Open fencing between Phoenix Park Racecourse and Deerpark Drive

Work away, but I can't see the Deerpark set being in favour, so it'll come down to a long string of appeals.

See the row between residents of Sefton Park and the developers of Honeypark in Dun Laoghaire for precedent.

over reach and it certainly will not get approved.

That's because they were blocked off due to problems with them.

But we do ban cars... at times and certain locations.

There is a balance between permeability and other factors. You're only looking at from one perspective.

But every location is different and should be looked at it own merits.

Why they often close them in the first place.

Sounds like an excellent idea to open the fence. More safe connectivity to the train will have a very positive impact.

All sorted so.

Nothing is sorted. It'll end up in the Four Courts in about three years time.

The school would benefit from a greater catchment area in walking distance.

The people in Dublin 15 in general would benefit from a reduction in car journeys.

The businesses in Castleknock village would get access to more customers in walking distance.

As with most of these threads I doubt anyone here is local to this.

The ones I'm familiar with. Yes.

Someone living in the immediate vicinity and directly affected by it.

When some starts screaming NIMBY at the first opportunity. Its usually to promote their own interests at the expense at someone else. Rather than trying to find middle ground all it achieves is harden resistance and push people to be entrenched in no compromising standoffs. Its not productive.

That's what I heard alright. You'd assume now it's opened it will attract more to it from nearby.

Lot of deep refurbs in recent years in DeerPark and Castleknock in general.

I wonder will there be a boost in the membership of Brigid's GAA.

Like?

That's a uselessly generic response.

But none of those things actually apply in this instance.

So, you don't have any actual examples then?

Just hand waves and vague references. Which is about all that is ever used to justify "I don't like the look of those teenagers", which is about the only actual reason ever.

There was no need to over-complicate or lengthen the question. Your sequence of replies that just gives the same answer as always would have done with some brevity and early clarity though.

So you won't bother doing any research and will fall back on hand waves and references. Then complain when its mirrored back to you.

Kettle black.

At least Blanch makes some effort to argue his position and engages in discussion.

Nah. A gate from nowhere to nowhere.

Just another soapbox for angry people to give out about NIMBYs.

For Alleyways to be closed there's usually and extinguishment and a documented process often in Fingal minutes. You could go look instead of badgering me. I said crime. (Crime - an action punishable by law). So afaik there no crime of "sacred of teenagers". If you looked at the studies and research you would see they are associated with certain crimes more than others.

But this is more suited to a general thread about permeability than one specific obscure location which likely has no such issues.

Don't just listen to me, listen to the experts.

"In the case of schools, if a proposal to open a new link would result in more children walking and cycling to school and less congestion at the school at peak times, this would be advantageous. Children would benefit from increased levels of exercise with consequent improved health and fitness. Parents, as well as children, will also benefit from increased social interaction. Schools are a critical element which binds a community together and their role in social capital building can be significantly aided by facilitating walking and cycling on the school trip."

The report makes particularly interesting points about Hartstown, and also shows other examples from around Dublin 15 of poor permeability.

As regards the safety aspects:

"A higher number of pedestrians and cyclists in housing estates and neighbourhood centres also changes the perception of a place in terms of safety. Passive supervision, the mere presence of more people, makes the place safer. By maintaining or creating links for pedestrians and cyclists, this enhanced safety can be provided. "

Agreed, but the principles of why permeability is a good approach are clear and unarguable. The mess from Ongar down to the Aquatic Centre, where the number of permeable crossings is only slightly more (if even that) than the number of road junctions is an example of how badly Fingal got it wrong.

I'm not convinced by experts (or posters) who mostly only give one side of a situation.

Also when we look at cycling infrastructure the authorities set guidelines and standards for best practice, then almost completely ignore them in practice. As you say yourself about Fingal.

I don't think you've read, or understood, the studies if you think that

Can you actually advance on just saying "crime" to some actual, real examples of actual, real crimes?