Dún Laoghaire Rathdown County Council’s entire Active School Travel scheme has been suspended after a group of councillors forced a deferral of the key Deansgrange Road section.
The Deansgrange Road section — which forms part of two of the three routes involved in the project — involved making the road one-way to provide a two-way cycle path. Car parking would be retained as it is currently on wider section of the road.
As reported recently, a group of councillors forced the deferral of the Deansgrange Road section routes to school plan, but now — according to councillors who are supporting the full project — the deferral has effected not just Deansgrange but also on-going or planned works in Sandyford, Stillorgan, Dundrum, Ballinteer, Glenageary and Shankill.
The deferral was prompted by a section 140 motion from councillors which was proposed by Cllr Marie Baker (FG) and Cllr Mary Hanafin (FF) and it was seconded by Cllr Maurice Dockrell (FG), Cllr Michael Clark (FF), Cllr Jim Gildea (FG), and Cllr Mary Fayne (FG). While Fianna Fáil TD Cormac Devlin, Fine Gael TD Jennifer Carroll MacNeill and Fine Gael Senator Barry Ward are among some of the most high-profile politicians objecting to the Deansgrange route as proposed by officials.
The Dublin Cycling Campain are looking to organise a protest this weekend. The campaign said: “How about a protest cycle this weekend against the obstruction and delaying of safe cycle routes to schools in Dún Laoghaire-Rathdown by a loud minority of self-interested people?”
How about a protest cycle this weekend against the obstruction and delaying of safe cycle routes to schools in Dún Laoghaire-Rathdown by a loud minority of self-interested people?— Dublin Cycling Campaign (@dublincycling) September 15, 2021
Cllr Shay Brennan (FF) said: “Why do we need ‘further consultation’ to provide 65 schools in DLR with safe cycling routes! We’ve been offered €3.3m by Government to complete this project, unfortunately it’s all or nothing, the pushback, capitulation and deferment on the Deansgrange trial route has cost us dearly.”
Cllr Oisín O’Connor (Greens) said: “Routes to school called off: Due to pressure from anti-cycle route (but definitely not anti-cycling) councillors, TDs & Senator, all measures as part of the @dlrcc Active School Travel project have been deferred. Including projects already started…”
“All deferred with thanks to a small and experienced cabal who have strong-armed the council executive into stopping the works,” he said.
He posted a photo stating “Here’s a boy cycling home from school on his own on the road next to a deferred cycle route that’s already started construction but can’t be finished yet because car lobbyists have the ear of some councillors…. Sorry kid, we have to consider the needs of motorists before we make things safe for you.”
Cllr O’Connor added: “Folks we’re facing a climate crisis. It’s already started. Facilitating kids to cycle school safely should be the easiest political choice we have to make before we start getting into the real contentious stuff. Safe routes for kids in suburban areas should be basic.”
Dun Laoghaire Rathdown County Council has been contacted for comment and this article will be updated once it is forthcoming.
€5 per month
IrishCycle's reader-funded journalism needs your help -- thank you!
- Support independent journalism
- Open access for all
€10 per month
If you can subscribe for more than the entry-level please do so today.
- Support independent journalism
- Open access for all
€20 per month
Not many will subscribe at this level, but thank you if you can and do.
- Support independent journalism
- Open access for all
It is quite inaccurate to label all those that opposed the conversion of Deansgrange road to one way as anti-cycling. I am cycling in the Dun Laoghaire area for 50 plus years. Serious questions need to be asked about DLRDCoCo’s safe cycle to school plans as they don’t stand up, when you know the area.
I wonder John Murphy, during that 50 years you have cyled in the Dun Laoghaire how many times have you been dangerously close passed, sworn at, threatened with violence or even been involved in an accident? I can’t claim to be from the Dun Laoghaire area but I have lived here for 10 years or so. As a regular cyclist who uses my bicycles for commuting, exercising and leasure cyclst I have unfortunately experienced all of the above from motorists, van, bus, truck and taxi drivers. This is a direct result of having to share a limited space on roads with other road users. I too know the area around Dun Laoghaire and can say that while the councils plans are not perfect they are massive improvement on the limited facilities in place at present. I think the serious questions that need to be asked are of the councilors who would put school age childrens health & safety before the convenience of the average motorist in the Dun Laoghaire area and all those who would attempt to block attempts to improve the safety for vunerable road users.
Hi Declan, yeah I have had all of the above from motorists, van, bus, truck and taxi drivers. I have even had a trip in the back of an Ambulance suffering from Spinal shock after being hit by a motorist that jumped the lights. There may indeed be serious questions that need to be answered but don’t get fooled into thinking the Council are really committed to cycle safety. They are cynically using opposition to a bad plan as a cover for their failure to provide actual safe cycle lanes for school going children. DLRDCoCo spent €400,000 on two redesigns of the Roundabout at Killiney towers. A serious amount of money that could have been better spent on making things better and was a stark example of their lack of knowledge of the subject. The Roundabout at TEK is a potential death trap for an inexperienced cyclist, whether they are going to Rockford or CBC. This was made worse when they redesigned it. I wrote to them but they were prepared to live with the risk. Rochestown Avenue was recently resurfaced/repaired and nothing to help cycle safety was included. Abbey Road is a wide road with ample space for a cycle lane and it is on the route to Rockford Girls school and yet they opt for a cycle lane out of the way in Deansgrange. The displaced traffic from the Deansgrange road will be dumped onto Abbey Road making it far less safe for anyone cycling on it. You have to ask why such an obvious mistake. There are no cycle lanes adjacent to either of the Harold Schools in Glasthule or Dalkey, but there is a cycle lane on the sea front. As a commuting cyclist, are you happy to use the coast road during the winter? For the 20 years that I cycled in and out of Dublin, I would rather use the Monkstown road, which thankfully finally got a cycle lane. Pity that it doesn’t continue through Monkstown Crescent, but that would interfere with car parking or so a Councilor told me. The same cycle lane could have been continued up to CBC, but they didn’t bother there either. Corrig Road was also resurfaced and again no attempt was made to help safe cycling. Despite it being close to St. Joseph’s and CBC Monkstown. So you have to ask, who is really concerned with safe cycling for school children. You and me, definitely but not DLRDCoCo. Don’t get fooled by their propaganda.
I would have to object to several of the comments raised in the article above. As a resident and business owner on the Deansgrange Road I have objected to the proposal to turn the road into a one way as it has the potential to destroy my Business and cause traffic chaos in the surrounding areas. If that makes me ” self Interested ” as you so sweepingly dismissed us in your protest tweet all I can say is that in our position you would be too.
As to Cllr Oisín O’Connor (Greens) comment that we are ” a small and experienced cabal ” ( emotive language there Oisin ) that is complete nonsense. We are for the most part residents and businesses in the affected area who have never engaged in protests before but were forced by the proposal to organise some resistance and learn how to as we went along. As to the point that we are a small minority I fear that Oisin has again parted ways with the reality on the ground as I am certain that beyond 80% of locals are against the PRESENT plans.
I am certain that some accomodation can be found with a bit of engagement between the parties rather than the ” This is how we are going to do it , so suck it up ” attitude displayed by the proponents of this part of the scheme.
Hi Shea, my “small and experienced cabal” was in reference to the councillors who are anti-this cycle route (but definitely not anti-cycling of course). Local people who support the trial have been contacting councillors in great numbers and so far I’d say the split of emails I’ve received in favour/against the cycle route is approximately 50:50. Given the level of anger and vitriol in emails, WhatsApp and online, I can understand why some local people who are in favour, are afraid to speak up.
I totally agree with you Shea. These decisions are being made by unaccountable un-elected bureaucrats. When they receive any criticism they cry foul and say the objectors are “anti cycling” and reckless with the safety of “School Children”. If there’s a cabal here, it’s populated by Bureaucrats and willfully misinformed politicians. As for their definition of “a small and experienced cabal”, I would be insulted if my 50+ years cycling in the borough wasn’t seen as experienced,unlike some of those making these ludicrous decisions.
@John Murphy — you stressing your “50+ years cycling in the borough” sounds a lot like “I’m alright Jack, to feck with the children and anybody who does not want to cycle mixing with motorists”.
Cian, I have been writing, to little effect to Councilors and County Officials as far back as the 1980’s over the lack of facilities for cyclists in the borough. Please re-read my post which was written in answer to Declan O’Shanahan’s. I want proper cycling infrastructure put in place that protects cyclists and not meandering cycle routes that cyclists will not use. As a “long time cyclist” (sorry if this term offends some people, but i am a cyclist a very long time) I will take the shortest, preferable safest route from my start point to my destination. Take a look at where the Schools are and examine the cycle infrastructure near them. I mentioned a few above. If you can find any joined up cycle infrastructure near the St. Joseph’s, the Harold Schools or CBC in Monkstown, you are definitely a better man than me. I don’t want DLRDCoCo let off the hook by installing a few high profile projects that lets cyclist but particularly school children down. If a young girl is cycling from Sallynoggin to Rockford School she is unlikely to want to detour to Deansgrange when Rochestown Road and Abbey Road are a shorter route. It’s hard enough to get girls to cycle as it is. Why wasn’t there cycle infrastructure put on Rochestown Road when it was resurfaced and repaired? I can’t answer that question and no one that should ask it, seems bothered. I have been reading and occasionally contributing to Irishcycle.com for a few years now. Keep up the good work, but please recognise who is on your side and who is trying to pull the wool over your eyes.
“I have objected to the proposal to turn the road into a one way as it has the potential to destroy my Business and cause traffic chaos in the surrounding areas. ”
This is the crux of the matter. Much of the criticism in this and similar cases appears to be based on sometimes spurious claims of negative outcomes. This project had a 63% approval rating in extensive public consultations. It is the wish of the majority of people to let the project proceed and there are very good reasons to believe that the impacts you outline will not in fact occur.
Firstly, the impact to business argument does not stand up to scrutiny. There is no doubt that customer practices will change, that not all businesses will benefit uniformly and that a small number may be negatively affected, but by and large the impact of such schemes in other areas (such as Blackrock village) has been beneficial for business in some cases greatly so. What makes the objectors in this case so certain that these benefits will not apply in Deansgrange?
Secondly if it is found that the scheme does cause actual traffic chaos in neighbouring areas, it will be quite likely to halt the project, but we all know that the principle of traffic evaporation will apply. Traffic is not like water. Through traffic will simply choose another route and much local traffic may choose an alternative transport mode such as cycling if it is safer.
You have written extensively on the lack of cycling infrastructure on various routes throughout the area and you seem to be advocating for a significantly more extensive cycle route network than the current proposals. It is clear that any such proposal would meet significant objections from the likes of Shea on many other roads were it ever to be considered.
And yet you agree with the objectors to the Deansgrange route and even dust off the old “unaccountable un-elected bureaucrats” trope without ever clearly articulating what is the specific problem is that you have with the Deansgrange route beyond the “meandering” nature of the route system as proposed. As stated elsewhere, this project had a 63% approval rating in extensive public consultations. Does that count for nothing in your opinion?
The fact is that a truly comprehensive cycle network has to start somewhere and the best way to do so is to put in place a framework of core routes around which a more complete network can be constructed. This is what this project is trying to achieve. It cannot solve all cycle infrastructure problems in one fell swoop. Nor can it proceed (as your own suggestions could not) without significant objections from certain quarters.
So by all means please feel free to outline your alternative proposals, not in the form of exhaustive lists of roads, but in the form of a cohesive and connected network that could greatly improve the situation for schools and businesses and which could form a framework for future network expansion without generating the objections that this proposal has received.
Dear Mr, MS or Mrs aka, please see the other excellent post in regards to my issues: https://irishcycle.com/2021/08/28/28-groups-write-to-minister-ryan-seeking-renewed-focus-on-cycling-for-all-ages-and-abilities/ I may not have articulated my frustration very well, but it is fairly well covered by the article.
I feel that a successful installation of a safe cycle route for school going children would start the whole project off on a positive footing. It should comprehensively cover schools and maybe not cemeteries and should focus on school children in particular!
It is hard not to dust off “unaccountable un-elected bureaucrats” trope when it is still accurate. I sat in on the webinar conducted in respect to the Deansgrange project. I remember particularly one representative of DLRDCoCo express his irritation at having to attend as he had put in a full days work and now had to listen to objections. He failed to realise, most of us had put in a full days work too and had better things to do than point out obvious mistakes being made. That’s not to say that there isn’t a lot of very good Staff in the Council. It’s just the people making the decisions that I take issue with. The fact that they are unaccountable is the problem. That needs to change.
But I do take the 63% seriously. If that is the will of the people that’s fine as long as people are getting the best designs. My issue is that it could be better spent. Lets face it DLRDCoCo don’t have a great track record in spending wisely. It would be a shame if the budget were exhausted before useful infrastructure was put in place. DLRDCoCo spent upwards of €400,000 on the Roundabout at Killiney Towers. I hope that is specific enough for you. There needs to be a priority given to the most effective direct routes.
I live in the Sallynoggin/Glenageary area. My daughter attended Rockford Girls School. The shortest route is along Rochestown Avenue and Abbey Road. This still leaves a lethal Roundabout at the TEK junction, another DLRDCoCo fiasco. I would not encourage her to risk life and limb as the route is not safe.
DLRDCoCo recently resurfaced and repaired Rochestown Avenue and failed to include any cycle friendly facilities. If she were still there, nothing would have changed. Are you seriously proposing that she or someone like her should make her way to the Deansgrange cycle route so she could get to school or are you in favour of the meandering nature of this and other routes proposed?
Suggestions, well here’s a few off the top of my head:
1. How about a cycle lane along Rochestown Avenue connecting to one on Abbey Road. I expect it will need to be a protected route as the closing of Deansgrange to North bound traffic will increase the traffic flow on this route. This was already mentioned above.
2. A cycle lane should be included on Corrig Road. Again recent work took place but nothing put in place. Use Culanore, Eglington park and widen the roadway at the York road end. By the by, why is there no cycle route through Culanore? Maybe people there won’t be allowed to use bicycles?
3. Connectivity to the Harold School in Glasthule is problematic as the recent dumping of traffic onto Summerhill road and Upper Georges street resulting from the closure of the seafront to traffic makes using the chapel lane pointless, but it could have been a solution! Alas, another opportunity missed. DLRDCoCo has compounded the problem will an ill thought out solution to a problem that didn’t exist. Similarly adversely affected is the Playschool adjacent to the Church on Summerhill road. Parents with very young children will find it virtually impossible to get safely up Dun Laoghaire with cargo bikes due to the large volume of additional traffic. But in fairness they do have a 30m meter section of cycle lane opposite the People park.
4. Harold School Dalkey could use a cycle route through Dalkey. Given the nature of the myriad of small roads and your liking of meandering routes, I’ll leave it to your imagination.
5. CBC Monkstown would benefit from a continuation of the cycle route from the seafront or Monkstown Road via Carrickbrennan Road. That is if DLRDCoCo are not afraid to upset the residents. Seeing as they weren’t all that worried about the residents in Deansgrane, that shouldn’t be a problem. But this is a reletively cheap easy fix, it just calls for a little imagination.
6. How about taking out the painted islands along the Sallynoggin Road and adding a cycle lane? Similarly the same could be done on the Stradbrook road!
7. Connect the Cycle Route along the Sallyglen Road to the one outside St. Kevin’s School on Pearse Road.
I hope this is laid out straightforwardly enough for you to follow.
@John — Nearly all of what you outline about goes back to aka’s point: “The fact is that a truly comprehensive cycle network has to start somewhere and the best way to do so is to put in place a framework of core routes around which a more complete network can be constructed.”
Or basicly: Amsterdam wasn’t redesigned in a day and it won’t happen in Dublin.
By objecting to one part of the jigsaw, you’re helping to delay further work. Every delay has a knock-on effect.
Cian, like you I am a graduate of UCD, which i noted with interest in your bio. In your over 10 years you are contributing massively to the cause of cycling. In my long career I have successfully delivered many projects and have been involved in delivering culture change in a large organisation.
Key elements of both are delivering components of a project in a manner that shows the benefits of the project. It is virtually impossible to complete culture change where you loose a large population of those you are trying to influence. I have no doubt there are many well intentioned people in DLRDCoCo but they lack the expertise. The fact that they are unaccountable is exacerbating the situation. And you will never get everybody on board, but you should go for as high a number as possible.
The pot of money available for cycling projects will prove not to be infinite. Nor will it receive the attention for a protracted period of time, so time is short. Consequently it will be prudent to get the best bang for your buck as quickly as possible. I have waited for over 50 years for cycling infrastructure to be put in place. So your allegation of “I’m alright Jack, to feck with the children and anybody who does not want to cycle mixing with motorists” couldn’t be wider of the mark. It was a cheap shot and I expected better from you.
I would rather the legacy of these relatively short delays result in infrastructure that my Grandchildren and their Grandchildren can use. The root causes of the delays and objections is the manner in which these projects are being rammed through without proper buy in by those affected. Having a small majority in favour will result in long term resentment and ongoing objections. This is the culture that DLRDCoCo are currently embedding in the borough and not one complementary to safe cycling.
I am and always have been pro-cycling. If it takes me be demonised as anti cycling just to get the best outcome for future generations, then so be it. Sometimes you are the statue, sometimes you are the pigeon.
So something like this?
The existing Segregated Cycle Paths are in solid Blue, the painted lanes in broken blue. The DLRD CoCo proposals are in Purple. Your proposed additions in Red. Most schools in the general area are pinned. Feel free to add anything I missed.
Your proposals would certainly add to the network but good luck getting them past the local business / local Councillor lobby group that will pop into existence as soon as such a proposal is mooted. You say local buy in is required and you are correct, but 63% positive feedback is as good as you are going to get on a project like this. You simply will not get that kind of buy-in to your proposals no matter how worthy because the impact on drivers would be far more significant than what is currently proposed.
The DLRD CoCo proposals seem to be largely for a quietway network, presumably to avoid busy routes and conflict with businesses, councillors and drivers. Hence the meandering nature. I understand the need to avoid conflict, but I am somewhat skeptical that these would actually be used, so what this is likely to amount to is a relatively small amount of new segregated cycleway such as the Deansgrange Road section. These would certainly be used because by their nature segregated paths are safe.
However the most glaring omission on this map is the key corridor between Monkstown and Deansgrange where there are no cycle paths of any kind, even rubbish painted ones. And I have to say it seems to me that a cycle route on the Deansgrange Road would go a considerable way towards addressing this omission. Likewise the Abbey road could also do with a cycle lane. By all means put me straight on why I am incorrect in this assessment.
Credit where credit is due, you have put together a great response. I would suggest that Foxrock Avenue be added to the routes as it connects with Granville Road. This route will take in St. Patrick’s primary school and provide a safer route from Deansgrange to the top of Newtown Park Avenue.
I think a key argument from the motor lobby is that the Deansgrange Road provides a route for people coming from Bray and Wicklow to work in Blackrock and Dublin. My concern is that this displace traffic will re-route via Abbey road, but i have covered that.
I understand the thinking behind the meandering routes but it is a volt face to the approach taken on the sea front and the Deansgrange proposal. I am suspicious of DLRDCoCo’s motivations. They have no problem in ramming through changes, such as Myrtle Square, Pedestrianising Georges Street Upper, the cycle route along the sea front and a massively expensive Library, but suddenly they are engaging in consultation! Late in the day, but possibly a good move, if trust weren’t already fractured?
I think the cavalier approach taken by DLRDCoCo in the previous projects has hardened attitudes and moving the 63% acceptance in the right direction will prove difficult. I think Abbey road would be a short and successful project, provided the locals are treated respectfully.
@John Murph & @aka
Fair play to you both in particular for engaging in such a thought provoking and ultimately constructive discussion (and thanks to Cian for his provocations and for hosting the debate). I read everyone’s contributions interest today, and was very struck by how you both engaged so respectfully with each other. The intention is everything and the final proposal was very impressive. There’s a rule in improvisation, always accept the offer and that looks to me like what ye have done.
I spent a month in Leuven (Belgium) a couple of years ago and one thing that stayed with me was the way they created a hierarchy of privilege on the road. Motorists gave way to cyclists (driving slower and keeping behind them instead of overtaking), cyclists in turn gave way to pedestrians on shared streets – going out of the way to make wide loops around pedestrians rather than ringing their bells at them to tell them to get out of the way. You push that idea further and pedestrians give way to anyone who needs support with their mobility, or the very young, or the elderly. In the end we all give way to tiny babies in prams and people with acute mobility issues.
It’s a radical thought: those with most power give way to those with least.
It took me as a pedestrian a couple of weeks to get used to the fact that the cyclists were looking out for me. Imagine what it would be like to cycle in Ireland and feel that motorists were looking out for us.
You’d think something like this would be impossible to implement but in fact this tis the law of the sea – steam gives way to sail, sail gives way to rowboats.
Can be done, if the will is there.
Thanks Mia, if we could only get to that stage of maturity, it would be great. As a motorist, cyclist and pedestrian, I’ll give it a go.
Thanks. I find that visualizing the situation can help to clearly identify at a high level how a system can work. It is not a replacement for area or on-the-ground knowledge but it complements it. Umap / OSM is a very useful and easy to use tool in that respect as it allows for the use of an overlay (“CyclOSM” in this case) to which you can then add your own routes.
In this case, the map at least identifies where some obvious gaps exist and what options there are to address them. If Deans Grange road objectors are willing to support a viable alternative route proposal then perhaps people can get behind it. But the choice cannot be between Deans Grange or nothing. It is clear that the events in support of the route over the weekend speak to a significant level of previously latent public support that is being mobilized and will not be silenced until a workable solution is delivered regardless of local authority or local business wrangling or objections.
It probably helps that we were already broadly in agreement in principle, but you are right that a lot more progress can be gained and common ground identified by sensible discussion than indignant outrage.
Hi aka, I think the people in Deansgrange are a pragmatic group, so I suspect they would be open to alternatives. That is provided their concerns are actually taken in to account and not just another bulldozer job from DLRDCoCo. I have had the “study reports” that back up the infallibility of DLRDCoCo in the past. They are masters at using the statistics to prove that the earth is indeed flat.
I am unsubscribing from Irishcycle.com as it lacks balance, so I will not be responding from here on out.
Please bear in mind that not everyone that expresses an alternative opinion is the enemy. More importantly, not everyone that appears to be on your side, actually is. Best wishes and much safe cycling.
Sorry to see you go John. Hopefully if the trial goes ahead, DLRCC will listen to concerns as best as they can, the outcome will be mainly positive and your mind will be changed. Happy cycling to yourself too.
I’ve cycled through the area in question many times but I certainly don’t know it well. Because I don’t have intimate on-the-ground knowledge of the area, I can’t say who is ‘right’ or ‘wrong’ in any of this. I’m also not a mind-reader so I can’t get into the heads of planners in the council to say whether they really are committed to safe cycle infra or not. Anyway, the above discussion was good to see. People with knowledge of the area offered suggestions and thoughts. I’m very sorry to see that John has decided to unsubscribe and not contribute anymore. John, even if you’re right that Irish-cycle is biased, you know that the website is committed to safe cycle infra. If Cian is wrong on something then I think it would be better for you to continue to contribute and to point out where mistakes or misunderstandings lie. If you think that Cian is taking a wrong tack, then point it out. I think we’d all like to ensure that the best decisions are being made and the best policies are being promoted.
It is curious that you choose to unsubscribe after a long and productive discussion just as it seems that some common ground is being reached. You’ll excuse me if I find that just a little rude.
People that cycle regularly are naturally pro-cycling and that is reflected in the tenor of this forum. To suggest that it lacks balance rather misses the point. There are differences of opinion amongst people who cycle but by and large their aims broadly align; namely to facilitate the growth of cycling as a means of transport not just for experienced cyclists like you and I but for all, and to achieve that, safe dedicated infrastructure is the only game in town. It is strange to expect a cycle lobby forum to give equal billing to those that would pursue policies and measures to ensure that cycling is not allowed to grow. This is not a newspaper.
In your objections to this plan, you focus on prior misdeeds, as you see them, of the council, as well as questions about the chosen route. These override for you the utility of the project. But you nevertheless appear to agree with the conclusion that a route of this nature or something very similar in or around this location is a necessary component of a proper comprehensive cycling network for this area.
Please remember that not everyone shares your distrust of and animosity towards the council. Many people see (an unelected official) Robert Burns making significant changes that are actually making a real difference after many years of obstructionism, procrastination and hostility from elected officials. Perhaps it is naive of us to hope that this is the turning over of a new leaf and the beginning of something better, but we have actual reason to be optimistic for the first time in a long time.
In any event all the best and good luck finding a forum that meets your standards.
As someone who works in DLR, and at least half of my colleagues live there, this doesn’t come as a surprise. A considerable part of the problem with traffic in south Dublin is cause by commutes to significant economic clusters around Stillorgan, Blackrock, Sandyford, Leopardstown etc. Its an older, wealthier community, and while there are plenty of active older people, not everyone is.
Add to that the fact that a disproportionate number of school Dublin schools are fee paying schools with a less “local” focus, and you can see why the area has a real car problem.
Many of my colleagues are literally convulsed with angst at a return to the office that for some of them would be a return to horrible commutes or 6am starts to avoid them. I think it might be a good time to take a reset, and a more concilliatory approach, rather than condemning individuals over individual projects. Remember Deansgrange Rd is a residential area and try to find common ground and areas of compromise rather than ramming a particular viewpoint many won’t just not share, but who’se lives might be made more difficult than it necessary. I expect this post won’t find much sympathy on your site, but it might help the cause more to try to see why such levels of opposition exist in the first place and accept you won’t win everywhere rather than losing the support of some of the community.
All the best LF