The page on our site, linked to above, provides further background info, including: a timeline of DCC’s engagement from 2015 to 2019; a list of examples input to consultations and projects between 2019 and 2024; and DCC’s questions about the more recent scheme with the responses provided by GCC.

There have been a series of significant announcements + consultations which have shown some promise, but these have, to date, failed to deliver on their potential. But DCC has continued to engage in good faith with these processes and sought to foster meaningful communication with GCC + councillors.

DCC recognises the many varied concerns raised regarding road safety, traffic and parking issues in Dennistoun and, on that basis, has made repeated requests for a comprehensive review and consultation on traffic and parking in Dennistoun. This has not been forthcoming.

This is not a proposal originating from Dennistoun Community Council. Nor has DCC ever lobbied for a restricted parking zone.

Road safety, traffic + parking in Dennistoun is complex. No easy answers or solutions. DCC engagement with the topic goes back many years, in response to resident concerns, with the aim of creating better safer streets for all as part of a thriving sustainable future for our diverse community.

... and in the DCC post promoting the GCC drop-in sessions, which highlights the backstory of the proposal in the context of the various recent projects, consultations, reports and funding schemes that have been overseen by GCC, which DCC has engaged with.
dennistouncc.org.uk/2025/11/02/n...

DCC recogises the facts, processes and aims (cf Learning Quarter DRF + Liveable Neighborhood + NIIF etc), as well as various concerns beyond just antisocial behaviour, and the queries about the justifications relative to other options, as noted in the reply thread here 👇 ...
bsky.app/profile/denn...

Maybe these drop-in sessions will finally reveal the answers?

DCC hasn't been unanimously for or against the proposed entrance, but recognises the various issues GCC is still to provide detail and assurance on, regarding some pretty basic fundamentals, highlighted by FoGN and others when the proposal first arose a few years ago.

NIIF funding has been denied for numerous other perfectly viable pedestrian improvements proposed by DCC, too. But £210k of NIIF has been OK'd for the Eastern entrance instead, despite the many key technical and logistical issues yet to be resolved.

...(as do other underutilised open spaces in Dennistoun, e.g. Wellpark, Hogarth Park and others) but, in response to DCC requests, GCC/the Area Partnership/Councillors seem resistant to committing NIIF funding to those areas.

On the green space point, the Necropolis is undoubtedly an asset but, as a cemetery rather than a park, it is somewhat limited in the breadth of utility it can offer. 'Fir park' on the eastern side of the wall, has much potential that could be unlocked with relative ease...

So, again, it's marginal benefits at best in terms of the route through the Necropolis being a significantly nicer/better route for walking as transport.

GCC have stated at DCC meetings that there'll be no upgrade to lighting or surfacing of the route in the Necropolis. Whereas Duke Street is getting the full Avenue upgrade treatment.

... centre around the north perimeter via Firpark St + Ally Parade etc to Cathedral St, or around the south perimeter via Ark Ln + Duke St to George St, vs winding through the Necropolis using the apparently proposed route, there's minimal to nil benefit time or distance-wise.

The driving factors cited seem to be 'pedestrian connectivity to/from the city centre' and 'access to green space'. On the connectivity point, when you compare the travel times and distances of existing pedestrian routes to the city centre...