm

Sam Russell wrote: »

. No homes lost and little CPO.
?

Theres very few homes (if any) being cpo'd. there's a plan to cpo some front gardens, and a car-park and an office building.

TJJP · 06-04-2018 9:37pm

Umihotaru....

https://www.umihotaru.com/en/

On the Tokyo Bay Aqualine.

https://www.japanvisitor.com/tokyo/aqualine

Sam Russell · 06-04-2018 10:35pm

josip wrote: »

Can you explain the logic behind the above please?
How long before the southbound Dart arrives do the gates close at SP?

The South bound train arrives two minutes after the gates close and the gates close once the train passes. The North bound train arrives three minutes after the gates close and opens about twenty seconds after the last carriage crosses the gates which is probably four minutes total time closed because of the dwell time.

There is only IR logic for this. The Merrion gates close at the same time as the Sydney Parade ones do for North bound trains. I cannot imagine why this would be so but it is.

josip · 06-04-2018 10:56pm

Sam Russell wrote: »

The South bound train arrives two minutes after the gates close and the gates close once the train passes. The North bound train arrives three minutes after the gates close and opens about twenty seconds after the last carriage crosses the gates which is probably four minutes total time closed because of the dwell time.

There is only IR logic for this. The Merrion gates close at the same time as the Sydney Parade ones do for North bound trains. I cannot imagine why this would be so but it is.

Thanks.
It's the reasoning behind the extra minute closing to cater for a potential overshoot that I don't understand.
What is the benefit of that extra minute?

Or is that 3 minutes a co-incidence of scheduling so that both north and south bound darts get through SP and MG LCs at the same closing and there isn't any additional time actually required for a potential overshoot?

Sam Russell · 06-04-2018 11:03pm

josip wrote: »

Thanks.
It's the reasoning behind the extra minute closing to cater for a potential overshoot that I don't understand.
What is the benefit of that extra minute?

Or is that 3 minutes a co-incidence of scheduling so that both north and south bound darts get through SP and MG LCs at the same closing and there isn't any additional time actually required for a potential overshoot?

The logic on the gates is complicated. The gates close on demand of the train. So the gates could be closed for five minutes under worst case.

There is an attempt to minimise the closing of Merrion Gates - that is if trains are on time, N and S bound trains will cross at the same through MG.

However, rarely will more than one each N and S bound trains will pass without the gates opening at SP. It can happen but not often and usually only when trains are backed up.

There is no logic for closing SP and MG at the same time for N bound trains.

specialbyte · 30-04-2018 2:31pm

I have some bad news folks. I got word through the grape vine that the Merrion Gates overpass is being officially put on hold for now. Expect a public announcement in the next few weeks when the NTA relaunch some S2S plans. The NTA go far too many negative comments during the public consultation last time around. It's a real shame. Closing Merrion Gates was going to have a huge safety benefit for train passengers and reduce some of the traffic congestion around there.

NTA are still pushing forward with 10 minute DART service though. 10 minute service will mean that the gates are closed a lot more often then they are now. So being a little cynical now, it wouldn't surprise me if their plan is to just sit back and watch the vehicle traffic build up at Merrion Gates. Then once residents and commuters complain about the congestion they come back with the same overpass in the same location.

marno21 · 30-04-2018 2:45pm

specialbyte wrote: »

I have some bad news folks. I got word through the grape vine that the Merrion Gates overpass is being officially put on hold for now. Expect a public announcement in the next few weeks when the NTA relaunch some S2S plans. The NTA go far too many negative comments during the public consultation last time around. It's a real shame. Closing Merrion Gates was going to have a huge safety benefit for train passengers and reduce some of the traffic congestion around there.

NTA are still pushing forward with 10 minute DART service though. 10 minute service will mean that the gates are closed a lot more often then they are now. So being a little cynical now, it wouldn't surprise me if their plan is to just sit back and watch the vehicle traffic build up at Merrion Gates. Then once residents and commuters complain about the congestion they come back with the same overpass in the same location.

Good to have the 10 minute DARTs. It may teach some of the locals that you can't have your cake and eat it. It might encourage some people out of their cars also given the enhanced rail service

Sam Russell · 30-04-2018 4:38pm

marno21 wrote: »

Good to have the 10 minute DARTs. It may teach some of the locals that you can't have your cake and eat it. It might encourage some people out of their cars also given the enhanced rail service

Well, actually I am a local. The project was not a 'close Merrion Gates' project, it was part of a €40 million cycling initiative, with this as a sub-project. Much of the cycling project involved cpo activity of people front gardens and parking spaces.

If it was a simple case of an overpass through the car parks, then the level of complaints would have been less (except for the church goers who lost their car park) and perhaps they could go ahead with it, but NIMBY rules. I think it was a very intelligent to the problem at a significantly over-engineered alternative with overpasses looping left and right at twice the cost, plus infringing on Merrion Strand. The proposal was costed at €5m, vs €12 m and €15 m for the alternatives.

marno21 · 30-04-2018 9:20pm

Sam Russell wrote: »

Well, actually I am a local. The project was not a 'close Merrion Gates' project, it was part of a €40 million cycling initiative, with this as a sub-project. Much of the cycling project involved cpo activity of people front gardens and parking spaces.

If it was a simple case of an overpass through the car parks, then the level of complaints would have been less (except for the church goers who lost their car park) and perhaps they could go ahead with it, but NIMBY rules. I think it was a very intelligent to the problem at a significantly over-engineered alternative with overpasses looping left and right at twice the cost, plus infringing on Merrion Strand. The proposal was costed at €5m, vs €12 m and €15 m for the alternatives.

The issue with it proceeding as just a Merrion bypass is that while there may be less objections, there would be a more straightforward case to block it as it's against current policy to increase roadspace/traffic flow within the M50. A case could very well be brought against the NTA (would the NTA even be able to advance a road project, would that not be the job of the local authority - I can't find a map to confirm which local authority) that they are facilitating private motorists which is against policy.

I understand there are issues around CPO's especially for the cycle route but it would be difficult to get any Merrion Gates proposal through based purely on road traffic benefits.

Sam Russell · 30-04-2018 10:05pm

marno21 wrote: »

The issue with it proceeding as just a Merrion bypass is that while there may be less objections, there would be a more straightforward case to block it as it's against current policy to increase roadspace/traffic flow within the M50. A case could very well be brought against the NTA (would the NTA even be able to advance a road project, would that not be the job of the local authority - I can't find a map to confirm which local authority) that they are facilitating private motorists which is against policy.

I understand there are issues around CPO's especially for the cycle route but it would be difficult to get any Merrion Gates proposal through based purely on road traffic benefits.

It is Dublin City Council.

It would be done as a safety issue, or as a railway project - Dart 10 min upgrade - something like that. There have been many accidents at the Merrion Gates causing injury, and significant delays to Darts. Apparently, truck drivers do not realise that the gate closes more from one side than the other as it closes, and it does not bend, it breaks.

The CPO for this current plan would be just two car parks. If it were done as an underpass, then many of the objections that were related to visual impact would melt away.

I think it would solve many of the level crossing problems in the area. IR are doing a lot of work in eliminating LCs across the network.

monument · 30-04-2018 11:34pm

Sam Russell wrote: »

Well, actually I am a local. The project was not a 'close Merrion Gates' project, it was part of a €40 million cycling initiative, with this as a sub-project. Much of the cycling project involved cpo activity of people front gardens and parking spaces.

If it was a simple case of an overpass through the car parks, then the level of complaints would have been less (except for the church goers who lost their car park) and perhaps they could go ahead with it, but NIMBY rules. I think it was a very intelligent to the problem at a significantly over-engineered alternative with overpasses looping left and right at twice the cost, plus infringing on Merrion Strand. The proposal was costed at €5m, vs €12 m and €15 m for the alternatives.

Where are you getting the idea that it is mainly a “cycling initiative”?

The NTA webpage on the project is clear that it is a multi-mode (rail, cycle, bus) corridor improved project.

Sam Russell · 01-05-2018 8:26am

monument wrote: »

Where are you getting the idea that it is mainly a “cycling initiative”?

The NTA webpage on the project is clear that it is a multi-mode (rail, cycle, bus) corridor improved project.

http://www.thejournal.ie/strand-road-plans-3048689-Oct2016/

monument · 01-05-2018 11:32am

Sam Russell wrote: »

http://www.thejournal.ie/strand-road-plans-3048689-Oct2016/

Even that mainly focuses on the railway level crossing closure.

It also wrongly doesn’t have any great focus on the Merrion Road etc bus corridor upgrade — which also included cycling elements but of poor quality and the bus was the main focus. Much of the cycling element along the bus route was nearly in the same vain as the QBN office’s work (ie get cyclists out of the way).

Sam Russell · 01-05-2018 11:56am

I was under the impression it was funded by a cycling based initiative that was to provide a cycleway from Sutton to Sandycove.

From the article above:

It’s long been proposed to develop a continuous coastal recreational promenade and cycleway from Sutton on the north side of Dublin to Sandycove on the south side.

I think it was wrapped up on this to move it out of a railway based upgrade into another heading just to hide it.

It is needed, even on its own. Traffic backs up from Ringsend to the Merrion Gates in the evening, and from Booterstown in the morning. With 10 min Darts, it will be much worse. The backup in the evening on the Merrion Road goes back to Pembroke Road in Ballsbridge. Something must be done - more than just this part of the project.

Claw Hammer · 01-05-2018 4:44pm

The main cause of traffic backing up is bus lanes. If the Merrion Gates become virtually permanently closed except in the small hours, then the bus lanes on the Merrion Road should be removed and right turns allowed off the Merrion Road.

buffalo · 01-05-2018 6:30pm

Claw Hammer wrote: »

The main cause of traffic backing up is bus lanes. If the Merrion Gates become virtually permanently closed except in the small hours, then the bus lanes on the Merrion Road should be removed and right turns allowed off the Merrion Road.

I would've thought the main cause of traffic backing up is too many people in (often single-occupancy) cars trying to use the road at the same time?

josip · 01-05-2018 8:05pm

Claw Hammer wrote: »

The main cause of traffic backing up is bus lanes. If the Merrion Gates become virtually permanently closed except in the small hours, then the bus lanes on the Merrion Road should be removed and right turns allowed off the Merrion Road.

Yes the bus lanes and all those people on the Dart requiring the gates to be closed so often.
Don't get me started on cyclists holding up the cars behind them.

Bits_n_Bobs · 01-05-2018 8:51pm

josip wrote: »

Yes the bus lanes and all those people on the Dart requiring the gates to be closed so often.
Don't get me started on cyclists holding up the cars behind them.

Not to mention the occasional pedestrian with their slow "walking" across busy roads....can't understand why their isn't a minimum speed limit imposed so they move their asses out of the way of cars in a hurry

NuMarvel · 01-05-2018 8:58pm

josip wrote: »

Yes the bus lanes and all those people on the Dart requiring the gates to be closed so often.
Don't get me started on cyclists holding up the cars behind them.

Pedestrians too. Who do they think they stopping traffic, just so they can cross the road safely. This is taking 23 seconds out of my day!!!!

Sam Russell · 01-05-2018 9:43pm

Mod: Can we leave the jokes at the gate please.

Sam Russell · 13-05-2018 12:08pm

There is a planning application in for Merrion Hall that might affect the plans for the bridge across the Dart.

See: http://www.dublincity.ie/swiftlg/apas/run/WPHAPPDETAIL.DisplayUrl?theApnID=2669/18&SearchID=2

Merrion Gates removal scheme

Comments