COMHAIRLE CONTAE ÁTHA CLIATH THEAS
SOUTH DUBLIN COUNTY COUNCIL
MEETING OF CLONDALKIN AREA COMMITTEE
Wednesday, January 15, 2014
HEADED ITEM NO.16
Report on Part 8 Public Consultation for Cycle and Pedestrian path system at Alpine Heights and Ashwood Estates, Bawnogue, Clondalkin
REPORT:
The Part 8 Public Consultation proposal for the construction of footpaths and cycle paths from;
(a) Bawnogue to Fonthill Road
(b) Bawnogue to Grand Canal
was presented to the elected Members on the 20th June 2012. It was subsequently advertised for public consultation on the 2nd August 2012.
The following report was presented to the Clondalkin Area Committee meeting on the 16th January 2013 in response to the submissions received during the public consultation period and subsequent discussion with the Elected Members;
'Report on Part 8 consultation process for the construction of footpaths and cycle paths from:
(a) Bawnogue to Fonthill Road
(b) Bawnogue to Grand Canal
It is proposed to construct footpaths and cycle paths across the open space linking;
(a) The Neighbourhood Centre at Bawnogue with the Fonthill Road and the estates of Ashwood and Alpine Heights.
The proposal will include the construction of a lit pedestrian and cycle link of approximately 600 meters from the Fonthill Road via Alpine Heights and Ashwood to the local centre.
(b) The Grand Canal with Ashwood estate and the Bawnogue Road.
The proposal will include the construction of a lit pedestrian and cycle link of approximately 492 meters from the Grand Canal to the estates of Ashwood and Lindisfarne.
Following agreement at the Clondalkin Area Committee held on 20th June 2012, the Draft layout plan/location map for development was placed on public display for the statutory period of six weeks from 2nd August 2012 until 13th September 2012, with a further statutory period of two weeks, extending to the 27th September 2012, for receipt of written submissions from the public.
A map and a layout plan are attached to the report.
81 submissions were received during the specified period of the public consultation in respect of the proposed development from the following:
1. Ann Gunning, 33 Ashwood Road
2. Cllr. Tony Delaney, SDCC
3. Marie & Tony Ward, 1 Alpine Heights
4. Maeve Flynn, 5 Ashwood Drive
5. Michael & Joan Flood, 63 Ashwood Road
6. Mary & Patrick O' Sullivan, 20 Ashwood Road
7. Marie Ramsay, 190 Alpine Heights
8. Susan Bermingham, 29 Ashwood Way
9. Patricia & Cianan O' Brien, 186 Alpine Heights
10. Rev. Fr. Marino Nguekam, Parish of the Transfiguration,Bawnogue
11. Michael Moloney@gmail.com
12. Sandra Scully, 67 Ashwood Road
13. Anne McArdle@eircom.net
14. John & Dorothy Hamm, 7 Ashwood Park
15. Liam Thunder, 77 Ashwood Road
16. Claire Thunder, 77 Ashwood Road
17. Maura Thunder, 77 Ashwood Road
18. Brian Thunder, 77 Ashwood Road
19. Letter from Teresa Fitzgerald, 18 Ashwood Park enclosing petition with 96 signatures
20. Letter from Marie Ramsey and Bernadette Hannigan enclosing same petition as above with 78 signatures
21. Peter Stafford (david.p.stafford@gmail.com)
22. Deputy Robert Dowds, Dáil Éireann
23. Cllr. Breeda Bonner SDCC
24. Geraldine Lanagan, Chairperson Oakwood Grove Residents Association, 58 Oakwood Grove
25. May O' Reilly, Chairperson Dunawley Residents Association, 16 Dunawley Grove
26. Maureen Murphy, 5 Lindisfarne Vale
27. Ruth Williams, 4 Hazelwood Court
28. Eileen Doyle, 3 Kilmahuddrick Place
29. Rachel McDonnell, 30 Riversdale Green
30. Marie Graham, 5 Lealand Road
31. P. White, 4 Kilcronan Green
32. Sheelagh Breen, 5 Nangor Crescent
33. Jessica Wade, 25 Mill Road
34. Anthony O'Sullivan, 50 Ashwood Road
35. Kitty Smith, 24 Lindisfarne Green
36. Orla O'Connor, 10 Lealand Gardens
37. Terry Bradley, 81 Ballyfermot Crescent
38. Kelly Hyland, 52 Kilmahuddrick Road
39. Dolores Shields, 20 Dunawley Way
40. Taylor Grogan, 26 Kilmahuddrick Road
41. Byrne Family, Lindisfarne Green
42. Debby Doyle, 10 Lealand Crescent
43. Devlin Family, 205 Alpine Heights
44. Madge Byrne, 5 Lindisfarne Green
45. Jackie & Aaron Byrne, 22 Lindisfarne Green
46. Sandra O'Neill, 18 Lindisfarne Green
47. Sharon Smith, 14 Lindisfarne Green
48. Eileen Healy, 24 Monastery Park
49. Mrs. O'Brien, 26 Lindisfarne Green
50. Fiona Corigan, 3 St. Ronan's Garden
51. Helen Powell, 12 Lindisfarne Lawn
52. Jennifer O'Reilly, 24 Melrose Park
53. Theresa Sherlock, 18 Deansrath Road
54. Ann O'Reilly, 24 Melrose Park
55. Sonja Dunne, 4 Westbourne Park
56. John Paul O'Sullivan, 60 Ashwood Road
57. Geraldine Dilworth, 20 Lindisfarne Green
58. Christina Smith, 16 Westbourne Avenue
59. Rosie & Catherine Smith, 6 Lindisfarne Green
60. Patrick Ennis, 4 Lindisfarne Avenue
61. Doreen Monaghan, 7 Kilmahuddrick Crescent
62. James Hempsey, 14 Cherrywood Villas
63. Mary Woods, 143 Alpine Heights
64. Slater Family, 20 Lindisfarne Green
65. O'Brien Family Clondalkin
66. B. Farrell, Clondalkin
67. Marian Freeman, 8 Melrose Avenue
68. Annie White, 1 Lealand Road
69. Charlene Kirk, 14 Monksfield Meadows
70. Rosie McGlone, 45 Westbourne Green
71. Ruth O'Sullivan, 16 Lindisfarne Green
72. Norah Treacy, 56 St. Patrick's Road
73. Veronica Morris, 1 Westbourne Close
74. Mickey Ryan, Lindisfarne Green
75. Brian Smith, Lindisfarne Green
76. Lorraine Clancy, 10 Deansrath Grove
77. Ann Hogan, 32 Lindisfarne Green
78. David O'Sullivan, 11 Lindisfarne Grove
79. Ivan O'Sullivan, 16 Deansrath Park
80. Pauline Coyle, 10 Lindisfarne Green
81. Cllr. Trevor Gilligan, SDCC
A summary of the issues with respect to the proper planning and sustainable development of the area in which the proposed development would be situated is as follows:
| Issue | Response |
| Concern from residents in Ashwood estate re increased movements and risk of anti-social behaviour. Ashwood Road will become a throughway for most of adjoining estates, thus increasing anti-social behaviour e.g. noise, vandalism and motorbikes. | The paths linking Ashwood estate with the Grand Canal will be omitted and replaced by a path linking the Lockview Road junction with the Grand Canal. |
| A cycle lane and entrance to canal pathways already exist by way of the Fonthill Road. | This entrance does not provide access from the Bawnogue area as proposed by the project. |
| Issue of motorbike and horse traffic gaining access to Ashwood estate. | The paths linking Ashwood estate with the Grand Canal will be omitted and replaced by a path linking the Lockview Road junction with the Grand Canal. The revised path will have no impact on Ashwood estate. |
| Would allow too much pedestrian & cyclist traffic through Alpine Heights & Ashwood Estate. | The paths linking Ashwood estate with the Grand Canal will be omitted and replaced by a path linking the Lockview Road junction with the Grand Canal. The routes chosen for the paths in Alpine Heights are based on existing desire lines and the need to connect facilities such as shops, church, schools, bus routes, train station etc. The paths are designed to provide safe lit routes for residents to travel and commute on. Given the number of connecting links proposed it is not expected that there will be a significant increase in pedestrian and cyclist traffic on any one individual road. |
| Cycle path exit/entrance at Ashwood Drive/Road would be on a bend in the road and would be dangerous. | The paths linking Ashwood estate with the Grand Canal will be omitted and replaced by a path linking the Lockview Road junction with the Grand Canal. The new path will not impact on the Ashwood Drive/Road. |
| Concern over loss of trees and shrubs and subsequent loss to bat habitat at junction of Ashwood Drive & Road | The paths linking Ashwood estate with the Grand Canal will be omitted and replaced by a path linking the Lockview Road junction with the Grand Canal. There will be no impact on this area as a result of the revised route. |
| Provision of paths in canal bank field will increase anti social problem with scramblers/quads | Kissing gates will be provided at both ends of the path in the canal bank field to restrict the movement of unauthorised vehicles. |
| Propose that the Fonthill Road cycle path should continue on the Bawnogue Road around the periphery of Alpine/Ashwood estate to the Lock Road. From there it should run across the canal field to link with the Grand Canal paths. | This alternative route would represent a significant variation to the original proposal and is outside the scope of this project. |
| Paths will exasperate anti social problems and provide easy access and escape routes for those participating in anti-social behaviour. | The paths are designed to provide safe lit routes for residents to travel and commute on. There is currently open and unencumbered access from the estates to the open space in which the paths are proposed. This unrestricted access will not be altered as part of the proposal except for the installation of a kissing gate at the Fonthill Road entrance. The increased bona fide use is likely to reduce the opportunity for anti-social behaviour. |
| Loss of football and training area where the paths are to be located. | The paths will be located so as to reduce the impact on football and training areas. It is not envisaged that there will be a significant loss to this amenity. |
| The proposed 3 metre wide path is excessive | The paths are designed to cater for pedestrians and cyclists. A 3 meter wide path is necessary to enable safe use by both pedestrians and cyclists. This is based on National Cycle Manual guidelines produced by the NRA. |
| Opening a walkway onto the Fonthill Road will lead to an increased in anti-social behaviour. | There is already a strong desire line from the Bawnogue area to the Fonthill Road. A safety issue exists here whereby residents are currently climbing over the existing wall and railing to access schools, busses etc. As this location is already in use, the provision of a formal lit entrance with a kissing gate and paths will provide a universally accessible link. |
| Concern over threat to biodiversity at northern end of Ashwood Road where paths meet Ashwood estate. | The paths linking Ashwood estate with the Grand Canal will be omitted and replaced by a path linking the Lockview Road junction with the Grand Canal. There will be no impact on this area as a result of the revised route. |
| An additional link path should be provided from the main path on the Ashwood/Alpine open space towards Ashwood Road adjacent to 2 Ashwood Road | This link will be considered for inclusion subject to the approval of the Members. |
| Cycleways from Ashwood towards the Canal should not proceed because they will upset a major floral display | The paths linking Ashwood estate with the Grand Canal will be omitted and replaced by a path linking the Lockview Road junction with the Grand Canal. There will be no impact on this area as a result of the revised route. |
| Long stretch of grass between Alpine Heights & Ashwood should be broken in some way, e.g. trees or fence, to prevent use of green by motorcyclists & sulkies | The design of the open space to prevent unauthorised vehicles is outside the scope of the project. Nevertheless the provision of tree planting will be included in the final plans subject to the availability of funding. |
| Stretch of grass between the Grand Canal and Alpine Heights/Ashwood open space should be broken in some way to discourage motorcyclists. | This area is already divided by a stub wall between the Fonthill Road and 15 Ashwood Lawn. Any further works in this area is outside the scope of the project and cannot be considered as part of the proposal. |
| Link to the Grand canal should be at the Lockview Road Junction towards the 11th Lock and not through Ashwood estate | Subject to the Members approval the provision of a link path from the Lockview Road junction towards the 11th Lock will be included in the proposal. The paths linking Ashwood estate with the Grand Canal will be omitted. |
| There is an existing path in the Ashwood/Alpine open space. The proposal is a duplication of this path. | This existing path runs between the cul de sacs of Ashwood Lawns/Park towards the Ashwood Road. This path is pedestrian only and does not cater for cyclists. The path only serves the Ashwood estate. The proposed route would provide connectivity between the Fonthill Road and the Bawnogue area and serve a wider range of communities i.e. Alpine, Ashwood, Oakwood, Dunawley etc. |
58 of the submissions received were in favour of the proposed works. A summary of the positive comments received is as follows:
· Improved access to No. 13 bus service, schools, GP service & local shops.
· Safe access from top of Bawnogue Road to canal.
· Improved access from Ashwood Park to Dunawley and Fonthill Road.
· Improved access to Fonthill Road at canal.
· Improved access to Bawnogue Youth Centre.
· Pedestrian entrance to Fonthill Road is long overdue – will facilitate access to Clonburris School & Rail Station.
Following consideration of the above submission, the Council is of the view that the issues raised by way of the submission can be satisfactorily addressed during the detailed design stage. Subject to the Members approval this will include the following:
1. The provision of a link path from the Lockview Road junction towards the 11th Lock.
2. The omission of all paths leading from Ashwood estate to the Grand Canal.
3. The provision of an additional link path from the main path on the Ashwood/Alpine open space to link up with the path between 27 and 29 Ashwood Road.
4. Modify the direction of the path in front of houses 138-150 Alpine Heights to a more direct route.
The above changes are indicated on the attached map.
Relocating the Bawnogue - Fonthill Road path to a position between Ashwood estate and the hedge on the open space was examined at the Members request. The Manager recommends that this alternative location is not implemented for the following reasons:
1. This new route is under the line of high voltage power lines. This will limit the height of lighting columns that can be installed. There is a high probability of these columns being regularly vandalized. This can be seen on the walkway adjacent to the Bawnogue Community Centre where 2 of the 3 lighting columns have been vandalized in a similar situation.
2. The level of passive supervision at this location is significantly less that if the path were located on the south side of the hedge in view of houses in Alpine Heights.
3. There is already a pedestrian path adjacent to the houses in Ashwood estate.
4. The area between the hedge and Ashwood estate is narrow and corralled and does not lend itself to an inviting environment.
5. Positioning a cycle/pedestrian path under a pylon corridor is not considered to be the most appropriate location from a visual perspective.
Recommendation:
It is recommended that, as the proposal is in conformity with proper planning and sustainable development, that the Council approve the proposal for the construction of footpaths and cycle paths from:
(a) Bawnogue to Fonthill Road
(b) Bawnogue to Grand Canal
and to include amendments No 1-4 as identified in the report.
It is recommended that this Headed Item be approved.'
Progress
Since that time there have been meetings with representatives of some of those in the community in Ashwood and Alpine Heights estates who were opposed to the paths or to sections of the paths at particular locations. Not all of the objections and alternatives proposed could be catered for since they would have substantially diluted the positive aspects of the proposal.
It is now proposed to proceed with the path system but modified from the previous proposals outlined above. This modification is explained graphically in the attached drawings:
Drawing 1 shows the original proposal
Drawing 2 shows the modified proposal containing the following amendments:
· The paths extending from Ashwood Road and from Bawnogue Road and traversing the Grand Canal Park are to be replaced by one path from Bawnogue Road going directly across the open space to the existing Grand Canal path.
· The paths at Alpine Heights have been modified to reduce the impact on the usability of the open space and to also include for a second link to the Fonthill Road that follows an existing desire line in this area.
· The path widths have also been modified to allow for a 4m wide path - as opposed to a 3m wide path - which will facilitate safer dual use of the paths by pedestrians and cyclists.
The link to the Fonthill Road and to Bawnogue Road from these paths will be by a K Barrier or Kissing Gate. This will restrict use of the paths by those on motor cycles or those wishing to gain access to the open spaces with horses and both of these issues were of concern to some of the local residents.
It is proposed that the paths will be lit by low level lighting similar to that on the Grand Canal Path and will be monitored by CCTV cameras.
Recommendation
The proposal is one that has already been identified in the scoping report on local permeability and connectivity projects presented to the Council in 2011. This report investigated areas of the county where there were potential sites to increase the permeability and connectivity with and between estates as well as to increase connections to local shopping areas, schools and public transport.
It is considered that this proposal will:
· enhance the possibilities for connections by foot and bicycle to local schools, public transport and other facilities such as shops and the local church, and to Council supported facilities in Bawnogue.
· increase opportunities for leisure walking and cycling utilizing the extensive network of open spaces in the area
· provide direct access to the Grand Canal Way, a major long distance way marked walking and cycling route
· align with Government policy in relation to preventive medicine for both adults and young people by providing opportunities for local exercise
It is recommended therefore that as the proposal is in accordance with proper planning and sustainable development that the modified proposal is accepted and that will allow the Council to pursue funding opportunities for the construction of the path system in due course.