MCA Stage 1 Clonsilla Level Crossing Assessment

FORMATTED FOR PRINTING

DART+ WEST - MCA Stage 1 Clonsilla Level Crossing Assessment

Parameter Criteria Sub-Criteria (Quantitative/ Qualitative) Do Nothing Do Minimum Option 1

Closure of the existing crossings with no Pedestrian Cycle Bridge only at Level Crossing / Leave the current level crossings in place. alternative provided. All traffic would be diverted Station (delivered contingent on road bridge to alternative routes around the crossing location. crossing at Barberstown)

Significant comparative advantage over Significant comparative advantage over other Significant comparative advantage over other other options options options

Assessment of cost of construction of option, land costs and 1.1 Construction and Land Cost The proposed signaling system will need The provsions here include low key works to temporary works Cost of removing crossing is nominal in augmentation to accommodate the level close the level crossing and the construction of a comparison to provision of road crossing. crossing left in place new pedestrian / cycle bridge

Significant comparative disadvantage over Significant comparative advantage over other Some comparative advantage over other other options options options Ongoing annual maintenance costs associated with varied 1.2 Long Term Maintenance costs options The do-nothing scenario would maintain the The closure of the level crossing would remove Maintenance costs low - 15k ex VAT per year for existing maintenance costs of the level crossing the maintenance requirement of the level crossing bridge structure

Some comparative disadvantage over other Some comparative disadvantage over other Some comparative disadvantage over other 1 Economy options options options

Displacement of mobility impaired and cycle traffic onto ramped alternative routes; increase in journey times for local residents.

Traffic Functionality /economic Benefits to vehicular traffic through reduction in journey time Removal of vehicular access over the level 1.3 benefit lengths and delays through removal of level crossings. crossing results in displaced flows - 680 vehicles Consideration of potentially longer routes for traffic. Reduced capacity as train frequencies increase; Displacement of traffic onto alternative routes; AM peak hour and 704 vehicles PM peak hour. increase in journey times for local residents. increase in journey times for local residents. Additional traffic delay will result along adjacent access routes - 1% AM peak hour and 1% PM peak hour.

Benchmark journey times will increase by up to 3%,

Some comparative disadvantage over other Some comparative disadvantage over other Some comparative disadvantage over other options options options

Impact on scope for and ease of interchange between modes. Impact on the operation of other transport services both during construction and in operation. New interchange Not shown on GDA Cycle Network Plan but Severance of access to train station car parking Transport Integration Not shown on GDA Cycle Network Plan but there 2.1 nodes and facilities; Reduced walking and wait times there would be a reduction in local accessibility from south of the railway. Would require would be a removal of local accessibility to the associated with interchanges. Modal shift figures during to the Royal Canal Cycle Route with increased significant re-routing of proposed L52 bus route Royal Canal Cycle Route. Severance of access to construction and operations. Changes to journey times to closures of the railway. Reduced access to train (BusConnects). Removal of local accessibility to train station car parking from south of the railway. transport nodes. station car parking from south of the railway. the Royal Canal Cycle Route

Page 1 FORMATTED FOR PRINTING

DART+ WEST - MCA Stage 1 Clonsilla Level Crossing Assessment

Parameter Criteria Sub-Criteria (Quantitative/ Qualitative) Do Nothing Do Minimum Option 1

Some comparative advantage over other Some comparative disadvantage over other Some comparative advantage over other options options options

The option is located in lands zoned “High Amenity” and “Open Space”. The construction of a pedestrian and cycle bridge would impact negatively on this land use objective which The Do – Minimum Option does not impact any crosses over the Royal Canal. It would prevent Impact on land use strategies and local plans. Assessment of Fingal DP map-based Zoning Objectives and continued vehicular acesss at this location. 2 Integration 2.2 Land Use Integration support for land use factors local land use and planning. The do-nothing option would not support for Specific Objectives. Closure of the level crossing However, when compared with other options it is Inclusion of project in relevant local planning documents. DART Expanision however it does not impact on with no alternative access would prevent land use more discrete and impacts less HA and OS local planning policy/objectives hence rated as and planning integration at this location and zoned lands when compared wiith other Do- an advantage over other options. access to Clonsilla Station from either side of the Something options and for this reason would tracks/ Canal and restricting access to the Royal have some advanttges over other options. The Canal greenway. Draft Kellystown LAP 2020 is currently being developed and would need to be take account of this as part of the movement strategy. Further consultation would be required with FCC if this is chosen as the preferred option.

Alternative level crossing options are mostly neutral in Comparable to other options Comparable to other options Comparable to other options respect of Geographical Integration due to localised nature of 2.3 Geographical Integration the level crossings. As a consequence all options are rated comparable to one another. No impact on Geographical Integration No impact on Geographical Integration No impact on Geographical Integration

Some comparative disadvantage over other Some comparative advantage over other Some comparative advantage over other options options options This option would support the delivery of the This option would not support the delivery of the This option would support the delivery of the Other Government Policy Integration with the other Government policy such as the higher level national and regional planning policies 2.4 higher level national and regional planning higher level national and regional planning Integration NPF and RSES. regarding the DART Expansion programme (NPF- policies regarding the DART Expansion policies regarding the DART Expansion (NS04), RSES & GDA Transport Strategy). programme (NPF- (NS04), RSES & GDA programme (NPF- (NS04), RSES & GDA However there would be impact to Smarter travel Transport Strategy). Transport Strategy). policy.

Some comparative disadvantage over other Significant comparative advantage over other Significant comparative advantage over other Estimated number of sensitive properties within 100m of the options options options works. Options closer to more sensitive locations will have an 3.1 Noise and Vibration increased risk of generating a noise impact. However, qualative criteria are also used where necessary to Retains vehicular traffic which will impact the low Removes vehicular traffic and minimal Pedestrian crossing only will have no operational differentiate between the options. number of sensitive receptors in proximity. construction phase. noise impact. 27 properties within 100m.

Some comparative disadvantage over other Significant comparative advantage over other Significant comparative advantage over other options options options

Estimated number of number of receptors within 50m reviewed as part of appriasal. Options closer to more sensitive locations will have an increased risk of changes in Pedestrian crossing only will have no operational 3.2 Air Quality and Climate impact locally. Traffic redistribution not air quality during construction or operational phases. Retains vehicular traffic which will impact the low Removes vehicular traffic and minimal considered. 8 properties within 50m. Potential for However, qualative criteria are also used where necessary to number of sensitive receptors in proximity. construction phase differentiate between the options. construction phase dust impact is not significant when mitigation measures are put in place.

Page 2 FORMATTED FOR PRINTING

DART+ WEST - MCA Stage 1 Clonsilla Level Crossing Assessment

Parameter Criteria Sub-Criteria (Quantitative/ Qualitative) Do Nothing Do Minimum Option 1

Significant comparative advantage over Significant comparative advantage over other Some comparative disadvantage over other other options options options Proposed structure will impact some trees at entrance to Beech Park. Significant impact on residential properties on Clonsilla Road/ Larch Grove and Weaver's Walk north of the canal, and along the east side of Clonsilla Road south of Key landscape characteristics affected; Impact on landscape canal (including Greenmount House). Impact on character; Impacts on landscape features, protected tree-lined corridor on northern side canal where Landscape and Visual (including landscapes. Loss of local connectivity. Minimal impact on structure will oversail the canal. 3.3 No impact on existing landscape or visual light) Key visual characteristics affected; Impacts on properties, existing landscape or visual characteristics - no characteristics amenities, protected views, key views. likely significant landscape or visual impacts.

Significant comparative advantage over Significant comparative advantage over other Some comparative advantage over other other options options options 3

Potential compliance/conflict with biodiversity objectives; 3.4 Biodiversity (flora and fauna) Indirect impacts on protected species, designated sites; Hydrologically connected to South Dublin Bay Overall effect on nature conservation resource. and River Tolka Estuary SPA. No risk of LSE. No likely impacts. No likely impacts. Potential impacts to Royal Canal pNHA. Minor habitat loss in comparison to other options.

Significant comparative advantage over Significant comparative advantage over other Some comparative advantage over other Environment other options options options Overall effect on cultural, archaeological and architecture heritage resource. Likely effects on RPS, National Cultural, Archaeological and 3.5 Monuments, SMRs, Conservation areas, etc. Potential Indirect impacts on Callaghan Bridge Architectural Heritage Number of designated sites/structures (by level of (RPS No. 706), the Royal Canal (RPS No. 944a) No likely impacts. No likely impacts. designation) directly impacted by scheme (landtake) and Clonsilla Overbridge and Signal Box (RPS No. 707).

Some comparative advantage over other Significant comparative advantage over other Some comparative advantage over other options options options

Maintains the status quo with potential negative Removes vehicular traffic borne pollutants and Potential Positive impact on surface water quality Overall potential significant effects on water resource impact on surface water quality /Canal due to minimal construction phase. The Do Minimum during operation by removing vehicular traffic 3.6 Water Resources attributes likely to be affected during construction and vehicular traffic borne pollutants associated with Option has significant comparative advantages borne pollutants. Potential negative impact on operation. traffic. No construction impacts. Has some over other options. surface water quality during construction phase. comparative advantages over other options. Option has some comparative advantages over other options.

Page 3 FORMATTED FOR PRINTING

DART+ WEST - MCA Stage 1 Clonsilla Level Crossing Assessment

Parameter Criteria Sub-Criteria (Quantitative/ Qualitative) Do Nothing Do Minimum Option 1

Significant comparative advantage over Significant comparative advantage over other Significant comparative advantage over other other options options options Overall impact on land take & property. Number of properties 3.7 Agriculture and Non-Agricultural to be impacted/acquired. Likely temporary or permanent severance effects, etc. Options 1 will have a direct impact involving a No likely impacts. No likely impacts. small area of amenity lands in Beech Park.

Soils and Geology and likely impact on geological resources Significant comparative advantage over Significant comparative advantage over other Some comparative advantage over other based on preliminary/likely construction details. Soil or topsoil other options options options resources to be developed/removed based on cut or fill requirements and potential for soft ground which may also Geology and Soils (including 3.8 need replaced. Existing information relating to potential to Lower fill import requirements compared to other Waste) encounter contaminated land. High-level assessment based options. No likely impacts. No likely impacts. on the likely structures/ works required and the potential for ground contamination due to historic landfills, pits and quarries.

Some comparative advantage over other Some comparative advantage over other Some comparative disadvantage over other options options options

It is assumed that the routing of the cabling, the Overall likely impact on existing sources of electromagnetic location of existing substations, hubs etc. along 3.9 Radiation and Stray Current radiation. the line will be changed or impacted by the No changes from an EMI perspective therefore No changes from an EMI perspective therefore selection of any of the options over the entire advantage over other options. advantage over other options. project. All Do-Something options are comparable from an EMI perspective at this stage in the assessment.

Significant comparative disadvantage over Significant comparative disadvantage over Significant comparative advantage over other other options other options options

Road traffic diverted distance route is 5.5km (12 Original Distance roundabout to roundabout Impacts on low income groups, non-car owners, mobility x diversion route) steep gradients on north side 4.1 Impact on Vulnerable Groups 500m retained. impaired, visually impaired and people with a disability. This option severs access locally across the of option will be a disadvantage to vulnerable railway road users. Local ped/cycle access maintained The long closure times associated with the level along ramped access over proposed bridge - crossing will, however, restrict access ~340m diversion

Significant comparative disadvantage over Significant comparative disadvantage over Significant comparative advantage over other other options other options options Station Accessibility is addressed for all level crossing options in proximity to a station Station Accessibility is addressed for all level crossing options in proximity to a station Quantification of increased service levels to the vulnerable Station Accessibility is addressed for all level This option will require that traffic seeking to 4.2 Stations Accessibility groups. crossing options in proximity to a station access the station from the north will divert This option requires that all traffic accessing the along the existing road network due to delays at station from the north must divert along the This option does not significantly affect access to the level crossing existing road network Accessibility & Social the station 4 inclusion Shortest diversion route 5.5km. Shortest diversion route 5.5km.

Page 4 FORMATTED FOR PRINTING

DART+ WEST - MCA Stage 1 Clonsilla Level Crossing Assessment

Parameter Criteria Sub-Criteria (Quantitative/ Qualitative) Do Nothing Do Minimum Option 1

Significant comparative disadvantage over Significant comparative disadvantage over Some comparative disadvantage over other other options other options options

This option causes severence of the community This option causes severence of the community through curtailment of local access over the Diverted distance for vehicular traffic 5.5km (12 x through curtailment of local access over the railway without replacement with effective diversion route), proposed pedestrian / cycle railway without replacement with effective Service levels impacts including severance of community alternative access. bridge maintains local non vehicular access. alternative access. groups; 4.3 Social Inclusion Severance from community facilities consequent on an Community facilities affected by reduced access Community facilities affected by reduced access Community facilities affected by reduced access option. include Shopping facilities, St Josephs Medical include Shopping facilities, St Josephs Medical include Shopping facilities, St Josephs Medical Centre, St Mary's Church, 2No.Montessori Centre, St Mary's Church, 2No.Montessori Centre, St Mary's Church, 2No.Montessori School School - north of the railway andThe Coartyard School - north of the railway andThe Coartyard - north of the railway andThe Coartyard Beechpark, Westmanstown Sports and Beechpark, Westmanstown Sports and Beechpark, Westmanstown Sports and Conference Centre, Dublin Falconry and Conference Centre, Dublin Falconry and Conference Centre, Dublin Falconry and Luttrellstown Castle Resort - south of the Luttrellstown Castle Resort - south of the railway. Luttrellstown Castle Resort - south of the railway. railway.

Significant comparative disadvantage over Significant comparative advantage over other Significant comparative advantage over other other options options options

This Option leaves the railway level crossing in This option removes the railway level crossing, a This option removes the railway level crossing, a place, a characteristic which is considered Safety for Rail users – removal of Level crossings is characteristic which is considered positive from characteristic which is considered positive from 5.1 Rail Safety negative from the perspective of railway safety. considered a significant safety enhancement the perspective of railway safety. the perspective of railway safety. This option will require construction activity There is no significant construction activity along There is no significant construction activity along associated with signalling along the live railway the railway associated with the level crossing the railway associated with the level crossing associated with the level crossing

Significant comparative disadvantage over Some comparative disadvantage over other Some comparative disadvantage over other other options options options This option retains the level crossing - a Quality of Access for these road users, lengths of diversions, signficant hazard to transport users; 5.2 Vehicular Traffic Safety Closing the crossing with no alternative would Closing the crossing with no alternative would removal of interface with rail and other modes of transport result in diversion of road traffic onto longer result in diversion of road traffic onto longer This option will result in traffic diversions of up to routes but would avoid congestion at the level routes but would avoid congestion at the level 5 Safety 5.5km and increased congestion on the local crossing. crossing. road network. Significant comparative disadvantage over Significant comparative disadvantage over Significant comparative advantage over other other options other options options The curtailed availability of access over the level crossing associated with this option will divert vulnerable road users onto the existing road network. This option closes the level crossing - removes a This option closes the level crossing - removes a Pedestrian, Cyclist and Vulnerable signficant hazard to transport users; signficant hazard to transport users; 5.3 Quality of Access for these road users. removal of interfaces Diverted road users will be required to negotiate Road user Safety up to 7No additional junctions including traffic This option will result in traffic diversions of up to Pedestrians, Cyclists and vulnerable road users light junctions and roundabouts, typically turning 5.5km and increased congestion on the local road are, however, accommodated at the level left travelling southbound, right if travelling network. crossing by the proposed bridge. northbound.

This options does not provide for segregation over the full length of the diversion routes for vulnerable road users.

Page 5 FORMATTED FOR PRINTING

DART+ WEST - MCA Stage 1 Clonsilla Level Crossing Assessment

Parameter Criteria Sub-Criteria (Quantitative/ Qualitative) Do Nothing Do Minimum Option 1

Significant comparative disadvantage over Significant comparative disadvantage over Significant comparative advantage over other other options other options options

There are existing pedestrian and cycle facilties The removal access over the level crossing north of the railway. There are none south of the associated with this option will divert vulnerable railway. road users onto the existing road network. This option supports good linkage between Connectivity to adjoining cycling Analysis of the extent that the scheme connects with cycle 6.1 Increased closures of the level crossing would Diverted road users will be required to negotiate existing and proposed cycle facilities facilities tracks. reduce access to cycle facilities and to the up to 7No additional junctions including traffic light proposed Royal Canal Greenway. junctions and roundabouts, typically turning left The quality of access to the train station for travelling southbound, right if travelling pedestrians and cyclists is good in respect of this Access to the train station for pedestrians and northbound. option. cyclists will be significantly inhibited by the level crossing, particularly with the planned level of This options does not provide for segregation on service on the railway. the diversion routes for vulnerable road users.

6 Physical Activity Significant comparative disadvantage over Significant comparative disadvantage over Significant comparative advantage over other other options other options options

Cross Railway journey = nil as crossing remains Cross Railway journey = 5.5km as level crossing Cross Railway journey = nil as the proposed in place; Inaccessible when crossing is closed. is removed. option is along the plan alignment of the existing Clonsilla Road. Journey Time and lengths of diversions for active modes and Diversion for cyclists when level crossing closed Diversion for cyclists when level crossing closed Permeability and local access numbers affected. Analysis of the connectivity between level 6.2 5.5km 5.5km Diversion for cyclists when level crossing closed crossing and green areas/key attractions related to active opportunity is 0.35km. mode The principal high amenity greenspaces in the The principal high amenity greenspaces in the vicinity of the existing train station include the vicinity of the existing train station include the The principal high amenity greenspaces in the Royal canal, the amenity zoned lands and golf Royal canal, the amenity zoned lands and golf vicinity of the existing train station include the courses south of the level crossing. Increased courses south of the level crossing. Increased Royal canal, the amenity zoned lands and golf closures of the level crossing would reduce closures of the level crossing would reduce courses south of the level crossing. This option access to each of them. access to each of them. retains access to the amenities effectively

Criteria Do Nothing Do Minimum Option 1

Significant comparative disadvantage over Significant comparative advantage over other Some comparative advantage over other 1 Economy other options options options Some comparative disadvantage over other Some comparative disadvantage over other Some comparative advantage over other 2 Integration options options options Some comparative advantage over other Significant comparative advantage over other Some comparative advantage over other 3 Environment options options options Significant comparative disadvantage over Significant comparative disadvantage over Some comparative advantage over other 4 Accessibility and social inclusion other options other options options Significant comparative disadvantage over Some comparative disadvantage over other Some comparative advantage over other 5 Safety other options options options Significant comparative disadvantage over Significant comparative disadvantage over Significant comparative advantage over other 6 Physical Activity other options other options options

Progress To Stage 2 No No Yes

Page 6 FORMATTED FOR PRINTING

DART+ WEST - MCA Stage 1 Clonsilla Level Crossing Assessment

Parameter Criteria Sub-Criteria (Quantitative/ Qualitative) Option 2 Option 3 Option 4

Overbridge with approach roadworks 200m to the Overbridge 370m to the west of crossing Overbridge 210m to the west of crossing east of crossing

Significant comparative disadvantage over Significant comparative disadvantage over Significant comparative disadvantage over other options other options other options This option includes costs above Option 2 for This option includes the costs of urban roadworks This option includes costs above Option 2 for additional at grade roadworks and a longer Assessment of cost of construction of option, land costs and 1.1 Construction and Land Cost across green fieldsto cross the railway and canal additional at grade roadworks and a longer bridge bridge structure and land acquisition associated temporary works via raised embankment and single span bridge. structure and land acquisition associated with with same. It also includes a premium for the Includes 2No, Junctions and the acquisition of same. This option does not require the acquisition cost of online construction which applies to the 6No houses. of any houses. works North of the canal. This option does not require the acquisition of any houses.

Some comparative disadvantage over other Some comparative disadvantage over other Some comparative disadvantage over other options options options Ongoing annual maintenance costs associated with varied 1.2 Long Term Maintenance costs An overbridge would increase the maintenance options The inspection and maintenance costs are The inspection and maintenance costs are requirements over a level crossing, though it associated with the roadworks and the bridge associated with the roadworks and the bridge would not be significantly more so than other options. Some comparative advantage over other Some comparative advantage over other Some comparative advantage over other 1 Economy options options options

Traffic Functionality /economic Benefits to vehicular traffic through reduction in journey time 1.3 benefit lengths and delays through removal of level crossings. Some improvement in journey time compared to Some improvement in journey time compared to Some improvement in journey time compared to Consideration of potentially longer routes for traffic. the Do Minimum and Option1; Some potential for the Do Minimum and Option1; Some potential for the Do Minimum and Option1; Some potential for induced trips; diversion required for local induced trips; diversion required for local induced trips; diversion required for local residents. residents. residents.

Some comparative advantage over other Some comparative advantage over other Some comparative advantage over other options options options

Improved facilities for pedestrians and cyclists on Improved facilities for pedestrians and cyclists on Improved facilities for pedestrians and cyclists on Impact on scope for and ease of interchange between new road link. Removal of direct local access to new road link. Removal of direct local access to new road link, although less extensive than other modes. Impact on the operation of other transport services Royal Canal greenway, although alternative Royal Canal greenway, although alternative options. Slightly more circuitous route for cyclists both during construction and in operation. New interchange access provided via slightly circuitous route. Transport Integration access provided via slightly circuitous route. to access station from the south. Removal of 2.1 nodes and facilities; Reduced walking and wait times Slightly more circuitous route for cyclists to access Slightly more circuitous route for cyclists to direct local access to Royal Canal greenway, associated with interchanges. Modal shift figures during station from the south. Would require slight re- access station from the south. Would require although alternative access provided via slightly construction and operations. Changes to journey times to routing of proposed L52 bus route (BusConnects), slight re-routing of proposed L52 bus route circuitous route. Would require slight re-routing transport nodes. although it would still directly serve Coolmine (BusConnects), and a looped route back to of proposed L52 bus route (BusConnects), Station, as per existing plan, and may increase continue to directly serve Coolmine Station, as although it would still directly serve Coolmine potential catchment by running closer to existing per existing plan. Station, as per existing plan developments.

Page 7 FORMATTED FOR PRINTING

DART+ WEST - MCA Stage 1 Clonsilla Level Crossing Assessment

Parameter Criteria Sub-Criteria (Quantitative/ Qualitative) Option 2 Option 3 Option 4

Some comparative disadvantage over other Some comparative disadvantage over other Some comparative disadvantage over other options options options

This Option would impact lands zoned LAP13.C Option 3 traverses through large area of land Kellystown LAP which is also zoned as a zoned for “Open Space” by Fingal DP which aims Strategic Development Zone (SDZ) Other to “Preserve and provide for open space and relevant zonings that apply include Open Space, recreational amenities” as well as lands zoned for established residential, town centre and district. It Options 4 impacts zonned 'High Amenity' and “High Amenity” where the aim is to “Protect and Impact on land use strategies and local plans. Assessment of is also within a wider 'urban Framework Plan' 'Open Space' and would include vehicular, enhance high amenity areas” . This option goes 2 Integration 2.2 Land Use Integration support for land use factors local land use and planning. area as per the Fingal DP map-based Zoning pedestrian and cycle access. It is a more against the aims of lands zoned for “Open Space” Inclusion of project in relevant local planning documents. Objectives. The Draft Kellystown LAP 2020 discrete solution than Opton 3 and some of the and “High Amenity”. Additionally, Option 3 (south of the railway) indicates that this Option other Do-Something options and therefore would traverses lands with a Fingal map-based Specific would be located in an area identified for have minor advantages over other Do- Objective to “Protect & Preserve Trees, openwith residential either side of the proposed Something options. Woodlands and Hedgerows”. online road option. Further consultion would be In terms of land use factors, it would connect to required with FCC if this is chosen as the the Hansfield SDZ. This option would not preferred option. correspond with the movement strategy or land use zoning objectives of this SDZ.

Some comparative advantage over other Some comparative advantage over other Some comparative advantage over other options options options

This option would support the delivery of the This option would support the delivery of the Other Government Policy Integration with the other Government policy such as the This option would support the delivery of the 2.4 higher level national and regional planning higher level national and regional planning Integration NPF and RSES. higher level national and regional planning policies policies regarding the DART Expansion policies regarding the DART Expansion regarding the DART Expansion programme (NPF- programme (NPF- (NS04), RSES & GDA programme (NPF- (NS04), RSES & GDA (NS04), RSES & GDA Transport Strategy). Transport Strategy). Transport Strategy).

Significant comparative disadvantage over Significant comparative disadvantage over Some comparative advantage over other Estimated number of sensitive properties within 100m of the other options other options options works. Options closer to more sensitive locations will have an This option constructs a new crossing point and This option constructs a new crossing point and 3.1 Noise and Vibration increased risk of generating a noise impact. However, 38 dwellings within 100m. Slightly less impacts therefore moves vehicular traffic closer to therefore moves vehicular traffic closer to qualative criteria are also used where necessary to options 2, 3, 5 and 6 due to lower number of dwellings not currently exposed to vehicular dwellings not currently exposed to vehicular traffic. differentiate between the options. properties within 100m traffic. 86 dwellings within 100m. 51 dwellings within 100m. Some comparative disadvantage over other Some comparative disadvantage over other Some comparative advantage over other options options options

Estimated number of number of receptors within 50m 25 dwellings within 50m. Due to longer length and reviewed as part of appriasal. Options closer to more overbridge, there would be a higher volume of 5 dwellings within 50m. Slightly less impacts 13 dwellings within 50m. Due to longer length and sensitive locations will have an increased risk of changes in embodied carbon in this option. Potential for over options 2, 3 and 6 due to lower number of 3.2 Air Quality and Climate overbridge, there would be a higher volume of air quality during construction or operational phases. construction phase dust impact is not significant properties within 50m and lower construction embodied carbon in this option. Potential for However, qualative criteria are also used where necessary to when mitigation measures are put in place. materials (embodied carbon). Potential for construction phase dust impact is not significant differentiate between the options. Potential for construction phase dust impact is construction phase dust impact is not significant when mitigation measures are put in place. not significant when mitigation measures are put when mitigation measures are put in place. in place.

Page 8 FORMATTED FOR PRINTING

DART+ WEST - MCA Stage 1 Clonsilla Level Crossing Assessment

Parameter Criteria Sub-Criteria (Quantitative/ Qualitative) Option 2 Option 3 Option 4

Significant comparative disadvantage over Significant comparative disadvantage over Significant comparative disadvantage over other options other options other options Overbridge option will remove a number of Very significant impact on trees north of the canal Impact on trees north of the canal - which are residential properties at Larch Grove. Very and through Beech Park - all of which are subject subject to Tree Preservation Objectives. Passes significant impact on residential properties on to Tree Preservation Objectives. Very Significant through Beech Park. Lands south of the railway Clonsilla Road/ Larch Grove and Weaver's Walk impact on GAA Pitch at Beech Park / are zoned High Amenity. Very significant impact Key landscape characteristics affected; Impact on landscape north of the canal, and along the east side of Westmanstowns Gaels and on parkland generally, on tree-lined corridor of canal and entrance to character; Impacts on landscape features, protected Clonsilla Road south of canal (including including allotments. Porter's Gate. Visual impact on canal side Landscape and Visual (including landscapes. Greenmount House). Significant impact on tree- Lands south of the railway are zoned High properties at end of western ramp. 3.3 light) Key visual characteristics affected; Impacts on properties, lined corridor of canal/railway. Junction with Amenity. Junction with Porterstown Road may amenities, protected views, key views. Porterstown Road may impact boundary of impact boundary of Luttrellstown Castle estate (an Luttrellstown Castle estate (an architectural architectural conservation area, and a protected conservation area, and a protected structure). structure). Tree Preservation Objectives within Tree Preservation Objectives within Luttrellstown Luttrellstown estate. Significant impact on tree- estate. lined corridor of canal/railway. Very significant Note also impacts for Option 1. visual impact on residential properties at Porter's Gate, and 2 canal side properties at bridge location.

Some comparative disadvantage over other Significant comparative disadvantage over Some comparative advantage over other options other options options 3

Potential compliance/conflict with biodiversity objectives; Hydrologically connected to South Dublin Bay and Hydrologically connected to South Dublin Bay and Hydrologically connected to South Dublin Bay 3.4 Biodiversity (flora and fauna) Indirect impacts on protected species, designated sites; River Tolka Estuary SPA. No risk of LSE. River Tolka Estuary SPA. No risk of LSE. and River Tolka Estuary SPA. No risk of LSE. Overall effect on nature conservation resource. Potential impacts to Royal Canal pNHA. Potential impacts to Royal Canal pNHA. Greater Potential impacts to Royal Canal pNHA. Loss of Significant loss of woodland, treeline, hedgerow loss of woodland, treeline, hedgerow amenity treeline and wet grassland habitat. Direct amenity grassland and wet grassland habitats grassland and wet grassland habitats than all impacts to veteran beech tree in the field where compared to other options. other options. Dissects public park. option runs through.

Some comparative disadvantage over other Significant comparative disadvantage over Some comparative disadvantage over other Environment options other options options Direct impacts on demesne associated with the Overall effect on cultural, archaeological and architecture Direct impact on demesne landscape associated Courtyard, Beech Park House (RPS No. 709) and heritage resource. Likely effects on RPS, National Direct impacts on demesne landscapes with Courtyard, Beech Park House (RPS No. Cultural, Archaeological and Clonsilla Lodge. Potential indirect impacts on 3.5 Monuments, SMRs, Conservation areas, etc. associated with Greenmount and Kellystown. 709). Potential indirect impact on the Royal Architectural Heritage Beech Park House (RPS No. 710), the Royal Number of designated sites/structures (by level of Potential indirect impact on the Royal Canal (RPS Canal (RPS No. 944a). Potential to encounter Canal (RPS No. 944a) and Luttrellstown ACA. designation) directly impacted by scheme (landtake) No. 944a). Potential to encounter archaeological archaeological deposits that may survive within Potential to encounter archaeological deposits deposits that may survive within undeveloped greenfield areas. that may survive within greenfield areas. areas.

Some comparative disadvantage over other Significant comparative disadvantage over Significant comparative disadvantage over options other options other options

Potential negative impact on surface water Proposed route indicated to have increased flood Proposed route indicated to have increased flood Overall potential significant effects on water resource quality during operational phase. Potential risk compared to other options. Potential surface risk compared to other options. Potential 3.6 Water Resources attributes likely to be affected during construction and negative impact on surface and groundwater water impacts during operational phase. Potential negative impacts to surface water quality during operation. quality during construction phase. Has some negative impact on surface and groundwater operational phase. Potential negative impact on comparative disadvantage over other options. quality during construction phase. Has some surface and groundwater quality during comparative disadvantage over other options. construction phase. Has some comparative disadvantage over other options.

Page 9 FORMATTED FOR PRINTING

DART+ WEST - MCA Stage 1 Clonsilla Level Crossing Assessment

Parameter Criteria Sub-Criteria (Quantitative/ Qualitative) Option 2 Option 3 Option 4

Significant comparative disadvantage over Some comparative advantage over other Significant comparative advantage over other other options options options Overall impact on land take & property. Number of properties Under Options 2, the non-agricultural impact will 3.7 Agriculture and Non-Agricultural to be impacted/acquired. Likely temporary or permanent Option 3 will result in significant land severance of involve the acquisition of five residential severance effects, etc. Beech Park amenity lands and landtake of St. Option 4 will have direct impact on amenity lands properties. The agricultural impact will result in Josephs Centre lands. There is a direct impact on in Beech Park. landtake and land severance on a livestock farm lands used for community allotments. holding.

Soils and Geology and likely impact on geological resources Some comparative advantage over other Significant comparative disadvantage over Some comparative advantage over other based on preliminary/likely construction details. Soil or topsoil options other options options resources to be developed/removed based on cut or fill requirements and potential for soft ground which may also Geology and Soils (including 3.8 need replaced. Existing information relating to potential to Longest route with overbridge require fill import to Waste) encounter contaminated land. High-level assessment based Lower fill import requirements compared to other the site (Minor negative). This option appears to Lower fill import requirements compared to other on the likely structures/ works required and the potential for options. have the highest earthworks needs. options. ground contamination due to historic landfills, pits and quarries.

Some comparative disadvantage over other Some comparative disadvantage over other Some comparative disadvantage over other options options options

It is assumed that the routing of the cabling, the It is assumed that the routing of the cabling, the It is assumed that the routing of the cabling, the Overall likely impact on existing sources of electromagnetic location of existing substations, hubs etc. along location of existing substations, hubs etc. along location of existing substations, hubs etc. along 3.9 Radiation and Stray Current radiation. the line will be changed or impacted by the the line will be changed or impacted by the the line will be changed or impacted by the selection of any of the options over the entire selection of any of the options over the entire selection of any of the options over the entire project. All Do-Something options are comparable project. All Do-Something options are comparable project. All Do-Something options are from an EMI perspective at this stage in the from an EMI perspective at this stage in the comparable from an EMI perspective at this assessment. assessment. stage in the assessment.

Some comparative advantage over other Some comparative disadvantage over other Some comparative advantage over other options options options

Impacts on low income groups, non-car owners, mobility Local ped/cycle access maintained along ramped Local ped/cycle access maintained along ramped Local ped/cycle access maintained along 4.1 Impact on Vulnerable Groups impaired, visually impaired and people with a disability. access over proposed bridge. access over proposed bridge ramped access over proposed bridge.

Road traffic diverted distance route is 572m (1.1x Shortest diversion route 1.7km (3.6x diversion Road traffic diverted distance route 894m (2.0x diversion route). route) diversion route)

Some comparative advantage over other Some comparative disadvantage over other Some comparative advantage over other options options options

Quantification of increased service levels to the vulnerable Station Accessibility is addressed for all level Station Accessibility is addressed for all level Station Accessibility is addressed for all level 4.2 Stations Accessibility groups. crossing options in proximity to a station crossing options in proximity to a station crossing options in proximity to a station

This option does not significantly affect access to Shortest diversion route 1.7km (3.6x diversion Shortest diversion route 894m (2.0x diversion Accessibility & Social the station route) route) 4 inclusion

Page 10 FORMATTED FOR PRINTING

DART+ WEST - MCA Stage 1 Clonsilla Level Crossing Assessment

Parameter Criteria Sub-Criteria (Quantitative/ Qualitative) Option 2 Option 3 Option 4

Significant comparative advantage over other Some comparative disadvantage over other Some comparative disadvantage over other options options options

This option does not cause community This option does not cause community Service levels impacts including severance of community This option does not cause community severence. severence. severence. groups; 4.3 Social Inclusion Severance from community facilities consequent on an This option does not curtail access to community This option does not curtail access to community This option does not curtail access to community option. amenities amenities amenities Shortest diversion route 1.7km (3.6x diversion Diverted distance route is 572m (1.1x diversion Diverted distance route 894m (2.0x diversion route) route). route)

Significant comparative advantage over other Significant comparative advantage over other Significant comparative advantage over other options options options

This option removes the railway level crossing, a This option removes the railway level crossing, a This option removes the railway level crossing, a Safety for Rail users – removal of Level crossings is 5.1 Rail Safety characteristic which is considered positive from characteristic which is considered positive from characteristic which is considered positive from considered a significant safety enhancement the perspective of railway safety. the perspective of railway safety. the perspective of railway safety.

There is no significant construction activity along There is no significant construction activity along There is no significant construction activity along the railway associated with the level crossing the railway associated with the level crossing the railway associated with the level crossing

Significant comparative advantage over other Significant comparative advantage over other Significant comparative advantage over other options options options

Quality of Access for these road users, lengths of diversions, 5.2 Vehicular Traffic Safety removal of interface with rail and other modes of transport Providing a segregated crossing would have a Providing a segregated crossing would have a Providing a segregated crossing would have a significant advantage as vehicular traffic is not significant advantage as vehicular traffic is not significant advantage as vehicular traffic is not 5 Safety crossing the live rail. crossing the live rail. crossing the live rail.

Some comparative disadvantage over other Some comparative disadvantage over other Some comparative disadvantage over other options options options

This option replaces access for pedestrians, This option replaces access for pedestrians, This option replaces access for pedestrians, Pedestrian, Cyclist and Vulnerable cyclists and vulnerable road users via the cyclists and vulnerable road users via the cyclists and vulnerable road users via the 5.3 Quality of Access for these road users. removal of interfaces Road user Safety proposed bridge but at more remote location than proposed bridge but at more remote location than proposed bridge but at more remote location Option 1. Option 1. than Option 1.

Diverted distance route 758m (1.6x diversion Shortest diversion route 1.7km (3.6x diversion Diverted distance route 894m (2.0x diversion route). route). route).

Page 11 FORMATTED FOR PRINTING

DART+ WEST - MCA Stage 1 Clonsilla Level Crossing Assessment

Parameter Criteria Sub-Criteria (Quantitative/ Qualitative) Option 2 Option 3 Option 4

Some comparative advantage over other Some comparative disadvantage over other Some comparative advantage over other options options options

Connectivity to adjoining cycling Analysis of the extent that the scheme connects with cycle 6.1 This option provides replacement pedestrian and This option provides replacement pedestrian and This option provides replacement pedestrian and facilities tracks. cycle access with associated linkage to existing cycle access with associated linkage to existing cycle access with associated linkage to existing and proposed facilities along a diverted route - and proposed facilities along a diverted route - and proposed facilities along a diverted route - diversion - 500m diversion - 1.2km diversion - 600m

6 Physical Activity Some comparative advantage over other Some comparative disadvantage over other Some comparative advantage over other options options options

This option provides replacement pedestrian and This option provides replacement pedestrian and This option provides replacement pedestrian and cycle access with associated linkage to existing cycle access with associated linkage to existing cycle access with associated linkage to existing Journey Time and lengths of diversions for active modes and and proposed facilities along a diverted route - and proposed facilities along a diverted route - and proposed facilities along a diverted route - Permeability and local access numbers affected. Analysis of the connectivity between level 6.2 diversion - 500m diversion - 1.2km diversion - 600m opportunity crossing and green areas/key attractions related to active mode The principal high amenity greenspaces in the The principal high amenity greenspaces in the The principal high amenity greenspaces in the vicinity of the existing train station include the vicinity of the existing train station include the vicinity of the existing train station include the Royal canal, the amenity zoned lands and golf Royal canal, the amenity zoned lands and golf Royal canal, the amenity zoned lands and golf courses south of the level crossing. This option courses south of the level crossing. This option courses south of the level crossing. This option retains access to the amenities retains access to the amenities retains access to the amenities

Criteria Option 2 Option 3 Option 4

Some comparative disadvantage over other Some comparative disadvantage over other Some comparative disadvantage over other 1 Economy options options options Some comparative advantage over other Some comparative advantage over other Some comparative advantage over other 2 Integration options options options Some comparative disadvantage over other Significant comparative disadvantage over Some comparative advantage over other 3 Environment options other options options Some comparative advantage over other Some comparative disadvantage over other Some comparative advantage over other 4 Accessibility and social inclusion options options options Some comparative advantage over other Some comparative advantage over other Some comparative advantage over other 5 Safety options options options Some comparative advantage over other Some comparative disadvantage over other Some comparative advantage over other 6 Physical Activity options options options

Progress To Stage 2 Yes No Yes

Page 12 FORMATTED FOR PRINTING

DART+ WEST - MCA Stage 1 Clonsilla Level Crossing Assessment

Parameter Criteria Sub-Criteria (Quantitative/ Qualitative) Option 5 Option 6 Option 7

Overbridge 200m to the east of crossing – Overbridge 200m to the east of crossing – Online Overbridge 200m to the east of crossing – Online Offline at Larchgrove at Larchgrove of Larchgrove with Retained Walls

Significant comparative disadvantage over Significant comparative disadvantage over Significant comparative disadvantage over other options other options other options

This option includes the costs of urban roadworks This option includes the costs of urban This option includes the costs of urban roadworks Assessment of cost of construction of option, land costs and across green fieldsto cross the railway and canal 1.1 Construction and Land Cost roadworks across green fieldsto cross the across green fieldsto cross the railway and canal temporary works via raised embankment and single span bridge. railway and canal via raised embankment and via raised embankment and single span bridge. Includes 2No, Junctions and the acquisition of single span bridge. Includes 2No, Junctions and Includes 2No, Junctions and the acquisition of 6No houses. Retaining Walls on Northern the acquisition of 6No houses. 8No houses. Approach to Railway to reduce land take

Some comparative disadvantage over other Some comparative disadvantage over other Some comparative disadvantage over other options options options Ongoing annual maintenance costs associated with varied 1.2 Long Term Maintenance costs An overbridge would increase the maintenance An overbridge would increase the maintenance An overbridge would increase the maintenance options requirements over a level crossing, though it requirements over a level crossing, though it requirements over a level crossing, though it would not be significantly more so than other would not be significantly more so than other would not be significantly more so than other options. options. options. Some comparative advantage over other Some comparative advantage over other Some comparative advantage over other 1 Economy options options options

Some comparative advantage over other Some comparative advantage over other Some comparative advantage over other options options options

Improved facilities for pedestrians and cyclists on Impact on scope for and ease of interchange between Improved facilities for pedestrians and cyclists on Improved facilities for pedestrians and cyclists on new road link. Slightly more circuitous route for modes. Impact on the operation of other transport services new road link. Slightly more circuitous route for new road link. Slightly more circuitous route for cyclists to access station from the south. both during construction and in operation. New interchange cyclists to access station from the south. Removal cyclists to access station from the south. Removal Transport Integration Removal of direct local access to Royal Canal 2.1 nodes and facilities; Reduced walking and wait times of direct local access to Royal Canal greenway, of direct local access to Royal Canal greenway, greenway, although alternative access provided associated with interchanges. Modal shift figures during although alternative access provided via slightly although alternative access provided via slightly via slightly circuitous route. Would require slight construction and operations. Changes to journey times to circuitous route. Would require slight re-routing of circuitous route. Would require slight re-routing of re-routing of proposed L52 bus route transport nodes. proposed L52 bus route (BusConnects), and a proposed L52 bus route (BusConnects), and a (BusConnects), and a looped route back to looped route back to continue to directly serve looped route back to continue to directly serve continue to directly serve Coolmine Station, as Coolmine Station, as per existing plan. Coolmine Station, as per existing plan. per existing plan.

Page 13 FORMATTED FOR PRINTING

DART+ WEST - MCA Stage 1 Clonsilla Level Crossing Assessment

Parameter Criteria Sub-Criteria (Quantitative/ Qualitative) Option 5 Option 6 Option 7

Some comparative disadvantage over other Some comparative disadvantage over other Some comparative disadvantage over other options options options

This option is supported in principle by the This option is supported in principle by the national and regional planning policy context. Overbridge 200m to the east of existing crossing national and regional planning policy context. – Online at Larchgrove Similar to Option 2, this At local level, Option 7 may impact the Fingal DP At local level, Option 6 may impact the Fingal DP option would impact lands zoned LAP13.C map-based Zoning Objectives for “Residential” map-based Zoning Objectives for “Residential” Kellystown LAP which is also zoned as a lands by impacting the existing residential lands by impacting the existing residential Strategic Development Zone (SDZ) Other properties. Additionally, Option 7 is likely to impact properties. Additionally, Option 6 is likely to impact relevant zonings that apply include Open Space, a map-based Specific Objective for the a map-based Specific Objective for the Impact on land use strategies and local plans. Assessment of established residential, town centre and district. development of a “School” at Clonsilla Road by development of a “School” at Clonsilla Road by 2 Integration 2.2 Land Use Integration support for land use factors local land use and planning. It is also within a wider 'urban Framework Plan' traversing through lands earmarked for this traversing through the lands earmarked for this Inclusion of project in relevant local planning documents. area as per the Fingal DP map-based Zoning development. development. Objectives. The Draft Kellystown LAP 2020 (south of the The areas south of the railway are within The areas south of the railway are within railway) indicates that this Option would be undeveloped lands zoned for “Residential Area” undeveloped lands zoned for “Residential Area” located in an area identified for openwith and “Open Space” by the Fingal DP, which are and “Open Space” by the Fingal DP, which are residential either side of the proposed online subject to the Draft Kellystown LAP currently at subject to the Draft Kellystown LAP currently at road option. Further consultion would be required public consultation stage. This option will result in public consultation stage. This option will result in with FCC if this is chosen as the preferred reduced zoned lands being made available for reduced zoned lands being made available for option. indiciative residential development and open indiciative residential development and open spaces identified in the draft LAP. spaces identified in the draft LAP.

Some comparative advantage over other Some comparative advantage over other Some comparative advantage over other options options options

This option would support the delivery of the Other Government Policy Integration with the other Government policy such as the This option would support the delivery of the This option would support the delivery of the 2.4 higher level national and regional planning Integration NPF and RSES. higher level national and regional planning policies higher level national and regional planning policies policies regarding the DART Expansion regarding the DART Expansion programme (NPF- regarding the DART Expansion programme (NPF- programme (NPF- (NS04), RSES & GDA (NS04), RSES & GDA Transport Strategy). (NS04), RSES & GDA Transport Strategy). Transport Strategy).

Significant comparative disadvantage over Significant comparative disadvantage over Significant comparative disadvantage over Estimated number of sensitive properties within 100m of the other options other options other options works. Options closer to more sensitive locations will have an 3.1 Noise and Vibration increased risk of generating a noise impact. However, This option constructs a new crossing point and This option constructs a new crossing point and This option constructs a new crossing point and qualative criteria are also used where necessary to therefore moves vehicular traffic closer to therefore moves vehicular traffic closer to therefore moves vehicular traffic closer to differentiate between the options. dwellings not currently exposed to vehicular dwellings not currently exposed to vehicular dwellings not currently exposed to vehicular traffic. traffic. 121 dwellings within 100m. traffic. 120 dwellings within 100m. 120 dwellings within 100m. Significant comparative disadvantage over Some comparative disadvantage over other Some comparative disadvantage over other other options options options

Estimated number of number of receptors within 50m reviewed as part of appriasal. Options closer to more 27 dwellings within 50m. This option constructs a 28 dwellings within 50m. This option constructs a 28 dwellings within 50m. This option constructs a sensitive locations will have an increased risk of changes in 3.2 Air Quality and Climate new crossing point and therefore moves new crossing point and therefore moves vehicular new crossing point and therefore moves vehicular air quality during construction or operational phases. vehicular traffic closer to dwellings not currently traffic closer to dwellings not currently exposed to traffic closer to dwellings not currently exposed to However, qualative criteria are also used where necessary to exposed to vehicular traffic. Potential for vehicular traffic. Potential for construction phase vehicular traffic. Potential for construction phase differentiate between the options. construction phase dust impact is not significant dust impact is not significant when mitigation dust impact is not significant when mitigation when mitigation measures are put in place. measures are put in place. measures are put in place.

Page 14 FORMATTED FOR PRINTING

DART+ WEST - MCA Stage 1 Clonsilla Level Crossing Assessment

Parameter Criteria Sub-Criteria (Quantitative/ Qualitative) Option 5 Option 6 Option 7

Significant comparative disadvantage over Significant comparative disadvantage over Significant comparative disadvantage over other options other options other options Overbridge option will remove a number of Unlikely that property demolition could be avoided. Unlikely that property demolition could be avoided. residential properties at Larch Grove / Weaver's Very significant impact on residential properties Very significant impact on residential properties on Walk. Very significant impact on residential on Clonsilla Road/ Larch Grove and Weaver's Clonsilla Road/ Larch Grove and Weaver's Walk properties on Clonsilla Road/ Larch Grove and Walk north of the canal, and along the east side north of the canal, and along the east side of Key landscape characteristics affected; Impact on landscape Weaver's Walk north of the canal; along the east of Clonsilla Road south of canal (including Clonsilla Road south of canal (including character; Impacts on landscape features, protected side of Clonsilla Road south of canal (including Greenmount House). Significant impact on tree- Greenmount House). Significant impact on tree- Landscape and Visual (including landscapes. Greenmount House) and Dolland House. lined corridor of canal/railway. lined corridor of canal/railway. 3.3 light) Key visual characteristics affected; Impacts on properties, Significant impact on tree-lined corridor of Junction with Porterstown Road may impact Junction with Porterstown Road may impact amenities, protected views, key views. canal/railway. boundary of Luttrellstown Castle estate (an boundary of Luttrellstown Castle estate (an architectural conservation area, and a protected architectural conservation area, and a protected structure). Tree Preservation Objectives within structure). Tree Preservation Objectives within Luttrellstown estate. Luttrellstown estate.

Some comparative disadvantage over other Some comparative disadvantage over other Some comparative disadvantage over other options options options 3

Potential compliance/conflict with biodiversity objectives; Hydrologically connected to South Dublin Bay 3.4 Biodiversity (flora and fauna) Indirect impacts on protected species, designated sites; and River Tolka Estuary SPA. No risk of LSE. Hydrologically connected to South Dublin Bay and Hydrologically connected to South Dublin Bay and Overall effect on nature conservation resource. Potential impacts to Royal Canal pNHA. Loss of River Tolka Estuary SPA. No risk of LSE. River Tolka Estuary SPA. No risk of LSE. woodland, treeline, hedgerow amenity grassland Potential impacts to Royal Canal pNHA. Potential impacts to Royal Canal pNHA. Loss of and wet grassland habitats similar to Option 2 Demolition. Loss of woodland, treeline, hedgerow woodland, treeline, hedgerow amenity grassland but reduced carriageway and therefore reduced amenity grassland and wet grassland habitats. and wet grassland habitats. impacts.

Some comparative disadvantage over other Some comparative disadvantage over other Some comparative disadvantage over other Environment options options options Overall effect on cultural, archaeological and architecture heritage resource. Likely effects on RPS, National Direct impacts on demesne landscapes Direct impacts on demesne landscapes Direct impacts on demesne landscapes Cultural, Archaeological and 3.5 Monuments, SMRs, Conservation areas, etc. associated with Greenmount and Kellystown. associated with Greenmount and Kellystown. associated with Greenmount and Kellystown. Architectural Heritage Number of designated sites/structures (by level of Potential indirect impact on the Royal Canal Potential indirect impact on the Royal Canal (RPS Potential indirect impact on the Royal Canal (RPS designation) directly impacted by scheme (landtake) (RPS No. 944a). Potential to encounter No. 944a). Potential to encounter archaeological No. 944a). Potential to encounter archaeological archaeological deposits that may survive within deposits that may survive within greenfield areas. deposits that may survive within greenfield areas. greenfield areas. Source: Fingal Development Plan 2017-2023 Source: Fingal Development Plan 2017-2023

Some comparative disadvantage over other Some comparative disadvantage over other Some comparative disadvantage over other options options options

Potential negative impact on surface water Potential negative impact on surface water Potential negative impact on surface water quality Overall potential significant effects on water resource quality during operational phase. Potential quality during operational phase. Potential during operational phase. Potential negative 3.6 Water Resources attributes likely to be affected during construction and negative impact on surface and groundwater negative impact on surface and groundwater impact on surface and groundwater quality during operation. quality during construction phase. Has some quality during construction phase. Has some construction phase. Has some comparative comparative disadvantage over other options. comparative disadvantage over other options. disadvantage over other options.

Page 15 FORMATTED FOR PRINTING

DART+ WEST - MCA Stage 1 Clonsilla Level Crossing Assessment

Parameter Criteria Sub-Criteria (Quantitative/ Qualitative) Option 5 Option 6 Option 7

Significant comparative disadvantage over Some comparative disadvantage over other Some comparative disadvantage over other other options options options Overall impact on land take & property. Number of properties 3.7 Agriculture and Non-Agricultural to be impacted/acquired. Likely temporary or permanent Under Options 5, the non-agricultural impact will Under Option 6, the non-agricultural impact will Under Option 7, the non-agricultural impact will severance effects, etc. involve the acquisition of five residential include landtake of property curtilage on include landtake of property curtilage on properties. The agricultural impact will result in residential properties. The agricultural impact will residential properties. The agricultural impact will landtake and land severance on a livestock farm result in landtake and land severance on a result in landtake and land severance on a holding. livestock farm holding. livestock farm holding.

Soils and Geology and likely impact on geological resources Some comparative disadvantage over other Some comparative disadvantage over other Some comparative disadvantage over other based on preliminary/likely construction details. Soil or topsoil options options options resources to be developed/removed based on cut or fill requirements and potential for soft ground which may also Geology and Soils (including 3.8 need replaced. Existing information relating to potential to Waste) encounter contaminated land. High-level assessment based Long route with overbridge require fill import to Long route with overbridge require fill import to the Long route with overbridge require fill import to the on the likely structures/ works required and the potential for the site (Minor negative). site (Minor negative). site (Minor negative). ground contamination due to historic landfills, pits and quarries.

Some comparative disadvantage over other Some comparative disadvantage over other Some comparative disadvantage over other options options options

It is assumed that the routing of the cabling, the It is assumed that the routing of the cabling, the It is assumed that the routing of the cabling, the Overall likely impact on existing sources of electromagnetic location of existing substations, hubs etc. along location of existing substations, hubs etc. along location of existing substations, hubs etc. along 3.9 Radiation and Stray Current radiation. the line will be changed or impacted by the the line will be changed or impacted by the the line will be changed or impacted by the selection of any of the options over the entire selection of any of the options over the entire selection of any of the options over the entire project. All Do-Something options are project. All Do-Something options are comparable project. All Do-Something options are comparable comparable from an EMI perspective at this from an EMI perspective at this stage in the from an EMI perspective at this stage in the stage in the assessment. assessment. assessment.

Some comparative advantage over other Some comparative advantage over other Some comparative advantage over other options options options

Impacts on low income groups, non-car owners, mobility Local ped/cycle access maintained along Local ped/cycle access maintained along ramped Local ped/cycle access maintained along ramped 4.1 Impact on Vulnerable Groups impaired, visually impaired and people with a disability. ramped access over proposed bridge. access over proposed bridge. access over proposed bridge.

Road traffic diverted distance route 758m (1.6x Road traffic diverted distance route 795m (1.8x Road traffic diverted distance route 795m (1.8x diversion route) diversion route) diversion route)

Some comparative advantage over other Some comparative advantage over other Some comparative advantage over other options options options

Shortest diversion route758m (1.6x diversion Diverted distance route 795m (1.8x diversion Diverted distance route 795m (1.8x diversion Accessibility & Social route) route) route) 4 inclusion

Page 16 FORMATTED FOR PRINTING

DART+ WEST - MCA Stage 1 Clonsilla Level Crossing Assessment

Parameter Criteria Sub-Criteria (Quantitative/ Qualitative) Option 5 Option 6 Option 7

Some comparative disadvantage over other Some comparative disadvantage over other Some comparative disadvantage over other options options options

This option does not cause community This option does not cause community Service levels impacts including severance of community This option does not cause community severence. severence. severence. groups; 4.3 Social Inclusion Severance from community facilities consequent on an This option does not curtail access to community This option does not curtail access to community This option does not curtail access to community option. amenities amenities amenities Diverted distance route 795m (1.8x diversion Diverted distance route 758m (1.6x diversion Diverted distance route 795m (1.8x diversion route) route) route)

Significant comparative advantage over other Significant comparative advantage over other Significant comparative advantage over other options options options

Some comparative disadvantage over other Some comparative disadvantage over other Some comparative disadvantage over other options options options

This option replaces access for pedestrians, This option replaces access for pedestrians, This option replaces access for pedestrians, Pedestrian, Cyclist and Vulnerable cyclists and vulnerable road users via the cyclists and vulnerable road users via the cyclists and vulnerable road users via the 5.3 Quality of Access for these road users. removal of interfaces Road user Safety proposed bridge but at more remote location proposed bridge but at more remote location than proposed bridge but at more remote location than than Option 1. Option 1. Option 1.

Diverted distance route 758m (1.6x diversion Diverted distance route 795m (1.8x diversion Diverted distance route 795m (1.8x diversion route) route) route)

Page 17 FORMATTED FOR PRINTING

DART+ WEST - MCA Stage 1 Clonsilla Level Crossing Assessment

Parameter Criteria Sub-Criteria (Quantitative/ Qualitative) Option 5 Option 6 Option 7

Some comparative advantage over other Some comparative advantage over other Some comparative advantage over other options options options

6 Physical Activity Some comparative advantage over other Some comparative advantage over other Some comparative advantage over other options options options

This option provides replacement pedestrian and This option provides replacement pedestrian and This option provides replacement pedestrian and cycle access with associated linkage to existing cycle access with associated linkage to existing cycle access with associated linkage to existing Journey Time and lengths of diversions for active modes and and proposed facilities along a diverted route - and proposed facilities along a diverted route - and proposed facilities along a diverted route - Permeability and local access numbers affected. Analysis of the connectivity between level 6.2 diversion - 500m diversion - 500m diversion - 500m opportunity crossing and green areas/key attractions related to active mode The principal high amenity greenspaces in the The principal high amenity greenspaces in the The principal high amenity greenspaces in the vicinity of the existing train station include the vicinity of the existing train station include the vicinity of the existing train station include the Royal canal, the amenity zoned lands and golf Royal canal, the amenity zoned lands and golf Royal canal, the amenity zoned lands and golf courses south of the level crossing. This option courses south of the level crossing. This option courses south of the level crossing. This option retains access to the amenities retains access to the amenities retains access to the amenities

Criteria Option 5 Option 6 Option 7

Some comparative disadvantage over other Some comparative disadvantage over other Some comparative disadvantage over other 1 Economy options options options Some comparative advantage over other Some comparative advantage over other Some comparative advantage over other 2 Integration options options options Significant comparative disadvantage over Significant comparative disadvantage over Significant comparative disadvantage over 3 Environment other options other options other options Some comparative advantage over other Some comparative advantage over other Some comparative advantage over other 4 Accessibility and social inclusion options options options Some comparative advantage over other Some comparative advantage over other Some comparative advantage over other 5 Safety options options options Some comparative advantage over other Some comparative advantage over other Some comparative advantage over other 6 Physical Activity options options options

Progress To Stage 2 No No No

Page 18