Comments on Transport, Permeability, Plaza

Public Transport
There is no evidence of serious engagement with the NTA in terms of how public transport will be improved in the village area or new access routes sought. Could the team outline whether any commitments have been made in this regard pending the plan's adoption?

Pedestrian Upgrades
I welcome the proposed physical pedestrian upgrades as if implemented they will make Clondalkin village a safer place to live and work in.

Cycling
I broadly support the plans to improve safety and access for cyclists, but would push for areas totally segregated not just from cars, but also pedestrians.

Specific Permeability concerns expressed
While permeability has many benefits, especially when planned as part of new developments, it is not something that should be forced on long-established communities, particularly those with ongoing anti-social behaviour.

The response of agencies has been inadequate to existing problems without creating new access routes for intimidation, graffiti and break-ins. The concerns expressed by residents are genuine and without detailed estate-by-estate consultation and firm guarantees around CCTV and the ability to close off access if problems arise, strong opposition will continue. Such permeability plans should be parked until better solutions are found. 

The areas objected to by residents include:
- Laurel Park cul de sac
- Floraville
- Round Tower Car Park opening
- Cherrywood Avenue and Old Nangor Road
- Woodford and Monastery Heath Square

Many residents have pointed out that they moved into their estates precisely because of the house location in a cul de sac. There are concerns with fast scooters and ebikes as well as anti-social behaviour and concerns about small children no longer being able to play safely are also valid. There needs to be a balance and nothing should be foisted on residents.