The ammendment starts with the following preamble as justification for the amendment "This amendment strengthens the existing guidance in Section 2.2.6 by clarifying key criteria that should form part of a car parking management strategy. It reflects evolving best practice in urban development, where more efficient and flexible parking provision is encouraged, particularly in areas served by high-quality public transport such as Clonburris".

Clonburris self-evidently is not served by high-quality public transport and with the ongoing delays to Dart+SW it appears that it will not be until well into the 2030s. Current public transport is infrequent and over crowded. This means that the current parking situation in the estates in Clonburris are a mess and these amendments fail utterly in fixing them.

The current amendment is an obvious attempt by SDCC to wash it's hands of responsibility for the problem and for the solution. This is an opportunity to allow for changes in policy for the currently affected developments while providing clarification for future developments. 

For example, houses sold with a parking permit could have a space allocated to them and for that to be clearly marked. This pragmatic solution would alleviate a significant number of the problems and the only argument against it seems to be purely based on a high minded vision of the mass adoption of public transport. I applaud this vision but it is manifestly impossible at the current point in time (or any point in time within at least the next decade).

I urge in the strangest terms that this opportunity be used pragmatically to fix the problem that exists now.