I am a local resident writing to strongly oppose Material Amendment No. 2[4].
The original masterplan included a dedicated, full-scale pedestrian and cycle bridge directly linking Parkleigh / South Link Street across the canal to Parkleigh/Lockhouse Way. Moving and downsizing this bridge is a major step backward for our area for the following reasons:
- Parkleigh's parks and green areas were built around this exact bridge location: The physical layout of Parkleigh—including our built parks, green corridors, and pedestrian paths—was deliberately designed and aligned to lead directly to the approved bridge landing point. Shifting the bridge east invalidates this existing landscape design, leaving built green spaces misaligned and breaking up the intended active travel flows.
- Severing direct access to Grand Canal Park: South Dublin County Council recently granted planning permission for Grand Canal Park under Planning Reg. Ref. SDZ25A/0034W. The original bridge provided a direct/middle of the ay gateway straight into this new park and the Grand Canal Greenway. Moving the bridge east breaks this direct connection, forcing cyclists and pedestrians onto unnecessary detours.
- Impact on my decision to buy here: The location of this bridge was a factor in my decision to purchase this home in Parkleigh, specifically because it promised a close and direct, safe bike and walking access to the canal. Moving it retroactively removes infrastructure that residents relied on when buying.
- Makes no spatial sense (clustering bridges in one spot): The proposed location near the 10th/11th Lock places the new crossing right next to the existing Fonthill Road (R113) vehicular bridge and lock crossings. Clumping crossings together in the exact same spot makes no sense when there is currently no bridge where it was originally planned. It creates redundant infrastructure in one spot while leaving our section of the canal cut off.
Conclusion: I ask the Council and An Coimisiún Pleanála to reject Amendment No. 2 and build the bridge in its original proposed location.
We object to this change as we believe it will cause more traffic congestion on the other two junctions and will restrict our connections.
- Completely removing vehicular connectivity across the railway line forces all north-south traffic onto surrounding external arterial roads (Fonthill Road / R113 and Grange Castle Road).
- Fonthill road is already clogged with traffic at peak hours, meaning all traffic will head to Grange Castle Road.
- As highlighted in the Council’s own Bridge Removal Assessment Modelling Report (Systra, 2025), removing this vehicular link results in significant traffic rerouting. The report states the following: An issue was identified in both the AM and PM for this junction. The impacts of the road removal may require mitigation to address the impact at this junction.
Replacing the mandatory 100% EV charging requirement in Section 2.2.6 with a discretionary assessment undermines both community needs and statutory policy objectives:
- Directly conflicts with National Climate Targets: Ireland’s statutory Climate Action Plan mandates a 50% reduction in transport emissions by 2030. Scraping the 100% EV requirement in a flagship Strategic Development Zone like Clonburris directly frustrates national targets and Zero Emission Vehicles Ireland (ZEVI) goals to accelerate EV uptake.
- Undermines National Planning Framework (NPF) Objectives: Clonburris was designated as a modern urban district to lead on sustainability (National Strategic Objective 8: Transition to a Carbon Neutral and Climate Resilient Society). Lowering standards to discretionary levels sends the wrong signal for a new development built from scratch.
- Incompatible with unallocated parking proposals: Paired with proposed changes to parking management (Amendment No. 9), removing guaranteed EV charging leaves residents with zero certainty on where chargers can be placed or how power will be billed, creating an immediate barrier to buying an electric car.
Conclusion: I urge South Dublin County Council and An Coimisiún Pleanála to reject Amendment No. 8 and retain the mandatory 100% EV charging requirement to keep Clonburris aligned with national climate and transport goals.
I am a local resident writing to strongly oppose Material Amendment No. 5, which seeks to cancel the permitted standalone pedestrian and cycle bridge spanning the Kildare railway line and replace it with a pedestrian connection integrated into Clondalkin–Fonthill Railway Station.
1. Isolating the Neighbourhood Behind Hard Borders
This amendment is part of a troubling pattern across the proposed changes—such as downgrading the Grand Canal bridge in Amendment No. 2—that confines our neighbourhood within hard physical barriers (the railway line, the Grand Canal, and Fonthill Road). Replacing dedicated community bridges with indirect detours isolates residential areas, reduces active travel options, and turns our community into a walled-off enclave rather than an integrated urban district.
2. Lengthening Daily Trips to Planned Local Schools
The Clonburris SDZ masterplan places vital social infrastructure—including planned primary and post-primary schools—on designated sites across the railway corridor.
- A dedicated, standalone bridge was designed to provide a direct, traffic-free "school run" desire line for children and families.
- Removing this standalone crossing forces students to take long detours through busy station areas or along heavily trafficked arterial roads, directly increasing daily walking/cycling distances and creating unnecessary road safety hazards during peak morning drop-off hours.
3. Backed by Research on Community Severance & Permeability
Established urban transport research (such as the UCL Transport & Community Severance Study) shows that major railway lines create severe physical barriers ("static severance") that cut communities off from essential local services:
- Friction and Delays: National cycling and urban design standards (DMURS and NTA Active Travel Guidelines) require primary active travel routes to be direct, continuous, and barrier-free. Routing everyday walking and cycling through a commercial train station introduces severe friction—elevators, stairs, ticket concourses, and narrow footbridges—that actively deters cyclists, cargo bikes, wheelchair users, and parents with buggies.
- Night-Time Safety & CPTED Failures: Transit station concourses fail basic Crime Prevention Through Environmental Design (CPTED) criteria. Unlike an open, well-lit, standalone bridge with continuous public visibility, an enclosed station environment introduces blind spots, restrictive access, and perceived safety risks at night, discouraging walking and cycling after dark.
4. Redundant Clustering Along Fonthill Road
Rerouting the crossing directly to Clondalkin–Fonthill Station clusters movement right next to the existing Fonthill Road (R113) vehicular bridge. Concentrating crossings in one spot leaves a wide spatial gap along the railway line, leaving local residents without a direct neighborhood connection.
Conclusion: A station footbridge serves rail commuters; a dedicated standalone bridge connects a community. I urge South Dublin County Council and An Coimisiún Pleanála to reject Amendment No. 5 and reinstate the approved standalone pedestrian and cycle bridge over the railway.
We object to this proposed amendment, particularly the Council’s intention to avoid allocating individual parking spaces to residents.
- Residents in developments such as Parkleigh and Cooper Square already have allocated parking. We are concerned about what the proposed changes would mean for existing developments and how parking would be managed and enforced in practice.
- Unallocated parking directly contradicts the Council’s push for EV adoption. In existing developments like Parkleigh, allocated spaces allow residents to invest their own money in installing home EV chargers. Without assigned spaces, neither residents nor Owners’ Management Companies (OMCs) have certainty about where to install EV chargers or who will cover the cost. This leaves neighbourhoods stuck with the minimum 10% provision.
- These restrictions are being introduced before public transport projects (DART+ SW, BusConnects) are delivered. Until viable alternatives exist, restricting resident parking will only lead to overspill onto surrounding roads.
Instead of prematurely restricting resident parking, we ask South Dublin County Council to first ambition on completing several of the items on the following list before actually removing/restricting parking, for the reason that no completing them force residents to use cars which requires parking:
- Make sure amenities and needed facilities (supermarkets, pharmacy, creche, schools, GPs, gyms/pools) are available and realised at walking distance; not just planned.
- Encourage active travel by improving infrastructure, security and connectivity, and certainly not reduce it by cost-cutting measures as removing pedestrian bridges or reallocating them to cheaper building locations.
- Increase commuter and visitor parking near the urban cores.
- Launch an SDCC bike-sharing scheme, using Clonburris and Adamstown as high-density pilot locations, utilising the Grand Canal Greenway as one of the key corridors.
In the interim until public transport projects realize, investigate the use of undeveloped building sites (e.g. future school or employment building site) as a temporary overflow parking until public transport projects are delivered.